The 'cyclists should pay road tax' folks
Discussion
Finlandia said:
There have been police at the beach walk to zap speeding cyclists, why are they there when it's not breaking any laws? Obviously there is a problem with fast moving cyclists, and some sort of deterrent has been agreed on.
Yes - the outcry was about the illegitimate fines not about the idea of protecting kids from idiot cyclists.Stopping cyclists going too fast and asking them to slow down around kids is fine.
Taking their money with no basis in law isn't.
"Zapping them for speeding" simply isn't possible because there is no speed limit.
Don't let that stop you repeating it ad nauseam.
Finlandia said:
A helmet protects your head from injury, it will not save your life, but it protects your skull better than your hair does.
Perhaps this is just a language issue.What you have written means "your head cannot sustain ANY injury if you wear a helmet".
That is obviously false.
A truck tyre will happily crush your head AND a helmet.
Everyone agrees that it HELPS protect your head.
Once again, the argument is for/against compulsory helmets not whether something designed to protect your head does what it has been designed to do.
Finlandia said:
Read the quotes, a cyclist going too fast on a busy and narrow beach promenade endangers others.
Read the responses - no one is disagreeing with you.Finlandia said:
It may not be against the law, but it's not big and clever either, and it looks like someone has had enough of it or there wouldn't have been any speed checks.
Blue sign, white lettering - you realise that is a minimum speed, don't you?Cyclists must travel faster than 10mph. That's what it says.
Finlandia said:
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
walm said:
WinstonWolf said:
Err, that is an answer to a completely different question, unless you're completely mental?
I can quite confidently say he's mental.Either that or his multi-thread trolling got confused and he started arguing with himself like that muppet with a Jag.
I bet you didn't realise quite how many petrol heads also cycle...
Do you agree with: No-one with any decency rides overly fast around kids on shared paths
Still, no reason for insulting people, is there?
Remind us all again how much VED is on a zero emissions vehicle.
heebeegeetee said:
Not in the UK no, nor anywhere in Europe, I don't think.
And that's fine, I happen to think the opposite though.walm said:
Finlandia said:
There have been police at the beach walk to zap speeding cyclists, why are they there when it's not breaking any laws? Obviously there is a problem with fast moving cyclists, and some sort of deterrent has been agreed on.
Yes - the outcry was about the illegitimate fines not about the idea of protecting kids from idiot cyclists.Stopping cyclists going too fast and asking them to slow down around kids is fine.
Taking their money with no basis in law isn't.
"Zapping them for speeding" simply isn't possible because there is no speed limit.
Don't let that stop you repeating it ad nauseam.
Finlandia said:
A helmet protects your head from injury, it will not save your life, but it protects your skull better than your hair does.
Perhaps this is just a language issue.What you have written means "your head cannot sustain ANY injury if you wear a helmet".
That is obviously false.
A truck tyre will happily crush your head AND a helmet.
Everyone agrees that it HELPS protect your head.
Once again, the argument is for/against compulsory helmets not whether something designed to protect your head does what it has been designed to do.
Finlandia said:
Read the quotes, a cyclist going too fast on a busy and narrow beach promenade endangers others.
Read the responses - no one is disagreeing with you.According to this article there was no fines involved, but the outcry was still rather massive.
Claire Armstrong, from the campaign group Safe Speed said: "This is completely ludicrous and a waste of taxpayers' money.
"It's just nonsense and I think cyclists will show the disrespect that it deserves."
Charmaine Andrews, spokeswoman for Bournemouth council's leisure services, said: "We have a duty to ensure the promenade is a safe environment for everyone to enjoy.
"It's a joint initiative with the police, involving one police officer and one seafront ranger on each day.
"They will catch any cyclists that are going too fast, give them a safety talk and provide them with a leaflet explaining the bylaws along the seafront.
Regarding helmets, yes I may have worded it incorrectly, a helmet protects your head, but it can't always stop you from dying.
To me it looks like quite a few are disagreeing, or intentionally misunderstanding.
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
walm said:
WinstonWolf said:
Err, that is an answer to a completely different question, unless you're completely mental?
I can quite confidently say he's mental.Either that or his multi-thread trolling got confused and he started arguing with himself like that muppet with a Jag.
I bet you didn't realise quite how many petrol heads also cycle...
Do you agree with: No-one with any decency rides overly fast around kids on shared paths
Still, no reason for insulting people, is there?
Remind us all again how much VED is on a zero emissions vehicle.
Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
funinhounslow said:
As roads are paid for out of general taxation (not VED) and motorways are not open to pedestrians, horses, and cyclists I'd say motorists are getting a pretty good deal.
If we have "road tax" for cyclists then surely in the interests of fairness all motorways should be toll roads?
No, because almost all roads in the UK are and have been built with cash raised from general taxation, but the government receives billions every year in the form of motor taxes, of which only a tiny fraction is spent back on the roads and motorists from where that cash came from in the first place. Therefore it is society as a whole which benefits from motor taxes, not the other way round.If we have "road tax" for cyclists then surely in the interests of fairness all motorways should be toll roads?
The ONLY toll roads which should exist in the UK are brand new roads, built by private companies, who then toll its users, to recoup their outlay, and make a profit on the venture. Tolling motorist to use existing state built roads, that motor taxes have already paid for thousands of times over is iniquitous.
The Dartford crossing would be a typical example of this. The Government contract was for the tolls to be completely removed in 2002, when the crossing had been completely paid for from tolls paid by the motorist who use it.
But no, not only did the government NOT remove the tolls as per the contract, they kept the tolls in place, and then INCREASED them.
Cycling is one of the few activities not targeted by the taxman, and I for one would rather it was kept that way. But for some to suggest that the motorist is getting a `good deal' with regard to the current level of motor taxation, set against government provision for the motoring public, I would have to say that that is utter nonsense.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/...
Chart 3 - Approx 75% of people whose commute to work is 2 to 5 miles use a car....
These arent van drivers who need to take tools etc with them, they are mostly peope who work in retail or regular offices and I appreciate that some will combine the commute with a school run or something but my commute runs parallel to the Bristol ring road and I see a lot of sole occupancy cars as traffic crawls... once past the suburban area, traffic thins out and moves quicker.....
Rather than reconsider their choice of transport though, its just easier to attack those who they perceive "have it easy" by virtue of not apying some arbitary emissions based tax... I know people who are fit and able to cycle 5 miles and have no reason to transport kit/laptops etc with them but time their commute around when the traffic is bearable than try an alternative just so they can drive it to work...
Chart 3 - Approx 75% of people whose commute to work is 2 to 5 miles use a car....
These arent van drivers who need to take tools etc with them, they are mostly peope who work in retail or regular offices and I appreciate that some will combine the commute with a school run or something but my commute runs parallel to the Bristol ring road and I see a lot of sole occupancy cars as traffic crawls... once past the suburban area, traffic thins out and moves quicker.....
Rather than reconsider their choice of transport though, its just easier to attack those who they perceive "have it easy" by virtue of not apying some arbitary emissions based tax... I know people who are fit and able to cycle 5 miles and have no reason to transport kit/laptops etc with them but time their commute around when the traffic is bearable than try an alternative just so they can drive it to work...
Finlandia said:
Read man, read!
Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
Given there are a huge number of unlicensed/uninsured drivers on the road in the UK, how do you propose managing these cyclists licences? its well known front line Police are incapable of dealing with motorists so you think throwing legislation at cyclists will help? or does it ease your feeling of persecution? Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
Anyone who advocates licensing or taxes or fees for cyclists must also have a solution as to how it will be enforced otherwise, you may as well not bother suggesting it.... I can quite happily say that if licensing was made law, I wouldnt do the training, no one would know and no one would stop me and no registration plate would be affixed to any of my bikes.
Do you really, honestly, think this is a matter of such importance that it is sufficient to generate the level of bureaucracy and cost tothe tax payer envisaged?
Finlandia said:
Read man, read!
Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
I think that certain vehicle users need the extra training. Riding through traffic seems to enrage some drivers. There is also the persistent issue of drivers not paying attention and using the correct observation techniques.Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
Why should someone pay a fee to ride in traffic? Does that fee apply to me in rural Lincolnshire where the most traffic I see on the back roads is the odd vehicle that passes me.
Tax for minimised car use? My car is taxed whether I use it or not. If I walk into town rather than driving, I'm not paying less tax for that journey.
Finlandia said:
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
WinstonWolf said:
Finlandia said:
walm said:
WinstonWolf said:
Err, that is an answer to a completely different question, unless you're completely mental?
I can quite confidently say he's mental.Either that or his multi-thread trolling got confused and he started arguing with himself like that muppet with a Jag.
I bet you didn't realise quite how many petrol heads also cycle...
Do you agree with: No-one with any decency rides overly fast around kids on shared paths
Still, no reason for insulting people, is there?
Remind us all again how much VED is on a zero emissions vehicle.
Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
You're being wilfully stupid on purpose I assume?pablo said:
Finlandia said:
Read man, read!
Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
Given there are a huge number of unlicensed/uninsured drivers on the road in the UK, how do you propose managing these cyclists licences? its well known front line Police are incapable of dealing with motorists so you think throwing legislation at cyclists will help? or does it ease your feeling of persecution? Licencing as in some sort of a licence as a proof of having been trained to ride in traffic, fee as in some sort of fee to be riding in traffic or parking or something of the like, tax as in well a tax to recoup some of the losses of the minimised car use.
Now read it again.
Anyone who advocates licensing or taxes or fees for cyclists must also have a solution as to how it will be enforced otherwise, you may as well not bother suggesting it.... I can quite happily say that if licensing was made law, I wouldnt do the training, no one would know and no one would stop me and no registration plate would be affixed to any of my bikes.
Do you really, honestly, think this is a matter of such importance that it is sufficient to generate the level of bureaucracy and cost tothe tax payer envisaged?
funkyrobot said:
I think that certain vehicle users need the extra training. Riding through traffic seems to enrage some drivers. There is also the persistent issue of drivers not paying attention and using the correct observation techniques.
Why should someone pay a fee to ride in traffic? Does that fee apply to me in rural Lincolnshire where the most traffic I see on the back roads is the odd vehicle that passes me.
Tax for minimised car use? My car is taxed whether I use it or not. If I walk into town rather than driving, I'm not paying less tax for that journey.
Why should someone pay a fee to ride in traffic? Does that fee apply to me in rural Lincolnshire where the most traffic I see on the back roads is the odd vehicle that passes me.
Tax for minimised car use? My car is taxed whether I use it or not. If I walk into town rather than driving, I'm not paying less tax for that journey.
Somone earlier said:
Sooner or later, the fossil fuels will be come too rare and expensive, and if nothing better comes along then people will use bikes, people will get hurt and insurances will become the norm as bikes are viewed as cars are today.
Insurance, licencing, charges for whatnot, it will come at some point, not tomorrow or next week, but at some point.FFS cycling is never going to taxed or regulated, people aren't going to stop cycling because it sets the bottom lip going of a few car drivers, best the anti cycling folk can wish for is better enforcement of existing rules and proper prosecutions for those who break them, as a cyclist I would support that.
it just is what it is, get over it !
it just is what it is, get over it !
J4CKO said:
FFS cycling is never going to taxed or regulated, people aren't going to stop cycling because it sets the bottom lip going of a few car drivers, best the anti cycling folk can wish for is better enforcement of existing rules and proper prosecutions for those who break them, as a cyclist I would support that.
it just is what it is, get over it !
^^ this.it just is what it is, get over it !
Finlandia said:
Insurance, licencing, charges for whatnot, it will come at some point, not tomorrow or next week, but at some point.
Really?Do you think that cycling will be levied like this?
Just look at the way things are going. Everyone is obsessed with the environment at the moment. Cycling is seen as a greener, more healthy alternative to driving. There are schemes encouraging the uptake of cycling. The recent Tour De France wins and track successes have also made it much more popular.
I simply cannot see anything happening to cycling. The medical and environmental bods wouldn't allow it and it makes no sense whatsoever.
funkyrobot said:
Finlandia said:
Insurance, licencing, charges for whatnot, it will come at some point, not tomorrow or next week, but at some point.
Really?Do you think that cycling will be levied like this?
Just look at the way things are going. Everyone is obsessed with the environment at the moment. Cycling is seen as a greener, more healthy alternative to driving. There are schemes encouraging the uptake of cycling. The recent Tour De France wins and track successes have also made it much more popular.
I simply cannot see anything happening to cycling. The medical and environmental bods wouldn't allow it and it makes no sense whatsoever.
Finlandia said:
funkyrobot said:
Finlandia said:
Insurance, licencing, charges for whatnot, it will come at some point, not tomorrow or next week, but at some point.
Really?Do you think that cycling will be levied like this?
Just look at the way things are going. Everyone is obsessed with the environment at the moment. Cycling is seen as a greener, more healthy alternative to driving. There are schemes encouraging the uptake of cycling. The recent Tour De France wins and track successes have also made it much more popular.
I simply cannot see anything happening to cycling. The medical and environmental bods wouldn't allow it and it makes no sense whatsoever.
Wrong, there have already been studies that show that even when you take injuries into account people statistically live longer if they cycle.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff