Accident outside Primark 28/03/15

[morecamberox 10]

Surely no pedal cyclists on the roads = no accidents involving pedal cyclists on the roads.

 

Why do pedal cyclists not have to have lights, insurance, mot's or a vehicle license plate why do they not need to have passed some form of proficiency and eysight tests?

 

Why do adults on pedal cycles ride on pavements and pedestrian precincts and ignore many other highway code recommendations that are often the subject of legislation for other road users with impunity?

 

These questions would be irrelevent if only we legislated to keep pedal cyclists both safe and off the roads. There are many rules and laws which very many people object to having imposed upon them by our controlling nanny state and keeping pedal cyclists of roads would be just one more, best for all and and hard luck for a few.

 

.

.

 

Possibly the most facile argument by a cycle-hater I have ever heard.

 

By that token: surely no motorised vehicles on the roads = no accidents involving motorised vehicles on the roads.

[Eater Sundae 12]

Originally Posted by Cyclone

 

You'd rather kill someone than pay for a little bit more training

 

If the activities indulged in by others require me in order to improve their safety by taking more, (in my view unnecessray) training the the very least they can do is pay for that training and compensate me well for my time.

 

If a bungee jumper, a hang glider or other extreme activities does get hurt do the rest of us lose any sleep over it? If they die we can empathise with the families of these people but do we really care about the person who died.. of course not. These are recognised dangerous activities that some people (arguably sometimes selfishly) indulge in. What is unfair is when their activities put other people at risk. The same can be said for riding a pedal cycle on the road.

 

There are in some cases for some dangerous activities legislation in place the purpose of which is primarily to protect the public and minimise costs to the state. The same should be true of pedal cycling.

.

.

 

Cyclists are rarely able to put anyone else at risk. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the drivers of motor vehicles. In any conflict between cyclists and motor vehicles, it is pretty clear who is at greatest risk. Roughly 2/3rds of deaths and serious injury following crashes between motor vehicles and cyclists are solely the fault of the driver.

 

I agree with you that it is unfair when activities put other people at risk. What are these motorists going to do to put their house in order?

[Tommo68 10]

Possibly the most facile argument by a cycle-hater I have ever heard.

 

I love it when somone that disagrees with me resorts tocomments like yours why dont you just say what you really mean ...

 

...that you have no valid argument and have to resort to drivel.

 

 

 

By that token: surely no motorised vehicles on the roads = no accidents involving motorised vehicles on the roads.

 

You are absolutely right but I think somewhat naive. What will you do when there are no lentils in the supermarket tomorrow, and how will people get to work? I doubt you gave your reply any real consideration but thank you for the entertainment.

 

BTW I really enjoy riding a cycle both on and off road and have done so since I was a child. I would though IMHO not be stupid selfish or irresponsible enough these days to take a pedal cycle on a public highway.

 

You are of course entitled to your own opinion but when expressing one about me to avoid complications please be careful of what you accuse me especially as you do not even know me.

.

.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Tommo68

[The Joker 10]

In the spirit of this thread, can I just say (as a pedestrian, cyclist, bus passenger and motorist) that all vehicles should be banned from the roads except the one I am driving.

[JFKvsNixon 11]

In the spirit of this thread, can I just say (as a pedestrian, cyclist, bus passenger and motorist) that all vehicles should be banned from the roads except the one I am driving.

 

What about if they banned other road users from being closer than 2/3 meters from you? This space can increase as your speed increases. Would that work?

[spider1 11]

Maybe its time cyclists were made to take a test before being allowed on the roads. cyclists are totally unregulated and untrained at present ,yet are allowed to use the roads alongside trained ,tested and licensed motorists . This is wrong on every level.

 

Yes make them take a test and pay for insurance .What happens if they cause

damage or injury some one. Wonder why this has not been addressed major concern isnt it .

[JFKvsNixon 11]

Yes make them take a test and pay for insurance .What happens if they cause

damage or injury some one. Wonder why this has not been addressed major concern isnt it .

 

What happens if pedestrians cause a crash that leads to serious damage to cars and their drivers?

[spider1 11]

What happens if pedestrians cause a crash that leads to serious damage to cars and their drivers?

 

Pedestrians are not on the road like bikers are so dont be daft / they use the cause way. :hihi:

[JFKvsNixon 11]

Pedestrians are not on the road like bikers are so dont be daft / they use the cause way. :hihi:

 

Perhaps you want to say that to the 398 pedestrians who died on our roads in 2013.

[perplexed 10]

Pedestrians are not on the road like bikers are so dont be daft / they use the cause way. :hihi:

 

Have you ever heard the phrase 'it is better to be quiet and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt'?

[spider1 11]

You will never get it will you .

Edited April 4, 2015 by spider1

[The Joker 10]

What about if they banned other road users from being closer than 2/3 meters from you? This space can increase as your speed increases. Would that work?

 

As long as I can use bus lanes / bus gates and run red lights, then I will tolerate other road users.