A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:09 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Alexis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 45
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

Mrcheerful wrote:

wrote:
On Sunday, 21 July 2013 22:16:07 UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-29436118.html


The Republic (there's a clue here) of Ireland is no longer part of
the UK, it was granted independence almost a century ago. Do keep up.


Then I should have marked it OT, sorry.

The particularly interesting bit about the story is that Ireland is having a
crackdown on RLJ cyclists and is to introduce on the spot fines of 50 euros
from next year. Apparently this has worked marvellously in places that have
enforced it, reducing cylists RLJ to miniscule levels.


Good. So, this horrendous problem (as you keep on reporting) that we
have with scofflaw cyclists can be readily remedied. I trust that the
relevant authorities understand this just as well as you do and no
doubt wherever they perceive the problem to warrant such action they
can step in and take it.

Likewise, where the problem is not thought to warrant such action,
none need be taken - other than, of course, to keep the situation
under review.

Maybe we can all get some peace now.

Ads
  #22  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:32 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:55:24 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 22/07/2013 08:26, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:44:26 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 21/07/2013 23:45, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:25:31 +0100, "Iain" wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:16:07 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-29436118.html

That photo is a rather curious one.

If I rewind the scene in my mind's eye, I have the jay walking
pedestrian, supposedly avoiding the cyclist, materialising having just
walked through the truck.

If I wind it forward a little, I have the cyclist resting one foot on
the ground just behind the stop line.

The cyclist in the picture is described as a "lycra law-breaker", but
he appears to be wearing black jeans and a white cotton t-shirt.

The cyclist in the picture is described as 'a cyclist'. You appear to be
quoting from the sub-heading.

I was quoting from the main article, yes. And the photo was
illustrating exactly which article?

Caption to the photograph: "A a woman evades a cyclist breaking the red
light at College Green, Dublin".

Sub-headline to the (whole) article: "THE heatwave appears to have
turned the growing army of cyclists on our streets into lycra law-breakers".

Come on, this isn't difficult.


No it's not. Mr Reilly spent 20 minutes observing cyclists. He
describes them in the article, and just one he describes as being clad
in lycra: a greybeard, a young man in a Manchester United top, a
middle-aged man and a pretty girl of Asian extraction, a Joni Mitchell
lookalike, a lycra clad, Oakley-sunglasses wearing speed king, a
cool-looking male student with a trilby, a beefy Italian-looking chap.



No, there is no reason whatsoever to suppose that the cyclist in the
photograph was being described as clad in lycra. It is as I pointed out
above.


Do you think that the girl in the photo had to evade the cyclist, as
claimed?

It there any evidence that the cyclist in the photo was "breaking the
red light", as claimed?

It clearly does not say what you desperately claim it says. Only someone
grasping at a straw in trying to deny the undeniable would weirdly claim
otherwise.


The photo clearly does not show what it claims to show in the caption,
and does not show what is claimed in the article it illustrates
either.
  #23  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:34 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 09:24:00 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:01:18 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:16:07 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-29436118.html

That photo is a rather curious one.

If I rewind the scene in my mind's eye, I have the jay walking
pedestrian, supposedly avoiding the cyclist, materialising having
just walked through the truck.

If I wind it forward a little, I have the cyclist resting one foot
on the ground just behind the stop line.

The cyclist in the picture is described as a "lycra law-breaker",
but he appears to be wearing black jeans and a white cotton t-shirt.

Well that completely negates the report.

Why are you trying to evade the subject, is it embarassing to you?


Why would I be embarrassed by what happens in Ireland?


It is like talking to a child. The subject is red light jumping.


And I do not condone red light jumping by cyclist or motor vehicle
driver. The latter I consider far more dangerous.
  #24  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:36 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 09:54:58 +0100, Judith
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:27:55 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


Why would I be embarrassed by what happens in Ireland?



"Lycra law-breakers" exist throughout the world? Are you proud of that then?


Law-breakers exist throughout the world. I am proud that law-breaking
is in steep decline in this country.
  #25  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:37 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 09:27:06 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sunday, 21 July 2013 22:16:07 UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-29436118.html


The Republic (there's a clue here) of Ireland is no longer part of
the UK, it was granted independence almost a century ago. Do keep up.


Then I should have marked it OT, sorry.

The particularly interesting bit about the story is that Ireland is having a
crackdown on RLJ cyclists and is to introduce on the spot fines of 50 euros
from next year. Apparently this has worked marvellously in places that have
enforced it, reducing cylists RLJ to miniscule levels.


Sark has a much more interesting ban in place.
  #26  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:38 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 09:59:26 +0100, Judith
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 09:27:06 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sunday, 21 July 2013 22:16:07 UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-29436118.html

The Republic (there's a clue here) of Ireland is no longer part of
the UK, it was granted independence almost a century ago. Do keep up.


Then I should have marked it OT, sorry.

The particularly interesting bit about the story is that Ireland is having a
crackdown on RLJ cyclists and is to introduce on the spot fines of 50 euros
from next year. Apparently this has worked marvellously in places that have
enforced it, reducing cylists RLJ to miniscule levels.



I think something similar is need here to crack down on the lycra law-breakers.
(© Crispin)


Will the term "lycra law-breaker" now produce a Pavlovian response
from you?
  #27  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:42 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On 22/07/2013 10:32, Bertie Wooster wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 22/07/2013 08:26, Bertie Wooster wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 21/07/2013 23:45, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:25:31 +0100, "Iain" wrote:
Bertie Wooster wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote:


http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-29436118.html


That photo is a rather curious one.
If I rewind the scene in my mind's eye, I have the jay walking
pedestrian, supposedly avoiding the cyclist, materialising having just
walked through the truck.
If I wind it forward a little, I have the cyclist resting one foot on
the ground just behind the stop line.
The cyclist in the picture is described as a "lycra law-breaker", but
he appears to be wearing black jeans and a white cotton t-shirt.


The cyclist in the picture is described as 'a cyclist'. You appear to be
quoting from the sub-heading.


I was quoting from the main article, yes. And the photo was
illustrating exactly which article?


Caption to the photograph: "A a woman evades a cyclist breaking the red
light at College Green, Dublin".
Sub-headline to the (whole) article: "THE heatwave appears to have
turned the growing army of cyclists on our streets into lycra law-breakers".
Come on, this isn't difficult.


No it's not. Mr Reilly spent 20 minutes observing cyclists. He
describes them in the article, and just one he describes as being clad
in lycra: a greybeard, a young man in a Manchester United top, a
middle-aged man and a pretty girl of Asian extraction, a Joni Mitchell
lookalike, a lycra clad, Oakley-sunglasses wearing speed king, a
cool-looking male student with a trilby, a beefy Italian-looking chap.


No, there is no reason whatsoever to suppose that the cyclist in the
photograph was being described as clad in lycra. It is as I pointed out
above.


Do you think that the girl in the photo had to evade the cyclist, as
claimed?


I see no reason to doubt it. The reporter was there and I was not. In
don't think you were there either.

It there any evidence that the cyclist in the photo was "breaking the
red light", as claimed?


I see no reason to doubt it. The reporter was there and I was not. In
don't think you were there either.

It clearly does not say what you desperately claim it says. Only someone
grasping at a straw in trying to deny the undeniable would weirdly claim
otherwise.


The photo clearly does not show what it claims to show in the caption,
and does not show what is claimed in the article it illustrates
either.


You inadvertently put in a "not" in that sentence. It cannot possibly be
justified, so it is reasonable to assume that you meant to say the
opposite of what you actually said.

The only circumstance in which you could possibly have meant what you
specifically said would be that you were present at the scene (being the
cyclist in the picture, perhaps) and are thus in a position to offer an
alternative explanation (which might or might not be accepted) for a
picture which otherwise, you cannot explain except in terms of it
depicting exactly what the caption says it depicts.

And is there any reason to doubt it?

Other than that you simply don't want to accept it, I mean.
  #28  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:43 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On 22/07/2013 10:36, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 09:54:58 +0100, Judith
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:27:55 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


Why would I be embarrassed by what happens in Ireland?



"Lycra law-breakers" exist throughout the world? Are you proud of that then?


Law-breakers exist throughout the world. I am proud that law-breaking
is in steep decline in this country.


Not, unfortunately, among cyclists.
  #29  
Old July 22nd 13, 10:51 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 484
Default 66 percent of cyclists ignore red lights

On Monday, 22 July 2013 10:42:35 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:

I see no reason to doubt it. The reporter was there and I was not. In
don't think you were there either.


Are you such a wide-eyed innocent that you believe everything you read in a newspaper?

The only circumstance in which you could possibly have meant what you
specifically said would be that you were present at the scene (being the
cyclist in the picture, perhaps) and are thus in a position to offer an
alternative explanation (which might or might not be accepted) for a
picture which otherwise, you cannot explain except in terms of it
depicting exactly what the caption says it depicts.

And is there any reason to doubt it?

Other than that you simply don't want to accept it, I mean.


Lets analyse this photo. The An Post lorry is in front of the red light, so has the light only just turned to red, is there a jam, is the cyclist about to stop? None of these questions can be answered from this photograph.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
20 percent of Oxford cyclists ignore red lights Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 29 February 12th 13 03:19 PM
2 percent rising in cycling, 9 percent rise in KSI, safety in numbers! Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 1 September 28th 12 03:25 PM
Cyclists are 9 percent of the road casualties in Leeds Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 10 May 30th 12 08:24 PM
why do cyclists think that they don't need lights at night? Mrcheerful[_2_] UK 49 December 16th 10 01:19 PM
Why do drivers ignore cyclists on roundabouts? Doug[_3_] UK 76 February 19th 10 08:24 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.