bad name for cyclists

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...782378,00.html

(last paragraph of column)

BugBear

bugbear wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...782378,00.html

(last paragraph of column)

Bit of a rant, isn't it?

Simon Bennett wrote:
bugbear wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...782378,00.html

(last paragraph of column)


Bit of a rant, isn't it?


Couldn't have been one of us though ...
"But there is nothing like having a podgy, middle-class sociopath leave
cycle-shaped bruises on your arms and legs to change your mind."
All the best
Dan Gregory

Dan Gregory wrote:

"But there is nothing like having a podgy, middle-class sociopath
leave cycle-shaped bruises on your arms and legs to change your mind."

Alas, Summer is the season of the part-time cyclist.

Simon Bennett wrote:
bugbear wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...782378,00.html

(last paragraph of column)

Bit of a rant, isn't it?

And fully justified by the sound of it.

pk

Simon Bennett came up with the following;:
bugbear wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...782378,00.html

(last paragraph of column)

Bit of a rant, isn't it?

But it does appear she has some justification in what she's saying.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

"p.k." wrote in message
...
Simon Bennett wrote:
bugbear wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...782378,00.html

(last paragraph of column)

Bit of a rant, isn't it?

And fully justified by the sound of it.

No. Not at all. Rant about pavement cyclists and others breaking the
existing laws, yes, but to demand the imposition of cycle registration etc
is as previously discussed not justified at all.

clive

This woman drives to work every day (Kentish Town to Farringdon),
according to a Guardian source. I wonder if she would be forthcoming if
we asked where this happened...

p.k. wrote:
Simon Bennett wrote:
bugbear wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...782378,00.html

(last paragraph of column)

Bit of a rant, isn't it?

And fully justified by the sound of it.

There is a rant that would have been fully justified by the events as
reported but it is not the one written. She extrapolates from the
indefensible[1] behaviour of one cyclist that "too many" cyclists have
an attitude problem and that this will result in similar behavior by
them and concludes that this justifies licensing and registration.

I am not convinced that rudeness in London is the preserve of cyclists
nor even that they are over represented. The perception that
anti-social cycling is a problem requiring some sort of specific
solution probably comes from a combination of lazy columnists and from
direct experience arising at least partly from cycling's rising modal
share in London. Whether cyclists in London are now more likely to
cycle anti-socially or even whether the increase in absolute numbers
means that anti-social cycling justifies any sort of targetted
response, I do not have enough information to judge.

best wishes
james


[1] I am making an assumption that she has objectively abd fairly
summarised the circumstances

p.k. wrote:
And fully justified by the sound of it.

The rant is justified, the conclusion isn't.

d.