Why can horses just **** everywhere?

Basher · 28 Jul 2015 at 18:47

Dis86 said:
You're presenting points as if they are fact when they are not. Shall we reduce it down to the very basics?

Caterham can keep up with traffic. FACT

Horse can't keep up with traffic. FACT.

Horse rider is aware his/her mount cannot keep up with traffic and is therefore an obstruction. FACT.

Horse rider therefore makes conscious decision to cause an obstruction. FACT.

Horse rider is therefore placing themselves above the other road users. FACT.

Drivers driving too slowly can and have been prosecuted for 'Inconsiderate driving'. FACT.

Therefore it is legally recognized that travelling on a road too slowly is inconsiderate. FACT.

I rest my case.

It is also legally recognised that horses can travel on our road. They should do what they can to cause as little inconvenience as possible, which everyone I have ever seen does (i.e. riding in single file, being visible)

mattyfez · 28 Jul 2015 at 18:51

Basher said:
It is also legally recognised that horses can travel on our road. They should do what they can to cause as little inconvenience as possible, which everyone I have ever seen does (i.e. riding in single file, being visible)

It's not our road, it's our carriageway which we allow cars on, with the exception of motorways.
I suggest brain trust in the other post lobbies his local council to have carriageways reclassified as motorways, should keep him occupied for a while!

Basher · 28 Jul 2015 at 18:52

mattyfez said:
It's not our road, it's our carriageway which we allow cars on, with the exception of motorways.

My point is that both cars and horses are road users as per the highway code.

SexyGreyFox · 28 Jul 2015 at 18:55

Greebo said:
It is a road tax from 2017 though. George Osbourne said so

Osborne said: "We will create a new roads fund from the end of this decade and every single penny raised in vehicle excise duty will go into that fund to pay for roads. The tax paid on people's cars will be used on the roads they drive on. It's a fairer tax system for motorists."

Therefore its not a vehicle excise duty based on emissions from then. Its based on using the road.

Interesting, I'll have to get a new T-shirt

Gammawolf · 28 Jul 2015 at 19:11

Tefal said:
heck go ask the next 10 people you meet what db a normal conversation is or a normal car is bet none of them get it.

I fear the results will be heavily biased towards the top end based on who i'm next likely to meet

Dis86 · 28 Jul 2015 at 19:26

Conscript said:
Horses are traffic. They are not obstructions, because they are not obstructing the road. They are simply slower moving traffic that you have to negotiate.

Again, they are not making a conscious decision to cause an obstruction, because general practice is that normal drivers will just overtake them sensibly and safely as the law dictates.
Therefore they are not placing themselves above other road users. But it's ironic that you say that, because you seem to be...

You seem to be trying to link these two completely unrelated facts in order to make a point.
I assume that you think a pedestrian walking along a country lane is also inconsiderate then? After all, they must also be travelling "too slowly"?

I hope you never go into law.

So you haven't actually proven any of my points wrong...

I suggest first off you look up the word obstruction.

How is something that causes an inconvenience not related to something being an inconvenience?

IC3 · 28 Jul 2015 at 19:26

Acme said:
I love these forums... Nobody ever takes a step back and thinks "Why am I having this argument?" they just continue until a moderator breaks it up.

Yeah, the time for closure has come.

mattyfez · 28 Jul 2015 at 19:37

Noo, it's just getting fun!

Amp34 · 28 Jul 2015 at 19:38

Acme said:
Get a convertible and put the horse in the car with you. Sorted.

Or better yet just ban Dis from the roads, he sounds like he's probably a nightmare driver. I bet he doesn't stop at zebra crossings, turnings or obey the speed limits.

mattyfez · 28 Jul 2015 at 19:39

Dis86 said:
So you haven't actually proven any of my points wrong...

I suggest first off you look up the word obstruction.

How is something that causes an inconvenience not related to something being an inconvenience?

So we should ban busses, bin lorries and delivery vans too because they are an 'obstruction'?

I think you are confused between obstructions and legitimate traffic.

Conscript · 28 Jul 2015 at 20:04

Dis86 said:
So you haven't actually proven any of my points wrong...

I suggest first off you look up the word obstruction.

How is something that causes an inconvenience not related to something being an inconvenience?

mattyfez said:
I think you are confused between obstructions and legitimate traffic.

Pretty much this.

I suspect you're just trolling, I can't believe anyone could be so unintentionally obtuse otherwise, so this whole discussion is just going to go around in pointless circles. I'm out.

Greebo · 28 Jul 2015 at 20:08

Dimple said:
Interesting, I'll have to get a new T-shirt

Lol what does your current T-shirt say?

Greebo · 28 Jul 2015 at 20:11

Dimple said:
Interesting, I'll have to get a new T-shirt

And in my opion means that all those vehicles currently exempted will be able to be included at a later date like classic cars and tractors and quad bikes and cyclists etc.

They use the road so they should pay for the upkeep of the road. Simples.

mattyfez · 28 Jul 2015 at 20:24

Greebo said:
And in my opion means that all those vehicles currently exempted will be able to be included at a later date like classic cars and tractors and quad bikes and cyclists etc.

They use the road so they should pay for the upkeep of the road. Simples.

It's an interesting point of view, I personally think having Road tax is dubious, im inclined to keep it as is because we all benefit from the infrastructure, food, services and goods need to get from depos /warehouses to shops or even direct to the door.

Call me a cynic but with everyone buying eco vehicles to evade vehicle excise duty, the government is facing a big loss of money and they need to fill the financial gap with something.

Edit : the honest way to do it would be to increase the excise duty on said eco vehicles, but that would be political suicide just to suggest such a thing. Considering the number of horses and cyclists, the actual wear on road surfaces is negligible compared to being pounded by hundreds of thousands of motorised vehicles on a daily basis.

Edit 2: imo, the only fair way to charge is to slap the tax on fuel, the more you burn, the more you pay, the more polluting your car is, the more you pay, the more time you spend on the road, the more you pay.