Tony Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 Originally posted by Zamo For god sake don't mention the plans for lavatory top up fees. The lavatory top up fees have been abandoned in favour of contributions from taxpayers at the bottom end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatjohn Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 Well that’s it then! Reading through these postings the consensus of opinion seems to be that cyclists can use public highways without any regard for the Highway Code whatsoever and should not be held accountable for any damage or financial loss caused to other road users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 Originally posted by fatjohn Well that’s it then! Reading through these postings the consensus of opinion seems to be that cyclists can use public highways without any regard for the Highway Code whatsoever and should not be held accountable for any damage or financial loss caused to other road users. Cars must cause a million times more death and distruction on our roads than bicycles. Wasn't there a report recently saying that 1 in 10 cars in the UK have no tax and insurance? Wouldn't police resource be better focused on these offending CAR drivers instead?!? By the way, how much tax and insurance do you think my 4 year old daughter would have to pay to ride her Barbie bike under your scheme? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatjohn Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 I have not thought it out in any detail. I am making a general statement that it is time to address the issue that cyclists should be made more accountable as road users. Quite frankly I think that any child cyclist should have to take a test, maybe at school, and be given a certificate of proficiency before being allowed onto a public road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dug Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 Originally posted by fatjohn I have not thought it out in any detail. I am making a general statement that it is time to address the issue that cyclists should be made more accountable as road users. Quite frankly I think that any child cyclist should have to take a test, maybe at school, and be given a certificate of proficiency before being allowed onto a public road. For most people learning to ride a bike and then being allowed on the roads is all part of growing up, in much the same way you get taught the highway code, to look both ways before crossing the road etc. by mummy and daddy. Anyway schools always used to organise a voluntary cycling proficiency test (not sure if this still goes on). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Miguel Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 I gave up cycling in the late sixties because I felt uncomfortable and at risk with the ever-increasing traffic. But just look at it now. Traffic must have increased ten-fold since then - and yet still people cycle. I, for one, do not blame a cyclist at all for taking any action deemed necessary by him or her if they think their health is at risk. If it means zipping off the road now and again and riding on the pavement, getting off at red lights, r whatever - so be it. Let's face it: we are trying to keep the numbers of cars off the roads, and these people are at least making an effort - unlike the majority - myself included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatjohn Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 I give up! Yet another posting defending the right of cyclists to ignore red lights. Don’t you realise that you are committing a traffic offence and that you are breaking the law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBouncer Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 Originally posted by fatjohn I give up! Yet another posting defending the right of cyclists to ignore red lights. Don’t you realise that you are committing a traffic offence and that you are breaking the law? Not if you get off and push, you're just a pedestrian then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Miguel Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 I didn't mean that they should ignore red lights! - far from it. I actually said that they could get off at them, meaning to dismount with caution and push. If I implied the former, I apologise. The gist of my post was that I do not object to cyclists, if they use the pavement - with caution, on feeling at all threatened by the traffic around them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hippy Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 Well cyclists shouldn't really ignore red lights but I can sometimes understand why they do. The problem with Sheff is that there doesn't seem to have been much thought put into the cycle lane system (in the random places that it exists). The roads shoud have proper cycle lanes that are cleary marked this way everyone knows where they are supposed to be. Taxing cyclists - no way. Sheffield isn't exactly the easiest place to cycle around with the busy roads and hills so anyone who attempts to make sure there is one less car on the road should be thanked. Just to note sometimes I do cycle around Sheffield but to be honest not very often as it just feels so dangerous on the roads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now