Survey - Lorry Drivers vs Cyclists

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 15:29:21 -0000, "mileburner"
wrote:

Vicko Zoomba wrote:
On 16 Jan, 22:14, Marc wrote:

There isn't one, there aren't enough literate lorry drivers for it
to be worth the effort.

ho ho ho....well as a lorry driver I'm probably educated far higher
than you will ever be.

Err, no you are wrong. Marc would win on the education comparison.



I don't think that an Open University degree is anything special - do
you?

BSc Hons (Open) , Systems thinking, Environment and Policy

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:25:40 +0000, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

"OG" considered Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:58:02
-0000 the perfect time to write:



snip


That was how you responded to the survey?

If so, we'd better warn CTC that it's now doubly invalid, since they
were looking for responses from cyclists to this survey, and truckers
in the other (so far undiscovered) one.


I am an occasional cyclist - are you saying that my views do not
count?

On Jan 17, 10:45*am, JMS wrote:
There is a running thread in uk.rec.cycling.moderated about a survey
being done for the CTC regarding cyclists and lorry drivers.

Some have said that the design of the survey is totally biased in
favour of cyclists

The site says : "If you are a regular cyclist, please answer the 10
questions that follow."

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?s...DNa0bc2A_3d_3d

I have x-posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.driving as there are probably
occasional cyclists who may want to take part in the survey.

--
Many cyclists are proving the need for registration by their contempt for the Highway Code and laws.

The answer:
All cyclists over 16 to take compulsory test, have compulsory insurance, and be registered.
Registration number to be clearly visible on the back of mandatory hi-viz vest.
Habitual law breakers' cycles confiscated and crushed.
(With thanks to KeithT for the idea)

we have similar (and different) problems here
http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-stan...ouring-cyclist

On 18/01/2010 00:32, NM wrote:
On 17 Jan, 21:37, wrote:
On 17/01/2010 21:16, NM wrote:

On 17 Jan, 20:26, wrote:
On 17/01/2010 20:10, Peter Grange wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:02:28 -0000, "Brimstone"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
NM wrote:
On 17 Jan, 15:29, wrote:
Vicko Zoomba wrote:
On 16 Jan, 22:14, wrote:

There isn't one, there aren't enough literate lorry drivers for it
to be worth the effort.

ho ho ho....well as a lorry driver I'm probably educated far higher
than you will ever be.

Err, no you are wrong. Marc would win on the education comparison.

Wanna bet?

I don't gamble, but if you are suggesting that they education required to
be a lorry driver exceeds the education of the poster known as Marc
then you are wrong.
The education needed to do a job has nothing to do with the education some
of the people doing the job have received.

Agreed, but he did say "as a lorry driver".

It doesn't make any difference, you can't trust anything a lorry driver
says. Don't forget this is the "profession" that is so untrustworthy
that the Government had to set up weighbridges because lorry drivers
can't be trusted to drive at a legal weight limit; Tachographs because
they couldn't be trusted to stay within their hours, even their hours
are restricted because they can't be trusted to drive when they aren't
tired; speed limiters because they can't be trusted to keep to speed
limits. Lorry drivers have shown over and over again that they can't be
trusted, so why would lieing about education bother them?

Really eating you that you couldn't make HGV isn't it.

Never interested me, I like sleeping at home and having a shower in the
morning.

I suppose there are those who appreciate a boring unadventurous life,
the world needs worker bees. In my HGV I have travelled every country
in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East to places far away as
Pakistan, Muscat, and Kano Nigeria, meanwhile you drive a supermarket,
each to their own.


Yawn!

A smelly gopher is a smelly gopher, no matter how far it's s(c)ent .

"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2010 20:10, Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:02:28 -0000, "Brimstone"
wrote:



wrote in message
...
NM wrote:
On 17 Jan, 15:29, wrote:
Vicko Zoomba wrote:
On 16 Jan, 22:14, wrote:

There isn't one, there aren't enough literate lorry drivers for it
to be worth the effort.

ho ho ho....well as a lorry driver I'm probably educated far higher
than you will ever be.

Err, no you are wrong. Marc would win on the education comparison.

Wanna bet?

I don't gamble, but if you are suggesting that they education required
to
be a lorry driver exceeds the education of the poster known as Marc
then you are wrong.
The education needed to do a job has nothing to do with the education
some
of the people doing the job have received.


Agreed, but he did say "as a lorry driver".

It doesn't make any difference, you can't trust anything a lorry driver
says. Don't forget this is the "profession" that is so untrustworthy that
the Government had to set up weighbridges because lorry drivers can't be
trusted to drive at a legal weight limit; Tachographs because they
couldn't be trusted to stay within their hours, even their hours are
restricted because they can't be trusted to drive when they aren't tired;
speed limiters because they can't be trusted to keep to speed limits.
Lorry drivers have shown over and over again that they can't be trusted,
so why would lieing about education bother them?

And no scientist ever manipulates results to his employers advantage in
order to keep his job?

No, of course not.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:50:05 +0000, Marc
wrote:

On 17/01/2010 22:24, Conor wrote:
In , Marc says...

Really eating you that you couldn't make HGV isn't it.
Never interested me, I like sleeping at home and having a shower in the
morning.

So do I. Managed to do that for the 16 years I drove trucks.

The exception that proves the rule?

Unlike you,
I also found the time to spell "lying" correctly.

It's a discussion with lorry drivers, not worth the effort.


I would tread very, very carefully if I was you :-)

On 18/01/2010 09:38, Brimstone wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2010 20:10, Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:02:28 -0000, "Brimstone"
wrote:



wrote in message
...
NM wrote:
On 17 Jan, 15:29, wrote:
Vicko Zoomba wrote:
On 16 Jan, 22:14, wrote:

There isn't one, there aren't enough literate lorry drivers for it
to be worth the effort.

ho ho ho....well as a lorry driver I'm probably educated far higher
than you will ever be.

Err, no you are wrong. Marc would win on the education comparison.

Wanna bet?

I don't gamble, but if you are suggesting that they education
required to
be a lorry driver exceeds the education of the poster known as Marc
then you are wrong.
The education needed to do a job has nothing to do with the
education some
of the people doing the job have received.


Agreed, but he did say "as a lorry driver".

It doesn't make any difference, you can't trust anything a lorry
driver says. Don't forget this is the "profession" that is so
untrustworthy that the Government had to set up weighbridges because
lorry drivers can't be trusted to drive at a legal weight limit;
Tachographs because they couldn't be trusted to stay within their
hours, even their hours are restricted because they can't be trusted
to drive when they aren't tired; speed limiters because they can't be
trusted to keep to speed limits. Lorry drivers have shown over and
over again that they can't be trusted, so why would lieing about
education bother them?

And no scientist ever manipulates results to his employers advantage in
order to keep his job?

No, of course not.


Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no comparison
between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry drivers. Over
decades and repeatedly, lorry drivers have been shown to be
untrustworthy over loads, hours, speeds etc...

"JMS" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:25:40 +0000, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

"OG" considered Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:58:02
-0000 the perfect time to write:



snip


That was how you responded to the survey?

If so, we'd better warn CTC that it's now doubly invalid, since they
were looking for responses from cyclists to this survey, and truckers
in the other (so far undiscovered) one.


I am an occasional cyclist - are you saying that my views do not
count?


Of course they count, I just wonder whether those were your actual responses
that you submitted to the survey.

"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 18/01/2010 09:38, Brimstone wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2010 20:10, Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:02:28 -0000, "Brimstone"
wrote:



wrote in message
...
NM wrote:
On 17 Jan, 15:29, wrote:
Vicko Zoomba wrote:
On 16 Jan, 22:14, wrote:

There isn't one, there aren't enough literate lorry drivers for
it
to be worth the effort.

ho ho ho....well as a lorry driver I'm probably educated far
higher
than you will ever be.

Err, no you are wrong. Marc would win on the education comparison.

Wanna bet?

I don't gamble, but if you are suggesting that they education
required to
be a lorry driver exceeds the education of the poster known as Marc
then you are wrong.
The education needed to do a job has nothing to do with the
education some
of the people doing the job have received.


Agreed, but he did say "as a lorry driver".

It doesn't make any difference, you can't trust anything a lorry
driver says. Don't forget this is the "profession" that is so
untrustworthy that the Government had to set up weighbridges because
lorry drivers can't be trusted to drive at a legal weight limit;
Tachographs because they couldn't be trusted to stay within their
hours, even their hours are restricted because they can't be trusted
to drive when they aren't tired; speed limiters because they can't be
trusted to keep to speed limits. Lorry drivers have shown over and
over again that they can't be trusted, so why would lieing about
education bother them?

And no scientist ever manipulates results to his employers advantage in
order to keep his job?

No, of course not.


Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no comparison
between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry drivers. Over decades
and repeatedly, lorry drivers have been shown to be untrustworthy over
loads, hours, speeds etc...

And why did lorry drivers behave in that manner?

Go on, try. See if you can work it out.

I won't be holding my breath.

On 18/01/2010 19:39, Brimstone wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 18/01/2010 09:38, Brimstone wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2010 20:10, Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:02:28 -0000, "Brimstone"
wrote:



wrote in message
...
NM wrote:
On 17 Jan, 15:29, wrote:
Vicko Zoomba wrote:
On 16 Jan, 22:14, wrote:

There isn't one, there aren't enough literate lorry drivers
for it
to be worth the effort.

ho ho ho....well as a lorry driver I'm probably educated far
higher
than you will ever be.

Err, no you are wrong. Marc would win on the education comparison.

Wanna bet?

I don't gamble, but if you are suggesting that they education
required to
be a lorry driver exceeds the education of the poster known as Marc
then you are wrong.
The education needed to do a job has nothing to do with the
education some
of the people doing the job have received.


Agreed, but he did say "as a lorry driver".

It doesn't make any difference, you can't trust anything a lorry
driver says. Don't forget this is the "profession" that is so
untrustworthy that the Government had to set up weighbridges because
lorry drivers can't be trusted to drive at a legal weight limit;
Tachographs because they couldn't be trusted to stay within their
hours, even their hours are restricted because they can't be trusted
to drive when they aren't tired; speed limiters because they can't be
trusted to keep to speed limits. Lorry drivers have shown over and
over again that they can't be trusted, so why would lieing about
education bother them?

And no scientist ever manipulates results to his employers advantage in
order to keep his job?

No, of course not.


Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no
comparison between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry
drivers. Over decades and repeatedly, lorry drivers have been shown to
be untrustworthy over loads, hours, speeds etc...

And why did lorry drivers behave in that manner?

Because they can't be trusted.....