Originally Posted by The PNP

Yes, they will 'pop' out under impact, but also come out/go back in, by applying a half-turn. It's easy enough to pick up stray ones and screw them back into their fixed base.

As for the culprits, consider:

1. Which group would stand to gain from their removal, pedestrians, cyclists or motorists?

2. Which group has been making the most noise complaining about them, pedestrians, cyclists or motorists?

3. The majority have disappeared from outside locations where motorists in particular would benefit the most from their removal.

4. Pubs etc are shut, so the usual 'merry' types on foot, who might do daft stuff, are not currently walking home at night.

5. Kids/'morons' are (or should be) at home and locked down.

6. Motorists regularly turn 20mph signs sideways at entrance to 20mph streets.

3. Motorists regularly turn cycle-route signs around, to misdirect riders.

7. Motorists regularly remove 'community concern speed area' signs.

While it's impossible, without CCTV footage, to completely rule-out 'mindless vandals', I know who my money is on!

Do you ever consider just how much your blinkered comments actually get peoples backs up?

Goading motorists does nothing to support cycling, but seems to go the other way!

Originally Posted by The PNP

As for the culprits, consider:

1. Which group would stand to gain from their removal, pedestrians, cyclists or motorists?

2. Which group has been making the most noise complaining about them, pedestrians, cyclists or motorists?

3. The majority have disappeared from outside locations where motorists in particular would benefit the most from their removal.


6. Motorists regularly turn 20mph signs sideways at entrance to 20mph streets.

3. Motorists regularly turn cycle-route signs around, to misdirect riders.

7. Motorists regularly remove 'community concern speed area' signs.

While it's impossible, without CCTV footage, to completely rule-out 'mindless vandals', I know who my money is on!

Right lads get the pitchforks and flaming torches.

I've got no evidence but I'm agoing to lynch me some of those varmints with cars.

Originally Posted by rumple

Embarrassingly poor "reporting".

I cycle all over the town and have rarely had a problem in fifty years. These cycle lanes are a waste of taxpayers money, we do not need them.

Originally Posted by The PNP

Yes, they will 'pop' out under impact, but also come out/go back in, by applying a half-turn. It's easy enough to pick up stray ones and screw them back into their fixed base.

As for the culprits, consider:

1. Which group would stand to gain from their removal, pedestrians, cyclists or motorists?

2. Which group has been making the most noise complaining about them, pedestrians, cyclists or motorists?

3. The majority have disappeared from outside locations where motorists in particular would benefit the most from their removal.

4. Pubs etc are shut, so the usual 'merry' types on foot, who might do daft stuff, are not currently walking home at night.

5. Kids/'morons' are (or should be) at home and locked down.

6. Motorists regularly turn 20mph signs sideways at entrance to 20mph streets.

3. Motorists regularly turn cycle-route signs around, to misdirect riders.

7. Motorists regularly remove 'community concern speed area' signs.

While it's impossible, without CCTV footage, to completely rule-out 'mindless vandals', I know who my money is on!

Well, this is a whole new level of stupidity, even by your pathetic standards. Why on Earth would motorists turn around 20mph and cycle route signs, and remove community speed area signs. It really is time you started to act like an adult, I have Grandchildren who make more sense than you do.
Might I suggest that you get on your bike, head off in the direction of Harwich, and jump on a ferry bound for Rotterdam. Once there, you’ll be able to cycle all night and all day on those designer cycle paths you rant on about so much.

Is this PNP fella for real ? He really comes over a someone who believes that all motorists are a four wheel version of Hells Angels who's only purpose in life is to seek out and run over angelic cyclists. I've never met ANYONE who would actually want to see harm done to anyone on the road, never mind the especially vulnerable on two wheels. I know plenty of people who are well p****d off with the stupid antics of SOME cyclists AND motorists but other than being disgusted with their behaviour they just get on with life. If he honestly believes, and as from his detective summing up, he apparently does, that 'motorists' are so inflamed by the joke bollards that they're actually stopping their cars just to unscrew them, or maybe that they're sneaking into town under the cover of darkness to do the dastardly deed, he probably needs thicker tinfoil for his hat. As mentioned by the previous poster, my money would be on the cretins, usually alcohol fueled, who think it's funny to move barriers away from holes in the road, put park benches in the middle of the street and smash up bus shelters. He's obviously passionate about his cycling but this has slipped over the line into something else. Either that or he's one of the Worlds greatest, as yet undiscovered comedians.

anyone who has a accident on Hoghton st. This has been reported, reference 112122. also a report to Hse as there are trip hazards in the rd.

Originally Posted by local

I cycle and think they are a waste of taxpayers cash for my minority pursuit,

but do not think anyone other than those who vandalised them is to blame.

The same mindless idiots vandalise windows on Lord Street, put graffiti up, damage trees, cars, etc without any prompting.


Or should I consider any vandalism on my car the fault of cycle lane proponents such as yourself and the Eco hypocrite PNP?

It is obvious that PNP is a very experienced cyclist who is capable of cycling any road route, cycle lanes or not. He is obviously winding you up. Though I must admit, I had never looked at those bollards closely enough to notice if they were screwed in or not, and would not have known they are easy to unscrew??

Originally Posted by Georgio

Is this PNP fella for real ? He really comes over a someone who believes that all motorists are a four wheel version of Hells Angels who's only purpose in life is to seek out and run over angelic cyclists. I've never met ANYONE who would actually want to see harm done to anyone on the road, never mind the especially vulnerable on two wheels. I know plenty of people who are well p****d off with the stupid antics of SOME cyclists AND motorists but other than being disgusted with their behaviour they just get on with life. If he honestly believes, and as from his detective summing up, he apparently does, that 'motorists' are so inflamed by the joke bollards that they're actually stopping their cars just to unscrew them, or maybe that they're sneaking into town under the cover of darkness to do the dastardly deed, he probably needs thicker tinfoil for his hat. As mentioned by the previous poster, my money would be on the cretins, usually alcohol fueled, who think it's funny to move barriers away from holes in the road, put park benches in the middle of the street and smash up bus shelters. He's obviously passionate about his cycling but this has slipped over the line into something else. Either that or he's one of the Worlds greatest, as yet undiscovered comedians.

If you read his posts in consideration of his knowledge, you would understand PNP gets his point across with British humour. I would not be so quick to consider just hooligans for this damage either - I was very surprised to learn who had been responsible for putting lather in the Lord Street fountains some years ago.

The reason why these cycle lanes were introduced so quickly was due to the lockdown and people not driving around much. Acting while the iron was hot so to speak, cycling was promoted as a means of exercise for people while also addressing the problem of pollution . The government offered every council in the UK incentives to install cycle lanes.

Originally Posted by cotton man

I cycle all over the town and have rarely had a problem in fifty years. These cycle lanes are a waste of taxpayers money, we do not need them.

I think restricting traffic on Queens Road is a perfectly good idea, encourage cyclists to use this and traffic to use Albert Road as it 'should' make it easier for both parties. I have posted on here in the past to say I think the Hoghton Street cycle lane is a waste of time. It's not that busy traffic wise and is plenty wide enough as it is.

Originally Posted by libraryguy

And if you replace them they'll go again, and again, and again, and again. They are way too flimsy. Never-ending extra costs. Pointless.

(Wait for the usual cycling suspects to shoot me down in flames now)

So the answer is if you don't like something just destroy it until people give up?

Originally Posted by said

A) It is obvious that PNP is a very experienced cyclist who is capable of cycling any road route, cycle lanes or not. He is obviously winding you up.

B) Though I must admit, I had never looked at those bollards closely enough to notice if they were screwed in or not, and would not have known they are easy to unscrew??

A) The widespread cases of interference with cycle and other signage etc is an established fact. There is a good reason why motorists turn one of each of the 20mph roundels at entrance to 20mph streets. It renders the signage defective, allowing speeders to ignore the limit. They know that if caught, a good solicitor could use the absence of correct signage as a valid defence, and get his client acquitted.

B) I came across loose bollards of exactly same type, whilst cycling in Lancaster last year. Some were lying in the cycle-lane causing an obstruction, others were scattered on adjacent pavement. I stopped to examine one and, realising they were easy to put back, screwed them back into their bases.

Originally Posted by cotton man

I cycle all over the town and have rarely had a problem in fifty years. These cycle lanes are a waste of taxpayers money, we do not need them.

The issue should be about the wanton destruction, not what the writer thinks about the cycle track. Shall we all start vandalising anything we happen to disagree with. It remains, embarrassingly poor "reporting".
Ditto to all subsequent comments to the contrary.

Originally Posted by Sap33

I think restricting traffic on Queens Road is a perfectly good idea, encourage cyclists to use this and traffic to use Albert Road as it 'should' make it easier for both parties. I have posted on here in the past to say I think the Hoghton Street cycle lane is a waste of time. It's not that busy traffic wise and is plenty wide enough as it is.

But traffic isn’t restricted on Queens Road, it’s just not allowed to enter from Park Crescent or Manchester Road, and that is why the scheme is flawed.

Originally Posted by The PNP

A) The widespread cases of interference with cycle and other signage etc is an established fact. There is a good reason why motorists turn one of each of the 20mph roundels at entrance to 20mph streets. It renders the signage defective, allowing speeders to ignore the limit. They know that if caught, a good solicitor could use the absence of correct signage as a valid defence, and get his client acquitted.

B) I came across loose bollards of exactly same type, whilst cycling in Lancaster last year. Some were lying in the cycle-lane causing an obstruction, others were scattered on adjacent pavement. I stopped to examine one and, realising they were easy to put back, screwed them back into their bases.

Absolute utter bo**ocks. IF, you were to actually have an occasional read of the Highway Code, (the bible to which you so often refer), you would know that all roads, with the exception of those with a 30mph speed limit on them, must, by law have repeater signs displayed every few hundred yards. No Solicitor in the world would be able to site incorrect signage as a defence to speeding on a 20mph road.
With your meticulous eye for detail, and your unquestionable hatred of anyone who dares to use a four wheeled mode of transport, you will no doubt, have photographic evidence of motorists that you have witnessed, interfering with these signs, perhaps you’d care to share this evidence with us all.

Originally Posted by The PNP

A) The widespread cases of interference with cycle and other signage etc is an established fact. There is a good reason why motorists turn one of each of the 20mph roundels at entrance to 20mph streets. It renders the signage defective, allowing speeders to ignore the limit. They know that if caught, a good solicitor could use the absence of correct signage as a valid defence, and get his client acquitted.

B) I came across loose bollards of exactly same type, whilst cycling in Lancaster last year. Some were lying in the cycle-lane causing an obstruction, others were scattered on adjacent pavement. I stopped to examine one and, realising they were easy to put back, screwed them back into their bases.

A) As a motorist, I have better things to do with my time than go out turning round speed limits signs etc.

You are totally deluded.