frame-src 'self' data:
 

Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Confirmation needed please?

 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 1:06pm Taff wrote:
can anyone confirm that the whole of Cliffe High Street is now 2 way for cyclists?
 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 1:26pm Smiler wrote:
Wasn't it always 2 way?
The sign by the pet shops says 'No entry for motor vehicles' so I don't think you could be blamed for taking that as authorisation to ride a bike up the road.
 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 1:31pm Taff wrote:
I dont ride a bicycle Smiler, the pillock who almost ran in to me on Saturday provoked the question.
 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 1:44pm No Pot Pourri wrote:
Yes it is. See www.eastsussex.gov.uk/roadsandtransport/roads/roadschemes/livingcliffe/default.htm
 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 3:50pm Mystic Mog wrote:
It is now 2 way for cyclists.
 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 3:54pm Lewes Laugher wrote:
Pedestrianisation ruins places.
 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 6:19pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Get a walking stick, Taff. It won't make you less of a target, but you can have fun sticking it between their spokes and having them off.
 
 
On 1 Dec 2008 at 8:36pm Thomas Paine wrote:
What have you got against cyclists?
A percentage of car drivers cyclists and pedestrians are morons we all know so sensible answer please!
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 8:47am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Pedestrians and car drivers don't tend to be sanctimonious morons like cyclists though.
A small but significant proportion of them seem to think that being powered by pedals exempts them from traffic regulations, common courtesy and the application of common sense (I think particularly here of the one who cycled at speed down the twitten outside the Lewes Arms, straight into the road, and nearly went under my front wheels as I was driving up Castle Ditch Lane). They can cause accidents, injury and damage just as easily as any motorised transport but aren't obliged to carry insurance. As they have no identifying marks, you've not even got a hope of identifying them and suing them afterwards.
I particularly hate the ones who ride all over the downs, including on footpaths and access land (where they shouldn't be), endangering dogs and walkers.
Far too few of them know how to ride safely - they should have to pass a test before they're allowed on the roads imo! What happened to riding in single file on the roads, and keeping close to the kerb? And there is simply no excuse for the practice followed by many of leaving the road and cycling on the pavement to avoid red lights (you know who I mean, the man who crossed in front of me at the prison lights a few weeks ago, against both the traffic and pedestrian lights, when the only traffic entitled to be moving was the queue I was in!).
If they ever put a bounty on their heads, I reckon I'd be rich. If a week goes by without me having to do an emergency stop to avoid a cyclist denting my bumper, it's rare. And if the man who does a right out of the Gallops and straight in between the moving cars heading south at about 8.50 each morning is reading, this practice might save you a few moments getting to Spital Road, but it is likely to be outweighed by the long wait in casualty that's bound to result.
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 9:11am sashimi wrote:
Phew, Annette, glad that's off your chest. That's quite a burden you've been living with for sometime.
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 11:25am wooolie the sheep wrote:
anyone wearing a helmet, skin-tight lycra, and sweating over the streets is fair game for a whack...
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 1:15pm Taff wrote:
If it accelerates the demise of the arrogant and smug ones then two is a great idea. Roll on spring.
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 1:56pm Thomas Paine wrote:
1) None of the cyclists I know are smug or sanctimonious. They just cycle because it is cheap, healthy, quiet, enjoyable, and more convenient than bus or car.
2) If far more people used bicycles then roads and towns everywhere would be quieter, and safer. Ashma in children would decrease. Healthier adults. Life would be better.
2) Pedestrians and car drivers do dangerous and inconsiderate things too. A percentage of all people are morons (no offense intended AC-T). Every year car drivers kill pedestrians on roads, pavements, pedestrian crossings (even ones with traffic lights). Every year pedestrians step out in front of cyclists and the cyclist is killed or suffers permanent disability. The official Road Accident Statistics published every year show this.
4) If more people used bicycles then we would save hundreds of millions of pounds every year in road maintenance and improvements. Just read the Co Council budget and the Highways Agency budgets and weep... YOU are paying for it, AC-T.
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 5:24pm Norman Tebbitt wrote:
So, are you saying that if a cyclist pulls out in front of a car and gets knocked down its the car drivers fault, but if a pedestrian steps in front of a cyclist and gets knocked down then its the pedestrians fault ? I agree with AC-T, when I was a kid we took cycling proficiency tests, we rode our bikes single file and stayed near the kerb. We were also taught not to ride on the pavements, and we got off and pushed our bikes if we had to. We also had proper lights and not some twinkly little christmas tree light that cyclists all seem to have these days - but then it seems most of them ride on the pavement at night nowadays so warning cars of their presence does seem immaterial.
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 5:45pm Cyclists dismount wrote:
The 'Cyclists dismount' sign should be introduced.
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 8:18pm old nick wrote:
cyclists should have insurance and pay some form of road tax as most of them flount the law ride on the pavement and most dont bother with lights at night !!!!!!!
 
 
On 2 Dec 2008 at 8:33pm How true. wrote:
Couldn't agree with you more Old Nick!
 
 
On 3 Dec 2008 at 1:31am sashka wrote:
Bad cyclists are dangerous, and are not uncommon But if 'most of them flout the law' and 'ride on the pavement' as you claim then why should they pay road tax?!
 
 
On 3 Dec 2008 at 8:28am Thomas Paine wrote:
Come off it, Old Nick...
Cyclists DO pay taxes that cover road use.
Many cyclists also have a car back home, remember. Unused for that journey. So maybe you think they should get a refund because they use their car less?
Cyclists also pay Income Tax, VAT etc. and these taxes help to pay for roads. Vehicle Tax does not cover the cost of roads and motorised traffic.
On costs for cycle projects, "tens of millions" is a huge exageration. See B&H Council budget in detail. See "tens of thousands" for most cycle mitigation. Have not seen "hundreds of thousands" for some time. "tens of millions" never. However, read "HUNDREDS of MILLIONS" in ESCC budget for highways every year including Highways Agency expenditure. Also, you forget the very modest surfacing needs of cyclists compared to motorised vehicles. Do the maths: road wear increases to the 4th power of the axle weight, so if road tax were paid by cyclists, and it was proportional to the road-surface-wear caused, then tax for a bicycle travelliing the same miles per year as the average car then it would be less than a penny per year.
So collect the £0.01pa from every cyclist, then deduct the rebate for the cyclist with a car sitting on the drive, Road Tax paid, then cyclists and advocates of a proportional road tax for all vehicles will finally be happy.
 
 
On 3 Dec 2008 at 1:22pm Taff wrote:
To Tom Paines earlier comments I would like to add that I agree with some of your points. Hoever I do not see why cyclists should not be guided by both the highway regulations and the highway code guidelines.
I dont particularly care about the funds you have discussed or making the planet healthier through cycling. What I do care about is the so called license for cyclists to perform extraordinary and unexpected actions that jeopardise others safety. If they choose to put themselves at risk then that is for the individual to decide.
 
 
On 3 Dec 2008 at 3:40pm Thomas Paine wrote:
Taff, huh?
Cyclists should abide by the law like anyone else. Lots of car drivers break the law too, and pedestrians also do stupid things.
I don't think anyone is saying cyclists have a license to do what they like regardless of others.
To anyone who wants emptier roads and more parking spaces, and a better life in other ways too, I suggest your very best bet is to encourage more people to use a bike, rather than engage in slagging off cyclists in general because of the ones that our idiots.
 
 
On 3 Dec 2008 at 6:25pm Jennifer wrote:
In my experience those who moan moan moan about cyclists are usually just venting their frustration at seeing others wizz past while they wait for ever. AC-T and all other frustrated soles should just rejoice at every might otherwise be car ahead of them in their queue.
 
 
On 3 Dec 2008 at 10:01pm Spinster Of This Parish wrote:
There was a wonderful letter to the Express a few years back - some silly woman cyclist complained about the cobbles on Cliffe Bridge and was requesting that the surface be tarmacked to make it more comfortable for cyclists! And I thought it was just female drivers that had a bad name!!!
 
 
On 4 Dec 2008 at 1:16pm Taff wrote:
I have a bike TP. It has a lovely 4 stroke engine in it.
Just for you, the next time I am confronted by an adult cyclist on the pavement I shall smile, step in to the road and let them through!


13 posts left

Your response


You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool

terms


 

Lewes Clouds 65:132
Lewes Clouds

She seemed very happy to tell us all about the cycle path in her newsletter of 16 July Sussex. Personally I'm all in favour of... more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
I like All the wide open spaces on the downs
Jojo