Fines for red light jumping and other offences
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Just zis Guy, you know? on 2 Aug 2010 10:03 On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:50:29 +0100, Sara <saramerriman(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >>> Just because others do something, it doesn't excuse those who should know >>> better. Putting on the lights on your bike when its dark is pretty basic! >> >> If you have them. And the batteries aren't flat. For some reason it is >> always assumed that the cyclist in question deliberately set off >> unlit, rather than the lamps failing en route. I don't know how often >> that happens but I guess it is not uncommon on country roads at least. >> >Or you get stuck in a meeting *just* as you were about to leave work, >which lasts a couple of hours... by which time it's dark and you hadn't >brought lights with you. This is why I switched to using hub dynamos on my commuters. I've never regretted it. I am having the devil's own job persuading the lad to do the same, though. I think we'll compromise on him using my hack when he's going out in the evenings - he is now only half an inch shorter than me so that will work I guess. Guy -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/ The usenet price promise: all opinions offered in newsgroups are guaranteed to be worth the price paid.
From: Clive George on 2 Aug 2010 10:06 On 02/08/2010 14:50, Sara wrote: > Or you get stuck in a meeting *just* as you were about to leave work, > which lasts a couple of hours... by which time it's dark and you hadn't > brought lights with you. Dynamo lights win here :-)
From: Just zis Guy, you know? on 2 Aug 2010 10:08 On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 14:59:27 +0100, "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote: >Why not - what if you leave work early and get home well before dusk, but >its one of those dark, rainy days - you still need your lights on and you >should have them attached to your bike. That is how other road user's >vehicles work - the lights are attached at all times and turned on when >necessary. The reasons are pretty obvious when you consider the essential differences between a bike and a car. Consider, for example, the risk of your lights being stolen from your car when you park it. And car lights are making use of the fact that you are wasting a whole load of energy anyway, so the additional load for powering (and lugging around) electrical ancillaries is counted in. It can be done (I use dynamo lights) but it is not a trivial cost, a decent dynamo set costs as much as most people spend on an entire bike. Most people use battery lights which either require batteries (that go flat without you noticing during the summer because you're not using the lights) or are rechargeable (which requires you to keep the power packs charged and carried with you on the off chance that you might lose the five hour window of light evening after 5pm. Which, for the most part, you won't, at least more than once a year. Guy -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/ The usenet price promise: all opinions offered in newsgroups are guaranteed to be worth the price paid.
From: Sara on 2 Aug 2010 10:22 In article <i36ivk$ntp$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "Mr. Benn" <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > "Sara" <saramerriman(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message > news:saramerriman-172F26.14502902082010(a)news.individual.net... > > In article <dged565sfaubfv2fpqusd5fcp0mvse8uno(a)4ax.com>, > > "Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 11:10:21 +0100, "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote: > >> > >> >"Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote in message > >> >news:bn5956pnb9eshr31coai6enfj01j29di60(a)4ax.com... > >> >> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:58:02 +0100, "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>>"Matt B" <matt.bourke(a)nospam.london.com> wrote in message > >> >>>news:8bi2oiF5pmU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >> >>>> On 31/07/2010 08:39, Derek C wrote: > >> >>>>> From the court reports in my local newspaper: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> [snipped details of some motoring offences] > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> If only penalties like these were applied to cyclists, we would > >> >>>>> soon > >> >>>>> see a drop in deliberate RLJing, no lights at night and the many > >> >>>>> other offences that cyclists seem to get away with scot free! > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Should the penalty be proportional to the size of the risk posed at > >> >>>> the > >> >>>> tine? > >> >>> > >> >>>How do you determine the risk posed by a cyclist with no lights on?... > >> >> > >> >> To you or to him? There's also a vast variation in risk depending on > >> >> the roads themselves. > >> >> > >> >>>A lorry driving along suddenly, at the last minute sees a cyclist with > >> >>>no > >> >>>lights on and swerves to avoid him. In doing so he wipes out 2 cars, > >> >>>each > >> >>>containing a family of four and the mangled mess then ploughs through > >> >>>a > >> >>>bus-stop of kids coming home from the cinema. > >> >> > >> >> s/cyclist/deer/ > >> >> > >> >> Or pedestrian. > >> >> > >> >> Or fallen tree. > >> > > >> >Just because others do something, it doesn't excuse those who should > >> >know > >> >better. Putting on the lights on your bike when its dark is pretty > >> >basic! > >> > >> If you have them. And the batteries aren't flat. For some reason it is > >> always assumed that the cyclist in question deliberately set off > >> unlit, rather than the lamps failing en route. I don't know how often > >> that happens but I guess it is not uncommon on country roads at least. > >> > > Or you get stuck in a meeting *just* as you were about to leave work, > > which lasts a couple of hours... by which time it's dark and you hadn't > > brought lights with you. > > In that situation, you should find an alternative method of getting home. > Bus or taxi or a lift from a friendly colleague. Oh, I wasn't looking for answers, I was just thinking of a situation where one could find oneself out without lights. -- Sara Run out of ideas for a sig for the moment
From: Sara on 2 Aug 2010 10:24
In article <ipjd56ph0cmgt74jnd3cde288tc6j28n3c(a)4ax.com>, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:50:29 +0100, Sara > <saramerriman(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > >>> Just because others do something, it doesn't excuse those who should know > >>> better. Putting on the lights on your bike when its dark is pretty basic! > >> > >> If you have them. And the batteries aren't flat. For some reason it is > >> always assumed that the cyclist in question deliberately set off > >> unlit, rather than the lamps failing en route. I don't know how often > >> that happens but I guess it is not uncommon on country roads at least. > >> > >Or you get stuck in a meeting *just* as you were about to leave work, > >which lasts a couple of hours... by which time it's dark and you hadn't > >brought lights with you. > > This is why I switched to using hub dynamos on my commuters. I've > never regretted it. I am having the devil's own job persuading the lad > to do the same, though. I think we'll compromise on him using my hack > when he's going out in the evenings - he is now only half an inch > shorter than me so that will work I guess. > Not sure I pedal hard enough to power a dynamo. I very much a pootling rider. -- Sara Run out of ideas for a sig for the moment |