bike on train
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: A danger to motorists...
Next: Brown bin day!
From: Sam Wilson on 10 Dec 2009 10:56 In article <hn32i51j3alsnvo5rnve6ao7v2rgv3jg1q(a)4ax.com>, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 13:41:06 -0000, "Paul Rigg" > <gzerotvb(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > > > >They [the cycling mafia] should have to > > > >1 Have registration numbets > >2 Have compulsory insurance > >3 Have them confiscated if found riding the pavement or otherwise > >disobeying traffic regulationsl, which would certainly include riding on > >station platforms. > > > Agree 100% on all three. So should item 3 apply just to bicycles or all means of transport? I trust you would apply the same to other vehicles whose operators are found disobeying traffic regulations. Sam
From: mileburner on 10 Dec 2009 11:03 "Sam Wilson" <Sam.Wilson(a)ed.ac.uk> wrote in message news:Sam.Wilson-4FBE7D.15565910122009(a)scotsman.ed.ac.uk... > In article <hn32i51j3alsnvo5rnve6ao7v2rgv3jg1q(a)4ax.com>, > Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 13:41:06 -0000, "Paul Rigg" >> <gzerotvb(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: >> > >> >They [the cycling mafia] should have to >> > >> >1 Have registration numbets >> >2 Have compulsory insurance >> >3 Have them confiscated if found riding the pavement or otherwise >> >disobeying traffic regulationsl, which would certainly include riding on >> >station platforms. >> >> >> Agree 100% on all three. > > So should item 3 apply just to bicycles or all means of transport? I > trust you would apply the same to other vehicles whose operators are > found disobeying traffic regulations. There would not be much traffic left on the road if that happened.
From: Sam Wilson on 10 Dec 2009 11:43 In article <hbk8tcuos3b0.jbhowk3h7b10$.dlg(a)40tude.net>, Chris Tolley <cj.tolley(a)bogus.co.uk (ukonline really)> wrote: > Paul Rigg wrote: > > > National cycle route 68 goes right past my front door and its straight > > and approximately level (unusually for the Pennines!) > > > > They bat on there at 40mph and they could quite easily cause an > > accident. > > I went to watch a number of the town centre tour races during the > summer. The speeds of the elite cyclists who took part were much closer > to 35. I've only once got a bike over 40, and that was down a hill with > a gale behind me. I've hit a recorded 39 with a slightly optimistic speedo and a long, steep hill. That was on a mountain bike with smooth tyres. You have to be very, very keen to hit 40 on the flat. Sam
From: Sam Wilson on 10 Dec 2009 11:51 In article <hfr6cm$46d$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > "Sam Wilson" <Sam.Wilson(a)ed.ac.uk> wrote in message > news:Sam.Wilson-4FBE7D.15565910122009(a)scotsman.ed.ac.uk... > > In article <hn32i51j3alsnvo5rnve6ao7v2rgv3jg1q(a)4ax.com>, > > Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 13:41:06 -0000, "Paul Rigg" > >> <gzerotvb(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> >They [the cycling mafia] should have to > >> > > >> >1 Have registration numbets > >> >2 Have compulsory insurance > >> >3 Have them confiscated if found riding the pavement or otherwise > >> >disobeying traffic regulationsl, which would certainly include riding on > >> >station platforms. > >> > >> > >> Agree 100% on all three. > > > > So should item 3 apply just to bicycles or all means of transport? I > > trust you would apply the same to other vehicles whose operators are > > found disobeying traffic regulations. > > There would not be much traffic left on the road if that happened. Ah, good point. Sam
From: Tom Anderson on 10 Dec 2009 13:17
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, OG wrote: > "Tom Anderson" <twic(a)urchin.earth.li> wrote in message > news:alpine.DEB.1.10.0912092147400.11745(a)urchin.earth.li... >> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Neil Williams wrote: >> >>> On 9 Dec, 13:41, "Paul Rigg" <gzero...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> 2 Have compulsory insurance >>> >>> You are presumably aware that most cyclists have third-party liability >>> insurance cover which is provided to any inhabitant of their home as >>> part of their home contents insurance? It's not mandatory, OK, but I >>> would think that more people have home contents insurance than not. >> >> I'd love to see some statistics on that, as i suspect it's not the case. I >> suspect most people who rent aren't insured, and an awful lot of people >> rent. I also suspect that the cycling demographic is skewed towards the >> young and the urban, which will mean it overrepresents renters. >> >> Of course, mostly what i'm doing here is extrapolating from a sample of >> one (and kidding myself that i'm still young). > > You don't have contents insurance? Nope. Looked into it once, but it costs a fortune. tom -- sh(1) was the first MOO |