Move to change law



Ziggy wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:55:49 GMT, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=AEi=A9ardo?=
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> That isn't even remotely close to what he said.
>>>
>>>

>> I know, that is what I said! Are you suggesting that in every accident
>> situation it can only be the fault of the motorist - if a motorist is
>> actually involved in the accident?

>
> No.
>
>> Who gets the blame when two cyclist collide - is that distraction by a
>> passing motorist, so not their fault?

>
> Possible, but quite unlikely.
>
> Any more stupid questions?


Well, I'm only just getting on the wavelength of some of the posters
here so...

--
Moving things in still pictures!
 
®i©ardo wrote:

> Ziggy wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:55:49 GMT, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=AEi=A9ardo?=
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>> That isn't even remotely close to what he said.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I know, that is what I said! Are you suggesting that in every accident
> >> situation it can only be the fault of the motorist - if a motorist is
> >> actually involved in the accident?

> >
> > No.
> >
> >> Who gets the blame when two cyclist collide - is that distraction by a
> >> passing motorist, so not their fault?

> >
> > Possible, but quite unlikely.
> >
> > Any more stupid questions?

>
> Well, I'm only just getting on the wavelength of some of the posters
> here so...


Whilst they already have you sussed.

John B
 
On Mar 18, 9:04 pm, ®i©ardo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Think, for heaven's sake! A cycling helmet is not a halo.


Whoops, now you've done it!

--
Dave...
 
On Mar 18, 10:24 pm, "Clive." <[email protected]> wrote:

> Why are people always ignoring cycling for the Belmarsh
> prisoner? How about his rights?


And it's through that there Magna Charter,
As were signed by the barons of old,
That in England today we can do what we like,
So long as we do what we're told.

--
Dave...
 
In article <[email protected]>, says...

> Cycling is by right,


No it isn't.


--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........
 
["Followup-To:" header set to uk.rec.cycling.]
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, [email protected] <> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:44:31 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >In article <[email protected]>, says...
> >
> >> Cycling is by right,

> >
> >No it isn't.

>
> Then, pray tell, what legal hurdles must one overcome in order to
> cycle?


I think that's not a logically valid objection.

There are no legal hurdles to overcome to be very rich (ask, for
example, the Duke of Westminster), but that doesn't mean everyone has
the right to be obscenely rich.

It's an argument that has more relevance to semantics than cycling (or
driving).

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
 
"Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> ["Followup-To:" header set to uk.rec.cycling.]
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, [email protected] <> wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:44:31 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >In article <[email protected]>, says...
>> >
>> >> Cycling is by right,
>> >
>> >No it isn't.

>>
>> Then, pray tell, what legal hurdles must one overcome in order to
>> cycle?

>
> I think that's not a logically valid objection.
>
> There are no legal hurdles to overcome to be very rich (ask, for
> example, the Duke of Westminster), but that doesn't mean everyone has
> the right to be obscenely rich.


Yes, they do have the right to be obscenely rich. There is no law requiring
someone yo pass any kind of test or other legal requirement to amass wealth
(just so long as you tell the taxman).

Whether or not everyone has the necessary wit or means to amass such wealth
is of course a different matter.
 
In article <[email protected]>, says...
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:44:31 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>, says...
> >
> >> Cycling is by right,

> >
> >No it isn't.

>
> Then, pray tell, what legal hurdles must one overcome in order to
> cycle?
>

No idea but if it was a right, it would apply everywhere and it clearly
doesn't.


--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:31:47 +0000, [email protected] wrote
(in message <[email protected]>):

> Cycling is by right, motoring is by permission.


Spot the "don't bother to read the post being replied to" merchant.

Motoring is NOT by permission, it is by removal of restriction. Anyone has
the right to drive but there are laws restricting when and how they may
excercise that right - exactly as everyone has the right to cycle but there
are laws restricting when and how they may excercise that right.

So I repeat the question YET AGAIN, though I assume it will be ignored again
!

If the government passes a law saying that you may not ride a cycle without
having passed a test of proficiency, is that removing the right or imposing
conditions on it's exercise ?