Calm down dear.
roaduser66:
Nobody is proposing registering bicycles as a solution because it’s an absurd idea. Even the Nazis gave up on the idea cos it’s too dumb. Feel free to lobby your MP about it. Meanwhile measures to make roads safer properly target the danger- drivers, and disproportionately HGV drivers.
Have you been overdosing on the lentils again?
roaduser66:
Nobody is proposing registering bicycles as a solution because it’s an absurd idea. Even the Nazis gave up on the idea cos it’s too dumb. Feel free to lobby your MP about it. Meanwhile measures to make roads safer properly target the danger- drivers, and disproportionately HGV drivers.
Are you actually going to answer points directly? or just keep blaming drivers again (which you claimed higher up you weren’t BTW)
I suspect Its only absurd because it doesn’t fit your agenda of
Killer trucks
being the sole problem with this issue.
Until there is some element of the cycling community at least attempting to address the issues within its own ranks, to acknowledge that they also have to engage with their peers and work to reduce the dangers to themselves by their own actions, and continue to lay total responsibility on hauliers and drivers then any discussion you bring onto this forum is going to be seen as fundementaly flawed. and quite rightly so
Even the Nazis gave up on the idea cos it’s too dumb
ah ha Godwins law, took a while but it nearly always turns up eventualy
Rikki-UK:
I suspect Its only absurd because it doesn’t fit your agenda ofKiller trucks
being the sole problem with this issue.
That’s not my agenda. That’s three strikes. Three times I’ve asked you to stop lying.
+roaduser66 ■■■■■■■■ to the idea that most cyclists are hit from behined most are caught when they try and pass on the left which is blind stupidity, its about time that cyclist where brought to account, no lights at night riding on the pavement cuttin up cars, lorrys and pedestrians, a basic cycling profficancy test should be brought in for them, to much has been pushed over to the driver especially when hgv’s are involved
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
roaduser66:
Rikki-UK:
I suspect Its only absurd because it doesn’t fit your agenda ofKiller trucks
being the sole problem with this issue.
That’s not my agenda. That’s three strikes. Three times I’ve asked you to stop lying.
Comparing those suggesting bike registration to ■■■■’s. Incoherent attacking of those profering reasoned arguments. I can see you starting to jump up and down, and bits of spit are coming out of your mouth. Next you’ll be waving your arms.
tomo3607:
+roaduser66 [zb] to the idea that most cyclists are hit from behined most are caught when they try and pass on the left which is blind stupidity, its about time that cyclist where brought to account, no lights at night riding on the pavement cuttin up cars, lorrys and pedestrians, a basic cycling profficancy test should be brought in for them, to much has been pushed over to the driver especially when hgv’s are involvedSent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
I’m afraid not:
The paper analysed 704 accidents involving heavy goods vehicles and found that 31% of road fatalities were caused by drivers pulling away, 19% were caused by left turns, 7% by right turns, and 25% from drivers reversing.
theguardian.com/environment … udy-claims
Catriona Patel and Alan Neve were both killed that way.
The lorry driver who killed Eilidh Cairns had faulty eyesight (the police didn’t even bother to discover this until the same driver killed another woman.)
The lorry driver who killed cyclist Brian Dorling turned across his path.
The lorry driver who killed cyclist Svetlana Tereschenko was in an unsafe lorry, failing to indicate and chatting on a mobile. The police decided to charge him with…nothing.
The lorry driver who killed cyclist Deep Lee failed to notice her and smashed into her from behind.
The lorry driver that killed cyclist Andrew McNicoll failed to notice him and side swiped him.
The lorry driver that killed cyclist Daniel Cox was in a truck which did not have the correct mirrors and whose driver had pulled into the ASL on a red light and was indicating in the opposite direction to which he turned.
the nodding donkey:
roaduser66:
Rikki-UK:
I suspect Its only absurd because it doesn’t fit your agenda ofKiller trucks
being the sole problem with this issue.
That’s not my agenda. That’s three strikes. Three times I’ve asked you to stop lying.
Comparing those suggesting bike registration to ■■■■’s.
I did nothing of the kind. Read the post again.
I think you are wasting your time Rikki, you can’t argue with an hormonal Greenhan Common woman.
Saying “Even the nazis gave up on bicycle registration” is not comparing anyone with nazis unless you have trouble with written English.
roaduser66:
Rikki-UK:
It’s a sensible move.
No- a sensible move would be for the haulage industry to point out they have spent millions on safer trucks, safer driver schemes ,driver education, compliance regulation and more, the cyclists haven’t been made/asked to modify their road behaviour in any way.
That’s complete nonsense. We had the advert earlier this week exhorting riders to “hang back”, as if they have a choice. In most HGV/cyclist collisions it is the DRIVER who is at fault, so any measure intended to reduce injuries and deaths ought naturally to focus on the source of the danger- drivers. The road freight industry has fought against extra safety checks, lobbied for longer trucks on the roads and resisted compliance controls. Extremely wealthy companies are saving money by putting lethal vehicles on the roads, mostly for construction. Finally they are being tackled. Any reputable company would support any initiative aimed at reducing harm rather than annoyance. Law breaking cyclists are annoying, law breaking HGV drivers are lethal.
It seems obvious that the advert telling riders to hang back at junctions is to stop the ongoing epidemic of cyclists undertaking trucks ( or for that matter all types of vehicles through junctions ).For some reason the cyclist lobby have a problem with that.The only conclusion being that they think it’s ok to go on doing it and that it’s the correct way to behave contrary to rule 167 of the Highway Code.While if it’s supposedly all about trucks running into them from behind why the need the nearside cab area of trucks to be covered in glass.Let alone the fact that even that won’t fix the obvious problem of an unlicenced ignorant unskilled road user group who don’t have the slightest intention of obeying the rules of the road regarding correct behaviour at road junctions.
As has been said.It’s time to take the gloves off with these militant London cyclist lobby muppets and their apologists like Khan and for the Road Transport Industry to get its act together by organising a boycot of the zb place in the interests of both drivers and operators.Especially when we’ve now got a proven example of a driver being convicted having been shown to have been waiting at a junction first and then being undertaken by a cyclist during a left turn. 
So that is still nowhere near the percentages that you report as happening and does this inckude in your ‘pulling away’ figures the muppets that sit in the blind spot in the front left quarter, no probably not does it
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
roaduser66:
Rikki-UK:
I suspect Its only absurd because it doesn’t fit your agenda ofKiller trucks
being the sole problem with this issue.
That’s not my agenda. That’s three strikes. Three times I’ve asked you to stop lying.
roaduser66:
Why are you waffling on about bike licences when the story’s about killer trucks?
Looks pretty clear to me you said it earlier in this very thread, I think we all know what your agenda is… and I think most here have cottoned onto it by now.
You wont accept that your own community has to step up and help reduce deaths, you wont accept any form of regulation over your use of the roads, and you wont accept that that haulage industry while making massive efforts in this area cannot do this without everyone involved stepping up. Killer Trucks you said- emotive words from someone who claims that he is not placing all responsibilty on the hauliers, but wont answer why the cycling community are not taking any responsibility themselves.
Your honour I suggest that this is a biased and therefore unreliable witness and anything he says is tainted by his inability to see beyond his own narrow viewpoint, as such should be ignored as unreliable and potentially hostile
The “Hang Back” message explains that the nearside of an HGV is THE DANGER ZONE and cyclists must never, ever , enter THE DANGER ZONE. Which means that every time an HGV driver overtakes a cyclist the cyclist is placed slap bang in THE DANGER ZONE. So, using thier own logic, these vehicles must never overtake cyclists and place them in danger. Either the HGV overtakes or the cyclist filters on the nearside. End result is the same, the person on the bike is in THE DANGER ZONE.
Except cyclists undertaking isn’t what’s hurting the riders. Usually they’re hit from behind or the HGV overtakes then cuts in. Left hook. HGV drivers playing with phones have killed more people than cyclists have in ANY circumstances so any sensible policy would tackle the danger at source. HGV drivers.
Thing is with all of this…Surely the cyclists that were killed all saw the HGV, as it was probably the largest thing nearest to them…Now, as a biker I have always ridden as though no one has ever seen me and have positioned myself accordingly…I am now 51 and so far have managed to stay alive without being maimed or even suffering minor injuries form other road users, I do not wear hi-viz( I abhor it) I ride to save my life at all times and I will lane split at 80MPH when possible on all roads, so I am no angel.
I am still here, I enjoy my biking, but I know that if I put myself in a blind spot, or depend on someone else seeing me, I will be injured or dead…I ride for me, no one else, but I do respect other road users when it comes to my life, this is a mix of experience and common sense, the test and tuition had little part to play in my life being preserved, that was down to me.
I f cyclists had the same simple yet effective attitude, then perhaps they would not end up as road kill.
roaduser66:
The “Hang Back” message explains that the nearside of an HGV is THE DANGER ZONE and cyclists must never, ever , enter THE DANGER ZONE. Which means that every time an HGV driver overtakes a cyclist the cyclist is placed slap bang in THE DANGER ZONE. So, using thier own logic, these vehicles must never overtake cyclists and place them in danger. Either the HGV overtakes or the cyclist filters on the nearside. End result is the same, the person on the bike is in THE DANGER ZONE.Except cyclists undertaking isn’t what’s hurting the riders. Usually they’re hit from behind or the HGV overtakes then cuts in. Left hook. HGV drivers playing with phones have killed more people than cyclists have in ANY circumstances so any sensible policy would tackle the danger at source. HGV drivers.
Oh sorry we are back on its all the hauliers fault bit…
Must have missed the bit where you answered the points about your own community standing up and actually doing something about this problem as well
Yes when over taking but we all give as much room as possible but tthe should be more emphasis on cyckists taking responsibility for there actions ive personly had them hanging on to my curtain straps, so how safe is that then, if he had lost control and gone under my wheels im the one that gets all the ■■■■■ from his greiving relatives
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
And will you stop saying that there usually hit from behind when there not
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
tomo3607:
Yes when over taking but we all give as much room as possible but tthe should be more emphasis on cyckists taking responsibility for there actions ive personly had them hanging on to my curtain straps, so how safe is that then, if he had lost control and gone under my wheels im the one that gets all the [zb] from his greiving relativesSent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
Get a dashcam facing backwards. If you haven’t already you can’t be that bothered by this regular event.
Number 1 easiest, cheapest and sensible thing that TFL or whatever could do, would be to stop painting cycle feeder lanes up the nearside, or mark them out with a with a 10m/33ft yellow box back from the stop line. Why’s it mostly women who get killed by left turning trucks? Mostly because they are more likely to follow the rules. TFL should capitalise on that and make the rules stop encouraging cyclists to position themselves that way.
Another easy win. Make some bloody simple adverts. Not the ridiculous one someone else posted here the other day. Remember “clunk click every trip”? Maybe not the best choice of spokesperson for it, in the end, but it got the message across 
Make the company owner jointly responsible if the driver isn’t legit. No matter how much of a cowboy the boss is, will they really employ a driver with no licence if he knows that he’s also going to jail when that driver kills someone? I think not!
Trouble is, there isn’t any incentive for the politicos to do anything useful.