A Rant At Cyclists...

Norman_Castle

skitler wrote: »

maybe if you had to pay road tax insurance the cyclists would then all have to tow the line and ride within the law.

Whats "road tax insurance"?

skitler

custardy wrote: »

Little confused?
Perhaps you need to toe the line?

custardy wrote: »

If you insist.
Little stupid?

stupid me is confused as to how to answer such questions.:rotfl:

skitler

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Whats "road tax insurance"?

about £150 should cover it.;)

blindman

My advice to cyclists is to wear a high viz helmet.

Helps find the head after the smash with the lorry.:eek:

armyknife

Sportycus wrote: »

The fact remains it only takes one incident to ruin the rest of your life.

I could fall off my bike several times and suffer no consequences, that's not the point, one occasion in the future maybe your undoing.

It may never happen...correct, but is it really worth taking that risk?

Do you work for a condom manufacturer?

thescouselander

I wear a helmet but only because if I were to come off and I wasn't wearing one any payout might be reduced.

As for the efficacy of helmets anyone who thinks they provide any significant protection is kidding themselves. They might prevent cuts and bumps but they won't protect against the much more dangerous concussive injuries. Arguably effort is best put into other safety measures such as lights, bright clothing and a bell.

esuhl

skitler wrote: »

maybe if you had to pay road tax insurance the cyclists would then all have to tow the line and ride within the law.

Hmmm... And maybe if we taxed people to enter shops, the shoplifters would all have to "tow" the line and not break the law. :rotfl:

We could tax people on their income to prevent anyone breaking the law at work! And tax car owners to stop them breaking the speed limit, drink-driving and driving dangerously around cyclists!

Meanwhile, back in reality...

Johnmcl7

I'm under no delusions that the helmet provides significant protection but it's comfortable enough that I don't notice it's there and it's still much better protection than wearing nothing, I've a couple of friends who had hard enough impacts to smash their helmets apart and they didn't even have a headache, I use a MIPS equipped helmet which should offer slightly more protection but hopefully not something I'll be testing any time soon.

From a non-safety point of view it's very handy for mounting a light or camera, I can't say it particularly bothers me if other people are wearing helmets or not as it's up to them.

John

skitler

esuhl wrote: »

Hmmm... And maybe if we taxed people to enter shops, the shoplifters would all have to "tow" the line and not break the law. :rotfl:

We could tax people on their income to prevent anyone breaking the law at work! And tax car owners to stop them breaking the speed limit, drink-driving and driving dangerously around cyclists!

Meanwhile, back in reality...

its always someone else's fault, not me me me.


you could always try a more plyable bike, so it doesn't damage our cars to much when you get in our way, now that's reality.

thescouselander

This rant should be aimed at pedestrians anyway. I've never seen a pedestrian wearing a helmet yet they stand to benefit the most as a helmet would protect them against the low speed collisions they are likely to be involved in.

Also the arguments for wearing a helmet apply to pedestrians as much as they do cyclists. They aren't noticeable when wearing one so why wouldn't you etc etc..