Disabled cyclist denied access to Brighton Pier.

On 19 Aug, 10:35, JNugent wrote:
Doug wrote:

[ ... ]

When are you motorists here going to grudgingly admit that disabled
cyclists are discriminated against? Maybe I should start posting
threads criticising disable motorists and all the privileges they
enjoy.

What am I allowed to do which a "disabled cyclist" (to the extent that there
is any difference between that and a disabled person who happens to want to
ride a bicycle) is not allowed to do?

Please be specific.

I shouldn't be surprised to hear that there is no difference at all between
our rights and privileges and that he is allowed to do anything and
everything that I am allowed to do - ie, that he is not being discrimunated
against for any normal and acceptable construction of "discrimate" and its
derivatives.

OTOH, that probably isn't a reversible argument - there will almost certainly
be things a disabled person is allowed to do which I am not allowed o do.

Isn't it glaringly obvious?

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow you
to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway platforms and
stations and places like Brighton Pier which discriminate against
disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get away with it.

Doug.

On 19 Aug, 18:40, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 18 Aug, 17:56, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 17 Aug, 17:54, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-

Fortunately Brighton is very cycle friendly, except for the pier,
and has a wide shared pavement along the length of the front.

I don't think so;

"Inspector James Biggs, of the Sussex Police road policing unit at
Hove, said: "Our communities in Brighton and Hove are regularly
raising concerns about anti-social cycling, where cyclists are
cycling on pavements, having no regard for red traffic lights and
cycling without lights at night".

"This behaviour puts both the cyclists and other road users at risk
and we will respond robustly to anyone found committing such
offences."

Well of course the police are not friendly, they never are.

Shock horror! Police not friendly towards law breakers!

I was pulled over a while ago, my van exhaust was smoking badly, it
was booked into a garage to be sorted.

The police were very friendly, even helpful & sympathetic. They were
more interested in me getting home safely than anything else. Nice
chaps.

Of course that might be because I was polite & didn't try to claim I
had the right to do whatever I liked.

Well of course the police are friendly to fellow drivers but not
cyclists.

I wonder why? *Is it because they are all tedious little ****s who 'know
their rights'?

It is plainly apparent where, for example, a car or taxi
deliberately rams a cyclists and the police almost always sides with
the driver. It is deeply embedded in their nature, unless they happen
to be a serious cyclists themselves, which is rare.

This ramming appears to be a figment of your imagination. *The police would
have a duty to take action against anyone proven to have done it.

But they don't, as numerous examples have shown. Here's just one...

"It seemed bizarre, that as the BMW pushed into the wheel of the
bicycle, police took the side of the motorist. I'm sure if it had been
a police bicycle, a completely different scenario would have occurred.
Some of the police seem to have taken an anti-cyclist stance".

Over to you for an example of the police taking action against a
rammer driver.

You smoking van is a prime example. It should have been taken off the
road immediately by the cops but they probably didn't want the hassle
and hence seemed sympathetic. Lucky old you!

It could have been taken off the road, but I politely explained that it had
been to the garage to be diagnosed, they had ordered the part and it was
booked in to be done.

It was still illegal.

They appreciated that I'm self employed (instead of being a scrounging
layabout like you) and that having the van off the road would cost money.
They also realised that I was acting in a responsible manner by having the
problem sorted.

Nevertheless it was still illegal and the police, as fellow drivers,
failed to exercise their duty

Of course if I'd been a bolshie **** like most cyclists & 'knew my rights'
they probably would have taken action.

Bicycles don't emit clouds of smoke. This newsgroup is hot on pointing
out the illegal actions of cyclists but when it comes to the illegal
action of a driver everyone is "very friendly, even helpful &
sympathetic". Typical!

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
All public road users are equal but some are more equal than others.

Doug wrote:
On 19 Aug, 10:35, JNugent wrote:
Doug wrote:

[ ... ]

When are you motorists here going to grudgingly admit that disabled
cyclists are discriminated against? Maybe I should start posting
threads criticising disable motorists and all the privileges they
enjoy.

What am I allowed to do which a "disabled cyclist" (to the extent
that there is any difference between that and a disabled person who
happens to want to ride a bicycle) is not allowed to do?

Please be specific.

I shouldn't be surprised to hear that there is no difference at all
between our rights and privileges and that he is allowed to do
anything and everything that I am allowed to do - ie, that he is not
being discrimunated against for any normal and acceptable
construction of "discrimate" and its derivatives.

OTOH, that probably isn't a reversible argument - there will almost
certainly be things a disabled person is allowed to do which I am
not allowed o do.

Isn't it glaringly obvious?

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow you
to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway platforms and
stations and places like Brighton Pier which discriminate against
disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get away with it.

Doug.

why don't you use your disability mobility allowance to go to these places
in comfort and take your wheelchair with you?

On Aug 20, 7:43*am, Doug wrote:
On 19 Aug, 10:35, JNugent wrote:

Doug wrote:

[ ... ]

When are you motorists here going to grudgingly admit that disabled
cyclists are discriminated against? Maybe I should start posting
threads criticising disable motorists and all the privileges they
enjoy.

What am I allowed to do which a "disabled cyclist" (to the extent that there
is any difference between that and a disabled person who happens to want to
ride a bicycle) is not allowed to do?

Please be specific.

I shouldn't be surprised to hear that there is no difference at all between
our rights and privileges and that he is allowed to do anything and
everything that I am allowed to do - ie, that he is not being discrimunated
against for any normal and acceptable construction of "discrimate" and its
derivatives.

OTOH, that probably isn't a reversible argument - there will almost certainly
be things a disabled person is allowed to do which I am not allowed o do.

Isn't it glaringly obvious?

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow you
to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway platforms and
stations and places like Brighton Pier which discriminate against
disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get away with it.

Doug.

Cycles are obviously percieved of as a danger, probably because of the
way some cyclist act, cycles are banned on the pier.
If you don't like it take it up with the human rights people, you
quote your rights every week.

On 20/08/2010 07:43, Doug wrote:

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow you
to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway platforms and
stations and places like Brighton Pier which discriminate against
disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get away with it.

The number of times it's been suggested that bicycles can carry huge
amounts of luggage, shopping etc I'm surprised you don't take your
wheelchair with you. After all, you've posted pics of your trailer, I'm
sure that would accommodate a wheelchair.

Beats me why you're so worried about Brighton, have you moved there, and
how did you move? Or was this just a holiday, you know, frivolous
hyper-mobility that you've often moaned about in the past?

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

On Aug 20, 8:45*am, Paul - xxx wrote:
On 20/08/2010 07:43, Doug wrote:

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow you
to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway platforms and
stations and places like Brighton Pier which discriminate against
disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get away with it.

The number of times it's been suggested that bicycles can carry huge
amounts of luggage, shopping etc I'm surprised you don't take your
wheelchair with you. *After all, you've posted pics of your trailer, I'm
sure that would accommodate a wheelchair.

Beats me why you're so worried about Brighton, have you moved there, and
how did you move? *Or was this just a holiday, you know, frivolous
hyper-mobility that you've often moaned about in the past?

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

He went there on a day trip, using a motorised vehicle (a coach).
He has previously told us that he does not like travelling in vehicles
that use diesel power.
He has told us that he would not use a diesel powered train.
Most Brighton trains are electric, I wonder why he did not use one of
them?

Perhaps he used the most convient method of travel for him, something
that he complains if others do.

Can anybody think of a word that describes such a person?

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 03:13:41 -0700, francis garbled:

On Aug 20, 8:45Â*am, Paul - xxx wrote:
On 20/08/2010 07:43, Doug wrote:

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow
you to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway
platforms and stations and places like Brighton Pier which
discriminate against disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get
away with it.

The number of times it's been suggested that bicycles can carry huge
amounts of luggage, shopping etc I'm surprised you don't take your
wheelchair with you. Â*After all, you've posted pics of your trailer,
I'm sure that would accommodate a wheelchair.

Beats me why you're so worried about Brighton, have you moved there,
and how did you move? Â*Or was this just a holiday, you know, frivolous
hyper-mobility that you've often moaned about in the past?

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

He went there on a day trip, using a motorised vehicle (a coach). He has
previously told us that he does not like travelling in vehicles that use
diesel power.
He has told us that he would not use a diesel powered train. Most
Brighton trains are electric, I wonder why he did not use one of them?

Perhaps he used the most convient method of travel for him, something
that he complains if others do.

Can anybody think of a word that describes such a person?

Does it begin with H?

--

Mike P

On Aug 20, 11:15*am, Mike P wrote:
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 03:13:41 -0700, francis garbled:



On Aug 20, 8:45*am, Paul - xxx wrote:
On 20/08/2010 07:43, Doug wrote:

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow
you to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway
platforms and stations and places like Brighton Pier which
discriminate against disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get
away with it.

The number of times it's been suggested that bicycles can carry huge
amounts of luggage, shopping etc I'm surprised you don't take your
wheelchair with you. *After all, you've posted pics of your trailer,
I'm sure that would accommodate a wheelchair.

Beats me why you're so worried about Brighton, have you moved there,
and how did you move? *Or was this just a holiday, you know, frivolous
hyper-mobility that you've often moaned about in the past?

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

He went there on a day trip, using a motorised vehicle (a coach). He has
previously told us that he does not like travelling in vehicles that use
diesel power.
He has told us that he would not use a diesel powered train. Most
Brighton trains are electric, *I wonder why he did not use one of them?

Perhaps he used the most convient method of travel for him, something
that he complains if others do.

Can anybody think of a word that describes such a person?

Does it begin with H?

--

Mike P

There is a high probabilty that it does.

Doug wrote:
On 19 Aug, 10:35, JNugent wrote:
Doug wrote:

[ ... ]

When are you motorists here going to grudgingly admit that disabled
cyclists are discriminated against? Maybe I should start posting
threads criticising disable motorists and all the privileges they
enjoy.
What am I allowed to do which a "disabled cyclist" (to the extent that there
is any difference between that and a disabled person who happens to want to
ride a bicycle) is not allowed to do?

Please be specific.

I shouldn't be surprised to hear that there is no difference at all between
our rights and privileges and that he is allowed to do anything and
everything that I am allowed to do - ie, that he is not being discrimunated
against for any normal and acceptable construction of "discrimate" and its
derivatives.

OTOH, that probably isn't a reversible argument - there will almost certainly
be things a disabled person is allowed to do which I am not allowed o do.

Isn't it glaringly obvious?

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow you
to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway platforms and
stations and places like Brighton Pier which discriminate against
disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get away with it.

Anywhere a "disabled cyclist" is banned from cycling, *I* also am banned from
cycling. Where is the discrimination?

In an effort to be constructive, could you not put a wheelchair in that
little trailer you tow around with your bike or trike?

On 20 Aug, 07:56, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 19 Aug, 10:35, JNugent wrote:
Doug wrote:

[ ... ]

When are you motorists here going to grudgingly admit that disabled
cyclists are discriminated against? Maybe I should start posting
threads criticising disable motorists and all the privileges they
enjoy.

What am I allowed to do which a "disabled cyclist" (to the extent
that there is any difference between that and a disabled person who
happens to want to ride a bicycle) is not allowed to do?

Please be specific.

I shouldn't be surprised to hear that there is no difference at all
between our rights and privileges and that he is allowed to do
anything and everything that I am allowed to do - ie, that he is not
being discrimunated against for any normal and acceptable
construction of "discrimate" and its derivatives.

OTOH, that probably isn't a reversible argument - there will almost
certainly be things a disabled person is allowed to do which I am
not allowed o do.

Isn't it glaringly obvious?

If you are a disabled person who uses a wheelchair you are allowed to
go places that a disabled cyclist is not. Even if you are a disable
motorist you can carry a wheelchair in your boot which would allow you
to go where cyclists are not, such as pavements, railway platforms and
stations and places like Brighton Pier which discriminate against
disabled cyclists and are still allowed to get away with it.

Doug.

why don't you use your disability mobility allowance to go to these places
in comfort and take your wheelchair with you?

Good question. Firstly I do not get a disability allowance because |
am too old to claim. Secondly the typical range of an arm-driven
wheelchair is much too limited compared to that of a bicycle and
special arrangements have to be made for ramps to be deployed for them
to access and leave trains. Bicycles OTOH can easily be wheeled onto
trains and across the gap. Another point is that wheelchairs are not
supposed to be used on roads and pavements do not always have dropped
kerbs which makes life difficult for the wheelchair user.

Doug.