Nuxx:A98860ad-f287-496b-8a3a-4d61d70080ae@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Speeding Fines Up By 400 Per Cent Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 06:14:27 -0700 (PDT) References: <979ff286-12ac-4e1d-9516-b18ca0133114@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>     <6ftipgFdchagU1@mid.individual.net> <977j94tprobdc6ohljup7vm6tv76hcjgna@4ax.com> Lines: 43 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.129.172 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1218028468 23860 127.0.0.1 (6 Aug 2008 13:14:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:14:28 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.129.172; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3752 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:661177

On Aug 6, 1:49=A0pm, "Just zis Guy, you know?"  wrote: > On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:12:34 +0100, Peter Clinch >  said in > <6ftipgFdcha...@mid.individual.net>: > > > > >Say, has it ever been the case that helmet promotion has had the effect > >of putting folk off cycling? > > > > Well, Pete, it's funny you should say that. =A0Opinions differ. > Surveys in Australia and other countries where compulsion has been > tried, say "yes". =A0One study by a pro-helmet group on one unenforced > law in one province of Canada over a short period of time with > poorly selected sample points, says "no", and clearly this outweighs > all the studies which say otherwise, especially since it is backed > by a paper by the notoriously impartial Lee and Mann (of BeHIT) > fame, who said their helmet promotion campaign in Reading increased > helmet use while not impacting cycle use, based on figures they > apparently pulled out of their arses (there are certainly no robust > sources named for this information).

I bet you were one of the wankers who was in support of the one-way IDR. That's yet another anti-car notch on your belt. The IDR doesn't cyclists have no need to use parts of it (e.g. the grade-separated bit): there are more direct and level routes that are open to them but not to cars. Both modes of transport have routes which are best- suited to them, and that's how it should (and thankfully will) stay.
 * need* to be especially "cycling-friendly" all the way round, as

Doubtless you'll now be pressing for a 20mph limit all the way round, and you'll probably be demanding that the dualled bits have the nearside lanes turned into hatching and cycle lanes (which you'll then refuse to use), all of the time protesting that you're not anti- motorist.

And I bet you were part of that mob of cyclists that I saw in Tilehurst a year or two ago, who were being unbelievable shit-stirring twats towards every motorist who passed them. I was very tempted to give them a nice wash with my windscreen fluid, but then I thought that they'd probably take my registration number down and then slash my tyres whenever they saw my car parked. People like that should be called "psychlists".