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

"Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old September 13th 09, 09:22 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Keitht
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,631
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

JNugent wrote:
Keitht wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Keitht wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote:
Doug :


Surely if every time a driver set off on a journey they knew they
could be facing a long prison sentence for killing or seriously
injuring someone they would drive much more carefully and have more
respect for the safety of vulnerable cyclists and pedestrians?


I favour the spiked steering wheel boss myself, although for maximum
psychological impact the spike would ideally be mounted about 14"
lower.


Doug and Lee interacting and egging each other on.
A better example of the social reinforcement of bullying would be
hard to find.


The steering wheel spike is frequently quoted by police as being the
only real item that would stop people riving like idiots.
PL is only repeating what I've seen on telly several times.


Doug, Lee and KeithT interacting and egging each other on.
A better example of the social reinforcement of bullying would be
hard to find. Unless another name can be added to the list.


But we are only repeating what has been said by those who have to deal
with the everyday mess that with is caused by poor and inconsiderate
drivers.


It would be better if you all stopped, *thought* about the topic,
*considered* it and then either:

It may be better if you stopped and thought.

(a) made *sensible* suggestions instead of your usual fourth form level
remarks, or

(b) refrained from making any suggestions at all (since you don't appear
to have any sensible ones to make).


Pot -kettle

Option (b) would make you all look less silly and less like demented
beings braying against the normal (and real) world.


Motor cars are not going away this side of a world cataclysm. Get used
to it.


Erm - I have never said anything about riddng the planet of motor vehicles?

More than one person having seen or heard similar remarks from those
qualified to investigate and interpret vehicle crashes are not engaged
in some form of bullying.
Real life - not something you seem to be that familiar with.


Or is it just that you are jumping on the 'hate Doug' bandwagon which
is is obvious bullying.


I - as Doug ought to be the very first to admit - have never done that.

When he is right (and he sometimes is), I support him.



My pink half of the drainpipe.

--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.
Ads
  #52  
Old September 14th 09, 06:39 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Doug[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,927
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

On 13 Sep, 10:04, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 12 Sep, 10:36, "Brimstone" wrote:
Simon Brooke wrote:
On 12 Sep, 08:03, "mileburner" wrote:


I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be prepared
to get out of it's way if it is coming at you and looking like it
is not going to stop. The roads are dangerous donchaknow?


While I agree they are dangerous, the question is whether it is
tolerable in a civilised society to allow them to be this dangerous?
It seems to me that either the people who drive have got to get a
lot better at driving (I include myself), or slow down drastically,
or be prevented from driving. Current standards of driving skill in
this country are not acceptable.


How do you legislate for a driver suffering a heart attack whilst in
motion?


Give every driver a medical once a year and impose draconian
sentencing when they kill vulnerable road users.


How does that stop a driver suffering from a heart attack whilst driving,
how would you pay for the additional new doctors required to carry out the
check and what sentence would you impose on a dead car driver?

With testing you can mimimise the chances of a heart attack. As things
stand heart attacks are being encouraged if there is no medical
testing. The drivers would have to pay for their own medicals.

When a driver hits a vulnerable road user the driver is unlikely to
die.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.
  #53  
Old September 14th 09, 06:45 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Doug[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,927
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

On 13 Sep, 13:18, "mileburner" wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message

...



Doug wrote:
On 12 Sep, 10:36, "Brimstone" wrote:
Simon Brooke wrote:
On 12 Sep, 08:03, "mileburner" wrote:


I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be prepared
to get out of it's way if it is coming at you and looking like it
is not going to stop. The roads are dangerous donchaknow?


While I agree they are dangerous, the question is whether it is
tolerable in a civilised society to allow them to be this dangerous?
It seems to me that either the people who drive have got to get a
lot better at driving (I include myself), or slow down drastically,
or be prevented from driving. Current standards of driving skill in
this country are not acceptable.


How do you legislate for a driver suffering a heart attack whilst in
motion?


Give every driver a medical once a year and impose draconian
sentencing when they kill vulnerable road users.


How does that stop a driver suffering from a heart attack whilst driving,
how would you pay for the additional new doctors required to carry out the
check and what sentence would you impose on a dead car driver?


Howsabout banning anyone from driving who has a BMI 25. That way it would
dramatically reduce the probability of said driver having heart attack, it
would mean all the fatties would be forced to walk a bit more and get some
much needed exercise, and reduce the traffic at the same time

Big problems often have very simple solutions.

Although an attractive idea it would be perceived as discrimination.
Instead, a widespread reduction in car use could have several
beneficial effects. I am thinking along the lines of the use of
psychology to reduce wander-lust. Somehow remove the urge to move
about aimlessly in cars and planes.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
Travel broadens the damage.
  #54  
Old September 14th 09, 09:32 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
mileburner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,365
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."


"Doug" wrote in message
...
On 13 Sep, 13:18, "mileburner" wrote:

Howsabout banning anyone from driving who has a BMI 25. That way it
would
dramatically reduce the probability of said driver having heart attack,
it
would mean all the fatties would be forced to walk a bit more and get
some
much needed exercise, and reduce the traffic at the same time

Big problems often have very simple solutions.

Although an attractive idea it would be perceived as discrimination.
Instead, a widespread reduction in car use could have several
beneficial effects. I am thinking along the lines of the use of
psychology to reduce wander-lust. Somehow remove the urge to move
about aimlessly in cars and planes.


A big part of the problem is not that people *want* to travel aimlessly (as
they might do by foot or cycle) but that people feel compelled that they
*have* to travel; to work, to shop, take kids to school etc. by car, and
firmly believe that there is no other option.

Many people have said to me that they would *love* to cycle to work but they
can't because [insert reason here] but most of the reasons could be overcome
if they really wanted to cycle. It might mean moving home, or changing work,
but it could be done *if* that is what they really wanted.

The fact of the matter is, people generally prefer the comfort and
convenience of sitting in their own car, than using other methods. Until
such a time where people have a very good motive to use alternative methods
(cost, health, time etc) they will continue to take the easier option. And
for most people, that is a car.





  #55  
Old September 14th 09, 09:55 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Brimstone[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,237
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Doug wrote:
On 13 Sep, 10:04, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 12 Sep, 10:36, "Brimstone" wrote:
Simon Brooke wrote:
On 12 Sep, 08:03, "mileburner" wrote:


I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be
prepared to get out of it's way if it is coming at you and
looking like it is not going to stop. The roads are dangerous
donchaknow?


While I agree they are dangerous, the question is whether it is
tolerable in a civilised society to allow them to be this
dangerous? It seems to me that either the people who drive have
got to get a lot better at driving (I include myself), or slow
down drastically, or be prevented from driving. Current standards
of driving skill in this country are not acceptable.


How do you legislate for a driver suffering a heart attack whilst
in motion?


Give every driver a medical once a year and impose draconian
sentencing when they kill vulnerable road users.


How does that stop a driver suffering from a heart attack whilst
driving, how would you pay for the additional new doctors required
to carry out the check and what sentence would you impose on a dead
car driver?

With testing you can mimimise the chances of a heart attack. As things
stand heart attacks are being encouraged if there is no medical
testing. The drivers would have to pay for their own medicals.


Many very fit people, the kind who are in physically demanding jobs, run or
take physical exercise every day, die of heart attacks Doug. The people
paying for exams down't pay for the training of new doctors Doug, where are
they to come from and where will they be accommodated to carry out their
duties?

When a driver hits a vulnerable road user the driver is unlikely to
die.


Which shows your inability to follow an argument through. If a driver has a
heart attack and collides with anything or anyone, he is quite possibly
already dead or is shortly after.

Why should someone who has no history of heart trouble but suffers a heart
attack be imprisoned Doug?


  #56  
Old September 14th 09, 05:57 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Dragon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,715
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 13 Sep, 10:04, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 12 Sep, 10:36, "Brimstone" wrote:
Simon Brooke wrote:
On 12 Sep, 08:03, "mileburner" wrote:
I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be
prepared to get out of it's way if it is coming at you and
looking like it is not going to stop. The roads are dangerous
donchaknow?
While I agree they are dangerous, the question is whether it is
tolerable in a civilised society to allow them to be this
dangerous? It seems to me that either the people who drive have
got to get a lot better at driving (I include myself), or slow
down drastically, or be prevented from driving. Current standards
of driving skill in this country are not acceptable.
How do you legislate for a driver suffering a heart attack whilst
in motion?
Give every driver a medical once a year and impose draconian
sentencing when they kill vulnerable road users.
How does that stop a driver suffering from a heart attack whilst
driving, how would you pay for the additional new doctors required
to carry out the check and what sentence would you impose on a dead
car driver?

With testing you can mimimise the chances of a heart attack. As things
stand heart attacks are being encouraged if there is no medical
testing. The drivers would have to pay for their own medicals.


Many very fit people, the kind who are in physically demanding jobs, run or
take physical exercise every day, die of heart attacks Doug. The people
paying for exams down't pay for the training of new doctors Doug, where are
they to come from and where will they be accommodated to carry out their
duties?

When a driver hits a vulnerable road user the driver is unlikely to
die.


Which shows your inability to follow an argument through. If a driver has a
heart attack and collides with anything or anyone, he is quite possibly
already dead or is shortly after.

Why should someone who has no history of heart trouble but suffers a heart
attack be imprisoned Doug?



Indeed should it be any different if a cyclist suffers a heart attack?

--

Tony Dragon
 




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
Chapman: "Speed Cameras are Dangerous, Kids" Nuxx Bar UK 0 May 1st 09 07:33 PM
Cycling not particularly dangerous Zebee Johnstone Recumbent Biking 1 June 13th 08 03:12 PM
Cycling not particularly dangerous Jens Müller[_2_] Social Issues 0 June 13th 08 12:42 PM
Most Dangerous: Cars, Dogs, Kids on Wheels, Other Bikers, Pedestrians? Ziactrice General 16 April 22nd 06 02:48 PM
"Dangerous" Cantilers? Robin Hubert Techniques 12 July 28th 05 06:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2021 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.