Illegal parking in cycle lanes - name and shame

Harry_Flashman

gadgetmind wrote: »

Hopefully for the final time ...

I did say cyclists wouldn't agree.

Never mind, it really doesn't matter. We can both go about our business confident we are right and we don't need to ever meet in the middle.

The only thing that should really concern you is how much more damaging my 'rightness' might be to you than your 'rightness' to me.

Marco_Panettone

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Hopefully for the final time.

No-one is claiming that road tax is used to build or maintain roads.

Similarly, I hope no-one is stupid enough to claim that the amount of road tax paid is directly affected by the amount of pollution a vehicle supposedly creates (I drive a big 4x4 that, because of anomalies in the road tax system, actually costs far less to tax than the far smaller and cleaner car I had before).

My point is simply this. In order to legally put my vehicle on the road, I have to have passed a government exam, I have to pay a tax first (and display an ugly governmental sign that says I have done so) and I have to have paid for extortionately expensive insurance. If I have two vehicles, I have to pay these amounts twice, etc, etc. A cyclist neither has to pass an exam nor has to pay these charges for their machine.

Therefore, to my mind, a paying road user has far more right to be there than a non-paying road user and the non-paying road user should be the one to wait, get out of the way, or whatever else in order to keep themselves safe while those who pay their way have as smooth and unimpeded a journey as possible.

I realise that cyclists will not agree with this (I suppose I wouldn't if I was getting use of the road for free), but this is my view.

And, Gadgetmind, I recognise many of the roads on your videos (in which you're so fond of giving advice to those who have passed a driving test), if we haven't already crossed swords, it may well be that we do in the future - only I won't be prepared to listen to your sanctimonious drivel so don't bother blowing your puny horn or telling me to stop.

Have you contacted your MP about this idea Harry? For you to be correct it requires a change in the law. I wish you luck in your endeavours...

Harry_Flashman

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

Have you contacted your MP about this idea Harry? For you to be correct it requires a change in the law. I wish you luck in your endeavours...

I fear not old chap, I have little faith in politicians.

Anyhow, the importance of the law is directly proportional to the chances of getting caught breaking it

gadgetmind

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

I did say cyclists wouldn't agree.

The vast majority of people don't agree with you.

BTW, as I drive about 4x the distance that I cycle, doesn't that make me primarily a motorist?

gadgetmind

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

The only thing that should really concern you is how much more damaging my 'rightness' might be to you than your 'rightness' to me.

That our road are currently less safe for those on two wheels than for those on four (or more) is beyond doubt. However, while the majority of people are trying hard to be part of the solution, you seem to be almost proud to be the core of the problem.

Naf

I have always been a firm believer that priority on he roads should be as follows:
1. Pedestrians (as in crossings, not walking along the road)
2. Cyclists
3. Busses
4. Goods Vehicles
5. Taxis
6. Car sharing/pooling
7. Other vehicles

Basically in an effort to encourage people to think about the transportation they use.

I have recently(ish) moved from Carlisle to York. In Carlisle cyclists are viewed as out of place on the road, motorists ignore them, are extremely inconsiderate and truth be told the roads are extremely poorly laid out for cyclists. I'm no rookie, but a number of times I nearly got knocked down while using the road layout in the only permissible way a cyclist could. Motorists just didn't understand the way I needed to use the road, and couldn't be bothered to take proper care.
Here in York it's much better: motorists are well accustomed to cyclists sharing the roads, the roads are laid out taking cyclists into consideration properly.

At the same time, many cyclists don't do themselves or the rest of us any favours: jumping red lights and such.

One thing that really gets me in some places is the attitude of motorists, and worse when it's the road designers prejudice, that cyclists can just get off and push and that's no problem. To me that's little different to suggesting that a motorist should get out and push just because they get to a level crossing.

Strider590

gadgetmind wrote: »

That our road are currently less safe for those on two wheels than for those on four (or more) is beyond doubt. However, while the majority of people are trying hard to be part of the solution, you seem to be almost proud to be the core of the problem.

The core of the problem is not one man, the core of the problem is word of mouth and idle gossip.
Drivers assume that "road tax" gives them ownership of the roads, it's only called "road tax" because people continue to ignorantly use that term and it's being passed on and on down the generations. Harry (like many others) is merely a victim of that fact.

Education is required, it should be a theory question on the UK driving test. But unfortunately the govt won't allow/do this, because if people knew what VED was really about they'd go nuts over it.
"WHY SHOULD WE PAY IF IT DOESN'T FUND THE ROADS!?!?!?!?"

As far as the authorities are concerned it's far better to let them think it pays for the roads, most people are too simple to comprehend the truth......

Harry_Flashman

Strider590 wrote: »

Drivers assume that "road tax" gives them ownership of the roads, it's only called "road tax" because people continue to ignorantly use that term and it's being passed on and on down the generations. Harry (like many others) is merely a victim of that fact.

The fact remains, it's a tax that some of us have to pay to use the road. Or do you deny that as well?

gadgetmind

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

The fact remains, it's a tax that some of us have to pay to use the road.

It's duty all of us have to pay if we want to operate a motor vehicle on the roads that emits more than 99g/km of CO2. How much we all have to pay depends on how much CO2 we choose to emit.

Harry_Flashman

gadgetmind wrote: »

It's duty all of us have to pay if we want to operate a motor vehicle on the roads that emits more than 99g/km of CO2. How much we all have to pay depends on how much CO2 we choose to emit.

Not quite. The CO2 we emit depends heavily on the miles driven - road tax takes no account of this.

I drive a large 4x4 which is actually far cheaper to tax than my smaller and cleaner previous car.

It is a tax to use the road - it doesn't matter how you dress it up.