View Single Post
Old August 17th 18, 11:19 AM posted to,uk.politics.misc,uk.rec.cycling
external usenet poster
Posts: 54
Default 'Death by dangerous cycling' law considered

On 2018-08-17, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein wrote:
In uk.politics.misc Incubus wrote:
On 2018-08-16, TMS320 wrote:

A footpath (not footway) is not reserved for the use of the pedestrian
alone. Though I happen to agree with the sentiment because when I am not
near motor vehicles I want to wander with my head in the clouds yet I
don't have any scary tales of nearly being injured by cyclists. So I
wonder what the difference is between us.

Perhaps you have never lived nor worked in places like Weybridge where
feral cyclists are numerous.

Your lexical choices are revealing. I've never heard a driver described as
'feral'. One calls them 'dangerous' or 'careless'. But 'feral'?

'Of an animal: Wild, untamed. Of a plant, also (rarely), of ground:
(_The OED_, retrieved 17 August 2018)

This really does demonstrate the low regard in which cyclists are held by
the general population [1], and the belief that they are 'out of control'.
Lawless, maybe.

Candour compels me to admit that I deliberately chose that word safe in the
knowledge that it would get a rise out of someone. However, it is a reasonable
choice of word to describe people who have shouted at me because they expected
me to move out of their way while they were riding on the footpath.

It's no wonder that there is such clamour on the part of the mentally
disadvantaged to have cyclists 'registered' and to 'make' them pay
'insurance'. Another kettle of fish, of course.

I would settle for them staying off the pavement, in which case I won't feel
the need to elbow them off their machines into the path of an oncoming Audi.

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home