Upsetting the 4x4 mums on Mumsnet

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

domtyler

Über Member
hubgearfreak said:
can anyone explain the abbreviations? :biggrin:
It's pretty basic stuff. D = Dear. Everything else is the relation, i.e ds = dear son, dh = dear husband, and so on.
 

yenrod

Guest
>Thanks for finding this site life is good again.

I find it amazing that anyone can say such stuff in the net...! though i suppose it is confidential !
 

LLB

Guest
Twenty Inch said:
Just thought I'd ruffle a few feathers over on Mumsnet. A high proportion of very entitled people over there, and when I searched "cyclists" on the forum, I got a load of tripe back. So I posted in their "Am I Being Unreasonable?" forum with the following title and message:

AIBU to expect motorists to concentrate on driving properly, instead of correcting cyclists' behaviour?

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/2724/497223

"Motorists kill 2,500 people a year on UK roads, and injure another 20,000 a year. Cyclists don't.

Cycle facilities are laughably bad, stopping and starting without warning, poorly designed, badly built.

Helmets only help people AFTER an collision has happened, they don't make cycling any safer, they just alleviate some of the consequences of a crash.

Some cyclists cycle on pavements and jump red lights. Many more motorists talk on mobiles, deliberately intimidate other road users, fiddle with cigarettes/radio/papers/laptop.

Cyclists are reducing congestion, the load on the NHS, air pollution and global warming. Motorists aren't.

If a cyclist makes a mistake, they'll probably hurt themselves. If a motorist makes a mistake, they'll probably hurt someone else.

Some cyclists cycle without lights and reflective gear. They'll learn. Many motorists drive with defective brakes, defective lights, no insurance, no licence. They couldn't give a stuff.

Most cyclists are also drivers and so they know about how cars, pedestrians and bikes mix. Most motorists are not cyclists, so they haven't a clue how scary it is when oh-so-important school-run-mum whips past at 6 inches away at 40mph in her 4x4.

Cyclists (and horseriders, skateboarders, joggers and so on) have an automatic right to use the road. Motorists are permitted to use the road so long as A) they have a driving licence, which can be withdrawn if they behave badly :biggrin: their car is safe, as shown by the MoT, and C) they pay vehicle excise duty, a charge based on the amount of pollution their car produces.

Cyclists contribute to the upkeep of the roads through general and council tax. However they don't cause anything like the damage to roads and buildings that motorists do.

You can kill someone in your car, and get away with a fine and a suspended licence.

And yet despite all the above, a majority of people see cyclists as aggressive, irresponsible, reprehensible road users. Why? It baffles me."


Feel free to get stuck in.


That old chestnut. Of the 3000 odd road deaths each year, how many are cyclists, motorcyclists, horseriders, pedestrians etc, and how many deaths as a percentage is caused by the emergency services (police mainly)

I think you will find that most of the deaths are inflicted upon themselves, or to other car occupants, and that doesn't include the deaths caused by commercial vehicles.

Son of Spindrift :biggrin: ?
 

Jaded

New Member
linfordlunchbox said:
That old chestnut. Of the 3000 odd road deaths each year, how many are cyclists, motorcyclists, horseriders, pedestrians etc, and how many deaths as a percentage is caused by the emergency services (police mainly)

I think you will find that most of the deaths are inflicted upon themselves, or to other car occupants, and that doesn't include the deaths caused by commercial vehicles.

Son of Spindrift :biggrin: ?

Any chance of that in English?
 

LLB

Guest
Jaded said:
Any chance of that in English?

Come on Jaded. He has some valid points, but you don't get them across by slagging off a specific group of driver when you are using a different form of transport. I see the 4x4 dig serving no purpose other than venting his spleen at a soft target, and the result is that the rest of the message gets lost.
There are hundreds of 4x4s of all shapes and sizes in this area in all shapes and sizes, and by proportion, there are far more than I see when up in London.

You cannot judge the actions or motives of all by that of the few.
 

Jaded

New Member
linfordlunchbox said:
Come on Jaded. He has some valid points, but you don't get them across by slagging off a specific group of driver when you are using a different form of transport. I see the 4x4 dig serving no purpose other than venting his spleen at a soft target, and the result is that the rest of the message gets lost.
There are hundreds of 4x4s of all shapes and sizes in this area in all shapes and sizes, and by proportion, there are far more than I see when up in London.

You cannot judge the actions or motives of all by that of the few.

That doesn't really throw any light on what your post (that I was referring to) actually meant.
 

LLB

Guest
The implication is that there are 2500 non driving deaths in the stats caused by car in particular which is a blatant porky Jaded
 

LLB

Guest
A quick google will give the figure of about 36 a year. Just over 1%. You could very easily have done that yourself before posting that distracting question.

Why are you doing what you complain about being done here, just to shift the blame away from your 4x4??


Which is an unacceptably high figure considering the percentage of them on the roads, and considering that they are supposed to be the best drivers on the roads.

Why not use WVMs as an example, just as big (or bigger), and usually squeezing gaps, driving above their speed limits, Oh hang on, a WVM is a 'working mans vehicle' ;)
 
Top Bottom