Nuxx:65f6b9e5-e644-4c06-91ee-7096e831c5c4@h20g2000yqn.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!h20g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <65f6b9e5-e644-4c06-91ee-7096e831c5c4@h20g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Dangerous driving complaint and response. Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:35:51 -0800 (PST) References: <3a30696f-4bca-46fb-87d4-a4c5dac7867a@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com> <6uis19Ff35gnU1@mid.individual.net> <34a4c060-bad6-478e-9a7f-c719f323eb33@z27g2000prd.googlegroups.com> <6uj1g0Ffo21sU1@mid.individual.net>  Lines: 25 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.151.152.80 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1233437753 29592 127.0.0.1 (31 Jan 2009 21:35:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 21:35:53 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: h20g2000yqn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.151.152.80; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008120122 Firefox/3.0.5,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2448 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:684475

On Jan 31, 1:38=A0pm, "Clive George"  wrote: > "Paul - xxx mobile"  wrote in messagenews:6uj= 1g0Ffo21sU1@mid.individual.net... > > > A car came a little closer than comfortable to a cyclist who complained > > about it and nothing came of it .. tough shit. > > It's indicative of a wider problem. > > A lot of road crashes are a result of lots of people taking little risks > like this one. Most of the time they get away with it, but when they don'= t, > mess results. > > Trouble is, people don't see that as a problem ("I didn't hit you, what a= re > you complaining about?"), despite the fact that due to the numbers involv= ed, > those tiny risks add up to quite a rate of carnage.

Quite right. But it's a shame that you don't (apparently) realise that driving at a safe speed for the conditions doesnt constitute a risk of any kind, whereas worrying unnecessarily about the speedo because you're in an unreasonably low speed limit with cameras most definitely does.