The cyclist's spokesman

Who'd have thought it? Out of a population of 300 000 people, the local CTC secretary and little old
me have become the de facto mouthpieces for the cyclists of the city of Hull as shown by this
letter. A whole city waits as I carefully formulate my witty and cutting response

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zwinter.htm

--
Simon Mason Anlaby East Yorkshire. 53°44'N 0°26'W http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

 

"Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Who'd have thought it? Out of a population of 300 000 people, the local
CTC
> secretary and little old me have become the de facto mouthpieces for the cyclists of the city of
> Hull as shown by this letter. A whole city waits
as
> I carefully formulate my witty and cutting response

Which is:

In response to T. Winter who asked me to reply to his query about cyclists who do not use lights at
night. Firstly, as a cyclist who uses two sets of lights, I well understand his annoyance at these
law breakers, but the answer to his question is easy.

Cyclists are human beings, the same as pedestrians and motorists. The reason why they have no lights
is the same as why pedestrians walk across the road against the red man, motorists park on double
yellow lines and on the pavement, cyclists ride through red lights and drivers exceed the speed
limit and drive in the Anlaby Road bus lane every evening.

Because they want to and they know they can get away with it. It's that simple.

 

On Mon, 5 May 2003 17:14:56 +0100, "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Who'd have thought it? Out of a population of 300 000 people, the local CTC secretary and little
>old me have become the de facto mouthpieces for the cyclists of the city of Hull as shown by this
>letter. A whole city waits as I carefully formulate my witty and cutting response
>

What about an answer refering to 'night-vision goggles'....ones made in Russia, of course

bob

>http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zwinter.htm
>
>--
>Simon Mason Anlaby East Yorkshire. 53°44'N 0°26'W http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

 

"Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Cyclists are human beings, the same as pedestrians and motorists. The
reason
> why they have no lights is the same as why pedestrians walk across the
road
> against the red man, motorists park on double yellow lines and on the pavement, cyclists ride
> through red lights and drivers exceed the speed limit and drive in the Anlaby Road bus lane every
> evening.
>
> Because they want to and they know they can get away with it. It's that simple.

Nicely put

Pete

 

"Peter B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Cyclists are human beings, the same as pedestrians and motorists. The
> reason
> > why they have no lights is the same as why pedestrians walk across the
> road
> > against the red man, motorists park on double yellow lines and on the pavement, cyclists ride
> > through red lights and drivers exceed the speed limit and drive in the Anlaby Road bus lane
> > every evening.
> >
> > Because they want to and they know they can get away with it. It's that simple.
>
> Nicely put
>
Apart from it is perfectly legal for peds to cross against the red man.

 

"Frank°" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> Apart from it is perfectly legal for peds to cross against the red man.
>

But it isn't always advisable, and they'd still do it even if it wasn't...

Rich

 

I haven't a clue why so many cyclists ride during the hours of darkness wihtout lights.
Perhaps because they can without fear of being caught, even though it is, in the least, an
unwise thing to do.

In the meantime perhaps you can tell me why so many unpaired socks end up in the laundry, with their
counterparts never to be found again. I assume you can speak for all socks in the same way you
assume I speak for all cyclists.

Or perhaps, you can tell me why so many motorists jump red lights, park in disabled parking bays
when they shouldn't, park in cycle lanes, break the speed limits and the provide the answers to many
other burning issues of the day. Again, I am assuming you can mind read all motorists in the same
way you assume I can mind read all cyclists.

Yours psychically


How's about that for starters ;-)

Cheers, helen s


~~~~~~~~~~
Clean up the waste & get rid of the trapped wind to send a reply

Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
~~~~~~~~~~

 

In article <[email protected]>, Frank° <[email protected]> writes
>
>"Peter B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > Cyclists are human beings, the same as pedestrians and motorists. The
>> reason
>> > why they have no lights is the same as why pedestrians walk across the
>> road
>> > against the red man, motorists park on double yellow lines and on the pavement, cyclists ride
>> > through red lights and drivers exceed the speed limit and drive in the Anlaby Road bus lane
>> > every evening.
>> >
>> > Because they want to and they know they can get away with it. It's that simple.
>>
>> Nicely put
>>
>Apart from it is perfectly legal for peds to cross against the red man.
>
>
But how annoying are those who press the request button, then cross against the red man, and later
cause other road users, who _would_ be breaking the law if they crossed the red light, to wait
around for no good reason. Ho Hum.

--
Peter Grange

Remove crude spam trap to reply

 

"Peter Grange" <[email protected]_THISplgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Frank° <[email protected]> writes
> >
> >"Peter B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> > Cyclists are human beings, the same as pedestrians and motorists. The
> >> reason
> >> > why they have no lights is the same as why pedestrians walk across
the
> >> road
> >> > against the red man, motorists park on double yellow lines and on the pavement, cyclists ride
> >> > through red lights and drivers exceed the
speed
> >> > limit and drive in the Anlaby Road bus lane every evening.
> >> >
> >> > Because they want to and they know they can get away with it. It's
that
> >> > simple.
> >>
> >> Nicely put
> >>
> >Apart from it is perfectly legal for peds to cross against the red man.
> >
> >
> But how annoying are those who press the request button, then cross against the red man, and later
> cause other road users, who _would_ be breaking the law if they crossed the red light, to wait
> around for no good reason. Ho Hum.
>
My point was about the letter, It seemed misleading to list a number of illegal activities and then
have the single possibly anti-social activity of crossing against the red man. It wasn't meant as a
criticism just an observation.

 

Peter Grange <[email protected]_THISplgrange.demon.co.uk> writes:

> But how annoying are those who press the request button, then cross against the red man, and later
> cause other road users, who _would_ be breaking the law if they crossed the red light, to wait
> around for no good reason. Ho Hum.

I do this occasionally, but feel guilty about it. But really, if it turns out that there's a break
in the traffic that I was unable to predict some time after I pressed the button, who would benefit
if I ignore it and avoid crossing until the green man appears?

Pelican crossings with "cancel request" buttons would be nice.

-dan

--

http://www.cliki.net/ - Link farm for free CL-on-Unix resources

 

"Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> Because they want to and they know they can get away with it. It's that simple.

... is the right answer.

--
Dave...

 

On Mon, 5 May 2003 21:30:38 +0100, Peter Grange <[email protected]_THISplgrange.demon.co.uk> in
<[email protected]> wrote:

>But how annoying are those who press the request button, then cross against the red man, and later
>cause other road users, who _would_ be breaking the law if they crossed the red light, to wait
>around for no good reason. Ho Hum.

Not very annoying I find, since as the pedestrian is now out of the equation, it means that i can
cycle on my way as soon as the flashing amber lights appear, rather than having to wait for the
pedestrian to finish crossing the road. A similar principle applies for crossings with no flashing
amber phase since these now detect the presence/absence of a pedestrian.

Both parties win.

Love and flashing men from Rich x

--
Two fish suddenly swim into a brick wall. Damn! To reply put only the word "richard" before
the @ sign

 

Actually, I would have thought that one reason so many cyclists ride without lights is that, in town
at least, they can see where they are going perfectly well without them.

They can see parked cars, other cyclists etc and so assume car drivers can as well. Assuming drivers
actually drive within the limits of their headlights, being able to 'stop well within the distance
they can see to be clear' all will be fine. However, cars tend to travel much faster then they
should in conditions of poor visibility, and certainly faster then cyclists. They also sit in a
metal box fitted with tinted glass windows, further reducing their visibility...

To be honest, given the number of unlit cyclists about I would have thought anyone who does not take
especial care to look out for unlit cyclist is driving without due care. After all they are a
perfectly predictable feature of the urban roads environment...

 

In news:[email protected], Howard <[email protected]> typed:
>
> To be honest, given the number of unlit cyclists about I would have thought anyone who does not
> take especial care to look out for unlit cyclist is driving without due care. After all they are a
> perfectly predictable feature of the urban roads environment...

As are drivers who cut up cyclists, overtake to turn left, pull out in front of you etc. So that's
alright then - when it happens its the cyclist's fault for not realising thats what drivers do.

Tony

--
http://www.raven-family.com

"All truth goes through three steps: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed.
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer

 

"Frank°" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Peter B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Cyclists are human beings, the same as pedestrians and motorists. The
> > reason
> > > why they have no lights is the same as why pedestrians walk across the
> > road
> > > against the red man, motorists park on double yellow lines and on the pavement, cyclists ride
> > > through red lights and drivers exceed the
speed
> > > limit and drive in the Anlaby Road bus lane every evening.
> > >
> > > Because they want to and they know they can get away with it. It's
that
> > > simple.
> >
> > Nicely put
> >
> Apart from it is perfectly legal for peds to cross against the red man.

It says not to in the Highway Code though, or are peds exempt from following its advice?. Simon

 

"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> I haven't a clue why so many cyclists ride during the hours of darkness
wihtout
> lights. Perhaps because they can without fear of being caught, even though
it
> is, in the least, an unwise thing to do.
>
> In the meantime perhaps you can tell me why so many unpaired socks end up
in
> the laundry, with their counterparts never to be found again. I assume you
can
> speak for all socks in the same way you assume I speak for all cyclists.
>
> Or perhaps, you can tell me why so many motorists jump red lights, park in disabled parking bays
> when they shouldn't, park in cycle lanes, break the
speed
> limits and the provide the answers to many other burning issues of the
day.
> Again, I am assuming you can mind read all motorists in the same way you
assume
> I can mind read all cyclists.
>
> Yours psychically

>
>

>
>
> How's about that for starters ;-)
>
> Cheers, helen s

That's better than mine. Send it in to [email protected] with your name and address and
I'll tell you if it gets printed, Helen. Simon

 

>>>>> "SM" == Simon Mason <[email protected]> writes:

SM> It says not to in the Highway Code though, or are peds exempt from following its advice?.

The rules of the HC are not law... so we're all exempt from following its advice if we so choose.

--
I HAVE to buy a new ``DODGE MISER'' and two dozen JORDACHE JEANS because my viewscreen is
``USER-FRIENDLY''!!

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> "Frank°" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> > Apart from it is perfectly legal for peds to cross against the red man.
>
> It says not to in the Highway Code though, or are peds exempt from following its advice?.

If it is advice then, yes, peds do not need to follow the advice. Advice isn't law. The HC is a mix
of law and, sometimes good, advice.

Colin

 

In news:[email protected], Paul Rudin <[email protected]> typed:
>
> The rules of the HC are not law... so we're all exempt from following its advice if we so choose.

They are not but where they say MUST they are based on the law and not taking that advice probably
means you are breaking the law. They very helpfully give a reference to the relevant Act where this
is the case. In fact you are exempt from complying with the law if you so choose but in doing so
accept liability for any penalty the Courts may choose to impose on you.

Tony

--
http://www.raven-family.com

"All truth goes through three steps: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed.
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer

 

"Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> >
> > "Frank°" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> > > Apart from it is perfectly legal for peds to cross against the red
man.
> >
> > It says not to in the Highway Code though, or are peds exempt from following its advice?.
>
> If it is advice then, yes, peds do not need to follow the advice. Advice isn't law. The HC is a
> mix of law and, sometimes good, advice.

I didn't mention the law in the post. Frank *assumed* that I was listing a series of illegal
activities and crossing on a red man was not one of them. This was not the case, l listed a set of
activities against the HC, not all of which were illegal.

For example, parking on the pavement is not illegal according to rule 218, but he didn't
mention this, nor did he mention that it *is* illegal to "loiter" on zebra, pelican or puffin
crossings, rule 18, which you could argue that peds are doing when they are not following the
crossing's rules.

--
Simon Mason Anlaby East Yorkshire. 53°44'N 0°26'W http://www.simonmason.karoo.net