42 points and still driving

[Dan B]

I'm not condoning driving while eating a bowl of cereal or whatever. I'm just intrigued why it is such a terrible thing for a car driver, but a cyclist is totally fine?

Fwiw I'm totally OK with the idea that we hold car drivers to higher standards than cyclists, in much the same way as we expect better of airline pilots than car drivers.

 

[postman]

Anyway fruit and cereal aside.I want to know what the blokes insurance quote is going to be next time.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Many, many cyclists want to be treated like motorised traffic, but do not want to play by the same rules.

I'm not on about insurance, and that silly nonsense.

But, a cyclist riding along a busy dual carriage way with no hands is as bad as a car driver with no hands. While the cyclist only poses a danger to themselves is irrelevant really.

But it's a strange idea that a time when the push is so strong for less distractions in car, cyclists are embracing more distractions on their own cycles.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

I have a feeling my opinion is going to be in a minority on this topic

 

[Dan B]

Do they? Speaking for myself, I want to be treated as a cyclist.

Yes, I'd far rather the roads were usable by all classes of road user rather than available only to people who can convincingly pretend to be driving a car

 

[mjr]

But it's a strange idea that a time when the push is so strong for less distractions in car, cyclists are embracing more distractions on their own cycles.

Do you have gear shifters and brake levers on both left and right? Why? All those extra gears are a distraction and you only need one hand brake.

Or maybe one person's distraction is sometimes another's useful tool, plus cycles are much lighter and move much more slowly, so operators can cope with more distractions than a motorist, just as most people can do things while walking that I wouldn't dream of attempting while cycling...

 

[Dayvo]

Yes, I'd far rather the roads were usable by all classes of road user rather than available only to people who can convincingly pretend to be driving a car

Or they can do the next best thing:

 

[Dayvo]

IWOOT!

Yebbut... would you wear a helmet or a seat belt?

 

[marknotgeorge]

[QUOTE 3778092, member: 9609"]I presume postman is referring to the bloke that got the 42 points - and I wouldn't be that surprised if he couldn't get insured. if he can, i would imagine the premium will be pretty eye watering[/QUOTE]

I wonder if he actually presses the 4 and 2 buttons on his laptop when he claims his stuffed Slavic rodent toy?

And I wouldn't be at all surprised if that other woman really got fined for contravening the Giving Lip to a Copper Act 1973...

 

[swee'pea99]

While the cyclist only poses a danger to themselves is irrelevant really.

You think?

So, endangering other people's lives is morally equivalent to risking your own? Care to explain that one to me, because I just can't see it.

 

[Brandane]

Still driving after 42 pints?
The guy has some constitution; I struggle to WALK after 10.

 

[Accy cyclist]

"He was warned if further driving offences were committed he would automatically be disqualified from driving, Essex Police said."

Yeah right(!)

 

[SD1]

Plain and simple, if you got the money you can get away with it. Well that would appear to be the case. In reality if you have the money you will no people who have got away with it and therefore you will do the same but everyone knows now. The plumber, the taxi driver and the candle stick maker. People who will suffer hardship ie the total loss of work.

 

[captain nemo1701]

This exceptional hardship malarkey is a joke. If you don't want to lose your licence and thus experience hardship then don't drive like a tool.

I thought the whole point of this was to put the fear of God into speeders ie..you might lose your job!