From: Ian Smith on
On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:46:22 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote:
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> >
> > Digressing slightly, do temporary traffic lights - the type erected by
> > contractors mending the roads - have any legal force?
>
> Yes. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#35
>
> > In such circumstances, are temporary traffic lights essentially
> > advisory, or do they have the same standing in law as 'normal' lights?
>
> They have the same standing in real life as 'normal' speed limits.

Normal speed limits do not apply to bicycles, so such a statement is
confusing in context.

Temporary traffic lights have the same standing as permanent ones. If
there's no painted line, the red "when red light shows..." sign
defines the stop line. If there isn't one of them, the signals
themselves (the box with lights in) define the line.

Regarding the detectors on temporary lights - most contractors I've
worked with prefer to turn them off, because they are flaky at the
best of times. Yes, that sometimes means a car waits most of a light
cycle to get through even when there's nothing coming the other way,
but at least they get through in one timed cycle. If you run on the
detectors and the detector hasn't noticed, you'll be sat there much
longer than one timed cycle of the lights.

regards, Ian SMith

--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
From: Nick Finnigan on
Ian Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:46:22 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote:
>> Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> Digressing slightly, do temporary traffic lights - the type erected by
>>> contractors mending the roads - have any legal force?
>> Yes. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#35
>>
>>> In such circumstances, are temporary traffic lights essentially
>>> advisory, or do they have the same standing in law as 'normal' lights?
>> They have the same standing in real life as 'normal' speed limits.
>
> Normal speed limits do not apply to bicycles,

Well spotted.

> so such a statement is confusing in context.

I hope most readers can see the meaning.
From: Derek C on
On Jul 5, 5:20 am, Doug <smi...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 3 July, 08:07, FrengaX <hnkjqr...(a)sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 3, 7:16 am, Doug <smi...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 3 July, 01:41, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote:> Apparently some Lexus (offshoot of Toyota) models have a fault that
> > > > may cause the engine to stall or run erratically.
>
> > > >  http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jul/01/toyota-faces-lexus-saf...
>
> > > > A recall is being arranged to fix the fault.
>
> > > > I just thought I would get in before Doug comes out with another
> > > > 'killer car' posting!
>
> > > Thanks but I had spotted it and realised that there are now so many
> > > faulty cars on our roads that it must be obvious to everyone by now
> > > and the serious danger they present to vulnerable road users like
> > > myself all too obvious..
>
> > But the issue here is that the car might stall. Hardly something that
> > poses a great danger.
>
> No the driver might dangerously lose control due to a sudden lack of
> engine power.

Only if he is in the middle of a maximum Jeremy Clarkson type power
slide round a corner. Otherwise it will just gently roll to a halt.
>
> > Anyway, here's another one for you. Have you been on the YourFreedom
> > web site? Here's a barmy idea thats right up your street:http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restoring-civil-liberties/to-re-balance...
>
> It is an idea that I completely agree with. It has been mooted many
> times in the EU but is yet to be implemented here, unfortunately. Due
> no doubt to the political clout of the car culture.
>
> -- .
Yes that is a fine idea Doug, but would you like to be held
responsible for injuring a pedestrian who unexpectedly steps out onto
the road in front of your electric bike without looking, when he is at
fault.
From: Ian Smith on
On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 02:22:07 +0100, Phil W Lee <phil(a)lee-family.me.uk> wrote:
> Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> considered Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:46:22
> >
> > Yes. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#35
>
> While they may or may not have legal force, the regulation linked to
> only describes the standards they are required to meet.

And you didn't think to read the next regulation too? The one that
is titled "Significance of light signals prescribed by regulations 33
to 35"?

Here, just for you:

Yes.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#35
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#36


--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
From: Brimstone on

"Derek C" <del.copeland(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:584ed54a-a1bf-4c8b-b480-b152e972b176(a)r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 5, 5:20 am, Doug <smi...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 3 July, 08:07, FrengaX <hnkjqr...(a)sneakemail.com> wrote:

>> > Anyway, here's another one for you. Have you been on the YourFreedom
>> > web site? Here's a barmy idea thats right up your
>> > street:http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restoring-civil-liberties/to-re-balance...
>>
>> It is an idea that I completely agree with. It has been mooted many
>> times in the EU but is yet to be implemented here, unfortunately. Due
>> no doubt to the political clout of the car culture.
>>
..
> Yes that is a fine idea Doug, but would you like to be held
> responsible for injuring a pedestrian who unexpectedly steps out onto
> the road in front of your electric bike without looking, when he is at
> fault.

I think you're overlooking the point that Doug always practices what he
preaches and therefore is always travelling at a speed from which he can
stop before hitting anyone who is feeling unwell and loses their balance
causing them to step in to Doug's path.

I only phrase it like that because Doug has told us that pedestrians and
cyclists never, ever do any wrong whilst out and about.


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Severed arm' brings m-way to halt
Next: Italian Tuneups