Nuxx:5a49d2a8-b69a-428d-8658-bf5e00c05179@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <5a49d2a8-b69a-428d-8658-bf5e00c05179@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Positive Evening Standard article about cycling. Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 03:47:36 -0700 (PDT) References: <8b36668d-bb57-4311-9ac4-5a2dd1c6e0eb@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>  <2fr294p1fc63q1n5oqkjmiru88h19nf8te@4ax.com>  Lines: 75 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.145.93 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1217501256 30559 127.0.0.1 (31 Jul 2008 10:47:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:47:36 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.145.93; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 5530 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:659871

Oh excellent. I see Spindrift's anti-motorist copy-and-paste library has now expanded to include some rubbish about how black is white, and it's supposedly safer not to let motorcyclists into bus lanes. Isn't it uncanny that with every single issue bar none, Spindrift always seems to side against powered private transport? It's almost as if he starts off with an anti-motorist/anti-motorcyclist conclusion, and works back from there, desperately trying to twist the facts into what he wants. And if he can't do that, he resorts to quoting other agenda- driven car-haters, like those who worked for TfL when it was an anti- car organisation presided over by an anti-car mayor.

On Jul 31, 11:08=A0am, spindrift  wrote: > Why shouldn't PTWs be allowed in bus lanes? > Motorcycles and mopeds should not be allowed in bus lanes for multiple > reasons: > > Safety: The BMF suggests that PTWs are not a serious danger to > vulnerable road users. Yet DfT road accident data shows conclusively > that PTW use is almost twice as hazardous to pedal cyclists as car > use, and at least 3 times as dangerous to pedestrians. The BMF also > suggests that PTW users are as much victims of pedestrian and cyclist > behaviour as vice versa. Yet DfT road accident data shows the true > risks are appallingly one-sided.

What has this got to do with motorcycles being allowed into bus lanes? It just seems to be a general, vague, prejudiced attack on motorcycles. In no way does it even attempt to contradict the premise that it is safer to allow motorcycles into bus lanes.

> Air quality: DfT measurements show that PTWs are far more polluting > than cars. Croydon Health Authority and the Greater London Authority > have both said that poor air quality kills many Londoners each year. > Therefore, measures that may lead to an increase is the use of PTWs, > and which will bring PTW exhausts nearer to both cyclists and > pedestrians, should be avoided.

Ah. So Spindrift finally admits that he wants fewer motorcycles, and cars, on the roads, and he wants to achieve that with measures that make things unpleasant for them, like bus lanes, speed cameras, and other anti-motorist measures. Furthermore, this social engineering is more important to Spindrift than safety. At last, we're getting somewhere.

> Policy: Permitting PTWs to use bus lanes is likely to discourage the > take-up of pedal cycling. This flies in the face of local and national > government objectives to encourage green forms of transport.

As above. It's clear from this that Spindrift is in favour of the use of anti-motorist measures to discourage use of powered private transport, and when it's a choice between the anti-motorist measures and safety, Spindrift chooses the former.

> Managing Director for Surface Transport at Transport for London David > Brown stated in April 2008: 'The data used in the earlier report was > not considered sufficiently reliable to inform a decision on such an > important issue.' Following a review of the data Mr Brown's conclusion > (April 2008) was that > > =A0'there is no evidence to indicate that motorcyclists would see any > significant safety benefits from being allowed to enter bus lanes but > that there were potential disbenefits for both cyclists and > pedestrians.'

As already mentioned, this perverse, incorrect conclusion from TfL was for blatant political reasons, since they were a viciously anti- motorist/anti-motorcyclist organisation under Livingstone, as evidenced by the spiteful "Road User Hierarchy" among many other things. The figures from the bus lane trial unequivocally indicated that it is safer to allow motorcyclists into bus lanes, and anyone without an anti-motorcyclist agenda who saw those figures would readily agree. If Spindrift and the other trolls are going to oppose motorcycles in bus lanes, they should at least have the grace to admit that that opposition is much more to do with social engineering than safety. Spindrift has effectively admitted that already in the previous post.