Nuxx:F7637ead-20a0-4af5-9d6f-5788200e2dc2@41g2000hsc.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!41g2000hsc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Reasonable? Necessary? You Decide Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 03:32:40 -0800 (PST) References: <6ea8bd3b-ff2f-4227-98f7-a5e457545b20@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com>   <62blb3F22ueorU2@mid.individual.net>  <62db5sF22j9p4U1@mid.individual.net>  Lines: 26 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.211.165.120 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1203939161 2715 127.0.0.1 (25 Feb 2008 11:32:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:32:41 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 41g2000hsc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.211.165.120; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080201 Firefox/2.0.0.12,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2726 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:641720

On Feb 24, 4:47 pm, Rob Morley  wrote: > In article <62db5sF22j9p...@mid.individual.net>, Adam Lea > asr...@yahoo.co.uk says... > > > > > "Tom Crispin"  wrote in message > >news:gaa2s3tiogeknlduusgbneic8ehsa9famp@4ax.com... > > > Certainly that is true of those with the skills and competence to > > > cycle on tricky sections of roads. But what of those without the > > > skills and competence? Should they be forced onto the carriageway > > > with fast moving traffic when there's an empty or almost empty footway > > > alongside. > > > They should get some cycle training, or find an alternative route. > > In the given case I think it's pretty reasonable to cycle on the > pavement as long as there aren't any pedestrians - units on industrial > estates tend to be set back from the road, with good visibility around > access drives and building entrances, and the Home Office advice not to > prosecute should be followed. That's very different from the typical > suburban/urban pavement where there are numerous property accesses with > poor visibility, tight corners and more pedestrians.

So you're happy for cyclists to break the law when it's "reasonable", but not motorists?