No, I think you have missed the point. If you could guarantee absolute safety for both cyclists and pedestrians I think more people would go for it. The sad fact is that motorists cannot keep their speed to suit the road conditions at the time. Did you see the bit about pedestrians getting killed by motorists? Thats when they are on your precious pathways, supposedly safe from drivers.
On the subject of horses, I’ve never seen a motor vehicle go past a horse at speed, blowing the horn & shouting at the riders. Why is that? Surely it’s not just about speed is it. You see them 2 abreast on roads & nobody does or says anything. Vehicles queuing up to get past all nicely, then they see a cyclist and the red mist comes down. Anyone got any idea why that is. And I don’t crap all over the road.
If we’re restraining bikes to 15mph and only allowing racing on closed roads, then where and how are our world champs like Wiggins and the Brownlee brothers (world triathletes ) supposed to train and the many thousands of others?
When the Goverment is pushing for us to ride bikes more and reduce congestion in cities than I very much doubt carryfasts proposal’s are going to be nothing more than forgotten posts on Trucknet!
I very much doubt they will be forgotten, he posts the same thing time & time again.
chester:
If we’re restraining bikes to 15mph and only allowing racing on closed roads, then where and how are our world champs like Wiggins and the Brownlee brothers (world triathletes ) supposed to train and the many thousands of others?When the Goverment is pushing for us to ride bikes more and reduce congestion in cities than I very much doubt carryfasts proposal’s are going to be nothing more than forgotten posts on Trucknet!
I think that sums up the bs nature of the arguments used by the cyclist lobby to keep the status quo going.It seems obvious that they won’t accept any solution that doesn’t allow for the roads to be used as a training ground for a load of tour de france wannabees.As I said the whole thing is a bs politically motivated policy and drivers are stupid enough to continue to allow the situation in which they are being victimised and being used as scapegoats for the inevitable results of that situation in terms of cyclist casualties.
The surprising thing is how the industry can continue to be so naive as to think that it’s all about finding a way for cyclists to co exist with trucks on the road when it should be a case of confrontation up to and including drivers walking off the job until the government sees sense in realising that the issue is all about making cyclists co exist with pedestrians on shared pedestrian /cycleways using existing pavement space.Especially being that such a strike would be preferable to taking the chance of possibly ending up at the wrong end of a causing death by careless or dangerous driving charge together with all the implications of that in regards to liberty and future job prospects.
I was not expecting that. Your repeat button must be worn out by now, change the record. Try to get it into your head, there is no politically motivated agenda, bs or otherwise,apart from the one that exists in your head. Cyclists will remain on the roads, some will get killed, sometimes it will be their fault & sometimes it won’t. When pedestrians can be killed while on the path your arguments are pointless. Wether I’m killed on a path or road I’m not any less dead am I?
LONDON AND SURREY ROAD CLOSURES FOURTH OF AUGUST 
plenty of target practice on Sunday then 
carryfast I agree with you, 
we should be able to drive on the pavements/ cycle lane at 44 tonne and do 56 mph/ 90 clicks in a straight line WITHOUT BRAKING! cocker knees, who’d ride a bike?
Fatboy slimslow:
LONDON AND SURREY ROAD CLOSURES FOURTH OF AUGUST
Yes we know all about it we’re just about sealed in here yet again just like during the bs Olympics with very few roads left available again ever since a few barmy London loony cyclist supporting tossers were allowed to infiltrate our County Council and told London’s cycling community ( rabble ) that they’re welcome to use our roads as their private race track and cycling theme park because their own place is such a zb hole.
It doesn’t stop at that because their supporters then continue to use the same roads over and over again whenever the sun shines and/or it stops raining with reports of the reclaim the streets supporting zb’s threatening the locals whenever anyone dares to complain about the situation.Anyway hopefully it’ll at least be torrential rain on the date. 
Slackbladder:
I was not expecting that. Your repeat button must be worn out by now, change the record. Try to get it into your head, there is no politically motivated agenda, bs or otherwise,apart from the one that exists in your head. Cyclists will remain on the roads, some will get killed, sometimes it will be their fault & sometimes it won’t. When pedestrians can be killed while on the path your arguments are pointless. Wether I’m killed on a path or road I’m not any less dead am I?
Make your mind up one minute,according to chester,it’s supposedly all about the government pushing for making cycling more attractive by putting them on the roads amongst trucks and buses and then it suddenly and conveniently isn’t when it suits you.
Exactly how many pedestrians have been killed by trucks and buses on the pavements as opposed to cyclists on the roads 
.
The Dutch roundabout seemed to work, but as mentioned, there were no large vehicles or buses in the clip. What there was though,was a cyclist who went the wrong way around the cycle path, and when asked why, said it was the shortest way, and he always did it. Case proven I think
Wtf are you rattling on about now? What suits when it’s not convenient?. Pedestrians killed by cyclists, last 5 years =nil. Pedestrians killed by trucks & buses while on the path, not specified, just that, I will put it again, over 60 have been killed by motor vehicles while walking on your precious pathways, you remember those safe places you want cyclists to go on. I’m starting to think you want cyclists on the pathways so you can have a go at them with your mobility scooter.
Sealed in! You live in the middle of London then. Sealed in, give your head a shake man, you havent driven a truck in anger this century, you havent ridden a bike for the thick end of 45 years,there’s got to be loads of roads you can use for your walk. I think it’s time for your medication old man. “where’s me pudding”
How come nobody has answered my horse question then?
Slackbladder:
I’m starting to think you want cyclists on the pathways so you can have a go at them with your mobility scooter.
I must admit I weed a little when I read this.
How come nobody has answered my horse question then?
I think its because horses get much more respect although they are more of a rarity in cities (not in rural areas though), perhaps we are just a country of animal lovers or the last thing we want is the paperwork involved when a horse rears up and chucks its rider.
Perhaps theres even a bit of genetic memory and conditioning to respect the horse more as its ancestors where the original truck, think reversing a horse and trailer would be a bit of nightmare though.
Course a horse would make a real mess as well if run over by a truck and I have often thought I may be worse off with more truck damage if I hit one, although I have the same thought when lets say a woman of a certain weight jumps out off the pavement.
Maybe there needs to be more warning signs of the dangers presented to cyclists but I would definately pee my undercrackers if I saw this happen:
Slackbladder:
Wtf are you rattling on about now? What suits when it’s not convenient?. Pedestrians killed by cyclists, last 5 years =nil. Pedestrians killed by trucks & buses while on the path, not specified, just that, I will put it again, over 60 have been killed by motor vehicles while walking on your precious pathways, you remember those safe places you want cyclists to go on. I’m starting to think you want cyclists on the pathways so you can have a go at them with your mobility scooter.
Sealed in! You live in the middle of London then. Sealed in, give your head a shake man, you havent driven a truck in anger this century, you havent ridden a bike for the thick end of 45 years,there’s got to be loads of roads you can use for your walk. I think it’s time for your medication old man. “where’s me pudding”
How come nobody has answered my horse question then?
It seems to me the whole cycling issue is based on the cycling lobby picking and choosing different contradictory arguments to suit it’s agenda.Wether that’s in the case of it being seen as ok for cyclists to undertake trucks with very little clearance,while at the same time expecting loads of room left in the case of trucks overtaking cyclists,or using cycle ways on the road but conveniently ignoring them whenever they direct cyclists off the road while saying at the same time that they want segregation from motor traffic,or saying that the whole thing is being directed by a government agenda that wants to attract more people into cycling on the roads,as in chester’s comments,and then saying that isn’t the case as in your comments.
As for the local issues here it’s got nothing to do with London it’s the use of Surrey’s roads which I’m referring to.In which case why should we have to walk or be subject to massive traffic disruption on the few roads left open in the area and some people on the route unable to use their access to their houses by car all because a bunch of cyclist tossers from London want to use Surrey’s road network as their private race track and theme park.In which case they should zb off back to their own zb hole in London where they belong.
As for horses we’ve got plenty of horse riders using the roads in the area.However in general they aren’t being wiped out by trucks obviously because in most cases they use the off road bridleway provision instead wherever possible and when they do use the roads they don’t generally try to gallop along the roads at silly speeds and in doing so undertake trucks on the approach to junctions etc etc.I think you’ve also missed the point that I do actually still use a cycle sometimes just not for transport purposes.In which case just as when I used one for commuting to school I never ride the thing on the road and in fact I could certainly ride the thing,at least from this area of the route in question,to Box Hill and back without needing to use the road.
Who is this cycling lobby?
I hear this is on offer
Or if you want to head for the rural areas this might interest you
I tried asking this question earlier on but of course Carryfast goes off ranting about something completely different, so I shall try again.
This is a Picture of London, where and how are you going to have your shared pavements.
chester:
I tried asking this question earlier on but of course Carryfast goes off ranting about something completely different, so I shall try again.This is a Picture of London, where and how are you going to have your shared pavements.
So how does that selective bollox justify the incident in the video posted by Boomerang Dave concerning the cyclist ignoring marked shared pedestrian/cycleway provision which directly led to the ‘issue’ in that case.Or are you saying that the pavements of Chiswick etc etc outside of the busiest parts of central London are all crowded to that same degree including the location in question in that case.
I think you missed the bit where I said whenever and wherever possible and where it’s not possible then cyclists would obviously need to weigh up the benefits of using that route against the risks which would at least include not undertaking trucks and buses resulting in inevitable hazardous conflict situations,if they choose to use such routes.
I think I’ve read you first paragraph five times now carry old bean, and that’s just in this thread. The usual tripe from someone who can now only guess at what goes on by cherry picking you tube vids. Oh, and where did I comment on the governments ideas about getting more cyclists onto the roads? Don’t recall that but then again it’s been a hard day. I know you will cut it out & post it.
If you have a problem with your local roads then it’s exactly that, local. Deal with it there, don’t go on about what may or may not happen in more enlightened parts of the country. We had a sky ride, the cycling event you are referring to, minus your bs, up here, Newcastle/Gateshead last Sunday. Sir Chris Hoy started it, you know the cycling hero, Olympic champion etc. knighted for services to cycling. Big turnout, no disruption, loads of happy people.
So on the horse front it’s a combination of not wanting to damage the vehicle, don’t want a huge mess to clean up, but don’t mind the ■■■■■■ good for the roses etc, & they don’t go as fast as cyclists therefore upsetting the motoring fraternity. Ok just so I know.
That pavement picture is daft, you should cycle here. twitter.com/carltonreid/status/3 … 64/photo/1
Carrfast you really need to take a chill pill regarding cyclists…It’s not healthy man.
Slackbladder:
I think I’ve read you first paragraph five times now carry old bean, and that’s just in this thread. The usual tripe from someone who can now only guess at what goes on by cherry picking you tube vids. Oh, and where did I comment on the governments ideas about getting more cyclists onto the roads? Don’t recall that but then again it’s been a hard day. I know you will cut it out & post it.
If you have a problem with your local roads then it’s exactly that, local. Deal with it there, don’t go on about what may or may not happen in more enlightened parts of the country. We had a sky ride, the cycling event you are referring to, minus your bs, up here, Newcastle/Gateshead last Sunday. Sir Chris Hoy started it, you know the cycling hero, Olympic champion etc. knighted for services to cycling. Big turnout, no disruption, loads of happy people.
So on the horse front it’s a combination of not wanting to damage the vehicle, don’t want a huge mess to clean up, but don’t mind the [zb], good for the roses etc, & they don’t go as fast as cyclists therefore upsetting the motoring fraternity. Ok just so I know.
Firstly I didn’t cherry pick any video it was actually posted by Boomerang Dave to make the case about how bad truck drivers are in regards to cyclists.When all it actually proved was yet another example,containing everything that’s bad about the majority of cyclists’ behaviour around large vehicles,including the issue of ignoring off road provision when it’s provided,all of which is actually what is causing the majority of the casualties amongst cyclists.
As for the issues concerning the subject of the topic being a local matter,it’s obvious that it’s a national one and the more cyclists there are the more casualties there will be because,as I’ve said,it’s all about the odds of a large vehicle coming into conflict with the wrong cyclists in the wrong place at the wrong time.It’s obvious in that case that those drivers who spend a lot of their working time in and around London face the highest chances of eventually facing that scenario because of the law of averages based on numbers.In this case that situation just seems to have taken place in/around another British city instead.
As for horses it’s all about that issue of numbers and the fact that there aren’t as many wrong ( suicidally stupid ) horse riders as there are wrong cyclists.It’s got nothing to do with any bs concerning truck drivers acting any differently around horses.
As for your comments concerning the issues being politically driven it was actually chester,another of the cyclist supporters group on here,who confirmed that while no surprise you then contradicted that.
albion1971:
Carrfast you really need to take a chill pill regarding cyclists…It’s not healthy man.
I could say the same about your obvious views regarding truck drivers in many cases.