BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 05:35 PM

or always so quaint - the point is buggered of course

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM

Not buggered in the slightest, CS. Anyone who can describe another as puerile while indulging in such juvenile games themselves would probably not even know the meaning of irony.

Cheers

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:07 PM

Not useage, CS & Dave - comprehension. But thanks for your overbearing Pommy sense of superiority.

Ta.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 08:05 PM

I had to give up serious cycling in 1994 when my right knee decided to let me down. I'd commuted to work every day, come rain, snow or shine, from Loughton to Walthamstow, a distance of about seven miles each way, for about five years. The journey took in a considerable stretch of the North Circular down to the Crooked Billet roundabout. For a change, I'd occasionally come in via Walthamstow dog track from Chingford. The ride always had me negotiating big rush-hour jams and several tricky junctions (look at a map!). I never jumped a red light (occasionally, to save time, I'd dismount and cross the road instead). I could usually sweep past the long queues on the outside and my journey time was predictable day to day to within a couple of minutes. In all that time my only altercation was with a bloke in a car in Loughton who hadn't seen me and who forced me to mount the pavement to get out of his way. He had religious posters in his car windows and one of those fish symbols stuck on his boot lid. He stopped to apologise, but, as he'd almost deprived a young wife of her husband and two little kids of their dad, I offered to stuff his effing crucifixes up his holier-than-thou bottom. After our move to Cornwall in 1986 I commuted from our house near Bude to Holsworthy, a daily distance of 22 miles, every day, on my good old Claud Butler Majestic. I never missed a single day due to weather, only "borrowing" our car on the rare days I had a streaming cold or something. I once did the eleven miles home in 29 minutes (hey, with almost 500 feet of climbing) with an easterly gale behind me! I became well known as that bloke that everyone on that road saw and waved to every day. In 1990 I cycled 6000 miles, adding rides for sheer pleasure on to my commuting miles. I did a 100-mile charity ride that summer in Cornwall and Devon (we cared not a jot about the hills!), and I rode the 320 miles from my mum's in Lancashire back to Bude in four days, staying at youth hostels. I've been trying to get back to some gentle riding again, bad bones permitting, and I've found that getting up on me bike is still very much in my blood. I did have occasion, in the late 80s, to cycle in London a lot, and there was no animosity then that I could discern between motorists and cyclists. You mustn't break the rules of the road on a bike but you do have to look after yourself. Fast is safe on a bike, and you must ride well out from the gutter. If it isn't safe for someone to pass you, you have the right to prevent them from doing so by occupying your rightful space. Most times, a cyclist is in a far better position than a motorist to decide what's safe and what isn't as there's far more at stake for them. There is no room for arrogance or bad manners on the part of cyclists, but, equally, motorists must accept that the bloke or blokess in the saddle is taking up much less road room than they are, they are not polluting the planet and they are flesh and blood unprotected by a tin overcoat. The "I pay road tax and you don't" argument is entirely bogus. That situation is engineered by the government, not cyclists, so choose your target a little better. I wouldn't mind betting that many of those self-same people who try to make that case would object if I told them to get their bloody dog off the pavement because it doesn't pay council tax. As for cycling on pavements, well I'd say it depends on the pavement. A good, wide sidewalk might have plenty of room for both cyclists and pedestrians. We have many miles of lovely trails in Cornwall where it's cheerfully understood by all users that bikes and walkers have equal precedence. Good manners must rule and pedestrians must come first (they're the least able to get out of the way quickly). Whatever happened to common sense?

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 08:06 PM

I absolutely promise that I hit send just the once.

[duplicate deleted... Mudelf]

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:34 PM

Try this traffic, folks...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H88mdbL2IYg

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:58 AM

It is not a sense, dear Greg. It is a knowledge.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 03:28 AM

Look at these clips of one cyclist's experiences in outer London.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBLPb0LzQnA

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 04:45 AM

"" "I pay road tax and you don't" argument is entirely bogus.""

And the fact that our expensive insurance and our no claim discount pays for the damage done by cyclists who cause accidents?

I know at least five motorists who had collisions as a direct result of having to take avoiding action when cyclists made irresponsible decisions, one of them writing off a £30,000 car, while the cyclists went happily on their way, not giving a damn.

There are more ways of causing damage than you seem to be aware of.

As for clips from cyclists, there are plenty of police video files of cyclists misdemeanours, and I wonder how that picture would change if pedestrians started wearing head cams?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 04:53 AM

Cyclists rarely ride happily away from collisions Don.
They tend to get killed or maimed while the driver gets home safe.
That is why we work so hard to avoid them in spite of what you claim.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 04:57 AM

One last word on his topic.

It is insulting to be accused of being anti cyclist, because you dare to point out that the number of irresponsible cyclists is far larger than cycists want to admit, and increasing.

I am anti anybody who wantonly disregards the safety of others, and the laws of this country, no matter what their mode of transport may be.

The only thing that is seemingly common to the whole cycling fraternity is the fact that they are in absolute and adamantine denial of the size of the problem.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:03 AM

""Cyclists rarely ride happily away from collisions Don.
They tend to get killed or maimed while the driver gets home safe.
That is why we work so hard to avoid them in spite of what you claim.""

Naught out of ten for comprehension once again my dumb friend.

I was talking, as I clearly stated, about collisions with other vehicles caused by avoiding two wheeled idiots, who didn't even have the grace to stop and see if anybody was injured, and because cyclists have no visible identification, could not be found to sue them for the damages.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:09 AM

I think you dream these experiences Don, because they bear no relation to anyone else's reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:16 AM

You are an arrogant, opinionated arsehole, who always thinks he knows best.

You have no basis for your claims that I am lying about these events.

They happened and they happen to other people as well.

You need to pull your head out of your arse and look around once in a while.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:26 AM

Funny how all the hostility and anger and rage emanates from the anti-cycles.

This is another irrational prejudice of yours, such that I have commented on in other contexts.
No-one else on here has experienced those kinds of incidents, and I have never ever heard of any such.


I am not calling you a liar, just a dreamer.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:30 AM

I was tootling along the cycle lane a while back when some loony pedestrian on a mobile phone, with no regard for her safety or that of others, stepped out in front of me with no prior warning. To avoid a collision I had to brake hard. I fell off, causing damage to my left arm, left knee and tearing my clothes. When I took her to task for it she told me to F-off and watch were I was going.

How are we doing on the anecdote front? This happened to me and has to other people. You need to pull your head out of your arse and look around once in a while. Has someone said that before?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:33 AM

- Have you ever been on a cycle? If you push anything while you are balancing on two wheels, chances are you will fall over. I suggest you try it.

To be fair Dave, I have seen and experienced such incidents on occasions.

The machine has always been one of those with the pedals fixed to the front wheel, and two small wheels at the back giving the required stability.
The behaviour of such riders can be truly awful.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,SPB at work
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:40 AM

"Are you using this example to say all cyclists are the same? If so then you are no better than those who say all Irish are thick , all Moslems are terrorists and all Blacks are lazy. "

No I am not - I am using this as an example to say that pedestrians have as much right to use the pavement as anyone else, and as such be able to use the pavement safely and without fear of intimidation. I could also rant about cars that park on pavement not leaving room for prams, wheelchair users. And what I was also suggesting is that if road users want the pavement then let pedestrians have the road.

"BTW - Have you ever been on a cycle? If you push anything while you are balancing on two wheels, chances are you will fall over. I suggest you try it."

Actually, I was a cyclist for more than 10 years - did not ride on the pavement. I followed something called the Highway Code, and rode considerately, stopping at traffic lights, not mowing pedestrians down at zebra crossings. I only stopped because I moved to a first floor flat and could not face carrying it up and down stairs every day.

BTW - have you ever been hit by a cyclist - it didn't take that much of a shove do to the transfer of energy from the forward momentum of the bike for me to get quite a sizeable bruise on my arm.

I have nothing against cyclists - only the inconsiderate ones. What have you got against pedestrians?

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:54 AM

What have you got against pedestrians?

Nothing whatsoever only the inconsiderate ones. Work on the basis that the same percentage of every group is inconsiderate and I think you will find that, pro-rata, there are many more inconsiderate drivers and pedestrians that cyclists. Glad to hear you have nothing against cyclists.

Suggestion to get over your issue with accommodation - Do the same as me. I had a fixed frame roadster but it was a pain to keep protected from both the elements and thieves anywhere. I now have a Ridgeback Attache folder - Bit expensive but not the dearest on the Market. Get to work, I can fold it and carry it up 2 flights of stairs. Stores under the stairs at home. If it (or me!) ever breaks, fold it and get a bus or taxi. Makes cycling much easier.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 07:04 AM

As a pedestrian, non-cyclist (I fell off last time I cycled somewhere!), it also really annoys me the amount of pedestrians who dominate cycle lanes when there's a wide pavement with clearly demarked zones. And it's ridiculous how annoyed people can get at a little bell letting them know a cyclist is coming through - on the cycle lane. I think this thread really just demonstrates that large numbers of people can be stupid, rude and inconsiderate, whether on foot or on two wheels or four.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 07:29 AM

And the fact that our expensive insurance and our no claim discount pays for the damage done by cyclists who cause accidents?

Bit of an old chestnut, this one, Don. In the bad old days, we used to say that women drivers didn't have accidents but they caused most of 'em, remember? Likewise elderly drivers (who cause accidents by forcing people to tailgate them). Your expensive insurance is expensive mainly because of the cartel operating between the insurance industry and major repairers (£1300+VAT for a damaged wing on a Honda Jazz...?), fraudulent claims brought about by people who'll crash your car for you for a couple of hundred and the plethora of claims for non-existent "injuries" such as whiplash in which your expensive insurance company has been woefully complicit. Don, if it's you vs a bike, the moral odds start off being stacked heavily against you. You're taking up much more space than him, you're polluting the air, you're helping global warming along and you're using up precious resources, fast. Sure, an idiot cyclist can redress the balance, but let's not get carried away with the notion that all cyclists are devils incarnate and all car drivers are paragons of virtue. But, as I said, in London in the 80s when I cycled thousands of urban miles per year, that animosity wasn't there. So who's to blame for it? Won't it just be the usual thing of the unrepresentative few (on both sides) giving everyone else a bad name?

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:40 AM

It is not a sense, dear Greg. It is a knowledge.

Thanks for confirming my point, Pom.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:05 AM

No Problems, Colonial. We try to help the disadvantaged.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,SPB at work
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM

"Your expensive insurance is expensive mainly because of the cartel operating between the insurance industry and major repairers (£1300+VAT for a damaged wing on a Honda Jazz...?),"

And of course - if the age/value of the car does not allow the preferred repairer to carry out a repair at an over-inflated cost, the insurers are most likely to write-off the vehicle, even if the repair is just a small dent. Also unless the repair is carried out by an 'authorised' repairer it is easier to get blood out of a stone than it would be to get a couple of hundred pounds for the repair to be done by a local repairer. Also don't forget the levy towards the uninsured drivers compensation fund.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:41 PM

So "pom" really is taken as an insult?    It does seem that "colonial" in this context is meant as one.    Perhaps there's still some bitterness as to the outcome of the 1775-1783 unpleasantness.

All I can find as the origin of "pom" is that pom was meant to indicate a reddish skin color.   I don't think that is really something a sensible person should react violently to.   So why would Britons object?    Another theory is :    prisoner of Mother England ( which seems to be an urban myth). But "pom" is supposedly directed at Britons by Australians--yet it's the Australians who would have prisoners in their backgrounds.    So it makes no sense to have Australians call the British "poms".   And even less sense to voluntarily take it as an insult.

Thoughts?    Inquiring minds want to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:43 PM

A facility should be provided in central London...a small gymnasium with a boxing ring where you chaps could settle your differences over these various vital matters.

Or...how about a dueling range somewhere in the Midlands, complete with swords, pistols, knives, nunchucks, leather gloves (for slapping the opponent's face), and other appropriate weapons? That would provide for the possibility of a final solution.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM

"Pom". "Pommie bastards!" Love the sound of that... ;-) I wonder if it has any connection with pomegranites? They have a red skin. The English probably tended to get noticeably sunburnt when they came to Australia, so that could account for the expression.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:55 PM

So "pom" really is taken as an insult?    It does seem that "colonial" in this context is meant as one.   

No, Ron, Pom is not an insult. Far to out of date. Colonial was not meant as one either. If I wanted to be insulting it would have been obvious! :-)

LH - Wonderful idea :-) Gladiatorial contest featuring cycles with sharpened blades protruding from the hubs. Bring it on!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM

BIKE!

The problem with most cyclists is the lack of drugs.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:49 PM

"not meant to be an insult"   Just like "help the disadvantaged" is also not meant to be one.   RIght.    Sorry, Dave, your nose is growing.

And nobody has answered the question yet.    "Pommy bastard" might possibly be an insult. This seems like a reasonable conclusion. But still, why "pommy" ?

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM

pommy, pommie n, adj, Australian
A British person. The standard and usually derogatory slang term for natives or immigrants from the British Isles, pommy is probably a corruption of 'pomegranate', chanted as a humorous semi-rhyme for 'immigrant'. The epithet has been in use since the first decade of the 20th century. The noun is now probably more common in the form of POM.
Thorne, Bloomsbury Dictionary of Contemporary Slang, London, 1990

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 03:15 PM

Yay! I said my insults would be obvious - Even you spotted it, Ron :-P

I think it more likely that pommy was short for pomegranate - The colour Brits went in the Aussie sunshine. I don't think anyone has a definitive answer though. It was classed as not offensive by the Aussie advertising standards body in 2006.

BTW - Although I was born here I am only about 3/8 English. Which I suppose makes me a true Pom :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:33 PM

And of course - if the age/value of the car does not allow the preferred repairer to carry out a repair at an over-inflated cost, the insurers are most likely to write-off the vehicle, even if the repair is just a small dent. Also unless the repair is carried out by an 'authorised' repairer it is easier to get blood out of a stone than it would be to get a couple of hundred pounds for the repair to be done by a local repairer. Also don't forget the levy towards the uninsured drivers compensation fund.

That's right. Doesn't that put into perspective Don's implied scenario of his insurance costs soaring because cyclists go around making cars crash into each other? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:55 AM

3/8 English?    What's the rest?

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:57 AM

And, by the way, "even you"--sounds like you've been taking lessons from my style. Imitation is....

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:42 AM

No-one need be sensitive about offending Greg F of all people!
"Pom" is the least of his insults, "asshole" being his standard form of address.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:48 AM

because cyclists go around making cars crash into each other?

You and I and everyone else may never have heard of such a case, but knows personally of 5 cases including a total right off!

He is also personally responsible for putting an errant cyclist in hospital, and getting him fined.

Tell us some more Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:56 AM

I can always learn from a master, Ron :-)

My Father is Polish - So that should make me half Polish but his father was Russian and Mother Polish so that makes me 1/4 Russian and 1/4 Polish. Half English you may think, but no. Paternal Grandfather was about 1/4 Irish and paternal Grandmother was 1/2 Welsh. Thinking about it I guess I am a bit less than 3/8 but seeing as I was born here, that'll do!

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:26 AM

Whoops - replace all instances of paternal with maternal in above post! I mixed my mats and pats! Not that anyone on here would notice...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:30 AM

Well done, Dave.   You really are learning.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:46 AM

"asshole" being his standard form of address.

Well, Keith, if the hole fits.....

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:55 AM

Holier than thou Greg?
Surely not.

BBC today.
Two cyclists who died after being struck by a lorry during a charity ride from Land's End to John O'Groats have been named.

Andrew McMenigall, 47, and Toby Wallace, 36, were killed in the crash on the A30 in Cornwall on Tuesday.

Mr McMenigall, from Edinburgh, was a senior investment manager with Aberdeen Asset Management. He was married with two daughters.

Colleague Mr Wallace worked in the firm's Philadelphia office.

The 31-year-old driver of the lorry involved in the crash near Summercourt was arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving.

The two cyclists were on a charity ride to raise funds for the Kirsten Scott Memorial Trust, which was set up in memory of a colleague who lost her battle with cancer in October 2011.

Mr McMenigall was a triathlete who graduated as an Army officer from Sandhurst before completing an MBA at Edinburgh University.

Mr Wallace was married, and was a senior relationship manager for the company.

He joined the firm in 2000 as a graduate trainee from Jesus College, Cambridge, where he had been on the winning team in the 1998 and 1999 University Boat Races.

In 2012, Mr Wallace was a member of an eight-man crew which rowed across the Atlantic to raise money for the Kirsten Scott Memorial Trust.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:19 AM

suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving[emphasis mine]

OR the two cyclists pulled out in front of the lorry.

I'll wait for the final report so that we have some factual information instead of speculation.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:46 AM

And of course you're right, Keith, about Greg and his native tongue.   It does appear to be gutter language.   I've spoken to him about it before, but for some strange reason my admonitions have had little effect.   Just can't understand why.   But I suppose you can take the boy out of the gutter but perhaps not the gutter out of the boy.

Ah well, It looks like all we can do is encourage him when he does stay out of the gutter for a few posts.    It must be a struggle for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:47 AM

"Ah, well, it..."

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM

Hey Simple Seeker After Truth And Source Of All Knowledge Worth Knowing And Then Some: go fuck yourself.

Didn't want you to be disappointed, heaven forbid.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:54 PM

Well, it's nice to get back to normal. I was beginning to think I'd wandered into the wrong universe.

After all, Greg and I were on the same side of an issue.   It happens once in a while, but it sure does seem to be against the natural order of things.

But thanks, also, Greg, for climbing out of the gutter for a few posts.

Maybe it might be an option for you to kick the habit.

Or maybe not.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:56 PM

Whoops, sorry.

I meant:    QED

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 03:02 PM

Maybe it might be an option for you to kick the habit.

Why should I want to, Simple Seeker? You seem to be faithful to type.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:45 PM

Well, it's just possible that the poster might realize that relying on foul language to communicate actually just indicates a poverty of vocabulary.   Which is a secret I'd think he'd want to keep to himself.   But who knows, maybe he does want to shout it to the world.

Although anybody more than half-educated knows the English language is incredibly rewarding in its opportunity for expression.    So it's a shame not to take advantage of its richness. But most of it is not in the gutter.