London not to include motorcycle in it's traffic congestion strategy

[NTECUK]

SADIQ KHAN’S NEW TRANSPORT STRATEGY IGNORE BENEFITS OF BIKERS
A few of you commute to the city?

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-industry/sadiq-khan%E2%80%99s-new-transport-strategy-ignore-benefits-bikers

[Talking Heads]

"The Mayor of London has 'placed the safety of hundreds of thousands of regular motorcycle and scooter riders at risk"

Sounds odd to me, ptw users are already at risk.

[andy650]

More at risk with the stupid empty cycle lanes. Now there is no space to filter on the right, but loads of unusable space on the left, apparently it is progress......

[NTECUK]

And no you can't always use the bus lanes

[Toooldtodie]

And no you can't always use the bus lanes

Especially in towns, where some can and some can't be used. Unless there are bus lane cameras, a copper admitted to me that they would turn a blind eye to ptw's using a bus lane. It is stupid that we are always overlooked as a solution to congestion.
Chelmsford had a PTW Strategy which was commissioned at the turn of the millennium and has been comprehensively ignored. This is why I have been a long-term member of MAG.
Don't just sit there and moan about obvious injustices, get active. If nothing else join the Motorcycle Action Group and get your voice heard. This is one of their No.1 lobbying points as well as the LEZ charge in London. :smt067

[Red Herring]

I thought bikers in London didn't need number plates?

Sometimes the logic of politicians and our supposed leaders defeats me. They evolve our law enforcement policies and procedures to depend on reading number plates and sending due process to the registered owners yet at the same time the penalty for failing to register a vehicle, or better still failing to display a number plate, is a small non-endorsable penalty, and that's assuming you're daft enough to stop for them in the first place given they are so frightened of doing what is necessary to maintain public safety. The only reason their system "works" is because the vast majority of us actually are responsible enough to recognise the need for some discipline and respect around our regulations, but it's the small minority who exploit the weakness in the system that are responsible for much of the changes that impact on the rest of us.

Has it occurred to anyone else that one of the reasons they seem so intent on moving PTW vehicles away from the nearside is because it separates them from pedestrians? By doing so they are seen to be "doing something" about the vulnerability of pedestrians to either being hit, or more likely mugged, by scum bags on mopeds. We all know that is completely daft, but to your average "voter" it's powerful polling station points.

[andy650]

Has it occurred to anyone else that one of the reasons they seem so intent on moving PTW vehicles away from the nearside is because it separates them from pedestrians?

Its not that, PTW's shouldn't be undertaking anyway......

The politicians simply don't consider PTW's. If we have a harder time or are discouraged due to other laws or changes, the politicians couldn't care less. We are collateral damage in their drive to reduce emissions and congestion.

The sad irony is that we should be part of the solution.....

[ophic]

Its not that, PTW's shouldn't be undertaking anyway......
Define undertaking.
If the traffic to your right is queuing, it's not undertaking.

[ophic]

Has it occurred to anyone else that one of the reasons they seem so intent on moving PTW vehicles away from the nearside is because it separates them from pedestrians?
It's a good policy. Pedestrians need separating. I'm sure we're all aware of the carnage that occurs when a myopic pedestrian lemming steps into traffic.

[Red Herring]

I didn't say it wasn't a good idea to keep pedestrians separate, in fact I didn't express a view either way, I simply suggested that may be one of their reasons for denying PTWs the use of bus lanes or the cycle paths, which are invariably on the nearside (nothing to do with undertaking). The, perhaps unintended, consequence of that is that they get lumped in with the rest of the traffic which has been confined to less space already, and this makes it harder (and riskier) to filter.

[ophic]

I was expressing a view. (Some) Pedestrians are a menace! Bring back the Green Cross Code!

[Talking Heads]

Anyone remember Tommy...?
Those deaf, dumb and (peripherally) blind kids sure surf a mean internet....

Head down, both hands in front, eyes focused on a small screen, ear plug delivered music drowning out ambient sound, its a wonder so few of them are killed.

[SV650rules]

Anyone remember Tommy...?
Those deaf, dumb and (peripherally) blind kids sure surf a mean internet....

Head down, both hands in front, eyes focused on a small screen, ear plug delivered music drowning out ambient sound, its a wonder so few of them are killed.

It is mainly down to drivers and riders that are paying attention that saves their lives, I have 'saved' the life of more than one pedestrian that has wandered straight into road in front of me while totally distracted by phone and music - not sure autonomous vehicles will be so understanding (especially after watching footage of Uber pedestrian fatality in Tempe, Arizona about a week ago, vehicle had time to swerve or brake or both but did neither), even after the collision it carried on - the first AV hit and run so far).

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/266158-video-tempe-crash-public-looks-really-bad-uber-driver

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/video-suggests-huge-problems-with-ubers-driverless-car-program/

[maviczap]

I was expressing a view. (Some) Pedestrians are a menace! Bring back the Green Cross Code!

Anyone remember Tommy...?
Those deaf, dumb and (peripherally) blind kids sure surf a mean internet....

Head down, both hands in front, eyes focused on a small screen, ear plug delivered music drowning out ambient sound, its a wonder so few of them are killed.

It is mainly down to drivers and riders that are paying attention that saves their lives, I have 'saved' the life of more than one pedestrian that has wandered straight into road in front of me while totally distracted by phone and music - not sure autonomous vehicles will be so understanding (especially after watching footage of Uber pedestrian fatality in Tempe, Arizona about a week ago, vehicle had time to swerve or brake or both but did neither), even after the collision it carried on - the first AV hit and run so far).

Which wasn't taken into account in the case of the cyclist who killed a pedestrian. Ok, he was 99.9% at fault for not having a brake on his fixed wheel bike, just relying on him using the rear wheel as a brake, but we don't know if the victim just stepped off the pavement whilst looking at her phone?

Pedestrians need to switch on

[Red Herring]

If we are serious about protecting pedestrians we would consider waist high railings along the sides of all the roads in our town centres with gaps only at specific crossing points. They would look awful but in the long term probably work out a whole lot cheaper than dealing with casualties and it would help keep traffic moving.

[ophic]

If we are serious about protecting pedestrians we would consider waist high railings along the sides of all the roads in our town centres with gaps only at specific crossing points. They would look awful but in the long term probably work out a whole lot cheaper than dealing with casualties and it would help keep traffic moving.
But would probably increase cyclist KSIs as there would be nowhere to go at junctions to avoid left turning HGVs. Oh a bit like now really.

[ophic]

Which wasn't taken into account in the case of the cyclist who killed a pedestrian. Ok, he was 99.9% at fault for not having a brake on his fixed wheel bike, just relying on him using the rear wheel as a brake, but we don't know if the victim just stepped off the pavement whilst looking at her phone?

Pedestrians need to switch on
From the reports I read, that's exactly what happened. He had no time to do anything. Unfortunately even if he'd had time, he still couldn't have as he had no brakes, so they threw the book at him. And his attitude didn't help much.

I'd rather ride through flock of Yorkshire sheep than London pedestrians.

Possibly coincidence but I've had a few close shaves with Chinese tourists as well.

[SV650rules]

I was expressing a view. (Some) Pedestrians are a menace! Bring back the Green Cross Code!

Unfortunately too many pedestrians and cyclists seem to think highway code does not apply to them, they are under the impression that if they have a mix up with a vehicle that the vehicle will always be a fault.

[ophic]

Cyclists perhaps. Many pedestrians just don't think at all.

[Red Herring]

But would probably increase cyclist KSIs as there would be nowhere to go at junctions to avoid left turning HGVs. Oh a bit like now really.

Perhaps if cyclists were a little less inclined to go up the nearside of an HGV that was indicating left they wouldn't need to bail out...... I'm sure there are occasions when some idiot of an HGV driver overtakes a cyclist and then attempts to turn left across them, but such individuals are few and far between compared to the number of cyclists that seem to consider the left hand side of the road theirs and theirs alone and anyone wishing to use it must give way to them under all circumstances.

I was trying to turn left at a roundabout last week and every time I had an opening from the right I couldn't move because of the succession of cyclists that continued to make their way up my nearside, despite an array of nearside indicators and my front wheels being turned to the left. In the end I simply moved slowly forwards, blocking the traffic on the roundabout and eventually taking two of the cyclists left with me, which for some reason they didn't seem to appreciate.......

[maviczap]

Perhaps if cyclists were a little less inclined to go up the nearside of an HGV that was indicating left they wouldn't need to bail out...... I'm sure there are occasions when some idiot of an HGV driver overtakes a cyclist and then attempts to turn left across them, but such individuals are few and far between compared to the number of cyclists that seem to consider the left hand side of the road theirs and theirs alone and anyone wishing to use it must give way to them under all circumstances.

I was trying to turn left at a roundabout last week and every time I had an opening from the right I couldn't move because of the succession of cyclists that continued to make their way up my nearside, despite an array of nearside indicators and my front wheels being turned to the left. In the end I simply moved slowly forwards, blocking the traffic on the roundabout and eventually taking two of the cyclists left with me, which for some reason they didn't seem to appreciate.......

As a cyclist I really don't understand the death wish mentality of these people on bikes, I don't classify them as cyclists, as cyclist are aware of the dangers of undertaking lorries at junctions, there's been enough coverage of the deaths in the cycling press.

I know what it's like to have a big vehicle run over me, and it's not something I wish to repeat, and no I wasn't undertaking at the time :D I was 12

[Talking Heads]

Unfortunately too many pedestrians and cyclists seem to think highway code does not apply to them, they are under the impression that if they have a mix up with a vehicle that the vehicle will always be a fault.

There's a number of holier than thou cycling fanatics who are pushing for legislation which places motor vehicle drivers automatically at fault for any collision with a cyclist.
Tis lunacy.

[maviczap]

Not so, it's presumed liability and is used in many European countries and places the onus on vehicle drivers to prove that it wasn't their fault. UK is one of the few countries not to use this type of legislation, and it would go someway to improving driving standards and behaviour of motorists in relation to all road users, not just cyclists.

[Talking Heads]

^^^^ see, its just like I said.

[Red Herring]

..... UK is one of the few countries not to use this type of legislation, and it would go someway to improving driving standards and behaviour of motorists in relation to all road users, not just cyclists.

I'm not generally a fan of statistics but if that is the case explain why it is that we are amongst the safest roads in Europe? I'm all for improving road safety, especially if it involves driver behaviour rather than yet more speed reducing legislation, but bringing in any system that contains a presumption of guilt would be seriously undermining the British justice ethos.

[maviczap]

Statistically there was a 5% increase in cyclists being killed on UK roads in 2016, which was 102 deaths. 77% of those were in 30mph areas.
3142 reported serious injuries to cyclists
57% as a attributed of drivers pulling out, crossing the path is sorry mate I didn't see you
43% were attributed to cyclists being at fault, pulling out, not stopping.at junctions etc
Govt figures
Very few of the deaths resulted in the prosecution of the driver, and if they were few resulted in a custodial sentence or lengthy ban.

To put it into perspective cyclists were held responsible for 25 deaths of pedestrians, but that was over 7 years! So about 2 a year, 2 to many.

But following the Charlie Alliston case where he killed a pedestrian the laws relating to causing death by reckless cycling were to be the same as causing death by dangerous driving which is 14 years, but proposed to increase to life imprisonment!

So after ONE case fuelled by the tabloid hatred of cyclists, the government rush through a review of changes to legislation into dangerous cycling, but hasn't completed any review of improving road safety by addressing the biggest cause of road deaths which are vehicle drivers?

Being labelled as a fanatic for wanting changes to improve my safety on the road when I'm cycling leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but if you cycle you'd know about the regular close passes and bad driving we have to live with, whereas we're always seen to be at fault if there's an accident, not the driver.

[garynortheast]

I'm with you on this Mav.

I don't cycle on the roads very often these days but every time I do I'm shocked by the lack of care shown by drivers of all 4 wheeled vehicles towards cyclists. I can guarantee that the majority of overtakes are much too close for comfort, with some being within inches of my elbow. Drivers who are not prepared to sacrifice a few seconds of journey time, and many of whom will try and squeeze past with traffic coming the other way. This is a rural area too, so how it must feel in slightly more urban areas is too terrifying for me to think about.

I find the majority of motorcyclists are much more sympathetic, perhaps because many of them understand the vulnerable nature of two wheeled transport.

If I overtake a cyclist, I will not do it with traffic coming the other way and I will always endeavour to give them a full lane's width of clearance as I find the buffeting caused by overtaking vehicles can be pretty uncomfortable.

[maviczap]

I'm with you on this Mav.

I don't cycle on the roads very often these days but every time I do I'm shocked by the lack of care shown by drivers of all 4 wheeled vehicles towards cyclists. I can guarantee that the majority of overtakes are much too close for comfort, with some being within inches of my elbow. Drivers who are not prepared to sacrifice a few seconds of journey time, and many of whom will try and squeeze past with traffic coming the other way. This is a rural area too, so how it must feel in slightly more urban areas is too terrifying for me to think about.

I find the majority of motorcyclists are much more sympathetic, perhaps because many of them understand the vulnerable nature of two wheeled transport.

If I overtake a cyclist, I will not do it with traffic coming the other way and I will always endeavour to give them a full lane's width of clearance as I find the buffeting caused by overtaking vehicles can be pretty uncomfortable.

Ireland are in the process of introducing a 1.5 metre passing gap for cyclists on rural roads, 1 metre on urban roads, Spain has had this law for some time. No such legislation being considered here.

Presumed liability on vehicle drivers in my fanatical view would be a good thing, even if it changes the fundamentals of our laws, as the biggest cause of road injuries/deaths aren't being held responsible for their actions. Only the UK, Cyprus, Malta and Romania don't have presumed liability legislation.

Road deaths were up 6% in the year 2016 from the previous year.

[SV650rules]

I find the majority of motorcyclists are much more sympathetic, perhaps because many of them understand the vulnerable nature of two wheeled transport.

If I overtake a cyclist, I will not do it with traffic coming the other way and I will always endeavour to give them a full lane's width of clearance as I find the buffeting caused by overtaking vehicles can be pretty uncomfortable.


It is much easier for a motorbike to get past cyclists without needing to cross the centre line of the road. It does annoy motorists when cyclist groups ride in a block (two or more abreast, talking to each other) I asked some Lycra fanatics I used to work with and they said it makes it easier for vehicles to pass :o

When I used to cycle quite a bit and I knew that traffic was trying to pass I would pull into the verge and let them through especially on twisting roads where overtaking opportunities were few. Even decent tractor drivers (most of which can do 30mph+ these days) will pull into layby or onto verge to let following vehicles through. I guess also that some driver do not know that they can cross single or double white line to pass slow vehicles like cycles, but double whites are normally on twist bits where overtaking even a cyclist is dangerous.

There are a few considerate cyclists around, but many are not unfortunately and feel they are exempt from rules, and the more expensive their bike and the brighter their Lycra the worse they seem to be.

[Talking Heads]

Statistically there was a 5% increase in cyclists being killed on UK roads in 2017

Being labelled as a fanatic for wanting changes to improve my safety on the road when I'm cycling leaves a bad taste in my mouth

Quoting statistics is only legitimate when you quote the source so people can verify your claim.
You say deaths are up 5% but fail to mention how many cycling journeys occured in the two periods during which your reported increase happened.
Using your source of statistics it may well be possible to show that cycling fatalities are reducing.
And it is my suspicion this may be why you have failed to quote your source.

Positive discrimination is still discrimination.
All road users are subject to the same rules of the road and should be treated equally by the legal system.
Anything else is simply unjust in my view.

[maviczap]

Disapointed you didn't read my post properly, the source of my stats was official gov stats

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf

The ROSPA fact sheet precis it

https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/facts-figures/

UK Govenment reported road casulties

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf

Why is it ok to have presumed liability in every country in the EU, but not in the UK, where the biggest cause of road deaths and serious injury

A quote from Lord Denning in 1982

"in the present state of motor traffic I am persuaded that any civilised system of law should require, as a matter of principle, that the person who uses this dangerous instrument on the road dealing death and destruction all round should be liable to make compensation to anyone who is killed or injured in consequence of the use of it. There should be liability without proof of fault. To require an injured person to prove fault is the gravest injustice to many innocent persons who have not the wherewithal to prove it."

[andy650]

Cyclists and motorcyclists, of which I am both, really should look out for each other. Sure there are a-hole cyclists, but I would much rather come across one of those than an a-hole car driver. Obviously there are no a-hole bikers ;-)

It never ceases to amaze me when I hear bikers slating cyclists, and vice versa, we are in the same boat FFS.

I always give cyclists room and consideration when on the mbike, or in the car. Why not?

[maviczap]

Careful you'll be labelled a fanatic like me ;-)

[andy650]

I posted similar views on a cycling forum where they were slating bikers. Some of them replied as if I was some sort of Antichrist.

So yes there are some real a-hole cyclists, and whilst I might want to punch them, I certainly would not want to put them in a life threatening situation....let alone myself.

Its not a war out there, or if it is, we are in the firing line, like the cyclists.

[maviczap]

Aholes in every branch of road users I'm afraid :-)

[Red Herring]

I'm not going to argue with any suggestion that we should try and make our roads safer, and I'm certainly in favour of trying to achieve that by improving driver and rider behaviour, both of those with and without engines..... rather than through more and more legislation, however my original point still remains unanswered.

Your suggestion was that introducing a presumption of fault on the part of the motorist would improve driver behaviour and reduce casualties, and I pointed out that countries that already do so have a worse casualty rate than we do. Nothing you have subsequently said has explained why that is the case.

The entire British legal system works on the presumption of innocence until shown otherwise. In practice nothing should be presumed, every incident should, and generally is, examined and directed according to the information available and the circumstances prevailing. I for one hope that will continue to be the case. In my experience once a presumption is adopted in the belief that it will support one side of a case it is widely abused, such as it has been in domestic violence and sexual abuse cases recently. Be careful what you wish for folks.

[maviczap]

The entire British legal system works on the presumption of innocence until shown otherwise. In practice nothing should be presumed, every incident should, and generally is, examined and directed according to the information available and the circumstances prevailing. .

This'll be my last on this, presumed liability does nothing to change the need to prove Innocence or Guilt, that's Criminal Law.

What it does is transfer is instead of the cyclist or pedestrian having to prove the motorist was at fault, it puts the onus on the motorist to prove they were negligent. This way damages can be claimed from the motorists insurance, but can be challenged. This'll be dealt with under Civil law

With the advent of dash cams it's a whole lot easier for the motorist to show the stupid cyclist or pedestrian was negligent. Much harder for the cyclist or pedestrian to show negligence on the motorists part

https://www.slatergordon.co.uk/media-centre/blog/2015/08/cycling-accidents-and-presumed-liability-uk-vs-europe/

http://www.cyclealert.com/presumed-liability-the-facts/

[Red Herring]

...
3142 reported serious injuries to cyclists
57% as a attributed of drivers pulling out, crossing the path is sorry mate I didn't see you
43% were attributed to cyclists being at fault, pulling out, not stopping.at junctions etc
Govt figures
.....

And figures quoted by you. So basically in 57% of crashes the motorist was found to be responsible and would have been liable, and in 43% the cyclist was found to be responsible and the motorist was therefore not liable. I guess bringing in a system of presumed liability against the motorist would make it a whole lot more easier to claim against them if responsibility for the incident couldn't be established. I'm not very good at maths, what percentage was that?

Or are you seriously suggesting there should be a system where, even though the incident isn't attributable to them, the motorist should pay compensation? I'm trying to think of a better incentive for motorists not to stop at the scene of any incident but failing miserably.

[SV650rules]

And figures quoted by you. So basically in 57% of crashes the motorist was found to be responsible and would have been liable, and in 43% the cyclist was found to be responsible and the motorist was therefore not liable. I guess bringing in a system of presumed liability against the motorist would make it a whole lot more easier to claim against them if responsibility for the incident couldn't be established. I'm not very good at maths, what percentage was that?

Or are you seriously suggesting there should be a system where, even though the incident isn't attributable to them, the motorist should pay compensation? I'm trying to think of a better incentive for motorists not to stop at the scene of any incident but failing miserably.

+1

Positive discrimination is every bit as bad as the other kind, if anything it may make cyclists more reckless if they know they will be always presumed to be in the right. Every case should be looked at with unbiased eyes, otherwise it is not justice as I understand it.

I don't think I have ever seen a rear view mirror on a cycle, and cyclists seem to fall into two categories where lights are concerned, they either have the eye scorching powerful rechargeable LED lights, which are angled in such a way they can temporarily blind other road users or they have no lights or reflective gear at all and appear suddenly like ghosts in your headlight beam.

[Talking Heads]

Disapointed you didn't read my post properly, the source of my stats was official gov stats

I did read your post, you made no mention of any source.


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf

The ROSPA fact sheet precis it

https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/facts-figures/

UK Govenment reported road casulties

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf


Your post talks of a percentage increase in 2017 but all your links only provide statistics up to 2016.
Therefore your claim regarding 2017 is unsubstantiated.

Why is it ok to have presumed liability in every country in the EU, but not in the UK, where the biggest cause of road deaths and serious injury

Its not OK, clearly these countries legal systems are inferior to ours.

A quote from Lord Denning in 1982

"in the present state of motor traffic I am persuaded that any civilised system of law should require, as a matter of principle, that the person who uses this dangerous instrument on the road dealing death and destruction all round should be liable to make compensation to anyone who is killed or injured in consequence of the use of it. There should be liability without proof of fault. To require an injured person to prove fault is the gravest injustice to many innocent persons who have not the wherewithal to prove it."

Oh dear, careful who you quote.
Lord Denning isn't someone I would have chosen to lecture us regarding a "civilised system of law".

Here's part of an interview...

Interviewer: Nevertheless, were you glad to see the death penalty abolished?
Denning: Not really. It ought to be retained for murder most foul.
We shouldn't have all these campaigns to get the Birmingham Six released if they'd been hanged.
They'd have been forgotten, and the whole community would be satisfied.
Interviewer: But would justice have been satisfied if the wrong men had been hanged?
Denning: (chuckles) No. There is always that danger.
Interviewer: If they had hanged the Guildford Four they would have hanged the wrong men, wouldn't they?
Denning: No. They'd probably have hanged the right men. Not proved against them, that's all.


Source: http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/18th-august-1990/8/england-his-england


That's just a quick taster of the man, besides being happy to see innocent men hanged he had other horrendous opinions as well.

This'll be my last on this

I always think its a mistake to make such pronouncements.

[Toooldtodie]

Everyone would be better off if we simply paid attention to what we were doing and tried to consider others.
I have noticed a decreasing empathy toward ALL other road users. A lot of people think their journey is more important than anyone else, and their convenience above others and that each foot of road is a competition. This will only get worse if congestion levels increase.
Which brings us back to the OP, which is that PTW are a solution to congestion, the more there are, the happier we'll all be!

[SV650rules]

Everyone would be better off if we simply paid attention to what we were doing and tried to consider others.
I have noticed a decreasing empathy toward ALL other road users. A lot of people think their journey is more important than anyone else, and their convenience above others and that each foot of road is a competition. This will only get worse if congestion levels increase.
Which brings us back to the OP, which is that PTW are a solution to congestion, the more there are, the happier we'll all be!

We could probably make a good start on improving road tolerance and safety by banning German made cars on UK roads, my dashcam has ample footage of their misdemeanors :rolleyes:

I was sitting on a local Tesco carpark the other day for a long time waiting for her indoors to complete her shopping and got interested in people who did not return their trolley to the proper trolley park (there was one only 25 metres away) - owners of German cars (including pseudo British Mini) and Volvo (sample of only 2 Volvo to be fair) did not seem inclined to take a short walk and park trolley properly, their time is obviously much more valuable than other peoples. Don't know why they don't have the trolleys that need a pound coin to release them like most other supermarkets as that seems to keep carpark clear of abandoned trolleys.

There - I managed to mention Germans without mentioning their infamous WW2 leader ( although I did mention the war ).

[Red Herring]

We could probably make a good start on improving road tolerance and safety by banning German made cars on UK roads, my dashcam has ample footage of their misdemeanors :rolleyes:

I was sitting on a local Tesco carpark the other day for a long time waiting for her indoors to complete her shopping.......

Tolerance is all about embracing the behaviour of others, not seeking to change it so instead of banning German cars learn instead to anticipate and avoid the behaviour that appears to cause you so much distress. I generally avoid stereotypes, we all have our reasons for doing things. I mean, just because I wouldn't dream of leaving my wife to struggle round the shops on her own doesn't make you a lazy sexist pig does it?

[Talking Heads]

I hate to see my wife struggling with the housework, so I go to the pub.
(Boom, boom, old ones are the best)

[SV650rules]

Tolerance is all about embracing the behaviour of others, not seeking to change it so instead of banning German cars learn instead to anticipate and avoid the behaviour that appears to cause you so much distress. I generally avoid stereotypes, we all have our reasons for doing things. I mean, just because I wouldn't dream of leaving my wife to struggle round the shops on her own doesn't make you a lazy sexist pig does it?

No because 90% of the time I do the shopping.

Anticipating behaviour is no substitute for that behaviour not happening in the first place, I was not put on this earth to accommodate behaviour of criminal drivers, like a BMW approaching me on my side of the road at high speed and making no attempt to brake and go back in behind the HGV they are dangerously overtaking, but willing to put me off the road because of their ego and sense of entitlement. Next time it happens I will give dashcan footage to police in heartbeat.

[Red Herring]

No because 90% of the time I do the shopping.
.

So I was right when I said it didn't make you a lazy sexist pig then wasn't I? It also shows how dodgy it is to form an opinion about someone based on a single event. I rest my case Sir. Tolerant, that's what I am......:)

[NTECUK]

I think we should ban German cars as Brexit votes say Britain First.

[Red Herring]

Reading this thread drift you would have to be pretty dim not to detect a dislike from some individuals towards drivers of certain brands of cars, such a dislike that they are proposing (even in jest) that action be taken against them as a whole.

Now imagine you are the mayor of London and all you are told and see in the press is that motorcyclists are this lawless brigade intent on wreaking havoc across your city....... We all know that those responsible for this image make up a very small proportion of riders, but just like the BMW drivers we have to suffer the consequences.

I didn't learn much in my working life, but one thing I did manage to pick up on, especially in the circles I moved in towards the end of my career, was that a lot of decisions get made in unbelievable ignorance, or indifference, to the consequences of them.

[SV650rules]

So I was right when I said it didn't make you a lazy sexist pig then wasn't I? It also shows how dodgy it is to form an opinion about someone based on a single event. I rest my case Sir. Tolerant, that's what I am......:)


You made a sweeping decision based on one episode, I have had a lifetime of driving and riding watching German car drivers do stupid, arrogant and dangerous things (in many countries as well). There is a point when so called tolerance and virtue signalling becomes stupidity.

I think we should ban German cars as Brexit votes say Britain First.

+1

European industry is keen to strike good deals, it's those stupid bonehead politicians who are standing in the way.


Now imagine you are the mayor of London and all you are told and see in the press is that motorcyclists are this lawless brigade intent on wreaking havoc across your city........
Old Sadiq has more than motorbikes to worry about, under his watch(and that ineffective woman commissioner of the Met) London has just become the murder capital of the world.

[Teejayexc]

I didn't learn much in my working life, but one thing I did manage to pick up on, especially in the circles I moved in towards the end of my career, was that a lot of decisions get made in unbelievable ignorance, or indifference, to the consequences of them.

True...most decisions/laws are brought in to curb the minorities but affect the majority.

[Red Herring]

You made a sweeping decision based on one episode, I have had a lifetime of driving and riding watching German car drivers do stupid, arrogant and dangerous things (in many countries as well). There is a point when so called tolerance and virtue signalling becomes stupidity.

I'm not sure if you're deliberately mis-reading and mis-quoting what I wrote or you just don't understand it. Either way it makes any kind of rational debate on the subject pretty difficult. I think you appear to have a rather prejudiced and narrow view point but that is only my opinion, and I didn't come to that conclusion from just the one post...... I love a good discussion, especially with people who can offer an alternative view to mine, but there really does have to be some substance to their contribution.

[NTECUK]

Now imagine you are the mayor of London and all you are told and see in the press is that motorcyclists are this lawless brigade intent on wreaking havoc across your city....... We all know that those responsible for this image make up a very small proportion of riders, but just like the BMW drivers we have to suffer the consequences.
.
I think he's got some issues with knives.
Although maybe"it's just part of living in a big city.."
(Out of context) ;)

[Dave-the-rave]

There's money in charging bikes the same as cars.
There's no money in not charging bikes the same as cars.
Simples innit.