Highway Code Revision

Just a reminder. Comments on the (bad) HC revisions are open until 10th
May. I have finally got round to writing something. You can find it
(if you are interested) and links to the HC site on my web pages (in sig
below).

Peter

--
www.amey.org.uk

Peter Amey wrote:

Just a reminder. Comments on the (bad) HC revisions are open until 10th
May. I have finally got round to writing something. You can find it
(if you are interested) and links to the HC site on my web pages (in sig
below).

I dug out a mid-1970s copy last weekend. Under "Extra rules for
cyclists", it said

"If there is an adequate cycle path by the side of the road, ride on it."

I suppose you could argue that virtually none are adequate!

Peter Amey wrote:
Just a reminder. Comments on the (bad) HC revisions are open until 10th
May. I have finally got round to writing something. You can find it
(if you are interested) and links to the HC site on my web pages (in sig

Sheesh! You're a reasonable man!

I let them have it with both barrels.

Yes, I know, they're more likely to listen to you, but I'm ****ed off
with daily death threats from motorheads on my commute, and after about
3000 such threats my patience has completely gone. I have no fuse at all.

ExG

Zog The Undeniable wrote:

I dug out a mid-1970s copy last weekend. Under "Extra rules for
cyclists", it said

"If there is an adequate cycle path by the side of the road, ride on it."

Excellent wording. Exactly right for a path that might be .. um ..
adequate for some cyclists but not others.

--
not me guv

Zog The Undeniable wrote:

"If there is an adequate cycle path by the side of the road, ride on it."

I suppose you could argue that virtually none are adequate!

Maybe it's just me, but the word 'adequate', in my mind, is synonymous
with, and automagically replaced by, the word '****e'. Most cycle paths
are, indeed, 'adequate'. If you don't mind a circumlocutory passage
that will involve broken glass, a flat tyre, and a significantly later
arrival time.

It deeply saddens me that 'adequate', in so many instances, is the upper
limit of our aspirations :-(

Russell Fulker wrote:
If you don't mind a *circumlocutory* passage

What was I banging on about! That isn't the word I thought I'd typed
last night :-(

Russell Fulker wrote:
Russell Fulker wrote:
If you don't mind a *circumlocutory* passage

What was I banging on about! That isn't the word I thought I'd typed
last night :-(

You're not going to talk your way round that one ...

...d