Number plates for pedal cycles

[Matt B]

jtaylor wrote:
> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Matt B wrote:
>>
>>>Marz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Matt B wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In certain US states _all_ pedal cycles have to display plates.
>>>>
>>>>Name two!
>>>
>>>Take your pick:
>>>
>>>http://tinyurl.com/847tt
>>
>>You can even get customised plates with your own message on them!
>>
>>"Custom Bicycle License Plates 501205012-BP. Great publicity for anyone.
>>The bicycle explosion in the U.S. has created thousands of opportunities
>>for you to get free publicity with bicycle license plates. Complete
>>design embossing and precision color work are featured on each tag.
>>Aluminum tag comes with mounting holes to fit any standard bicycle
>>mounting. Size: 3"X6"X.024"." [1]
>>
>>Note the size 3" x 6" - they *are* number plates as we know them on cars
>
>
>
> And these are required by law, troll?

Not the customised ones, no.

--
Matt B

 

[Matt B]

Marz wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>
>>Alan Braggins wrote:
>>
>>>Care to try again?
>>
>>Why? Do you deny that there *are* places that mandate bicycle number
>>plates?
>
> Why, because you've failed to provide evidence that any place in the US
> has an active bicycle license plate requirement.

You want evidence because you deny there are such places or because you
are unable to find any yourslf?

--
Matt B

 

[Matt B]

John Hearns wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:33:58 +0000, Matt B wrote:
>
>>You missed my point. I was alluding to the network of _underground_
>>railways that they built, given the lack of availability of surface land.
>
> I was alluding to the London to Greenwich railway, I am about a mile away
> from it. A huge series of brick arches marching across SE London.
> And I would imagine not a few homes cleared out of the way.

Yes, quite, we need to be subtler.

--
Matt B

 

[Richard Webb]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 10:58:26 +0000, Matt B <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Richard Webb wrote:
>>>This government wants something not far short of that with ID cards.
>>>How can we argue against it, yet support number plates on motor vehicles?
>>
>> Err operating a motor vehicle is voluntary.
>
>How is that relevant? Living in the UK is voluntary.

Living in GBNI has been voluntary since 1961 I suppose.

IIRC thats when suicide was decriminalised (only I think thanks to
ASBO creep it can be punished again)

Richard Webb

 

[Richard Webb]

On 14 Dec 2005 03:56:27 -0800, "davek" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Richard Webb wrote:
>> Who will think
>> of the children.
>
>The Daily Mail.

Thanks.. I feel all warm and safe again.

Richard Webb

 

[Richard Webb]

>Not really. Take a look at all the government websites concerned with
>cycling or road safety. They recommend helmets.
>

Pleeease... One troll per thread...... Dont overegg the pudding.

(BTW, mine will of course be tin foil lined - you just cannot be too
careful)

Richard Webb
DINTYIHAB

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Matt B wrote:
>Alan Braggins wrote:
>
>> Care to try again?
>Why?

Because I'm curious to see whether you can back up your claims,
having failed on your first try. But if you want to conceed you
can't, that's just as good.


> Do you deny that there *are* places that mandate bicycle number
>plates?

I deny that you've provided any evidence they do. All you have shown is
that some places require something more like a tax disk than a number
plate.

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Matt B wrote:
>Alan Braggins wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>, Matt B wrote:
>>
>>>Yes, if they can maintain the requisite minimum speed - which is the
>>>only reason why many types of motor vehicle are excluded from using them.
>>
>> That minimum speed, not mentioned in the Highway Code, nor signposted
>> on the motorways using the standard minimum speed limit sign (white
>> numbers on a blue circle), being what?
>
>I dunno, but I know that vehicles which are inherently slow are banned -
>I don't know the exact criteria, but push bikes, mopeds, tractors and
>the like are expressly prohibited.

There are pushbikes that can do over 70mph. They still aren't allowed
on motorways.

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:20:10 +0000, Zog The Undeniable
<[email protected]> said in <43a073a4.0@entanet>:

>> Good lad! Now justify plates on motor vehicles.
>They kill 3,500 people a year?

That and several other good reasons, but don't go expecting MattB to
be able to tell the difference between two tons of potentially lethal
pollution factory and a harmless and health-improving bike.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On 14 Dec 2005 18:07:02 +0000 (GMT), [email protected] (Alan
Braggins) said in <[email protected]>:

>>Now stand back and think about how daft that is for a moment. When the
>>Victorians had a similar problem fitting a railway network in what did
>>*they* do?

>Built a series of disconnected networks with the middle left out, so
>anyone crossing London has to arrive at one terminus, transfer to another
>means of transport, and set off again from another rail station.

Is the right answer Also, they missed out the means of getting
from, say, Reading to St. Albans - which is 40 miles as the bike
flies, and actually quicker to cycle than to do by train.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:52:45 +0000, John Hearns <[email protected]>
said in <[email protected]>:

>I was alluding to the London to Greenwich railway, I am about a mile away
>from it. A huge series of brick arches marching across SE London.
>And I would imagine not a few homes cleared out of the way.

My uncle lived for some decades in a house compulsorily purchased by
the railways and never knocked down because they bought up a wider
strip of land than it turned out they needed.

Compulsory purchase was not always an option: the main line to
Scottishland got as far as the Earl of Verulam's land and there came
to a grinding halt due to his refusal to sell. A second line was then
run, leaving the first as the "Abbey Flyer" out from Watford Junction.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On 14 Dec 2005 05:04:03 -0800, "MartinM" <[email protected]> said
in <[email protected]>:

>Yiiiih! I remember when those M25 10 line motorways was all fields.

Ar. I do too. And I remember the traffic jams on the A405 vanishing
the day it opened. They are back now, of course.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

 

[Tim Hall]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:51:54 +0000, Matt B <[email protected]>
wrote:

>jtaylor wrote:
>> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>Precisely. So remind me why cars have number plates.
>>>
>>
>> It is required by law, troll.
>
>Ah, so let me think of a supplementary question - yes I've got one...
>Why is there a law that requires cars to have number plates?


Purely to wind you up, obv.


Tim

 

[MartinM]

Tim Hall wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:51:54 +0000, Matt B <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >jtaylor wrote:
> >> "Matt B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >>>Precisely. So remind me why cars have number plates.
> >>>
> >>
> >> It is required by law, troll.
> >
> >Ah, so let me think of a supplementary question - yes I've got one...
> >Why is there a law that requires cars to have number plates?
>
>
> Purely to wind you up, obv.

no it's to sell more cars in the hitherto flat month of August as any
fule kno

 

[Matt B]

Zog The Undeniable wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>
>> Good lad! Now justify plates on motor vehicles.
>
> They kill 3,500 people a year? They pay a large proportion of the taxes
> in the country? They are used as the getaway vehicle for most crimes?
> Abandoned vehicles cost a lot of money to remove and are potentially
> hazardous?
>
> How many of those apply to bikes?

Or, how many are influenced by number plates. Are you saying no number
plates would increase road deaths? How are number plates relevent to
taxes - I pay _many_ taxes with no plate required. As getaway vehicles
the plate is false or the vehicle stolen or both. Abandoned vehicles
are traceable with no number plate from their vehicle identity number
stamped in various places.

--
Matt B

 

[Matt B]

Alan Braggins wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Matt B wrote:
>
>>Alan Braggins wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>, Matt B wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yes, if they can maintain the requisite minimum speed - which is the
>>>>only reason why many types of motor vehicle are excluded from using them.
>>>
>>>That minimum speed, not mentioned in the Highway Code, nor signposted
>>>on the motorways using the standard minimum speed limit sign (white
>>>numbers on a blue circle), being what?
>>
>>I dunno, but I know that vehicles which are inherently slow are banned -
>>I don't know the exact criteria, but push bikes, mopeds, tractors and
>>the like are expressly prohibited.
>
>
> There are pushbikes that can do over 70mph. They still aren't allowed
> on motorways.

Yes, and tractors and mopeds. Equally there are motor vehicles which
travel no faster than peds, yet require number plates - strange old world.

--
Matt B

 

[davek]

Guy wrote:
> That and several other good reasons, but don't go expecting MattB to
> be able to tell the difference between two tons of potentially lethal
> pollution factory and a harmless and health-improving bike.

No, indeed - MattB is far too open-minded for that. In fact, his mind so
open it's like a vast empty space, stretching out for miles and miles...

d.

 

[davek]

Matt B wrote:
> This government wants something not far short of that with ID cards. How
> can we argue against it, yet support number plates on motor vehicles?

You're absolutely right - people should be treated like motor vehicles.
It makes perfect sense.

d.

 

[Jon Senior]

Matt B wrote:
> Now stand back and think about how daft that is for a moment. When the
> Victorians had a similar problem fitting a railway network in what did
> *they* do? (clue: our world is three dimensional).

What a brilliant idea. We can quarantine the cars into a dedicated
subterranean network, with integrated car parks, using the now unused
space at ground level for a sensible, integrated mass-transit system.
Filters could be put in to trap the chemicals released, and a number
place (he he) monitoring system could be employed to release said
discharge in / near the homes of the offenders in relative proportions.

All we'd need is some kind of device for chewing large tunnels out of
rock... kind of like the sort of thing one might use to dig a tunnel
under the channel... where might one find such a thing?

Jon

 

[Jon Senior]

sothach wrote:
> who
> in their right mind, seeing the traffic in western world for the first
> time, could think that this is in anyway a rational and sane way of
> transporting goods and people around?

MattB?

Jon