WVM again

Heading home last night from work I went as usual south down London
road in Brighton towards the Old Stein. The north bound traffic on
this road was as usual grid locked up to the traffic lights.

WVM wanted to join the stationary traffic by turning right from a
junction on my left. The problem was no room.

We achieved eye contact so I figured there was no way he would pull
out....... wrong!

I stopped ok and as his window was open asked 'what now?'

The enlightening reply was 'I pay to use the road, you don't'

Discussing this in the office later a fellow cyclist suggested that
perhaps this is the reason behind a lot of motorist hostility to
cyclists. His suggestion is that we wear a small sign saying the car
is at home or something to that effect.

Would this be pandering to stupidity or could it be of benefit?

I might give it a go if it would reduce the aggressive behaviour.

Any suggestions?

Brian

Any suggestions?

Neutering.

Brian Drury wrote:

Any suggestions?

Ignore and move on. Reasoning is no use, they have not the brain cell
required although it's hardly his fault - society makes them like that
dontcha know. Attitudes take years to turn around, assuming anyone can
be arsed to help (inc WVM himself) and there is nothing in the world
(other than CS) that will show him the errors of his ways in the short
time you have available in these sort of situations. Thatcher's Britain eh!

Or move to France and let the ******* fight it out amongst themselves...

hth,

Tony B

Brian Drury wrote:

I stopped ok and as his window was open asked 'what now?'


No He Doesnt


And in any case - even if Road Tax DID exist and it DID pay for "you to
use the road" White Van Man is driving for a company, in a vehicle pai
for by said company and Vehicle Excise Duty paid for by the company.
So he isn;t "paying to use the road" either.

Brian Drury wrote:

I stopped ok and as his window was open asked 'what now?'

The enlightening reply was 'I pay to use the road, you don't'

Perhaps he should have said: "To enable me to use the road legally, in
this specific vehicle, an extra tax has had to be paid - no such tax is
required for the vehicle on which you are using the road. I therefore
consider that logically, I pay to use the road, you don't"? ;-)

Discussing this in the office later a fellow cyclist suggested that
perhaps this is the reason behind a lot of motorist hostility to
cyclists.

Is it fanned by the tabloid press, like the intolerance of immigrants
getting housing, benefits and health care without paying in?

His suggestion is that we wear a small sign saying the car
is at home or something to that effect.

That may only rub salt into his wounds because he may also have a car at
home, but his van needs taxing /too/.

Would this be pandering to stupidity or could it be of benefit?

It would be adding insult to injury.

I might give it a go if it would reduce the aggressive behaviour.

Report back! ;-)

Any suggestions?

Lobby for the abolition of VED?

--
Matt B

In ,
Brian Drury brian@ibisdesignsdotukfsndotorg tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:

Any suggestions?

o gun
o petrol
o matches

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
Among the calamities of war may be jointly numbered the
diminution of the love of truth, by the falsehoods which
interest dictates and credulity encourages.

On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 09:05:52 +0100, "Dave Larrington"
wrote:

In ,
Brian Drury brian@ibisdesignsdotukfsndotorg tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:

Any suggestions?

o gun
o petrol
o matches


Wot? No Lighthouse Family?


Tim

Brian Drury wrote on 04/04/2007 22:32 +0100:
Heading home last night from work I went as usual south down London
road in Brighton towards the Old Stein. The north bound traffic on
this road was as usual grid locked up to the traffic lights.

WVM wanted to join the stationary traffic by turning right from a
junction on my left. The problem was no room.

We achieved eye contact so I figured there was no way he would pull
out....... wrong!

I stopped ok and as his window was open asked 'what now?'

The enlightening reply was 'I pay to use the road, you don't'

Discussing this in the office later a fellow cyclist suggested that
perhaps this is the reason behind a lot of motorist hostility to
cyclists. His suggestion is that we wear a small sign saying the car
is at home or something to that effect.

Would this be pandering to stupidity or could it be of benefit?

I might give it a go if it would reduce the aggressive behaviour.

Any suggestions?


Two retorts much easier thought of after the event than during

"So it true when they say WVM thinks he owns the road"

or

"Its a good job I left my car at home or you could have had a modified door"
--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

On 5 Apr, 09:05, "Dave Larrington"
wrote:
,
Brian Drury brian@ibisdesignsdotukfsndotorg tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:

Any suggestions?

o gun
o petrol
o matches

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
Among the calamities of war may be jointly numbered the
diminution of the love of truth, by the falsehoods which
interest dictates and credulity encourages.

Point out that YOU pay for HIM to use the roads.

He owes you and other cyclists around £1000 a year.

Tell him you'll accept used fivers.

Brian Drury said the following on 04/04/2007 22:32:

Any suggestions?

You say the window was open? Well, there's no problem there that a
well-aimed hand grenade wouldn't cure :-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/