Do cyclists have a date with death?

It sounds to me that your just moaning because cyclist dont have to pay anything and you resent that ! Once again they dont pay because they dont have to, if i had to pay i would but once again i want to remind you i already have 3rd party insurance for my bike. I would like to think that i ride pretty well on my bike, infact im more cautious because im more vunerable, i have lost count the amount of times i have almost been knocked from my bike - not through careless riding but because of impatient / dangerous drivers. I do actually pay road tax just like you as i own a car so does that not entitle me to use my bike on the road - in fact i have two cars so i pay two lots of road tax ! As already mentioned you pay Road Tax because of the damage your car does to the enviroment, bikes dont have emissons !

Im not quite sure where the "traveller" argument fits in. I know for a fact they wouldnt get treated any quicker than anyone else unless their symptoms warranted it.

I think its time to put this to bed, you obviously dont ride a bike so you cant even see both sides of the argument or are even willing too it seems.
You obviously have a bee in your bonnet about the fact cyclists use the road for free - god help pensioners then who get free bus passes and you have to travel on a bus !
Not all cyclists are irresponsible riders but once again it seems you dont realise this or even care.
The fuel point is totally irrelivant, so someone who has a smaller engined car than you would use less fuel and therefore pay less so are you saying they should be allowed to use the road any less than you ??
 
EvilDreams said:
It's like if you (a hard working tax payer) went into an NHS A&E with an excruciating broken bone and after an hour in a queue, some "traveller" got put in the queue ahead of you....or would you like that?
Click to expand...
Just read this.
That happened to me in May this year when I broke my collar bone, except it wasn't a traveller but a child with a burnt hand - Sometimes you have to give in ;)

Just the same when you're holding up a 4x4 or performance car on the road, they pay more tax and insurance than you, doesn't mean they can ram you [peasant] off the road ;)
 
Last edited:
SDK^ said:
Just read this.
That happened to me in May this year when I broke my collar bone, except it wasn't a traveller but a child with a burnt hand - Sometimes you have to give in ;)
Click to expand...


You mean you didnt kick off, that child lives tax free and is a total free loader on his parents and whats more i bet they have a bike and ride it for FREE
 
Point to note.

The seriousness of the injury dictates who gets seen first.

So if you have been waiting an hour with a broken leg and are next in line to be treated and some unfortunate person comes in with their head practically hanging off then don't you think they deserve priority ?

This happened to me in about 1984-ish
I was involved in an industrial accident in which my left hand was crushed by a quarry dumper (good job I rolled to one side). I was wearing gloves which got pretty well mangled but I knew it was serious because of the numbness (It was actually my thumb that had been crushed off).

I was taken to PDH and was about to go to theatre when an RTA between two HGV's (head on collision) gave them priority and I had to wait another 4 hours before I went in. Your only allowed X amount of Morphine so the pain had become VERY intense.

It turned out both vehicles struck each other a glancing blow as the muppet that was overtaking didn't quite clear in time. They both sustained broken arms.

My injury was far worse. (They saved my thumb but the first joint is seized)

Quite Ironic that I became a truck driver with the Compo

and...

I ride a bicycle to work !!
 
Personally I think prams should require a license, tax and insurance, they are a bloody menace I tell you, and that goes for skateboarders as well.
 
teulk said:
You mean you didnt kick off, that child lives tax free and is a total free loader on his parents and whats more i bet they have a bike and ride it for FREE
Click to expand...

A child can't pay tax. A traveller could go get a job and pay tax just like a cyclist could either get a car and pay tax and stop holding me up, or get on the pavement with the kiddies and get out of my way.
 
When you say I don't pay tax, how about the £400 I pay in VED for my car? Surely everyone who pays less than me should get the hell out of my way.

The quickest way to cross London is by bike or Tube, so I think you'll find it's cars getting in my way.
 
[QUOTE='[DOD]The quickest way to cross London is by bike or Tube, so I think you'll find it's cars getting in my way.[/QUOTE]

It takes me 25 minutes to get to work by bike in London, by public transport it's 55-65 minutes and I'd hate to think how long it would take by car in that sort of traffic.
 
Aye, I've driven back from central London tonight and it's taken an hour and a half, oddly enough, the same time it takes me to cycle to and from work in central London.
 
SDK^ said:
It's like if you (a hard working tax payer) went into an NHS A&E with an excruciating broken bone and after an hour in a queue, some "traveller" got put in the queue ahead of you....or would you like that?
Click to expand...

Children are afforded a certain priority in A&E departments to reduce suffering for other patients, if nothing else - would you rather wait for 2 hours with a screaming child next to you, or 2.5 hours in relative peace?
But a traveller would have no such priority, and for him to jump the queue would mean he's significantly worse off than the rest of the queue (most A&E departments use the Manchester Triage System, which is a 5-point scale of severity; most patients will have a score of 4 (Standard), and all those patients are dealt with in order of presentation - no 'queue-jumping' unless they make a score 3 or higher, which includes things like potential heart attacks.)



Outcast said:
*snip*
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear about your hand. But I feel compelled to point out that there must've been something considerably more serious wrong with the drivers than a couple of broken arms - they'd get a couple of beds in Resus depending on how serious their condition was, but wouldn't go to theatre unless they had substantial internal bleeding/that sort of thing, and certainly wouldn't displace a thumb reattachment unless their life/limb would be in jeopardy by not doing so.


Back on topic, IMO the idea that cyclists should not be on the road because they don't pay road tax is silly. First off, your road tax does not go straight back into the roads; it goes into the government's coffers and the roads are maintained from those coffers - meaning cyclists pay for the roads in other taxes. Insurance however, while hard to enforce, should be compulsory, if it is as little as a few pounds a month - as it is, cyclists are essentially uninsured motorists, which makes them a financial liability to drivers and other cyclists alike, which is really unacceptable.

I have yet to come across a cyclist riding in a way I deem unsafe, although I'm sure such cyclists exist.
 
I find it hard not swear when talking about cyclists and for the record I am one myself but I ride off road no way would I dream of going on roads.
 
EvilDreams said:
........just like a cyclist could either get a car and pay tax and stop holding me up
Click to expand...

So if a cyclist gets a car and pays tax then thats ok - well i have a bike, a car and i pay tax so that makes me ok then :D

You could always get a bike and stop whinning about cyclists, just think you could ride a bike and as you would already pay tax for your car you'd be sorted.............so i see no mention of insurance now...............

Given the choice would you pay Tax and Insurance for your car if it wasnt compulsory ????? Be honest now
 
Last edited:
[DOD]Asprilla;14732324 said:
The quickest way to cross London is by bike or Tube, so I think you'll find it's cars getting in my way.
Click to expand...

No, you get in their way, then they stop at the lights, then you skip the queue and you get in their way again, then they have to stop at the lights and you skip the queue again. Then they have to overtake you again ad nauseum. It doesn't really matter somewhere like London because at least there seems to be a decent amount of cycle lanes there where you can stay out of everyone's way on a bike and do 10mph to your heart's content.

In such a case it becomes buses that are the problem.
 
Last edited:
miniyazz said:
Children are afforded a certain priority in A&E departments to reduce suffering for other patients, if nothing else - would you rather wait for 2 hours with a screaming child next to you, or 2.5 hours in relative peace?
Click to expand...

Ummm, most hospitals (here at least) have a separate building for children. That includes a separate A&E here. Don't know about the rest of Britain.

But a traveller would have no such priority, and for him to jump the queue would mean he's significantly worse off than the rest of the queue (most A&E departments use the Manchester Triage System, which is a 5-point scale of severity; most patients will have a score of 4 (Standard), and all those patients are dealt with in order of presentation - no 'queue-jumping' unless they make a score 3 or higher, which includes things like potential heart attacks.)
Click to expand...

It was a simple analogy. Let's not get caught up in the finer details of the priority assignment system of UK healthcare. All I was saying is it sucks to see someone who isn't paying jumping the queue.


Back on topic, IMO the idea that cyclists should not be on the road because they don't pay road tax is silly. First off, your road tax does not go straight back into the roads; it goes into the government's coffers and the roads are maintained from those coffers - meaning cyclists pay for the roads in other taxes.
Click to expand...

It's still called "road tax" and I am paying it and they don't have to, and they have to be given the same amount of space as a car.

Insurance however, while hard to enforce, should be compulsory, if it is as little as a few pounds a month - as it is, cyclists are essentially uninsured motorists, which makes them a financial liability to drivers and other cyclists alike, which is really unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Finally someone agrees with something.
 
Last edited:
EvilDreams said:
No, you get in their way, then they stop at the lights, then you skip the queue and you get in their way again, then they have to stop at the lights and you skip the queue again. Then they have to overtake you again ad nauseum. It doesn't really matter somewhere like London because at least there seems to be a decent amount of cycle lanes there where you can stay out of everyone's way on a bike and do 10mph to your heart's content.
Click to expand...

No, they definately get in my way, especially the morons who block the advance stopping areas. As I mentioned before, I pay my VED, how much do you pay a year?

EvilDreams said:
It's still called "road tax" and I am paying it and they don't have to, and they have to be given the same amount of space as a car.
Click to expand...

It's not called road tax, that's just what you call it and you're wrong. It's called Vehicle Excise Duty and it's got nothing to do with paying for roads or their repair. Your point is pointless.
 
teulk said:
Given the choice would you pay Tax and Insurance for your car if it wasnt compulsory ????? Be honest now
Click to expand...

Come on then answer the queston. Ive already said i have insurance for my bike (and i dont have to) I dont pay tax for my bike because i dont have to because ITS not a requirment. All this they should they should they should - well we dont have to so end of.

If i was honest as regards to my car i would still pay insurance but i wouldnt pay tax if given the choice - but then again its just a case of you resenting the fact that cyclists use the roads effictively for free and nothing to do with the fact they hold you up for all of a few seconds. And if your brutally honest you probably just breeze past most of them anyway without so much of a delay or even a great drop in your speed !

If you look here you will see that the Tax is based on engine size and emissions so tell me based on the governments guidelines why again cyclist should pay road Tax - you will notice that cars with zero emission pay nothing yet will still do more damage to the road ( due to the size and weight) than a bike.........so by your argument as they dont pay the required two things you keep banging on about (insurance and tax) and seem to be basing the majority of your argument on, why should they be allowed on the road ?

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524



miniyazz said:
.......Insurance however, while hard to enforce, should be compulsory, if it is as little as a few pounds a month - as it is, cyclists are essentially uninsured motorists,.......

I have yet to come across a cyclist riding in a way I deem unsafe, although I'm sure such cyclists exist.
Click to expand...

How can a cyclist be a "motorist" when they dont have an engine on their bikes ;). The insurance i agree with and i have it (as ive said on many times)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom