From: Alex Potter on
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:41:35 +0100, mileburner wrote:

> But is IS TRUE, there is NO DENYING, my tax disc says I can use the
> roads.

No, it says that Vehicle Excise duty was paid, a tax which is only
applicable to motor vehicles, and that vehicle may be kept or used on the
road. Of itself, it implies no permission to an individual. That is
granted by your driving license.

Regards, Alex (Reply-To: is valid)

How the Internet is supposed to work: <>
From: Maximum Joy on
In article <hopq1u$vvu$1(a)>, boltar2003(a)
> I was sitting at some lights on the A22 (not exactly a minor road) when a
> couple on a Tandem come past and stop. Not to the side, oh no. They stop
> right bang in front of me. Unsurprisingly when the lights go green me and
> all the traffic behind are now slooowly accelerating to a heady speed of
> 15mph and its only when I hammer the horn that these pair of tossers move
> over and I look in the mirror and the bloke at the front is laughing. I was
> sorely tempted to slam on the brakes and see how funny he thought it was then.
> So what gives? Not content with getting in the way on side roads some of you
> people now think you have to block the main roads too to feel safe because you
> voluntaritly choose a dangerous mode of transport?

I think this person was being an interfering, obstructive prick and it
was entirely reasonable of you to use your horn after 30 seconds of it
(which is actually a pretty long time to completely unnecessarily and
avoidably stop someone exceeding 15mph). It's no surprise that
mileburner and the other car-haters have reacted the way they have.

Don't forget mileburner thinks speed limits are "far too high" anyway
(just because he's too incompetent to drive at a reasonable speed,
everyone else must be as well), so he probably thinks that even 15mph is
excessive. But what do you expect from someone who's decided that just
because *he* thinks that no-one should be driving then it's OK for
motorists to be deliberately persecuted and delayed ad nauseam?
Obviously when someone disapproves of a legitimate, legal activity then
it's perfectly acceptable for them to advocate direct action and
bullying against those performing that activity.

You can bet that mileburner and the other psycholists do everything they
can to obstruct and irritate motorists every time they're out psychling.
"I've chosen a mode of transport that can't exceed 15-20mph so I don't
want anyone else to go faster than that." Dog-in-the-manger

Oh that all road users were courteous towards all other road users
regardless of their mode of transport (and of course part of being
courteous is doing what one reasonably and practically can not to
obstruct others more than's really not difficult or
onerous, and everyone wins that way, except those who like interfering).
When mileburner is walking along a pavement then he presumably doesn't
obstruct other pedestrians; when he cycles he presumably lets other
cyclists overtake; so why the resentment towards motorists who want to
pass? It's because mileburner thinks that no-one should be driving
(apparently people can *always* walk instead), which gives him the right
to be as obnoxious as he likes towards anyone who does it. Yet he
expects drivers to be nice to him despite continually picking fights
with them. Incredible.
From: mileburner on

<boltar2003(a)> wrote in message
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:36:47 +0100
> "mileburner" <mileburner(a)> wrote:
>>You are right, drivers will get past if they possibly can, regardless of
>>available space and with no consideration to the speed in which they are
>>passing at. The more room the cyclist gives, the faster they will pass.
>>Eating into the available space makes the driver think, slow down and act
>>more cautiously. It also stops them making dangerous overtakes when there
>>really is not enough room.
> So you're moaning about drivers not giving enough room but now you're
> saying
> thay you'll deliberaly not give them enough room so they don't speed past
> you!

I do not have a problem with drivers coming too close because I do not give
them the opportunity to squeeze past if I think there is not enough room to
overtake safely. They can sweat, they can moan, they can honk, they can hurl
abuse out of the window 'cos that's what cagers do. But they are not going
to be overtaking me if I do not think there is enough room. If they *do*
come close, the simple answer is to ride wider so they can't :-)

From: boltar2003 on
On 31 Mar 2010 14:42:20 GMT
Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)> wrote:
>> Someone clips a bike with their wing mirror while doing 20mph. The bike
>> then falls over. Yeah , good luck on making the dangerous driving
>> charges stick with that one.
>Small problem. You forget that there will be at least one witness - the
>driver coming from the opposite direction - who will be only too happy to
>state that you deliberately pushed through despite there being totally
>insufficient space to do so.

On the contrary the other driver will merely see a car pass him on the other
side of the road. He's unlikely to see the cyclist fall unless he looks in
his rearview mirrors and even if he did the odds on him stopping are slim.


From: boltar2003 on
On 31 Mar 2010 15:08:19 GMT
Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)> wrote:
>B'sides, not only did you just have the cyclist, but you had the other
>guy's mirror - then there's the others behind, who had a ringside view.

I think you missed the point - you avoid hitting the oncoming car at all
costs. The oncoming driver sees nothing unusual.