Hazard Perception Test???

[Just a driver]

Or that cyclist think that rule 59 of the Highway Code doesn't apply them!

Clothing. You should wear

a.. a cycle helmet which conforms to current regulations, is the correct size and securely fastened

b.. appropriate clothes for cycling. Avoid clothes which may get tangled in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights

c.. *light* *coloured* or *fluorescent* *clothing* which helps other road users to see you in daylight and poor light

d.. *reflective* *clothing* and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in the dark

I'm not anti-cyclist, but it's surprising how many cyclists wear drab clothing (and have no lights) in conditions of poor visabilty, and then scream blue murder or bang the roof of the vehicle when the driver *cannot* see them against a dark background [1] - and those 83% of cyclists who also drive vehicles really should be more aware of the hazards of not using such gear in *all* weather conditions.

[1] And when you stop and tell them that, they still blame the vehicle driver.

Jad

[Judith]

You're not related to Porky Chapman, are you?

-- Porky Chapman bragged about the fact that he was taking someone he had accused of harassing him through the court system. All of a sudden his court case is off. Was it because Porky was scared of being cross-examined and having to answer questions under oath? Or did the CPS sling the case out because of Porky's "evidence"? Why won't he tell us?

[Tim Streater]

Aren't they supposed to have a bicycle bell, too - or at any rate some audible means of warning of their approach, like my mode of transport is obliged by law to have? Or did that get repealed along with the laws about shooting red lights, riding on the pavement, having working lights.

Compulsory insurance would be a good idea for cyclists, too.

[Peter Keller]

While polychaete marine worms on or near the sea floor are a major source of nutrition, hagfish can feed upon and often even enter and eviscerate the bodies of dead and dying/injured sea creatures much larger than themselves.

[N Ron Hubbard]

Logic breach!

No one said 83% of motorists are cyclists. See if you can work out how 83% of Bs can be As while a much smaller % of As are Bs.

[Mrcheerful]

Nowadays the car must have head rests or the examiner won't go in it. Probably won't be long before they require a passenger airbag too.

[The Medway Handyman]

Their fridge freezer insurance covers that Tim. Apparently.

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

I refer the hon. gentleman to my previous reply:

Guy

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

There is no legal requirement to have a bell fitted. The human voice is versatile enough to give warning of approach, but in any case it's best to keep on the road where such things are much less necessary. Guy

[Jeff]

None of which are required by law.

Jeff

[Jeff]

Depends where you live, it is required in NI and IoM

Jeff

[polygonum]

And it the ideal question for taunting young girls with a certain name. Isabel necessary on a bicycle?

[Alan Braggins]

Why do you think most motorists think the basics of the Highway code don't apply to themselves? Probably the same for cyclists.

Followups set.

[Dave - Cyclists VOR]

But are required by those with common sense.

[Alan Braggins]

Mr. Benn has been complaining he's been the victim of forgeries. Could be someone else out to get him accused of being a troll.

And your excuse for including uk.d-i-y?

Followups set.

[Judith]

Any news?

-- Porky Chapman bragged about the fact that he was taking someone he had accused of harassing him through the court system. All of a sudden his court case is off. Was it because Porky was scared of being cross-examined and having to answer questions under oath? Or did the CPS sling the case out because of Porky's "evidence"? Why won't he tell us?

[01928]

In message , Tim Streater writes

Having had a discussion with a cyclist, on a pavement, over a similar situation I feel that you may be wrong on this.

Cyclists are God and us mere mortals should understand this and move out of their way as a display of reverence to their higher authority.

They do not need a mechanical bell to warn of their approach, we, as pedestrians, and in fact motorists too, should feel their presence and act accordingly. The use of their voice, and the interesting terminology they use, should be more than adequate to move the average old granny out of the way.

As for the insurance issue, no worries, any accident would be covered, an act of cyclist, or as us lesser mortals refer to it as "an act of God".

As you may realise I have encountered a number of cyclists that were less than polite in their ways, it is unfortunate that this minority taint the publics views of the majority. So, as with most walks of life, the laws of the land should be altered to cover the lowest common denominator, unfortunate for the sensible ones. Insurance, testing and some form of license plate being but 3 that should be brought in and enforced.

[Clive George]

This isn't exactly an original thought. People have been spouting this crap for years, and how much has been done about it? Nothing. Given the current government's stated aim of reducing red tape and expenditure, how much do you think is going to be done about it? Nothing.

Carry on whining on in newsgroups about your fantasy la-la land rules, but don't hold out any hope they're going to be enacted.

[Bill Wright]

Is your nom de plume appropriate?

Bill

[JNugent]

Either you believe in adhering to the Highway Code or you don't.

Picking and choosing, with or without dodgy ex-post rationalisation, is a form of wriggling, isn't it?

It's alright if you don't believe in sticking rigorously to the Code, particularly where it provides advice and guidance as opposed to stating legal requirements; just don't whinge at the analogous choices of others.