Nuxx:C7adf572-9775-4b27-88f2-d507323ebddc@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Positive Evening Standard article about cycling. Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:08:20 -0700 (PDT) References: <8b36668d-bb57-4311-9ac4-5a2dd1c6e0eb@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> Lines: 46 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.145.93 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1217466501 31777 127.0.0.1 (31 Jul 2008 01:08:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 01:08:21 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.145.93; 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: 3465 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:659798

On Jul 30, 3:55 pm, spindrift  wrote: > As the hazards of London cycling go, it was fairly minor: a white van > passing too close to me in Clapham, and a shout out of the window of > > "You're going to get yourself killed!" > > (I always take that one as a threat rather than a warning, given that > it only ever comes from cretins driving aggressively or carelessly > themselves). > > So I calmed down and sped home. After all, as a cyclist one has to > make the most of the temporary disappearance of school-run traffic at > this time of year. Because on present showing, it's the only relief > we're getting for a while.

Why is it that it's OK for a cyclist to make the most of clear roads, but any suggestion from a driver that he's doing the same is met with accusations like "selfish", "dangerous" and "child-killer" from the trolls? It's almost as if the trolls want drivers to suffer and sit in traffic as much as possible. Could that be because they're anti- motorist? Perish the thought. (It does give the lie to their claims that they support con charging because they "want to ease congestion" though....)

> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23522897-details...

I like the first comment:

"Boris was right to propose letting motorcycles use bus lanes. The study initiated by Livingstone showed there was a slight improvement in the overall accident rate on the test routes, but this was dismissed for clearly political reasons. As a cyclist and motorcyclist I think anything that improves road safety should be implemented. Before the cycling lobby rejects Boris's plan they would do well to clean up their own house by not ploughing through red lights and pedestrian crossings. At least motorcyclists are forced to obey the highway code.

- Andy, London"

Quite right. Now *that's* a cyclist who's genuinely without an anti- motorist agenda; compare him to the motorist-haters here. If only Spindrift, Crapman and the like would stop saying things like "I don't want motorcyclists in bus lanes, even though it would improve safety, BUT I'm not anti-motorist", the genuinely non-anti-motorist people here could stop laughing at them and their silly, silly lying.