WTF-OTD -
-
Johnny J. wrote:
In my opinion, bikers should follow the same traffic rules that apply to everybody else in the traffic and take responsibility for their actions.
If people could get behind the steering wheel of a car without getting the overpowering belief that they own the road and all on it, there would be no need for laws. The fact that you are in a car does not give you any special rights, and does not allow you to exclude yourself from meeting the requirements of civilised society. People want to get from A to B. Cyclists do so without damaging anything, spoiling the environment, or costing us all billions in taxes. So, in my opinion, the sooner drivers realise that they are not gods of the road, and interact with other people going from A to B, rather than attempt to dominate them, the better.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark_Wallace wrote:
The fact that you are in a car does not give you any special rights, and does not allow you to exclude yourself from meeting the requirements of civilised society.
Same goes for you on your bike! And I maintain that the actions of the cyclist are more likely to put other peoples lives in danger than the actions of the car drivers...
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011
-----
Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach
-----
Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
-----
Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932 -
Mark_Wallace wrote:
The fact that you are in a car does not give you any special rights, and does not allow you to exclude yourself from meeting the requirements of civilised society.
Same goes for you on your bike! And I maintain that the actions of the cyclist are more likely to put other peoples lives in danger than the actions of the car drivers...
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011
-----
Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach
-----
Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
-----
Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932Johnny J. wrote:
And I maintain that the actions of the cyclist are more likely to put other peoples lives in danger than the actions of the car drivers...
Oh, absolutely. You only have to look at the figures. :zzz:
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Johnny J. wrote:
And I maintain that the actions of the cyclist are more likely to put other peoples lives in danger than the actions of the car drivers...
Oh, absolutely. You only have to look at the figures. :zzz:
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark_Wallace wrote:
You only have to look at the figures.
Can't - there ARE no figures for accidents/fatalities/damages caused by cyclists because they never get any blame no matter what they do!
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011
-----
Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach
-----
Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
-----
Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932 -
“I knocked a cyclist off his bike. I have right of way, he doesn’t even pay road tax”
Yup a genuine real tweet from a lovely lass by the twitter name
@emmaway20; though her account has mysteriously disappeared. Apparently the police sent her a very nice message telling her she had committed an offence and needed to notify them PDQ. They really should introduce an Common Sense part to the driving test.Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
Aside from the obvious issue that she knocked down a cyclist and that having right of way doesn't mean you should drive into things, the thing that annoys me is the 'Road Tax' excuse. You see there is no road tax, you pay tax on your car. Your council tax is what pays for roads. And besides what going to damage the roads more, 90kg of bike and rider or many tons of car? Cyclists and drivers would all get along a little better if both would obey the rules. Cyclists cutting across lanes and running red lights, motorists cutting off cyclists and generally being ignorant of other road users. Then again maybe the problem is that some people just shouldn't be allowed out - I bet they're also the kinds of people that stand in the middle of the isle at the supermarket so nobody else can get past, or walk 4 abreast through crowded areas like some kind of rolling road block.
-SK Genius
Vehicle Simulation Demo - New and Improved!
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
motorists do not own the roads
Neither do the cyclists
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
And cyclists are expected to obey the law just the same as motorists
Maybe, but they don't see it like that, and they're not treated egally according to the law either.
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
But just see one cyclist do it and all hell breaks loose.
It's not just ONE cyclist - it's all of them!
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011
-----
Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach
-----
Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
-----
Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932Johnny J. wrote:
Maybe, but they don't see it like that, and they're not treated egally according to the law either.
Yes, they do see it like that. You are falling into this too common trap of seeing a few cyclists break the law, and concluding that they all do it. I see motorists breaking the law every day, am I to conclude that all motorists do the same? And on the second point they are treated exactly the same, according to the offence. In the UK you can even get penalty points on your driving licence for cycling offences.
Johnny J. wrote:
It's not just ONE cyclist - it's all of them!
That just is not true, and you know it.
Use the best guess
-
I can see how someone might be confused by my previous statements. I'm not advocating violence against cyclists. I'm for running them over if you can manage to get away with it. I hope that clears things up. :-D
-
Johnny J. wrote:
Maybe, but they don't see it like that, and they're not treated egally according to the law either.
Yes, they do see it like that. You are falling into this too common trap of seeing a few cyclists break the law, and concluding that they all do it. I see motorists breaking the law every day, am I to conclude that all motorists do the same? And on the second point they are treated exactly the same, according to the offence. In the UK you can even get penalty points on your driving licence for cycling offences.
Johnny J. wrote:
It's not just ONE cyclist - it's all of them!
That just is not true, and you know it.
Use the best guess
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
That just is not true, and you know it.
I admit it might be a generalisation, but I can say that for every time I see one car driver breaking the traffic rules, I see 10 bikers doing the same. Car drivers are generally more aware of the traffic rules (even though some choose to neglect them), and they are also more aware of their potential power to do damage in the traffic than the biker. If you had to pass a test and have a bikers license to be allowed to ride a bike, I think it it would be a great improvement. Because that would make the bikers more aware that there ARE rules to follow - it's not just getting on the bike and going as fast as possible with no regards to others (including pedestrians).
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011
-----
Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach
-----
Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
-----
Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932 -
MehGerbil wrote:
I'm for running them over if you can manage to get away with it.
That's even more stupid than your first comment. You think deliberately injuring or killing someone is acceptable?
Use the best guess
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
That just is not true, and you know it.
I admit it might be a generalisation, but I can say that for every time I see one car driver breaking the traffic rules, I see 10 bikers doing the same. Car drivers are generally more aware of the traffic rules (even though some choose to neglect them), and they are also more aware of their potential power to do damage in the traffic than the biker. If you had to pass a test and have a bikers license to be allowed to ride a bike, I think it it would be a great improvement. Because that would make the bikers more aware that there ARE rules to follow - it's not just getting on the bike and going as fast as possible with no regards to others (including pedestrians).
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011
-----
Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach
-----
Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo!
-----
Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932Johnny J. wrote:
can say that for every time I see one car driver breaking the traffic rules, I see 10 bikers doing the same.
I doubt that very much, especially considering the number of cyclists on the roads relative to the number of cars.
Johnny J. wrote:
Car drivers are generally more aware of the traffic rules
Another generalisation; I suspect in relative terms just as many cyclists are aware of the rules.
Johnny J. wrote:
If you had to pass a test and have a bikers license to be allowed to ride a bike, I think it it would be a great improvement.
I agree entirely.
Use the best guess
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
You think deliberately injuring or killing someone is acceptable?
It's the only way they'll learn. :-D <-- important clue.
-
I can see how someone might be confused by my previous statements. I'm not advocating violence against cyclists. I'm for running them over if you can manage to get away with it. I hope that clears things up. :-D
Quote:
I'm not advocating violence against cyclists. I'm for running them over if you can manage to get away with it.
Good call. It's not violence unless you get caught. :)
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
MehGerbil wrote:
It's the only way they'll learn.
:-D <-- important clue.Yes, and that girl in Norfolk thinks it's just a joke.
Use the best guess
-
No, she doesn't have a point: motorists do not own the roads. And cyclists are expected to obey the law just the same as motorists. It's strange how no one seems to complain when cars make illegal turns, drive on the wrong side of the road, exceed the speed limit, jump red lights, etc., etc. But just see one cyclist do it and all hell breaks loose.
Use the best guess
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
motorists do not own the roads
Yes sure, but this is not a valid argument. Following this logic and because I pay my taxes as anybody else I can drive an ox wagon with 3 mph on a 50 mph road blocking the entire traffic and force drivers to drive in the opposite lane thus violating the traffic rules.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
motorists do not own the roads
Yes sure, but this is not a valid argument. Following this logic and because I pay my taxes as anybody else I can drive an ox wagon with 3 mph on a 50 mph road blocking the entire traffic and force drivers to drive in the opposite lane thus violating the traffic rules.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
Actually I believe you can. You will find you're not allowed on motorways but the rest are mostly okay.
Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
-
Johnny J. wrote:
can say that for every time I see one car driver breaking the traffic rules, I see 10 bikers doing the same.
I doubt that very much, especially considering the number of cyclists on the roads relative to the number of cars.
Johnny J. wrote:
Car drivers are generally more aware of the traffic rules
Another generalisation; I suspect in relative terms just as many cyclists are aware of the rules.
Johnny J. wrote:
If you had to pass a test and have a bikers license to be allowed to ride a bike, I think it it would be a great improvement.
I agree entirely.
Use the best guess
You say that most bikers obey the law, but that's not the case where I live. The biking community adamantly supports Idaho stops, which apparently mean they can treat red lights as stop signs and stop signs as yield signs. This is NOT the law where I live, but the biking community swears by it, loudly and often. They openly profess to breaking the laws as written, because they don't like them. Granted, that is not unlike cars and speed limits, but it does lead to disagreements like this one about bikers in general.
-
I'm making my posts in the spirit of The Lounge. You evidently want serious debate. I cannot help you there. Good luck.
-
Aside from the obvious issue that she knocked down a cyclist and that having right of way doesn't mean you should drive into things, the thing that annoys me is the 'Road Tax' excuse. You see there is no road tax, you pay tax on your car. Your council tax is what pays for roads. And besides what going to damage the roads more, 90kg of bike and rider or many tons of car? Cyclists and drivers would all get along a little better if both would obey the rules. Cyclists cutting across lanes and running red lights, motorists cutting off cyclists and generally being ignorant of other road users. Then again maybe the problem is that some people just shouldn't be allowed out - I bet they're also the kinds of people that stand in the middle of the isle at the supermarket so nobody else can get past, or walk 4 abreast through crowded areas like some kind of rolling road block.
-SK Genius
Vehicle Simulation Demo - New and Improved!
SK Genius wrote:
And besides what going to damage the roads more, 90kg of bike and rider or many tons of car?
Weather conditions. Should we be taxed for that too?
more from me | GALex: C++ Library for Advanced Genetic Algorithms
-
You say that most bikers obey the law, but that's not the case where I live. The biking community adamantly supports Idaho stops, which apparently mean they can treat red lights as stop signs and stop signs as yield signs. This is NOT the law where I live, but the biking community swears by it, loudly and often. They openly profess to breaking the laws as written, because they don't like them. Granted, that is not unlike cars and speed limits, but it does lead to disagreements like this one about bikers in general.
Testing 1 2 ... uh... 7? wrote:
can treat red lights as stop signs and stop signs as yield signs
That significantly reduces their life expectancy, so maybe not that bad, ain't it ? :rolleyes:
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
motorists do not own the roads
Yes sure, but this is not a valid argument. Following this logic and because I pay my taxes as anybody else I can drive an ox wagon with 3 mph on a 50 mph road blocking the entire traffic and force drivers to drive in the opposite lane thus violating the traffic rules.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
Deyan Georgiev wrote:
I can drive an ox wagon with 3 mph on a 50 mph road blocking the entire traffic
Hey, you have been to Romania, haven't you ?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
motorists do not own the roads
Yes sure, but this is not a valid argument. Following this logic and because I pay my taxes as anybody else I can drive an ox wagon with 3 mph on a 50 mph road blocking the entire traffic and force drivers to drive in the opposite lane thus violating the traffic rules.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.