Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: Keitht on 14 Dec 2009 06:29 Adrian wrote: > > A bike MOT would also increase business for local bike shops, of course. > And put places like Toys R Us and Argos out of the bike business - along with so many others that would fail even if brand new. -- Its never too late to reinvent the bicycle
From: Keitht on 14 Dec 2009 06:25 The Medway Handyman wrote: > Adrian wrote: >> "The Medway Handyman" <davidlang(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> gurgled >> happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> >>>> '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. >> Is it the presence or absence of a valid tax disc which enables that, >> then? > > No, its the fact that number plates are part of the system. > > Odd that it was only the tax disc a while back -- your education is coming on nicely. -- Its never too late to reinvent the bicycle
From: MasonS on 14 Dec 2009 06:44 On 14 Dec, 11:20, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "Mas...(a)BP.com" <Mas...(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. I agree, but JNugent doesn't believe that reflective bits on specific cycling clothing counts as hi-vis, it's a cheapo builder's vest or nothing for him. -- Simon Mason
From: Mr Benn on 14 Dec 2009 06:46 <MasonS(a)BP.com> wrote in message news:14ed2a3d-b659-473b-8847-3c8e799665d5(a)j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... > 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. You would have to be mad to rely solely on high-visibility clothing on a bicycle. This is why it is a useful compliment to lighting. Anything which improves safety has to be a good thing. Anyway, I can see I'm wasting my time offering you advice.
From: Adrian on 14 Dec 2009 06:47
"MasonS(a)BP.com" <MasonS(a)BP.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > I agree, but JNugent doesn't believe that reflective bits on specific > cycling clothing counts as hi-vis To be fair, I don't recall seeing you mention that before... |