Road legal bikes banned from certain roads due to noise
Discussion
BobSaunders said:
The temporary ban was introduced due to 70% of traffic being motorcycles - 3,300 motorcycles in one given day on one road, that basically looks like a mix of a UK A/B road based on the photos.. That's a lot.
Yeah I was ready for some righteous indignation as someone with a bike but f
k that. I'm lucky to live in a pretty scenic part of the world which is popular with bikers. On a warm sunday in the summer we probably get 100 in a day going past which is fine. But 3300 in a day is about 1 every 15 seconds (presumably most are during daylight hours.) That would be like like living beside the Nurburgring. Not sure what other option they have in this case other than to close the roads to non-local traffic which would obviously be worse. black-k1 said:
This is yet another step in a very worrying trend. There is an ever increasing gradual creep of legislation making it more and more difficult to ride an otherwise legal motorcycle. Those that don't think it affects them are, at best, short sighted and naive. If it "works" how long do you think it'll be until it's applied to the Highlands (no more NC500) or the Dales, or North Wales etc.
As a group we must carry a lot of the blame for this. The selfish bds who ride with baffles out or loud pipes are responsible for this. Joe Public does not want to hear your bike yet is being forced to endure it. Joe Public does not know the difference, and couldn't care less about the difference, between a modified exhaust and a standard one so will opt for the easy answer of ban the lot.
Forget the totally unproven cobblers that says "loud pipes save lives" and remember that load pipes will kill motorcycling!
I sort of agree with this.As a group we must carry a lot of the blame for this. The selfish b
ds who ride with baffles out or loud pipes are responsible for this. Joe Public does not want to hear your bike yet is being forced to endure it. Joe Public does not know the difference, and couldn't care less about the difference, between a modified exhaust and a standard one so will opt for the easy answer of ban the lot.Forget the totally unproven cobblers that says "loud pipes save lives" and remember that load pipes will kill motorcycling!
I don't have an issue with loud pipes as long as they aren't "too loud" - everything within reason.
I don't agree with a blanket ban especially when many motorcycles have passed EU legislation at a louder volume.
Sound restriction in and of itself doesn't necessarily show how loud something is as I had a SV650s with a baffle out system and I had it tested out of interested and it was around 98db but then I had a Z750 with a cheap Ebay can which tested lower but was notably more "annoying" in terms of pitch, tone and how "far" the sound seemed to travel.
I notice the bill was passed on a minority as well, which I deeply disapprove of.
I agree that motorcycling is getting harder and harder as it's clamped down on more and more, with vehicle restrictions and licensing changes - I suspect they are trying to legislate it out of feasibility for most people and I suspect the aim is within the next 10 years there will be next to no freshly licensed motorcyclists.
Is the end goal to be able to live within <100m of a main road but somehow not hear vehicles passing by? I don't really get it myself.
I occasionally have some people who live local to me who have loud exhausts which I hear late at night but they don't wake me up if I'm asleep and I only need to hear them for a few seconds.
Not sure I would agree with BANNING ALL CARS over a given DB , I would be more in agreement with banning motorcycles that have a louder exhaust than a factory one but even then I don't really agree with outright bans.
Steve Bass said:
Pothole said:
Steve Bass said:
Apologies, I'm not aware of the 'ace Cafe" situation tbh..
My point is simply that the law is clear and to begin introducing supplemental requirments or conditions that are discriminatory is unacceptable.
The slippery slope is in reference to what some people determine to be to their disliking and driving discriminatory acts or regulations that are in potential violation of the law.
Regardless of our opinions, the law establishes the contract by which we live and are governed. it establishes basic rights and obligations and I would worry that the inhabitants of a particular location would be able to implement discriminatory regulations that are a clear contravention of the law and based on their particular "special interests"
I'll make reference to the comment on the other thread where the residents were 'absoultly convinced" that bikes were travelling 130+.. Only upon the Police showing them were they made aware of their error and predujice.
it sets a angerous precedent is all.
Except that it doesn't appear to have done in a similar situation in England. My point is simply that the law is clear and to begin introducing supplemental requirments or conditions that are discriminatory is unacceptable.
The slippery slope is in reference to what some people determine to be to their disliking and driving discriminatory acts or regulations that are in potential violation of the law.
Regardless of our opinions, the law establishes the contract by which we live and are governed. it establishes basic rights and obligations and I would worry that the inhabitants of a particular location would be able to implement discriminatory regulations that are a clear contravention of the law and based on their particular "special interests"
I'll make reference to the comment on the other thread where the residents were 'absoultly convinced" that bikes were travelling 130+.. Only upon the Police showing them were they made aware of their error and predujice.
it sets a angerous precedent is all.
Your focus is on location. Understandably so.
My focus is on the application of the law irrespective.
Just different perspectives of the important issue
I am less bothered because it's not UK
I am EVEN LESS bothered because a similar scheme actually IN ENGLAND has not yet proved to be either a slippery slope or a dangerous precedent.
Why are you bothered?
Harry H said:
The days of roads being used for leisure are dying.
The people in power see the use of them only as a means for workers to be productive. In reality they'd like us all on public transport, on a push bike or walking.
Ever decreasing speed limits, regulations, fines are growing year by year. Parking is being reduced where ever possible. Taxes are increasing. All in the name of safety and the environment. "How dare the workers use our transport system for fun, it's not there for that. It's there to move people about to ensure the economy keeps growing" Yes leisure is part of the economy but that needs to be ever tighter regulated. "How dare people go to the beach when they've been told to stay in their boxes" Unless they're worried about their eyesight :-)
Most motorcycles are seen as leisure vehicles hence the targeting. They are non productive. Any car other than something with the same functionality of a fridge will go the same way.
It's over guys, not quite yet for us but for our children, wake up and smell the coffee.
P.S Not a fan of loud pipes either and those that use them are just accelerating the death of biking.
This pretty much nails it.The people in power see the use of them only as a means for workers to be productive. In reality they'd like us all on public transport, on a push bike or walking.
Ever decreasing speed limits, regulations, fines are growing year by year. Parking is being reduced where ever possible. Taxes are increasing. All in the name of safety and the environment. "How dare the workers use our transport system for fun, it's not there for that. It's there to move people about to ensure the economy keeps growing" Yes leisure is part of the economy but that needs to be ever tighter regulated. "How dare people go to the beach when they've been told to stay in their boxes" Unless they're worried about their eyesight :-)
Most motorcycles are seen as leisure vehicles hence the targeting. They are non productive. Any car other than something with the same functionality of a fridge will go the same way.
It's over guys, not quite yet for us but for our children, wake up and smell the coffee.
P.S Not a fan of loud pipes either and those that use them are just accelerating the death of biking.
The direction of travel is plain to see for most, presumably apart from knuckle dragging retards running Racefit Growlers & shorty Austin cans.
Race bikes needs a race track in this day & age.
Pothole said:
PushedDover said:
Surely the simple solution is to have a Motorbike that does not sound off (and make you obnoxious to the 95% at the same time)
Or not live in Austria.is it not clear that the larger view is that Bikes are noisy - and thats from a Car / Bike forum !?!?
Carry on scoffing at Austrian draconian rules, with obnoxious bikes here - guess what will happen?
PushedDover said:
And ignore the warnings? More fool the UK riders that do.
is it not clear that the larger view is that Bikes are noisy - and thats from a Car / Bike forum !?!?
Carry on scoffing at Austrian draconian rules, with obnoxious bikes here - guess what will happen?
Except that we have a similar situation in place in North West London (as I explained with picture yesterday) and have had since 2013. As of yet, it hasn't proven to be either a dangerous precedent, the thin end of any wedge, or a dangerous precedent. This despite and aging population...so I'm guessing it won't happen, at least in the near future.is it not clear that the larger view is that Bikes are noisy - and thats from a Car / Bike forum !?!?
Carry on scoffing at Austrian draconian rules, with obnoxious bikes here - guess what will happen?
Pothole said:
Steve Bass said:
Apologies, I'm not aware of the 'ace Cafe" situation tbh..
My point is simply that the law is clear and to begin introducing supplemental requirments or conditions that are discriminatory is unacceptable.
The slippery slope is in reference to what some people determine to be to their disliking and driving discriminatory acts or regulations that are in potential violation of the law.
Regardless of our opinions, the law establishes the contract by which we live and are governed. it establishes basic rights and obligations and I would worry that the inhabitants of a particular location would be able to implement discriminatory regulations that are a clear contravention of the law and based on their particular "special interests"
I'll make reference to the comment on the other thread where the residents were 'absoultly convinced" that bikes were travelling 130+.. Only upon the Police showing them were they made aware of their error and predujice.
it sets a angerous precedent is all.
Except that it doesn't appear to have done in a similar situation in England. My point is simply that the law is clear and to begin introducing supplemental requirments or conditions that are discriminatory is unacceptable.
The slippery slope is in reference to what some people determine to be to their disliking and driving discriminatory acts or regulations that are in potential violation of the law.
Regardless of our opinions, the law establishes the contract by which we live and are governed. it establishes basic rights and obligations and I would worry that the inhabitants of a particular location would be able to implement discriminatory regulations that are a clear contravention of the law and based on their particular "special interests"
I'll make reference to the comment on the other thread where the residents were 'absoultly convinced" that bikes were travelling 130+.. Only upon the Police showing them were they made aware of their error and predujice.
it sets a angerous precedent is all.
However, I, like many, enjoy touring Europe on my bike and thus am likely to get direct experience of these restrictions so I feel that, even though it's Austria, they will likely effect me.
Likewise, I'm also aware that various changes in Europe (mandatory ABS, Euro 4 etc.) have applied to the UK. Yes, I know we were (and still are) part of the EU in relation to those but I'm also aware that the post BREXIT situation is not likely to be significantly different of only because it makes things "easier" for all concerned. If it's shown to work in one area then there is a real likelihood it'll be adopted in another. This suggests to me that if the pilot in Austria is shown "to work" (happy little Austrians not bugged by nasty, noisy motorbikes) then it is likely that people in certain places in the UK will also want a piece of that.
The BIG difference between the UK example you gave and the Austrian pilot is that the UK one was an attempt to ban ALL bikes. Banning ALL of anything is always a risky strategy as has been shown many times before. In Austria they're only banning the the "noisy" ones which allows everyone to say "we're not restricting anyone's freedoms, just get a quieter bike". The fact that the bikes have been tested and "certified" as road legal appears to be irrelevant.
Edited by black-k1 on Thursday 4th June 15:01
black-k1 said:
I am really pleased for you that you don't see the changes in Austria as a possible precursor to similar changes in the UK. If you are right and It has no impact here then I'm more than happy to have been wrong and will continue to enjoy riding my bike.
However, I, like many, enjoy touring Europe on my bike and thus am likely to get direct experience of these restrictions so I feel that, even though it's Austria, they will likely effect me.
Likewise, I'm also aware that various changes in Europe (mandatory ABS, Euro 4 etc.) have applied to the UK. Yes, I know we were (and still are) part of the EU in relation to those but I'm also aware that the post BREXIT situation is not likely to be significantly different of only because it makes things "easier" for all concerned. If it's shown to work in one area then there is a real likelihood it'll be adopted in another. This suggests to me that if the pilot in Austria is shown "to work" (happy little Austrians not bugged by nasty, noisy motorbikes) then it is likely that people in certain places in the UK will also want a piece of that.
The BIG difference you gave an the Austrian pilot is that the UK one was an attempt to ban ALL bikes. Banning ALL of anything is always a risky strategy as has been shown many times before. In Austria they're only banning the the "noisy" ones which allows everyone to say "we're not restricting anyone's freedoms, just get a quieter bike". The fact that the bikes have been tested and "certified" as road legal appears to be irrelevant.
it wasn't an attempt. It was, and still is, a ban.However, I, like many, enjoy touring Europe on my bike and thus am likely to get direct experience of these restrictions so I feel that, even though it's Austria, they will likely effect me.
Likewise, I'm also aware that various changes in Europe (mandatory ABS, Euro 4 etc.) have applied to the UK. Yes, I know we were (and still are) part of the EU in relation to those but I'm also aware that the post BREXIT situation is not likely to be significantly different of only because it makes things "easier" for all concerned. If it's shown to work in one area then there is a real likelihood it'll be adopted in another. This suggests to me that if the pilot in Austria is shown "to work" (happy little Austrians not bugged by nasty, noisy motorbikes) then it is likely that people in certain places in the UK will also want a piece of that.
The BIG difference you gave an the Austrian pilot is that the UK one was an attempt to ban ALL bikes. Banning ALL of anything is always a risky strategy as has been shown many times before. In Austria they're only banning the the "noisy" ones which allows everyone to say "we're not restricting anyone's freedoms, just get a quieter bike". The fact that the bikes have been tested and "certified" as road legal appears to be irrelevant.
ETA: link to street view showing the signage - street view photo from 2019
Edited by Pothole on Thursday 4th June 15:06
Noise testing as part of the UK MOT scheme will not be introduced any time soon, it will remain at the testers discretion whether 'the noise output is not clearly unreasonably above the level expected from a similar motorcycle with a standard silencer in average condition'.
The DVSA are strictly enforcing this, or at least trying to.
The DfT and DVSA have been pushing to introduce noise measuring into the MOT for some years, bringing it inline with the IVA test for imports, kit cars etc.
The main problem is the cost involved would be substantial in equipment, training and regular periodic calibration, all paid for by the individual testing stations on top of the already significant costs involving roller brake and decelerometer brake testing equipment, headlamp beam testing equipment and most importantly emissions/smoke testing equipment (not for bikes yet).
The maximum cost of a motorcycle MOT is £29.65, it may take half an hour, once all expenses are taken into consideration there isn't much profit left, the government hasn't increased the price for many years even though the costs involved have risen dramatically.
The new recently introduced regulations involving all the above mentioned testing equipment having to be connected online to the DVSA giving live data and the soon to be introduction of ANPR cameras in every MOT station (all paid for by the individual station) to stop fraudulent testing will have a further dramatic affect on running costs.
I believe we will eventually adopt an MOT system similar to Spains ITV, that's what the government are aiming for and they know that by making it uneconomical the days of the small town and country MOT stations are numbered. They have driven another convenient nail in the coffin with the 6 months extension, what effect did they think that would have on the industry?
That was a long winded way of trying to explain why metered noise testing won't be part of the MOT anytime soon!
There's no money in it anyway for the government, but have you heard (pun intended) about the roadside noise meters?
The DVSA are strictly enforcing this, or at least trying to.
The DfT and DVSA have been pushing to introduce noise measuring into the MOT for some years, bringing it inline with the IVA test for imports, kit cars etc.
The main problem is the cost involved would be substantial in equipment, training and regular periodic calibration, all paid for by the individual testing stations on top of the already significant costs involving roller brake and decelerometer brake testing equipment, headlamp beam testing equipment and most importantly emissions/smoke testing equipment (not for bikes yet).
The maximum cost of a motorcycle MOT is £29.65, it may take half an hour, once all expenses are taken into consideration there isn't much profit left, the government hasn't increased the price for many years even though the costs involved have risen dramatically.
The new recently introduced regulations involving all the above mentioned testing equipment having to be connected online to the DVSA giving live data and the soon to be introduction of ANPR cameras in every MOT station (all paid for by the individual station) to stop fraudulent testing will have a further dramatic affect on running costs.
I believe we will eventually adopt an MOT system similar to Spains ITV, that's what the government are aiming for and they know that by making it uneconomical the days of the small town and country MOT stations are numbered. They have driven another convenient nail in the coffin with the 6 months extension, what effect did they think that would have on the industry?
That was a long winded way of trying to explain why metered noise testing won't be part of the MOT anytime soon!
There's no money in it anyway for the government, but have you heard (pun intended) about the roadside noise meters?
Pothole said:
Hmmm. Not really. You're happy to argue that EU law trumps Austrian law therefore what this council have done appears illegal to you (it seems). You also keep repeating your slippery slope mantra, apparently implying that it doesn't matter that this is a small area in a small country, because it's set a "dangerous precedent" which we should ALL be bothered about.
I am less bothered because it's not UK
I am EVEN LESS bothered because a similar scheme actually IN ENGLAND has not yet proved to be either a slippery slope or a dangerous precedent.
Why are you bothered?
Thjats the point I thionk you're missing.I am less bothered because it's not UK
I am EVEN LESS bothered because a similar scheme actually IN ENGLAND has not yet proved to be either a slippery slope or a dangerous precedent.
Why are you bothered?
I'm not bothered, at least I suspect not in the way you perceive.
And in relation to the legalities, I'm only raising concerns becuase it sets precedents that may lead to future wider ranging issues.
Part of my job requires I deal with construction legal matters and this may or may not have relevance in the future.
And from a legal standpoint, I find it an interesting issue insofar as the laws of a land seem to be overridden by acts that on the surface imply an element of discrimination.
And as the laws of construction are largely based on civil and national Laws, there's a direct correlation whereby the rights and obligations of a Contractor may be affected by such egregious decisions.
Context is King
XR said:
Noise testing as part of the UK MOT scheme will not be introduced any time soon, it will remain at the testers discretion whether 'the noise output is not clearly unreasonably above the level expected from a similar motorcycle with a standard silencer in average condition'.
The DVSA are strictly enforcing this, or at least trying to.
The DfT and DVSA have been pushing to introduce noise measuring into the MOT for some years, bringing it inline with the IVA test for imports, kit cars etc.
The main problem is the cost involved would be substantial in equipment, training and regular periodic calibration, all paid for by the individual testing stations on top of the already significant costs involving roller brake and decelerometer brake testing equipment, headlamp beam testing equipment and most importantly emissions/smoke testing equipment (not for bikes yet).
The maximum cost of a motorcycle MOT is £29.65, it may take half an hour, once all expenses are taken into consideration there isn't much profit left, the government hasn't increased the price for many years even though the costs involved have risen dramatically.
The new recently introduced regulations involving all the above mentioned testing equipment having to be connected online to the DVSA giving live data and the soon to be introduction of ANPR cameras in every MOT station (all paid for by the individual station) to stop fraudulent testing will have a further dramatic affect on running costs.
I believe we will eventually adopt an MOT system similar to Spains ITV, that's what the government are aiming for and they know that by making it uneconomical the days of the small town and country MOT stations are numbered. They have driven another convenient nail in the coffin with the 6 months extension, what effect did they think that would have on the industry?
That was a long winded way of trying to explain why metered noise testing won't be part of the MOT anytime soon!
There's no money in it anyway for the government, but have you heard (pun intended) about the roadside noise meters?
By the time they bring it in my near silent electric bike will do 0-300 mph in about 5 seconds and legislation will be needed to force it to make a noise so stupid sheeple can hear it and don't have to look up from their screens to save their own lives!The DVSA are strictly enforcing this, or at least trying to.
The DfT and DVSA have been pushing to introduce noise measuring into the MOT for some years, bringing it inline with the IVA test for imports, kit cars etc.
The main problem is the cost involved would be substantial in equipment, training and regular periodic calibration, all paid for by the individual testing stations on top of the already significant costs involving roller brake and decelerometer brake testing equipment, headlamp beam testing equipment and most importantly emissions/smoke testing equipment (not for bikes yet).
The maximum cost of a motorcycle MOT is £29.65, it may take half an hour, once all expenses are taken into consideration there isn't much profit left, the government hasn't increased the price for many years even though the costs involved have risen dramatically.
The new recently introduced regulations involving all the above mentioned testing equipment having to be connected online to the DVSA giving live data and the soon to be introduction of ANPR cameras in every MOT station (all paid for by the individual station) to stop fraudulent testing will have a further dramatic affect on running costs.
I believe we will eventually adopt an MOT system similar to Spains ITV, that's what the government are aiming for and they know that by making it uneconomical the days of the small town and country MOT stations are numbered. They have driven another convenient nail in the coffin with the 6 months extension, what effect did they think that would have on the industry?
That was a long winded way of trying to explain why metered noise testing won't be part of the MOT anytime soon!
There's no money in it anyway for the government, but have you heard (pun intended) about the roadside noise meters?
SpeckledJim said:
I live on a rural road that leads from a part of England where lots of people live, to a part of Wales where nobody lives. At the weekend I reckon 98% of the loudest vehicles to pass my house will be bikes. And 98% of the vehicles doing over double the speed limit will also be bikes.
I reckon I'm probably in the 5% locally who don't really mind it. Just about everyone else hates it. Many of them would just ban them all.
A large proportion of bikers (of whom I used to be one, and hope to be again) don't help themselves or the rest of you. I like noisy engines, but I'd support a crack-down on the louder bikes. They're selfish and obnoxious and impose disproportionately on other people.
Our little village, if you asked them, wouldn't tell you we have an Aventador problem. Or a Golf R problem. They would say we have a motorbike problem. Because they're too loud, and ridden too quickly. And these are crotchety Tory grannies and grandads who all use their vote.
Sad, but there it is.
I live on the A272 in West Sussex - the past two or three weeks have seen hundreds of bikes a day at weekends and sunny weekdays - the noise at times is overwhelming. There is a significant minority who seem to deliberately make as much noise as possible through the town, including bouncing off the rev limiter if the fancy takes them. There is speeding through the town which combined with the full bore acceleration from a couple of hundred yards before the NSL really pisses off the locals. It would also seem that, particularly for the larger groups, the light controlled crossings are advisory if they prevent the whole group riding through them. These locals are not all crotchety Tory grannies and grandads who all use their vote. The cry for action is coming from across society in our local area and, judging from news reports, for a considerable area around us. I've no idea what form any action might take but for any group of people to seemingly get such a wide range of locals, both in age and political persuasion, united is quite an achievement - and not a good one.I reckon I'm probably in the 5% locally who don't really mind it. Just about everyone else hates it. Many of them would just ban them all.
A large proportion of bikers (of whom I used to be one, and hope to be again) don't help themselves or the rest of you. I like noisy engines, but I'd support a crack-down on the louder bikes. They're selfish and obnoxious and impose disproportionately on other people.
Our little village, if you asked them, wouldn't tell you we have an Aventador problem. Or a Golf R problem. They would say we have a motorbike problem. Because they're too loud, and ridden too quickly. And these are crotchety Tory grannies and grandads who all use their vote.
Sad, but there it is.
Travs said:
I live on the A272 in West Sussex....... united is quite an achievement - and not a good one.
https://www.chichester.co.uk/lifestyle/travel/mps-...Pothole said:
black-k1 said:
I am really pleased for you that you don't see the changes in Austria as a possible precursor to similar changes in the UK. If you are right and It has no impact here then I'm more than happy to have been wrong and will continue to enjoy riding my bike.
However, I, like many, enjoy touring Europe on my bike and thus am likely to get direct experience of these restrictions so I feel that, even though it's Austria, they will likely effect me.
Likewise, I'm also aware that various changes in Europe (mandatory ABS, Euro 4 etc.) have applied to the UK. Yes, I know we were (and still are) part of the EU in relation to those but I'm also aware that the post BREXIT situation is not likely to be significantly different of only because it makes things "easier" for all concerned. If it's shown to work in one area then there is a real likelihood it'll be adopted in another. This suggests to me that if the pilot in Austria is shown "to work" (happy little Austrians not bugged by nasty, noisy motorbikes) then it is likely that people in certain places in the UK will also want a piece of that.
The BIG difference you gave an the Austrian pilot is that the UK one was an attempt to ban ALL bikes. Banning ALL of anything is always a risky strategy as has been shown many times before. In Austria they're only banning the the "noisy" ones which allows everyone to say "we're not restricting anyone's freedoms, just get a quieter bike". The fact that the bikes have been tested and "certified" as road legal appears to be irrelevant.
it wasn't an attempt. It was, and still is, a ban.However, I, like many, enjoy touring Europe on my bike and thus am likely to get direct experience of these restrictions so I feel that, even though it's Austria, they will likely effect me.
Likewise, I'm also aware that various changes in Europe (mandatory ABS, Euro 4 etc.) have applied to the UK. Yes, I know we were (and still are) part of the EU in relation to those but I'm also aware that the post BREXIT situation is not likely to be significantly different of only because it makes things "easier" for all concerned. If it's shown to work in one area then there is a real likelihood it'll be adopted in another. This suggests to me that if the pilot in Austria is shown "to work" (happy little Austrians not bugged by nasty, noisy motorbikes) then it is likely that people in certain places in the UK will also want a piece of that.
The BIG difference you gave an the Austrian pilot is that the UK one was an attempt to ban ALL bikes. Banning ALL of anything is always a risky strategy as has been shown many times before. In Austria they're only banning the the "noisy" ones which allows everyone to say "we're not restricting anyone's freedoms, just get a quieter bike". The fact that the bikes have been tested and "certified" as road legal appears to be irrelevant.
ETA: link to street view showing the signage - street view photo from 2019
Edited by Pothole on Thursday 4th June 15:06
black-k1 said:
The approach of ignore the law and hope it's not enforced really doesn't work for me and is fraught with risks.
You've lost me. The doom and gloomers are trying to make out that this situation in Austria is something I need to worry about because it's the thin end of a wedge which will drive its way to the UK imminently. My argument is that we have had a similar scheme in place right here in England since 2013 and it does not appear to have been precipitous. I know of no other schemes which have sprung up banning bikes from other roads in England. If the ban in North West London has not, apparently, so far, "set a dangerous precedent" why should I be expected to believe a ban in a totally different country from which, as far as I know, we haven't taken a lead on any other aspect of legislation, road-related or otherwise, will be such a slippery slope?Yet,
I’d offer that most, if they knew bans were feasible, Would motivate and reach for them with the nuisance loud bikes make.
Bikes are cool and should be enjoyed- there is no reason to pollute the air with their exacerbating noise unnecessarily.
If the riders or owners insist on the noise - kick them out of the villages and countryside. Let them ‘enjoy’ the noise on the m’ways.
I’d offer that most, if they knew bans were feasible, Would motivate and reach for them with the nuisance loud bikes make.
Bikes are cool and should be enjoyed- there is no reason to pollute the air with their exacerbating noise unnecessarily.
If the riders or owners insist on the noise - kick them out of the villages and countryside. Let them ‘enjoy’ the noise on the m’ways.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff