"Hi-vis distracts from the real issues on our roads," says makers of bike camera warning signs; "Tedious" number plate debate follows former Met chief's comments; Friday Facebook Fancy; A front light with a difference; Mythbusting + more on the live blog

Steve K wrote:

squired wrote:

The response from the police was that scooters are on the road illegally, so there is nothing they can do about the guy who hit me.  

By that logic, they can't do anything about shootings.

No numberplate, so no way to identify him....  The video of the accident wasn't enough.  Or the fact that the camera from my bike shows that he went into the nearby Tesco and did some shopping before disappearing.  I suggested they might be able to identify him given that people generally pay by card, but they just closed the case and said there is nothing they can do.

When he hit me he was carrying a can of laughing gas, so I wouldn't be surprised if he was known to the police in the local area anyway.

squired wrote:

When he hit me he was carrying a can of laughing gas, so I wouldn't be surprised if he was known to the police in the local area anyway.

A can? I thought they were usually sold in cartridges (c.f. CO2) for use in whipped cream devices.

That seems extremely poor policing - straying into "can't be bothered" territory if you ask me.

When he hit me he was carrying a can of laughing gas, so I wouldn't be surprised if he was known to the police in the local area anyway

These 2 were high on nitrous, shouting and laughing while careering round Garstang, blaring the horn, with the driver turning to show this picture of a naked woman's breasts on his phone. Ignoring incidents like this is just part of the routine every day's work for a Lancashire copper. Mind how you go!

Or in fact anything.

squired wrote:

In the summer I was hit by a guy on an e-scooter.  I've had two shoulder surgeries since and am likely not back on the bike until January.  The response from the police was that scooters are on the road illegally, so there is nothing they can do about the guy who hit me.

I wonder if you could make an insurance claim against the MIB for an illegal scooter.

I suspect that it would fall under motorcycle rules and I seriously doubt they could refuse to cover injuries from an illegal motorbike on the road... Could probably only claim for injuries not property damage, but still.

(depending on the type of e-scooter, it could plausibly be certified as a motorbike if it had plates etc, so I would argue it should fall under MIB cover...)

squired wrote:

The response from the police was that scooters are on the road illegally, so there is nothing they can do about  

The police are reporting that they are powerless to stop people committing crimes? Is this really the position they want to take? Because what are we funding them for if this is the case?

It seems really simple, no need to check if the e scooter is legal or not, stop them, charge them and confiscate.

I'm triggered that you are fed up and outraged!

I'm outraged that you are triggered

That's the way the web works these days I'm afraid.

HarrogateSpa wrote:

There is some good content on road.cc but I get fed up with the way you constantly try to wind us up and get engagement through outrage.

When the former head of the nation's biggest police force makes a speech in the national legislative assembly calling for something that would be incredibly restrictive and damaging to cycling, it would be a bit odd if a cycling website didn't report it, wouldn't it?

Can't see anything on GCN or cyclingnews.com

They must be a bit odd...or maybe road.cc is a bit odd. 

They are both, as you well know, websites solely dedicated to cycle sport and as such this news does not come under their purview, as it naturally does for a more general cycling site like road.cc.

Rendel Harris wrote:

They are both, as you well know, websites solely dedicated to cycle sport and as such this news does not come under their purview, as it naturally does for a more general cycling site like road.cc.

Oh really? "Global Cycling Network" really sounds like a name they'd choose to focus on the sport side doesn't it! 

And hang on, did you say it'd be odd if "cycling websites" didn't report it? Which would mean you don't consider those to be "cycling websites" lol

thisismyusername wrote:

Oh really? "Global Cycling Network" really sounds like a name they'd choose to focus on the sport side doesn't it! 

And hang on, did you say it'd be odd if "cycling websites" didn't report it? Which would mean you don't consider those to be "cycling websites" lol

Oh sit down FFS Loser, go and look at the GCN website, every single article on there is about racing in one way or another apart from one article on teaching kids to ride. If you think these websites are so great why don't you stay on them instead of polluting the one from which you've already been banned? One suspects you're only here because of road.cc's curiously lax moderation policy whereby people banned from the site for bullying and racism are allowed back under new names, you clearly make this your trolling spot of choice as you know you'd be turfed from the other sites in minutes if you carried on as you do on here, and rightly so.

Now now, calm down, and come back into the room once you've considered your words and actions. 

More of your boring swipes at me - can't you think up anything else to say to try and get me banned? 

It's about time you were banned with your trolling of new users and pedantic childishness. 

It's not like you need to get that angry at me for correcting you. 

Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

More of your boring swipes at me - can't you think up anything else to say to try and get me banned? 

It's quite difficult to think of ways that you could get banned, given that you have already been banned as thisismyusername for your bullying, libel and racism. It would be excellent if road.cc had a policy of keeping previously banned users off the site but apparently this is difficult for them.

As much as I enjoy GCN's content they are definitely cycling/industry cheerleaders so I can understand why something like this doesn't appear on their everything is rosy site.

It's not news. It's been covered plenty before and the government has said it's not introducing plates for cyclists. So there is no story.

Rendel Harris wrote:

HarrogateSpa wrote:

There is some good content on road.cc but I get fed up with the way you constantly try to wind us up and get engagement through outrage.

When the former head of the nation's biggest police force makes a speech in the national legislative assembly calling for something that would be incredibly restrictive and damaging to cycling, it would be a bit odd if a cycling website didn't report it, wouldn't it?

Nope - coz thats the slipperly slope.  When one old buffer in the HoL says something that is in no way on the legislative agenda its irrelevant, giving him attention is what he wants.

HarrogateSpa wrote:

There is some good content on road.cc but I get fed up with the way you constantly try to wind us up and get engagement through outrage.

Are you talking about the superb and not at all divisive or engaging reporting that the highly trained road.cc staff do? 

They've openly admitted that people arguing generates more revenue. Sums up what sort of a site this is. 

Article on helmet use incoming....I don't think there's been one this week.

I'd be interested in people's views on disc brakes vs rim brakes, just in case anyone's opinion has shifted since a month ago.

Wing mirror!

mark1a wrote:

I'd be interested in people's views on disc brakes vs rim brakes, just in case anyone's opinion has shifted since a month ago.

I've forgotten where the science and ethics are at on what if any rules should apply if a trans person wishes to compete at the top level of a cycling discipline.  Or just any thoughts people might have around that issue.

Don't forget mechanical vs electronic shifting.

Or tubes vs tubeless.

Those cyclists doing 44 m.p.h. through Ringinglow - I bet they were all wearing helmets.