Question for cyclists...

Uncle Bully said:

I am in sympathy, there should be more bike lanes. What I don't get is why
this particular practice happens.
I thought someone in here could shed some light, but so far it been fairly
negative.

first sentence good. 2nd sentence...
you asked a question and havent recieved the answer you were trolling for and therefore think any other answer is wrong. This is based on your inability to refresh your own knowledge of the relevant road laws. go away, read , then ride in peace. PS bet you didnt know its also a crime to ride your motobic in the bike lanes...

"Uncle Bully" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Peter Signorini" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully said:

What is with lanesplitting to the front of traffic at a red light, then
pulling in front of everyone so that when the light turns green everyone
has to wait for you because you are by far the slowest thing on the
road?

All the other [censored] I can live with but this one I can't understand.
Cyclists are usually the ones asking to share the road, yet this action
would indicate otherwise.

Perfectly legal manoeuvre for cyclists on Australian roads. Cyclists may
overtake on the left or right side of stationary vehicles. And as for
being the slowest thing, in most inner city suburbs plenty of cyclists
could thoroughly trounce your Falcodore in any peak period door to door
journey.

Quoted message said:

I'm all for sharing, but sharing means giving way to bigger/faster. I
can't see how being selfish can work as a strategy when you are the
smallest/slowest/most vulnerable thing on the road ?

You share the roads by following the roads rules and giving way to other
vehicles as required. Slower vehicles are not rquired to give way to the
faster. As a faster vehicle it is YOUR obligation to overtake safely, by
changing lanes (and completely out of the left lane, none of this
half-laning bull$&*t)

Erm, perhaps you should read the road rules sometime. In everystate the
rules are the same. Keep as far left as practical. For a cyclist this
means you do not own the whole lane.

Just read through them. No mention whatsoever of keeping left other than
with reference to shared pathways...shared between bikes and pedestrians,
that is. http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/vrpdf/randl/part_15.pdf

Quoted message said:

Um, I don't drive in peak hour. It seems all of the arguments in here are
based around peak hour where bike is usually quicker than a car. What
about the other 18 hours of the day when it's not peak hour.

Then traffic isn't congested and motorists can pass us easily. No problem.

Quoted message said:

And for the record, I ride a sportsbike. There is no way in hell you could
keep up with me, rush hour or not.

If you're on a motorcycle and find it hard to pass a cyclist, it's time to
post that license back to Kelloggs.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully> All the other [censored] I can live with

What other [censored]? How do cyclists impact on your existence? Cyclists are
not the ones belching poisonous fumes which kill more people than the
road toll every year.

In Australia, that'd be power generation. Brown coal and Diesel pollute
far more than all the personal transport combined.

Yeah, but only around the power stations, not in metro areas where most
people live. The pollution that clogs people's lungs causing endemic levels
of illnesses like asthma is from traffic. This is why *concentrated* air
pollution is an issue in cities. Biologically cumulative toxins and
greenhouse gasses are certainly something that you get vast quantities of
from power stations, but the [censored] that kills people directly isn't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cyclists aren't the ones filling up the emergency
ward with carnage every day of the year.

You sure about that. Per capita they are about the same as cars.

Quoted message said:

Cyclists aren't the ones
raping the planet for oil just to go about their daily lives.

Again, Electricity can take the blame here, and you're suddenly not the
eco-warrior you thought you were.

Actually, I suspect that I am. See last comment.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully> Cyclists are usually the ones asking to share the road,
Uncle Bully> yet this action would indicate otherwise. I'm all for
Uncle Bully> sharing, but sharing means giving way to bigger/faster.

So the biggest / fastest / strongest have the greatest right? That's
not the way it works. Those with the potential to do the most harm have
the greatest care of duty to their fellow road users. When I drive
trucks I look out for cars, when I drive cars I look out for cyclists
and when I ride bikes I look out for jay walking pedestrians.

Law of the jungle. It is how it has always worked.

Actually, no. It might have been law of the jungle once, but now it's the
law of the land. That's why we have a judiciary system. The fact that you
have the biggest stick doent give you the right to whack people over the
head with it. It does, however, imply a degree of expected responsibility in
using said stick.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully> I can't see how being selfish can work as a strategy
Uncle Bully> when you are the smallest/slowest/most vulnerable thing
Uncle Bully> on the road ?

Selfish huh? Next time you complain about congestion, realise that it's
the people taking up the most space that are contributing the most to
congestion. A car needs six times its length to operate. For most cars
that's 12 meters. A bike needs about an eighth of that.

Don't worry. I take that up with Aus.cars quite regularly.

Quoted message said:

You know what I think? I think you're jealous of us. I really do. If
you're [censored] being part of congestion, get on a bike and experience
freedom. If you're too scared to do it on your own, find your local BUG
and ask for help. Driving's very over-rated. I know, I used to drive
every day. Now I ride every day, I'm happy, fit, can eat like a king
and still maintain a respectable waistline. The tax free 10k each year
from not owning a car works wonders too :-)

I ride everyday too. My bike is fast though.

Quoted message said:

When's the last time you heard a cyclist complaining about traffic?

Er last night. In this very NG.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email protected]
says...

Quoted message said:

"Uncle Bully" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Peter Signorini" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Uncle Bully" wrote:

> What is with lanesplitting to the front of traffic at a red light, then
> pulling in front of everyone so that when the light turns green everyone
> has to wait for you because you are by far the slowest thing on the
> road?
>
> All the other [censored] I can live with but this one I can't understand.
> Cyclists are usually the ones asking to share the road, yet this action
> would indicate otherwise.

Perfectly legal manoeuvre for cyclists on Australian roads. Cyclists may
overtake on the left or right side of stationary vehicles. And as for
being the slowest thing, in most inner city suburbs plenty of cyclists
could thoroughly trounce your Falcodore in any peak period door to door
journey.

> I'm all for sharing, but sharing means giving way to bigger/faster. I
> can't see how being selfish can work as a strategy when you are the
> smallest/slowest/most vulnerable thing on the road ?

You share the roads by following the roads rules and giving way to other
vehicles as required. Slower vehicles are not rquired to give way to the
faster. As a faster vehicle it is YOUR obligation to overtake safely, by
changing lanes (and completely out of the left lane, none of this
half-laning bull$&*t)

Erm, perhaps you should read the road rules sometime. In everystate the
rules are the same. Keep as far left as practical. For a cyclist this
means you do not own the whole lane.

Just read through them. No mention whatsoever of keeping left other than
with reference to shared pathways...shared between bikes and pedestrians,
that is. http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/vrpdf/randl/part_15.pdf

And in fact in a "Share the Road" FAQ from the Vic Roads site:
"http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/vrne/vrne5nav.nsf/v/1CE236C4E56F6D69CA25
701B0017BB6D/$file/str%2Dquest.pdf"

"Are bicycles allowed to pass other vehicles on the left?
Yes, except when those vehicles are indicating and turning left"

AND

" Are cyclists allowed to occupy a whole traffic lane?
Yes, this may be necessary in narrow traffic lanes where there is not
enough space for another vehicle to overtake a bicycle safely in the
lane. "

What this means is that a cyclist can legitimately go to the front at
stopped traffic AND use the entire lane if it is narrow over the other
side, as it often is, all in the interests of safety.

I'm sorry, but our Westminster based system of law we practise is one of
the best methods of avoid the knuckle dragging primate jungle law Mr
Bully (such an appropriate name for a TROLL) is proposing.

BUILD A BRIDGE, GET OVER IT, AND LEARN TO BE TOLERANT

Ray

Ray said:

And in fact in a "Share the Road" FAQ from the Vic Roads site:
"http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/vrne/vrne5nav.nsf/v/1CE236C4E56F6D69CA25
701B0017BB6D/$file/str%2Dquest.pdf"

"Are bicycles allowed to pass other vehicles on the left?
Yes, except when those vehicles are indicating and turning left"

AND

" Are cyclists allowed to occupy a whole traffic lane?
Yes, this may be necessary in narrow traffic lanes where there is not
enough space for another vehicle to overtake a bicycle safely in the
lane. "

What this means is that a cyclist can legitimately go to the front at
stopped traffic AND use the entire lane if it is narrow over the other
side, as it often is, all in the interests of safety.

I'm sorry, but our Westminster based system of law we practise is one of
the best methods of avoid the knuckle dragging primate jungle law Mr
Bully (such an appropriate name for a TROLL) is proposing.

BUILD A BRIDGE, GET OVER IT, AND LEARN TO BE TOLERANT

Touche! Couldn't have said it better myself

Cheers
Peter

In aus.bicycle on Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:40:05 +1000

Ray said:

BUILD A BRIDGE, GET OVER IT, AND LEARN TO BE TOLERANT

shouldn't that be get under it?

although that might mean the entire population of aus.bicycles are
goats....

Zebee
- who got the pushbike out for the first time in ages the other day.
Fark that's hard work!

Uncle Bully said:

I was hoping to find a representive of cyclists that did this particular
action to get their opinion.

OK. I didn't say it before, but I *do overtake motor vehicles on the left*
when they are stationary at traffic lights. Why?

Because it is legal.
Because there's room to pass on my bike.
Because I don't harm anyone by doing this.
Because I don't want to breathe the stinking exhaust fumes while I'm deep
breathing to accelerate when the lights go green.
Because I actually feel it's a safer strategy to take off at the head of the
line where motorists can see me as I cross the intersection, rather than
have to deal with fast moving lane-squeezers cutting in on me back in the
queue.

You think I should stay back in the queue? That's OK if you don't mind me
riding in the middle of my lane - at all times - to ensure I have safe road
space. I usually only do this where I need to maintain space because the
lane is narrow or there's rubbish, broken glass, oil, parked cars, wandering
pedestrians, stopped buses etc. Most of the time I ride well to the left
allowing about 1 metre clearance from the kerb. But if the laws were changed
to force me to ride in the car queue I'll be taking the full lane full time.

Does this answer your question?

Quoted message said:

So far, all I've got is "Bikes are faster than cars, and I'm just jealous
because I'm stuck in my car" (even though I never drive in rush hour).

I drive a car to work. Wish I didn't have to but won't go into that now. I
am often jealous as I sit in my car stuck. But I don't begrudge the lucky
cyclist, he/she is just having a good ride and keeping fitter than me.

Cheers
Peter

<SNIP> Hmm, seems all this guys posts are full of carp. Where's my ignore
user button?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In Australia, that'd be power generation. Brown coal and Diesel pollute
far more than all the personal transport combined.

Yeah, but only around the power stations, not in metro areas where most
people live.

Um, you might want to learn some fundamental physics.

Quoted message said:

The pollution that clogs people's lungs causing endemic levels of
illnesses like asthma is from traffic.

So what causes Asthma in the bush?

Quoted message said:

This is why *concentrated* air pollution is an issue in cities.

So how do those toxins reach Antartica?

Quoted message said:

Biologically cumulative toxins and greenhouse gasses are certainly
something that you get vast quantities of from power stations, but the
[censored] that kills people directly isn't.

Which [censored] is that then? Which people are being killed> And how?
There's a long way between "people die from air pollution" to "Cars are
killing everyone". Feel free to fill in the gaps.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cyclists aren't the ones filling up the emergency
ward with carnage every day of the year.

You sure about that. Per capita they are about the same as cars.

Quoted message said:

Cyclists aren't the ones
raping the planet for oil just to go about their daily lives.

Again, Electricity can take the blame here, and you're suddenly not the
eco-warrior you thought you were.

Actually, I suspect that I am. See last comment.

Last or previous? Neither of them back you up.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully> Cyclists are usually the ones asking to share the road,
Uncle Bully> yet this action would indicate otherwise. I'm all for
Uncle Bully> sharing, but sharing means giving way to bigger/faster.

So the biggest / fastest / strongest have the greatest right? That's
not the way it works. Those with the potential to do the most harm have
the greatest care of duty to their fellow road users. When I drive
trucks I look out for cars, when I drive cars I look out for cyclists
and when I ride bikes I look out for jay walking pedestrians.

Law of the jungle. It is how it has always worked.

Actually, no. It might have been law of the jungle once, but now it's the
law of the land. That's why we have a judiciary system. The fact that you
have the biggest stick doent give you the right to whack people over the
head with it. It does, however, imply a degree of expected responsibility
in using said stick.

Really? John Howard doesn't seem agree with you, nor his American buddy.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully> I can't see how being selfish can work as a strategy
Uncle Bully> when you are the smallest/slowest/most vulnerable thing
Uncle Bully> on the road ?

Selfish huh? Next time you complain about congestion, realise that it's
the people taking up the most space that are contributing the most to
congestion. A car needs six times its length to operate. For most cars
that's 12 meters. A bike needs about an eighth of that.

Don't worry. I take that up with Aus.cars quite regularly.

Quoted message said:

You know what I think? I think you're jealous of us. I really do. If
you're [censored] being part of congestion, get on a bike and experience
freedom. If you're too scared to do it on your own, find your local BUG
and ask for help. Driving's very over-rated. I know, I used to drive
every day. Now I ride every day, I'm happy, fit, can eat like a king
and still maintain a respectable waistline. The tax free 10k each year
from not owning a car works wonders too :-)

I ride everyday too. My bike is fast though.

Quoted message said:

When's the last time you heard a cyclist complaining about traffic?

Er last night. In this very NG.

"Peter Signorini" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully said:

I was hoping to find a representive of cyclists that did this particular
action to get their opinion.

OK. I didn't say it before, but I *do overtake motor vehicles on the left*
when they are stationary at traffic lights. Why?

Because it is legal.
Because there's room to pass on my bike.
Because I don't harm anyone by doing this.
Because I don't want to breathe the stinking exhaust fumes while I'm deep
breathing to accelerate when the lights go green.
Because I actually feel it's a safer strategy to take off at the head of
the line where motorists can see me as I cross the intersection, rather
than have to deal with fast moving lane-squeezers cutting in on me back in
the queue.

You think I should stay back in the queue? That's OK if you don't mind me
riding in the middle of my lane - at all times - to ensure I have safe
road space. I usually only do this where I need to maintain space because
the lane is narrow or there's rubbish, broken glass, oil, parked cars,
wandering pedestrians, stopped buses etc. Most of the time I ride well to
the left allowing about 1 metre clearance from the kerb. But if the laws
were changed to force me to ride in the car queue I'll be taking the full
lane full time.

Does this answer your question?

Yes. (at last)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So far, all I've got is "Bikes are faster than cars, and I'm just jealous
because I'm stuck in my car" (even though I never drive in rush hour).

I drive a car to work. Wish I didn't have to but won't go into that now. I
am often jealous as I sit in my car stuck. But I don't begrudge the lucky
cyclist, he/she is just having a good ride and keeping fitter than me.

Try a motorbike. Lots of fun, and you have a lot more control of your
situation.

"flyingdutch" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully said:

I am in sympathy, there should be more bike lanes. What I don't get is
why
this particular practice happens.
I thought someone in here could shed some light, but so far it been
fairly
negative.

first sentence good. 2nd sentence...
you asked a question and havent recieved the answer you were trolling
for and therefore think any other answer is wrong. This is based on
your inability to refresh your own knowledge of the relevant road laws.
go away, read , then ride in peace. PS bet you didnt know its also a
crime to ride your motobic in the bike lanes...

What bike lanes would those be? We don't have any where I live.

"Uncle Bully" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully said:

>>I'm curious, with the higher absolute speeds attainable by motorcycles,
>>wouldn't they need more room than bicycles? Can a motorcycle out brake
>>a
>>car
>
>In thery yes

Wrong.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Makes no difference. Full brakes on two small wheels can't keep up with
full brakes on four.

Quoted message said:

and so on so on.

keep going...

Quoted message said:

A typical bike will at least in theory outbrake its car equivelent.

Nope.

Yes it will

Quoted message said:

No it won't

Yes it will

Quoted message said:

No it won't

.........Gee, this is such a deep and meaningful thread :-O

Cheers and goodnight
Peter

Uncle Bully said:

"Peter Signorini" wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I drive a car to work. Wish I didn't have to but won't go into that now.
I am often jealous as I sit in my car stuck. But I don't begrudge the
lucky cyclist, he/she is just having a good ride and keeping fitter than
me.

Try a motorbike. Lots of fun, and you have a lot more control of your
situation.

Not in the least bit interested.

Cheers
Peter

"Uncle Bully" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Um, I don't drive in peak hour. It seems all of the arguments in here are

based around peak hour where bike is usually quicker than a car. What
about the other 18 hours of the day when it's not peak hour.
And for the record, I ride a sportsbike. There is no way in hell you could
keep up with me, rush hour or not.

There's one thing quicker than a sports bike in peak hour. A sports
scoot.... (that's me :-P
I fit anywhere, if you want to talk lane splitting...
Gemm

Uncle Bully said:

What bike lanes would those be? We don't have any where I live.

Yippee!!!

that means you are nowhere near me 😄

and if you reckon you're MORE in control on a motorbike you are seriously deluded. I raced Superbikes with my bro for years in another lifetime, have ridden virtually every size of bike in all conditions and I can assure you i have FAR more control on a bicycle. (over 70-80kph i would agree with you tho...). Not to mention you can get yourself INTO trouble on abike SOOO much easier.
run along trolly-wolly 🙄

Uncle Bully said:

"Peter Signorini" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Uncle Bully said:

I was hoping to find a representive of cyclists that did this particular
action to get their opinion.

OK. I didn't say it before, but I *do overtake motor vehicles on the left*
when they are stationary at traffic lights. Why?

Because it is legal.
Because there's room to pass on my bike.
Because I don't harm anyone by doing this.
Because I don't want to breathe the stinking exhaust fumes while I'm deep
breathing to accelerate when the lights go green.
Because I actually feel it's a safer strategy to take off at the head of
the line where motorists can see me as I cross the intersection, rather
than have to deal with fast moving lane-squeezers cutting in on me back in
the queue.

You think I should stay back in the queue? That's OK if you don't mind me
riding in the middle of my lane - at all times - to ensure I have safe
road space. I usually only do this where I need to maintain space because
the lane is narrow or there's rubbish, broken glass, oil, parked cars,
wandering pedestrians, stopped buses etc. Most of the time I ride well to
the left allowing about 1 metre clearance from the kerb. But if the laws
were changed to force me to ride in the car queue I'll be taking the full
lane full time.

Does this answer your question?

Yes. (at last)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So far, all I've got is "Bikes are faster than cars, and I'm just jealous
because I'm stuck in my car" (even though I never drive in rush hour).

I drive a car to work. Wish I didn't have to but won't go into that now. I
am often jealous as I sit in my car stuck. But I don't begrudge the lucky
cyclist, he/she is just having a good ride and keeping fitter than me.

Try a motorbike. Lots of fun, and you have a lot more control of your
situation.

Actually, I gave you an answer more than twenty posts ago - you may have missed it. As for the motorcycle idea, I have tried it and liked it, but you're the one asking why cyclists do things as if they're getting away with something. Perhaps you're the one looking for a change.

Ritch

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> "Uncle Bully" == Uncle Bully <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Biologically cumulative toxins and greenhouse gasses are
certainly something that you get vast quantities of from power
stations, but the [censored] that kills people directly isn't.

Uncle Bully> Which [censored] is that then? Which people are being killed>
Uncle Bully> And how? There's a long way between "people die from
Uncle Bully> air pollution" to "Cars are killing everyone". Feel
Uncle Bully> free to fill in the gaps.

Start here. Be sure to follow through on the referenced reports.

http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/177_11_021202/kje10481_fm.html
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

Uncle Bully,

a) It is perfectly legal for a cyclist to move up on the left side of stationary vehicles.

b) On a multi-lane road, the law allows (and encourages) us to take up any such lane as we choose (unless Keep Left Unless Overtaking Signs apply)

c) On single lane roads we are required to keep as far left as practicle. I decide what is a practicle distance for my riding skill not you. For me, that is usually the centre of the single lane.

d) If you truly believe that bigger / heavier wins (which I doubt), then I hope you immediately pull over for all trucks. However, I doubt a hyppocrite would do that.

e) If you don't like the law, speak to your local member.

f) You toot me in an attempt to intimidate - I get soooo scared that I have to stop in the middle of said lane to investigate the danger you are reporting. This is because I know YOU WOULD NEVER BREAK THE LAW by activating your horn unless you are warning of danger. You would never do this, because he is without sin is allowed to cast the first stone.

Suggestion.

Grow up, stop polluting the world and calm down. A thirty second delay in your trip will not harm you.

Geez... the people we have to put up with,.....

scotty72 said:

Geez... the people we have to put up with,.....

Yeah, we've had a visitation from an aus.cars troll. Been jolly fun reading the a.b crew spin, um, er, rise to the occassion and tell the sad git to bugger off. Love your work. 😄

"Uncle Bully" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In Australia, that'd be power generation. Brown coal and Diesel pollute
far more than all the personal transport combined.

Yeah, but only around the power stations, not in metro areas where most
people live.

Um, you might want to learn some fundamental physics.

And that'd tell me that pollution does NOT exist in higher concentrations
near the source?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The pollution that clogs people's lungs causing endemic levels of
illnesses like asthma is from traffic.

So what causes Asthma in the bush?

Pollen, mostly. Take a look at per capita incidence of asthma in urban vs.
rural areas. Also take a look at increasing incidence of asthma over time,
notably in urban rather than rural areas.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is why *concentrated* air pollution is an issue in cities.

So how do those toxins reach Antartica?

Slowly, diffusely and ineffectively. The air in Antarctica is much MUCH
cleaner than it is in this country, just as it's much cleaner in rural areas
than it is in urban areas.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Biologically cumulative toxins and greenhouse gasses are certainly
something that you get vast quantities of from power stations, but the
[censored] that kills people directly isn't.

Which [censored] is that then? Which people are being killed> And how?
There's a long way between "people die from air pollution" to "Cars are
killing everyone". Feel free to fill in the gaps.

Asthma, (yes it kills people) emphysema, laryngeal and lung cancer (yes
there is a demonstrable causal link, again, incidence in urban vs. rural
areas) There was a scary gradient in lead levels that more or less
paralleled population density until they canned tetra-ethyl lead in petrol.
There are other bronchial disorders with varying degrees on severity. A lot
of this doesn't actually kill people directly, but I'd submit that they do
reduce both life span and quality of living.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Cyclists aren't the ones filling up the emergency
> ward with carnage every day of the year.

You sure about that. Per capita they are about the same as cars.

> Cyclists aren't the ones
> raping the planet for oil just to go about their daily lives.

Again, Electricity can take the blame here, and you're suddenly not the
eco-warrior you thought you were.

Actually, I suspect that I am. See last comment.

Last or previous? Neither of them back you up.

Again, I'm not contributing the emissions that would have come out of a car.
The tyres that I'm wearing out don't create a great deal of debris (that
rubber that wears off tyres doesn't just disappear) and they don't represent
anywhere near as much landfill per km. The process of manufacturing the
vehivle itself creates a great deal less in the way of pollution (a not
insignificant consideration) and my fuel doesn't require a whole separate
infrastructure to mine, refine and transport it and make it available for
sale. If cycling was a more accepted means of transportation, the road
infrastructure required per capita per km would be far less intrusive
overall than it is for motorised transport, particularly cars.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>
> Uncle Bully> Cyclists are usually the ones asking to share the road,
> Uncle Bully> yet this action would indicate otherwise. I'm all for
> Uncle Bully> sharing, but sharing means giving way to bigger/faster.
>
> So the biggest / fastest / strongest have the greatest right? That's
> not the way it works. Those with the potential to do the most harm
> have
> the greatest care of duty to their fellow road users. When I drive
> trucks I look out for cars, when I drive cars I look out for cyclists
> and when I ride bikes I look out for jay walking pedestrians.

Law of the jungle. It is how it has always worked.

Actually, no. It might have been law of the jungle once, but now it's the
law of the land. That's why we have a judiciary system. The fact that you
have the biggest stick doent give you the right to whack people over the
head with it. It does, however, imply a degree of expected responsibility
in using said stick.

Really? John Howard doesn't seem agree with you, nor his American buddy.

That's hardly surprising, I don't agree with them most of the time. On the
other hand, if you were to suggest to John Howard that people shouldn't have
to obey state or federal law and be allowed to do whatever they can get away
with, I rather suspect that he'd not be a sympathetic audience. In a global
govt vs govt sense, I see what you're saying. In traffic, person vs person,
[censored] no.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>
> Uncle Bully> I can't see how being selfish can work as a strategy
> Uncle Bully> when you are the smallest/slowest/most vulnerable thing
> Uncle Bully> on the road ?
>
> Selfish huh? Next time you complain about congestion, realise that
> it's
> the people taking up the most space that are contributing the most to
> congestion. A car needs six times its length to operate. For most
> cars
> that's 12 meters. A bike needs about an eighth of that.

Don't worry. I take that up with Aus.cars quite regularly.

>
> You know what I think? I think you're jealous of us. I really do. If
> you're [censored] being part of congestion, get on a bike and
> experience
> freedom. If you're too scared to do it on your own, find your local
> BUG
> and ask for help. Driving's very over-rated. I know, I used to drive
> every day. Now I ride every day, I'm happy, fit, can eat like a king
> and still maintain a respectable waistline. The tax free 10k each year
> from not owning a car works wonders too :-)

I ride everyday too. My bike is fast though.

>
> When's the last time you heard a cyclist complaining about traffic?

Er last night. In this very NG.