Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: mileburner on 26 Nov 2009 11:43 "Dermot Goldstein" <dgoldstein(a)charter.net> wrote in message news:4b0ea920.105251921(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:26:36 -0000, "mileburner" > <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > >> >>"webreader" <websitereader(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >>news:d281183f-003b-4a78-8185-ec7cbc50741a(a)n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... >>> Why do the police not do anything about the likes of these cyclists. >>> Yet again proof that cyclists get special consideration unlike >>> motorists. >> >>I disagree, I have contacted the police concerning drivers stopping past >>the >>stop line at a set of traffic lights in the advanced stop reservoir for >>cyclists. They replied that drivers did not always understand what the >>advanced stop meant and would not take action. > > Why do cyclists need this "advanced stop reservoir" if they don't stop > at red lights? P'raps it's a guvvermunt initiative to encourage cyclists to wait until the lights are green by giving them their own special holding area.
From: David Hansen on 26 Nov 2009 12:23 On 26 Nov 2009 15:35:47 GMT someone who may be Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote this:- >No, it applies to all motor vehicles - it's just that some are zero-rated. If memory serves me correctly motor vehicles used for public services have a little bit of paper in them which says that they are exempt from VED, not that it is zero rated. The piece of paper for members of the public is called a "VED exemption certificate", look it up in a search engine. Not conclusive, but as far as I'm going at the moment. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000023_en_8#pt3-pb3-l1g54
From: thirty-six on 26 Nov 2009 12:27 On 26 Nov, 16:14, dgoldst...(a)charter.net (Dermot Goldstein) wrote: > On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:26:36 -0000, "mileburner" > > <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > > >"webreader" <websiterea...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > >news:d281183f-003b-4a78-8185-ec7cbc50741a(a)n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > >> Why do the police not do anything about the likes of these cyclists. > >> Yet again proof that cyclists get special consideration unlike > >> motorists. > > >I disagree, I have contacted the police concerning drivers stopping past the > >stop line at a set of traffic lights in the advanced stop reservoir for > >cyclists. They replied that drivers did not always understand what the > >advanced stop meant and would not take action. > > Why do cyclists need this "advanced stop reservoir" if they don't stop > at red lights? They dont. It's an excuse to move back stop lines for motorists in an attempt to reduced the fatalities caused by amber gamblers, those who jump the lights and dont ensure the junction is clear before proceeding. It's also an effort to gain the ecology conscious voter. Cyclists do not as a rule go plowing into other vehicles because the orange light turns on so do not require this mummying aimed at the majority of drivers.
From: Adrian on 26 Nov 2009 12:30 David Hansen <SENDdavidNOhSPAM(a)spidacom.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>No, it applies to all motor vehicles - it's just that some are >>zero-rated. > If memory serves me correctly motor vehicles used for public services > have a little bit of paper in them which says that they are exempt from > VED, not that it is zero rated. > > The piece of paper for members of the public is called a "VED exemption > certificate", look it up in a search engine. Not conclusive, but as far > as I'm going at the moment. Yup, higher-rate DLA. One of the situations I was thinking of. It's an exemption from having to pay for the vehicle excise disk - but not from having to have it. The vehicle must still have a current excise disk displayed, and it's issued in exactly the same way, with MOT/ insurance checked. It's just zero-cost.
From: David Hansen on 26 Nov 2009 12:32
On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:27:37 -0800 (PST) someone who may be thirty-six <thirty-six(a)live.co.uk> wrote this:- >It's an excuse to move back stop lines for motorists in an >attempt to reduced the fatalities caused by amber gamblers, those who >jump the lights and dont ensure the junction is clear before >proceeding. It's also an effort to gain the ecology conscious voter. Leaving aside your contentions they also make crossing the road more pleasant for pedestrians as the motor vehicles are generally a little further back. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000023_en_8#pt3-pb3-l1g54 |