Holy shatz! Cop stops bicycle! - Page 44 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

06-14-2004, 02:07 PM

> Must be different where you live. As a 100% legally riding bicyclist
> I can say that the majority of drivers treat geese better than bicyclists.

Geese can't be expected to know what they're doing.

06-14-2004, 02:12 PM

In article <kbozc.23849$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Resound <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> I wouldn't go along with the registration and licensing of riders part.

Same here. But every once in awhile some officious driver such as
the original poster gets it into their head that it's a good idea.
Then they start trying to promote that idea. I'm compelled to do
all I can to keep them from getting very far with it.

> It would put a lot of people off cycling, which is the last thing
> needed. As someone else pointed out, offences committed by cyclists can
> be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other offence committed by
> someone who isn't carrying ID. I suppose that I'm neither specifically
> for nor against the parent post, but I do hold some opinions that I felt
> were relevant.

And I respect your opinions, and I think we're more or less
of the same mind. Scary, eh? :-)

cheers again,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-14-2004, 02:12 PM

In article <kbozc.23849$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Resound <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> I wouldn't go along with the registration and licensing of riders part.

Same here. But every once in awhile some officious driver such as
the original poster gets it into their head that it's a good idea.
Then they start trying to promote that idea. I'm compelled to do
all I can to keep them from getting very far with it.

> It would put a lot of people off cycling, which is the last thing
> needed. As someone else pointed out, offences committed by cyclists can
> be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other offence committed by
> someone who isn't carrying ID. I suppose that I'm neither specifically
> for nor against the parent post, but I do hold some opinions that I felt
> were relevant.

And I respect your opinions, and I think we're more or less
of the same mind. Scary, eh? :-)

cheers again,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-14-2004, 02:12 PM

In article <kbozc.23849$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Resound <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> I wouldn't go along with the registration and licensing of riders part.

Same here. But every once in awhile some officious driver such as
the original poster gets it into their head that it's a good idea.
Then they start trying to promote that idea. I'm compelled to do
all I can to keep them from getting very far with it.

> It would put a lot of people off cycling, which is the last thing
> needed. As someone else pointed out, offences committed by cyclists can
> be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other offence committed by
> someone who isn't carrying ID. I suppose that I'm neither specifically
> for nor against the parent post, but I do hold some opinions that I felt
> were relevant.

And I respect your opinions, and I think we're more or less
of the same mind. Scary, eh? :-)

cheers again,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-14-2004, 02:12 PM

In article <kbozc.23849$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Resound <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> I wouldn't go along with the registration and licensing of riders part.

Same here. But every once in awhile some officious driver such as
the original poster gets it into their head that it's a good idea.
Then they start trying to promote that idea. I'm compelled to do
all I can to keep them from getting very far with it.

> It would put a lot of people off cycling, which is the last thing
> needed. As someone else pointed out, offences committed by cyclists can
> be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other offence committed by
> someone who isn't carrying ID. I suppose that I'm neither specifically
> for nor against the parent post, but I do hold some opinions that I felt
> were relevant.

And I respect your opinions, and I think we're more or less
of the same mind. Scary, eh? :-)

cheers again,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-14-2004, 02:12 PM

In article <kbozc.23849$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Resound <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> I wouldn't go along with the registration and licensing of riders part.

Same here. But every once in awhile some officious driver such as
the original poster gets it into their head that it's a good idea.
Then they start trying to promote that idea. I'm compelled to do
all I can to keep them from getting very far with it.

> It would put a lot of people off cycling, which is the last thing
> needed. As someone else pointed out, offences committed by cyclists can
> be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other offence committed by
> someone who isn't carrying ID. I suppose that I'm neither specifically
> for nor against the parent post, but I do hold some opinions that I felt
> were relevant.

And I respect your opinions, and I think we're more or less
of the same mind. Scary, eh? :-)

cheers again,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-14-2004, 02:22 PM

In article <cal46s$i9g$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, John David Galt wrote:
>> Must be different where you live. As a 100% legally riding bicyclist
>> I can say that the majority of drivers treat geese better than bicyclists.
>
> Geese can't be expected to know what they're doing.

I don't stop for geese, they then either abort their road crossing
nonsense or get out of the way before I reach them. Even if not so,
it's no excuse for treating them better than a legal road user.

06-14-2004, 02:22 PM

In article <cal46s$i9g$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, John David Galt wrote:
>> Must be different where you live. As a 100% legally riding bicyclist
>> I can say that the majority of drivers treat geese better than bicyclists.
>
> Geese can't be expected to know what they're doing.

I don't stop for geese, they then either abort their road crossing
nonsense or get out of the way before I reach them. Even if not so,
it's no excuse for treating them better than a legal road user.

06-14-2004, 02:22 PM

In article <cal46s$i9g$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, John David Galt wrote:
>> Must be different where you live. As a 100% legally riding bicyclist
>> I can say that the majority of drivers treat geese better than bicyclists.
>
> Geese can't be expected to know what they're doing.

I don't stop for geese, they then either abort their road crossing
nonsense or get out of the way before I reach them. Even if not so,
it's no excuse for treating them better than a legal road user.

06-14-2004, 02:22 PM

In article <cal46s$i9g$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, John David Galt wrote:
>> Must be different where you live. As a 100% legally riding bicyclist
>> I can say that the majority of drivers treat geese better than bicyclists.
>
> Geese can't be expected to know what they're doing.

I don't stop for geese, they then either abort their road crossing
nonsense or get out of the way before I reach them. Even if not so,
it's no excuse for treating them better than a legal road user.