Lawbreaking cyclists

On 03/03/2012 09:04, Bertie Wooster wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 07:36:51 -0000, "Mr. > wrote:
>
>> I am a normal cyclist
>
> Do you ride on pavements, disobey red traffic signals and ride the
> wrong way down one-way streets?

Do you?

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

Mr. Benn said

> I THOUGHT we were living in a democracy? A place where majority
> decision rules? So let us consider cyclists. I have yet to hear of a
> cyclist that rides according to the law. Every single one I see cuts
> through red lights like a knife through butter.

Mow 'em down! That's what I do. I figure I'm cleansing the gene pool.

"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...

On 03/03/2012 09:04, Bertie Wooster wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 07:36:51 -0000, "Mr. > wrote:
>
>> I am a normal cyclist
>
> Do you ride on pavements, disobey red traffic signals and ride the
> wrong way down one-way streets?

Do you?
================================================

I certainly don't cycle on pavements. And I stop at traffic lights when
they are red. Always. I don't understand why the militants find obeying
the law so difficult to comprehend.

"Simon Mason" > wrote in message
. uk...
> On Mar 3, 7:33 am, Brent > wrote:
>
>>
>> > So let us consider cyclists. I have yet to hear of a cyclist that
>> > rides according to the law.
>>
>> I do. And ****es of drivers like you far more than any POB. Why? Because
>> your hate has nothing to do with the law.
>
> So do I.
> Look, even in the middle of the night, I wait at three red lights, while a
> truck drives straight over a pedestrian crossing at red.
> All caught on my camera.
>
> http://www.swldxer.co.uk/rlj6.wmv
>

And here is yet another one.
A BMW this time.

http://www.swldxer.co.uk/rlj.wmv

--
Simon Mason

On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>
> On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
>> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>>
>> On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
>>> I THOUGHT we were living in a democracy? A place where majority decision
>>> rules?
>>
>> Tyranny of the majority. How quaint. 51% decide to take everything the
>> other 49% have, or murder them outright. That's the essence of
>> "democracy".
>>
>>> So let us consider cyclists. I have yet to hear of a cyclist that
>>> rides according to the law.
>>
>> I do. And ****es of drivers like you far more than any POB. Why? Because
>> your hate has nothing to do with the law.
>>==============================================
>>
>> I am a normal cyclist and I only hate militant cyclists (psycholists).
>>
>> BTW, cyclists make up far less than 49% of road users - more like 0.5% in
>> most places.
>
> In a democracy that means that if the majority wants to kill them,
> that's a-ok.
>=========================
>
> Absolutely not.

Then it's not a democracy.

"Brent" wrote in message ...

On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>
> On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
>> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>>
>> On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
>>> I THOUGHT we were living in a democracy? A place where majority decision
>>> rules?
>>
>> Tyranny of the majority. How quaint. 51% decide to take everything the
>> other 49% have, or murder them outright. That's the essence of
>> "democracy".
>>
>>> So let us consider cyclists. I have yet to hear of a cyclist that
>>> rides according to the law.
>>
>> I do. And ****es of drivers like you far more than any POB. Why? Because
>> your hate has nothing to do with the law.
>>==============================================
>>
>> I am a normal cyclist and I only hate militant cyclists (psycholists).
>>
>> BTW, cyclists make up far less than 49% of road users - more like 0.5% in
>> most places.
>
> In a democracy that means that if the majority wants to kill them,
> that's a-ok.
>=========================
>
> Absolutely not.

Then it's not a democracy.
============================================

I have no idea what the hell you are on about.

On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>
> On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
>> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>>
>> On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
>>> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>>>
>>> On 2012-03-03, Mr. Benn > wrote:
>>>> I THOUGHT we were living in a democracy? A place where majority decision
>>>> rules?
>>>
>>> Tyranny of the majority. How quaint. 51% decide to take everything the
>>> other 49% have, or murder them outright. That's the essence of
>>> "democracy".
>>>
>>>> So let us consider cyclists. I have yet to hear of a cyclist that
>>>> rides according to the law.
>>>
>>> I do. And ****es of drivers like you far more than any POB. Why? Because
>>> your hate has nothing to do with the law.
>>>============================================= =
>>>
>>> I am a normal cyclist and I only hate militant cyclists (psycholists).
>>>
>>> BTW, cyclists make up far less than 49% of road users - more like 0.5% in
>>> most places.
>>
>> In a democracy that means that if the majority wants to kill them,
>> that's a-ok.
>>=========================
>>
>> Absolutely not.
>
> Then it's not a democracy.
>============================================
>
> I have no idea what the hell you are on about.

It's quite obvious you don't because you don't know what a democracy is.
A democracy is simply majority rule. If a person's rights are recognized
or not depends on if the majority chooses to do so. If the majority
chooses not to, then that's just the way it goes in democracy.

If the majority in a democracy decides bicyclists as a group don't have
rights then it's open season on bicyclists. That's how democracy rolls.

On Mar 3, 6:35*pm, "Simon Mason" > wrote:
> "Simon Mason" > wrote in message
>
> . uk...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 3, 7:33 am, Brent > wrote:
>
> >> > So let us consider cyclists. I have yet to hear of a cyclist that
> >> > rides according to the law.
>
> >> I do. And ****es of drivers like you far more than any POB. Why? Because
> >> your hate has nothing to do with the law.
>
> > So do I.
> > Look, even in the middle of the night, I wait at three red lights, while a
> > truck drives straight over a pedestrian crossing at red.
> > All caught on my camera.
>
> >http://www.swldxer.co.uk/rlj6.wmv
>
> And here is yet another one.
> A BMW this time.
>
> http://www.swldxer.co.uk/rlj.wmv
>


And yet another one.

http://www.swldxer.co.uk/rlj2.wmv

--
Simon Mason

On 04/03/2012 05:03, Brent wrote:
> On 2012-03-03, Mr. > wrote:
>> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>>
>> On 2012-03-03, Mr. > wrote:
>>> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>>>
>>> On 2012-03-03, Mr. > wrote:
>>>> "Brent" wrote in message ...
>>>>
>>>> On 2012-03-03, Mr. > wrote:
>>>>> I THOUGHT we were living in a democracy? A place where majority decision
>>>>> rules?
>>>>
>>>> Tyranny of the majority. How quaint. 51% decide to take everything the
>>>> other 49% have, or murder them outright. That's the essence of
>>>> "democracy".
>>>>
>>>>> So let us consider cyclists. I have yet to hear of a cyclist that
>>>>> rides according to the law.
>>>>
>>>> I do. And ****es of drivers like you far more than any POB. Why? Because
>>>> your hate has nothing to do with the law.
>>>> ==============================================
>>>>
>>>> I am a normal cyclist and I only hate militant cyclists (psycholists).
>>>>
>>>> BTW, cyclists make up far less than 49% of road users - more like 0.5% in
>>>> most places.
>>>
>>> In a democracy that means that if the majority wants to kill them,
>>> that's a-ok.
>>> =========================
>>>
>>> Absolutely not.
>>
>> Then it's not a democracy.
>> ============================================
>>
>> I have no idea what the hell you are on about.
>
> It's quite obvious you don't because you don't know what a democracy is.
> A democracy is simply majority rule. If a person's rights are recognized
> or not depends on if the majority chooses to do so. If the majority
> chooses not to, then that's just the way it goes in democracy.
>
> If the majority in a democracy decides bicyclists as a group don't have
> rights then it's open season on bicyclists. That's how democracy rolls.

That is theoretically possible.

In practice, however? No.

Minorities, even delinquent minorities, are accorded certain personal (not
group) rights which may - in serious enough cases - transcend the political
rights of the majority. Hence the spectacle of national leaders and
high-ranking officials being hanged by the neck in a Nuremburg gymnasium.

On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 18:17:45 -0000, "Mr. Benn" > wrote:

>"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
>
>On 03/03/2012 09:04, Bertie Wooster wrote:
>> On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 07:36:51 -0000, "Mr. > wrote:
>>
>>> I am a normal cyclist
>>
>> Do you ride on pavements, disobey red traffic signals and ride the
>> wrong way down one-way streets?
>
>I certainly don't cycle on pavements. And I stop at traffic lights when
>they are red. Always. I don't understand why the militants find obeying
>the law so difficult to comprehend.

Good.

I am glad we can agree on a definition of a "normal cyclist" as one
who rides as you do, and a "militant" cyclist as one who breaks the
law.