200 quid fine for cycling in 'Games Lanes'

Cyclists just want everything their own way.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...nd-200-fine.do

On Jun 17, 10:10*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Cyclists just want everything their own way.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-cyclists-usin...

Good, the car-hating psycholists will get a dose of their own medicine
for once. I bet they were coming in their pants at the idea of
Communist-style lanes heaping yet more restrictions on those terrible
selfish motorists (and with an even bigger fine than normal)...until
it transpired that cyclists will (for once) be (mis)treated the same
way. Serves them bloody right.

I can't wait until the first psycholist complains on here that "I was
using an empty lane on an empty road at 11:30pm, I wasn't getting in
anyone's way, and now I've been landed with a £200 fine...it's just a
money-making anti-cyclist ploy and there's no need to have a VIP lane
there anyway...why can't they at least use some discretion?" I will
then take great delight in smugly reminding them that "The law is the
law", "You knew the risks of going in the lane so don't complain now
you've been caught", and all the other sanctimonious cliches, while
deliberately ignoring the points they've made. At long last they will
know what it feels like to get stung for a ridiculous amount of money
for a victimless technical infringement which is only being enforced
1) for financial gain, 2) to make some (most) road users feel like
second class citizens for ideological reasons and 3) because it's
easier than going after the real lawbreakers.

The only disappointment is that since cyclists don't have registration
plates, the revenue-raising "enforcement" method of choice (cameras)
won't work against them (unless they get some kind of facial
recognition working in time for the Games...you never know your luck,
and there are always plenty of technology firms looking for a slice of
the lucrative traffic enforcement pie). But anyway, hopefully
there'll be plenty of police officers pulling them over
instead...after all it's very important to keep the lanes clear for
corrupt FIFA *******s, friends of despotic leaders and all the other
worthless scum who for some reason have more of a right to see the
Olympics than those who have been in this country, and looking forward
to the Olympics here, for their whole lives.

On Jun 17, 10:10*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Cyclists just want everything their own way.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-cyclists-usin...

You overlooked this bit...

"...A Transport for London spokesman said: "The network and associated
traffic measures will cover around one per cent of London's roads and
only operate when absolutely necessary." He said most Games lanes
would be in the centre of the road, leaving cyclists free to continue
riding next to the pavement."

Given their much greater numbers and ability to congtest my guess is
that motorists will suffer even more from the Olympics.

http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympi...ng-london-2012

Doug.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 20:17:24 -0700 (PDT), Nuxx Bar
wrote:

On Jun 17, 10:10*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Cyclists just want everything their own way.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-cyclists-usin...

Good, the car-hating psycholists will get a dose of their own medicine
for once. I bet they were coming in their pants at the idea of
Communist-style lanes heaping yet more restrictions on those terrible
selfish motorists (and with an even bigger fine than normal)...until
it transpired that cyclists will (for once) be (mis)treated the same
way. Serves them bloody right.

I can't wait until the first psycholist complains on here that "I was
using an empty lane on an empty road at 11:30pm, I wasn't getting in
anyone's way, and now I've been landed with a £200 fine...it's just a
money-making anti-cyclist ploy and there's no need to have a VIP lane
there anyway...why can't they at least use some discretion?" I will
then take great delight in smugly reminding them that "The law is the
law", "You knew the risks of going in the lane so don't complain now
you've been caught", and all the other sanctimonious cliches, while
deliberately ignoring the points they've made. At long last they will
know what it feels like to get stung for a ridiculous amount of money
for a victimless technical infringement which is only being enforced
1) for financial gain, 2) to make some (most) road users feel like
second class citizens for ideological reasons and 3) because it's
easier than going after the real lawbreakers.

The only disappointment is that since cyclists don't have registration
plates, the revenue-raising "enforcement" method of choice (cameras)
won't work against them (unless they get some kind of facial
recognition working in time for the Games...you never know your luck,
and there are always plenty of technology firms looking for a slice of
the lucrative traffic enforcement pie). But anyway, hopefully
there'll be plenty of police officers pulling them over
instead...after all it's very important to keep the lanes clear for
corrupt FIFA *******s, friends of despotic leaders and all the other
worthless scum who for some reason have more of a right to see the
Olympics than those who have been in this country, and looking forward
to the Olympics here, for their whole lives.

Fantastic rant Nuxx! I enjoyed that...
--
And every night in my tiny spare bedroom
my bright red bike sleeps dreaming of tomorrow and me.
Drifting round London together. Smiling.

On Jun 18, 8:43*am, Tom Crispin wrote:

Fantastic rant Nuxx! I enjoyed that...

Why thank you. I was quite proud of that one I must admit. I like to
give people what they've come to expect. :-)

On 18/06/2011 11:47, Phil W Lee wrote:
considered Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:33:12
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Jun 17, 10:10 am, wrote:
Cyclists just want everything their own way.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-cyclists-usin...

You overlooked this bit...

"...A Transport for London spokesman said: "The network and associated
traffic measures will cover around one per cent of London's roads and
only operate when absolutely necessary." He said most Games lanes
would be in the centre of the road, leaving cyclists free to continue
riding next to the pavement."

Given their much greater numbers and ability to congtest my guess is
that motorists will suffer even more from the Olympics.

http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympi...ng-london-2012

Doug.

If they are claiming that operation will only be when absolutely
necessary, they'll not activate them at all.
There are many descriptions you could use for the Olympics, but
"necessary" is not one of them.

Hear, hear.

The Olympics should always be held in mid-Pacific (near the International
Date Line) and broadcast live.

"Nuxx Bar" wrote in message
...
On Jun 18, 8:43 am, Tom Crispin wrote:

Fantastic rant Nuxx! I enjoyed that...

Why thank you. I was quite proud of that one I must admit. I like to
give people what they've come to expect. :-)
===================

And I agreed with what you said as well.

On Jun 18, 8:43*am, Tom Crispin wrote:


Fantastic rant Nuxx! I enjoyed that...
--
And every night in my tiny spare bedroom
my bright red bike sleeps dreaming of tomorrow and me.
Drifting round London together. Smiling.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Those lanes will be gone by next year and yet we have silly rules
whereby taxi drivers can drive in bus lanes even though the drivers
may be on their own, whereas a private car with 5 people in it is
barred. Taxi and PH drivers seem to get away with a lot for little
benefit to society.

--
Simon Mason

On Jun 18, 8:51*pm, Simon Mason wrote:

Those lanes will be gone by next year and yet we have silly rules
whereby taxi drivers can drive in bus lanes even though the drivers
may be on their own, whereas a private car with 5 people in it is
barred. Taxi and PH drivers seem to get away with a lot for little
benefit to society.

So do you think buses should be allowed in bus lanes when they're
carrying fewer than 5 people? If so, why, and what's the difference?
What about buses which aren't in service?

I do agree with you that a car is a car, whatever financial
arrangements have or haven't been made between the driver and the
passenger(s), so the rules are indeed silly: bus lanes should be open
to everyone. You yourself said that bus lanes are "useful" as a
"deterrent" to driving, so it's OK that they stand empty while other
lanes are chocka. I think that especially in this day and age, the
authorities should have *much* better things to do with our money than
deliberately causing congestion in that way: it's a negative, spiteful
and patronising approach which is also grossly undemocratic.

If we had proper local democracy like we do in the US then that kind
of crap would be blown out of the water (along with speed cameras,
which people have got rid of all over the place there...it seems that
strangely enough, those running the cameras there are more interested
in making money than improving safety, and are quite happy to be
dishonest about the figures to keep their income stream
going...*everywhere* that cameras spring up, their proponents are up
to the same old self-serving tricks).

Anyway, if congestion hadn't been deliberately caused in the first
place with maliciously phased traffic lights and all the rest of the
nonsense drivers get subjected to, the chances are that the roads
would work properly for everyone and no-one would even need to think
about bus lanes or "Olympic Lanes". Just imagine that: *everyone*
getting where they want to go in good time. Wonderful, eh? Well yes,
for anyone who's not mentally defective, but the car-haters wouldn't
like it one bit: they can't stand the idea of drivers not being
punished for their transport choice, so they pretend that the only way
for the "legitimate" transport modes to get there on time is to
inconvenience the "illegitimate" ones. The sad thing is that they
seem to have persuaded a lot of people of that, to the extent that it
is now just subconsciously assumed that punishing motorists will
automatically benefit other modes, even when there's no mechanism for
that to happen through.

(BTW, where I am, I don't think private hire drivers are allowed to
use bus lanes, but it could be different elsewhere...although in areas
where there is no register of private hire cars, I'm not sure how they
would differentiate, or whether there's anything to stop just anyone
from saying they're using a private hire car.)

On Jun 18, 1:53*pm, JNugent wrote:

The Olympics should always be held in mid-Pacific (near the International
Date Line) and broadcast live.

I think I might be missing something here...what would be the
advantage of being near the Date Line?

(And more to the point, I'm going to start worrying about you if you
agree with Phil "Perjury Advocate" Lee again this year! ;-) )