Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: johnwright ""john" on 28 Nov 2009 08:34 Huge wrote: > On 2009-11-27, Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote: >> Peter Grange <peter(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> >>>> No, it's just that the majority of cyclists are selfish, stupid >>>> bastards. You seem typical of the breed. >>> There goes the unsubstantiated "majority" word again. >> The day this becomes a court of law or I get paid to do the research >> I'll provide the statistics. However on a random sample, the majority of >> cyclists I encounter are selfish, stupid bastards. Not to mention >> "holier than thou" and "smug". >> >> Here's something you could try to test the theory. Stop the next >> pavement cyclist that you see and ask them to ride where they belong. > > Did you want to get assaulted? Size can matter :-) -- I'm not apathetic... I just don't give a sh** anymore ?John Wright
From: Peter Grange on 28 Nov 2009 08:36 On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:42:54 +0000, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: >Peter Grange <peter(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> >I'd rate my chances as being about as good as those of stopping a >> >cyclist. >> Ah, but then you may find yourself drawn into the "relative amount of >> damage" argument. > >No I'd find myself being drawn into the typical cyclists "tu quoque" >fallacy. I didn't attempt to justify either of them being there. It's a simple comparison between getting hit by a ton of fairly hard steel and a couple of hundred kilos of steel and squidgy bits. -- Pete
From: johnwright ""john" on 28 Nov 2009 08:39 Peter Grange wrote: > On 28 Nov 2009 11:31:39 GMT, Huge <Huge(a)nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > >> On 2009-11-28, Peter Grange <peter(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>> On 28 Nov 2009 10:58:07 GMT, Huge <Huge(a)nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2009-11-27, Peter Grange <peter(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:56:05 +0000, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) >>>>>> No, it's just that the majority of cyclists are selfish, stupid >>>>>> bastards. You seem typical of the breed. >>>>> There goes the unsubstantiated "majority" word again. >>>> I used to walk through the City of London every day to work. In that >>>> place and time I'd say "majority of" is indeed incorrect. I'd substitute >>>> "all". >>> If I've told you once I've told you a million times not to exaggerate. >> Damn. Found out. :o) >> >> But seriously, cyclists in the CoL do seem to be a breed apart. Apart >>from the law, that is. > > I had a spell commuting by bike between Waterloo and Bishopsgate which > finished about 2 years ago. There were a number of eejuts as there are > in all walks of life. The red-light behaviour at the north side of > London Bridge was quite good, as most were going right-ish towards > Bishopsgate. Other places it wasn't so good. I did see, and reported > on here, a couple of plod stopping cyclists coming south on > Bishopsgate who had gone through a red light at the junction of > Threadneedle Street. They were there for 2 or 3 days IIRC. So > sometimes something is done, but not often enough to discourage the > behaviour of those who give the rest of us a bad name. Perhaps the real solution would be the equivalent of the drive through penalty in F1. Slow them down by means of a plod just talking to them if one sees an infraction aimed at reducing journey times. With the result that their journey time is extended once again. Needs more assertive plod on the beat though. -- I'm not apathetic... I just don't give a sh** anymore ?John Wright
From: Peter Grange on 28 Nov 2009 09:45 On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:42:54 +0000, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: >Peter Grange <peter(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> There was an element of exaggeration in Steve's post I think, 25 mph? > >Peter Messen. OK, that's one. You did use the word "cyclist" though :-( I guess you didn't see him though. Stop the next one you see. -- Pete
From: NM on 28 Nov 2009 15:42
On 28 Nov, 19:41, Phil W Lee <phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote: > Driving is a privilege, not a right, and it is right and proper for > that privilege to be withdrawn if there is any doubt over a drivers > competence. This should apply equally to cyclists. > Life is a right, anything that threatens it is a breach of that right > (and therefore illegal under international law). > It is therefore perfectly legal to withdraw the licence of any person > who fails to operate a motor vehicle safely (in fact, it's probably > obligatory, if the requirement to safeguard the right to life is to be > complied with). Shame cycling privilidges cannot be removed for the same reasons. > > |