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

What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old May 29th 20, 02:37 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Attitude to Outgroups

On 29/05/2020 11:08, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:

On Thu, 28 May 2020 10:56:41 GMT, JNugent
wrote:
[]

Don't you think it would be less easy to "demonise" cyclists if they
(the majority of cyclists) simply behaved better and committed fewer
traffic offences?


But they do (behave well); it's your selective view that's being reinforced
by the transgressors - you discount the ordinary well-behaved. We all
believe what we want, and the brain rewards re-inforcement; we fool
ourselves.


It is obvious that you are fooling *yourself*, but, please, don't be obtuse.

Cycling along footways is not good behaviour. Passing through red
traffic lights is not good behaviour. Ignoring one-way working (whether
on rhe footway or the carriageway) is not good behaviour.

It is objectively correct to see all those as bad behaviour (and each of
them is also a traffic offence).

Let us see whether you can reasonably disagree with that without
resorting to the standard "Cyclists must be allowed to do as they like"
attitude.

Additionally, in current conditions, passing pedestrians with less than
six feet of clearance - particularly on a footway - is *terrible* behaviour.

Ads
  #32  
Old May 29th 20, 02:38 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?

On 29/05/2020 11:10, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 18:31:59 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 28/05/2020 15:18, Bod wrote:


[Let's get this a bit neater]

Cyclists Break Far Fewer Road Rules Than Motorists, Finds New Video
Study
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton...ists-break-far
-fewer-road-rules-than-motorists-finds-new-video-study/


Forbes is a magazine about money, isn't it?


Did you read it? Do you not want to believe it?


Forbes is an American magazine about money, isn't it?

What is its expertise in UK road traffic law?

  #33  
Old May 29th 20, 02:49 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,244
Default What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?

On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 9:24:47 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Rod Liddle has to be a real second rater, though. It was well over a
decade ago that Matthew Parris wrote 'the most complained about story
of the year'. His article in The Times in which he suggested piano
wire should be strung across country lanes to decapitate cyclists
prompted almost 600 protests to the Press Complaints Commission.


How come nearly all of these "string up cyclists" merchants are pasty, whey-faced obese white men? They must hate people thinner and happier than them so much that they want to kill and seriously injure them. I feel sorry for them.
  #34  
Old May 29th 20, 04:26 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kerr-Mudd,John[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 374
Default What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?

On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:38:19 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 29/05/2020 11:10, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 18:31:59 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 28/05/2020 15:18, Bod wrote:


[Let's get this a bit neater]

Cyclists Break Far Fewer Road Rules Than Motorists, Finds New Video
Study
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton...yclists-break-

far
-fewer-road-rules-than-motorists-finds-new-video-study/

Forbes is a magazine about money, isn't it?


Did you read it? Do you not want to believe it?


Forbes is an American magazine about money, isn't it?

What is its expertise in UK road traffic law?

Is this answer a question with a question week?



--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
  #35  
Old May 29th 20, 05:27 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?

On 29/05/2020 16:26, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:38:19 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 29/05/2020 11:10, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 18:31:59 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 28/05/2020 15:18, Bod wrote:

[Let's get this a bit neater]

Cyclists Break Far Fewer Road Rules Than Motorists, Finds New Video
Study
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton...yclists-break-

far
-fewer-road-rules-than-motorists-finds-new-video-study/

Forbes is a magazine about money, isn't it?


Did you read it? Do you not want to believe it?


Forbes is an American magazine about money, isn't it?

What is its expertise in UK road traffic law?

Is this answer a question with a question week?


It looks like it.

OK: I'll make a statement.

When and if someone can demonstrate to me that Forbes magazine has any
expertise at all in UK road traffic law, and that it does not simply run
articles dashed off by trendy New York Times or Washington Post
Lycranazis whose heads are full of Monbigotry, I *might* deign to have a
look at it. Don't read too much into "might".

Until then, no thanks, any more than I would consult Cycling Weekly on
moral philosophy or the Daily Mirror on macroeconomics.


PS: What is a "video study"? Is it like that thing on Channel 4 where
(some) people sitting on sofas watch other people sitting on sofas
watching TV or videos?
  #36  
Old May 29th 20, 05:31 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kelly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 269
Default What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?

Simon Mason wrote:

On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 9:24:47 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Rod Liddle has to be a real second rater, though. It was well over a
decade ago that Matthew Parris wrote 'the most complained about story
of the year'. His article in The Times in which he suggested piano
wire should be strung across country lanes to decapitate cyclists
prompted almost 600 protests to the Press Complaints Commission.


How come nearly all of these "string up cyclists" merchants are pasty, whey-faced obese white men?
They must hate people thinner and happier than them so much that they want to kill and seriously
injure them. I feel sorry for them.


I have reached that same conclusion. The problem "string up cyclists"
merchants have with cyclists is really their problem, not mine. It
transpires that this Rod Liddle guy, who wrote a few days ago that he
finds it 'tempting' to stretch piano wire across the road to target
cyclists, has past form in expressing his animosity to cyclists. This
includes a The Spectator article he wrote in which he came out with:

Quote

Like many people, I am worried that too few cyclists are being killed
on our roads each year... My concern is that if killing cyclists is no
longer allowable in a free country, then it is the thin end of the
wedge and it may be that, down the line, cycling will become an
'acceptable' pursuit for normal people.

Unquote

What would be the point in trying to explain you are a responsible
cyclist to someone like that? I think you have it spot on with people
who take their cyclist hatred to such extremes - feel sorry for them.


  #37  
Old May 29th 20, 05:35 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,244
Default What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?

On Friday, May 29, 2020 at 5:31:40 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:

On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 9:24:47 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Rod Liddle has to be a real second rater, though. It was well over a
decade ago that Matthew Parris wrote 'the most complained about story
of the year'. His article in The Times in which he suggested piano
wire should be strung across country lanes to decapitate cyclists
prompted almost 600 protests to the Press Complaints Commission.


How come nearly all of these "string up cyclists" merchants are pasty, whey-faced obese white men?
They must hate people thinner and happier than them so much that they want to kill and seriously
injure them. I feel sorry for them.


I have reached that same conclusion. The problem "string up cyclists"
merchants have with cyclists is really their problem, not mine. It
transpires that this Rod Liddle guy, who wrote a few days ago that he
finds it 'tempting' to stretch piano wire across the road to target
cyclists, has past form in expressing his animosity to cyclists. This
includes a The Spectator article he wrote in which he came out with:

Quote

Like many people, I am worried that too few cyclists are being killed
on our roads each year... My concern is that if killing cyclists is no
longer allowable in a free country, then it is the thin end of the
wedge and it may be that, down the line, cycling will become an
'acceptable' pursuit for normal people.

Unquote

What would be the point in trying to explain you are a responsible
cyclist to someone like that? I think you have it spot on with people
who take their cyclist hatred to such extremes - feel sorry for them.


Me too - there used to be troll called "Mr Cheerful" here who used to delight in posting stories where young cyclists were killed by cars. There are some sick people about for sure.
  #38  
Old May 29th 20, 11:12 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Attitude to Outgroups

On 29/05/2020 14:37, JNugent wrote:
On 29/05/2020 11:08, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 10:56:41 GMT, JNugent
wrote:
[]

Don't you think it would be less easy to "demonise" cyclists if they
(the majority of cyclists) simply behaved better and committed fewer
traffic offences?


But they do (behave well); it's your selective view that's being
reinforced
by the transgressors - you discount the ordinary well-behaved.Â* We all
believe what we want, and the brain rewards re-inforcement; we fool
ourselves.


It is obvious that you are fooling *yourself*, but, please, don't be
obtuse.

Cycling along footways is not good behaviour. Passing through red
traffic lights is not good behaviour. Ignoring one-way working (whether
on rhe footway or the carriageway) is not good behaviour.

It is objectively correct to see all those as bad behaviour (and each of
them is also a traffic offence).


You sound as though road law is a set of school rules: "You're a naughty
boy: don't run in the corridors, do your tie up properly and get a haircut."

Also, "bad behaviour" and "not good behaviour" are not the same thing.

Let us see whether you can reasonably disagree with that without
resorting to the standard "Cyclists must be allowed to do as they like"
attitude.


Yawn.

Additionally, in current conditions, passing pedestrians with less than
six feet of clearance - particularly on a footway - is *terrible*
behaviour.


This is the only law pedestrians can break. Noticeably more are breaking
it than they were a few weeks ago.
  #39  
Old May 31st 20, 02:55 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Attitude to Outgroups

On 29/05/2020 23:12, TMS320 wrote:

On 29/05/2020 14:37, JNugent wrote:
On 29/05/2020 11:08, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
JNugent wrote:


[]


Don't you think it would be less easy to "demonise" cyclists if they
(the majority of cyclists) simply behaved better and committed fewer
traffic offences?


But they do (behave well); it's your selective view that's being
reinforced
by the transgressors - you discount the ordinary well-behaved.Â* We all
believe what we want, and the brain rewards re-inforcement; we fool
ourselves.


It is obvious that you are fooling *yourself*, but, please, don't be
obtuse.
Cycling along footways is not good behaviour. Passing through red
traffic lights is not good behaviour. Ignoring one-way working
(whether on rhe footway or the carriageway) is not good behaviour.
It is objectively correct to see all those as bad behaviour (and each
of them is also a traffic offence).


You sound as though road law is a set of school rules: "You're a naughty
boy: don't run in the corridors, do your tie up properly and get a
haircut."


You seem to "think" that compliance with the law is merely an option to
be considered. Other people need and deserve to be protected from you.

Also, "bad behaviour" and "not good behaviour" are not the same thing.


shrug

Cyclists (or the majority of them today) behave badly. That's the only
way to describe it.

Let us see whether you can reasonably disagree with that without
resorting to the standard "Cyclists must be allowed to do as they
like" attitude.


Yawn.


I was already well aware that you do not accept that cyclists are under
a duty to comply with the law or to consider others.

Additionally, in current conditions, passing pedestrians with less
than six feet of clearance - particularly on a footway - is *terrible*
behaviour.


This is the only law pedestrians can break. Noticeably more are breaking
it than they were a few weeks ago.


Does that make it alright for you to do it?
  #40  
Old May 31st 20, 12:23 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kelly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 269
Default Attitude to Outgroups

JNugent wrote:

Cyclists (or the majority of them today) behave badly. That's the only
way to describe it.


Quote:

....the idea that the UK is menaced by an advancing tide of reckless
cyclists ignores the fact that cycling levels across the country have
stayed largely static for years, and remain pitifully low, at about 1%
or so for all trips.

....the pandemic of avoidable ill-health caused by sedentary lifestyles
will, if unchecked, pretty soon bankrupt the NHS and social care
systems. ...the best way to get people active is exercise which forms
part of their everyday life, such as active travel, and that cycling
is ideal for this.

About 85,000 people in England and Wales die each year from illness
connected to inactive living. Obsessing about the supposed dangers
caused by cycling, rather than the many, provable benefits it brings,
strikes me as extremely odd.

Unquote.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...kless-cyclists

 




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
Why is hi-vis clothing easier to see? What’s so special about the colour? Max Demian UK 37 September 5th 19 08:43 AM
Dog walker almost decapitated by lorry that passes inches from herhead Bod[_5_] UK 1 June 13th 16 10:49 PM
Arrogant, abusive and oh-so smug . Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 32 December 8th 12 02:58 PM
That's my smug moment for the year. wafflycat UK 22 March 19th 07 02:01 PM
Smug archierob UK 4 September 13th 05 01:40 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:17 PM.


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.