Demand for cyclists number plates.

Status
Not open for further replies.
viv1969 said:
Are you seriously suggesting that all people who suffer chronic heart disease do so because of a life on inactivity?
Click to expand...


Re read it :)

He just used it as an example of one (of many) potential problems that can be brought on by inactivity.

That's not to say they cannot be caused by other factors of course :)

But the general consensus is those who stay fit and trim (not just cyclists obviously) have a higher potential to avoid all sorts of illnesses in later in life.
 
viv1969 said:
Making motorcyclists wear helmets also didn't help "prevent" accidents.
Click to expand...

....Of course it hasn't prevented accidents. What it has done is reduce the number of fatalities (or worse) due to head injuries and the same would apply to bicycle riders.

But, in my opinion, any cyclist who refuses to wear a helmet is already brain damaged.
 
Although car occupants have to wear seat belts by law, there is still quite a high risk of head injury even to a belted in car occupant, so there is an argument that car occupants should be made to wear helmets.
 
boliston said:
Although car occupants have to wear seat belts by law, there is still quite a high risk of head injury even to a belted in car occupant, so there is an argument that car occupants should be made to wear helmets.
Click to expand...

....No problem!

RR_finger_Spa.jpg
 
boliston said:
Although car occupants have to wear seat belts by law, there is still quite a high risk of head injury even to a belted in car occupant, so there is an argument that car occupants should be made to wear helmets.
Click to expand...

Heard this argument many times. I belive (well, I've heard, so not data to back it up) something like 40% of in car deaths are as a result of head injury. If true I have to wonder why car helmets are not a consideration for many people. I would think most have never considered them at all.

One thing I hear a lot of in cycle helmet discussions is the comment - "well, if it saves one life it's worth it". Obviously that's a principle we could apply to everything...yet we don't.

The other thing I hear from time to time is.. "We know cycle helmets work, because pro cyclists wear them. They simply wouldn't wear them if they didn't work". The obvious reply to this is sure. We know in car helmets work because Lewis Hamilton wears one....so why aren't you when you drive your car?

Anyway...I wear one, I advocate them. But I take a very pessimistic view of them. It's important to understand they can/might save your life. But many believe them to be as effective as seat-belts, or motorcycle helmets. I don't think that'sa healthy attitude to have. When you look into it you discover there's not a lot of science behind them, and their effectiveness is only measured at low speeds (said to be 12mph which is I think the speed if someone falling over).



Another oddity....

If you measure deaths on per miles traveled (which personally I believe is a flawed measurement, but it does seem to be the measurement all these sorts of things are based on) walking is more dangerous than cycling.
 
boliston said:
One of the main costs to the taxpayer is caring for inactive people who develop chronic diseases in later life caused by a life of inactivity, such as heart disease. If anything cyclists should pay a "negative" insurance premium as they save taxpayers money by staying healthy and being a lower burden on the health system.
Click to expand...
Try telling that to a workmate of mine who cycled to work and back daily for years, yet died of a heart attack on his way to work one morning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
boliston said:
Although car occupants have to wear seat belts by law, there is still quite a high risk of head injury even to a belted in car occupant, so there is an argument that car occupants should be made to wear helmets.
Click to expand...
Please explain where you think my high risk of head injury comes from. My 1yr old car, has front airbags, seat airbags, b pillar airbags, side curtain airbags above the doors and so did my previous car, now 7yrs old. Drivers airbags were a compulsory fitment in cars from 1993, but manufacturers have voluntarily increased the number of airbags inside cars to prevent/reduce injury to occupants and increase a cars NCAP safety rating. Cars built since 1993 form the higher proportion of vehicles found on UK roads.

This NCAP safety rating also factors in safety to pedestrians and cyclists. One of the most common injuries suffered by these in an accident with cars was head injuries, not from hitting the ground but from hitting the cars bonnet. Up until around 15yrs ago maybe more, bonnet lines on cars were quite low with the engine just below it, the injuries were being sustained by the injured parties head ultimately coming into contact with the engine, the bonnet providing them no real protection. Since then, may well have started before, car bonnet lines have been raised, increasing the gap beneath to the engine and reducing injuries to others. It's fair to say, bicycles provide no crash protection to other road users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
boliston said:
One of the main costs to the taxpayer is caring for inactive people who develop chronic diseases in later life caused by a life of inactivity, such as heart disease. If anything cyclists should pay a "negative" insurance premium as they save taxpayers money by staying healthy and being a lower burden on the health system.
Click to expand...

Is cycling the only form if exercise you can do? I love the moral superiority there.

There are many others out there so you cannot assume car drivers are NHS drains and cyclists aren't. Plus all the road duty paid and fuel duty paid that cyclists don't pay, where does that money go if it's not directly paid to fund the roads?
 
nilagin said:
Try telling that to a workmate of mine who cycled to work and back daily for years, yet died of a heart attack on his way to work one morning.
Click to expand...
Depends on the rest of their lifestyle. Andy if there were any other undetected Heath issues (look at the footballers who have dropped dead during a game because of an undiagnosed issue).

jogging to the shop to buy crisps and cake isn't going to result in a heathly lifestyle.

For the most part it will help as part of a heathly life.
 
boliston said:
I think actually enforcing a compulsory helmets for cyclists rule would be almost impossible, when you consider that that the compulsory lights at night rule for cyclists is rarely enforced and this is a rule that actually helps prevent accidents wheras a helmet does NOT help prevent accidents. I'd imagine it would simply be overlooked in the same way that the 70mph limit on motorways is rarely enforced as people pay no attention and drive at 80 knowing being pulled over would be rare.
Click to expand...
Surely that is purely down to the culprits being caught in the act rather than being ignored.
 
ST4 said:
Is cycling the only form if exercise you can do? I love the moral superiority there.
Click to expand...

Again with the assumptions.

Also "moral superiority" is a little pot and kettle given your stance in this thread..

There are many others out there so you cannot assume car drivers are NHS drains and cyclists aren't. Plus all the road duty paid and fuel duty paid that cyclists don't pay, where does that money go if it's not directly paid to fund the roads?
Click to expand...

I'd wager that most cyclists also pay VED and fuel duty so go figure. Along with all of the relevant NI contributions of course.
 
Last edited:
A friend's mother died of lung cancer, she never smoked, no one in the house smoked, she cycled 3 miles to work
every day along a busy road, although not proven that was suggested as a cause for her disease.

Sadly all these things we make laws to prevent, depend on outside influences and predisposition of the person.

I cycled many miles as a kid and during my youth etc. long before cycle helmets were even thought of, fell off a few
times too without major injury
 
neil_g said:
Depends on the rest of their lifestyle. Andy if there were any other undetected Heath issues (look at the footballers who have dropped dead during a game because of an undiagnosed issue).

jogging to the shop to buy crisps and cake isn't going to result in a heathly lifestyle.

For the most part it will help as part of a heathly life.
Click to expand...
I agree, there could well have been other underlying factors, I believe he was a smoker.
But then I believe if you wish to lead a healthy lifestyle you go the whole hog, not meet it part way. I'm amazed by the number of people I see in the gym car park having a fag after just having had a workout.
 
Musicman said:
Posting on my phone, but the link works for me.

As I said, it's the one directly before Chris Malcolm's that you just quoted, which is 384.

Click on view original for that and scroll up a little
Click to expand...
Ok read through that as best I could, but I still fail to see how you can factor in the width of car tyres which will spread the loads more evenly over the road surface than over a more finite narrower surface. If it was just down to axle weight rather than contact area, are you telling me that if you applied the same car weight per axle over one tyre per axle instead of two, there would be no change.
When walking on a frozen lake you risk the ice cracking and you could fall through. Slide out on your stomach, exact same weight but spread it over a greater surface area and the ice and water beneath it have a better chance of supporting the weight and greatly reduces the risk of falling through.
 
FLOG THEM ALL ,BRING BACK THE BIRCH time to stop these two wheeled things from taking over our fair country .killing our roads ,running over old ladies on there way to the toilets ,and while your at it ban them electric wheelchair things to there all over the place these days :runaway::runaway::runaway::runaway::runaway::runaway::runaway:
 
the 500th post in response to a troll thread - are you all mental?
 
Rapscallion said:
the 500th post in response to a troll thread - are you all mental?
Click to expand...

You're not keen on it, therefore it's a trolling thread?
Righty-oh o_O
 
If you drivers would put down your phones and breakfast rolls while driving you might actually see the cyclists in good time, y'know, the ones who have as much right to the road as you lazy sods?

Aye.
 
nilagin said:
When walking on a frozen lake you risk the ice cracking and you could fall through. Slide out on your stomach, exact same weight but spread it over a greater surface area and the ice and water beneath it have a better chance of supporting the weight and greatly reduces the risk of falling through.
Click to expand...

So, you think crossing the frozen lake in a Toyota Hilux or M1 Abrams tank would be less likely to break the ice than doing the same on a mountain bike?
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
There are many others out there so you cannot assume car drivers are NHS drains and cyclists aren't. Plus all the road duty paid and fuel duty paid that cyclists don't pay, where does that money go if it's not directly paid to fund the roads?
Click to expand...


road duty? Not heard anyone call it road duty in years....

Anyway - the whole road tax/ved issue has been discussed to death and debunked countless times.
 
ST4 said:
Is cycling the only form if exercise you can do? I love the moral superiority there.

There are many others out there so you cannot assume car drivers are NHS drains and cyclists aren't. Plus all the road duty paid and fuel duty paid that cyclists don't pay, where does that money go if it's not directly paid to fund the roads?
Click to expand...
"Road duty" and "fuel duty" go into the consolidated fund. Which means it goes on lots of things, including MP expenses, bailing out bankers who are terrible at their jobs and dropping high explosives on brown people.

Most roads that cyclists use are paid out of local taxation (council tax). So almost all adult cyclists pay for the maintenance of most of the roads they use. As do people who don't drive or cycle or use the roads at all.

And guess what! If you take your car from Glasgow up to Inverness or over to Penicuik or to any authority where you don't pay council tax then you're using roads you haven't paid for! You naughty little man! The locals should run you off the roads with pick-up trucks and pitchforks.

Moreover, most adult cyclists also drive. So they pay VED and fuel duty anyway.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
If you drivers would put down your phones and breakfast rolls while driving you might actually see the cyclists in good time, y'know, the ones who have as much right to the road as you lazy sods?

Aye.
Click to expand...

....Cyclists who have attitudes like that really make my blood boil!

I have now retired from a few decades of amateur road racing bicycles but drive a high performance car. I am very bike-friendly, especially motorbikes, but only to those who conduct themselves safely (and who wear helmets). Respect is a 2-way street!
 
Regarding running red lights...as a cyclist and driver I think cyclists should be explicitly permitted to ignore red lights if conditions are appropriate. Would aid the flow of traffic for everyone.
You see drivers get terribly worked up about cyclists running red lights - even in perfectly safe circumstances. I don't know why. As a driver I welcome it. The bike doesn't hold you up when the light goes green. It makes things smoother.
 
ghoti said:
Regarding running red lights...as a cyclist and driver I think cyclists should be explicitly permitted to ignore red lights if conditions are appropriate. Would aid the flow of traffic for everyone.
You see drivers get terribly worked up about cyclists running red lights - even in perfectly safe circumstances. I don't know why. As a driver I welcome it. The bike doesn't hold you up when the light goes green. It makes things smoother.
Click to expand...

Agree.

When I started getting back into cycling being stuck in traffic at the lights was a nightmare. The pressure is a very real thing. I can totally see the appeal of skipping the lights to get ahead and out of the way of cars and trucks.

And it it aids traffic flow then that's only a benefit to everyone.

I believe France have brought in such a rule...So far ive not heard anything negative about it.
 
Mattyd said:
Agree.

When I started getting back into cycling being stuck in traffic at the lights was a nightmare. The pressure is a very real thing. I can totally see the appeal of skipping the lights to get ahead and out of the way of cars and trucks.

And it it aids traffic flow then that's only a benefit to everyone.

I believe France have brought in such a rule...So far ive not heard anything negative about it.
Click to expand...
Some parts of London have brought in a separate set of lights for cyclists, which go green before the lights for motor vehicles. Quite a good idea on paper; in practise it's quite confusing and there has been at least one death attributed to it.
 
Mattyd said:
That attitude is pretty common place with motorists to be fair - You can find plenty of examples in this very thread.
Click to expand...


....I agree that the less there is road rage between cyclists and motorists (and vica versa), the better. Unfortunately there are some atrociously unfocussed and unaware drivers out there as well as irresponsible cyclists - That's where the aggro starts.
 
ghoti said:
"Road duty" and "fuel duty" go into the consolidated fund. Which means it goes on lots of things, including MP expenses, bailing out bankers who are terrible at their jobs and dropping high explosives on brown people.

Most roads that cyclists use are paid out of local taxation (council tax). So almost all adult cyclists pay for the maintenance of most of the roads they use. As do people who don't drive or cycle or use the roads at all.

And guess what! If you take your car from Glasgow up to Inverness or over to Penicuik or to any authority where you don't pay council tax then you're using roads you haven't paid for! You naughty little man! The locals should run you off the roads with pick-up trucks and pitchforks.

Moreover, most adult cyclists also drive. So they pay VED and fuel duty anyway.
Click to expand...

They aren't paying fuel duty when they cycle, so if I do 12000 miles a year in a car, I pay 12000 miles worth of fuel duty for the efficiency of my car, how I drive it. If I have a car and a bike, and I travel 12000 miles a year in total but do 4k miles in the bike, 8k in the car, I have paid less fuel duty for the same type of car/driving style. Some might even call that tax avoidance ;)
 
ST4 said:
They aren't paying fuel duty when they cycle, so if I do 12000 miles a year in a car, I pay 12000 miles worth of fuel duty for the efficiency of my car, how I drive it. If I have a car and a bike, and I travel 12000 miles a year in total but do 4k miles in the bike, 8k in the car, I have paid less fuel duty for the same type of car/driving style. Some might even call that tax avoidance ;)
Click to expand...
What would cyclists pay fuel duty on for their cycling? Porridge?
 
ghoti said:
What would cyclists pay fuel duty on for their cycling? Porridge?
Click to expand...

My point is your car owner/cyclist argument is flawed as the cyclist is not paying any tax on their journeys when they cycle. Perhaps when GPS based road pricing comes in, cyclists bikes will be chipped so they pay into the system. Afterall, they are using the roads like everyone else?
 
ST4 said:
Some might even call that tax avoidance ;)
Click to expand...

Walking....some might even call that tax avoidance.

If it makes you feel better Ill no doubt spend my saved cash (from not buying fuel) on other items which are taxable.
 
ST4 said:
My point is your car owner/cyclist argument is flawed as the cyclist is not paying any tax on their journeys when they cycle. Perhaps when GPS based road pricing comes in, cyclists bikes will be chipped so they pay into the system. Afterall, they are using the roads like everyone else?
Click to expand...
Nobody is taxed on "journeys", per se. And, in any case, the bit about car owners/cyclists was peripheral. It was stuck on the end of the main point, which you have dutifully ignored. The principal point is that, by and large, council tax pays for roads (the roads mostly used by cyclists, anyway). We all pay for local roads through local taxation. Your precious VED and fuel duty go into the consolidated fund.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top