SPAM random annoying things

[old.user4556]

See above.

 

[Scouse]

See above.

Was cross-post editing

Edit: AND, you said you "nearly" killed him. That's an admission of going too fast for the conditions as you should be able to stop safely and in plenty of time.

So yah-boo sucks m'lad

 

[old.user4556]

That's an admission of going too fast for the conditions as you should be able to stop safely and in plenty of time

I did stop safely and in plenty of time. Well done for twisting my words to suit your argument.

They're clearly NOT a "hazard to themselves" - the hazard is the other road users. (We'll ignore the rather selfish "Who cares if they have the right" bit)...

Yes they are.

 

[Scouse]

I did stop safely and in plenty of time. Well done for twisting my words to suit your argument.

I nearly killed a cyclist here:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.1417812,-4.9523386,3a,75y,133.27h,78.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWNFnZk5JkP3hoAQMKNE49Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

....

Your post. Are you taking it back now?

 

[Tom]

I have the highest of respect for you Tom, but that post gave me aids to the power of cancer.

There was plenty of time to stop (because clearly, I didn't hit him), that did not change the fact that I had to slam on the anchors because a) continuing to travel at 45mph would have meant I would have killed the mushroom-head and b) it was double white lines, so illegal to overtake. I had to dribble at 5mph until it was safe to do so. The point being made by Moriath, and what I was reinforcing, is that I really don't think these roads with 60mph limits are the right place for cyclists to be travelling very slowly. But alas, it's everyone else's fault but the cyclists. Who cares if they have the right, they're a hazard to themselves.

If you had to perform any kind of emergency braking then you were travelling too quickly. And if he really was cycling at 5mph then it was perfectly legal to cross the white line to pass him.

You might think that NSL roads aren't for slow cyclists but unless specified, roads are for everyone. That includes pedestrians, who very often have no pavements to walk on.

You know I'm not some lentil-eating car-hating loony, but cyclists and pedestrians present no danger to motorists. None. The real hazard is the person driving inappropriately.

 

[old.user4556]

We're talking about a remote road in the west highlands of Scotland. If you go cycling on those roads, you're a risk to yourself. Cattle (sheep, cows, deer) are killed regularly because they're in the middle of the road over blind summits, or round bends. Tom it doesn't matter that the roads are for everyone - you're both missing my point - anything but cars on these remote NSL roads are a risk, that is the context of what Moriath is talking about and I was reinforcing with an example.

I get that the roads are for everyone, I get that anyone could be on them, I get that cyclists have the right ad nauseum, but it doesn't change the fact that there are better, safer places for them to be.

We'll need to agree to disagree.

And @Scouse , I won't bite for your tiresome word dissecting bollocks.

 

[Scouse]

Motorists are the danger to the cyclists, sheep, cows etc etc. They're demonstrably not the danger to themselves that you keep saying.

there are better, safer places for them to be.

No, there aren't. Road bikes go on the road. That's where they go. As silly as I think it is to road bike because of agressive uncaring motorists, that's where road bikes belong.

And @Scouse , I won't bite for your tiresome word dissecting bollocks.

I'm not trying anything on. You said you nearly killed someone. If you hadn't said that then there wouldn't have been any discussion at all.

You didn't say "I came round this corner and stopped safely in front of a cyclist in plenty of time" or I'd have gone Well Done @Big G. Well done

 

[Bodhi]

I am going to state 3 completely unrelated facts.

Fact 1 - Cyclists get a lot of abuse from other road users (motorists and pedestrians).

Fact 2 - Cyclists have as much right to be on the road as anyone else.

Fact 3 - Cyclists are a lot more vocal about their rights and will bore anyone who will listen.

OK I tell a lie, 1 and 3 are connected.

Looking at that road I dont think 45 is too fast for that corner at all, from G's account I'd wonder what the hell a cyclist was doing wobbling up the middle of the road after a blind bend, and not showing a little consideration and moving over upon hearing a car.

Generally I'd call that "not being a twat to other road users" but that concept can be lost on some cyclists.

Only thing you did wrong G was not just overtake if it was clear, you can overtake on double white lines at up to 15 mph.

 

[Scouse]

Yeah, as you say, 3's because cyclists get a lot of shit, constantly, and feel the need to defend themselves.

Also, the point about being in the middle of the road - I've already said there are a lot of reasons why a cyclist would be in the middle of the road - if he was wobbling it could simply be down to sheer exhaustion - but there are a lot of other reasons. And it's doubtful that he'd hear a car coming around that corner. What with sound travelling in straight lines and all.

But what I like about this story is that G stopped in plenty of time, and everyone was safe. So I'm failing to see what the problem is at all?

 

[Moriath]

Yeah, as you say, 3's because cyclists get a lot of shit, constantly, and feel the need to defend themselves.

Also, the point about being in the middle of the road - I've already said there are a lot of reasons why a cyclist would be in the middle of the road - if he was wobbling it could simply be down to sheer exhaustion - but there are a lot of other reasons. And it's doubtful that he'd hear a car coming around that corner. What with sound travelling in straight lines and all.

But what I like about this story is that G stopped in plenty of time, and everyone was safe. So I'm failing to see what the problem is at all?

That tom saidd he was driving too fast.

And its not a case of it being illegal. Same for horses and pedestrians who also have no defence if hit. Unlike tractors and caravans. Its that a narrow country lane is a lot riskier than a wider road with room ro manouver.

Yes the cars make it risky. Not the fact that the cyclist is there on his own. Or the horse or the ped. Which when doing a risk assessment would suggest there is a greater risk of death or injury by cycling on those roads.

Not that they are not perfectly entitled to do so if they want to. Just that i would be bricking myself everytime a car passed me and it wouldnt be enjoyable for me at all. But i guess i have too active an imagination .

 

[Tom]

I am going to state 3 completely unrelated facts.

Fact 1 - Cyclists get a lot of abuse from other road users (motorists and pedestrians).

Fact 2 - Cyclists have as much right to be on the road as anyone else.

Fact 3 - Cyclists are a lot more vocal about their rights and will bore anyone who will listen.

OK I tell a lie, 1 and 3 are connected.

Looking at that road I dont think 45 is too fast for that corner at all, from G's account I'd wonder what the hell a cyclist was doing wobbling up the middle of the road after a blind bend, and not showing a little consideration and moving over upon hearing a car.

Generally I'd call that "not being a twat to other road users" but that concept can be lost on some cyclists.

Only thing you did wrong G was not just overtake if it was clear, you can overtake on double white lines at up to 15 mph.

You're a shit driver Bodhi. Don't ever buy a really fast car because if you don't kill someone else, you'll kill yourself. You don't even know the rules on solid white lines.

 

[old.user4556]

Motorists are the danger to the cyclists, sheep, cows etc etc. They're demonstrably not the danger to themselves that you keep saying.


No, there aren't. Road bikes go on the road. That's where they go. As silly as I think it is to road bike because of agressive uncaring motorists, that's where road bikes belong.



I'm not trying anything on. You said you nearly killed someone. If you hadn't said that then there wouldn't have been any discussion at all.

You didn't say "I came round this corner and stopped safely in front of a cyclist in plenty of time" or I'd have gone Well Done @Big G. Well done

Jesus Christ Scouse, I'll describe the incident as I see fit. I said "I nearly killed someone" because in that scenario if I had been going faster - perhaps, 60 mph - then I would have most certainly would have knocked them off.

But - and this is where you're doing a "Scouse v Toht" special and totally ignoring what I've been saying - I stopped in plenty of time and nobody died. Stop being obtuse for the sake of it. Can you let that sink in before you quote my post again and say "BUT BUT BUT BUT YOU SAID YOU NEARLY KILLED SOMEONE". Maybe? No?

No, there aren't. Road bikes go on the road. That's where they go. As silly as I think it is to road bike because of agressive uncaring motorists, that's where road bikes belong.

You can scream the "it's their right" all day and night, but that doesn't change my opinion. These roads are driven at pace by cars and motorbikes, the oil boys of Aberdeen bring their R8s and Skylines to these roads and will drive in excess of 60mph on a regular basis. Given the number of cyclist only options in Scotland, like I said, you risk your own life. There are far better places to be regardless of who has the right, or what is right or wrong.

 

[old.user4556]

So I'm failing to see what the problem is at all?

The point being made and the context was about country NSLs - these may be a different situation in England, but in the remote areas of Scotland (as above re the super car point) these roads are absolutely no place for pedestrians, cattle or push bikes regardless of the highway code. I was reinforcing that with my own experience that, if I was a nutter in a Caterham doing over 60mph which happens regularly, he would have been bulldozed off the road. There are many cycle-only places for them, and these places are a much safer place to be.

I'm not saying the situation is right, I'm merely demonstrating that anything other than cars on the road are at risk.

 

[Bodhi]

You're a shit driver Bodhi. Don't ever buy a really fast car because if you don't kill someone else, you'll kill yourself. You don't even know the rules on solid white lines.

Oh I do apologise, I was 5 mph out, it's 10mph. Clearly worth the sanctimonious personal attack you utter cocksocket.

 

[Bodhi]

Jesus Christ Scouse, I'll describe the incident as I see fit. I said "I nearly killed someone" because in that scenario if I had been going faster - perhaps, 60 mph - then I would have most certainly would have knocked them off.

But - and this is where you're doing a "Scouse v Toht" special and totally ignoring what I've been saying - I stopped in plenty of time and nobody died. Stop being obtuse for the sake of it. Can you let that sink in before you quote my post again and say "BUT BUT BUT BUT YOU SAID YOU NEARLY KILLED SOMEONE". Maybe? No?



You can scream the "it's their right" all day and night, but that doesn't change my opinion. These roads are driven at pace by cars and motorbikes, the oil boys of Aberdeen bring their R8s and Skylines to these roads and will drive in excess of 60mph on a regular basis. Given the number of cyclist only options in Scotland, like I said, you risk your own life. There are far better places to be regardless of who has the right, or what is right or wrong.

Precisely. I'm all for people being happy to be in the right, but if you're dead it's quite difficult to get on that high horse cyclists love when they're not dressing up like a giant condom.

Whilst they have every right to ride on them actually taking a bicycle out on a Scottish A or B Road is utterly retarded, due to the fact people on these roads will still be making progress. There are tons of bike only trails in Scotland, far more sensible to use those.

 

[Tom]

I stopped in plenty of time and nobody died.

I think that's fair enough, but you have to admit that you could have phrased it better.

 

[Scouse]

Then stop having a moan at the cyclists and have a go at the utterly moronic retarded selfish cunts in cars who make those roads unsafe for everyone. No?

Strange that. You admit that unsafe driving causes the problem (and I agree - I was nearly forced off the single track road in my car by a range rover doing at least 80 in the lovely Skirtland). But you guys keep on harping on at the section of road users who do the least harm. Then you call people sanctamonious when you're called out on your seemingly self-contradictory views.

 

[Tom]

Oh I do apologise, I was 5 mph out, it's 10mph. Clearly worth the sanctimonious personal attack you utter cocksocket.

There's nothing sanctimonious about stating simple facts. If you think a corner that has a solid white line on your side of the road, and warning signs of a sharp curve, is safe at 45mph, then you're clearly a shit driver.

https://forums.freddyshouse.com/threads/oooops.168723/#post-2445637

Yes, a shit driver. Safe drivers do not drive their cars off the road into hedges.

 

[Scouse]

Lol! I didn't know that. Funny.

Must remember to auto-disregard anything Bodhi has to say about driving or road safety in the future.



Edit: @Big G - reading back through the posts - I don't think we're a million miles away on the subject - but your language blames the cyclists for being there rather than the idiotic drivers for dangerous driving. Now, I know the drivers are idiotic and I keep myself off the roads for that reason - but I don't think people should have to and it's clearly not "their fault" if a bad driver hits them...

 

[Bodhi]

There's nothing sanctimonious about stating simple facts. If you think a corner that has a solid white line on your side of the road, and warning signs of a sharp curve, is safe at 45mph, then you're clearly a shit driver.

https://forums.freddyshouse.com/threads/oooops.168723/#post-2445637

Yes, a shit driver. Safe drivers do not drive their cars off the road into hedges.

Good drivers learn from their mistakes, and as I haven't done that since, I'd say I probably have. But hey, nothing like digging up a 10 year old post to try and prove a point!

 

[old.user4556]

Let's all agree to disagree.

Move along!

 

[Bodhi]

Then stop having a moan at the cyclists and have a go at the utterly moronic retarded selfish cunts in cars who make those roads unsafe for everyone. No?

Strange that. You admit that unsafe driving causes the problem (and I agree - I was nearly forced off the single track road in my car by a range rover doing at least 80 in the lovely Skirtland). But you guys keep on harping on at the section of road users who do the least harm. Then you call people sanctamonious when you're called out on your seemingly self-contradictory views.

Well no, because just because a cyclist can go somewhere, doesn't mean it is in any way a sensible idea to do so.

 

[Scouse]

Maybe they should just cede control of the roads to people who park their cars in hedges eh?

 

[~Yuckfou~]

I'm having to use public transport today. With the public.
Wish me luck.

 

[Bodhi]

Maybe they should just cede control of the roads to people who park their cars in hedges eh?

I could dig out posts where you've suggested highly illegal speeds on the motorway are all a ok, but as they'd be about 7 years ago or so I'm not sure if they'd be relevant.

About as relevant as confusing hand signals from the car in front 10 years ago.

 

[DaGaffer]

Tom and Scouse. The rightest men in the cemetery.

 

[Tom]

The ones who end up in cemeteries are the ones who don't learn from their mistakes.

 

[Moriath]

As a cyclist if you road cycle doesnt take much of a mistake to get wiped out

 

[DaGaffer]

The ones who end up in cemeterie are the ones who don't understand physics.

Fixed.

 

[TdC]

I'm having to use public transport today. With the public.
Wish me luck.

Feel your pain Yuck. Had problems with trains today, and am now in a "football train" going home. The drunk idiot density is very high. Atm they're singing a song about penises to the tune of No Limits by 2 Unlimited. One of the NL's more shite dance acts from the 90's.