Manchester City fans slammed for “constantly blocking” cycle lane outside Etihad Stadium, as council says it “shares cyclists’ frustration” with illegal parking

Its taking responsibility for safety in an area where the authorities are letting us down and its brave to stand up to bullies who think just because they are protected by a metal box they can make things dangerous for others. I would say its the opposite of cowardly and irresponsible. 

What is cowardly and irresponsible is putting other's lives at risk by leaving your car somewhere dangerous because you are too afraid to pay for parking like a responsible person. 

How is deflating some stranger's tyres taking responsibility for safety? If anything it's the opposite. A car isn't a toy. Tyes are a safety-critical component. Messing about with them isn't clever at all.

The fact that you think the driver has done something wrong isn't justification for your doing something equally wrong.

Indeed.

However these considerations always seems to be invoked in one direction.  Sometimes blocking the pavement / cycle path isn't "nothing" or "just walk round it".  It might even be a serious hazard or completely stop someone getting about.  That access can be required by those with disabilities, discourage children from going into the road, could even enable emergency vehicles to get through a traffic blockage.

Active travel infra is not "optional"*, nor "just for kids / recreation", any more than the roads are in practice "for" serious and consequential stuff ("essential travel" - carrying lifesaving equipment, fetching life-sustaining provisions, making a living, serving livelihood-supporting businesses, enabling young lives to blossom or maintaining a social life).

At the very least - how will people safely reach their cars without?

* Where it's not just "but you've got the park" or "you can walk on the verge" or "I can get my bike down that alley".

john_smith wrote:

There's no excuse for messing around with people's cycle lanes. It's cowardly and irresponsible.

FTFY

 No one here is recommending you park in a cycle lane.

But you don't seem to be critical of them judging by your posts.

That's a bit like saying objecting to people chucking soup at old masters implies you're not critical of climate change.

Currently at six posts on this thread in the last four hours and still not typed a word against the illegal parking, are you afraid of wearing out your keyboard?

Gone on then. What would you like me to type about illegal parking?

Perhaps you could type that you don't approve of it, but only if you really don't approve of it, I wouldn't want you to lie.

I could type it, but why should I? I fact, I am going to type that I wholeheartedly  approve of it, especially when it particularly inconveniences peds and cyclists.

I'll leave it to you to decide whether I am telling the truth or not. Happy now?

john_smith wrote:

I could type it, but why should I? I fact, I am going to type that I wholeheartedly  approve of it, especially when it particularly inconveniences peds and cyclists.

I'll leave it to you to decide whether I am telling the truth or not. Happy now?

I'm always happy, I knew from the first post that you lived under a bridge but if you're busy responding to me you're not annoying someone else

john_smith wrote:

There's no excuse for messing around with people's cars. It's cowardly and irresponsible.

There's no excuse for parking in bike lanes or on pavements. It's cowardly and irresponsible.

As I wrote above, no one here is recommending you park in cycle lanes. The same goes for pavements. What is your point?

no facility to upload a picture

That mean they really don't want to know, and really couldn't care less. Just like Lancashire Constabulary and DVLA. DVLA make sure that you can't send in photos of cars on the road without VED, because there are so many of them and they can't be bothered doing anything about any they're told about. Same with the idlest police force in the world- this vehicle VX70 GXV, never MOTd and SORN-ed, was reported to LC on 2.10.23

Looks slightly above average for the UK: separated from cars, behind a vertical kerb on the carriageway side, passable width, clearly demarcated from the additional separate footway, plus there are even markings (no parking) for otherwise perfect drivers who haven't been near a Highway Code (or TV or radio) for a couple of years or more.

Con: UK standard at junctions e.g. it disappears, UK standard driver behaviour (completely ignoring it except as a place to park), UK standard enforcement (none), separation is a little narrow from the narrow street MASSIVE dual carriageway next to it, not sure what thought has been given to drainage (see NL for "regular drains, often in-kerb"), the kerbs need to be "forgiving" e.g. 45 degree slope or maybe less, the entire think should be given a continous coat of hard-wearing coloured asphalt to scream "cycle path here" (colour should be standard: I'm all for rainbows but we need to pick one colour across the UK so everyone understands the infra.  Well, OK, perhaps each home nation wants to pick its own?)

If it's full of potholes that can only be because of the intense use by tens of thousands of cyclists per day, all carrying their family and a week's shopping on a 25 kilo Omafiets, am I right?

It's not so much convincing them as just telling them cars are banned on the local roads, either you use public transport, cycle, walk or you just don't go to the race.

Try the same thing at Silverstone I don't think you'd get very far.