Nuxx:B27a233d-1201-4caa-9b5d-cb035f34b70a@cu4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!cu4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: "I can (go through red lights), I am on a bike" Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:27:18 -0800 (PST) References:  <8u10liF9puU1@mid.individual.net> Lines: 25 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1299976038 7590 127.0.0.1 (13 Mar 2011 00:27:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 00:27:18 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: cu4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Firefox/3.6.15,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2421 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:844080

On Mar 12, 10:36=A0am, Tony Raven  wrote: > Peter Keller  wrote: > > I have had to also. =A0And I am on a bike myself! > > Also as a pedestrian I have had to jump out off the way of RLJ > > bicyclists, (and also, occasionally, RLJ vans.) =A0 > > Yes but that is in New Zealand where all cyclists wear the Foam Hat of > Invincibility ;-).

Even if helmet compulsion were shown to make cycling safer, you would still oppose it, on the "grounds" that it's more important to "encourage cycling" than it is to improve safety, cycling of course being a "morally superior" form of transport.

It's exactly like you supporting restrictions on motoring, even when they're shown to either not improve or even worsen safety: again, it's more important to discourage motoring (and therefore hopefully encourage cycling), because motoring is "bad" and cycling is "good".

For you, ideological bullying of people into using certain modes of transport over others is more important than saving "a few" lives "here and there", isn't it? The lives saved once everyone is happily cycling instead of driving will outweigh those "few", won't they?

That's what you think, isn't it?