Full house, right?
YOU are choosing to be argumentative and react emotionally, even responding to my replies to other posters. That’s your choice.
Yes, I ride a bike, yes, I’ve had a couple of “incidents” over the years, no I don’t believe we should legislate for traffic based on one person’s view. My view throughout has been that EVERY road user should take care and be considerate and patient of everyone else. Nobody on this thread has been totally opposed to your views, as far as I recall. Just offering varying opinions.
Something that almost every other Western European country has done so it’s hardly “One person’s view”, is it?
Maybe one person on this forum, assuming @Longbyt et others feel it’s absolutely fine cycling here.
That’s just not happening. It would be great if they did.
You need laws to make people obey rules otherwise there wouldn’t be drivers on their mobile phones, cyclists going through red lights where not allowed, people driving too fast for the conditions and so on.
But the point is, in an accident, it’s invariably the cyclist or pedestrian who comes off worse in a collision and other countries have seen that as these groups are generally more vulnerable, they need more protection.
That’s why I said “My view…” This is regardless of what is actually happening.
Doesn’t the law already account for using a mobile at the wheel? Or am I misunderstanding the word “verboten” in the articles I’m reading? It seems that Switzerland is no different from many other European countries whereby you can be fined for being caught using the mobile at the wheel but if it’s the reason for an accident, then the law has more severe punishments, as you would expect.
And I would be the first to vote for cycling infrastructure improvements. Until that happens, I’m just going to continue employing my tried and tested “taking care and being patient” approach, which has worked a treat up to now.
I mentioned that earlier. It’s a good thing - I don’t have a problem with it but obviously it’s getting a high profile after the London park fatality and is a bit of a knee-jerk, pre-election, Tory Party crowd-pleasing exercise.
Even IDS said "“But it’s only right that the tiny minority who recklessly disregard others face the full weight of the law for doing so.”
There have also been demands for Strava* to remove the timed segment they have on the park route.
That was highly irresponsible and TBH, they should remove all timed segments in towns and limit them to the open road.
*Strava is an app which allows cyclists to log routes and times etc to monitor performance, but also to show their friends on social media. It also has leader-boards for different road routes.
I don’t use it personally as I don’t care how fast I am compared with others and I don’t share my cycling performance on social media. There’s a skiing version too I think.
Why are you so surprised that you get some salty replies when you start your post with an inflammatory sentence like that?
Just because people aren’t agreeing with you and are posting alternative views doesn’t make them trolls.
Firstly, there aren’t many, if any alternative views on this thread.
There are people picking holes in what I have written and there are people who believe a painted line on the road gives them protection from motorists but that’s about it.
As for trolling, it was one of your fellow EF mods who pointed this out first to me on this thread:
When I commented on the subject of Lycra, for example and asked why people kept mentioning, Ace replied:
Do you not value the judgement of your (ex) fellow moderators?
Get over yourself; “people” didn’t keep mentioning Lycra. It was you who made a big case out of a couple of comments about “Lycra cyclists”. Seriously now, some of us might have been guilty of being easily dragged into a vortex of negativity and reactive posts here but nobody tried to stir anything up. After all who started this thread? I know you have to be extremely careful here about how you phrase every little sentence of ANY opinion, but this was trolling from Ace.
He kind of changed his opinion a few times on this thread.
You do realise that you were one of the “trolls” referred to by a former mod?
I’m trying to stick to the subject but it seems most people aren’t interested in it and just want to flame and troll.
I see that Roegner liked your post. They are getting more like MusicChick every day. Roegner - stay off this thread if you can’t add anything to the topic.
You’re a mod FFS and I’m fed up with reporting your posts.
Yes, he was being such a hypocrite. He started arguing against that movement and then changed his opinions along the way as to fender your ego.
And calling people trolls for not agreeing with every thought you might have on this issue is not OK; after all who says that his opinion is the highest measure of validity. This discussion is getting tedious and you know it, you write multiple posts to inflame people here.
Sir Chris Hoy, six times Olympic champion did point out that even on an indoor track, slip-streaming behind a motorised bicycle, never got more than 80Km/h, let alone the 84Km/h which the ‘journalist’ suggested a commuter did.
That speed isn’t even attained in the final 200m or so sprint at the end of a Tour de France stage.
Erroneous GPS speed spikes are really quite common - I had to explain that to my son when after a leisurely final ski run this winter, he checked his phone and said he had done 84Km/h at one point.
My other son then did the maths and proved that it would have been impossible on that run after our last pause on the run.
So I guess a more realistic 32 mph on a sprint would be OK then? It looks like your alleged interest of “protecting vulnerable road users” becomes a defense of speeding violations.
