We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Suicidal Cyclist
Comments
-
peter_the_piper wrote: »Nice theory but only motorists get done for having an untaxed vehicle on the highway.
Irrelevant, motorists will be done for not wearing a seatbelt or having bald tyres, neither of which apply to cycles.
The government requires a car to have VED, they set the fines for not having it, however, VED is calculated based on how much your car pollutes, as a cyclist would sit in the lowest band and pay £0, it is a waste of money to register them to charge them £0 for the disc. Hybrids, electric and many small engined cars fit into this band and pay £0 VED yet no-one complains about them using the road.
Road repairs come out of council tax, road building (Highways Agency department) comes from general taxation. A car driver pays nothing that is directly used to fund any part of the road building/maintenance process.Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0 -
A car driver pays nothing that is directly used to fund any part of the road building/maintenance process.
That is of course absolutely true - but there are many who will take a lot of persuading of it.
It's ingrained into the brain of many blinkered motorists that only those with engines pay for our roads and other users are barely tolerated - if at all.0 -
peter_the_piper wrote: »Nice theory but only motorists get done for having an untaxed vehicle on the highway.
57,000 Zero rated Band A cars don't pay anything.
ex-soldiers in receipt of war pensioners’ mobility supplement, are exempt from VED, and there are at least 18,340 individuals who have a VED-waiving WPA442 form. Disabled drivers are also exempt from VED. in 2007, 1.12 million Vehicle Excise Duty exemptions were granted to disabled people.
http://ipayroadtax.com/bloody-tax-dodgers/bloody-tax-dodgers-theres-millions-of-em/0 -
Its not a theory. Its a fact. Vehicles are taxed because the government chooses to tax them. Paying vehicle taxes entitles you to nothing other than avoiding tax evasion penalties.peter_the_piper wrote: »Nice theory but only motorists get done for having an untaxed vehicle on the highway.
Educate yourself. http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...82001339,d.d240 -
Ultimately, people are entitled to do what they choose within the law.So whats your point? That you only ever do things to aid safety if you are forced, not when its optional?
The highway code has developed over years of research and access to statistics like accidents etc etc etc. You can ride (or drive) within the specific letter of the law, but still be deemed reckless or not paying due care and attention if your actions are deemed to have caused an accident.
Olias
It's my personal choice to wear generally bright clothing plus illumination when cycling - at all hours of the day. Other cyclists would disagree with me, arguing that I am giving in to pressure to make myself ultra visible, in so doing taking responsibility away from the motorist, who should be looking properly for hazards, rather than waiting for a red flashing light to spark their otherwise dormant hazard recognition mechanisms.
I largely agree with that sentiment, there is a gradual creep towards ultra visibility, with daytime running lights on cars, super powerful leds for bikes and yellow everything which in turn causes anything less than day-glo to be criticised as less visible.
However, I also want not only to keep myself safer than others, I want to be able to offer no semblance of an excuse to anyone to collide with me - which is why I wear colours and flashing leds.Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.0 -
However, I also want not only to keep myself safer than others, I want to be able to offer no semblance of an excuse to anyone to collide with me - which is why I wear colours and flashing leds.
Except that anything different to the norm will often spark instant self-righteousness in a number of drivers, they'll try to "teach you a lesson" and if they hit you, probably get away with it by saying they were dazzled by all the lights and retro-reflective gear.
http://cars.aol.co.uk/2013/04/03/government-promises-action-on-dazzling-bicycle-lights/
Basically, until attitudes change, it's just no-win for the cyclist.“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”
<><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/0 -
Insulting, patronising and completely wrong, all in 7 words. :TJustinR1979 wrote: »This thread reminds me of that video on top gear about being righteous.
Doesn't stop you getting hurt.
Make yourselves visible - or work harder and buy a car.
Many if not most cyclists also own a car but choose to cycle.
Some bikes are worth more than some cars.
A cyclist can be an idle layabout or a hard worker, a pauper or a millionaire, a dunce or a genius. You can't usually tell from inside the cocoon of a metal box.0 -
Strider590 wrote: »Basically, until attitudes change, it's just no-win for the cyclist.
I cycle for pleasure
I cycle for leisure
I cycle for social interaction
I cycle to satisfy my competitive instincts
I cycle to keep fit
I cycle to keep slim
I cycle to enjoy the battle of wits against the cold, rain and wind
I cycle to enjoy a contemplative two or three hours on my own
I cycle to encourage my family to do the same
I cycle to enjoy the beauty of the area in which I live
I cycle to hear the sounds of nature above the near silence of the bike.
I cycle to gain the buzz from hard exercise
I cycle to take on personal challenges
I cycle to commute
I cycle because I like wearing lycra :cool:
In amongst all that pleasure and positivity are some motorists who haven't properly learned how to behave around cyclists in the way they should.
That is the only negative, and for me it doesn't come close to outweighing the positives.Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.0 -
As a truck driver I'm a little paranoid when it comes to cyclists but I have to say that the vast majority are pretty much on the ball when it comes to safe riding..... there are some though who ride like they're invincible & they scare the !!!!!! out of me sometimes.
I particularly like the extra white line at traffic lights to create a box for cycles to get in front & be seen, it's just a pity that too many drivers don't understand the concept & stop in the box despite the big cycle logo on the road.Always try to be at least half the person your dog thinks you are!0 -
I particularly like the extra white line at traffic lights to create a box for cycles to get in front & be seen, it's just a pity that too many drivers don't understand the concept & stop in the box despite the big cycle logo on the road.
You mean the Advanced Stop Line/Zone? Which are just the same shape as a wagons blind spot, really clever idea.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards