Cyclists without lights - something needs to be done
Discussion
cb1965 said:
If a few of you want to start a separate ‘cb1865 is s ****’ thread then please do!
Who's he? Sounds like you've got multiple personalities at work in that head of yours. This thread is the paradigm of poor presentation of a good point. Resulting in the merit of the good point being entirely lost.
G321 said:
Cb1965 I read these threads and really think you need to seek some kind of help. Every couple of weeks you're either starting an anti cycling thread or spreading hate on someone else's. If you have a family and they have to put up with this kind of behavior from you then they must be long suffering. Either that or they're just like you. Ironically you might find riding a bike or some other form of exercise might sort your head out and clear away the anger.
Either way just give it a rest
I do ride a bike and sorry if you don’t agree that riding around in the dark with no lights is stupid and dangerous, but that is up to you as you are entitled to opine however you like as am I. Either way just give it a rest
80sMatchbox said:
cb1965 said:
Are you really saying that if I can't see them it's my fault and you can judge my driving from a post on the Internet? I think probably not and suspect you're only trying to get a rise as usual, but just in case you are that daft you might want to realise that seeing a cyclist with no lights/hi-vis in a well lit dry night time street might be easy whereas seeing them on a dark wet back road might be less so. Hope that helps!
PS not my step daughter, the assumptions on here are quite amusing.
I'm basing your standard of driving on numerous posts on here. I'm not saying I'm right, just that's how you come across to me. HTH.PS not my step daughter, the assumptions on here are quite amusing.
PS: My mistake, your partner's daughter. I'd had a few ales last night....
cb1965 said:
I do ride a bike and sorry if you don’t agree that riding around in the dark with no lights is stupid and dangerous, but that is up to you as you are entitled to opine however you like as am I.
Do you ever think of everyone is saying the same thing it might not be them that’s the issue?yonex said:
cb1965 said:
I do ride a bike and sorry if you don’t agree that riding around in the dark with no lights is stupid and dangerous, but that is up to you as you are entitled to opine however you like as am I.
Do you ever think of everyone is saying the same thing it might not be them that’s the issue?Not sure how nyone can consider that cycling without lights at night is not that dangerous but there you go and that is up to them/you if that is what you are trying to say.
cb1965 said:
Anyway as usual the cycling bods on here have dragged this off topic and made it personal so perhaps we could get back to the topic in hand. If a few of you want to start a separate ‘cb1865 is s ****’ thread then please do!
I'll make you a deal, as you seem to think its the cyclist zeolots who have the problem.I'll record an intersection in rush hour traffic tomorrow night for a few light changes. If the stats are anywhere near as bad as you posted (34 out of 102 so 33.33%) for people not having any sorts of high vis or lights on their bike, I'll apologise and never post in one of the cyclist threads again.
If they are not, you do the same? (I'll even give you a 10% margin for error). And as a bonus, lets say the numbers are below 10%, you never mention London again.
I've no problem with discussing the idiocy of people, stupid things cyclists do, but there is no discussion with you
cb1965 said:
They’re not though are they, there’s plenty of posters in here on both sides of the fence or are you just ignoring the other ones you disagree with?
Not sure how nyone can consider that cycling without lights at night is not that dangerous but there you go and that is up to them/you if that is what you are trying to say.
No cyclist has defended riding without lights, as most point out this is just another one of your anti cycling moans. Find one post which says otherwise?Not sure how nyone can consider that cycling without lights at night is not that dangerous but there you go and that is up to them/you if that is what you are trying to say.
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
Anyway as usual the cycling bods on here have dragged this off topic and made it personal so perhaps we could get back to the topic in hand. If a few of you want to start a separate ‘cb1865 is s ****’ thread then please do!
I'll make you a deal, as you seem to think its the cyclist zeolots who have the problem.I'll record an intersection in rush hour traffic tomorrow night for a few light changes. If the stats are anywhere near as bad as you posted (34 out of 102 so 33.33%) for people not having any sorts of high vis or lights on their bike, I'll apologise and never post in one of the cyclist threads again.
If they are not, you do the same? (I'll even give you a 10% margin for error). And as a bonus, lets say the numbers are below 10%, you never mention London again.
I've no problem with discussing the idiocy of people, stupid things cyclists do, but there is no discussion with you
cb1965 said:
No chance, you’re hardly likely to be objective are you? Nice try though and anyway I would miss your rapier sharp wit and Hawking like intelligent input to the debates
You can run the count?What is unobjective about a video? You can do the count, and others can verify?
I think you actually know the figures you use are such nonsense.
So, as usual, your "debates" are nothing more than whiny trolling, now with added child stats. But keep them coming, they benefit the community massively.
J4CKO said:
Saw this and thought of this thread, two kids on a bike at 2.55 AM, one tragically killed and the other seriously injured by a drink driver, strongly suspect that they wont have had lights and possibly why the pisshead didnt see them, that and being blind drunk by the sound of it.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/great...
That’s terrible https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/great...
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
No chance, you’re hardly likely to be objective are you? Nice try though and anyway I would miss your rapier sharp wit and Hawking like intelligent input to the debates
You can run the count?What is unobjective about a video? You can do the count, and others can verify?
I think you actually know the figures you use are such nonsense.
So, as usual, your "debates" are nothing more than whiny trolling, now with added child stats. But keep them coming, they benefit the community massively.
cb1965 said:
What is unobjective is I suspect the video you upload will very surprisingly illustrate that you are right and I am wrong, the multitude of other videos you record that might well tell a different story will likely end up being left on ‘the cutting room floor’.
But we are to believe your story about your 12 year old's count? Is that because it fits your narrative?I'm confident I won't get anywhere near your numbers because that's not what I see. As a person that cycles nearly daily, yes you get the occasional idiot without lights on, but I would estimate maybe 1 in 50.
I also don't see who is saying is not dangerous. I've asked you who is, but you are strangely silent on that too.
So, the question is, is this an issue worth making a whiny post about? Create another issue out of something that's not really an issue? Are you that bored and upset about it? It's a little sad
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
What is unobjective is I suspect the video you upload will very surprisingly illustrate that you are right and I am wrong, the multitude of other videos you record that might well tell a different story will likely end up being left on ‘the cutting room floor’.
But we are to believe your story about your 12 year old's count? Is that because it fits your narrative?I'm confident I won't get anywhere near your numbers because that's not what I see. As a person that cycles nearly daily, yes you get the occasional idiot without lights on, but I would estimate maybe 1 in 50.
I also don't see who is saying is not dangerous. I've asked you who is, but you are strangely silent on that too.
So, the question is, is this an issue worth making a whiny post about? Create another issue out of something that's not really an issue? Are you that bored and upset about it? It's a little sad
There are plenty of people in this thread who trivialise the point being made ... 'nothing needs to be done' or the classic 'you can see unlit cyclists easily so it's your driving that's at fault' and other such b
ks. These people are clearly not attributing much, if any, sense of danger to being unlit at night on a bike.Even you describe it as being 'not really an issue' so you seem to be implying that unlit cyclists are not a problem. As for your 1 in 50.... lol frankly! Maybe in the countryside, but in any major city with a good number of cyclists you will see plenty without lights every night without fail as has been stated by several other cyclists here... are they all liars with an agenda too?
All that said at the end of the day it is clear to me that you (like several others here) are far more interested in 'playing the man rather than the ball' in this argument and the thread would be best served by getting back to the topic rather than trying to score points so carry on if you want to, but I'm not really interested in playing games.
Nanook said:
cb1965 said:
but I'm not really interested in playing games.
Funniest thing you've written on this thread. Everyone here knows that's all you're interested in.You don't care about cyclists. Don't pretend.
PS Also love it when the egotists like you say 'everyone here knows...' like you think your opinion is automatically that of everyone else's.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff