Columbia bike rider gets hit with SUV, ticket

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 20:33:36 +0000,
(Ekul Namsob) wrote:

Matt B wrote:



Driving is a mere priviledge.

We've been through this before. Driving is an absolute right once
you've completed the legal formalities, and stick to the rules.

That is not an absolute right, in my understanding of the term.

People have an absolute right to education, for example. Even those who
break the rules have the right to it in this country.

A right for those who have completed the formalities and stick to the
rules may also be known as a privilege: "A special advantage, immunity,
permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual,
class, or caste..."


Exactly.

The Home Office has specifically declared that the misconception that
driving is a right is wrong, when they state that it instead "... is a
privilege, earned by proving competence in safe driving, and
withdrawable on proof of incompetence and dangerousness."

Can't really argue with that, can you?

wrote:

The Home Office has specifically declared that the misconception that
driving is a right is wrong,

Exactly. Saying "driving is a right is wrong" _is_ a misconception.

when they state that it instead "... is a
privilege, earned by proving competence in safe driving, and
withdrawable on proof of incompetence and dangerousness."

And the first part of the sentence, which you /accidentally/ omitted
nails it, doesn't it. The full quote:

"The _right_ to drive is a privilege, earned by proving competence in
safe driving, and withdrawable on proof of incompetence and
dangerousness." (my emphasis).

Can't really argue with that, can you?

Not now we see it all, no. It confirms that driving _is_ a right. It
is there in black and white. And the right /can/ be withdrawn (as it
says) in the same way as the right to cycle can be withdrawn.

Now behave yourself.

--
Matt B

Quoting Ekul Namsob :
David Damerell wrote:
Quoting Ekul Namsob :
By the way, how much of the electricity in your household
comes from renewable sources?
What's that got to do with loss of life to motor vehicles?
Nothing. It has a lot to do with loss of life to environmental
catastrophe.

So this is a dodge, basically, to avoid admitting that by driving you
endanger others.

I've excised the whining where you illustrate that you are happy to risk
other people's lives for your own convenience.
Thanks for the giggle. Now go and troll elsewhere.

It's obviously easier to label something a troll than to face up to the
fact that your habits are dangerous.
--
David Damerell Kill the tomato!
Today is Olethros, March - a weekend.

On 5 Mar, 15:48, David Damerell
wrote:
Quoting Ekul Namsob :

David Damerell wrote:
Quoting Ekul Namsob :
However, no-one has yet adequately explained why I, as a responsible
driver, pedestrian and cyclist, should be held responsible for the
idiocy of an irresponsible pedestrian or cyclist if they choose to
ignore the law.
If you drive you have chosen to make the world dangerous.
No. I haven't.

Motor cars are dangerous. Don't attempt to deny it.

A lot of things are dangerous. Knives are dangerous, electricity is
dangerous, bricks are dangerous
(if one falls on you).

If used properly though they are perfectly safe.

The same with motor cars - if driven in a sensible way.

I've excised the whining where you illustrate that you are happy to risk
other people's lives for your own convenience.

By driving dangerously or simply by driving at all?

"Earl Purple" wrote in message
A lot of things are dangerous. Knives are dangerous, electricity is
dangerous, bricks are dangerous
(if one falls on you).

If citizens were regularly put in fear by the careless use of knives, bricks
or electricity, what would happen?
Mike Sales

David Damerell wrote:

Quoting Ekul Namsob :
David Damerell wrote:
Quoting Ekul Namsob :
By the way, how much of the electricity in your household
comes from renewable sources?
What's that got to do with loss of life to motor vehicles?
Nothing. It has a lot to do with loss of life to environmental
catastrophe.

So this is a dodge, basically, to avoid admitting that by driving you
endanger others.

No. However, do you buy food directly from local organic farms? If not,
you are endangering others by encouraging the use of lorries.

Consider: in what ways does your lifestyle as a consumer encourage
others not to drive?

I've excised the whining where you illustrate that you are happy to risk
other people's lives for your own convenience.
Thanks for the giggle. Now go and troll elsewhere.

It's obviously easier to label something a troll than to face up to the
fact that your habits are dangerous.

It is obviously easier to troll than to engage in intelligent debate. If
you would like to engage in intelligent debate then that's great, I'm
here and I'm interested.

If you bothered to answer the points raised in my post I would not
consider you a troll. However, you class those points as whining.

You have a black and white view of the world. Now, please tell me:

how am /I/, as a driver of good repute, guilty of endangering others?

how should I support my family without a job?

what are /you/ doing to encourage the necessary societal change that
would enable me, and many others, not to commute daily?

do /you/ buy anything that has been manufactured, assembled or delivered
by motor vehicle?

Cheers,
Luke


--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

Mike Sales wrote:

"Earl Purple" wrote in message
A lot of things are dangerous. Knives are dangerous, electricity is
dangerous, bricks are dangerous
(if one falls on you).

If citizens were regularly put in fear by the careless use of knives, bricks
or electricity, what would happen?

Fortunately, citizens are not regularly scared by the careless use of
any of them. Including cars.

Well, not here anyway.

Cue whining from Mr. Damerell about how, actually, I'm defending the
indefensible and how he only eats food from his own smallholding. His
computer is made from parts which were all sourced locally and delivered
by rickshaw.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

"Ekul Namsob" wrote in message
Fortunately, citizens are not regularly scared by the careless use of
any of them. Including cars.

Jon Snow sounds a bit spooked. I agree with the doctrine that proper skill
and attention makes cycling reasonably safe, but nevertheless many people
just do not have the nerve to ride a bike, at all, or on the road.

Mike Sales

Quoting Ekul Namsob :
David Damerell wrote:
Quoting Ekul Namsob :
Nothing. It has a lot to do with loss of life to environmental
catastrophe.
So this is a dodge, basically, to avoid admitting that by driving you
endanger others.
No. However, do you buy food directly from local organic farms?

Still dodging, I see. Give it up; you're not going to win the
environmental distraction against a childfree non-driver, and it's a
distraction anyway.
--
David Damerell Kill the tomato!
Today is Tuesday, March.

Mike Sales wrote:

"Ekul Namsob" wrote in message
Fortunately, citizens are not regularly scared by the careless use of
any of them. Including cars.

Jon Snow sounds a bit spooked. I agree with the doctrine that proper skill
and attention makes cycling reasonably safe, but nevertheless many people
just do not have the nerve to ride a bike, at all, or on the road.

Many people do not have the nerve to eat rabbit. Certainly, efforts
should be made to encourage road users to be more considerate and to
encourage motorists to reduce their reliance on cars.

However, my comment above was in response to an attempt to elicit a
response suggesting that cars should be banned, a proposal which is
neither realistic nor sensible.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush