Summer biking ban?

Ok, so the subject line is (hopefully) OTT. But it wouldn't surprise me if
the gov't start to announce more cameras and more m'bike related legislation
as a result of reports like this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3467377.stm

In synopsis:
Deaths and injuries on British roads down by 5% in the 12 months to
September 2003,
Speed cameras played a part in this reduction,
16% increase in motorcycle deaths and injuries over last decade, due mostly
to young blokes with fast bikes in the summer.

I wonder if they'd ever consider making "bike awareness" part of the car
driving training / test?

 

And what has changed in the last 100 years, my dad had a 1932 norton es2
for years, it weren't fast by todasy stndards but pissed on the traffic of
the day, that is why he bopught the bloody thing(Thank God, as its this
experience that made him encourage me onto 2 wheels)

No because it would cost 3 1/2 p to do hence it aint worth it.

 

Todasy was a quick rider ?

 

Well then I wonder how much the current "watch out for the car that doesn't
see you" advertising campaign is costing?

The "Think Bike" campaign was a much better idea IMO.

Bikers already get plenty of training / frights / other warnings to teach
'em to watch out for SMIDSY's as best they can, so I reckon it's a waste of
money putting these current stupid ads on the telly, and I reckon it only
encourages car drivers to think "oh well it's the biker's fault, s/he should
have been looking out for me in the first place".

£0.02

 

Well he won the 1967 IoM TT didn't he, under an assumed name obviously ;-)

 

in message

and more m'bike related legislation

Obvious really, I can imagine Teflon Tony and cronies of his persuasion
thinking "hmm, bike deaths up by 16%. I wonder how we can use this to
introduce some convoluted, ineffectual measures which we can spin to show
how concerned we are but will force the human resources of my kingdom to
hand over more money?"


--
Martin -Yamaha XVS650A (Im a Norfolk boy ... nearest thing I could afford
to a tractor)

Norfolk n' good

www.rockdoctors.org.uk

 

How about "Motorcycles only permitted upon the public roads with a gov't
authorised red flag bearer walking ahead of them (to be paid for by the
rider)"?
Not sure El Presidente would be happy about the "red" bit of the flag, but
Gordo would go for it like a shot, both the red and the payment.

Sounds cool.

I've not been out of London for too long now, not since last October I
think. Looking forward to the end of February when I can (fingers crossed)
get back into the inlaws' holiday place at Brancaster; I could do with some
chilling out away from town.

 

[snip]

No mention of the large increase in use of motorcycles for leisure over the
past decade I see. Methinks it might be rather more than 16%, so somewhat
perversely, you could argue this was a good result.

Rick

 

I wonder if they'd ever consider making "bike awareness" part of the car

I think car learners should have to do their CBT on an ickle bike before
they let them out in a car.

 

Disabled drivers?

 

Anyone got a copy/picture of Tony sat on a Triumph (yellow T595) in the
run up to the 97 election?

He visited some bike show (I think with Glenda Jackson in tow?) and gave
loads of warm words about bikes forming an integral part of any labour
transport policy. I think it got the approval of the half-wits at MCN.

If there is any proposed legislation it would be *lovely* to pull that
issue out...

 

What a stupid, prejudiced idea.

 

Aside from them then....
is there no such thing as disabled riders though ?

 

Yes, well, that's going to bring down the government, isn't it?

Could be top-up fees all over again.

Or he may not give a shit.

Let me think ...


--
AndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas)
Kawasaki ZX-6R J1
BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL)
BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, TEAR#3 (and KotL), DS#5, Keeper of the TFSTR#
The speccy Geordie twat.

 

Ideal to form the basis of government policy then, eh?

I think the OP should take this idea and stand for parliament on the
strength of it.

Let's face it, "I'll make you all ride bikes", _has_ to be a better rallying
cry than, "Vote for me - I shoot people" ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3467923.stm


--
AndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas)
Kawasaki ZX-6R J1
BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL)
BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, TEAR#3 (and KotL), DS#5, Keeper of the TFSTR#
The speccy Geordie twat.

 

Fair enough.

But I doubt it'd be a bad thing to ensure that some form of awareness of the
other types of road vehicles and their practicalities is part of the
training required to drive any vehicle.

Hmmm. Yeah that might have some legs actually. After all we live in an
country with very crowded roads in many places.

Now for example, in Norway they get snow and ice, so skidpan training and
assessment forms part of their driving test.

I dunno if it's part of the test but when I had a refresher / learn to drive
on the right lesson in Norway the instructor was most insistent about
keeping out of the cycle lanes and watching out for bicycles. He didn't try
to make me ride a bicycle obviously, but he did make me very aware of them.

Can anyone see anything wrong with that sort of thing happening in UK car
driver training?

Mind you, would it do any good?

 

That would then be discriminatory.

Riding PTW?

 

Well I know one.


--
AndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas)
Kawasaki ZX-6R J1
BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL)
BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, TEAR#3 (and KotL), DS#5, Keeper of the TFSTR#
The speccy Geordie twat.

 

Oh, you misunderstand my motivations.

I'm not suggesting it'll make any difference at all. But, if would be
*lovely* for *me*. At the time I said (maybe in here) that he was
electioneering and they'd do **** all for bikes.

I had the argument with fellow 'bikers' at my office that it was a waste
of time voting for Labour on this point; one or two disagreed- these
were supposedly intelligent people.

And, regarding running the country- what's my choice?

1. A slightly power crazed Tony Blair leading a government with a small
majority.

2. A concerningly smug and mis-understanding Gordon Brown leading a
government with a small majority.

3. A concerning Michael Howard leading any government.


Well, speaking as a life-long Tory (albeit a wet one, and increasingly
wet as the years go by), I'll go for the first option *every* time.

Labour have made a few decisions I've disagreed with but nothing big, on
the whole they've struck a good balance keeping most of the people
minimally pissed off most of the time. If you look at the position of
the Tories in '86 which is broadly analogous to the current position
they were very unpopular- 3 million unemployed etc.etc.

I still maintain that all in all Labour have done an OK job and, more
importantly, haven't hurt me anywhere near as badly as I'd feared!

 

You're not very bright, are you?