Nutsey wrote:Clarkson is essentially a brilliant troll. He doesn't even need to come on this site, he's that good.
He even trolled an entire nation last week, and pre-emptively trolled the Mexican ambassador before he could hand wring in retaliation.
Search found 152 matches
- 7 Feb 2011, 9:45pm
- Forum: On the road
- Topic: Clarkson advocates cutting cyclists up
- Replies: 68
- Views: 5040
Re: Clarkson advocates cutting cyclists up
- 7 Feb 2011, 9:44pm
- Forum: On the road
- Topic: Clarkson advocates cutting cyclists up
- Replies: 68
- Views: 5040
Re: Clarkson advocates knocking cyclists off
gilesjuk wrote:NUKe wrote:If we follow this logic then we shouldn't complain when car drivers misbehave.
There's complaining to the Police and there's using your position as a TV presenter to broadcast your views to the nation. Two completely different things.
I don't think cyclists need Clarkson's blessing to use the public highway.
They're not cyclists they're "victorian distractions" and he doesn't mind them on the road.
Great idea if you ask me - cyclists add character to the road - in a quaint way.
- 7 Feb 2011, 8:56pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: Another Criminal Cyclist?
- Replies: 22
- Views: 2326
Re: Another Criminal Cyclist?
OldGreyBeard wrote:MartinC wrote:TC, it's a well known fact that all the best, most convenient and most used cycle routes are marked with the prohibitory sign.There's no point in prohibiting routes that cyclists don't want to use.
I'd never thought of it like that but it's so true!
The application of TRO's (ie prohibiting cycling) is a very blunt instrument. TRO's can be imposed in very flexible ways that wouls still aloow for cycle access at appropriate times.
Take seafront promenades. Often cycling is banned. arguably necescary on busy summer days (tho I see little reason not to have shared use) but is it really needed on a quiet autumn morning when the route would be ideal for cycling to work?
Prohibition of cycling on the pavement should be the exception rather than the rule
- 7 Feb 2011, 8:51pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: "The Government Can't Stop People Driving Badly"
- Replies: 77
- Views: 7504
Re: "The Government Can't Stop People Driving Badly"
kwackers wrote:KTM690 wrote:Even penalties for parking are harsh - plus they can tow your car away.
They are! It's cheaper to kill 4 cyclists in a car with 3 bald tyres than it is to get your towed car back!
Not so sure when you factor the cleaning costs of removing squashed cyclist from the paintwork
- 7 Feb 2011, 6:52pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: "The Government Can't Stop People Driving Badly"
- Replies: 77
- Views: 7504
Re: "The Government Can't Stop People Driving Badly"
reohn2 wrote:The government can't stop people driving badly,but they can minimize it.At present, with a distinct lack of police presence and by all accounts that presence about to become even less,add to that the paltry sentences handed down, and it seems the government's objective is to maximize bad driving IMO.
The sentences for bad driving are relatively harsh compared to other sentences/fines dished out.
Look at the sentences for burglary. Plead drug addiction and you walk free.
Fines are harsh as well for driving offences.
Even penalties for parking are harsh - plus they can tow your car away.
- 6 Feb 2011, 9:14pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: Cycles and motorcycles
- Replies: 18
- Views: 2042
Re: Cycles and motorcycles
You need relatively little room to escape in with a motorcycle.
What's percieved as tailgating can be relatively safe.
What's percieved as tailgating can be relatively safe.
- 6 Feb 2011, 9:12pm
- Forum: On the road
- Topic: Clarkson advocates cutting cyclists up
- Replies: 68
- Views: 5040
Re: Clarkson advocates knocking cyclists off
gilesjuk wrote:On Top Gear tonight Clarkson said cyclists should be knocked off as they don't pay road tax.
Given the number of Clarkson wannabees around can I expect some more abuse than usual on the bike tomorrow?
I really think the BBC should sack him, he is advocating murder and dangerous driving.
Lighten up
- 6 Feb 2011, 9:10pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: Anti-motorist?
- Replies: 42
- Views: 2828
Re: Anti-motorist?
hubgearfreak wrote:KTM690 wrote:Acceptable loss.
really?
a better standard of driving (caused by a sterner police and courts) could slash that.
if it's your son, wife, brother that gets killed for want of the motorist involved taking care - i'm sure you'll change your mind
Smoking, alcohol and chronic cake retention kill more than cars.
Make more sense to ban one of them first.
There were also 159 deaths from accidents at work.
cycling is safer than going to work - the risk of death increases as you step off the bicycle and enter the office.
- 6 Feb 2011, 6:18pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: Another Criminal Cyclist?
- Replies: 22
- Views: 2326
Re: Another Criminal Cyclist?
Is the Dartford crossing open to cyclists?
- 6 Feb 2011, 4:55pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: Another Criminal Cyclist?
- Replies: 22
- Views: 2326
Re: Another Criminal Cyclist?
I wouldn't take the incident as anti cyclist or police being daft.
They may have though you had nicked the bike and were just being nosey
They may have though you had nicked the bike and were just being nosey
- 6 Feb 2011, 4:39pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: Anti-motorist?
- Replies: 42
- Views: 2828
Re: Anti-motorist?
kwackers wrote:
As for the war on motorists, how many have died in this war? Those that have seemed to be killed pretty much by 'friendly fire' whereas large numbers of innocent bystanders have also been killed. Seems fundamentally to be a war on 'non-motorists'.
Only a 115 cyclists last year.
And 500 pedestrians.
Not all of those would be entirely the fault of drivers.
Think how many miles were covered in that time by all users.
Acceptable loss.
- 6 Feb 2011, 4:29pm
- Forum: On the road
- Topic: Police Taking No Action - Advice Please
- Replies: 67
- Views: 5390
Re: Police Taking No Action - Advice Please
thirdcrank wrote:Just to get back for a moment to the nearside overtaking thing, I was involved in something a little earlier today which left me amazed.
We are in the Leeds Green Belt here (not as rural as it sounds) but we do have plenty of riding schools hereabouts as the countryside is being urbanised. This means lots of riders out on the roads, especially on Sundays. I was driving to do my care in the community / Meals on Wheels duties when I came up behind a long string of riders, mainly of the Angels on Horseback age group, supervised by adults. I moved over to the other side of the fairly narrow (single carriageway) road to pass them with plenty of room to spare. Checking my nearside mirror I realised that the driver of a Volvo was attempting to overtake me on the inside, between me and the equestrians.![]()
Come to think of it, I don't remember anything in the HC that specifically advises people not to act like ... er .... idiots.
Maybe you pulled so far over to the right he thought you were parking?.....or he could just be daft
- 6 Feb 2011, 1:30pm
- Forum: Helmets & helmet discussion
- Topic: Stop Headway - Helmet compulsion in Northern Ireland
- Replies: 118
- Views: 10981
Re: Stop Headway - Helmet compulsion in Northern Ireland
meic wrote:Headway dont need or want anything more than "If only one child's life may possibly be saved" to justify their case.
Acceptance.
Well done for overcoming your denial.
Truth is that Headway have a greater selection/weight of evidence to warp in favor of their arguments than CTC have to warp in favor of theirs.
Plus cyclists are suffering an image problem because they keep attacking motorists re: accidents which means cycling is viewed as dangerous.
Not surprisingly an (unintended) result of this will be mandatory helmets.
So the self righteous, radical cyclist element has managed to score an own goal and screw it up for the rest of us.
Nice one
- 6 Feb 2011, 1:19pm
- Forum: Helmets & helmet discussion
- Topic: Formerly N.I. legislation - now general helmet argument
- Replies: 101
- Views: 8346
Re: Formerly N.I. legislation - now general helmet argument
snibgo wrote:It may be worth saying that cycling is generally considered good for not only the cyclist, but society in general.
A personal anecdote: I banged my head on the pavement yesterday evening. it was only a slight tap, which might not have happened if I hadn't been wearing the cycle helmet. I also banged the hip I broke last year, which wasn't clever.
It wasn't a bike accident. I had parked the bike and was walking to the community centre, stupidly didn't see the downstep in the path, and crashed down.
That'll learn you,
Take the car next time.
- 6 Feb 2011, 1:04pm
- Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
- Topic: Anti-motorist?
- Replies: 42
- Views: 2828
Re: Anti-motorist?
meic wrote:There is too much wrong with that post for me to put in the effort of correcting it all.
If you split it up into individual points they can be demolished individually before moving on to the next then I might reply.
As it stands the amount of work is too great, I am here for fun not hard work.
Suffice to say that post is mostly garbage with some irrelevant points thrown in for padding.
truth hurts - deal with it