Overtaking in the blackwall tunnel.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by thulfi

I reckon if you're not endangering others but only yourself,

Why can't some people get it into their head that it can be done without it being endangering to even yourself?

Originally Posted by Stu

Why can't some people get it into their head that it can be done without it being endangering to even yourself?

eh? Of course it (I assume you mean overtake/filter) can be dont without endangering yourself. I do both when its safe to do so.

Read what I was quoting in the post you quoted me on.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Red Herring
We all know when we are taking risks, and if you do so then you deserve the consequence of it.

Originally Posted by thulfi

Not sure if you mean risks on the road or risks in general. I think accepting the outcomes of your risk is different to deserving them. Do you really deserve to not walk for life if you took a risk squeezing in behind a couple of cars when say filtering?

yup, I'm pretty happy with cause and effect. If you do something yourself that results it not walking again, then fair enough.
I don't see why you equate filtering with not being able to walk though as I've done it a few times & can still walk too.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by thulfi

eh? Of course it (I assume you mean overtake/filter) can be dont without endangering yourself. I do both when its safe to do so.

Read what I was quoting in the post you quoted me on.

I tried, but I couldn't understand it. Lots of words written in English, but not making much sense so I just dealt with the first sentence.

Like I said accepting an outcome is different to deserving it.

I don't equate filtering with not being able to walk. My point is that if a rider went for a 'risky' filter (ie only person at risk is him and him alone) and botched it up do you really believe they deserve to never be able to walk again, should it go tits up?

Originally Posted by Stu

If you do something yourself that results it not walking again, then fair enough.

So Christopher Reeve deserves to never walk again because he rode a horse (risky) and fell off?

Surely you don't think that.

That theory of yours can be applied from a non bikers point of view. ie, 'any biker who comes off or is killed deserves to because they knew riding a bike is a risky thing to do'.

Originally Posted by thulfi

That theory of yours can be applied from a non bikers point of view. ie, 'any biker who comes off or is killed deserves to because they knew riding a bike is a risky thing to do'.

No-one deserves to die because they knew it was risky, but we should all accept that one day we might die because we are on a bike, and bikes are inherently more risky to travel on than cars, for example


All this is academic in my case, because I am going to live forever, despite riding like a tw4t and having more medical problems than a series of Holby

Originally Posted by Lozzo

No-one deserves to die because they knew it was risky,

exactly

Originally Posted by Lozzo

but we should all accept that one day we might die because we are on a bike, and bikes are inherently more risky to travel on than cars, for example

yep, and I don't think anyone should get on a motorcycle in the first place unless they're willing to accept the risks involved (which is different to deserving it should the worst befall you, which is the point I'm trying to get across).

Originally Posted by Lozzo

All this is academic in my case, because I am going to live forever, despite riding like a tw4t and having more medical problems than a series of Holby

ahh if only everyone had this outlook

cant we all just get along?

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Owenski

cant we all just get along?

Where is fun in that?


Yarrrrrr