A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Not a viable means of transport



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 4th 10, 10:50 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Raven[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,347
Default Not a viable means of transport

The Institute of Advanced Motorists is recommending bicycles as the best
way of getting round London in the Tube strike and says "taking the car
is not going to be a viable option for most."

http://www.iam.org.uk/latest_news/ge...iththeiam.html

Tony
Ads
  #2  
Old October 5th 10, 07:58 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 645
Default Not a viable means of transport

On 5 Oct, 01:05, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
The Institute of Advanced Motorists is recommending bicycles as the
best way of getting round London in the Tube strike and says "taking
the car is not going to be a viable option for most."


No **** sherlock?

However, on the other 364 days of the year....


Only one strike a year? How is fatty Crow going to justify his £100k
salary with one poxy strike?

--
Simon Mason
  #3  
Old October 5th 10, 08:28 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Trevor A Panther[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default Not a viable means of transport


" wrote in message
...
On 5 Oct, 01:05, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
The Institute of Advanced Motorists is recommending bicycles as the
best way of getting round London in the Tube strike and says "taking
the car is not going to be a viable option for most."


No **** sherlock?

However, on the other 364 days of the year....


Only one strike a year? How is fatty Crow going to justify his £100k
salary with one poxy strike?

--
Simon Mason


Hi there Simon

I remember that several months ago you decided to abandon urc when you
stated that you were being harassed over the source of your postings. and
were migrating to "urcm"

The trouble was then, as it is now, is that you insist on engageing in
endless baiting of the same few "trolls" ( I don't like the term but it
serves its purpose).

So here you are again doing exactly the same as before and, as before, you
do yourself and other "cyclists" no favours at all with this endless
wrangling.

I confess that, although I cycle every day and use my little Suziki Swift
about once every fortnight, I have come to consider myself just as an
odinary "person". I certainly am not a "motorist" ( although I hate to
think how many thousand of miles I have driven in my life). And I am
cerrtainly not a "cyclist" or a "pedestrian"

None of those term actually ought to be applied to anyone -- I am just a
person who does an awful lot of ordinary things in any day.

I shun being labelled in this way. I am not a "cyclist" -- cycling is a
very small part of my whole life -- it is even a very small part of my 24
hour day.

I have got weary of all the interminable rubbish that is posted by foolish
people who take up impossible stances and refuse to jump off their pedestal.

I find that there are just a many "mission cyclists" as "mission motorists"
and just "mission posters"

And here is my own mission -- I will not waste my precious last few years
of my life reading such twaddle that you -- with many others -- insist in
endless repitition of your particular foibles.


From
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk



  #4  
Old October 5th 10, 09:22 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mike P[_16_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Not a viable means of transport

On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 08:28:04 +0100, Trevor A Panther boggled us with:

" wrote in message
...
On 5 Oct, 01:05, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
The Institute of Advanced Motorists is recommending bicycles as the
best way of getting round London in the Tube strike and says "taking
the car is not going to be a viable option for most."


No **** sherlock?

However, on the other 364 days of the year....


Only one strike a year? How is fatty Crow going to justify his £100k
salary with one poxy strike?

--
Simon Mason


Hi there Simon

I remember that several months ago you decided to abandon urc when you
stated that you were being harassed over the source of your postings.
and were migrating to "urcm"

The trouble was then, as it is now, is that you insist on engageing in
endless baiting of the same few "trolls" ( I don't like the term but it
serves its purpose).

So here you are again doing exactly the same as before and, as before,
you do yourself and other "cyclists" no favours at all with this
endless wrangling.

I confess that, although I cycle every day and use my little Suziki
Swift about once every fortnight, I have come to consider myself just as
an odinary "person". I certainly am not a "motorist" ( although I hate
to think how many thousand of miles I have driven in my life). And I am
cerrtainly not a "cyclist" or a "pedestrian"

None of those term actually ought to be applied to anyone -- I am just
a person who does an awful lot of ordinary things in any day.

I shun being labelled in this way. I am not a "cyclist" -- cycling is a
very small part of my whole life -- it is even a very small part of my
24 hour day.

I have got weary of all the interminable rubbish that is posted by
foolish people who take up impossible stances and refuse to jump off
their pedestal.

I find that there are just a many "mission cyclists" as "mission
motorists" and just "mission posters"

And here is my own mission -- I will not waste my precious last few
years of my life reading such twaddle that you -- with many others --
insist in endless repitition of your particular foibles.


Was this meant to be sent via email? Or is it some kind of ironic reply?


--
Mike P
  #5  
Old October 5th 10, 09:23 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 645
Default Not a viable means of transport

On 5 Oct, 08:28, "Trevor A Panther" wrote:


And here is my own mission *-- I will not waste my precious last few years
of my life reading such twaddle that you -- with many others -- insist in
endless repitition of your particular foibles.


A good decision Trevor, if only I was as sensible as you. I only came
back because a poster here expressed glee at a female cyclist I know
getting crushed under a shed lorry load. He made out that this
grandmother and carers death was god's way of punishing cyclists for
having no lights on in his neck of the woods, or words to that effect.

I decided to stay around for a while as well as posting to ucrm. I am
sorry that you find my posts "twaddle" as I try and keep them as
sensible and level headed as possible without having to resort to
personal attacks or foul abuse as some posters seem to when they start
to use the plot.

Since I also own and maintain a car, I am also a motorist, but as this
is a cycling ng, talking about speed cameras and the like would be OT,
so I try not to bring too many aspect of my car driving experiences in
as they would be OT. I could bore people to death about my time
driving around in 25 European countries and their differing road
cultures.

Hope to see you around for many more than just a "precious last few
years".

All the best.
--
Simon Mason
  #7  
Old October 5th 10, 10:52 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
mileburner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,365
Default Not a viable means of transport


"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
wrote:

A good decision Trevor, if only I was as sensible as you. I only came
back because a poster here expressed glee at a female cyclist I know
getting crushed under a shed lorry load.


I said that God moves in mysterious ways, the method of death was worthy
of any TV show, such as 1001 ways to die.


I fail to see how, when somone dies as a result of a road traffic accident,
it could be deemed as worthy of a TV show. Perhaps if the person who died
was doing something incredibly stupid and incredibly dangerous there may be
some point. But this was merely a case of an unfortunate person, doing
something generally regarded as quite safe, but being involved in a fatal
accident.

I also questioned the lack of common sense of cyclists in using a road
that is known to be very dangerous. and it is quite possible that she
caused the lorry to swerve and shed its load. (no pun intended)


Anything is quite possible. It is quite possible the poor unfortunate woman
was pulling wheelies while riding against the traffic - unlikely, but quite
possible, and in which case there might be some reason to scoff at her
death. But as far as we know, this was not the case. All the woman was
guilty of doing is riding a bike on a busy roundabout. There is no evidence
that she caused anyone to swerve.

I know that cyclists often do stupid things. They often pull out of side
roads or onto roundabouts without looking or giving way. But the really
stupid thing they do is not take into account how stupid drivers might be
and what *they* might do. Things like lorries taking roundabouts too fast
while trying to pass a cyclist to close and losing control of their vehicle.
Which seems to me the most likely thing that happened whether this happened
or not.


  #8  
Old October 5th 10, 11:06 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 645
Default Not a viable means of transport

On 5 Oct, 10:52, "mileburner" wrote:
Things like lorries taking roundabouts too fast
while trying to pass a cyclist to close and losing control of their vehicle.
Which seems to me the most likely thing that happened whether this happened
or not.


This is borne out by the fact that four lorries have overturned on
four roundabouts on this road in recents months.
The drivers are taking them at far too fast a speed, the last one
actually overturned landing on a cycle path.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...l/article.html


--
Simon Mason
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Yes that Means YOU!!! IAMGOD Recumbent Biking 0 November 11th 06 09:52 PM
red means.... Zebee Johnstone Australia 30 October 16th 06 09:03 AM
Low T/E: What It Means Bruce Wilson Racing 28 August 19th 06 06:52 PM
Electric bicycles: Viable or not? [email protected] Techniques 72 August 17th 06 05:25 AM
New to this....which means...I know nothing! Dru Mountain Biking 6 December 13th 05 07:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.