Car crash smashes telegraph pole in half

Daily Echo: Car crash smashes telegraph pole in half Car crash smashes telegraph pole in half

A CAR smashed into power cable pole snapping it in half on a major Hampshire road today.

The one vehicle accident involved a Peugeot 206 on the A36 outside the Red Rover pub just before 3am.

No-one is thought to have been hurt in the crash and the road has now reopened after a southbound lane closure.

A team from Scottish and Sourthern Electric are currently on the scene repairing the damage.

Temporary traffic lights are also in place at the site.

It is not yet known if anyone was hurt in the incident.

Comments (38)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:16pm Sat 15 Mar 14

richard57 says...

another drink driver ?
another drink driver ? richard57
  • Score: -1

12:17pm Sat 15 Mar 14

mickey01 says...

bloody poles get everywhere i blame the e.u influx
bloody poles get everywhere i blame the e.u influx mickey01
  • Score: 14

1:17pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Rockstone says...

mickey01 wrote:
bloody poles get everywhere i blame the e.u influx
You must be a skate then
[quote][p][bold]mickey01[/bold] wrote: bloody poles get everywhere i blame the e.u influx[/p][/quote]You must be a skate then Rockstone
  • Score: -7

4:36pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 4

6:50pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Maine Lobster says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights! Maine Lobster
  • Score: 9

6:58pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
[quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -6

9:43pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Sir Ad E Noid says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Rubbish, the speed limit is 40 MPH where the collision took place. Stuff a 206 into a post at 40 MPH and the post will break.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Rubbish, the speed limit is 40 MPH where the collision took place. Stuff a 206 into a post at 40 MPH and the post will break. Sir Ad E Noid
  • Score: 0

10:07pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Maine Lobster says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune. Maine Lobster
  • Score: 2

10:10pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Sir Ad E Noid wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Rubbish, the speed limit is 40 MPH where the collision took place. Stuff a 206 into a post at 40 MPH and the post will break.
Not necesarily so, to add to my previous comment, it does also depends on a number of factors, such as age/condition of the pole, diameter, speed of the car and mass of the car, some poles can be hit at 70mph and be left standing.
[quote][p][bold]Sir Ad E Noid[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Rubbish, the speed limit is 40 MPH where the collision took place. Stuff a 206 into a post at 40 MPH and the post will break.[/p][/quote]Not necesarily so, to add to my previous comment, it does also depends on a number of factors, such as age/condition of the pole, diameter, speed of the car and mass of the car, some poles can be hit at 70mph and be left standing. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

10:21pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
[quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

10:34pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Maine Lobster says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street. Maine Lobster
  • Score: 4

10:41pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
I've seen them ignore motorists jumping lights and using the phone while driving too, you might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe all over the city, it all depends on the attitude of the officer in question, some can't be arsed if it means shouting or running, some can't even be arsed if it means turning on the blues and two's and maneuvering around traffic they're sat in.
[quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]I've seen them ignore motorists jumping lights and using the phone while driving too, you might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe all over the city, it all depends on the attitude of the officer in question, some can't be arsed if it means shouting or running, some can't even be arsed if it means turning on the blues and two's and maneuvering around traffic they're sat in. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

10:45pm Sat 15 Mar 14

downfader says...

Thats right... turn this into a cyclist thing when its a driver who has caused a **** load of damage.
Thats right... turn this into a cyclist thing when its a driver who has caused a **** load of damage. downfader
  • Score: -1

10:47pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

downfader wrote:
Thats right... turn this into a cyclist thing when its a driver who has caused a **** load of damage.
Always someone who does that, even if it happens on the motorway. :/
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: Thats right... turn this into a cyclist thing when its a driver who has caused a **** load of damage.[/p][/quote]Always someone who does that, even if it happens on the motorway. :/ Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:15pm Sat 15 Mar 14

elvisimo says...

Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
[quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people? elvisimo
  • Score: 0

11:19pm Sat 15 Mar 14

downfader says...

elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
It does make me wonder - if the cyclists are SUCH an issue, then why do many motorists waste the police time by doing damage like the driver in the above article....?
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]It does make me wonder - if the cyclists are SUCH an issue, then why do many motorists waste the police time by doing damage like the driver in the above article....? downfader
  • Score: -1

12:52am Sun 16 Mar 14

Torchie1 says...

elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best. Torchie1
  • Score: 1

12:57am Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

4:41am Sun 16 Mar 14

nervousbumskin420 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist... nervousbumskin420
  • Score: 2

6:38am Sun 16 Mar 14

Drhysted says...

nervousbumskin420 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...
Or in other words
"never let the facts get in the way of opinion".
[quote][p][bold]nervousbumskin420[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...[/p][/quote]Or in other words "never let the facts get in the way of opinion". Drhysted
  • Score: 1

9:21am Sun 16 Mar 14

Maine Lobster says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
The tax issue is irrelevant, as you correctly say. The issue for most is all road users being held accountable for their breaches of the highway code and endangering themselves and others.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]The tax issue is irrelevant, as you correctly say. The issue for most is all road users being held accountable for their breaches of the highway code and endangering themselves and others. Maine Lobster
  • Score: 3

10:42am Sun 16 Mar 14

downfader says...

You know Ginger only responded because you baited the guy. Then you got all antsy about it.
You know Ginger only responded because you baited the guy. Then you got all antsy about it. downfader
  • Score: 0

10:44am Sun 16 Mar 14

downfader says...

nervousbumskin420 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...
Another troll!

Hello troll, are you getting all the attention you want troll? You must be *incredibly* lonely to come here with a new account just to spew a rubbish insult?

Incredibly, incredibly lonely....
[quote][p][bold]nervousbumskin420[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...[/p][/quote]Another troll! Hello troll, are you getting all the attention you want troll? You must be *incredibly* lonely to come here with a new account just to spew a rubbish insult? Incredibly, incredibly lonely.... downfader
  • Score: 1

11:03am Sun 16 Mar 14

forest hump says...

What a load of drivel
What a load of drivel forest hump
  • Score: 0

11:17am Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

nervousbumskin420 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...
And know one likes a motorist the law on overtaking.
[quote][p][bold]nervousbumskin420[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...[/p][/quote]And know one likes a motorist the law on overtaking. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:17am Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
nervousbumskin420 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...
And know one likes a motorist the law on overtaking.
*that doesn't know the law
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nervousbumskin420[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...[/p][/quote]And know one likes a motorist the law on overtaking.[/p][/quote]*that doesn't know the law Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:18am Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Drhysted wrote:
nervousbumskin420 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...
Or in other words
"never let the facts get in the way of opinion".
Pretty.
[quote][p][bold]Drhysted[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nervousbumskin420[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]lets just face it mate...no one likes a know it all cyclist...[/p][/quote]Or in other words "never let the facts get in the way of opinion".[/p][/quote]Pretty. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:22am Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.
Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights!
Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.
I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.
I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.
If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.
You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?
Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.
I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.
The tax issue is irrelevant, as you correctly say. The issue for most is all road users being held accountable for their breaches of the highway code and endangering themselves and others.
They ARE all held accountable, simple maths dictates that because there is more of them, motorists are FAR more likely to be caught and fined or even arrested than cyclists.
[quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: You'd have to be going a considerable pace to snap one of those wooden poles with a little 206.[/p][/quote]Probably avoiding a cyclist with no lights![/p][/quote]Do you really think that type of cyclist would be out at 3AM? Because I don't, infact, the only way you'd see a cyclist at that sort of time, is if they were sleepwalking and got on their bike in their sleep.[/p][/quote]I know you always stand up for cyclists and that is your right, but you don't seem to accept that there are very unsafe cyclists who seem to think they are above the law. They cannot be identified, like a motorist, so many take advantage of this to ignore the rules of the road. There are of course good sensible cyclists and before you say it, there are bad drivers too, but drivers re caught all the time for offences while bad cyclists seem almost immune.[/p][/quote]I'm not denying there's total darwin award winners at all, hence my comment included the words "that type of cyclist", also, motorists are only more likely to get caught due to sheer numbers and cyclists often are pulled up on cycling offences such as no lights or going through red lights, I know people personally who have been stopped for jumping lights, one person along with his mates, even got hit with a £50 fine each for no lights and jumping a red, he then went on to moan about it on facebook, claiming he didn't have to stop because he didn't have an engine and didn't like it when I proved him wrong, neither did his mate who even threatened(he called it a promise) to run me over for it... I'm still waiting for the "promise" to be fulfilled, another friend of mine got pulled over because his vehicle(full sus MTB) was in a state of disrepair with no brakes and jumping a red because of it but the officer didn't fine him but made some bull about points eing added to his licence in future, so please, don't try telling me things that I know are complete bull.[/p][/quote]If only you were right over the regular fining of cyclists. Sadly, few would agree with you based on their own observations and in conversation I have had with many people. I regularly see Police vehicles ignore red light jumpers and the like. You might not want to accept it but the reality is there to observe on any high street.[/p][/quote]You regularly see these things? Hmm. Anyway, I think the police have slightly more important things to do than go after a fraction of 2 % of road users. I would guess they go after the speeding motorist, drink drivers etc etc as these big heavy cars have an ability to kill people?[/p][/quote]Poor old Ginger, he gets more like Southy every day with his conviction that he knows best.[/p][/quote]I know better about cycling, taxation and road laws than most people who comment here do, lost count how many people wrongly suggest bicycles aren't road vehicles or that a non-existant tax pays for the roads.[/p][/quote]The tax issue is irrelevant, as you correctly say. The issue for most is all road users being held accountable for their breaches of the highway code and endangering themselves and others.[/p][/quote]They ARE all held accountable, simple maths dictates that because there is more of them, motorists are FAR more likely to be caught and fined or even arrested than cyclists. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

11:22am Sun 16 Mar 14

dolomiteman says...

DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away. dolomiteman
  • Score: 0

11:28am Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

dolomiteman wrote:
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.
[quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.[/p][/quote]Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

4:05pm Sun 16 Mar 14

gilbertratchet says...

Looks like any story remotely related to roads or transport is now destined to become a pro-cyclist soapbox. Brilliant.
Looks like any story remotely related to roads or transport is now destined to become a pro-cyclist soapbox. Brilliant. gilbertratchet
  • Score: -3

4:18pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
Looks like any story remotely related to roads or transport is now destined to become a pro-cyclist soapbox. Brilliant.
*anti-cyclist
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: Looks like any story remotely related to roads or transport is now destined to become a pro-cyclist soapbox. Brilliant.[/p][/quote]*anti-cyclist Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 2

4:19pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Torchie1 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
dolomiteman wrote:
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.
Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.[/p][/quote]Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.[/p][/quote]Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

4:22pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
dolomiteman wrote:
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.
Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.
At least I usually know what I'm talking about.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.[/p][/quote]Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.[/p][/quote]Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.[/p][/quote]At least I usually know what I'm talking about. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 2

5:09pm Sun 16 Mar 14

downfader says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
dolomiteman wrote:
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.
Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.
You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong.

You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.[/p][/quote]Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.[/p][/quote]Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.[/p][/quote]You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong. You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders. downfader
  • Score: 2

5:11pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

downfader wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
dolomiteman wrote:
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.
Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.
You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong.

You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders.
Or one where I haven't admitted to being wrong if I am wrong(always admit mistakes).
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.[/p][/quote]Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.[/p][/quote]Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.[/p][/quote]You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong. You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders.[/p][/quote]Or one where I haven't admitted to being wrong if I am wrong(always admit mistakes). Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 2

8:13pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Torchie1 says...

downfader wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
dolomiteman wrote:
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.
Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.
You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong.

You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders.
Perhaps we could go back to the post where Ginger announced that using the registration number alone he would write to the owners insurance company and list their driving errors so that he could get their insurance premium raised
A suggestion that HGVs were able to speed through Beaulieu caused Ginger to announce that he'd looked at the B3054 on Google Earth and decided that it was a genuine problem. The reality being that it would be difficult for a bicycle to exceed the speed limit through the village.
A story about animal accidents lead to Ginger's statement about 'two tonnes of pure muscle' indicating that he nothing about horses either.
Would you like me to go on?
Ginger is a self proclaimed expert just like Southy and it seems you have a blind spot to these shortcomings, is it because he is another member of the 2% club?
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.[/p][/quote]Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.[/p][/quote]Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.[/p][/quote]You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong. You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders.[/p][/quote]Perhaps we could go back to the post where Ginger announced that using the registration number alone he would write to the owners insurance company and list their driving errors so that he could get their insurance premium raised A suggestion that HGVs were able to speed through Beaulieu caused Ginger to announce that he'd looked at the B3054 on Google Earth and decided that it was a genuine problem. The reality being that it would be difficult for a bicycle to exceed the speed limit through the village. A story about animal accidents lead to Ginger's statement about 'two tonnes of pure muscle' indicating that he nothing about horses either. Would you like me to go on? Ginger is a self proclaimed expert just like Southy and it seems you have a blind spot to these shortcomings, is it because he is another member of the 2% club? Torchie1
  • Score: 0

8:19pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
downfader wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
dolomiteman wrote:
DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait.

Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.
Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.
Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.
You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong.

You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders.
Perhaps we could go back to the post where Ginger announced that using the registration number alone he would write to the owners insurance company and list their driving errors so that he could get their insurance premium raised
A suggestion that HGVs were able to speed through Beaulieu caused Ginger to announce that he'd looked at the B3054 on Google Earth and decided that it was a genuine problem. The reality being that it would be difficult for a bicycle to exceed the speed limit through the village.
A story about animal accidents lead to Ginger's statement about 'two tonnes of pure muscle' indicating that he nothing about horses either.
Would you like me to go on?
Ginger is a self proclaimed expert just like Southy and it seems you have a blind spot to these shortcomings, is it because he is another member of the 2% club?
"announced that using the registration number alone he would write to the owners insurance company"
I never said anything of the sort.
"announce that he'd looked at the B3054 on Google Earth and decided that it was a genuine problem"
I said it was plausible.
"two tonnes of pure muscle" that was about cows, not horses and yes, cows do get very heavy.
Should I list even more of my words and words of others that you've conveniently twisted to fit your own agenda?
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: DON'T FEED THE TROLL, Looks like the troll wins this one with the usual thin skinned cyclists taking his bait. Ignore the troll and his comments, he will soon get bored and go away.[/p][/quote]Trolls are easily beaten by simple logic that they can't comprehend, if they get angry they've lost.[/p][/quote]Again you demonstrate your closeness to Southy as you will add post after post after post until everyone else is bored to death or has forgotten about the story. You then congratulate yourself on having the last word, and just like Southy you are the only one that can't see it.[/p][/quote]You know.. there are times when even Southy is right... I've yet to see a post where Ginger is actually wrong. You on the other hand are one of the trolls baiting for attention on here, having digs at riders.[/p][/quote]Perhaps we could go back to the post where Ginger announced that using the registration number alone he would write to the owners insurance company and list their driving errors so that he could get their insurance premium raised A suggestion that HGVs were able to speed through Beaulieu caused Ginger to announce that he'd looked at the B3054 on Google Earth and decided that it was a genuine problem. The reality being that it would be difficult for a bicycle to exceed the speed limit through the village. A story about animal accidents lead to Ginger's statement about 'two tonnes of pure muscle' indicating that he nothing about horses either. Would you like me to go on? Ginger is a self proclaimed expert just like Southy and it seems you have a blind spot to these shortcomings, is it because he is another member of the 2% club?[/p][/quote]"announced that using the registration number alone he would write to the owners insurance company" I never said anything of the sort. "announce that he'd looked at the B3054 on Google Earth and decided that it was a genuine problem" I said it was plausible. "two tonnes of pure muscle" that was about cows, not horses and yes, cows do get very heavy. Should I list even more of my words and words of others that you've conveniently twisted to fit your own agenda? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree