BS: Bleeping Cyclist

Subject: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 16 Aug 23 - 06:36 PM

I understand that as a pedestrian and public transport user I am probably of an inferior race to those who need to get about on their cycles, but these days cyclists disregarding the law is almost at an epidemic level, but these days it seems to be getting worse, particularly with food delivery riders who are not bothered about anything except earning money and think that gives the right of way on the pavement and us inferior pedestrians having the duty to make allowances for them.

There need to be a lot more enforcement so that delivery rider run the risk of prosecution for having to meet the targets that they are expected to fulfill by their employers to avoid losing pay.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 16 Aug 23 - 06:40 PM

e bikes are even worse - they use the pavement at speed. aybe pedestrians need to pass a driving test to demonstrate lane disciplin before they are allowed to leave their homes, and in the meantime pay for supervision by a qualified walking instructor.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Aug 23 - 07:13 PM

It's a shame. Thirty or forty years ago I was commuting by pushbike thousands of miles a year. My route for years included the incredibly busy road from Woodford towards central London and often through Chingford High Road and on the South Circular. There were rush-hour jams all along the way. I weaved in and out of traffic all the time. I never ran a red light or cycled on a pavement. Not once did I encounter any aggro or intimidation from motorists. It seems that the culture has changed radically. I notice that in London these days the roads cater for cyclists far better than they used to. A cyclist is quiet, non-polluting and takes up little space. Every town and city should be treating cyclists far better, in terms of separating them from traffic, than many of them do. Having said that, being a cyclist doesn't mean being a saint. No cyclist should ever cycle on a pavement (small children excepted) or jump a red light. It's complicated, but those two rules should be immutable.

By the way, unlike my cycling son I never wore Lycra. I found baggy shorts (with the chamois gusset) and loose tops far more comfortable and far less likely to attract the automatic "look at that twat" reaction that lycra does.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 16 Aug 23 - 11:54 PM

Vehicles are supposed to stay in the street, whether motorized or bicycles. They don't belong on the sidewalks. They're also supposed to follow the rules of the road.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Aug 23 - 03:41 AM

I have cycled on the pavement. Usually when pushed off the road by a white van or a BMW! Only when there are no pedestrians present though.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 17 Aug 23 - 03:49 AM

I wonder if the law ever got changed to allow perambulators to use the pavement. At one time they had to use the roadway and I'm not sure if it ever got an official alteration.

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 17 Aug 23 - 04:06 AM

The rules about cycling have been changed in the UK in comparatively recent times, SRS. Back when I was a keen cyclist, riding a bicycle on the pavement was absolutely forbidden, as was riding without an ‘audible warning of approach’ (usually a bell), and riding at night without front and rear lights.

In recent years, the requirement for an ‘audible warning of approach’ has been abandoned, many riders simply ignore the requirement for lights at night, and many local authorities encourage cyclists to ride on the pavement, even marking the pavements to indicate that cycling there is acceptable. This is certainly the case in my part of the Lincolnshire Backwoods. Add to that the fact that, where separate cycle lanes are provided, they are frequently ignored by cyclists who just ride on the pavement anyway.

I’m very much a pedestrian since I retired eleven years ago - I do drive when and where necessary, but I try to walk a minimum of five miles each day - and I’ve become very aware of how vulnerable pedestrians are, and how reckless many cyclists are. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve narrowly escaped being hit from behind by cyclists (and E-scooter-riders, for that matter) speeding and weaving around on the pavement when, owing to their not having an ‘audible warning of approach’, I had absolutely no idea they were there.

I find it rather surprising that so many cyclists - a group who constantly draw public attention to their vulnerability on the roads - appear to have so little regard for the vulnerability of pedestrians on the pavement.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Aug 23 - 05:44 AM

Like with many groups it is the vociferous minority that grab the headlines, BWM. As a motorist, cyclist, public transpot user and pedestrian I can quote you many examples of bad behavior in all of the groups. Believe it or not, particulary in Skipton on a market day, running the gauntlet of mad mobility scooter users, dog owners with extending leads and young girls with their noses stuck in mobiles can be very challenging!

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Aug 23 - 01:08 PM

Spot on there, Dave. Especially those deadly extending dog leads. Is there anyone here who would ban disability scooters from pavements?

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: gillymor
Date: 17 Aug 23 - 05:23 PM

It got way too scary riding on the main roads around here, even the ones with bike lanes, what with all the big pickups rumbling by at 60+ mph and the rubbernecking out of towners weaving all over the road, so I sold my road bike and bought a comfort/fitness bike with shocks and started riding on the sidewalks. No incidents so far, I give plenty of warning to pedestrians verbally and by clicking my brake handles and when when there's dog or people situation that looks dicey I stop and maneuver around it on foot. I do agree though that ebikes traveling on the same track with pedestrians is potentially a dangerous proposition.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 17 Aug 23 - 08:24 PM

Cyclists do not now what brakes are for ans expect us inferior pedestrians to respect their right to not have to slaw down. As I am lucky enough to not be frail and do not need assistance for walking, I do not have the means to accidently poke a walking stick through the wheel spokes.

I have heard that one of the causes of food delivery riders not giving a toss about pedestrians safety is that they have to meet unreasonable delivery times or lose pay.

In UK we have laws that mean that householders that use unlicensed disposal services the go on to flytip rubbish can be heavily fined. We need similar laws which means that people who order takeways which are deivered by inconsiderate riders who are caught breaking the law face similar fines. having to pay $1,000 for a takeaway will discourage customers from buying from cafes/restaurants that fo not poperly supervise their riders.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 18 Aug 23 - 03:46 AM

Was it here or somewhere else I read this ....

Old lady gets cut up by a speeding pavement cyclist. With great presence of mind, she shoves her walking stick through his spokes. Cyclist goes arse over tit. Sympathetic crowd gathers round old lady; they help her to her feet, and generally check that she's OK. Fate of cyclist unknown, as nobody pays him any attention.

.... Discuss.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Aug 23 - 04:19 AM

Live by the sword, die by the sword… ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 07:28 AM

.... Discuss


The Guardian 2 Mar 23

A woman has been jailed for 3 years for manslaughter after causing cyclist to fall in front of a car in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, UK. The woman, who has cerebral palsy, waved her arm aggressively and shouted “get off the fucking pavement” causing the cyclist to fall into the road where she died after being struck by a car. During the trial, police could not confirm whether or not that section of path was legally intended for both pedestrians and cyclists, but in the sentencing the judge declared it a shared path.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: gillymor
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 08:41 AM

Wow, I guess I'll have to mount some kind of weapon on my handle bars to deal with disgruntled pedestrians.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 11:55 AM

"Cyclists do not now what brakes are for"

Some cyclists, SPB, and then only a minority.

I have a theory. Lycra constricts the flow of blood to the brain. The more Lycra a cyclist wears, the more stupid he becomes. And before I am accused of sexism, it is invariabley male cyclists that act like idiots

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 12:15 PM

... it is invariabley male cyclists that act like idiots

I know, from personal experience, that to be untrue.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: gillymor
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 12:27 PM

Or maybe lycra keeps the blood down in a region where it can do some good.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 12:43 PM

Yebbut I can forgive female lycra clad cyclists...

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: gillymor
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 12:46 PM

That's very generous of you but I was referring to it as an alternative to expensive ED drugs (insert smiley face here).

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Charmion
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 02:38 PM

I was walking home from the theatre one night a few weeks ago when I found myself face to face with a thirty-something man mounted on an electric scooter -- the kind with two small wheels, a little platform to stand on, and handlebars mounted on an upright thingy. I was on the sidewalk and the street was quite innocent of other traffic.

Scooter Man was larking about with a buddy, likewise mounted, and I rather suspect both of them were at least a little tipsy. He braked just in time to not hit me dead on.

"You have wheels. You belong on the road," I said, pointing into the carriageway.

"But that's dangerous!" he replied, not moving.

"Better you should be scared than you should run me down," I replied, also not moving.

"Bitch," he yelped and swooped away -- but off the sidewalk.

Scooter Man and his buddy were almost certainly tourists, the species that makes summer in Stratford such a mixed blessing. The electric scooter is a newcomer to the local scene and I hope it is a quickly passing fad.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 02:47 PM

Offering insults means he doesn't have a good argument to answer your logic.

Charmion: 1

Tourist: 0

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 03:44 PM

Charmion:

Unless things have changed there are no legal e-Scooters in Stratford:
Here

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 03:52 PM

”Charmion:

Unless things have changed there are no legal e-Scooters in Stratford:”

Nigel, I think you’re confused. Charmion is in Stratford, Ontario, Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 07:32 PM

Here in the Washington DC/Maryland area, most cyclists don't stop at stop signs or red lights unless there is heavy traffic. They look both ways and if they see an opening, they just keep going. Downtown is even worse where bicycle messengers act as though none of the rules apply to them in any way. Up here, a few miles north of DC, it's just cycling aficionados ignoring stop signs. They are breaking the law every time, and they do not appreciate being reminded.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Aug 23 - 08:20 PM

Gosh, until the mid-90s (after which one of my knees went) I cycled thousands of miles a year, for several years in just about the busiest urban area of outer London, then in rural Devon and Cornwall for four or five years after that. My daily commute was 16 miles a day (return!) in London and 22 miles a day in the Westcountry (each daily return trip involving 1400 feet of climbing). Not once did I ever break any rule of the road, nor did I ever have any altercation with motorists or pedestrians. I think that most cyclists are environmentally conscious and would not wish to harm or inconvenience pedestrians. Of course, there are always a few. It's amazing how so many people, including two or three here, jump opportunistically on cyclists, who, as a genre, are mostly very responsible. Cyclists don't create air or noise pollution and are not using fossil fuels. Remember that at least. And yet, when I mention that the vast majority of dog owners can't control their dogs and fail to clean up after their pet noise machines (come to Bude if you don't believe me), I get shot down by the "it's not my dog" brigade. I know that the odd cyclist can cause harm, but that pales alongside the health hazard that every dog at large in our streets potentially causes.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Aug 23 - 04:47 AM

Hey Professor Cynophobe, the thread is about cyclists, SFA to do with dogs. I suggest that you stop being a knob, desist from the ‘Whataboutery’ and address the subject of the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Aug 23 - 05:54 AM

Most of that post was about cycling. Dogs were first mentioned in this thread by someone else two days ago. There is a connection in that both cyclists on pavements and dogs on extendable leads, or just loose, are potential hazards to pedestrians. Stop being so defensive!

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 23 - 11:57 AM

Yep. Along with mobility scooter riders and mobile phone users. Should they all be banned?

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 23 - 11:57 AM

Yep. Along with mobility scooter riders and mobile phone users. Should they all be banned?

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 23 - 11:57 AM

Yep. Along with mobility scooter riders and mobile phone users. Should they all be banned?

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 23 - 12:22 PM

Ban them all 3 times!

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Rain Dog
Date: 21 Aug 23 - 12:32 PM

"I know that the odd cyclist can cause harm, but that pales alongside the health hazard that every dog at large in our streets potentially causes."

Potentially?

Dogs at large?

Don't see too many dogs at large on the roads these days.

I am always wary of any dog riding a bike though.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Aug 23 - 01:07 PM

To be clear, "at large" simply meant out and about, not running loose.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 22 Aug 23 - 05:10 AM

I think that most cyclists ............. would not wish to harm or inconvenience pedestrians.

I live on a main road. It has a segregated cycle/pedestrian path on one side, marked by a white line and separated from the road by a grass verge. The other side of the road is for pedestrians only, who walk next to the kerb with a grass verge on the inside. There is not really enough room on the footpath itself for pedestrians and cyclists to pass safely. Despite the provision of the cycle path, cyclists of all ages use either side of the road as they want and many seem to expect pedestrians on the footpath to step aside.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 22 Aug 23 - 05:27 AM

If we had the confidence, we could stand our ground, it would be the cyclists who would be held accountable, and the insurance companies picking up the tab through their uninsured drivers claims premium they charge to motorists. If that means that motor insurance premiums were under threat to double or triple then parents would do something to make sure that their little darlings behaved themselves when they are out on their bikes.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 22 Aug 23 - 05:56 AM

... parents would do something to make sure that their little darlings behaved themselves when they are out on their bikes.

As I said above, it's cyclists of all ages who use the pedestrian-only footpath. In fact, when they are going to and from school in their uniforms, the kids generally use the cycle track. At other times, the youngsters tend to be the ones who are prepared to go 'off-road' and go round you on the grass verge. The nearer to retiring age, the more likely the cyclist is to head straight for you.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 23 - 06:36 AM

It's a very subjective observation, but I can't help thinking that there's a general increase in selfishness and downright philistinism all round. Even in good old friendly Bude, a supermarket trolley will head towards you at speed in the veg aisle and, as you jump out of the way, the perpetrator will say "Oops, sorry!" I always tell them that they're not sorry at all...

Maybe it's the world getting more crowded or people getting more miserable or something. Or me getting older and slower.

We use the Camel Trail and the Tarka Trail a lot on our bikes. The trails are intended for all and sundry: cyclists of all ages, pedestrians, runners, joggers, kiddie pushchairs, invalid scooters, the lot. There's a tacit understanding among all users that everyone shows tolerance, consideration and good manners to everyone else. It works.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 22 Aug 23 - 12:22 PM

And Madcap Maud was there, me boys, a fearsome sight was she
With her turbo ton-up trolley, a dreadful sight to see
With not a care for life and limb, she sped along the aisles
And many a poor shopper's life, each week was brought to trial.
.....

So I drew out my chequebook, and the tension I could feel
As Madcap Maud behind me rammed her trolley in my heel.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: HuwG
Date: 22 Aug 23 - 05:27 PM

Some of my friends keep trying to get spoof news items into mainstream news.

One of their efforts was:

"Cyclist fails to sign in to Google when he fails to recognise any image containing traffic lights."

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 23 - 06:10 PM

Cyclists are using an environmentally-friendly mode of transport. Most cyclists are law-abiding and considerate to pedestrians and road-users. As in every walk of life, there are a few rogues. Fair enough. Have a go. The vast majority of dog-owners cannot control their dogs and many of them behave with a completely unjustified sense of entitlement. Their pets shit and piss in the streets that the rest of us inhabit. You can't clear up your dog's piss and even if you pick up the shit (which most don't if no-one's looking) you leave a nice smear that can spread disease. My bike cost me thousands but your dog cost you next to nothing and you don't need to pay for a licence, to pay for collecting the shit from those revolting bins or to pay for getting your dog properly trained. Hotels, pubs and cafes have got to be "dog-friendly" or else risk losing custom. The dog lobby is untouchable. One false anti-dog move by a politician would get them thrown out of office, rather like those anti-gun lobby politicians in America. Yet, in this great dog-loving nation of ours, it's those cyclists who get the flack every time. Sometimes, I feel like a still, small voice...

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 02:34 AM

Whatever you claim to ‘feel like’, you sound like an over-opinionated, big-mouth hater who never grew up and got over his childish fear of dogs, nor his hatred of both dogs and their owners. Change the record, Professor Knowitall, we’re all sick and tired of that cacophony.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 02:42 AM

The thread is about cyclists. Whataboutery is the refuge of a scoundrel who knows he has no case. If you want to discuss dogs, their owners, and their shortcomings, feel free to start another thread instead of fucking this one up?

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 04:30 AM

Most cyclists are law-abiding and considerate to pedestrians and road-users.

To use your words upthread, it's a very subjective observation. I don't have any figures so I want say 'most' but many cyclists seem to think that the rules of the road are for guidance and open to their personal interpretation. I used to cycle a lot before I got my free bus pass and, like you Steve, I always followed the rules of the road. I used to find it just as annoying as a cyclist as in my car, to see other cyclists threading their way through crossing traffic against red lights, ignoring no-entry signs or cycling on pedestrian-only paths.

Our local paper is reporting that, this week, seven people have been fined for breaking the cycling ban in the pedestrianised area of the town centre.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 04:44 AM

"...we’re all sick and tired..."

"All"? Have you asked everyone on the forum, or are you a psychic, a mind reader, God? Now listen. I've already explained the connection between cyclists impacting pedestrians and dogs impacting pedestrians (and everybody really). Making that link isn't even thread drift, and, as I said, 'twas not I who introduced dogs to this thread. I'm not a profligate thread-starter, but when I do start threads I actually welcome thread drift. You don't like doggie criticisms and you're resorting to accusations of "thread drift" in order to try to shut down that criticism, even when it's nothing personal directed at you. I could suggest that your tirades of insults actually prolong these sour-faced discussions. Most human beings resent being insulted and will often bite back. So, as you claim, you're a responsible dog owner. Why wouldn't I believe you? But you are in a minority as far as I can glean from the bad behaviour of huge numbers of dog owners round here and from the undeniable evidence of the mounds of dogshit that you see everywhere. I refuse to believe that dog-owning Bude residents are any different to those anywhere else. I don't like cyclists on pavements or who jump traffic lights either, but (observational evidence again) this is an extremely popular area for cyclists, both locals and holidaymakers. Almost all of them behave as they should and are non-threatening to pedestrians. They are also quiet, non-polluting and they don't leave their poo or poo-smears everywhere. The few who do break the rules fully deserve to be shouted at, of course. I suppose it could be different in some urban areas.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 04:54 AM

Well rules of the road, Doug. Don't tell the cops but I generally break the speed limit somewhere or other most times I go out in my car. In 55 years I've been "done" just four times. The speed awareness course was hugely entertaining. The guy who ran it was a cardboard cutout of Dixon of Dock Green, knee bends and pelvic thrusts included. I see plenty of drivers speeding up to get through lights on amber, dangerously cutting corners, displaying terrible road positioning when turning right, ignoring pedestrians who are trying to cross, tailgating, undertaking...

Cyclists are easy meat. They are flesh and blood out in the open, they can hear you shout, they will always come off worse in any accident with other vehicles. Shout at the blatant rule-breakers by all means, but, generally, you can't shout at the bad drivers. Their windows are up, they can speed off, they're often elderly, etc. and there are plenty of 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 03:19 PM

Rant on, Professor - your blustering rants and acreage of script don’t disguise the fact that you’re indulging in Whataboutery because you know you can’t ‘win’ with regard to the thread topic, and ‘winning’ is what matters most to you.

You’ve claimed, on more than one occasion, to be a ‘scientist’, yet you have no evidence whatsoever to support the claims which you always make that good dog owners are ‘in a minority’, or that owners only pick up after their dogs ‘when someone is watching’ - those are nothing more than inventions - the only evidence you do have is that **some** dog owners don’t clear up after their dogs, and you have no evidence at all of what proportion of dog owners that **some** represents. Some ‘scientist’!

You take every opportunity to post your spittle-flecked, hate-filled rants about dogs and their owners, and you started this spat with your standard anti-dog/dog owner rants, for no other reason than to draw attention away from the, in many cases, well-deserved criticism that cyclists receive. You’ll note that I don’t say ‘all’ or even ‘most’ cyclists - I’ll leave that kind of unjustifiable, broad-brush exaggeration to you.

And, if you don’t like my reaction to your attacks on dogs and their owners, don’t make those attacks. And don’t be surprised, when you do make deliberately provocative posts, that the target of your provocation reacts. When I encounter someone who’s behaved like a bell-end, I tell them to their face that they’ve behaved like a bell-end. You’ve behaved like a bell-end, so suck it up, or STFU.

Any further occurrences of you posting your know-it-all horse-shit will be treated with the contempt they deserve.

Now back to the thread topic, and people’s experiences of cyclists’ bad behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 03:21 PM

Shout at the blatant rule-breakers by all means, ...

Take heed of my post of 19 Aug 23 - 07:28 AM.



Of course there are many drivers who will break the law if they think that they can get away with it, but two wrongs don't make right. Cyclists get away with breaking the rules because they are not generally enforced.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 04:21 PM

I know that two wrongs don't make a right, and I've never held back from criticising badly-behaved cyclists (check my posts!). But, like motorists and even pedestrians, (and dog-walkers), cyclists are street/road users and all street-users need to show tolerance and understanding. Mostly they do, but in this thread we're singling out cyclists for special excoriation. I'm not sure that's entirely fair, though I wouldn't hold back on criticising the few badly-behaved ones. I think it's fair, and not thread drift or whataboutery, to point out that cyclists as a genre may not be the worst street offenders, not by a long chalk.

A few years ago I'd just emerged from the superb Bude butcher's shop (sadly, John the butcher died last year) with a couple of pounds of sausages in a carrier bag. As I made my way up towards Sainsburys a thuggish type of chap, somewhat Neanderthal in appearance, scruffy, hoodie, sort of thing, was heading towards me. He had a huge, vicious-looking dog on a heavy metal chain lead. As we passed each other his hound smelled the bangers and made a sudden lunge for my carrier bag, behind his owner's back. The chain wrapped itself round the chap's legs and he was well and truly decked. Excellent...

Subject: RE: BS: Bleeping Cyclist
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 23 - 08:04 PM

By the way, my background (and university degree from Imperial College) is in science. I taught science in schools up to 'A' Level for decades and I was a chief examiner at the University of London in 'A' Level biology. There is no claiming going on here, just a statement of how it actually is. I've never "claimed" to be a scientist because I do not need to. Suck it up, John, and try not to be so rude, eh?