- Joined
- Sep 17, 2008
- Messages
- 2,869
- Points
- 113
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Another cyclist causing nuisance on Sinkie roads!
- Thread starter Wayne Piew
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 28,077
- Points
- 113
Goes to prove once again that cyclists = cancer
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 76,216
- Points
- 113
The bike no brake. New light weight design.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2013
- Messages
- 6,980
- Points
- 113
That is not a cyclist
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2016
- Messages
- 35,356
- Points
- 113
Fuck his mother's phua cheebye
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 103,099
- Points
- 113
The drama never ends with all these pests crawling around on the roads.
Now the drama has shifted to the pavements, and with those Grabfood and Foodpanda delivery folks cruising on their bicycles and electric scooters.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2010
- Messages
- 2,086
- Points
- 83
IIRC, this is considered inconsiderate driving (9 demerit points, $180 fine before 1st April 2019 (double there after)) by traffic police, cut into people's lane and force them to give way to you.
Cyclist had to jam on his brakes to give way to the car or at least significantly slowed down his speed (as evidenced by the fact that he could very easily hit the car).
It is arguable if cam car endangered the life of the cyclist because cyclist had sufficient time to brake to avoid hitting the car. Any shorter an over taking distance and the charge would probably be dangerous driving, this one cam car driver would be charged in court with possible disqualification from driving.
Cam car should have followed behind the cyclist unless he is confident that he can overtake with so much space to spare that the cyclist need not apply brakes in order for cam car to enter slip road.
Cam car must appreciate that he is not the only road user and that he should not use his big car to force the cyclist to give way/ obstruct the cyclist path.
WRT dent to car by cyclist, probably that is civil claim by car driver against cyclist. Lawyers will have a field day since defense lawyers for cyclist will probably counter claim for psychological trauma, being bullied by car driver etc. Lots of claims and counter claims in court.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 76,216
- Points
- 113
Cyclist should ride defensively, just like motor cyclist. Be aware of bigger motorcars. In this case, car turned left, but too slowly. Cyclist should by intuition, just sliw down a bit. Its all part of everyday lifeon the road food delivery guy must face. Reducing mishaps equated to more income.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2013
- Messages
- 6,980
- Points
- 113
That’s me, not this moron. This one training to be karangguni. The thrash piece of metal he’s sitting on does not even qualify to be called a bike. Anyone who rides with a cap is a moron at best.He's training for Tour de France, you are a bad person for obstructing him.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...-start-behaving-like-decent-human-beings.html
Once, it might have been possible to say loud and proud that you like eating meat - not any more.
Anyone that foolhardy must be prepared to be roasted online by militant vegans, bombarded with pictures of miserable dairy cows, and threatened with physical violence.
Meat eaters have become pariahs, and will soon be forced to meet in secret to enjoy rare steaks and chat about making a decent black pudding. Admitting you like bacon and love a juicy sausage is tantamount to admitting you enjoy porn.
In modern society, a ludicrous puritanism has taken over - we have to be constantly vigilant not to offend someone somewhere, from Muslim women wearing veils (the New Zealand Prime Minister can take hers off now, we have got the point) to people who are on a journey from one sexual place in the spectrum to another.
+2
The subject of Gender fluidity is a minefield, best avoided in public, because there’s a 100% chance of offending someone somewhere. I have no idea what ‘+’ stands for, who constitutes a ‘he’ and who is a ‘the’ or a ‘she’, so I am steering well clear. As an opinionated woman, I’m starting to self-censor. I certainly couldn’t run a class for primary kids telling them about relationships and gender, now officially part of the school curriculum.
Discussing race is another no go area - Amber Rudd (trying so very hard to say something positive and on-message on International Women’s Day) was roasted for using the term ‘coloured’ instead of ‘black’, much to the annoyance of Labour’s Diane Abbott.
RELATED ARTICLES
Dictionaries are finding it hard to keep up with this constant revising and sanitising of modern language. At the end of the day, if someone calls me ‘girl’ or ‘lady’, how upset am I going to be? Surely we should all learn to be more relaxed about terminology, because at the current rate, we’ll have nothing left to talk about except the weather. BY the way, are the new names for storms gender neutral? I thought not.
The most sensitive and easily offended of all special interest groups are cyclists. You’d think they’d be thick-skinned, tough individuals, used to the rigours of weaving through heavy traffic in appalling weather, pumping their way up hills at the weekends in their embarrassingly clingy lycra.
Cyclists don’t have to prove their cycles are roadworthy, get them insured or even pass any kind of driving test. Any fool can get on a bike, writes Janet Street-Porter
Criticise cyclists at your peril - they are far more abusive than vegans any day. Dare to suggest they are pampered road users, with special ‘lanes’ being built at vast expense, causing massive traffic jams for all other road users, and you might as well stay off all social media and emails for weeks. You will be deluged with nastiness. Cyclists are more aggressive than militant Scottish Nationalists and Brexiteers - quite an achievement.
In their eyes, cycling is next to godliness, and the rest of us (just like meat eaters and dreary heterosexuals) haven’t got the message, we are inferior human beings.
Cycling has become (like veganism) a modern religion. Devotees wear cameras to record anything that gets in their way, convinced the world wants to harm them. They regard other road users are unhealthy scum and serial polluters.
Not only have cyclists got a powerful lobby campaigning for more road space, more cycle routes through the countryside, and more traffic free areas in towns, they also use pavements whenever it suits them and routinely ignore traffic lights.
If any motorised road user is caught exceeding the pitiful 20 miles an hour speed limits in most parts of London, they will be fined hundreds of pounds and marched off to be re-educated at special classes which take up a big chunk of the working day.
No such punishments exist for cyclists who speed, and who refuse to wear helmets. Cyclists don’t have to prove their cycles are roadworthy, get them insured or even pass any kind of driving test. Any fool can get on a bike.
Since the success of the Tour de France in Yorkshire in 2015, the roads throughout the county are clogged every weekend with middle aged men in lycra (MAMILS) attempting to emulate the yellow jersey brigade.
Luckily, my local village managed to raise the money for a defibrillator, because the hill above it is bound to result in heart attacks and we are at least an hour from a hospital.
Now, in the latest example of language sanitising, experts want the word cyclist banned because they say it ‘dehumanises’ the poor darlings.
+2
Researchers at Queensland University in Australia claim that non-cyclists rate cyclists as ‘not completely human’. The Professor in charge of the study wants us to call cyclists ‘people on bikes’ and learn how to grow ‘a culture of mutual respect’. Drivers stand accused of deliberately blocking these paragons on two wheels and cutting them off, of throwing things at them and shouting. I haven’t done any of these things (yet), but I’ve come very close.
I am that old-fashioned person, a walker. A pedestrian. Not a jogger or a skate-boarder or an electric scooter user. I quietly walk part of my journey to work every day along a canal towpath. It is my attempt at mindfulness, gazing at the moorhens and ducks, admiring the stagnant water and peeking inside the curtains as I pass a line of old barges turned into trendy homes. Cyclists thunder past in packs, their ugly middle aged bare thighs pumping furiously, intruding into my zone of peace and contemplation. They would force me into the water if they could.
The vast majority do not bother with a bell to signal their impending approach - that would wreck their machismo posturing. Urban cyclists refuse to give way to anyone, ignoring signs telling them to slow down. I end up screaming at these warriors on wheels who can’t bear the fact harmless peace loving walkers use the same footpath.
Respect works both ways. As far as I’m concerned, cyclists need to learn manners, and until they do, they are as toxic as vegans.
Once, it might have been possible to say loud and proud that you like eating meat - not any more.
Anyone that foolhardy must be prepared to be roasted online by militant vegans, bombarded with pictures of miserable dairy cows, and threatened with physical violence.
Meat eaters have become pariahs, and will soon be forced to meet in secret to enjoy rare steaks and chat about making a decent black pudding. Admitting you like bacon and love a juicy sausage is tantamount to admitting you enjoy porn.
In modern society, a ludicrous puritanism has taken over - we have to be constantly vigilant not to offend someone somewhere, from Muslim women wearing veils (the New Zealand Prime Minister can take hers off now, we have got the point) to people who are on a journey from one sexual place in the spectrum to another.
+2
The subject of Gender fluidity is a minefield, best avoided in public, because there’s a 100% chance of offending someone somewhere. I have no idea what ‘+’ stands for, who constitutes a ‘he’ and who is a ‘the’ or a ‘she’, so I am steering well clear. As an opinionated woman, I’m starting to self-censor. I certainly couldn’t run a class for primary kids telling them about relationships and gender, now officially part of the school curriculum.
Discussing race is another no go area - Amber Rudd (trying so very hard to say something positive and on-message on International Women’s Day) was roasted for using the term ‘coloured’ instead of ‘black’, much to the annoyance of Labour’s Diane Abbott.
RELATED ARTICLES
JANET STREET-PORTER: Don’t worry about starving after a...
Janet Street-Porter claims Kylie Jenner is a SHOCKING role...
JANET STREET-PORTER: I suspect Michael Jackson WAS guilty...
Dictionaries are finding it hard to keep up with this constant revising and sanitising of modern language. At the end of the day, if someone calls me ‘girl’ or ‘lady’, how upset am I going to be? Surely we should all learn to be more relaxed about terminology, because at the current rate, we’ll have nothing left to talk about except the weather. BY the way, are the new names for storms gender neutral? I thought not.
The most sensitive and easily offended of all special interest groups are cyclists. You’d think they’d be thick-skinned, tough individuals, used to the rigours of weaving through heavy traffic in appalling weather, pumping their way up hills at the weekends in their embarrassingly clingy lycra.
Cyclists don’t have to prove their cycles are roadworthy, get them insured or even pass any kind of driving test. Any fool can get on a bike, writes Janet Street-Porter
Criticise cyclists at your peril - they are far more abusive than vegans any day. Dare to suggest they are pampered road users, with special ‘lanes’ being built at vast expense, causing massive traffic jams for all other road users, and you might as well stay off all social media and emails for weeks. You will be deluged with nastiness. Cyclists are more aggressive than militant Scottish Nationalists and Brexiteers - quite an achievement.
In their eyes, cycling is next to godliness, and the rest of us (just like meat eaters and dreary heterosexuals) haven’t got the message, we are inferior human beings.
Cycling has become (like veganism) a modern religion. Devotees wear cameras to record anything that gets in their way, convinced the world wants to harm them. They regard other road users are unhealthy scum and serial polluters.
Not only have cyclists got a powerful lobby campaigning for more road space, more cycle routes through the countryside, and more traffic free areas in towns, they also use pavements whenever it suits them and routinely ignore traffic lights.
If any motorised road user is caught exceeding the pitiful 20 miles an hour speed limits in most parts of London, they will be fined hundreds of pounds and marched off to be re-educated at special classes which take up a big chunk of the working day.
No such punishments exist for cyclists who speed, and who refuse to wear helmets. Cyclists don’t have to prove their cycles are roadworthy, get them insured or even pass any kind of driving test. Any fool can get on a bike.
Since the success of the Tour de France in Yorkshire in 2015, the roads throughout the county are clogged every weekend with middle aged men in lycra (MAMILS) attempting to emulate the yellow jersey brigade.
Luckily, my local village managed to raise the money for a defibrillator, because the hill above it is bound to result in heart attacks and we are at least an hour from a hospital.
Now, in the latest example of language sanitising, experts want the word cyclist banned because they say it ‘dehumanises’ the poor darlings.
+2
Researchers at Queensland University in Australia claim that non-cyclists rate cyclists as ‘not completely human’. The Professor in charge of the study wants us to call cyclists ‘people on bikes’ and learn how to grow ‘a culture of mutual respect’. Drivers stand accused of deliberately blocking these paragons on two wheels and cutting them off, of throwing things at them and shouting. I haven’t done any of these things (yet), but I’ve come very close.
I am that old-fashioned person, a walker. A pedestrian. Not a jogger or a skate-boarder or an electric scooter user. I quietly walk part of my journey to work every day along a canal towpath. It is my attempt at mindfulness, gazing at the moorhens and ducks, admiring the stagnant water and peeking inside the curtains as I pass a line of old barges turned into trendy homes. Cyclists thunder past in packs, their ugly middle aged bare thighs pumping furiously, intruding into my zone of peace and contemplation. They would force me into the water if they could.
The vast majority do not bother with a bell to signal their impending approach - that would wreck their machismo posturing. Urban cyclists refuse to give way to anyone, ignoring signs telling them to slow down. I end up screaming at these warriors on wheels who can’t bear the fact harmless peace loving walkers use the same footpath.
Respect works both ways. As far as I’m concerned, cyclists need to learn manners, and until they do, they are as toxic as vegans.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 76,216
- Points
- 113
It works both ways. Cyclist can also slow down when car is turning.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2019
- Messages
- 168
- Points
- 28
Why did car suddenly stop to obstruct cyclist? Video showed there's no obstruction in front of car when it turned left to enter fuel station.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2015
- Messages
- 5,970
- Points
- 113
Car should have slowed down and goes behind cyclist if he wants to turn left into the kiosk. Anyway, he has to slow down to make the turn...
Similar threads
