Re: Yet another town that is fed up with dangerous motorists forcingcyclists to use pavements.

[Marc[_5_]]

On 07/12/2010 09:02, Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 07/12/2010 07:54, Doug wrote:
>> On Dec 7, 7:43 am, > wrote:
>>> On Dec 7, 7:29 am, > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Dec 6, 4:45 pm, > wrote:> all
>>>> the usual: pavement cycling, no lights, ignoring road signs, two up
>>>>> riding etc.
>>>
>>>>> http://www.tivysideadvertiser.co.uk/news/8721750.Cyclists_concerns_ra...
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> Yes one thing leads to another. Dangerous drivers force cyclists,
>>>> particularly children, to use pavements. So what happens? The cyclists
>>>> are blamed by groups of predominantly motorists. Its always the way
>>>> isn't it?
>>>>
>>> I must have missed that bit about 'dangerous drivers force cyclists to
>>> use pavements' could you point out where it says that?
>>>
>> It is implied. Why else would cyclists use inconvenient pavements,
>> particularly children?
>>
>>>> -- .
>>>> UK Radical Campaigns.
>>>> http://www.zing.icom43.net
>>>> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>
> It is not implied, only in your brain.
> While waiting for the bus in the morning a dozen or so cyclists ride
> past on the road, they seem to have no problems at all, I see the same
> people most mornings.
> There are also usually two cyclists who use the pavements, one in a very
> aggressive way (he will ride at pedestrians to force them out the way).
> Why do these two cyclists use the pavements, other cyclists have no
> problems?
>
Because they are ****s?

[Tony Dragon]

On 07/12/2010 18:54, Marc wrote:
> On 07/12/2010 09:02, Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 07/12/2010 07:54, Doug wrote:
>>> On Dec 7, 7:43 am, > wrote:
>>>> On Dec 7, 7:29 am, > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 6, 4:45 pm, > wrote:> all
>>>>> the usual: pavement cycling, no lights, ignoring road signs, two up
>>>>>> riding etc.
>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.tivysideadvertiser.co.uk/news/8721750.Cyclists_concerns_ra...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Yes one thing leads to another. Dangerous drivers force cyclists,
>>>>> particularly children, to use pavements. So what happens? The cyclists
>>>>> are blamed by groups of predominantly motorists. Its always the way
>>>>> isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>> I must have missed that bit about 'dangerous drivers force cyclists to
>>>> use pavements' could you point out where it says that?
>>>>
>>> It is implied. Why else would cyclists use inconvenient pavements,
>>> particularly children?
>>>
>>>>> -- .
>>>>> UK Radical Campaigns.
>>>>> http://www.zing.icom43.net
>>>>> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>>
>> It is not implied, only in your brain.
>> While waiting for the bus in the morning a dozen or so cyclists ride
>> past on the road, they seem to have no problems at all, I see the same
>> people most mornings.
>> There are also usually two cyclists who use the pavements, one in a very
>> aggressive way (he will ride at pedestrians to force them out the way).
>> Why do these two cyclists use the pavements, other cyclists have no
>> problems?
>>
> Because they are ****s?

Right answer.

But according to Doug, because I mention two idiots, I am having a go at
all cyclists, he ignores the others that I mentioned.
But you must feel sorry for those two ****s, because they are scared to
use the roads, so the others who use the roads must be really heroic.

--
Tony Dragon

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 07/12/2010 18:54, Marc wrote:
>> On 07/12/2010 09:02, Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 07/12/2010 07:54, Doug wrote:
>>>> On Dec 7, 7:43 am, > wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 7, 7:29 am, > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 6, 4:45 pm, > wrote:> all
>>>>>> the usual: pavement cycling, no lights, ignoring road signs, two
>>>>>> up
>>>>>>> riding etc.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.tivysideadvertiser.co.uk/news/8721750.Cyclists_concerns_ra...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes one thing leads to another. Dangerous drivers force cyclists,
>>>>>> particularly children, to use pavements. So what happens? The
>>>>>> cyclists are blamed by groups of predominantly motorists. Its
>>>>>> always the way isn't it?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I must have missed that bit about 'dangerous drivers force
>>>>> cyclists to use pavements' could you point out where it says that?
>>>>>
>>>> It is implied. Why else would cyclists use inconvenient pavements,
>>>> particularly children?
>>>>
>>>>>> -- .
>>>>>> UK Radical Campaigns.
>>>>>> http://www.zing.icom43.net
>>>>>> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>>>
>>> It is not implied, only in your brain.
>>> While waiting for the bus in the morning a dozen or so cyclists ride
>>> past on the road, they seem to have no problems at all, I see the
>>> same people most mornings.
>>> There are also usually two cyclists who use the pavements, one in a
>>> very aggressive way (he will ride at pedestrians to force them out
>>> the way). Why do these two cyclists use the pavements, other
>>> cyclists have no problems?
>>>
>> Because they are ****s?
>
> Right answer.
>
> But according to Doug, because I mention two idiots, I am having a go
> at all cyclists, he ignores the others that I mentioned.
> But you must feel sorry for those two ****s, because they are scared
> to use the roads, so the others who use the roads must be really
> heroic.

I saw a cyclist riding on the road today and he had hi-viz jacket. I kept
expecting him to be run over as that is what happens if you wear hi-viz or
so I understand, but he wasn't !!!

[Marc[_5_]]

On 07/12/2010 19:00, Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 07/12/2010 18:54, Marc wrote:
>> On 07/12/2010 09:02, Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 07/12/2010 07:54, Doug wrote:
>>>> On Dec 7, 7:43 am, > wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 7, 7:29 am, > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 6, 4:45 pm, > wrote:> all
>>>>>> the usual: pavement cycling, no lights, ignoring road signs, two up
>>>>>>> riding etc.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.tivysideadvertiser.co.uk/news/8721750.Cyclists_concerns_ra...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes one thing leads to another. Dangerous drivers force cyclists,
>>>>>> particularly children, to use pavements. So what happens? The
>>>>>> cyclists
>>>>>> are blamed by groups of predominantly motorists. Its always the way
>>>>>> isn't it?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I must have missed that bit about 'dangerous drivers force cyclists to
>>>>> use pavements' could you point out where it says that?
>>>>>
>>>> It is implied. Why else would cyclists use inconvenient pavements,
>>>> particularly children?
>>>>
>>>>>> -- .
>>>>>> UK Radical Campaigns.
>>>>>> http://www.zing.icom43.net
>>>>>> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>>>
>>> It is not implied, only in your brain.
>>> While waiting for the bus in the morning a dozen or so cyclists ride
>>> past on the road, they seem to have no problems at all, I see the same
>>> people most mornings.
>>> There are also usually two cyclists who use the pavements, one in a very
>>> aggressive way (he will ride at pedestrians to force them out the way).
>>> Why do these two cyclists use the pavements, other cyclists have no
>>> problems?
>>>
>> Because they are ****s?
>
> Right answer.
>
> But according to Doug, because I mention two idiots, I am having a go at
> all cyclists, he ignores the others that I mentioned.
> But you must feel sorry for those two ****s,

No I don't.

>because they are scared to
> use the roads, so the others who use the roads must be really heroic.

They aren't scared, they are just selfish , lazy and stupid.

Selfish because they are only thinking of themselves.
Lazy because they think they doing it to avoid effort.
Stupid because 9 out of ten times using the road is faster/easier.
>

[Tony Dragon]

On 07/12/2010 19:21, Marc wrote:
> On 07/12/2010 19:00, Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 07/12/2010 18:54, Marc wrote:
>>> On 07/12/2010 09:02, Tony Dragon wrote:
>>>> On 07/12/2010 07:54, Doug wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 7, 7:43 am, > wrote:
>>>>>> On Dec 7, 7:29 am, > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 4:45 pm, > wrote:> all
>>>>>>> the usual: pavement cycling, no lights, ignoring road signs, two up
>>>>>>>> riding etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.tivysideadvertiser.co.uk/news/8721750.Cyclists_concerns_ra...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes one thing leads to another. Dangerous drivers force cyclists,
>>>>>>> particularly children, to use pavements. So what happens? The
>>>>>>> cyclists
>>>>>>> are blamed by groups of predominantly motorists. Its always the way
>>>>>>> isn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I must have missed that bit about 'dangerous drivers force
>>>>>> cyclists to
>>>>>> use pavements' could you point out where it says that?
>>>>>>
>>>>> It is implied. Why else would cyclists use inconvenient pavements,
>>>>> particularly children?
>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- .
>>>>>>> UK Radical Campaigns.
>>>>>>> http://www.zing.icom43.net
>>>>>>> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>>>>
>>>> It is not implied, only in your brain.
>>>> While waiting for the bus in the morning a dozen or so cyclists ride
>>>> past on the road, they seem to have no problems at all, I see the same
>>>> people most mornings.
>>>> There are also usually two cyclists who use the pavements, one in a
>>>> very
>>>> aggressive way (he will ride at pedestrians to force them out the way).
>>>> Why do these two cyclists use the pavements, other cyclists have no
>>>> problems?
>>>>
>>> Because they are ****s?
>>
>> Right answer.
>>
>> But according to Doug, because I mention two idiots, I am having a go at
>> all cyclists, he ignores the others that I mentioned.
>> But you must feel sorry for those two ****s,
>
> No I don't.
>
> >because they are scared to
>> use the roads, so the others who use the roads must be really heroic.
>
> They aren't scared, they are just selfish , lazy and stupid.
>
> Selfish because they are only thinking of themselves.
> Lazy because they think they doing it to avoid effort.
> Stupid because 9 out of ten times using the road is faster/easier.
>>
>

Your not going to be on Dougs 'winter solstice' list.

--
Tony Dragon

[Marc[_5_]]

On 07/12/2010 20:02, Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 07/12/2010 19:21, Marc wrote:
>> On 07/12/2010 19:00, Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 07/12/2010 18:54, Marc wrote:
>>>> On 07/12/2010 09:02, Tony Dragon wrote:
>>>>> On 07/12/2010 07:54, Doug wrote:
>>>>>> On Dec 7, 7:43 am, > wrote:
>>>>>>> On Dec 7, 7:29 am, > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 4:45 pm, > wrote:> all
>>>>>>>> the usual: pavement cycling, no lights, ignoring road signs, two up
>>>>>>>>> riding etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.tivysideadvertiser.co.uk/news/8721750.Cyclists_concerns_ra...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes one thing leads to another. Dangerous drivers force cyclists,
>>>>>>>> particularly children, to use pavements. So what happens? The
>>>>>>>> cyclists
>>>>>>>> are blamed by groups of predominantly motorists. Its always the way
>>>>>>>> isn't it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I must have missed that bit about 'dangerous drivers force
>>>>>>> cyclists to
>>>>>>> use pavements' could you point out where it says that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is implied. Why else would cyclists use inconvenient pavements,
>>>>>> particularly children?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- .
>>>>>>>> UK Radical Campaigns.
>>>>>>>> http://www.zing.icom43.net
>>>>>>>> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is not implied, only in your brain.
>>>>> While waiting for the bus in the morning a dozen or so cyclists ride
>>>>> past on the road, they seem to have no problems at all, I see the same
>>>>> people most mornings.
>>>>> There are also usually two cyclists who use the pavements, one in a
>>>>> very
>>>>> aggressive way (he will ride at pedestrians to force them out the
>>>>> way).
>>>>> Why do these two cyclists use the pavements, other cyclists have no
>>>>> problems?
>>>>>
>>>> Because they are ****s?
>>>
>>> Right answer.
>>>
>>> But according to Doug, because I mention two idiots, I am having a go at
>>> all cyclists, he ignores the others that I mentioned.
>>> But you must feel sorry for those two ****s,
>>
>> No I don't.
>>
>> >because they are scared to
>>> use the roads, so the others who use the roads must be really heroic.
>>
>> They aren't scared, they are just selfish , lazy and stupid.
>>
>> Selfish because they are only thinking of themselves.
>> Lazy because they think they doing it to avoid effort.
>> Stupid because 9 out of ten times using the road is faster/easier.
>>>
>>
>
> Your not going to be on Dougs 'winter solstice' list.
>

Do I sound worried? Don't forget I'm a "real" cyclist, unlike Doug.