FAO Town Hall Cyclist

[adamf 10]

Always one clever charlie with the "no such thing as road tax" arguement.

I think its pretty obvious whats meant is VED (vehicle excise duty) esp as the majority of people refer to it as "road tax".

 

Unfortunately many people are stupid enough to believe VED pays for roads or gives some people special entitlement to the roads.

[achorste 10]

It's been a long time since I've posted on here, but hey ho.

 

The point that roads are paid for the use of EVERYONE out of general taxation has already been made.

 

Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) is not a road tax, but a tax on emissions designed to earn the government money and to encourage lower emissions. If bikes were included they'd pay the same as a low emission vehicle (i.e. nothing).

 

Motorists have to have insurance because they drive multiple tonne metal boxes capable of going 80+ mph. Bikes are nowhere near as dangerous. Unless you'd have pedestrians having insurance to step outside their door as well?

 

Some idiot cyclists do run red lights, most likely in just the same proportion as the number of idiot drivers who jump red lights. Just because one person does it doesn't make the whole lot bad? Or would you ban all cars from the road too?

 

Going back to the original thread - sometimes cyclists need to shout at someone to make themselves known. If the pedestrians weren't looking both ways, there could easily be a collision. I wasn't there so I can't judge on how much of a d*ck this cyclist was being, but I would wager that at least some of his shouting was merely to avoid a collision.

 

And yes, to pre-empt the question, I am a cyclist. I am also a car driver. I also run. I used to have a skateboard too if that counts?

[Cyclone 10]

Always one clever charlie with the "no such thing as road tax" arguement.

I think its pretty obvious whats meant is VED (vehicle excise duty) esp as the majority of people refer to it as "road tax".

Yeah. It's a duty that is due to be paid by motorised vehicles that use the public road where the rate is set based on pollution.

Do you think that zero rated cars (of which there are plenty now) don't have rights to use the road?

 

The cyclist should have been more aware of the pedestrians and slowed down or made allowances given the obscure nature of the section in question.

Car drivers cant just ignore them so why did this numpty think he could give them some abuse. The best course of action would be to make it one way for all vehicles inc cycles. If you want to use the road then expect to follow the rules of it with no special dispensation.

 

Sorry, but that opinion makes me think that you're either stupid or anti cyclist.

 

---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 14:56 ----------

 

 

the point being then is that to use the road all other methods of transport need something extra, ie VED, insurance, registration and a valid MOT if required cyclists require nothing, that is why people have issues with cyclists, quite apart from the more sanctamonious issues.

 

So basically you're jealous.

 

---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 14:58 ----------

 

Where is the OP to better explain just how close the pedestrian was when they stepped into the path of the cyclist? I can't imagine many cyclists shouting from a distance at a pedestrian who will have cleared the cycle lane before they reach that point.

Perhaps the pedestrian was actually walking in the cycle lane? I find that all the time, and it's very annoying. (But I have an air horn so I don't have to shout).

[Guest]

I think its pretty obvious whats meant is VED (vehicle excise duty) esp as the majority of people refer to it as "road tax".

I also think its pretty obvious that the poster missed a comma between "road tax" and "insurance" in the post and didnt mean "road tax insurance".

 

Just so its easier for you in future, when people say road tax they mean VED, although im sure you know that already.

 

.

 

You think cyclists should have to pay VED?

[yellowperil 10]

Unfortunately many people are stupid enough to believe VED pays for roads or gives some people special entitlement to the roads.

 

Its easy to see why people think paying it gives them entitlement to use the road though really, if you dont pay it when you own a car or motorcycle then youre not able to use the road, therefore in most peoples minds, paying=entitlement.

 

---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 15:20 ----------

 

You think cyclists should have to pay VED?

 

I wasnt arguing for or against it to be honest, just pointing out that people mean VED when they say road tax.

 

I think there should be some form of proficiency test and registration however, then we could get some nice statistics about those who run red lights etc and some fines sent out, level the playing field a bit.

[mattythefish 10]

You think cyclists should have to pay VED?

 

Not really but insurance yes!, registration yes and a proficiency test.

[Penistone999 10]

What an absolute jeb end of a man you are!

 

around 8:15am this morning outside the town hall cycling in the opposite direction of the one way street, screaming his head off and ringing his bell at a woman and small child.

 

You don't own the road, if it was a car they would have had to slow down to let them cross as they were already halfway across the lane.

 

No! you kept going shouting profanities!!

 

Complete Pillock,

 

Rant over

 

 

What else did you expect from a two wheeled , lycra clad lunatic ? They are all the same , they think the laws of the road dont apply to them.

 

---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 15:36 ----------

 

You think cyclists should have to pay VED?

 

Yes of course they should. And the argument that many of them are also motorists and already pay VED on their car dosnt wash. I own two motors , but i cannot use one of them on the roads without VED just because i pay VED on my other vehicle.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Penistone999

[Cyclone 10]

There he is, our very own, lycra obsessed, morality challenged, anti cyclist extraordinaire.

[altus 540]

Its easy to see why people think paying it gives them entitlement to use the road though really, if you dont pay it when you own a car or motorcycle then youre not able to use the road, therefore in most peoples minds, paying=entitlement.

 

I wasnt arguing for or against it to be honest, just pointing out that people mean VED when they say road tax.

 

Calling it road tax instead of VED reinforces that sense of entitlement. That's why people keep correcting those who use road tax - it's to try and dispel that particular myth.

[Penistone999 10]

There he is, our very own, lycra obsessed, morality challenged, anti cyclist extraordinaire.

 

 

Too right i am .

[altus 540]

Yes of course they should. And the argument that many of them are also motorists and already pay VED on their car dosnt wash. I own two motors , but i cannot use one of them on the roads without VED just because i pay VED on my other vehicle.

 

You're right that's a bad argument - but the real reason is that it implies that those cyclists who don't have a car have less right to use the road than those who do.

 

What about the argument that if cyclists where VED rated it would be zero like it is for other zero emission vehicles so it would be a waste of time and money to do so.

[Cyclone 10]

Don't try and get all rational on him, and definitely don't start using facts. You'll just make him angry and he'll get spittle all over his screen.