OT - unbelievable

On or around 14 Jul 2006 07:24:13 -0700, "Dave P"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Cyclist caught going through red light, fined £30. Appeals, complains
>that this is a waste of police time, and the wrong thing to do, as it
>discourages people from getting out of their cars and onto a bike.

cnut. You ride on the road, you obey the rules same as the rest of us, and
running red lights is almost always dangerous. I suppose he'd still be of
the same view if his thoughtless action had caused an accident wherein
others, not he, got hurt.

>He should try driving a car for a bit. Then he's know about
>unreasonable enforcement of the law. I bet he wears a bobble hat.

or worse yet, a motorbike.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"It is a characteristic of the human mind to hate the man one has injured"
Tacitus (c.55 - c.117) Agricola, 45

On or around Sat, 15 Jul 2006 14:14:35 +0100, Ian Rawlings
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On 2006-07-15, beamendsltd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> And it isn't here?!!!!
>
>According to friends who've tried it, it's a *lot* worse in France, I
>don't know the specifics but apparently who you know is very
>important, far more so than your legal rights. People seem to think
>that Britain is the worst place to be, I've said previously that
>foreigners I've met have been amazed at how much freedom we have here
>compared to their home countries like France, Sweden and Germany.
>

AIUI, the law in france is rather by way of being opposite to ours: roughly
speaking, in this country, you can do anything that's not forbidden, whereas
in france, you can do the things which are allowed. If it's not
specifically allowed, you can get done for doing it.

Speaking of such stuff as building and the like, mainly.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"It is a characteristic of the human mind to hate the man one has injured"
Tacitus (c.55 - c.117) Agricola, 45

On 2006-07-17, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> AIUI, the law in france is rather by way of being opposite to ours: roughly
> speaking, in this country, you can do anything that's not forbidden, whereas
> in france, you can do the things which are allowed. If it's not
> specifically allowed, you can get done for doing it.

I was flabbergasted at the ex military vehicle legislation being
pushed through their legal system at the moment. It's like a more
extreme version of the NERC bill, i.e. "why would anyone want to do
that, ban it!" but in this case, the vehicles get confiscated and
scrapped. Apparently if it's passed as it currently is, if you drive
a 101FC or olive-drab landy to france, expect to be walking back minus
the vehicle. Hopefully they'll stop playing the fool.

I was also warned by some french types to carry cash with me at all
times in case of traffic fines, if you can't pay an on-the-spot fine
right there and then, you can be made to abandon the vehicle and walk.
No idea if that's true or not, it sounds too draconian to me, or
perhaps they can do it but generally don't, but I didn't take chances.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

<snip>
: I was also warned by some french types to carry cash with me at all
: times in case of traffic fines, if you can't pay an on-the-spot fine
: right there and then, you can be made to abandon the vehicle and walk.
: No idea if that's true or not, it sounds too draconian to me, or
: perhaps they can do it but generally don't, but I didn't take chances.

Well if you havent got the cash, just make sure you've got a sheep that you
can set light to - that appears to be the french way

Si

Austin Shackles wrote:
> On or around 14 Jul 2006 07:24:13 -0700, "Dave P"
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>> Cyclist caught going through red light, fined £30. Appeals, complains
>> that this is a waste of police time, and the wrong thing to do, as it
>> discourages people from getting out of their cars and onto a bike.
>
> cnut. You ride on the road, you obey the rules same as the rest of us, and
> running red lights is almost always dangerous. I suppose he'd still be of
> the same view if his thoughtless action had caused an accident wherein
> others, not he, got hurt.
>
>> He should try driving a car for a bit. Then he's know about
>> unreasonable enforcement of the law. I bet he wears a bobble hat.
>
> or worse yet, a motorbike.

Amazing thread.

There's a similar, but opposite thread flaming 4wd drivers in a bike
forum I belong to, I'd cross post but I like you guys too much to start
a nuclear flame war.

Let's face it, the *average* cyclist is as law abiding as the *average*
motorist. None of us has never made a mistake.

Get over it!

Karen, who drives a car, drives a Land Rover, and has two treadlies too.
AND wears Lycra (tm)
I do as many kms in the motors as I do on the bikes per week.

--
"Sometimes I think I have a Guardian Idiot - a little invisible spirit
just behind my shoulder, looking out for me ... only he's an imbecile" -
Jake Stonebender

On or around Fri, 14 Jul 2006 16:56:37 +0100, "William Tasso"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Don't start me off on traffic lights at roundabouts - you'll never get me
>to stop. That has to be one of the worlds best arguments against over
>engineering.

properly done, they work quite well. properly, they work in concert to
allow the main traffic flow to proceed across the rdbt in whichever
direction it does, (or 2 flows in more than 1 direction) while stopping it
every now and then to let the minor flow traffic have a chance.

>If the round-a-bout can't-cope/is-failing then redesign it or replace it
>with a traditional junction and lights as a last resort.

the biggest weakness of roundabouts is that they fail quite quickly if
there's one heavily-trafficked path across them. All other inputs get
swamped. The only solution is lights to stop the heavy flow every now and
then. Of course, in overall light traffic the lights can be switched off,
and some of them are. It should be easy enough to combine this with sensors
for waiting traffic and a decent programming setup to balance the needs of
the traffic flows.

Having recently done quite a bit of big-roundabout stuff on motorway
junctions and the like, when there's significant traffic, the ones with
lights almost invariably work better.

Of course, mini roundabouts are the work of Stan and should be ignored where
at all possible - the roundabout rules just don't work properly, on such a
small device. Just use a normal junction, and if the traffic doesn't flow
right, put lights on it.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Travel The Galaxy! Meet Fascinating Life Forms...
------------------------------------------------\
>> http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ << \ ...and Kill them.
a webcartoon by Howard Tayler; I like it, maybe you will too!

On or around Sat, 15 Jul 2006 13:02:19 +0100, PDannyD
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Perhaps motorists should start looking at themselves as being the cause of
>congestion rather than grasping at straws and blaming cyclists who are
>obviously bastards intent on using the road for which the poor motorist has
>paid for.

while I agree in general, I also take Richard's point: if there's a good,
usable cycle path, f*cking well ride on it. in our area we have narrow,
bendy main roads and the drivers of artics are well aware for the most part
of the problems and dangers of passing bicycles. Thus you get a build-up of
traffic at 5mph up a hill behind a bicycle. Now if the cyclist has no
option but to use the road, then I have no complaint at all. But if there's
a good cycle path, then the best thing for all concerned is for the cyclists
to use it, and to deliberately eschew it simply to make a point is, in my
view, pathetic.

And yes, I'm well aware that SOME cycle paths are not good and usable, and
if it's clearly more difficult to ride on the path than on the road, then I
would still support the cyclist in riding on the road.


There's also the point from the highway code about drivers of large or slow
vehicles pulling in where possible to allow faster traffic to proceed, and I
reckon most cyclists could heed that, too.

more tolerance and less impatience and less downright orneryness will make
the roads more bearable for all of us. As example the 2 miles or so of 5-10
mph traffic on the south side of the roundabout on the A417 last evening
where it goes from 2 lanes down to 1. I sat in the outer lane (since that's
where I arrived at the back of the queue) and pootled steadily along at 5-10
mph, and only actually came to a standstill about 3 times. At intervals
there was a gap in front of me of as much as 50 yards, and sure enough on 4
occasions sometosser from the other lane jumped into it, then had to stop,
then didn't make any better progress. 2 of them switched back to the inner
lane and still made no better progress.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Chuck didn't reply, so George swung round in his saddle. He could just
see Chuck's face, a white oval turned toward the sky.
'Look,' whispered Chuck, and George lifted his eyes to heaven.
(There is always a last time for everything.)
Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out"
Arthur C. Clarke, "The 9 billion names of God"

On or around Sat, 15 Jul 2006 17:17:52 +0100, PDannyD
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Bicycles do bugger all damage as well as producing no more pollution than a
>pedestrian so they shouldn't have to pay any VED yet some people seem to
>think because cyclists don't pay VED that they somehow have no right to use
>the roads.

they breathe out loads of CO2 though...
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Chuck didn't reply, so George swung round in his saddle. He could just
see Chuck's face, a white oval turned toward the sky.
'Look,' whispered Chuck, and George lifted his eyes to heaven.
(There is always a last time for everything.)
Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out"
Arthur C. Clarke, "The 9 billion names of God"

On or around Sat, 15 Jul 2006 17:24:53 +0100, "Nige"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>I'll let you have that, but they MUST be insured given the idiocy i see from some of them.
>

and they must obey the rules and it's absolutely right that they get fined
just the same as I would for infringing them.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Chuck didn't reply, so George swung round in his saddle. He could just
see Chuck's face, a white oval turned toward the sky.
'Look,' whispered Chuck, and George lifted his eyes to heaven.
(There is always a last time for everything.)
Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out"
Arthur C. Clarke, "The 9 billion names of God"

> I was also warned by some french types to carry cash with me at all
> times in case of traffic fines, if you can't pay an on-the-spot fine
> right there and then, you can be made to abandon the vehicle and walk.
> No idea if that's true or not, it sounds too draconian to me, or
> perhaps they can do it but generally don't, but I didn't take chances.

If you can't pay they confiscate your documents (passport etc) and send
you off (they don't make you walk that I've ever heard of) to go and
get the money and come back within half hour or something similar then
you can have your documents back!

The roadside fines aren't quite as bad as many people make out. But
if you get caught for something serious then court issued fines (and
prison sentences!) can be very severe - talking many thousands of
Euros - worst one is if you kill someone and are found negligent it
can be up to 100,000€ fine and 7 years inside.

Matt

On 2006-07-17, Matthew Maddock <[email protected]> wrote:

> If you can't pay they confiscate your documents (passport etc) and send
> you off (they don't make you walk that I've ever heard of) to go and
> get the money and come back within half hour or something similar then
> you can have your documents back!

That sounds more reasonable, I didn't think even the french could be
that nasty! The french types I spoke to did say people had been made
to walk, perhaps that's old stuff, myth, a power used occasionally, or
a wind-up.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:48:26 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On or around Fri, 14 Jul 2006 16:56:37 +0100, "William Tasso"
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>> Don't start me off on traffic lights at roundabouts - you'll never get
>> me
>> to stop. That has to be one of the worlds best arguments against over
>> engineering.
>
> properly done, they work quite well. properly, they work in concert to
> allow the main traffic flow to proceed across the rdbt in whichever
> direction it does, (or 2 flows in more than 1 direction) while stopping
> it
> every now and then to let the minor flow traffic have a chance.

properly done, a roundabout will do all of that

>> If the round-a-bout can't-cope/is-failing then redesign it or replace it
>> with a traditional junction and lights as a last resort.
>
> the biggest weakness of roundabouts is that they fail quite quickly if
> there's one heavily-trafficked path across them. All other inputs get
> swamped. The only solution is lights to stop the heavy flow every now
> and
> then.

You and I will have to disagree on this - I think that the problem is that
roundabout traffic is sometimes too fast for a vehicle at a standing start
to merge into. Smaller roundabouts or sharper turns would make the
traffic speed slower.

> Of course, in overall light traffic the lights can be switched off,
> and some of them are. It should be easy enough to combine this with
> sensors
> for waiting traffic and a decent programming setup to balance the needs
> of
> the traffic flows.

I agree - all of that. This type of traffic management is kiddie stuff.
FFS my local big supermarket has a set of lights controlling the junction
- why these are operating at 2:00 in the morning is anybodys guess.


> Having recently done quite a bit of big-roundabout stuff on motorway
> junctions and the like, when there's significant traffic, the ones with
> lights almost invariably work better.

don't be fooled - it's a sticky plaster over bad design.

> Of course, mini roundabouts are the work of Stan and should be ignored
> where
> at all possible - the roundabout rules just don't work properly, on such
> a
> small device. Just use a normal junction, and if the traffic doesn't
> flow
> right, put lights on it.

They are generally ingnored IME.

The 'problem' at many junctions is only apparent during times of peak
usage. Well traffic jams are what happens when it's busy - there's little
point in designing a traffic system for every eventuality.

At 8:00AM there is the expectation of delays.
At 10:00AM they should really be the exception.

--
William Tasso

Land Rover - 110 V8
Discovery - V8

Matthew Maddock wrote:
>> I was also warned by some french types to carry cash with me at all
>> times in case of traffic fines, if you can't pay an on-the-spot fine
>> right there and then, you can be made to abandon the vehicle and
>> walk. No idea if that's true or not, it sounds too draconian to me,
>> or perhaps they can do it but generally don't, but I didn't take
>> chances.
>
> If you can't pay they confiscate your documents (passport etc) and
> send you off (they don't make you walk that I've ever heard of) to go
> and get the money and come back within half hour or something similar
> then you can have your documents back!
>
> The roadside fines aren't quite as bad as many people make out. But
> if you get caught for something serious then court issued fines (and
> prison sentences!) can be very severe - talking many thousands of
> Euros - worst one is if you kill someone and are found negligent it
> can be up to 100,000€ fine and 7 years inside.
>
> Matt

That's OK, by the time you've made it to the ATM and back you'll be due full
remission and out in time to catch the ferry!

--
"He who says it cannot be done would be well advised not to interrupt
her doing it."

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

On 2006-07-17, GbH <[email protected]> wrote:

> That's OK, by the time you've made it to the ATM and back you'll be due full
> remission and out in time to catch the ferry!

It seems they have foreign criminals allowed to roam the country to
commit further crimes too!

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On or around Mon, 17 Jul 2006 16:18:01 +0100, "William Tasso"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:48:26 +0100, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On or around Fri, 14 Jul 2006 16:56:37 +0100, "William Tasso"
>> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>> properly done, they work quite well. properly, they work in concert to
>> allow the main traffic flow to proceed across the rdbt in whichever
>> direction it does, (or 2 flows in more than 1 direction) while stopping
>> it
>> every now and then to let the minor flow traffic have a chance.
>
>properly done, a roundabout will do all of that

not when there's a constant flow of traffic across a roundabout. Granted, a
PROPER solution to that is a flyover or underpass for the straight-in
traffic, but that multiplies the build cost quite considerably, so it
doesn't get done much. I see they're building one on the A419 by Swindon
though.

>> the biggest weakness of roundabouts is that they fail quite quickly if
>> there's one heavily-trafficked path across them. All other inputs get
>> swamped. The only solution is lights to stop the heavy flow every now
>> and
>> then.
>
>You and I will have to disagree on this - I think that the problem is that
>roundabout traffic is sometimes too fast for a vehicle at a standing start
>to merge into. Smaller roundabouts or sharper turns would make the
>traffic speed slower.

well, yes, that is the problem. but slowing the traffic on the heavy
through route unduly would create even more delays, I expect.

>> Of course, in overall light traffic the lights can be switched off,
>> and some of them are. It should be easy enough to combine this with
>> sensors
>> for waiting traffic and a decent programming setup to balance the needs
>> of
>> the traffic flows.
>
>I agree - all of that. This type of traffic management is kiddie stuff.
>FFS my local big supermarket has a set of lights controlling the junction
>- why these are operating at 2:00 in the morning is anybodys guess.

morons in planning. they should observe the lights for a week or three and
work out when they're necessary, then switch 'em off the rest of the time.

>> Having recently done quite a bit of big-roundabout stuff on motorway
>> junctions and the like, when there's significant traffic, the ones with
>> lights almost invariably work better.
>
>don't be fooled - it's a sticky plaster over bad design.

yeah, but the typical motorway junction works best it seems as a big
roundabout. adding peak-traffic-time lights just makes it a bit more
reliable, I reckon. lights all the time is of course silly.

>> small device. Just use a normal junction, and if the traffic doesn't
>> flow
>> right, put lights on it.
>
>They are generally ingnored IME.

I thought you meant the lights, for a moment, there.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Appearances: You don't really need make-up. Celebrate your authentic
face by frightening people in the street.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

On or around Mon, 17 Jul 2006 22:11:34 +1000, Karen Gallagher
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>Amazing thread.
>
>There's a similar, but opposite thread flaming 4wd drivers in a bike
>forum I belong to, I'd cross post but I like you guys too much to start
>a nuclear flame war.
>
>Let's face it, the *average* cyclist is as law abiding as the *average*
>motorist. None of us has never made a mistake.
>
>Get over it!

yeah, but the implication was that the bloke didn't pas the red light by
mistake, he did it deliberately, does so regularly and when caught in the
act instead of just paying the fine and saying "OK, fair cop" he took it to
court and challenged it. should be done for wasting police time.

I wonder what the result would be if a motorist did exactly the same?

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Blue: The sky is blue for a reason. Blue light is a source of strength
and harmony in the cosmos. Create a blue light in your life by
telephoning the police
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:57:08 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>not when there's a constant flow of traffic across a roundabout. Granted, a
>PROPER solution to that is a flyover or underpass for the straight-in
>traffic, but that multiplies the build cost quite considerably, so it
>doesn't get done much. I see they're building one on the A419 by Swindon
>though.

2 roundabouts on the main road through stoke on trent are getting
replaced with underpasses at the moment. its taken then 2 years so far
and made it almost impossible to get to certain places without taking
very long scenic routes or sitting in queues for hours.