Bus runs over School boy

[FusionRail]

After the impending civil war in this country, cyclists will be made to under take competence testing similar to that of a motorist and will also be expect to pay Vehicle Excise Duty.

I dont think thats true some how!

 

[Coxster]

OK, can I say 0.0001% of car drivers stay within the speed limit 100% of the time?

No; 0.001 (just two zeros after the decimal - not three)

As for the truth in whether or not 0.001% of drivers keep within the speed limit 100% of the time, it depends if you are including learner drivers or not. Obviously I didn't have the option to include/exclude leaner cyclists as there isn't officially such a thing.

Out of interest, have you completed a cycling proficiency test? Before you say "What's that got to do with anything", it doesn't - I'm just interested.

But you don't need to worry Yorkie, as people like you will be rounded up and shot

If he's not crushed by an overtaking bus first...

 

[yorkie]

No; 0.001 (just two zeros after the decimal - not three)

As for the truth in whether or not 0.001% of drivers keep within the speed limit 100% of the time, it depends if you are including learner drivers or not. Obviously I didn't have the option to include/exclude leaner cyclists as there isn't officially such a thing.

Surely 99% of learner drivers never exceed 50% of the speed limit

Out of interest, have you completed a cycling proficiency test? Before you say "What's that got to do with anything", it doesn't - I'm just interested.

Yep I have, and it has nothing to do with anything Seriously though - I would recommend people consider doing the scheme. Although I can't remember if advice regarding not using dodgy cycle paths was covered or not (I was 11 at the time).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If he's not crushed by an overtaking bus first...

Had a couple of lucky escapes, the usual problem is when a bendy bus tries to overtake just before a bus stop and then pulls in. Two ways to avoid being crushed are: brake immediately (I have good brakes thankfully, and I can't believe idiots who cycle without brakes - that's suicidal) or heading for the kerb (not good if barriers are there!!), the former has always worked for me.

 

[Coxster]

Although I can't remember if advice regarding not using dodgy cycle paths was covered or not (I was 11 at the time).

I was in the second year of juniors when I did mine, and it was the first time our school had been involved in anything like it. It was done on Sundays over the course of five weeks or so. We never even got onto the road until the last week, and even then it was just a cul-de-sac that saw like one car every 20 minutes. Overall I felt thar it was a somewhat pointless exercise as it didn't really give you any on-road experience - just riding around on the playground between cones that were meant to represent the kerb. I don't even know what I did with my certificate and badge...

Surely 99% of learner drivers never exceed 50% of the speed limit

In your test you get marked down for going too slow.

 

[TheSlash]

I have good brakes thankfully, and I can't believe idiots who cycle without brakes - that's suicidal.

All part of the thrill and skill 8)

 

[FusionRail]

My disc brakes just don't work well as they had to handle all the extra weight of the 250cc 4 stroke on the back... :grin:

 

[David]

He is 1 extremely lucky person to survive.

I didn't think so. I see the words idiot and prat, but not in relation to the driver.

Edit

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1655256.ece

%$@&! Flea brain hasn't even learnt the lessson.

At least the mum is being honest about things and not trying to blame everything but her son .....

Mum Angela said drivers dread driving past the school at lunchtimes — because they know what the children do.


She added: “It’s always been an accident waiting to happen — but the children only have themselves to blame. The railings are there to protect them but they ignore that.”

Anyway .......

Road tax doesn't actually exist.

Okay, 'vehicle tax' then...

Let me get this straight .... Yorkie is saying there is no tax you have to pay to use the roads. Hmm .....

Vehicle Excise Duty (fancy word for tax) is what you have to pay for the right to drive on the road, so it is really a fancy way of saying road tax.

Not only do motorists have to pay road tax, put in order to drive, they need to buy petrol (or diesel). Fuel Duty (tax) and VAT (tax) is included in the price of the fuel and makes up about 75% of the price.

Last but not least, motorists need to buy insurance, and guess what? You have to pay tax on that (0.5% of the cost of the policy).

The point I'm making is that motorists (myself included) are fed up of hearing non motorists saying "the bus driver was in the wrong", that car driver should have done this"*, etc when quite frankly, as a cyclist, they have not payed to use the road, but are the first to complain and try to apportion blame about anything to do with with roads and accidents.

I don't see anything that the driver of the bus could have done to prevent that happening.

 

[FusionRail]

Pulled a sicky?

 

[yorkie]

Let me get this straight .... Yorkie is saying there is no tax you have to pay to use the roads. Hmm .....

Vehicle Excise Duty (fancy word for tax) is what you have to pay for the right to drive on the road, so it is really a fancy way of saying road tax.

No, you do not have to pay it. You could choose to use a vehicle that is exempt from payment.

Not only do motorists have to pay road tax,

No they don't, some choose to, in their choice of vehicle.

put in order to drive, they need to buy petrol (or diesel). Fuel Duty (tax) and VAT (tax) is included in the price of the fuel and makes up about 75% of the price.

But that's not a tax to use the roads.

Last but not least, motorists need to buy insurance, and guess what? You have to pay tax on that (0.5% of the cost of the policy).

Ditto.

The point I'm making is that motorists (myself included) are fed up of hearing non motorists saying "the bus driver was in the wrong", that car driver should have done this"*, etc when quite frankly, as a cyclist, they have not payed to use the road, but are the first to complain and try to apportion blame about anything to do with with roads and accidents.

Is this a generic rant or does it actually have a purpose? I've not said any of the comments quoted. Yes, I have paid to use the road in general taxation. And your last comment appears to suggest that owners of vintage vehicles, electric vehicles, etc have less right to free speech than people with gas-guzzlers who pay more VED. This, of course, makes no sense at all, and the more gas-guzzling they are, the less right they have to be consuming the planet's resources at such a high rate, IMO!:roll:

I don't see anything that the driver of the bus could have done to prevent that happening.

If there had been a solid line for the cycle lane, he would have been committing an offence by encroaching into it. Perhaps, if there had been a solid line (making it 'mandatory') he might not have been encroaching into it, then it is possible the teen would not have gone into the bus. That doesn't mean the bus driver was "to blame" for the incident; clearly that is not the case. Equally, if there had been a cyclist in the cycle lane they could have been killed. That would not make them "to blame". It is just an observation.

 

[Coxster]

Ditto.

Ditto?! Since when have cyclists had to pay insurance?

 

[yorkie]

Ditto?! Since when have cyclists had to pay insurance?

No, the ditto* referred to "But that's not a tax to use the roads."

* ditto = "repeat the above information here"

 

[Coxster]

No, the ditto* referred to "But that's not a tax to use the roads."

* ditto = "repeat the above information here"

I apologise. I mistakenly took that to me "I have to to".

 

[yorkie]

I apologise. I mistakenly took that to me "I have to to".

No worries. 'Ditto' is sometimes used in that sense (I may have done so myself at some point), although it's not correct to do so ('Likewise' or 'Same here' would be a good substitute)

 

[Mintona]

No, you do not have to pay it. You could choose to use a vehicle that is exempt from payment.

Vehicles like that aren't common enough. They are not in production enough yet. But when they are, the Government will tax them because then they will be getting no tax from the people who have switched.

No they don't, some choose to, in their choice of vehicle.

It's not a choice of vehicle. I don't have a choice what I drive. I pay £2000 insurance a year to drive a 1.1 litre Peugeot 106. No way I could afford any more than that. I also pay in excess of £35 for a full tank of fuel, £120 per year for road tax, and god knows what for MOTs and Services.

But that's not a tax to use the roads.

Agreed. But you still need petrol or diesel to go anywhere (except in a G Wizz thing, but then you need to charge it for hours, and the battery doesn't last long enough for a long journey)

Is this a generic rant or does it actually have a purpose? I've not said any of the comments quoted. Yes, I have paid to use the road in general taxation. And your last comment appears to suggest that owners of vintage vehicles, electric vehicles, etc have less right to free speech than people with gas-guzzlers who pay more VED. This, of course, makes no sense at all, and the more gas-guzzling they are, the less right they have to be consuming the planet's resources at such a high rate, IMO!:roll:

You don't have any less right to use the road than we do. But we also pay general taxation, on top of the extras for sinning by "owning a car".

If there had been a solid line for the cycle lane, he would have been committing an offence by encroaching into it. Perhaps, if there had been a solid line (making it 'mandatory') he might not have been encroaching into it, then it is possible the teen would not have gone into the bus. That doesn't mean the bus driver was "to blame" for the incident; clearly that is not the case. Equally, if there had been a cyclist in the cycle lane they could have been killed. That would not make them "to blame". It is just an observation.

I don't really have a response to that, I agree with you.

 

[David]

Yorkie .... VED, fuel duty (and VAT), and IPT are all indirect taxes to use the road (and the government makes a surplus from them), so they are basically road taxes. Every vehicle has payed to be on the roads through a combination of at least 2 of these taxes. What does a cyclist pay?

Next point .... Yes there is a cycle lane (even though it isn't mandatory), but the bus was only a foot or 2 from the other lane. What do you want drivers to do? Hog the middle of the road every time they seen a pedestrian? That would lead to even more congestion on the roads ....

The bottom line is that we would not be having this argument (and you trying to pin the blame on the bus driver) if the stupid prat had not tried to jump over the railing anyway.

What's your next suggestion? 10 foot high railings seperating the path from the road with only the odd gap for pedestrians to cross?

 

[TheSlash]

What's your next suggestion? 10 foot high railings seperating the path from the road with only the odd gap for pedestrians to cross?

Like this?