On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 02:22:42 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 12/07/2020 21:09, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 12/07/2020 11:36, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
JNugent wrote:
[]
So you were one of the obstructive fairy-cycle riders, were you?

Is this your new insult-of-choice; given up on the "fully qualified
cyclist" mantra?

Are you (and maybe more to the point, certain others) going to take
the
same huff about terms such as "cagers", "moronists", etc?
If you were to do that, we could start getting somewhere, couldn't
we?

I don't have any faith that you can set aside your blinkers, sadly.


You don't want to give up the insults. OK.
Eh? If you think that's an insult you must be everso sensitive.


In the meantime, there is nothing remotely insulting in pointing out
that someone who is too dangerous, too stupid or too lacking in
skills
(singly or in any combination) to have a driving licence is still
fully
qualified to ride a bike.

Ah, here we go again.

Which bit of it was the slightest bit inaccurate?

Perhaps that should not be the legal situation.
But it is.

I hear you say it's all about Legalities not about Safety.

Then let me expand it a little in order to accommodate your reasonable
concern.

Someone who is too anti-social (even sociopathic) and far too prone to
causing danger on the roads to be trusted with a driving licence is
nevertheless deemed safe enough to be a cyclist.

I'm sure you're trolling, but have you never heard of momentum? These
large metal boxes that you seem so keen to promote can cause serious
injury and death if not used properly - society handles this by requiring
various standards [of manufacture, maintenence and care when driving] to
be met; the danger from a cycle is much, much less.

Got it?


--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.