Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: MasonS on 14 Dec 2009 06:05 On 13 Dec, 23:08, "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > Mas...(a)BP.com wrote: > > On 13 Dec, 18:33, "Mr. Benn" <%...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> "Mas...(a)BP.com" <Mas...(a)BP.com> wrote > >> innews:23017181-2785-41ab-89e6-875c1a475935(a)g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com: > > >>> On 13 Dec, 17:49, "Mr. Benn" <%...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >>>> If you give me your address Simon, I'll order you one of those > >>>> GBP1.35 high visibility vests that you seem so reluctant to wear if > >>>> it reduces the chace of you not getting hurt in an accident.- Hide > >>>> quoted text - > > >>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>> No need thanks - they don't work in the dark and our site stores has > >>> 100's of them in stock. > >>> I rely on my lights which are much more useful. > > >> They do work in the dark which is why the vests are made from a > >> fluorescent > >> and reflective fabric. They reflect light from oncoming vehicles. > >> Why is > >> that difficult for you to understand? They are a very useful > >> compliment to > >> cycle lighting and even the CTC recognise this. The only reason I > >> don't > >> wear one is that I never cycle at night. > > >> It's all down to whether you want to reduce the chance of getting > >> involved > >> in an accident at the end of the day. If your own arrogance leads > >> you to > >> believe that a reasonable and proven safety measure doesn't work, > >> then you > >> have yourself partially to blame if another road user doesn't see > >> you in > >> time to avoid a collision. A driver seeing you a second sooner could > >> make > >> all the difference between life and death if that matters to you. > > >> BTW, have you received your insurance payout yet for your most recent > >> accident? > > > Most recent? You mean the only one I have had in my life? > > Next month, after a physio examines me for long term damage. > > > I do have reflective stripes on my shoe covers, tights, shorts and > > jacket for cars coming from the front and rear. > > For side traffic this is no use, so I have a 1000 lumen flashing front > > light and if they miss that there is no hope. > > So you admit you are a danger to innocent motorists? > > -- > Dave - The Medway Handymanwww.medwayhandyman.co.uk- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Yes, they seem to be scared of "boy racer cyclists" in their flimsy steel boxes. -- Simon Mason
From: Keitht on 14 Dec 2009 06:06 MasonS(a)BP.com wrote: > On 13 Dec, 16:18, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> gurgled happily, >> sounding much like they were saying: >> >>> A multi millionaire cyclist still wouldn't have to pay a 'specific' fee >>> before being able to use his cycle on a public road though would he? >> If it makes you any happier, perhaps you ought to buy this van - you >> could then use the roads yourself, for work, without paying any VED or >> fuel duty. Perfectly legally. >> >> http://www.leboncoin.fr/vi/80500342.htm > > I'd buy the bloody thing for him out of my own pocket, just to hear of > him driving around Kent having paid no "road tax". > Please be kind to those less fortunate than yourself. It's become clear that SuperHandyMan couldn't manage such a conflict. It's either/or all/nothing black/white, anything else would leave a gibbering wreck. -- Its never too late to reinvent the bicycle
From: MasonS on 14 Dec 2009 06:14 On 14 Dec, 09:37, "Mr Benn" <nos...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > > > So you admit you are a danger to innocent motorists? > > He's a danger to himself because he won't take sensible advice.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - When you've clocked up 60,000 miles in 10 years on a bike, then you can lecture me on safety. Even our work's HSE dept has admitted that relying solely on hi-vis is a failure. -- Simon Mason
From: Adrian on 14 Dec 2009 06:20 "MasonS(a)BP.com" <MasonS(a)BP.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Even our work's HSE dept has admitted that relying solely on hi-vis is a > failure. "Relying solely on hi-vis" is not the same as "ignoring hi-vis completely", of course. Yes, of course a decent set of lights is vital. But - equally - hi-vis can help to identify "that little red light in the distance" as a cyclist as early as possible, which can only be of benefit.
From: Keitht on 14 Dec 2009 06:18
The Medway Handyman wrote: > Adrian wrote: >> "MasonS(a)BP.com" <MasonS(a)BP.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like >> they were saying: >> >>>> If it makes you any happier, perhaps you ought to buy this van - you >>>> could then use the roads yourself, for work, without paying any VED >>>> or fuel duty. Perfectly legally. >>>> >>>> http://www.leboncoin.fr/vi/80500342.htm >>> I'd buy the bloody thing for him out of my own pocket, just to hear >>> of him driving around Kent having paid no "road tax". >> 'course, it would still need a valid tax disc on display. > > Indeed it would. So if I drove through red traffic lights, on the pavement > or the wrong way up a one way street I could be identified & prosecuted. > > > Blimey -- you can get all that info from a distance from a tax disc while the vehicle is moving? SuperHandyMan strikes again! -- Its never too late to reinvent the bicycle |