Tadej Pogačar unleashes Strava KOM revenge hunt after noticing Lombardia 2021 win was flagged; A humdinger to add to the puzzling cycle lane collection; How to train like a Tour de France champ — step one, get a dog; LTN vandalism + more on the live blog

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

Mods take note. This person is a previously banned user and makes no qualms in admitting it. So if they are not removed it sets a precedent for all.

Fake news. 

I suppose it doesn't surprise me for someone of your political following to call the truth "fake news". Classic right wing playbook.

Tell me you are not "thisismyusername" from previously on this site, and I will show you a god-damn liar.

Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

I do not intend to name drop him

One assumes you mean name check rather than name drop, the latter meaning to mention an actual or imagined connection with a person of celebrity in order to enhance your own status.

For somebody who doesn't intend to "name drop" me you do it an awful lot; obsessively, some might say.

Even just this morning you have said that this site is biased and hypocritical and that the community here is corrupt and spiteful; yesterday you were extolling the virtues of other sites, saying how much better they were than this one. Same question as usual, why the hell are you here, particularly as you have already been banned under a previous guise?

Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

And had the result gone the other way, would it have been a license to ride with no lights, reflectors, and dark clothing? 

No, because riding unlit in dark clothing (although unwise) isn't a crime whereas driving whilst using your phone at almost double the speed limit is.

Also, wearing dark clothing wouldn't be the cause of a collision, because someone driving to the light/conditions should easily be able to spot someone dressed in black. Just as you'd expect someone driving to the conditions to be able to spot any of the thousands of other hazards that wouldn't be lit or covered in Hi-Vis .

BalladOfStruth wrote:

No, because riding unlit in dark clothing (although unwise) isn't a crime whereas driving whilst using your phone at almost double the speed limit is.

Also, wearing dark clothing wouldn't be the cause of a collision, because someone driving to the light/conditions should easily be able to spot someone dressed in black. Just as you'd expect someone driving to the conditions to be able to spot any of the thousands of other hazards that wouldn't be lit or covered in Hi-Vis .

It's a mitigating factor - as a person you have a responsibility to make yourself seen in the dark, be aware of your surroundings (i.e. not go onto a crossing 15m in front of a speeding driver) 

It's not "easy" to spot people riding in black - you try doing that in a narrow country road near me and you'd be off before you knew it in an accident. 

"She says she had seen the cyclist before the BMW hit him but she doesn’t know if he was on the road or the kerb"

One of the witness statements.

Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

It's not "easy" to spot people riding in black - you try doing that in a narrow country road near me and you'd be off before you knew it in an accident. 

It absolutley is if you're driving to the conditions (which is in the driver's best interest because a lot of the unlit hazards you'll encounter are more dangerous to you than you are to them).

I live in remote countryside, nearly all of my driving is on winding singletrack. I personally have no issue spotting and avoiding pedestrians/shed loads/escaped livestock/downed trees/etc at night because (unlike seemingly most motorists) I don't think it's my God-given right to drive flat out in the pitch black with no regards for other people's safety.

Quote:

He hadn't made any calls or sent any texts or emails on his mobile phone but had accessed two apps - one for the CCTV at his home.

So was more concerned about what was going on at home, than what was happening around him...?

Also explains "told officers he thought the speed limit was 40mph - but he was actually in a 30mph zone."

His defence being I was so distracted by my phone, its understandable I didn't know the speed limit.

As he lived just down that road a mile from the collision he must have been using his phone for the last at least 12 years according to Google streetview. Although unfortunately at the time of the killing, using the phone for anything other then a phone call / text message was legal due to arseholes like Poophole and the slow delay of the government to rectify said loophole. 

I wonder if the prosectution decided to raise how long the road as been a 30 compared to how long he has lived "just off it" as part of its prosecution case, along with the said stopping distances of a driver travelling at the correct speed to one doing "between 40 and 50" as per his own defence.

Both easily proving careless driving. Just a shame the jury were so biased.

"He confirmed there are no warning signs such as “elderly or horses or cyclists”. 

A policeman said when asked.  Do we have to let drivers know now that there might be cyclists or horses or old people on the road?

Driving 50% over the limit, but if he'd been travelling at the limit he could probably have stopped, or at least not inflicted mortal injuries.

"Dilks was driving at “not less than 44pmh” the prosecution say when the incident occurred.

The speed limit for the area is 30mph.

The jury has heard that Dilks began braking 15.4m before the start of the toucan crossing - the other side of the toucan crossing was 19.4m away.

The court heard that at the speed Dilks was travelling he would need 27.6m to stop and “he couldn’t avoid the collision”."

eburtthebike wrote:

The court heard that at the speed Dilks was travelling he would need 27.6m to stop and “he couldn’t avoid the collision”."

The court heard that Dilks so completely misjudged the road conditions and his own incompetence that “he couldn’t avoid the collision”.

Thus demonstrating that his driving was far below the standard required to pass the DVSA test.

Guilty as charged.

I reckon this is the crossing in question, with the cyclist travelling from right to left...

https://maps.app.goo.gl/AQvMmj4VG77TPSdK9

Lessons to learn for all...

But...wearing dark clothing, entering a toucan crossing 15m from a speeding car, and having no lights or reflectors does not help yourself either 

Likewise not speeding or using your phone will also help prevent accidents. 

Do you get off talking nonsense???? I bet you do. 

Just go away loser. 

essexian wrote:

Do you get off talking nonsense???? I bet you do. 

Just go away loser. 

Hello, the fact you got 12 likes on that, and had I said similar I would be accused of trolling and asked to retract that says all you need to know about the corrupt and spiteful community here. 

RE: "Mindless" low-traffic neighbourhood vandalism the result of "anti-active travel rhetoric" (Silverknowes)

Fairly near to me.  For ref: Silverknowes itself is a mostly very quiet residential place - I suspect mostly better-off (though not absolutely minted) and/or retired folks.  The picture actually shows a road off Main Street, the main road into Davidsons Mains.  This is not bad but still a bit stroad-y as it is a "high street" - a "place" with both ameneties and residential properties on it, but with a bus route or two and which functions as a distributor / connector road.  (Still waaaay more pleasant than the "urban motorway" of Queensferry Road running parallel though!).

Planters here block the road encouraging a kind of mini LTN.  It ought to be very little value as a cut-through ... except you can indeed use it to cut off a corner (say if traffic had slowed for the next 100 metres) and reach the Queensferry Road via Corbiehill Road.

How many seconds does that save you?

Oh probably three or four.  Actually if you were stuck because e.g. a bus had stopped and other traffic was unable to overtake, or the junction was temporarily blocked, I could imagine it might save you up to a minute (which is a very long time in driving).  Or you could use this to get direct to other access points on the Queensferry Road - but then you might be waiting at those for longer to get onto the main road...

Sa-luke-i Rowe

Jack Russell Haig

Tadej Pugacar

Egan Bernese

Wouf Van Aert

Chris Boardman Collie

Tom Pid-Cocker Spaniel

Alberto Labrador

Philippa Yorkie.