Cycling wrong way up one way streets to be made legal

Sir Jeremy

On 4 Jun, 11:26, spindrift <newty...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 4, 11:14*am, Mark <i...@getlotsofspamthankstoplus.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT), POHB <goo...@hayward.uk.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
> > >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ed-wrong-way-up....
>
> > >http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...iving/news/arti....
>
> > >There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> > >this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.
>
> > Seems to have stirred up the anti cycle brigade into even more mouth
> > foaming comments.
>
> > --
> > (\__/) *M.
> > (='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
> > (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
> > posted from there. *If you wish your postings to be seen by
> > everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
> > Seehttp://improve-usenet.org
>
> Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
> Gatso" to comment?
>
> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol...Submitted=true- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Because he's a folk hero

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 06:36:09 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<pete.aron@virgin.net> said in
<b8e85480-8a82-4949-8489-986eb0de5846@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>:

>> > when you have a
>> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
>> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.
>> So why is pot still illegal?

>and breaking the speed limit?

You missed the bit about "obvious negative consequences".

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 06:37:55 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<pete.aron@virgin.net> said in
<de63be8d-a76b-440b-8d7a-8664da1f2fb7@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:

>> Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
>> Gatso" to comment?

>Because he's a folk hero

FSVO hero, and indeed folk.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Dervin

On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 06:36:09 -0700, Sir Jeremy wrote:

> On 4 Jun, 13:57, Dervin <Der...@Dervin.Dervin> wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
>> > That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
>> > that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
>> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
>> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.
>>
>> So why is pot still illegal?
>
> and breaking the speed limit?

There's a reason for speed limits. To reduce fuel emissions.

Clive George

"spindrift" <newtyres@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:26e5a277-daca-4106-a6a3-db8be5de7499@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

>Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
>Gatso" to comment?

Cos he's such an obvious numpty it makes the proposal look all the better.

If the writers of the piece had wanted to make it look bad, they'd have had
somebody from Rospa or some other such body to oppose it, but instead they
want to support it so they choose their contributors appropriately.

That or they just want to start an argument and don't actually care about
the proposal.

cheers,
clive

Dave Larrington

In news:y3x1k.145665$cZ3.54248@newsfe10.ams2,
Dervin <Dervin@Dervin.Dervin> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 06:36:09 -0700, Sir Jeremy wrote:
>
>> On 4 Jun, 13:57, Dervin <Der...@Dervin.Dervin> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
>>>> That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He
>>>> said that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when
>>>> you have a law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious
>>>> negative consequences it is sensible to consider if the law is
>>>> really needed.
>>>
>>> So why is pot still illegal?
>>
>> and breaking the speed limit?
>
> There's a reason for speed limits. To reduce fuel emissions.

Where can I get one of these vehicles that emits fuel?

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Among the calamities of war may be jointly numbered the
diminution of the love of truth, by the falsehoods which
interest dictates and credulity encourages.

Sir Jeremy

On 4 Jun, 14:48, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <u...@ftc.gov> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 06:36:09 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
> <pete.a...@virgin.net> said in
> <b8e85480-8a82-4949-8489-986eb0de5...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >> > when you have a
> >> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> >> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.
> >> So why is pot still illegal?
> >and breaking the speed limit?
>
> You missed the bit about "obvious negative consequences".
>
> Guy
> --
> May contain traces of irony. *Contents liable to settle after posting.http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
>
> 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound


Couldn't think of any. Annoying the 'mentalists counts as a positive
consequence.

Sir Jeremy

On 4 Jun, 14:49, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <u...@ftc.gov> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 06:37:55 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
> <pete.a...@virgin.net> said in
> <de63be8d-a76b-440b-8d7a-8664da1f2...@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >> Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
> >> Gatso" to comment?
> >Because he's a folk hero
>
> FSVO hero, and indeed folk.
>
> Guy
> --
> May contain traces of irony. *Contents liable to settle after posting.http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
>
> 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound


What does FSVO mean?

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 08:24:58 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<pete.aron@virgin.net> said in
<a89e85f0-455d-4d3d-9a24-b661c9aa4986@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>:

>> You missed the bit about "obvious negative consequences".

>Couldn't think of any. Annoying the 'mentalists counts as a positive
>consequence.

If you can't think of any obvious negative consequences of speeding,
it's time you turned in your driving license.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Peter Pie Eater

POHB wrote:
> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.

My initial thoughts are as follows:

I'm always stepping out in front of cyclists on those damn contraflow
one way roads. It just doesn't come naturally to me to look in the
"wrong direction" when crossing a one way street.

The argument being presented seems to be that cycling the wrong way down
one-way streets should be legalised because some bike users do it
already and it can't be policed. That seems to me to be a bad argument.
Maybe next, using the same argument, they should legalise maiming
cyclists by cutting them up at corners?

PoB

"Dave Larrington" <smert.spamionam@privacy.net> wrote in message
| >> and breaking the speed limit?
| >
| > There's a reason for speed limits. To reduce fuel emissions.
|
| Where can I get one of these vehicles that emits fuel?

Buy an old Leyland car.

I reckon more unburnt fuel came out of my metro that it was burning, as the
performance showed...

pOB

Clive George

"Peter Pie Eater" <M8R-0ku37n@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:VJKdnY_mwN_zKNvVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@giganews.com...

> The argument being presented seems to be that cycling the wrong way down
> one-way streets should be legalised because some bike users do it already
> and it can't be policed. That seems to me to be a bad argument.

In those terms, maybe. But add the critical extra bit "and it seems to work
fine - no carnage has resulted", and it becomes a rather better one.

clive

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 08:26:09 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<pete.aron@virgin.net> said in
<bc743403-6822-46e3-9cb6-5c787f459274@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:

>What does FSVO mean?

For Some Values Of. Do KUATB.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

David Hansen

On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:48:23 +0100 someone who may be "Just zis Guy,
you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote this:-

>>> > when you have a
>>> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
>>> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.
>>> So why is pot still illegal?
>
>>and breaking the speed limit?
>
>You missed the bit about "obvious negative consequences".

Until relatively recently if councils measured the speed motorists
were driving down roads and a weighted average was higher than the
speed limit they raised the speed limit. I still hear the same
concept from time to time.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54