Another cyclist dies in London
Discussion
cb1965 said:
Yep, cyclists ride like imbeciles so I need training to deal with that.... only in your head could that make sense! How about they do like the rest of us and obey the basic rules of the road. Problem solved! Don't take my word for it, speak to any professional driver (you know the ones with compulsory additional training) who has the misfortune to drive in London... you'll get the same story, but of course they're all wrong too!
There we are with one of the basic dishonesties - "how about they obey basic rules like the rest of us."Yeah right, because we obey the rules, don't we? Starting with the most basic one of all, speed limits
Speaking very much as one of the "us", the big difference is when things go wrong they tend to hurt themselves where as we tend to hurt others. Which is the bigger sin?
Speaking very much as one of the "us" on this website, I don't want to obey speed limits because speed matters.
So now where are we?
Next: "Road tax".
heebeegeetee said:
I do feel that there is little behind the multiple and regular anti-cycling threads other than gross hypocrisy, stupidity and a large dose of dishonesty. There's precious little fact, evidence, logic or sense behind them, nor behind the rantings of you, Digby and a few others.
Talking of hypocrisy, why do you continue to propagate the stupidity and dishonesty if you dont enjoy it? Why continue with your crusade of denial when its so transparent?
nickfrog said:
Finlandia said:
Exactly, I never got my head around the insurance system there, very confusing for someone coming from a straight forward system like the one in Finland and Sweden.
The UK system is very straight forward, albeit different from yours maybe. What is the rationale behind it, because I can't work that one out. Why do you need to name drivers who are covered to drive a car that is already insured?
I like a lot about the UK, the insurance system is not on that list
heebeegeetee said:
Speaking very much as one of the "us", the big difference is when things go wrong they tend to hurt themselves where as we tend to hurt others. Which is the bigger sin?
Where does hurting themselves but placing responsibily on other road users for thier own negligence fall on your scale of sin?Mr2Mike said:
heebeegeetee said:
Speaking very much as one of the "us", the big difference is when things go wrong they tend to hurt themselves where as we tend to hurt others. Which is the bigger sin?
Where does hurting themselves but placing responsibily on other road users for thier own negligence fall on your scale of sin?Mr2Mike said:
Where does hurting themselves but placing responsibily on other road users for thier own negligence fall on your scale of sin?
Jesus! So you're saying there are hordes of cyclists out there with physic powers that are making motorists perform close passes, left hooks and all the other stupid things they do?We need to commission CB1937 to imagine it in his head to see if this dangerous new species of cyclist constitutes a threat.
cb1965 said:
heebeegeetee said:
Personally, far from being impressed by uk drivers, for a very long time now I've been of the opinion that a great many motorists can not cope with any kind of challenge at all, and I've got to tell you that the likes of yourself, Digby, Mr2mike and a (small few) others are doing very little to dissuade me of this.
I was serious about you getting extra training though - you might be much better able to deal with Londons roads if you got some help. Seriously, just a change of attitude can see problems mysteriously disappear, but you might need some help to achieve this.
Yep, cyclists ride like imbeciles so I need training to deal with that.... only in your head could that make sense! How about they do like the rest of us and obey the basic rules of the road. Problem solved! Don't take my word for it, speak to any professional driver (you know the ones with compulsory additional training) who has the misfortune to drive in London... you'll get the same story, but of course they're all wrong too!I was serious about you getting extra training though - you might be much better able to deal with Londons roads if you got some help. Seriously, just a change of attitude can see problems mysteriously disappear, but you might need some help to achieve this.
Nice to hear you’ve polled all the “professional drivers” there too. I didn’t realise Uber drivers had additional training. I’ve read that Addison Lee drivers do a short course on customer relations though. That must help a lot. Bus drivers: truly the worst group of drivers in London, yet they’ve actually had “additional training”.
And once again “they do like the rest of us”, there you go, making up imaginary support for your views. So insecure. If you think the basic rules of the road are widely observed by all London drivers, I have some magic beans you’ll definitely be interest in buying.
Finlandia said:
gazza285 said:
Finlandia said:
Why do you need to name drivers who are covered to drive a car that is already insured?
Because the risk changes.Motorists in London, often aggressive and often unobservant of the rules.
Truck Drivers in London, often aggressive and often unobservant of the rules
Bus Drivers in London, often aggressive and often unobservant of the rules
Cyclists in London, often aggressive and often unobservant of the rules
Any more to add to the list ?
Truck Drivers in London, often aggressive and often unobservant of the rules
Bus Drivers in London, often aggressive and often unobservant of the rules
Cyclists in London, often aggressive and often unobservant of the rules
Any more to add to the list ?
Mave said:
Finlandia said:
In what way does it change differently to a named driver? Knowing the name of someone won't help you know how the person drives.
You don't just add their names. You also need to answer questions about their driving history.s55shh said:
Yes it does, because there is a database of drivers who have convictions for driving badly, and if you add one of their names to your policy, the cost goes up accordingly.
Makes a little bit more sense, but makes life much more difficult and seeing as the premiums are not that much different to the ones in Sweden, I still don't see the advantage of it.Anyway, enough of this, I suppose if you are born into it, it makes more sense.
Digby said:
It's not convenience at all. That driver is a 
if that's what happened. There's no excuse. I would ban him for 6 months for being a danger and for giving other HGV drivers a bad name. Fortunately, I have yet to see an example of exactly that, although I have seen vehicles turn in front of riders. Any examples I can give, however, pale in to insignificance compared to the number of times I see riders put themselves in dangerous positions.
So no, it's not "convenience", it's just a single example you spotted on your commute compared to twenty or so bad cycling examples I saw within 20 minutes on a single junction.
Once I pulled out from where I was, within seconds a rider did as I mentioned earlier and went up the inside of a bus with such little room, it required a leg to be walked along the pavement. Nothing new.
So, I say ban the idiot in the truck and fine him, what do you suggest happens to all the cyclists?
Any suggestions at all, anyone? What do we do with such riders? How do we stop it? It's not a London only issue, of course, but it's staggering you can see so much law flouting and bad riding in such a tiny amount of time, on such a dangerous junction, on just a single street. if that's what happened. There's no excuse. I would ban him for 6 months for being a danger and for giving other HGV drivers a bad name. Fortunately, I have yet to see an example of exactly that, although I have seen vehicles turn in front of riders. Any examples I can give, however, pale in to insignificance compared to the number of times I see riders put themselves in dangerous positions.So no, it's not "convenience", it's just a single example you spotted on your commute compared to twenty or so bad cycling examples I saw within 20 minutes on a single junction.
Once I pulled out from where I was, within seconds a rider did as I mentioned earlier and went up the inside of a bus with such little room, it required a leg to be walked along the pavement. Nothing new.
So, I say ban the idiot in the truck and fine him, what do you suggest happens to all the cyclists?
cb1965 said:
heebeegeetee said:
Digby said:
It's not convenience at all. That driver is a if that's what happened. There's no excuse. I would ban him for 6 months for being a danger and for giving other HGV drivers a bad name.
Blimey, you give hgv drivers an absolutely terrible name, just by pretending to be one. if that's what happened. There's no excuse. I would ban him for 6 months for being a danger and for giving other HGV drivers a bad name. 
Digby said:
Greg66 said:
Once again, Cbeebies, the lying fantasist, has to fabricate a body of opinion to make himself feel right.
Delusionist fool.
Don't forget to pick on Heebee, too. He says he knows what we all think and often blames his postings on having been down the pub.Delusionist fool.
Finlandia said:
Makes a little bit more sense, but makes life much more difficult and seeing as the premiums are not that much different to the ones in Sweden, I still don't see the advantage of it.
Anyway, enough of this, I suppose if you are born into it, it makes more sense.
Regarding the premiums - there's a huge range in the UK depending on your personal driving history. Anyway, enough of this, I suppose if you are born into it, it makes more sense.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff