http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Cyclists and Pedestrians (mild rant) en Sun, 31 May 2026 06:44:35 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4661 Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:01:42 +0000 Kim 4661@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes the speed limits along the canal are for the boats see the <a href="http://www.britishwaterways.co.uk/license-it/boating-essentials/navigation-rules">BW Navigation Rules</a> 4 (g) "Exceed the speed limit. Creating waves causes expensive damage to the Waterway." </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4658 Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:39:13 +0000 SRD 4658@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"The one mentioned above is on the Canal. I assume British Waterways ones are even less legally valid." </p> <p>I've always thought the speed limits on the canal referred to the boats! Am I wrong? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4657 Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:36:03 +0000 Dave 4657@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The only problem with the Mars bar analogy is that to be correct, we'd have to say that people stealing wide-screen plasma TVs are getting a verbal warning, while those stealing Mars bars are going to jail.</p> <p>I'm sure it's possible to be worried about this without actually promoting mars bar theft. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4654 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:46:35 +0000 Kim 4654@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Most driver regard speed limit signs as purely advisory... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4649 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:42:12 +0000 SRD 4649@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Must admit that it is this sort of thing that makes me realize that I live in a foreign country. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4648 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:36:41 +0000 Smudge 4648@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Gembo "What is the point of an advisory sign?"</p> <p>Particularly where there have been a run of accidents through excessive speed, an advisory could be used, set quite low, to provide a guide for drivers/riders unfamiliar with the route without restricting the ability of others to make good progress when conditions are suitable.<br /> If set apparently artificailly low it allows for less both confident drivers and a range of vehicles. For example I could comfortably take a family car round there at 40mph without upsetting the passengers, 50 on my motorbike, 30 however is probably about right for an HGV tanker. So in the tanker, I'm happy, in the others I am safe but can speed up a little if I wish.</p> <p>Not saying that is the official reason, just my understanding of it. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4647 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:43:11 +0000 LaidBack 4647@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That's why we have lanes, I suppose. Those that feel compelled by speed limits stay to the left (except to allow merging traffic to join I think). Those that feel less compelled by speed limits (advisory or otherwise) stay on the outside and run their vehicle as fast as they feel is safe.</p> <p>Got a lift with someone that set an audible warning when his car went above 80mph. I enquired and found that this is one way to avoid speed traps.... sorry off subject here... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4641 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:43:06 +0000 gembo 4641@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What is the point of an advisory sign? If the advice is that the limit should be 30mph or 20 mph then people will drive at that speed if compelled. (well most people). If it is only advisory then less people will drive at the speed the advice indicates? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4630 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 18:18:37 +0000 chdot 4630@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I'm going off topic again for a cycle forum"</p> <p>that's fine, you have a useful driver+cyclist perspective. </p> <p>It's going off topic that's the problem... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4625 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:56:05 +0000 Smudge 4625@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yup, that's the one. Most frustrating crawling round the bend at 25mph and causing tailbacks when it is only advisory but someone in front believes it is mandatory... hopefully when it is changed to two lanes that problem will disappear as safe overtaking should be possible. However I'm going off topic again for a cycle forum, sorry ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4620 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:13:40 +0000 Kim 4620@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@anth at work "Is a cyclist a risk to a pedestrian?" Yes but a very slight one. Although it is rare for pedestrians to be hit by cyclist, it does happen. When it does the cyclist <em>should</em> by liable, unless the cyclist can show negligence on the part of the pedestrian, i.e. they saw the cyclist coming and deliberately jumped in front of them. </p> <p>"Stealing a mars bar poses no risk to anyone" little bit worried about that one coming from a lawyer. I am sure the guy who owns the shop I buy my paper from would see it just theft at a risk to his livelihood.</p> <p>@Smudge, are you referring to a sign saying max speed 30mph? If yes, then that is advisory (see <a href="http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/gpg/trafficsigns.pdf">Know Your Traffic Signs</a> page 137), Red rings or circles tell you what you must not do. Of course if you ignore the advice given and then have a crash you can be found negligent. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566&page=2#post-4614 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:51:15 +0000 chdot 4614@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Smudge</p> <p>That sounds correct.</p> <p>The one mentioned above is on the Canal. I assume British Waterways ones are even less legally valid. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4613 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:45:08 +0000 Smudge 4613@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Anth what about (probably) 'advisory' signs."<br /> I will have to check up sometime, however I have been told at least once by a Traffic Policeman that square / oblong signs are advisory, the round ones are compulsory, anyone able to confirm?<br /> Certainly when I did an IAM test the examiner advised me that the speed limit sign on the long curve where one leaves the M9 turning towards the bridge is an advisory not a compulsory... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4599 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:46:51 +0000 chdot 4599@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Anth what about (probably) 'advisory' signs.</p> <p>"There is a huge sign saying Cyclists Dismount but we all ignore that."</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=171#post-1184" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=171#post-1184</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4593 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:57:06 +0000 LaidBack 4593@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>In exactly the same way I think if you're caught doing something wrong on the bike it's not legitimate to say, "Ah but drivers pose more of a risk when they do something wrong, so I shouldn't be dealt with."</em></p> <p>I could only imagine what the woman was saying to the police. She was doing her best to look surprised and hopefully didn't use that argument. If she had looked behind her then she may have noticed that the police were around (another good reason to check behind you!). For all I know she may have run another red light further back and they were really getting hacked off. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4588 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:27:22 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 4588@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>To carry on that analogy actually. If I steal a mars bar and get caught would it be a legitimate excuse to say, "Ah but some people steal cars, that's much more serious, so I shouldn't be dealt with"?</p> <p>In exactly the same way I think if you're caught doing something wrong on the bike it's not legitimate to say, "Ah but drivers pose more of a risk when they do something wrong, so I shouldn't be dealt with."</p> <p>Re-allocation of perspective is needed, yes, but it shouldn't be a way for anyone to dodge their responsibilities to others and to not breaking the the law. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4586 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:24:40 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 4586@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Absolutely correct Kim, but... Is a cyclist <em>a</em> risk to a pedestrian? As far as I'm concerned if you break the law you do it knowingly and should be dealt with accordingly, no matter what your transport choice. If you don't like the law then campaign against it.</p> <p>And please, let's not compare cyclists breaking laws that they don't think should apply to them as some sort of Rosa Parks-esque stand (I've seen motorists try it with speed limits, it's utterly demeaning). Putting risk aside, because no-one was hurt in any of these actions, are we seriously considering that breaking the law on a bike is acceptable? And is that because we're cyclists? One rule for us, another for motorists?</p> <p>Stealing a mars bar poses no risk to anyone whatsoever (save perhaps obesity for the purloiner) but it remains illegal. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4585 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:18:45 +0000 Kim 4585@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Cyclist or motorist, which is the greatest risk to others? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4583 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:09:19 +0000 chdot 4583@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Police dish out 20 spot fines per day</p> <p>ON-THE-SPOT fines for anti-social behaviour are being handed out by Lothian and Borders Police at the rate of nearly 20 a day.A total of 6,871 fixed penalty notices were issued in 2009 for offences such as drunkenness, vandalism and breach of the peace – more than twice that for 2008.</p> <p><a href="http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Police-dish-out-20-spot.6187390.jp" rel="nofollow">http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Police-dish-out-20-spot.6187390.jp</a>"</p> <p>Motorists? Cyclists? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4582 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:03:30 +0000 LaidBack 4582@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><strong>anth</strong><em>"drivers DO behave like this (in their own way, the offences are different) and DON'T get nicked."</em></p> <p>I watched a driver continue across a green man in front of police van waiting to turn right off at Lawnmarket. I actually pointed in the vain hope that they would 'do something'. I mean if someone can't see a red light and police car waiting at same junction then what next..?</p> <p>The police sat and ignored. The traffic was heavy and in reality they could have caught suspect on foot as he just joined a queue going down Mound. So it wasn't speeding you see. He was merely someone like them that didn't want to spend hours stuck in traffic!</p> <p>Some roads are now so full to overflowing with cars that it's now accepted by many drivers and pedestrians that traffic lights are 'advisory'!</p> <p><strong>In contrast</strong><br /> I was waiting to wheel a bike over green man at West End beside Frasers. I saw a woman (normally dressed, no helmet) in her twenties on a bicycle with basket heading towards Charlotte Square. Traffic had stopped at the Fraser's side of road. Next thing I hear a police siren and this patrol car undertakes her at barriers and stops her. The pedestrian crossing is still red but it seems she had infringed something. They had blue lights flashing etc.<br /> Overkill? I think she was booked because traffic was quiet. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4581 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 11:36:08 +0000 chdot 4581@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>This was sent to CTC members last week, (and forwarded to me).</p> <p>From: philip rankin &lt;philiprankin@hotmail.com&gt;</p> <p>Subject: cycling safety in edinburgh</p> <p>Hi All</p> <p>I am attending a meeting with Lothians and Borders Police on Cycling Safety in Edinburgh next Tuesday. If anyone has any burning issue about cycling safety which you would like raised please let me know<br /> regards<br /> Philip </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4571 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:10:38 +0000 Dave 4571@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Funny, I was just thinking that! </p> <p>This weekend I was highly amused to see a taxi driver roll up to a red light at the big junction near Blackford Station, wait for a gap in the traffic which did have a green light, and then gun it through.</p> <p>It was terrible. Situations like this are what give all drivers a bad name, and I was scandalised and outraged to be tarred with his brush! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4567 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:04:03 +0000 chdot 4567@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>We're in a parallel universe here</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=559#post-4565" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=559#post-4565</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4566 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:51:16 +0000 SRD 4566@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I always assume that car drivers who jump a red, know they are breaking the law, and look round rather suspiciously for police. They gamble, but I rather assume that if a cop car pulls out behind them, they acknowledge that they broke the rules. </p> <p>Cyclists always seem to have this 'it doesn't apply to me' attitude. (maybe a bit more like red lights or speeding at 3am - 'the laws aren't for circs like this, and I know better what is safe')</p> <p>The drivers and violations that really gall me are the drivers on their mobiles who don't even consider themselves to be vulnerable to accusations of breaking the law, and just flagrantly chat without a care in the world. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4562 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:23:21 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 4562@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>This comment from Liz struck a chord with me: "If car drivers behaved like this they could expect to get nicked", mainly because it's one you hear from the anti-cycling lobby a lot.</p> <p>The fact of the matter is, while this is true, absolutely 100% true, drivers DO behave like this (in their own way, the offences are different) and DON'T get nicked. Just last night I was in the car and stopped at a red light, a car pulled out from a side street behind me, undertook me and went straight through the red. They didn't get nicked.</p> <p>They SHOULD. As should the cyclists who flout the law, but saying that, "If car drivers behaved like this they could expect to get nicked" sort of backs up that idea of cyclists as law-breaking eejits and drivers as rule-following saints.</p> <p>There are two laws in this country that I can guarantee are the most broken, and at the same time the least prosecuted. Firstly, a pub is not allowed to sell alcohol to someone who is intoxicated, and secondly, drivers are not supposed to break the speed limit.</p> <p>Note, I'm not saying law-breaking cyclists shouldn't be dealt with, they should, clearly.</p> <p>By the by, at the Eyre Place/Rodney Street bit mentioned above, I always get off and push. It's daft, it's ridiculous, it's a gap with no sense, but my personal view is we get a bad enough press as it is without me 'flagrantly breaking the law when a driver would expect to get nicked for such behaviour...' ;) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4544 Sun, 28 Mar 2010 17:13:46 +0000 chdot 4544@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"not meant to be popular"</p> <p>Just <a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=512">trendy</a>. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4543 Sun, 28 Mar 2010 17:11:16 +0000 LaidBack 4543@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Yeah, thought it looked like you, but you were quickly obscured by big bus! </em></p> <p>Good. Glad no-one else was recumbenteering... not meant to be popular. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4541 Sun, 28 Mar 2010 16:57:12 +0000 SRD 4541@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yeah, thought it looked like you, but you were quickly obscured by big bus! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4540 Sun, 28 Mar 2010 16:49:59 +0000 LaidBack 4540@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>My foul mood ameliorated only slightly when a recumbant (that you Laidback?) went through a few minutes later, and waited nicely at lights....</em></p> <p>Went up Lothian Road about 10am on Saturday morning but was on a trike recumbent with a flag. I don't remember stopping at lights at King Stables. I was on way from Stockbridge - a couple from Northumbria had booked a trike tour for a birthday present.</p> <p><em>Gosh you seem to have more than your fair share of troubles SRD. I wonder if it is something to do with the weans?</em></p> <p>When you have children you do get very angry when their safety is put in question. Children are also very good at pointing out when something is wrong.... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=566#post-4539 Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:49:26 +0000 SRD 4539@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Definitely my worst pedestrian encounters yet. Surely, it can only get better! </p>