cloudybay Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 What's nonsense about it:confused: I said sense.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meshuga Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 Of course I know that Vehicle Excise Duty is the official name. But Parkers still call it Road Tax. http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/road-tax/ Just because a large organisation says something, doesn't mean they're right. It is commonly called road tax yes, but the name is incorrect as not a single penny pays for the road. VED goes into general taxation, not directly back into roads. Anyone who pays income tax or VAT pays for the roads already. That includes most if not all cyclists. It also includes anyone without a car who never uses roads or motorways. So I'm afraid your comment "why should only car users pay for roads" does smack of stupidity, because they don't OP - why do red lights not apply to cyclists? Well, they do. The trouble is you put a human being on a bike, in a car, any mode of transport, and they are likely to flout the rules. Human nature, not restricted to cyclists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david12656 Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 if you are a cyclist please dont reply to any more anti cycling threads leave the car driving morons to moan amongst themselfs. after all we know we are right and they are jut so wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul2412 Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 I don't usually have a problem with bikes. If it's clear ahead and they want to ride across then let them do it. The times when I have a problem is when there are 2 or more riding together, side by side and taking up more than half the road just so they can have a chat, oblivious to the carnage behind them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Anthrop Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 Cycling is fun and not at all dangerous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meshuga Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 I have read all the posts on here. My conclusion is that my opinion has not changed. Todays busy roads are just too dangerous for cyclists. They are not easy to see, if someone hits them they have no protection , plus they pay no road tax and so should NOT be allowed to ride on OUR roads.....wonder who pays for the cycle tracks too?....taken out of cyclists tax? All the posts except mine 3 above yours? Taxpayers pay for the cycle tracks, yes that's you and the cyclists that use them. It is well proven that the more people cycle = the less cars there are on the road = the safer roads become for all. I don't see why cyclists should be frightened off the roads. I think its good that they are trying to spread the message that cycling is cheap, healthy, faster than driving for journeys of less than 5 miles (>50% of all car journeys), and good for reducing our carbon emissions. It is also very safe when done properly. I try to encourage car users to consider joining cyclists in the one true path by riding responsibly, stopping at reds, and passing (safely on the right) huge lines of cars stuck in jams going nowhere much slower than me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Anthrop Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 All the posts except mine 3 above yours? Taxpayers pay for the cycle tracks, yes that's you and the cyclists that use them. It is well proven that the more people cycle = the less cars there are on the road = the safer roads become for all. I don't see why cyclists should be frightened off the roads. I think its good that they are trying to spread the message that cycling is cheap, healthy, faster than driving for journeys of less than 5 miles (>50% of all car journeys), and good for reducing our carbon emissions. It is also very safe when done properly. I try to encourage car users to consider joining cyclists in the one true path by riding responsibly, stopping at reds, and passing (safely on the right) huge lines of cars stuck in jams going nowhere much slower than me OK...thats fine. I may run into you some day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockBaboon Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 I have read all the posts on here. My conclusion is that my opinion has not changed. Todays busy roads are just too dangerous for cyclists. They are not easy to see, if someone hits them they have no protection , plus they pay no road tax and so should NOT be allowed to ride on OUR roads.....wonder who pays for the cycle tracks too?....taken out of cyclists tax? YOUR roads eh? Is that YOUR zebra crossing because you pay road tax and pedestrians don't? There is no such thing as road tax. I suggest you read through this thread, and the many others like it, just to educate yourself a little more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockBaboon Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 I don't usually have a problem with bikes. If it's clear ahead and they want to ride across then let them do it. The times when I have a problem is when there are 2 or more riding together, side by side and taking up more than half the road just so they can have a chat, oblivious to the carnage behind them. Perfectly legal for cyclists to ride two abreast. Any more than that and it is illegal. However, there is a bit of sound logic behind riding two abreast at times. Two abreast can make vehicles following slow and overtake appropriately, rather than trying to squeeze past therefore giving only a foot of space each between the rider and an oncoming vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 Those that you said you'd get back to me on but never did. Well that's made it all perfectly clear. Not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.