Holy shatz! Cop stops bicycle! - Page 13

06-12-2004, 02:36 PM

"Paul" <UPS_SUCKS!@slower_traffic_get_to_the_right.com> wrote:

>"Daniel T." <postmaster@eathlink.net> wrote in message
>news

ostmaster-C0C7A5.11023712062004@news6.west.earthlink.net...
>> In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406120010490.8911@alumni.engin.umi ch.edu>,
>
>> I'm new to this car vs bicycle debate, yet is sounds very familliar to
>> the debate over in rec.boats; there it's motor-boat vs sailboat.
>> Different vehicles, but the same facts. How much property damage can a
>> bicycle do compaired to a car? Can DUI bicyclests ram through the wall
>> of the local McDonald's killing and injuring happy meal eaters?
>
>A DUI bicyclist could pull many types of idiotic maneuvers that could cause a
>car
>operator to lose control of his vehicle and plow into a McDonalds.

And a DUI driver could pull many types of idiotic maneuvers that could
cause a bicyclest to lose control and plow into a McDonalds... Oops
actually that's not the case is it, the bicyclest *can't* plow into a
McDonalds.

Your ignoring the central fact; a bicyclist simply *cannot* do the kind
of damage that an auto driver can do. Because of this central fact,
there really isn't as much need to ensure that bicyclests are skilled
compared to auto drivers.

06-12-2004, 05:20 PM

Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is,
> bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as cars,

That's fiction, not fact.

> otherwise
> they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Which has nothing to do with it. Just because a law isn't enforced
doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist. Cyclists are supposed to
follow the rules of the road just like a driver does.

06-12-2004, 05:20 PM

Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is,
> bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as cars,

That's fiction, not fact.

> otherwise
> they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Which has nothing to do with it. Just because a law isn't enforced
doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist. Cyclists are supposed to
follow the rules of the road just like a driver does.

06-12-2004, 05:20 PM

Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is,
> bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as cars,

That's fiction, not fact.

> otherwise
> they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Which has nothing to do with it. Just because a law isn't enforced
doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist. Cyclists are supposed to
follow the rules of the road just like a driver does.

06-12-2004, 05:20 PM

Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is,
> bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as cars,

That's fiction, not fact.

> otherwise
> they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Which has nothing to do with it. Just because a law isn't enforced
doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist. Cyclists are supposed to
follow the rules of the road just like a driver does.

06-12-2004, 05:20 PM

Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is,
> bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as cars,

That's fiction, not fact.

> otherwise
> they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Which has nothing to do with it. Just because a law isn't enforced
doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist. Cyclists are supposed to
follow the rules of the road just like a driver does.

06-12-2004, 05:29 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is, bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as
> cars

Sorry, that's just plain incorrect. Check your local laws.

> otherwise they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Well, then, I guess marijuana must be legal, then, because I smelled/saw
someone smoking it at a party a few weeks ago, and he didn't get picked up
by the cops. I guess speeding must be legal, too, 'cause most people
disregard the speed limit on the freeways around here. Lack of enforcement
does NOT imply legality. To think otherwise is stunningly simpleminded.

-Stern

06-12-2004, 05:29 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is, bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as
> cars

Sorry, that's just plain incorrect. Check your local laws.

> otherwise they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Well, then, I guess marijuana must be legal, then, because I smelled/saw
someone smoking it at a party a few weeks ago, and he didn't get picked up
by the cops. I guess speeding must be legal, too, 'cause most people
disregard the speed limit on the freeways around here. Lack of enforcement
does NOT imply legality. To think otherwise is stunningly simpleminded.

-Stern

06-12-2004, 05:29 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is, bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as
> cars

Sorry, that's just plain incorrect. Check your local laws.

> otherwise they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Well, then, I guess marijuana must be legal, then, because I smelled/saw
someone smoking it at a party a few weeks ago, and he didn't get picked up
by the cops. I guess speeding must be legal, too, 'cause most people
disregard the speed limit on the freeways around here. Lack of enforcement
does NOT imply legality. To think otherwise is stunningly simpleminded.

-Stern

06-12-2004, 05:29 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Daniel T. wrote:

> The fact is, bicyclists don't have to obey the same traffic laws as
> cars

Sorry, that's just plain incorrect. Check your local laws.

> otherwise they would be getting pulled over and fined.

Well, then, I guess marijuana must be legal, then, because I smelled/saw
someone smoking it at a party a few weeks ago, and he didn't get picked up
by the cops. I guess speeding must be legal, too, 'cause most people
disregard the speed limit on the freeways around here. Lack of enforcement
does NOT imply legality. To think otherwise is stunningly simpleminded.

-Stern