Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

Unless you’re a cyclist of course, especially one who uses shared paths, because then you can take great delight in waxing lyrical about your great speed and the fact that speed limits don’t apply to you. I’m sure beesonthewhatnow’s average cycling speed is as large as his manhood.
No shared paths, just roads. It’s a) quicker and b) pisses off drivers like you :thumbs:
 
You love to see it!

 
I've got maomao down as more of a spree killer than a serial type. The kind who takes a gun to the office and blows away all his colleagues; then his neighbour gets interviewed on the news and says "he didn't seem the type".
If it's the neighbour I'm off down the pub with in a minute it'll be 'yeah, he definitely wanted to kill a lot of people'
 
If anyone feels they are the correct judge of proper speed on a given road and that they should be making those decisions on a road by road basis then I genuinely feel they shouldn't be allowed a driving license. It's not up to you.
That is the very basic foundation of driving, ffs. Of course everyone should judge the appropriate speed based on the local road geography and characteristics, among other things. How could it be anything but? I gather you don’t drive at all, or are not good at it?

This is in fact further proof if any was needed of the dangerous fallacy of believing blindly in the limits set by the authorities. Single lane A roads have a blanket 50 mph in most places, but anyone who can drive and have done so on countless twisting A roads in the likes of Cornwall and plenty other places will tell you that a 50 mph is far too high for certain stretches, bends, cambers and other spots along those roads, and 40 mph limit should be in place. So yes, it is vital that drivers read the road ahead adjust their speed, rather than assuming if the government hasn’t told them to reduce their top speed to below 40 mph, then surely a very sensible 44 on a 50 mph road couldn’t possibly be too fast.
 
That is the very basic foundation of driving, ffs. Of course everyone should judge the appropriate speed based on the local road geography and characteristics, among other things. How could it be anything but? I gather you don’t drive at all, or are not good at it?

I don't drive, don't want to drive and don't want to be good at it (though if I did I'd be fucking great at it).

This is in fact further proof if any was needed of the dangerous fallacy of believing blindly in the limits set by the authorities. Single lane A roads have a blanket 50 mph in most places, but anyone who can drive and have done so on countless twisting A roads in the likes of Cornwall and plenty other places will tell you that a 50 mph is far too high for certain stretches, bends, cambers and other spots along those roads, and 40 mph limit should be in place. So yes, it is vital that drivers read the road ahead adjust their speed, rather than assuming if the government hasn’t told them to reduce their top speed to below 40 mph, then surely a very sensible 44 on a 50 mph road couldn’t possibly be too fast.
For the hard of thinking: I don't think anyone has argued that drivers should drive at the speed limit at all times and the Highway Code clearly says you should be aware of stopping distances in rain or where where visibility is reduced etc. which implicitly means reducing speed. However, the maximum should be treated as the maximum in all circumstances as I don't believe there is a situation in which it is safer to drive above the speed limit and I don't trust any individual driver to make that decision.
 
I don't drive, don't want to drive and don't want to be good at it (though if I did I'd be fucking great at it).


For the hard of thinking: I don't think anyone has argued that drivers should drive at the speed limit at all times and the Highway Code clearly says you should be aware of stopping distances in rain or where where visibility is reduced etc. which implicitly means reducing speed. However, the maximum should be treated as the maximum in all circumstances as I don't believe there is a situation in which it is safer to drive above the speed limit and I don't trust any individual driver to make that decision.

You have a wonderful trust in the authorities to set the maximum safe speeds correctly, for every single road in the country. I assume your trust in the powers that be extends to all our other laws and regulations, which you no doubt adhere to vigorously at all times.
 
You have a wonderful trust in the authorities to set the maximum safe speeds correctly, for every single road in the country.
I have very little trust in them to do any such thing, I just think having an upper limit of some sort is infinitely preferable to leaving it up to individual drivers given that it could never be made more dangerous by being too low.
 
And presumably the Walt is a reference to Walt Whitman whose writing mine reminds you of. Just as your gregarious nature, love of alcohol, poor housekeeping skills and threatening darker side remind me of Dennis Nilsen, hence your new nickname.
Oh, I had totally the wrong idea. I thought Dennis and Walt were these two
397x400.jpg
 
I see you, and raise you to


False premise as no-one has claimed cyclists never jump lights. Just that it's a fairly insignificant problem in comparison to the harm caused by car drivers. Also, in three months of footage he finds eighteen cyclists jumping red lights? Cab drivers have to do twenty plus hours a week just to cover their costs; even if he worked the minimum possible over the time period, that's less than one every twelve hours.
 
It is as ture as anti-car Talibans stomping their feet at drivers breaking the speed limit in all circumstances also being whiny fucks.

Exceeding the speed limit and travelling too fast for the conditions were assigned by police officers as contributing to 27% of fatal collisions in 2020, as well as 16% of collisions in which a serious injury occurred and 13% of total collisions.

In Great Britain in 2020, 202 people were killed in collisions involving someone exceeding the speed limit, with a further 1,368 people seriously injured and 2,803 slightly injured. A further 115 people died when someone was travelling too fast for the conditions.

How many people were hurt by cyclists going through red lights?
 
Wow, fewer people killed by speeding drivers than by trains travelling too fast for the conditions, I didn’t expect that.
The vast majority of deaths on train tracks are suicides. Additional safety features or restrictions would mostly be moving the problem elsewhere and money would probably be better spent on mental health services.
 


How many people were hurt by cyclists going through red lights?
The operating phrase of my earlier post being 'in all circumstances'. Whether some pople might foam at the mouth at the thought, it remains a fact that there is such thing as safe speeding, just as there is such thing as safe red light jumping by cyclists. It's not too much to ask that we all accept this and refrain from absolutist standpoints.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom