Helmets, hi-viz and tax for pedestrians.

In amongst the various ePetitions for making parking outside someone's house illegal, and for the many cyclist ones, making cyclist pay for the road, we are the only organisation to campaign for pedestrians to be better equipped for our cities. Cutting and pasting from someone else's proposal, we have one of our own.

In our petition., we say

Other road users have to pass tests to prove they are competent to operate a vehicle on the public highway. Pedestrians however are at the most risk and from any age they can walk around without any training, they are often wearing ipods and flout the rules of the roads e.g not stopping at traffic lights and crossing the road. I propose that all pedestrians must undertake training and be insured before riding on the road to protect themselves and others. They should wear hi-viz clothing and have helmets for their own safety

Some people will think we are taking the piss or something but not so: it's for their own safety.

Look at this scene from the Stokes Croft/Ashley Road junction.

A pedestrian crossing the road nearly gets hit by a taxi waiting for the lights to change in the middle of their road -past the ASL and not blocking it, we note. This taxi that manages to turn in front of the oncoming traffic by putting their foot down as soon as the lights go red & orange -and were it not for the pedestrian, would be on their way safely sprinting down the 20mph road to east Bristol.

Look at that pedestrian

1. Dark clothing, hard to spot: no hi-viz anywhere
2. No helmet.
3. No insurance/tax disk.
4. Probably no third party liability for damage caused to the front of cars.
5. Moving really slowly.

The taxi driver narrowly manages to avoid running them over as he accelerates down Ashley Road, and has to sound his horn to make them move faster. The tax-dodger seems a bit upset by this.

Stop this menace to our roads!

Everyone should sign our petition now! We have three signatures already!

Friday Afternoon Quiz

A typical scene in Stokes Croft. Click to enlarge.

What might be wrong?

Cyclists: losers or gentry?

Our coverage of cycle-friendly hairdressers in Cheltenham Road raised a comment from a known subversive: are cyclists therefore gentry? Good point. We hadn't considered the origin of the word gentrification before now.

1. Really important people: they drive.
2. Poor, under funded students: they drive.
3. Outside the inner city, people don't walk.

Cyclists are interesting. While cinema shows that any adult riding a bicycle is a loser, there is some discussion about how best to manage this conflict of images between cyclist-as-loser and cyclist-as-posh-git-with-fancy-bike. The answer is both images are true. Some have money, but not the intelligence to realise they can get a car for the amount they spend bicycles. All are losers.

That's why were horrified to see this footage from Horfield.


Within a couple of seconds, our van encountered two pedestrians and a cyclist -with one of the pedestrians walking in the road as if they had the right to. This is not Montpelier! This is a nice fast road where people park up on the pavement to let passing traffic through. Yet today, somebody walking. Here!

We had to drive up the rest of the road in shock, until the sight of all the cars and vans up on the pavement reassured us that this was a temporary event.