Re: Bicycle license

[Jeßus[_2_]]

On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:

>About time!
>http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html

I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.

[news13]

On Fri, 02 May 2014 13:16:16 +1000, Jeßus wrote:

> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>
>>About time!
>>http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-
bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>
> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to come
> in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.

Please pick up the threads in aus.cars if you want to comment.
They have just done this to death over there and trolling out of boredom.

[Tomasso[_8_]]

"news13" > wrote in message ...
> On Fri, 02 May 2014 13:16:16 +1000, Jeßus wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>
>>>About time!
>>>http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-
> bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>
>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to come
>> in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>
> Please pick up the threads in aus.cars if you want to comment.
> They have just done this to death over there and trolling out of boredom.

It's probably more relevant to require a licence to change a bike tyre. T.

[F Murtz[_2_]]

Jeßus wrote:
> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>
>> About time!
>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>
> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>
Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
bicycle again.
Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
riding.
They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
crowd would still cycle.

[D Walford]

On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
> Jeßus wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>
>>> About time!
>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>
>>
>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>
> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
> bicycle again.

Why?

> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
> riding.

So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?

> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,

If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.

if they
> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
> crowd would still cycle.

Why?

--
Daryl

[F Murtz[_2_]]

D Walford wrote:
> On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>> Jeßus wrote:
>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>
>>>> About time!
>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>
>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>> bicycle again.
>
> Why?
>
>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
>> riding.
>
> So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?

I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally different to
mandated clothing
>
>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>
> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.
>
> if they
>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>> crowd would still cycle.
>
> Why?

It is just what would happen.
Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
with a number on the back.)

[D Walford]

On 02/05/2014 7:12 PM, F Murtz wrote:
> D Walford wrote:
>> On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> About time!
>>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>>
>>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
>>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>>> bicycle again.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
>>> riding.
>>
>> So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?
>
> I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally different to
> mandated clothing
>>
>>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>>
>> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.
>>
>> if they
>>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>>> crowd would still cycle.
>>
>> Why?
>
> It is just what would happen.
> Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
> with a number on the back.)
>
>
>
Why is it stupid?
Are seat belts in cars and helmets for motorcycles stupid?
Cyclists have zero protection and are often difficult to see, better to
be seen than dead or seriously injured.
With a visible number cyclists could be identified when they break the
road rules, couldn't have cyclists obey the road now could we.

--
Daryl

[F Murtz[_2_]]

D Walford wrote:
> On 02/05/2014 7:12 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>> D Walford wrote:
>>> On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> About time!
>>>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>>>
>>>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>>>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>>>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>>>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
>>>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>>>> bicycle again.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>>
>>>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to
>>>> cease
>>>> riding.
>>>
>>> So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?
>>
>> I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally different to
>> mandated clothing
>>>
>>>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>>>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>>>
>>> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.
>>>
>>> if they
>>>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>>>> crowd would still cycle.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> It is just what would happen.
>> Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
>> with a number on the back.)
>>
>>
>>
> Why is it stupid?
> Are seat belts in cars and helmets for motorcycles stupid?

You keep bringing in motor cycle helmets and seat belts which are a
different kettle of fish and I am not discussing them.

> Cyclists have zero protection and are often difficult to see, better to
> be seen than dead or seriously injured.
> With a visible number cyclists could be identified when they break the
> road rules, couldn't have cyclists obey the road now could we.

Most ordinary people look at these things like lights on, fluro clothing
etc because their mind thinks that it would fix things because it sounds
to them so sensible that it would fix things which is not necessarily
the case statistically

Lights on frinstance has for and against studies, Long term usually against.
When you mandate lights on,at first stats drop but soon resume the same
or worse stats as before
have not looked at fluoro vest studies yet.
Just look at reversing beepers, when only a few trucks had them they
worked well but as they become more prolific the brain starts to ignore
them as they are so common and they do not have the same effect as they
once did,same with lights on and probably fluoro vests.
Maybe Paul can come up with the west aus stats on injuries prevented
after the introduction of bicycle helmets and the effect on bicycle use
after the introduction

[Albm&ctd]

In article m>,
says...
> Jeßus wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
> >
> >> About time!
> >> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
> >
> > I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
> > come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
> >
> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
> bicycle again.
> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
> riding.
> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
> crowd would still cycle.
>
If you insist on riding a pushbike on busy roads, you should have an ace of
spades on your back and a will in your pocket.

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.

[Jonz[_2_]]

On 5/2/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
> Jeßus wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>
>>> About time!
>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>
>>
>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>
> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
> grey)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~```
His name is Duncan Gay. Helps to know to whom you are
referring>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..

for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
> bicycle again.
> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
> riding.
> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
> crowd would still cycle.

[F Murtz[_2_]]

Jonz wrote:
> On 5/2/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>> Jeßus wrote:
>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>
>>>> About time!
>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>
>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>> grey)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~```
> His name is Duncan Gay. Helps to know to whom you are
> referring>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..

Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>
> for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>> bicycle again.
>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
>> riding.
>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>> crowd would still cycle.
>

[D Walford]

On 02/05/2014 7:53 PM, F Murtz wrote:
> D Walford wrote:
>> On 02/05/2014 7:12 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>> D Walford wrote:
>>>> On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> About time!
>>>>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>>>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>>>>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>>>>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>>>>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades
>>>>> that
>>>>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>>>>> bicycle again.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to
>>>>> cease
>>>>> riding.
>>>>
>>>> So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?
>>>
>>> I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally different to
>>> mandated clothing
>>>>
>>>>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>>>>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>>>>
>>>> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.
>>>>
>>>> if they
>>>>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>>>>> crowd would still cycle.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> It is just what would happen.
>>> Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
>>> with a number on the back.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Why is it stupid?
>> Are seat belts in cars and helmets for motorcycles stupid?
>
> You keep bringing in motor cycle helmets and seat belts which are a
> different kettle of fish and I am not discussing them.

Sounds like your fear of compulsory safety items for cyclist is
irrational, many people complained about compulsory safety in cars and
helmets on motor bikes yet both are well proven life savers.
>
>> Cyclists have zero protection and are often difficult to see, better to
>> be seen than dead or seriously injured.
>> With a visible number cyclists could be identified when they break the
>> road rules, couldn't have cyclists obey the road now could we.
>
> Most ordinary people look at these things like lights on, fluro clothing
> etc because their mind thinks that it would fix things because it sounds
> to them so sensible that it would fix things which is not necessarily
> the case statistically
>

There aren't any statistics on the items in question because they are
not yet in common use.



--
Daryl

[F Murtz[_2_]]

D Walford wrote:
> On 02/05/2014 7:53 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>> D Walford wrote:
>>> On 02/05/2014 7:12 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>> D Walford wrote:
>>>>> On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> About time!
>>>>>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>>>>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>>>>>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>>>>>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>>>>>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>>>>>> bicycle again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to
>>>>>> cease
>>>>>> riding.
>>>>>
>>>>> So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?
>>>>
>>>> I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally different to
>>>> mandated clothing
>>>>>
>>>>>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which
>>>>>> some
>>>>>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>>>>>
>>>>> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.
>>>>>
>>>>> if they
>>>>>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>>>>>> crowd would still cycle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> It is just what would happen.
>>>> Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
>>>> with a number on the back.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Why is it stupid?
>>> Are seat belts in cars and helmets for motorcycles stupid?
>>
>> You keep bringing in motor cycle helmets and seat belts which are a
>> different kettle of fish and I am not discussing them.
>
> Sounds like your fear of compulsory safety items for cyclist is
> irrational, many people complained about compulsory safety in cars and
> helmets on motor bikes yet both are well proven life savers.

You are still going on about things which I was not discussing
>>
>>> Cyclists have zero protection and are often difficult to see, better to
>>> be seen than dead or seriously injured.
>>> With a visible number cyclists could be identified when they break the
>>> road rules, couldn't have cyclists obey the road now could we.
>>
>> Most ordinary people look at these things like lights on, fluro clothing
>> etc because their mind thinks that it would fix things because it sounds
>> to them so sensible that it would fix things which is not necessarily
>> the case statistically
>>
>
> There aren't any statistics on the items in question because they are
> not yet in common use.
>
>
>

[F Murtz[_2_]]

D Walford wrote:
> On 02/05/2014 7:53 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>> D Walford wrote:
>>> On 02/05/2014 7:12 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>> D Walford wrote:
>>>>> On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> About time!
>>>>>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>>>>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>>>>>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>>>>>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>>>>>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>>>>>> bicycle again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to
>>>>>> cease
>>>>>> riding.
>>>>>
>>>>> So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?
>>>>
>>>> I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally different to
>>>> mandated clothing
>>>>>
>>>>>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which
>>>>>> some
>>>>>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>>>>>
>>>>> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.
>>>>>
>>>>> if they
>>>>>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>>>>>> crowd would still cycle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> It is just what would happen.
>>>> Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
>>>> with a number on the back.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Why is it stupid?
>>> Are seat belts in cars and helmets for motorcycles stupid?
>>
>> You keep bringing in motor cycle helmets and seat belts which are a
>> different kettle of fish and I am not discussing them.
>
> Sounds like your fear of compulsory safety items for cyclist is
> irrational, many people complained about compulsory safety in cars and
> helmets on motor bikes yet both are well proven life savers.
>>
>>> Cyclists have zero protection and are often difficult to see, better to
>>> be seen than dead or seriously injured.
>>> With a visible number cyclists could be identified when they break the
>>> road rules, couldn't have cyclists obey the road now could we.
>>
>> Most ordinary people look at these things like lights on, fluro clothing
>> etc because their mind thinks that it would fix things because it sounds
>> to them so sensible that it would fix things which is not necessarily
>> the case statistically
>>
>
> There aren't any statistics on the items in question because they are
> not yet in common use.
>
>
>
There are studies about the lights on in the daytime

But I am having trouble finding any stats on hi viz that is not biased
by commercial interests.
There was a study on hi viz clothing for bicycles in England which found
that it did not change the vehicle bike clearances.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/study-finds-hi-viz-clothing-has-no-effect-on-driver-passing-distances-23061

[D Walford]

On 02/05/2014 10:20 PM, F Murtz wrote:
> D Walford wrote:
>> On 02/05/2014 7:53 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>> D Walford wrote:
>>>> On 02/05/2014 7:12 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>> D Walford wrote:
>>>>>> On 02/05/2014 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> About time!
>>>>>>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>>>>>>>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>>>>>>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>>>>>>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>>>>>>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never
>>>>>>> ride a
>>>>>>> bicycle again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to
>>>>>>> cease
>>>>>>> riding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you don't wear a helmet when riding your motorcycle?
>>>>>
>>>>> I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally
>>>>> different to
>>>>> mandated clothing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if they
>>>>>>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>>>>>>> crowd would still cycle.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> It is just what would happen.
>>>>> Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
>>>>> with a number on the back.)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Why is it stupid?
>>>> Are seat belts in cars and helmets for motorcycles stupid?
>>>
>>> You keep bringing in motor cycle helmets and seat belts which are a
>>> different kettle of fish and I am not discussing them.
>>
>> Sounds like your fear of compulsory safety items for cyclist is
>> irrational, many people complained about compulsory safety in cars and
>> helmets on motor bikes yet both are well proven life savers.
>
> You are still going on about things which I was not discussing
>>>

Ignoring facts and burying your head in the sand won't make them
suddenly disappear.



--
Daryl

[Noddy[_2_]]

On 02/05/14 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:

> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.

What rot :)

> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
> bicycle again.

And why is that? Do you like the idea of being able to get away with any
accidental damage you may cause and not be caught?

> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
> riding.

Presumably you wear a helmet :)

> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
> crowd would still cycle.

Time will tell. Still, if every bike riding nutbag gave up in protest I
couldn't be happier :)


--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Noddy[_2_]]

On 02/05/14 7:12 PM, F Murtz wrote:

> I do but It is not fluoro and it is a single item, totally different to
> mandated clothing

How exactly?

> It is just what would happen.

Oh, right.

> Just wait an see, (if they are stupid enough to mandate fluoro vests
> with a number on the back.)

They'd be stupid *not* to do it. It's *way* over due.



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Noddy[_2_]]

On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:

> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen

It's his *name* for ****'s sake....

*Jesus*.


--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[F Murtz[_2_]]

Noddy wrote:
> On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>
>> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>
> It's his *name* for ****'s sake....
>
> *Jesus*.
>
>

As a matter of fact I think that mr Gay used to live near me and I think
my brother pinched his mini before he was licensed And drove to the
beach.(They were mates)If he is the same Duncan gay.
My original "Duncan grey" was a brain fart the second post was Just a
silly answer for a silly poster.

[F Murtz[_2_]]

Noddy wrote:
> On 02/05/14 6:09 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>
>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>
> What rot :)
>
>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>> bicycle again.
>
> And why is that? Do you like the idea of being able to get away with any
> accidental damage you may cause and not be caught?
>
>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
>> riding.
>
> Presumably you wear a helmet :)

On the motor cycle yes, on the bicycle under protest, the times and
places that I ride a bicycle statistically would have a 10 million to
one (deliberately exaggerated)chance of having any bearing on damage to
my head.If I fell off highly unlikely to damage, if a vehicle drove over
my head it would not help.
PS there are statistics on bicycle helmets relation to head trauma
figures and their efficacy.


>
>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>> crowd would still cycle.
>
> Time will tell. Still, if every bike riding nutbag gave up in protest I
> couldn't be happier :)
>
>

[Noddy[_2_]]

On 02/05/14 11:07 PM, F Murtz wrote:

> On the motor cycle yes, on the bicycle under protest, the times and
> places that I ride a bicycle statistically would have a 10 million to
> one (deliberately exaggerated)chance of having any bearing on damage to
> my head.If I fell off highly unlikely to damage, if a vehicle drove over
> my head it would not help.
> PS there are statistics on bicycle helmets relation to head trauma
> figures and their efficacy.

And what do they tell you?




--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Noddy[_2_]]

On 02/05/14 10:54 PM, F Murtz wrote:

> As a matter of fact I think that mr Gay used to live near me and I think
> my brother pinched his mini before he was licensed And drove to the
> beach.(They were mates)If he is the same Duncan gay.
> My original "Duncan grey" was a brain fart the second post was Just a
> silly answer for a silly poster.

Uh, yeah. Okay.


--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Jeßus[_2_]]

On Fri, 2 May 2014 20:05:26 +1000, Albm&ctd
> wrote:

>In article m>,
says...
>> Jeßus wrote:
>> > On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>> >
>> >> About time!
>> >> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>> >
>> > I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>> > come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>> >
>> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>> grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.
>> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
>> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
>> I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>> bicycle again.
>> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
>> riding.
>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
>> mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>> crowd would still cycle.
>>
>If you insist on riding a pushbike on busy roads, you should have an ace of
>spades on your back and a will in your pocket.

Agreed. Never mind all the exhaust fumes...

[Jeßus[_2_]]

On Fri, 02 May 2014 18:09:43 +1000, F Murtz >
wrote:

>Jeßus wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>
>>> About time!
>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>
>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>
>Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan
>grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number on the back.

The jacket sounds a bit over the top - that should be a personal
choice,

>They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.

Well, something needs to be done with those cyclists who have either
an attitude or are just plain irresponsible in traffic.

>The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that
>I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I would just never ride a
>bicycle again.
>Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease
>riding.
>They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced, if they
>mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra
>crowd would still cycle.

[Trent W. Buck]

D Walford > writes:

>> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some
>> think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was introduced,
>
> If that's true it just shows how dumb most cyclists are.

There is no consensus on whether helmets themselves are effective,
useful, or worth either promotion or compulsion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet_laws
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet#Risk_compensation

Bikeshedding this is unlikely to be productive.

[Trent W. Buck]

D Walford > writes:

> With a visible number cyclists could be identified when they break the
> road rules, couldn't have cyclists obey the road now could we.

My old Kronan 3vxl herrcykel came with a rear license plate.
It was a gimmick, of course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronan_(bicycle)
Probably only feasible with a rear fender or rack.

[Trent W. Buck]

F Murtz > writes:

> There was a study on hi viz clothing for bicycles in England which
> found that it did not change the vehicle bike clearances.

See also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#cite_ref-Walker2007_33-0

[Tomasso[_8_]]

"F Murtz" > wrote in message eb.com...
> Jeßus wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:50:53 +1000, Jonz > wrote:
>>
>>> About time!
>>> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/duncan-gay-considers-licence-for-cyclists-bans-from-certain-roads-20140502-zr2zf.html
>>
>> I'm in two minds about it myself - other than I'd love licencing to
>> come in for the 'bicycle Nazis' that infest our roads.
>>
> Must be a full moon 2UE has been pushing all afternoon ( and Duncan grey) for license and fluoro jacket with a number
> on the back.
> They wish to sound a death Knell for cycling.
> The cycle use would drop dramatically,There is not a hope in hades that I would wear a fluoro jacket with a number, I
> would just never ride a bicycle again.
> Same with mandated clothing for my motorcycle I would just have to cease riding.
> They have already knobbled cycle use with mandated helmets (which some think good) but bicycle use dropped when it was
> introduced, if they mandate fluoro jackets with numbers on the back only the yuppy lycra crowd would still cycle.

Would like to see cars with name, licence number and photo.

Better yet, a solid connection rod between bumper bars and gonads.

THAT would sharpen attention and reflexes of car drivers. Or reduce
their tendency to reproduce!

T.

[Tomasso[_8_]]

"Noddy" > wrote in message ...
> On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>
>> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>
> It's his *name* for ****'s sake....
>
> *Jesus*.

JeBus!

[Tomasso[_8_]]

"Trent W. Buck" > wrote in message ...
>D Walford > writes:
>
>> With a visible number cyclists could be identified when they break the
>> road rules, couldn't have cyclists obey the road now could we.
>
> My old Kronan 3vxl herrcykel came with a rear license plate.
> It was a gimmick, of course.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronan_(bicycle)
> Probably only feasible with a rear fender or rack.

I cycled with an "L" plate for a couple of years. It was tremendously
effective in making drivers give me space.

[Noddy[_2_]]

On 06/05/14 9:19 AM, Tomasso wrote:

> Would like to see cars with name, licence number and photo.

Sure, but don't stop at cars. Lets have pushbike riders on board as
well, because we all know they're completely innocent of any road
offences, right?



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Xeno]

On 6/05/2014 9:22 AM, Tomasso wrote:
>
> "Noddy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>
>>> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>>
>> It's his *name* for ****'s sake....
>>
>> *Jesus*.
>
> JeBus!

It was Jeßus but close enough I guess! ;-)


--

Xeno

[Trent W. Buck]

"Tomasso" > writes:

> "Noddy" > wrote in message ...
>> On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>
>>> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>>
>> It's his *name* for ****'s sake....
>>
>> *Jesus*.
>
> JeBus!

If you mean the feller upthread, that was a
'ß' 0000223 0000df LATIN SMALL LETTER SHARP S, Ll, 0, L, N, German,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9F
It would be prounounced something like [Jess-us].

[Tomasso[_8_]]

"Xeno" > wrote in message ...
> On 6/05/2014 9:22 AM, Tomasso wrote:
>>
>> "Noddy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>>>
>>> It's his *name* for ****'s sake....
>>>
>>> *Jesus*.
>>
>> JeBus!
>
> It was Jeßus but close enough I guess! ;-)

The close approximation should be fine, for someone called Xeno...

[Tomasso[_8_]]

"Trent W. Buck" > wrote in message ...
> "Tomasso" > writes:
>
>> "Noddy" > wrote in message ...
>>> On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>>>
>>> It's his *name* for ****'s sake....
>>>
>>> *Jesus*.
>>
>> JeBus!
>
> If you mean the feller upthread, that was a
> 'ß' 0000223 0000df LATIN SMALL LETTER SHARP S, Ll, 0, L, N, German,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9F
> It would be prounounced something like [Jess-us].

No, the JeBus of Homer Simpson.

[Xeno]

On 6/05/2014 11:11 AM, Tomasso wrote:
>
>
> "Xeno" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 6/05/2014 9:22 AM, Tomasso wrote:
>>>
>>> "Noddy" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 02/05/14 8:37 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don't like to use the word since it was stolen
>>>>
>>>> It's his *name* for ****'s sake....
>>>>
>>>> *Jesus*.
>>>
>>> JeBus!
>>
>> It was Jeßus but close enough I guess! ;-)
>
> The close approximation should be fine, for someone called Xeno...


;-)


--

Xeno

[Noddy[_2_]]

On 06/05/14 11:11 AM, Tomasso wrote:

> The close approximation should be fine, for someone called Xeno...

Lol :)



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.