A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Pavement cyclists targeted again but not pavement motorists.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 22nd 09, 09:48 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Doug[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,927
Default Pavement cyclists targeted again but not pavement motorists.

With the all too familiar denigration of cyclists in a motorist
dominated society a group of MPs are studiously ignoring the fact that
cyclists ride on pavements to avoid death-dealing motorists and HGVs.
They also ignore the fact that many more motorists frequently drive
onto pavements to park and in so doing also put pedestrians at serious
risk and inconvenience and especially when they crash onto pavements,
as they often do.

"The Lycra louts: MPs call for curbs on cyclists who put lives at risk

Anti-social cyclists are a potentially fatal hazard to themselves,
other road users and pedestrians, say MPs.

They claim the Government is turning a blind eye to the aggressive and
dangerous antics of such cyclists, described by one MP as 'Darth
Vaders on wheels'.

The criticism of the so-called Lycra louts comes in a report published
today by the Commons public accounts committee into improving road
safety for pedestrians and cyclists..."

Read mo http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0UeVYPSK7

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's democracy is another man's regime.
Ads
  #2  
Old October 22nd 09, 09:52 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
BrianW[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Pavement cyclists targeted again but not pavement motorists.

On 22 Oct, 09:48, Doug wrote:
With the all too familiar denigration of cyclists in a motorist
dominated society a group of MPs are studiously ignoring the fact that
cyclists ride on pavements to avoid death-dealing motorists and HGVs.
They also ignore the fact that many more motorists frequently drive
onto pavements to park and in so doing also put pedestrians at serious
risk and inconvenience and especially when they crash onto pavements,
as they often do.


Doug, could you remind me which can cause more damage - a car or a
bike? I've forgotten again. Do you have any stories which could help
me here?
  #3  
Old October 22nd 09, 10:11 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,985
Default Pavement cyclists targeted again but not pavement motorists.

Doug wrote:
With the all too familiar denigration of cyclists in a motorist
dominated society a group of MPs are studiously ignoring the fact that
cyclists ride on pavements to avoid death-dealing motorists and HGVs.
They also ignore the fact that many more motorists frequently drive
onto pavements to park and in so doing also put pedestrians at serious
risk and inconvenience and especially when they crash onto pavements,
as they often do.

"The Lycra louts: MPs call for curbs on cyclists who put lives at risk

Anti-social cyclists are a potentially fatal hazard to themselves,
other road users and pedestrians, say MPs.

They claim the Government is turning a blind eye to the aggressive and
dangerous antics of such cyclists, described by one MP as 'Darth
Vaders on wheels'.

The criticism of the so-called Lycra louts comes in a report published
today by the Commons public accounts committee into improving road
safety for pedestrians and cyclists..."

Read mo http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0UeVYPSK7


It's interesting that there is so much public support for cutting the
Lycra-lout lobby down to size. The positive responses to the cited article
are just another indication of this - the MPs and the writer of the article
have hit the nail on the head and identified this source of significant
public disquiet.

I loved the cyclist response which ended:

"...I ride over fields and fells up in the Lake district, I enjoy it to keep
fit and just have fun, I don't think my bike needs 'urgent regulation'...".

Drunk drivers made very similar noises when calls were made for the
introduction of the breathalyser - and for the same sort of reasons.
  #4  
Old October 22nd 09, 10:22 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 307
Default Pavement cyclists targeted again but not pavement motorists.

JNugent writes:

It's interesting that there is so much public support for cutting the
Lycra-lout lobby down to size


There's a Lycra-lout lobby?


-dan
  #7  
Old October 22nd 09, 10:29 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mike P[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Pavement cyclists targeted again but not pavement motorists.

On 22 Oct, 09:48, Doug wrote:
With the all too familiar denigration of cyclists in a motorist
dominated society a group of MPs are studiously ignoring the fact that
cyclists ride on pavements to avoid death-dealing motorists and HGVs.
They also ignore the fact that many more motorists frequently drive
onto pavements to park and in so doing also put pedestrians at serious
risk and inconvenience and especially when they crash onto pavements,
as they often do.

"The Lycra louts: MPs call for curbs on cyclists who put lives at risk

Anti-social cyclists are a potentially fatal hazard to themselves,
other road users and pedestrians, say MPs.

They claim the Government is turning a blind eye to the aggressive and
dangerous antics of such cyclists, described by one MP as 'Darth
Vaders on wheels'.

The criticism of the so-called Lycra louts comes in a report published
today by the Commons public accounts committee into improving road
safety for pedestrians and cyclists..."


YAWN

Wake me up when you've finished....

Mike P


  #10  
Old October 22nd 09, 11:34 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,985
Default Pavement cyclists targeted again but not pavement motorists.

wrote:

JNugent writes:
wrote:
JNugent writes:
wrote:
JNugent writes:


It's interesting that there is so much public support for cutting the
Lycra-lout lobby down to size


There's a Lycra-lout lobby?


I think it's officially called "the Department of Transport" or
something similar. It has branches/chapters all over the country that
call themselves "local councils".


And it promotes dangerous cycling, does it? I assume that's what you're
talking about when you refer to "Lycra louts"


It certainly seems to take a very lax attitude to footway cycling, as
has been cited and demonstrated here many times (and is also mentioned
and demonstrated in the article which Doug cited).


I'd describe this as "backpedalling", except that I'm not sure you're
familiar with the concept of pedalling.
It's more interesting, I think, that there is a total of one (1) hit on
Google for the term "lycra-lout lobby", and it's a link to this very
thread. Perhaps the term is not as widely recognised as you believe it
to be


Have I claimed otherwise?

Why argue with an off-the-cuff coinage rather than with the substantive issue
of the dangers caused to pedestrians by Lycra-louts, and the very obvious
widespread public concern it causes?

It's easier and more comfortable for you, I suppose. But here's your chance
to prove my supposition wrong:

insert your arguments - if any - as to why the law should not be properly
enforced and pedestrians protected
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another killer motorists mounts pavement.. Doug[_3_] UK 16 September 30th 09 09:34 AM
Pavement cyclists wafflycat UK 4 September 30th 05 10:15 PM
Cyclists on pavement Euan Australia 103 June 22nd 05 11:43 PM
Pavement cyclists criticised Brendan Halpin UK 0 May 28th 05 11:04 PM
Pavement cyclists Andy Leighton UK 45 June 14th 04 09:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.