Laws Shouldn't Apply to Cyclists...

....because they're using a "morally superior" form of transport.
Equally, laws should be enforced without discretion and in draconian,
conveyer-belt fashion against motorists at every possible opportunity,
because they're using an "illegitimate" form of transport and
shouldn't really be driving at all (unless they're important, like
Crapman, aka the group moderator who no-one's actually voted for).

Laws which are ostensibly about safety should not only be enforced for
safety's sake, they should also be used as a tool to "encourage"
people to cycle and use public transport. Furthermore, restrictions
which enable these laws to be enforced should be applied with this in
mind (so speed limits should be lowered even when there's no safety-
related reason to do so, and restrictions on cyclists should be eased
even when doing so would be dangerous, as both of these things will
encourage modal shift, and that's a more important priority than
saving lives).

The above is quite obviously the thrust behind a lot of what is said
by certain parties on this newsgroup. Are any of them going to have
the backbone to admit that it's what they actually think?