SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[rynnor]

Cool, cheap day light source. Great for the shed, but not so practical in English homes. I'm not sure my neighbour above would like me drilling through his floor so I can get some light lol

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23536914

I thought it was a strange definition of inventor - he invented sunlight? Or he invented light coming in through holes? This stuff called glass seems popular

 

[Lakih]

Cool, cheap day light source. Great for the shed, but not so practical in English homes. I'm not sure my neighbour above would like me drilling through his floor so I can get some light lol

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23536914

It must suck waking up in the middle of the night wanting to take a piss with those "lights" though

 

[Chilly]

Why cyclists need number plates:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23699538

I don't get it? They spoke and he walked away. If the cyclist had visibly injured him they'd have stuck around and called an ambulance.

 

[Access Denied]

Not exactly a new thing though. Someone in India/Pakitan/Asia somewhere makes them for the poor people with no natural light getting into their shacks. Has done for years.

 

[Raven]

I thought it was a strange definition of inventor - he invented sunlight? Or he invented light coming in through holes? This stuff called glass seems popular

A glass window wont work as well as one of these things, they produce close to the same amount of light as a 40-60w bulb due to the refraction in the water/bottle.

 

[caLLous]

Not exactly a new thing though. Someone in India/Pakitan/Asia somewhere makes them for the poor people with no natural light getting into their shacks. Has done for years.

I'm pretty sure this is that guy and he started doing it in the favelas in Rio (although I can't help thinking there was a guy doing it in slums in India as well but more recently).

 

[Scouse]

Why cyclists need number plates:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23699538

Don't make me laugh.

He spoke to the cyclist afterwards and then walked away.

Plus, a mate was knocked off his bike a couple of months ago by a car, the number plate didn't help him one bit when the driver did a runner as he was too dazed to get it.

(Returning to the scene the next day did tho - the woman lived 200 yards away)...

 

[rynnor]

Don't make me laugh.

He spoke to the cyclist afterwards and then walked away.

Plus, a mate was knocked off his bike a couple of months ago by a car, the number plate didn't help him one bit when the driver did a runner as he was too dazed to get it.

(Returning to the scene the next day did tho - the woman lived 200 yards away)...

If it had been a car in the same circumstances the police could easily trace him - there's CCTV everywhere in London.

If bikes are going to use the roads they ought to be identifiable and insured like other vehicles.

Edit - btw the rule is if the guy dies within a year and a day and the accident can be shown as a significant factor in his death then the cyclist could be guilty of manslaughter.

 

[Access Denied]

Good luck proving that being knocked down by the bike caused the stroke.

 

[Scouse]

If bikes are going to use the roads they ought to be identifiable and insured like other vehicles.

Massive massive unnecessary overkill:

Pedestrian Casualties 2001-2009

• Killed by cycles: 18
• Seriously injured by cycles: 434
• Killed by cars: 3,495
• Seriously injured by cars: 46,245

TWO pedestrian deaths a year from cycles.

436 per year from cars - more deaths per year by cars than cyclists cause injuries and over a hundred times more injuries by cars than cyclists.

You may hate cyclists - but you're clearly directing your anger in totally the wrong direction.

 

[caLLous]

Not this shit again.

You can't argue with the very basic logic that every type of vehicle that uses the road (the road, not the pavement) should be licensed/insured. It would be an utter ballache to set up and enforce but from whatever way you look at it, it's not a bad idea.

 

[Raven]

I heard cyclists with face aids will be working at the NHS soon.

 

[rynnor]

Good luck proving that being knocked down by the bike caused the stroke.

It may not have - but the autopsy will be the decider - its quite possible for low speed collisions to damage delicate bloodvessels in the neck and head that could take a day or two to manifest as a stroke. Humans can be suprisingly delicate creatures - especially as they get older.

 

[Scouse]

You can't argue with the very basic logic that every type of vehicle that uses the road (the road, not the pavement) should be licensed/insured. It would be an utter ballache to set up and enforce but from whatever way you look at it, it's not a bad idea.

Of course you can.

It's a terrible idea. It would cost way more to setup and administer than would be worth it. And we're talking two deaths a year.

Also, we're trying to attract people to cycling, not put them off it.

 

[rynnor]

Massive massive unnecessary overkill:

TWO pedestrian deaths a year from cycles.

436 per year from cars - more deaths per year by cars than cyclists cause injuries and over a hundred times more injuries by cars than cyclists.

You may hate cyclists - but you're clearly directing your anger in totally the wrong direction.

Considering 98 percent of journeys are by car its not that suprising but all I am saying is that all road users should be treated the same in regards to accidents/traceability/insurance.

It's a legal anomaly currently because we never had the numbers we do now - as the cyclist numbers increase it will become more glaringly out of line. I expect legislation in 5-10 years.

 

[Nate]

Sometimes the pavement doesn't exist where I live so I walk in the road or even run on it, I suppose I need to get insured, have a licence and pay tax for that now ;/

 

[rynnor]

It would cost way more to setup and administer than would be worth it. And we're talking two deaths a year.

Nah - it will make money because then you can fine this new chunk of road users for camera caught mis-demeanours - imagine how much would be generated a day by cameras at certain junctions

 

[Scouse]

Just to highlight how pathetic the anti-cyclist rhetoric is why not introduce bathing licences?

After all more than ten times more people accidentally drown in their bath each year in the UK than pedestrians from cyclists:

In 2010, 9 men and 20 women died by drowning in the bath. 29 in total. In 2009, it was 33. In 2008 it was 22.


The data also sheds a bit of light on the other tabloid-rage-induced-problem we talk about - dangerous dogs. THREE people died last year from dogs.

Which is fuck all.

Also, if you bother to look at the data you'll see the number of injuries caused by cyclists are falling each year.

 

[Scouse]

Nah - it will make money because then you can fine this new chunk of road users for camera caught mis-demeanours - imagine how much would be generated a day by cameras at certain junctions

Imagine how much police time would be taken up in a futile attempt to catch cyclists who, to a man, would refuse this idiotic idea of yours.

 

[rynnor]

Thats a lot of noise but fundamentally using the roads is a privilege not a right and all users should conform to basic standards like identifiability and 3rd party insurance (which would be dirt cheap).

 

[Scouse]

Thats a lot of noise but fundamentally using the roads is a privilege not a right and all users should conform to basic standards like identifiability and 3rd party insurance (which would be dirt cheap).

I've tried the evidence route, but I'll go the other way now.

Get fucked. You're talking bollocks

 

[rynnor]

Imagine how much police time would be taken up in a futile attempt to catch cyclists who, to a man, would refuse this idiotic idea of yours.

You say that but 90% would do it like any other law - you jail a few and crush their bikes - the rest fall into line.

 

[rynnor]

I've tried the evidence route, but I'll go the other way now.

Get fucked. You're talking bollocks

All I hear is 'I'm a special case - laws and rules dont apply to me - Waahh!!' tbh.

 

[caLLous]

Of course you can.

No, you can't. You just are anyway.

 

[Scouse]

All I hear is 'I'm a special case - laws and rules dont apply to me - Waahh!!' tbh.

All I'm hearing is "I fucking hate cyclists and their getting through rush-hour-traffic-much-quicker-than-unfit-fatty-me and I want to hurt them even if I have to invent shit to do it - Waahhhhhh!"

 

[Chilly]

Not this shit again.

You can't argue with the very basic logic that every type of vehicle that uses the road (the road, not the pavement) should be licensed/insured. It would be an utter ballache to set up and enforce but from whatever way you look at it, it's not a bad idea.

Of course you can argue with it. What is the cost of doing so? What are the benefits of doing so? Scouse has just shown that the benefits would be sod all and we all know that nothing the government does is cheap. So you'd take money away from other spending (schools, hospitals, defense) and spend it on enforcing licencing for bikes to prevent 2 deaths a year in a population of 60 million? Please, never work in government, you'd be terrible at it.

 

[Scouse]

No, you can't. You just are anyway.

I just did. It's an argument based on the evidence of harm (there's very little harm) and the cost of running a beauracracy (which is very expensive and clearly unwarranted in a case of such insignificant harm).

If cyclists were killing people left right and centre then I'd support you. But they aren't.

 

[BloodOmen]

 

[rynnor]

So you'd take money away from other spending (schools, hospitals, defense) and spend it on enforcing licencing for bikes to prevent 2 deaths a year in a population of 60 million? Please, never work in government, you'd be terrible at it.

It pays for itself due the millions of new road users you can now fine for a variety of infractions that are currently un-enforceable.

 

[rynnor]

All I'm hearing is "I fucking hate cyclists and their getting through rush-hour-traffic-much-quicker-than-unfit-fatty-me and I want to hurt them even if I have to invent shit to do it - Waahhhhhh!"

Well you hear wrong because I don't drive in central london but I do walk around there a lot and cyclists are making it increasingly hazardous. It's getting pretty obvious that something needs to be done about it.

As to the figures - most collisions with cyclists go unrecorded because they dont hang around and are impossible to trace so people dont do it unless they are hospitalised - the real problem is masked by this.