Help me write a reply to a newspaper

[dondare]

-1

Whilst I agree with that under certain circumstances, that response is very town / city centric, IMO. For instance, the good weather has added 5 minutes each way to the wife's morning run because there are now 10 cyclists who need care and consideration to pass, whereas the NSL roads used had plenty of spare capacity to take them in their cars.

Do 10 cyclists take up more road space than 10 cars?
What alternatives are there for cyclists who wish to stay safe, stay legal, not go miles out of their way but don't want to be accused of slowing down motor traffic?

"Coronary arrests cost money. If a lazy, car-driving, selfish dicksplash (amend as appropriate fails to use the medical evidence and insists on using a car, then fine him for wilful negligence."

Not to mention the harm air pollution does to everyone's health (cyclists, drivers and pedestrians alike). Particulates from exhausts cause heart attacks and strokes, and petrol vapour contains carcinogens.

 

[dondare]

True, but given the area that the newspaper serves, it's the correct view to discuss. This is the same area that has a cycle path on most of my way to work, which is completely bloomin' unusable as it's not a reserved lane but a dashed line on the left hand side of the road; where everyone is parked!

Hm, maybe I can incorporate that into my reply....

Concise:-

If motorists wish to see the marked cycle lanes used for their intended purpose they should
a) not park in them and
buy a bike and use them themselves.

 

[brokenbetty]

"Traffic hold-ups cost money. Oh and if a cyclist fails to use his designated painted highway and insists on using the road then fine him for dangerous riding".

How about agreeing?

"Dear Sir or Madam,

I want to add my whole-hearted support to Dicksplash of Slough's comments. If a cyclist fails to use a cycle lane when, given the current road conditions, other road users, the cyclist's speed and their intended direction, this is unequivocally the safest course of action, they should indeed be fined for dangerous riding.

I look forward to the provision of cycle facilities that allow me to comply with this noble aim.

Yours, etc"

 

[Mr Bunbury]

Dear Sir,
Having read Dicksplash's article on DATE, I am now a reformed cyclist and intend to stay within designated cycle lanes for the whole of my future trips. To this end I have recently bought a mountain bike, the better to ride over the many obstacles I find parked in my way. I trust that when Mrs Muggins complains of tyre marks on her car windscreen, I can forward the bill to Dicksplash?

Sincerely
Mr B

 

[jeltz]

Dear Sir

I was behind you last week while driving and you were not driving as fast as I wanted to, please advise how I may arrange for you to be fined.

 

[Twiggy]

Leveling fines, catching offenders and court time costs far more money than the supposid cost of being supposidly impeaded by cyclists.
Are you aware that if no one cycled, then there would be a significantly worse sitiuation traffic and parking wise, and that quite simply, urban areas would be unnavigable during peak hours.

Are you aware that my commute of X miles takes me Y minutes?

Then possibly point out that really if you haven't accounted for delays when it's going to cost you lots to be late, then you are really not the brightest thing out there. or words to that effect.

I'd really be tempted to throw in a "motorists should stick to motorways only" sort of comment, just to highlight the major flaw in the argument. Maybe suggest that bike lanes should really be on every roadway, never be blocked at any time, and should be utterly safe at all times to be useable.

 

[RyanW]

Traffic hold-ups cost money. Oh and if a Driver fails to use his designated car park and insists on using the cycle lane instead then fine him for dangerous driving".

Traffic hold-ups cost money. Oh and if a horse fails to use his designated horse lane and insists on using the road instead then fine him for dangerous canting".

Traffic hold-ups cost money. Oh and if a pedestrian fails to use his designated path and insists on using the cycle lane instead then fine him for dangerous walking".

You get the point.

Then point out there are a multitude of views and his inconsideration to others indicates very poor journalism and he should go back to obituary's.

 

[RyanW]

Traffic hold-ups cost money. Oh and if a Driver fails to use his designated car park and insists on using the cycle lane instead then fine him for dangerous driving".

Traffic hold-ups cost money. Oh and if a horse fails to use his designated horse lane and insists on using the road instead then fine him for dangerous canting".

Traffic hold-ups cost money. Oh and if a pedestrian fails to use his designated path and insists on using the cycle lane instead then fine him for dangerous walking".

You get the point.

Then point out there are a multitude of views and his inconsideration to others indicates very poor journalism and he should go back to obituary's.

 

[PBancroft]

(do you have a link to the original article?)

Sirs,

X in the article Y (date) is quite correct to suggest that congestion is a uniquely modern nuisance. However, this is not caused by cyclists but from when the sheer volume of road traffic outweighs the available space. This may partly be down to recurring conditions (such as the "rush hour") or specific events, such as road works, accidents or bad weather.

In the article X suggests that cyclists should be fined for not using cycle lanes, however he does not mention that they are not required to do so (just as motorists are not required to use the motorway, should they not wish to). In fact, even the Highway Code explicitly states that the use of cycle lanes is not compulsory.

Cycle lane provision is sometimes poorly designed and maintained resulting in a dangerous option for the cyclist should they choose to use it. Should they choose to drive instead they, in turn, add to the weight of large vehicles on the road and the much hated congestion. Perhaps the only purpose cycle lanes offer is to take away road space from all road users, including cyclists and motorists?

Yours sincerely,

 

[SavageHoutkop]

whats the paper?

South Manchester Reporter - James Chapman Kelly column (roundabout in the middle of a fairly long column)

 

[Hilldodger]

It's a crap reporter who can't get a decent job so works at a free paper writing something to wind people up in order to increase readership in the short term.

It'll now be forgotten by everyone apart from those sad, lonely tossers who lives revolve around what is written in the letters page of a cheap rag.

Just ignore it, by replying you'll be igniting an argument.

 

[SavageHoutkop]

(do you have a link to the original article?)

No, seems like the South Manchester Reporter is not yet properly in the internet age!

 

[Theseus]

No, seems like the South Manchester Reporter is not yet properly in the internet age!

It lives here, but I have not looked for this particular column.

 

[jonny jeez]

Dear ....

thank you for your recent newspaper article on cycle road use and its huge contribution to congestion. I enjoyed the article immensely, I have not laughed so much in years. Your comic wit is sharp and sublimely subtle, in places it is almost as if you are writing seriously, but, fear not, i was able to see through this and enjoy your comic intent.

I was so impressed by your article that i showed it to a few of my own friends. One is a published Author and a curator of the Victoria and Albert museum, another is a senior lecturer and also dabbles with a few published efforts of her own. They were both highly amused by your efforts to appear as uninformed and ignorant as possible whilst still managing to draw a salary for your time. Baron Cohen has nothing on you sir, as his work is clumsy by comparison.

I wish you the very best of luck in your rise from columnist of a local rag to a serious, informed, intelligent writer.

I fear you may need it.

 

[jimboalee]

If you feel so bad about it, go round to their office in the depth of the night and pi55 through the letter box.