splodgeyAl Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I think this is why there is such disparity when it comes to this tax/license etc. Many pay while others do not. It does come across as unfair for those reasons. Personally I think many of the arguments boil down to cars vs cyclists and the latters freedom to flout the road laws with immunity as they are unidentifiable. This is the crux of many car drivers annoyances. I think rad tax should be scrapped and the tax added to fuel. This way you pay for what you use. Cycles should also have a unique method of identifying them so when they do cause accidents or break the law, they can be prosecuted and would stop giving other cyclists a bad name. but I think thats a whole other thread. Review that comment, and maybe, just maybe, you'll see why you find having conversations with cyclists difficult Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrannyGranny Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I think this is why there is such disparity when it comes to this tax/license etc. Many pay while others do not. It does come across as unfair for those reasons. Personally I think many of the arguments boil down to cars vs cyclists and the latters freedom to flout the road laws with immunity as they are unidentifiable. This is the crux of many car drivers annoyances. I think rad tax should be scrapped and the tax added to fuel. This way you pay for what you use. Cycles should also have a unique method of identifying them so when they do cause accidents or break the law, they can be prosecuted and would stop giving other cyclists a bad name. but I think thats a whole other thread. Firstly some CAR owners do not pay VED because they own cars which 'pollute' less. Secondly I see drivers flouting the law daily on my commute without prosecution. Where's your rant about these? Thirdly, registering individual cycles would be un-enforcable and so costly to administer it would never become law. I agree that maybe compulsory 3rd part insurance would be a good idea similar to what is offered by the CTC when you join then you can take the car driver to court who pulled out of a side road without looking for example Maybe the problem of uninsured/untaxed drivers should be sorted first before you pick on cyclists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkleyIan Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Is there any other service where where many pay to use it but others get free access? Prescriptions, dental treatment, eye tests, TV licences? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
players Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Is there any other service where where many pay to use it but others get free access? Schools and hospitals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I think this is why there is such disparity when it comes to this tax/license etc. Many pay while others do not. It does come across as unfair for those reasons. Personally I think many of the arguments boil down to cars vs cyclists and the latters freedom to flout the road laws with immunity as they are unidentifiable. This is the crux of many car drivers annoyances. I think rad tax should be scrapped and the tax added to fuel. This way you pay for what you use. Cycles should also have a unique method of identifying them so when they do cause accidents or break the law, they can be prosecuted and would stop giving other cyclists a bad name. but I think thats a whole other thread. rad tax??? Is that similar to road tax? Do cyclists have to pay rad tax? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 rad tax??? Is that similar to road tax? Do cyclists have to pay rad tax? Only the gnarly BMXers pay that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
players Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 wex, do you think a driver who misjudges a gap, smashes into a kerb, bounces off and hits a cyclist, knocking him off his bike and killing him should face charges? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Semantics. Most vehicles are levied with VED. Most vehicles also need roads to drive on. Hence why it is commonly called "road tax". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Semantics. Most vehicles are levied with VED. Most vehicles also need roads to drive on. Hence why it is commonly called "road tax". Not semantics at all. VED is not a fee paid to be allowed to use roads. It is a fee paid to be allowed to operate certain ve-hicles. Sorry about the last bit. I lived in Texas for a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I think this is why there is such disparity when it comes to this tax/license etc. Many pay while others do not. It does come across as unfair for those reasons. Personally I think many of the arguments boil down to cars vs cyclists and the latters freedom to flout the road laws with immunity as they are unidentifiable. This is the crux of many car drivers annoyances. I think rad tax should be scrapped and the tax added to fuel. This way you pay for what you use. Cycles should also have a unique method of identifying them so when they do cause accidents or break the law, they can be prosecuted and would stop giving other cyclists a bad name. but I think thats a whole other thread. WeX=Sam1970. Do I win five pounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.