# Myths and Rebuttals



## magnatom (23 Jul 2008)

This thread will serve as a place to post the myths that are often used in arguments against cyclists with relevant rebuttals. For example, cyclists don't pay road tax, cyclists are supposed to use cycle lanes where they exist etc, etc.Where possible rebuttals should be referenced to confirm the source of the information. 

The aim of this thread is to allow all of this information to be collated and brought together in a document which cyclists could refer to in the future. This document will acknowledge any contributions made by forum members.


So, who's first?


----------



## Cab (23 Jul 2008)

Myth: "You should be in the cycle lane!"

Rebuttal: No, its your choice as to whether or not to use a cycle lane. If it is safer and convenient then do so, otherwise you're not obliged to use the cycle lane or any other facility.

There was a bit of a scare a while back when the highway code was updated, but the current text says:

_"Cycle Routes and Other Facilities. Use cycle routes, advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings unless at the time it is unsafe to do so. Use of these facilities is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer."_

In fact, many cycle lanes are poorly designed, ill maintained, badly thought out and, on occasion, completely un-navigable. It is entirely appropriate to choose not to use such facilities.


----------



## dondare (23 Jul 2008)

A common myth is that cyclists who don't obey the Highway Code are breaking the law. 
Rebuttal: "Now you're just being ignorant."


----------



## HLaB (23 Jul 2008)

Myth: the Legality of flashing lights
Rebuttal: Can't think of anything witty but Flashing Lights are Legal.


----------



## 4F (23 Jul 2008)

Myth: You don't pay road tax
Rebuttal: F off lard arse


----------



## ChrisKH (23 Jul 2008)

For the slightly portly cyclists on being called 'fat' by a passing motorist

"Well of course I'm fat; everytime I shag your wife she gives me a biscuit".

Source: Wisdens book of Cricket sledging. 







What do you mean, not _that sort _of rebuttal?


----------



## GrahamG (23 Jul 2008)

magnatom said:


> This thread will serve as a place to post the myths that are often used in arguments against cyclists with relevant rebuttals. For example, cyclists don't pay road tax, cyclists are supposed to use cycle lanes where they exist etc, etc.



Right, I'm going for the 'same-level' rebuttal that is not confrontational and might appease the average Sun reader:

Cyclists don't pay road tax - "Don't worry mate - I still get fisted by Brown on everything else, believe me"

Cyclists should use cycle lanes - "You know the council can't do a f**king thing right - those lanes included"

Get out the middle of the road - "F**king council don't sweep the roads enough to be riding in the guttter - it's a disgrace I tell you"

Get out the middle of the road - "Could you smell my fart? I was trying to share it with you!"


----------



## Nigeyy (23 Jul 2008)

Oh this is a weak one, but here goes:

Myth: my average speed is 23mph! I can easily keep up 20mph (caveat: this may not be applicable to _everyone_).

Rebuttal: "average" speed really depends on how you measure it (hey, going down a steep hill, my average speed is over 30mph!). Generally speaking, measuring average speed by looking down at your cyclocomputer when you are cycling for 30 seconds on the flat does not qualify, rather your speed calculated for your whole journey -preferably a complete loop back to where you start to offset a strongly downhill course -does.


----------



## spindrift (23 Jul 2008)

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Bloody_cyclists

that is all.


----------



## TwickenhamCyclist (23 Jul 2008)

Myth: “I’m allowed to knock you off if you’re not in a cycle lane”
Rebuttal: Huge dent in vehicle belonging to driver that just tried to put that one into practice. 

Myth: “You don’t pay any road tax so I’m not giving you any respect.”
Rebuttal: See above

Myth: If you purposely cut up a cyclist in London, just call them a w***er and drive off quickly – they’ll never catch you up.
Rebuttal: At next set of lights - See above


----------



## Cab (23 Jul 2008)

Myth: "You don't pay road tax so..."

Rebuttal: It doesn't matter what follows the above statemet. No, we don't pay road tax, but neither does a motorist. 'Road tax' has been 'VED' since 1936, and is completely unlinked to spending on road maintenance and road building. We have every bit as much right to be on the road as motorists, there is no taxation or payment argument.

Or, if you like, point out that we pay the same amount of road tax as any other bottom band vehicle with zero carbon emission; i.e. none.
But of course, if we were to pay zero tax but have to go through the rigmarole of having a free valid tax discs on display and all of the incomprehensibly expensive admin spent on this, estimated to be in the region of £50 per disc, then each and every tax paying motorist would see a rise in how much they would pay.


----------



## Disgruntled Goat (23 Jul 2008)

"'kin Puff!!"

Blow them a kiss.


----------



## Carwash (23 Jul 2008)

Minor correction:



Cab said:


> ...We have every bit as much right to be on the road as motorists...



More, actually: cyclists - along with pedestrians, horse riders, etc - are allowed to use the roads by right. Motorists use them by license.

(Or am I perpetuating another misconception here?)


----------



## Cab (23 Jul 2008)

Carwash said:


> Minor correction:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're right, but I didn't want to start coming over 'holier than thou'. I'm not aiming to tell motorists to get off the road because we've got more right to be there than them, I'm aiming to state why the claim that we've got less right to be there is incorrect.


----------



## Carwash (23 Jul 2008)

> No, you're not, but you're at risk of opening a huge can of worms.



One which I did not meant to open! I had no idea it was such a touchy subject, nor any intention of hijacking this thread with what I considered to be a mere statement of fact. Apologies.


----------



## Maz (23 Jul 2008)

> No, you're not, but you're at risk of opening a huge can of worms.


Rebuttal: Worms don't come in cans.


----------



## Arch (23 Jul 2008)

User said:


> Myth: "Cyclists don't pay VED".
> 
> Rebuttal: "Cycles are subject to VED - however, they are zero rated (unlike you gas-guzzling penis replacement)".



They have petrol powered vibrators these days?

Talking of penises (I never thought I'd say that on this forum!) I suppose there's the old variation on the "why can't women park cars" joke.

"I gave you plenty of room!"
"That's because you claim this <hold fingers an insultingly small distance apart> is six inches..."

There's the riding two abreast one, I was just looking at in Campaign. the Highway code says never ride MORE THAN two abreast, not never ride two abreast...


----------



## Arch (23 Jul 2008)

User said:


> However, if you read on it talks about cycling single file when the road is busy....



Yes, but the point is, it doesn't say you must never ride two abreast, which is what most people seem to think.


----------



## PBancroft (23 Jul 2008)

Myth: Cyclists should not use the road at rush hour as they slow everyone else down.

Rebuttal #1: Cyclists take up less space in congested areas, allowing more room for cars. 

Rebuttal #2: Cyclists do not use the motorways at all (obviously), which still gets congested at these times. How are cyclists to blame for this?

Rebuttal #3: You would introduce a subjective and discriminatory curfew over a subset of society based upon their vehicle of choice, hindering their ability to arrive at work or be at home with their family? Obviously you don't work or have a family otherwise you would be on a bike and not sat in the traffic jam, so may I suggest that your recommendation is taken up, but rather that drivers are not allowed to use the road at your proposed time to allow the free flow of traffic for the benefit of other road users?


----------



## Riding in Circles (23 Jul 2008)

> Comment: "But I ride a bike"
> 
> Rebuttal: any ideas?



Shut up!


----------



## Carwash (23 Jul 2008)

> Comment: "But I ride a bike"
> 
> Rebuttal: any ideas?



How about: "Well if you cycle with the same care and attention as you drive, it's a wonder you're not dead!"


----------



## ufkacbln (23 Jul 2008)

> Comment: "But I ride a bike"
> 
> Rebuttal: any ideas?



I hope for your sake you cycle better than you drive!


----------



## ufkacbln (23 Jul 2008)

Which comes to another one...

Peroxide blonde in 4x4 which overtook and then stopped across the ASL.

"Hi - As this area is exclusively for bikes - You shouldn't be here... As this is a car, you must be a bike?

Watch face change as she realises connotation!


----------



## ufkacbln (23 Jul 2008)

Maz said:


> Rebuttal: Worms don't come in cans.




Rebuttal of rebuttal:

Yes they do - and in a choice of flavours!


----------



## Riding in Circles (24 Jul 2008)

RichK said:


> Myth: "you fat b@stard" (OK, I can pretend it's a myth)
> 
> Rebuttal: Yes I know. That's why I ride a bike. What are you doing about it?



An alternative is;

"I can get slimmer, you will be ugly for the rest of your life"


----------



## BentMikey (24 Jul 2008)

> Who is Chapman?



LOL, you noob!!


----------



## GrahamG (24 Jul 2008)

Cunobelin said:


> Which comes to another one...
> 
> Peroxide blonde in 4x4 which overtook and then stopped across the ASL.
> 
> ...



That's golden.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (24 Jul 2008)

So it seems there are only 4 myths:

1. tax
2. cycle lanes
3. flashing lights
4. cycling two abreast

One rebuttal suits all: "wrong". Increase in volume and repeat until you deem the situation to be resolved.

Not really worthy of a sticky is it?


----------



## biking_fox (24 Jul 2008)

Myth: You should be in the cycle lane
Rebuttal: Like you should only be on the motorway?

Although the downside is that it suggests that cycle lanes are faster than the road when they aren't.


----------



## ChrisKH (24 Jul 2008)

Hopefully I should be able to put some of these rebuttals to good use. A letter to the local rag with the usual anti-cycling rubbish in it is screaming out for a written response.


----------



## Wolf04 (24 Jul 2008)

biking_fox said:


> Myth: You should be in the cycle lane
> Rebuttal: Like you should only be on the motorway?
> 
> Although the downside is that it suggests that cycle lanes are faster than the road when they aren't.



Alternative Rebuttal: You should be on public transport!


----------



## dondare (24 Jul 2008)

biking_fox said:


> Myth: You should be in the cycle lane
> Rebuttal: Like you should only be on the motorway?
> 
> Although the downside is that it suggests that cycle lanes are faster than the road when they aren't.



The correct answer is "_You _should be in the cycle lane, they're intended for people too scared to cycle on the real road."


----------



## hackbike 6 (24 Jul 2008)

Whatever.


----------



## hackbike 6 (24 Jul 2008)

Catrike UK said:


> An alternative is;
> 
> "I can get slimmer, you will be ugly for the rest of your life"



I dont see where being ugly and slimmer are connected.btw im ugly.


----------



## Arch (24 Jul 2008)

hackbike 6 said:


> I dont see where being ugly and slimmer are connected.btw im ugly.



no, I think it's a twist on a remark made by George Bernard Shaw? to a Lady Something or other. When she said "Mr Shaw, you're drunk!" , he replied, "yes, madam, and you are stupid, but I will be sober in the morning..." or something like that...

Ugly and slimmer aren't connected, it's just that if one is fat, one can do something about it, whereas if one is the sort of person who shouts random nonsense at people, one is probably doomed for good...

I'd rather call someone in the situation thick, I think, than ugly, as i'm not sure I've got much to crow about in the looks department, but I do know I'm fairly bright...


----------



## mickle (24 Jul 2008)

Winston Churchill methinks.


----------



## Arch (24 Jul 2008)

mickle said:


> Winston Churchill methinks.



I wondered as I wrote it. Oh, damn, yes. I'm thinking of:

Lady wotsit: "Mr Shaw, we should have children, if they had my looks and your brains they would be brillant..."

GBS: "But madam, imagine if it were the other way about..."

Churchill it was, for the other quote.


----------



## hackbike 6 (24 Jul 2008)

I try not to do it as i dont like it myself i guess.normally its a f.o. Or something,im never personal but i do get where ur coming from.i can see what you mean if it was a fat car driver hurling assaults.


----------



## marinyork (24 Jul 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> So it seems there are only 4 myths:
> 
> 1. tax
> 2. cycle lanes
> ...



There are a lot more than that. Apart from the Helmet one there are plenty of small ones I think.

1. Contraflow cycle lanes or cycle lanes to the left of a no entry sign. Cyclists are allowed to use these.
2. Blue signs with cycle marked in it means some sort of cycle path whether shared use or whatever. There are quite a few peds and dog walkers that think unless the thing is painted in bright red it's not for cycling on. Many quieter shared use paths just have signs up every few hundred yards to sensibly save money.
3. No motor vehicles road sign. This does not apply to cyclists. Red circle with white inside, no vehicles, this does include bicycles. These may apply in town centers but also extreme urban roads and de facto motorways. 
4. Gutter cycling, should probably add something in there in general about how rough the surface is, how detritous will give you punctures etc.
5. Filtering/overtaking to the right. Perfectly legal if sensibly done. Just because drivers get irked about it (usually after having just done it to me or other cars).
6. Bus lane mislabelled tarmac reinforcer messages. A fair few bus lanes exist where they have written in white tarmac Buses Only. These are errors/to save space and quite often mean buses, taxis, bicycles & access but they don't have the space to write them on the tarmac. Signs further up the road confirm you are allowed to cycle in them.
7. Many A roads are bad roads to cycle. This is a myth. In urban sections speeds could be as low as 20 or 30 miles per hour, add to that that many have double or single yellows in operation much of the day and the roads can be physically wider by a very large margin allowing primary or strong secondary to be taken with easy passes by other vehicles.


----------



## dodgy (24 Jul 2008)

Myth: "you should use the cycle lane"

rebuttal: The DFT disagree if you're doing 18mph or more - http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/archive/2004/ltnwc/annexdcodeofconductnoticefor1688

Dave.


----------



## Carwash (24 Jul 2008)

marinyork said:


> There are a lot more than that. Apart from the Helmet one there are plenty of small ones I think....



I would also add 'tarring with the same brush' to that - namely things like this:

"I saw a cyclist the other day riding on the pavement and jumping a red light on the wrong side of the road with no helmet(!!) and no lights chatting on his mobile with no hands on the handlebars going the wrong way down a one-way street without looking or signalling, entering a box-junction without a clear exit while insulting the Queen (gawdbless'er!), impersonating a policeman, eating rustly sweets in the theatre and _plotting to invade Poland..._

...so yer _ALL_ a bunch of lawless dangerous ne'er-do-wells who should banned from the roads! It was definitely representative of all cyclists' behaviour and certainly not a one-off."

</clarkson>

etc.


----------



## tdr1nka (24 Jul 2008)

mickle said:


> Winston Churchill methinks.



Said to Nancy Astor.

The duo also giving us the equally wonderful;

Astor; 'If you were my husband, I'd poison your Tea.'

Churchill; 'If you were my Wife, I'd drink it!'


----------



## hackbike 6 (24 Jul 2008)




----------



## bonj2 (24 Jul 2008)

"You should be in the cycle lane!" 

"So should you."

"But i'm in a car!"

"So, get out of it and get on a bike you lazy git."


----------



## Twenty Inch (25 Jul 2008)

> Comment: "But I ride a bike"
> 
> Rebuttal: any ideas?



So you're a liar as well as an idiot.


----------



## marinyork (25 Jul 2008)

Can we add RLJing as a myth. That it's an extremely rare event outside of London, that most cyclists don't condone it, that it's not comparing like for like and motor vehicle RLJing is far more common and dangerous. Oh and it's exaggerated by people with an excitable disposition for political points perhaps wanting to raise their blood pressure?


----------



## GrahamG (25 Jul 2008)

It's crazy common in Bristol too - easily ignored by more than 50%. Purely anecdotal like, but I see a great deal in and around the centre on a daily basis.


----------



## Arch (25 Jul 2008)

Carwash said:


> "I saw a cyclist the other day riding on the pavement and jumping a red light on the wrong side of the road with no helmet(!!) and no lights chatting on his mobile with no hands on the handlebars going the wrong way down a one-way street without looking or signalling, entering a box-junction without a clear exit while insulting the Queen (gawdbless'er!), impersonating a policeman, eating rustly sweets in the theatre and _plotting to invade Poland..._



Excellent, although I read it as 'rusty sweets' and was a bit confused.


Sadly, I'd say RLJing is fairly common here in York too. Not 50% by any means, but not 'extremely rare'...


----------



## dondare (26 Jul 2008)

> Unfortunately it's becoming increasingly common in Birmingham. At certain junctions I'd estimate that at least 50% of bikes RLJ.


It's becoming more common as more motorists become cyclists.


----------



## HJ (27 Jul 2008)

Myth: "You don't pay tax so..."

Rebuttal: "How would you know, your *not* my accountant..."


----------



## HJ (27 Jul 2008)

> Comment: "But I ride a bike"
> 
> Rebuttal: any ideas?



"That's no way to speak of your wife..."


----------



## HJ (27 Jul 2008)

marinyork said:


> Can we add RLJing as a myth. That it's an extremely rare event outside of London, that most cyclists don't condone it, that it's not comparing like for like and motor vehicle RLJing is far more common and dangerous. Oh and it's exaggerated by people with an excitable disposition for political points perhaps wanting to raise their blood pressure?



I see a fair bit of it in Edinburgh, it is not so rare, but it is stupid...


----------



## sheddy (27 Jul 2008)

Cager - 'insert nonsense'
Rebuttal - 'read the highway code !'


----------



## LLB (27 Jul 2008)

rlj'ing is about 40% in cheltenham but then most bikes around are clunkers, and used as convenient transport as opposed to enthusiasts. 

vehicles at both the dirtiest end of the spectrum (pre 73) as well as the cleanest are ved exempt which demonstrates that the duty is a fund raising exercise aimed at the middle ground than a serious attempt to reduce pollution.


----------



## Arch (28 Jul 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> vehicles at both the dirtiest end of the spectrum (pre 73) as well as the cleanest are ved exempt which demonstrates that the duty is a fund raising exercise aimed at the middle ground than a serious attempt to reduce pollution.



Nooo, isn't it just that the pre-73 thing (which used to be a rolling 25 years old deal instead anyway) was in place ages before anyone started to think about taxing in terms of pollution, and has just stuck? It's not like someone at the Treasury sat down and said "I know, let's exempt the cleanest cars and the dirtiest ones..." in some random moment...


----------



## LLB (28 Jul 2008)

Arch said:


> Nooo, isn't it just that the pre-73 thing (which used to be a rolling 25 years old deal instead anyway) was in place ages before anyone started to think about taxing in terms of pollution, and has just stuck? It's not like someone at the Treasury sat down and said "I know, let's exempt the cleanest cars and the dirtiest ones..." in some random moment...




It was established about 10 years ago as the vintage enthusiasts argued that they are preserving the motoring heritage with their hobby, and to penalise them by charging full screw for VED when the vehicles may only be brought out a handful of times a year is risking them falling into disrepair as the owners will just lay the vehicles up and sorn them.

The same precident is being argued by the owners of large vehicles which do very small mileage but still have to pay full screw regardless.


----------



## Arch (29 Jul 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> It was established about 10 years ago as the vintage enthusiasts argued that they are preserving the motoring heritage with their hobby, and to penalise them by charging full screw for VED when the vehicles may only be brought out a handful of times a year is risking them falling into disrepair as the owners will just lay the vehicles up and sorn them.
> 
> The same precident is being argued by the owners of large vehicles which do very small mileage but still have to pay full screw regardless.



Another reason to just whack a huge tax (huger than now) on fuel, and do away with confusing VED rules, I'd have thought.. Use the car less, pay less..

But we digress....


----------



## User482 (29 Jul 2008)

marinyork said:


> Can we add RLJing as a myth. That it's an extremely rare event outside of London, that most cyclists don't condone it, that it's not comparing like for like and motor vehicle RLJing is far more common and dangerous. Oh and it's exaggerated by people with an excitable disposition for political points perhaps wanting to raise their blood pressure?




Here in Bristol, I'd say about 50% of cyclists RLJ. My usual response to a motorist pointing this out is "you're quite right about RLJing. Most motorists break the speed limit - which do you think is more dangerous?". 

Or if they try and blame me personally: "is it your fault that other motorists drink and drive?".


----------



## Arch (29 Jul 2008)

I stood at a ped crossing (at a cross road junction) yesterday and watched a minicab go through a red light, a good 2-3 seconds after it changed (to red, having been amber for sometime of course), just following the car in front. I gave him a glare and a WTF! kind of shrug, but I doubt he noticed. Really ought to stand there for a while sometime and do a little survey.


----------



## magnatom (29 Jul 2008)

Arch said:


> I stood at a ped crossing (at a cross road junction) yesterday and watched a minicab go through a red light, a good 2-3 seconds after it changed (to red, having been amber for sometime of course), just following the car in front. I gave him a glare and a WTF! kind of shrug, but I doubt he noticed. Really ought to stand there for a while sometime and do a little survey.



Take your camera and post the results!


----------



## Arch (29 Jul 2008)

magnatom said:


> Take your camera and post the results!



yeah, I should! It's one of those things I always mean to do, and never get round to.

When I get more organised, and have a working laptop again (assuming it ever IS working again)....


----------



## marinyork (29 Jul 2008)

I used to get nearly run over just about everytime I walked back from the supermarket in York by RLJers on a particular junction in cars. If you stood the other side of the junction you'd sometimes see upto 6 cars doing it which was why when the ped crossing had gone green for quite a few seconds you'd have cars zooming through in a convoy for several seconds. Some poor blighter on a bike got smacked one day.. The local councillor agreed about that junction but like a 20 zone said that North Yorkshire police couldn't give a monkeys about traffic offences unless it was the once a year Coppergate crackdown or cycling in the fictional pedestrianized zone. I rarely saw cyclists RLJ other than ring road related routes (and not very often then). You'd hear a lot of people moaning in York but I think a lot of it was false advocates or Mike Usherwood's fanclub or people saying I saw someone RLJ in 1973 and they're all like that, evil lot.

In Sheffield there's a small commuting belt in the south west where it's flatter and I sometimes see other cyclists pulling up behind me at lights. Mobile phone used in cars, RLJing by cars, broken lights and speeding (not as bad as North Yorkshire) are the biggest problem on the roads. Cycling RLJing must be somewhere in the top 25 problems on the road but not that high up.


----------



## classic33 (31 Jul 2008)

Maz said:


> Rebuttal: Worms don't come in cans.



Sure on that. Check this!
http://www.presentaid.org/invt/worms


----------



## skoda38 (1 Aug 2008)

*tax*

myth; you dont pay tax

rebuttal; i pay tax and insurance for three cars and there all in the drive.


----------



## hackbike 6 (3 Aug 2008)

Not so sure if this is a good rebuttal but some stupid old cow was reading a bit of paper while she was driving (the sort of behaviour reserved for delivery van drivers)(sorry to stereotype) and I shouted through stupid old cows window when I caught up with her in Leyton on one of my commutes to work during the week *"How stupid can you get"*

I think she got the point.

Silly old cow I couldn't give a monkies if you injure yourself while being so stupid but don't bring me into the equation.


----------



## dondare (3 Aug 2008)

skoda38 said:


> myth; you dont pay tax
> 
> rebuttal; I pay tax and insurance for three cars and there all in the drive.



This is not the best answer as it implies that if you own a car (or three) you're then paying tax and that's what entitles you to cycle on the road; but what about cyclists who don't own a car?
Cyclists like everyone else pay tax on what they earn, what they spend and where they live and it's this that pays for roads, not VED. But even someone who pays no tax at all is still entitled to use the road freely.


----------



## marinyork (3 Aug 2008)

That's true dondare but isn't it a myth itself about cycle use, that in actual fact cyclists as a subgroup have a higher percentage of car ownership than the general population?


----------



## dondare (3 Aug 2008)

Cycling is more popular with the afluent middle classes (who bear the brunt of the tax burden) than it is among the lower earners and unwaged; so cyclists as a subgroup pay more than their share of the road budget. However, this does not affect the right of non-cyclists to use the roads.


----------



## Ludwig (3 Aug 2008)

Rebuttal to everything...Does your social worker know your hear!!!....or You're in breach of your ASBO!!!


----------



## Twiggy (4 Aug 2008)

"You don't pay road tax!"
"you pay road tax??" *point and laugh*

"cycling is dangerous!"
"only around you"


----------



## Riding in Circles (5 Aug 2008)

I get "you shouldn't be on the road on that thing"

My rebuttal is "thankyou (with a cheery wave)".

From time to time i am asked if I am disabled, to which I wave my arms about and go "naaaaargh". I expect a scottish wok wearer will tell me that is offensive in a moment.


----------



## magnatom (5 Aug 2008)

Catrike UK said:


> I get "you shouldn't be on the road on that thing"
> 
> My rebuttal is "thankyou (with a cheery wave)".
> 
> From time to time i am asked if I am disabled, to which I wave my arms about and go "naaaaargh". I expect a scottish wok wearer will tell me that is offensive in a moment.



Not at all, I think you've just reduced the price of the POV.1 to £455


----------



## Arch (6 Aug 2008)

Catrike UK said:


> I get "you shouldn't be on the road on that thing"
> 
> My rebuttal is "thankyou (with a cheery wave)".
> 
> From time to time i am asked if I am disabled, to which I wave my arms about and go "naaaaargh". I expect a scottish wok wearer will tell me that is offensive in a moment.



Better would be to say "Oh, yes, I am", and then stand up, lock the biek and walk away, leaving the mystified person to wonder what your disability is...

Or perhaps to say, "Oh, yes, I am, I'm totally deaf" and see how long it takes thier brains to clunk through "but, he heard my question..."


----------



## dondare (6 Aug 2008)

Catrike UK said:


> I get "you shouldn't be on the road on that thing"
> 
> My rebuttal is "thankyou (with a cheery wave)".
> 
> From time to time i am asked if I am disabled, to which I wave my arms about and go "naaaaargh". I expect a scottish wok wearer will tell me that is offensive in a moment.



Tell them that you're not disabled, you use your legs to make it go. Then ask them why they need an engine in their vehicle, is it because they're disabled? No? Just lazy, then.


----------



## nilling (13 Aug 2008)

Hoping to use this one day...

Driver: "You're holding up the traffic!"
Me: "But I AM traffic!"


----------



## Number14 (21 Aug 2008)

Maz said:


> Rebuttal: Worms don't come in cans.



They come in big cans.


----------



## hackbike 6 (24 Sep 2008)

Not so much as a witty comeback but to the knob who was on his car phone in his big knob end (company) car drifting left into the cycle lane just as I was passing in heavy traffic,(coming off of Southwark Bridge onto that Lower/Upper Thames Street.)

My reaction was to shout "get off of your phone you effing twat".

What gets me is why the surprised reaction?

Didn't you realise your pile of crap was drifting into the cycle lane?

To the cab driver who I called a twat as I passed you this morning going towards Southwark Bridge (on the same stretch as the evening event...Apologies bit of an over-reaction from me even though you pulled straight into the pavement when some twat stuck his hand up in the air.I had that move covered so much that I could take my hand off of one brake to blare the double horn combo just as I passed you.


----------



## Cooperman (24 Sep 2008)

Myth : Roadies do not acknowledge MTBers.....and vv...

Happens to me a lot especially as ride road and MTB - leads to a split personality>


----------



## mikeitup (4 Oct 2008)

*re*



Cooperman said:


> Myth : Roadies do not acknowledge MTBers.....and vv...
> 
> Happens to me a lot especially as ride road and MTB - leads to a split personality>




I make a point of saying hi to every cyclist I see. Even if they do blank me.


----------



## PBancroft (4 Oct 2008)

mikeitup said:


> I make a point of saying hi to every cyclist I see. Even if they do blank me.



Yup. I try to do the same. Sometimes they have a reason to blank me - such as climbing a steep hill for example. And more cyclists will stop and ask if everything is OK if I'm pfaffing about at the side of the road trying to get something out of my pannier than motorists.


----------



## jimboalee (4 Oct 2008)

"Hey, you're supposed to stop at a Pelican crossing!" ( when no-one is waiting ). 
"Who for? The Invisible F*****g man!"


----------



## jimboalee (4 Oct 2008)

Never get out of your car to shout at or confront a cyclist.

He might be a Royal Marine on leave.


----------



## jimboalee (4 Oct 2008)

Its not a Frame-fit pump. Its a length of aluminium tube to defend myself against motorists.


----------



## ufkacbln (5 Oct 2008)

On Friday outside Portsmouth Uni with the Catrike....

"Student" - "Man, are you going to, like ride on that?"

Me - "Yes"

Student - "What, like on the road?"

Me - "Yes"

Student - "Like WOW - You're the coolest dude I have met in Portsmouth"


Well that's a myth I shan't dispel , although i suggest someone else will!


----------



## TheDoctor (5 Oct 2008)

This is Portsmouth we're talking about here though...


----------



## ufkacbln (5 Oct 2008)

TheDoctor said:


> This is Portsmouth we're talking about here though...






I like also have reservations like about the judgement of any student who talks with like the word "like" interspersed in every sentence like.


----------



## TheDoctor (9 Oct 2008)

Innit. Like.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Oct 2008)

Motorist to cyclist- "Why don't you just get a car?"
Cyclist to motorist- "I can't, I'm dyslexic and always fail the test on reading the number plate". "When I try to read your plate, all I read is W4NKR."


----------



## Carwash (23 Oct 2008)

Myth: the purpose of hazard lights on cars is to allow drivers to ignore certain parking restrictions (e.g. double yellow lines) as and when it suits them to do so.


----------



## PBancroft (23 Oct 2008)

Carwash said:


> Myth: the purpose of hazard lights on cars is to allow drivers to ignore certain parking restrictions (e.g. double yellow lines) as and when it suits them to do so.



I've started calling double yellows "phonelines" because that's where most people seem to stop when they get a call.


----------



## BentMikey (23 Oct 2008)

Kaipaith said:


> I've started calling double yellows "phonelines" because that's where most people seem to stop when they get a call.



I'd take the opposite view - I'll praise those who did bother to pull over when taking a call. Sure, you're right technically, but I think it's minor compared with the idiocy of driving whilst still on the phone.


----------



## PBancroft (24 Oct 2008)

BentMikey said:


> I'd take the opposite view - I'll praise those who did bother to pull over when taking a call. Sure, you're right technically, but I think it's minor compared with the idiocy of driving whilst still on the phone.



Absolutely - however usually there is somewhere safer to pull over than exactly where you are the moment the phone rings, which is what a lot of people seem to do, and what ends them up on the phonelines.

I just can't believe that there are that many important conversations going on that either can't wait until the end of a journey, or can't wait a few minutes longer to be called back when somewhere safe.


----------



## BentMikey (24 Oct 2008)

Yup, that's what you or I would do...


----------



## Maizie (24 Oct 2008)

Kaipaith said:


> Absolutely - however usually there is somewhere safer to pull over than exactly where you are the moment the phone rings, which is what a lot of people seem to do, and what ends them up on the phonelines.


Heh heh, reminds me of one time my husband was coming home late, he pulled over in to a closed petrol station (in the village where I used to live) to let me know how far he'd got on the way home, what the traffic was like, how long he was likely to be, etc. He was followed in to the petrol station by a police car, who asked him just what he was doing stopping by a closed shop at this time of night. He said "Well, I've just pulled over so I can safely make a phone call" and the policeman was a bit lost for words, just had to say something like "Oh, well, that's very good of you sir" and went on his way. This was before phoning while driving was illegal, like that makes a difference...


----------



## downfader (7 Nov 2008)

Apart from a letter in the local paper this summer saying "...cyclists refuse to pay road tax.." so we've moved on to "refuse" LOL. I have since heard another myth - does this ring any bells?

Cyclist riding down a road has to screech on their brakes to avoid a collision with a car thats pulled out of side road. He shakes his fist and shouts a few choice words before the driver starts playing the "brakey game" in front of him

The cyclist then loses his rag and screams at the driver, who then suddenly reverses into the rider with an almighty crash breaking the back window and then drives off leaving the poor cyclist on the deck with passers by attending....





...the myth then continues that the police pull over a driver 3 miles (or whatever its changed to) away who denies any altercation with cyclists. "I hit a low branch on a tree and cut me hand on the glass freeing the broken wood". But the police soon realise the guy must be involved as theres a head in a helmet on his back seat. 

Nice.

Have only heard this one verbally. Should have been told that for halloween.


----------



## sheddy (18 Nov 2008)

Cager: SMIDSY
Cyclist: So why are you driving with defective eyesight ?
Cager: I don't have defective eyesight
Cyclist: In that case why did you run me over? You shouldn't be driving with defective eyesight. 

I think I saw this in the letters page in Cycling Weekly


----------



## hackbike 666 (17 Dec 2008)

So today I stop at a red traffic signal at Stratford with peds to the left of me.

Ped pipes up "you are the first cyclist I have seen stop at the traffic lights" and I piped up "you are the first pedestrian I have seen stop at the lights".

I think it was funnier at the time,or perhaps not.


----------



## scootaboi (18 Dec 2008)

Some comprehensive rebuttals here:
http://theurbancyclist.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/why-do-so-many-people-hate-cyclists/


----------



## J4CKO (26 Dec 2008)

I am quite happy to pay "Road Tax", work out the Co2 per km output of a 1970 male on a Cannondale Bad Boy 700 (08 model), quite happy to pay based on the current scheme, based on CO2, I would imagine I am well within Band A and therefore have a VED figure of £0.


----------



## SCSimlett (31 Dec 2008)

*Myths*

'You dont pay road tax'
Rebuttal 'I know, but thanks for reminding me'


----------



## SCSimlett (31 Dec 2008)

*Myths*

My favourite and the car driver did laugh.

At the traffic lights (I had stopped) he said 'Buy yourself a car you retard'

My answer 'When I have saved up £50 I will buy two cars just like yours'


----------



## hackbike 666 (16 Jan 2009)

Yet another crap remark from peds at lights ooh look a cyclist that stops,which gets right on my tits so I just grinned sheepishly.Should have said oooh look peds who actually cross when the man is at green but usually im crap at some sort of intelligent come back.


----------



## thomas (19 Jan 2009)

SCSimlett said:


> My favourite and the car driver did laugh.
> 
> At the traffic lights (I had stopped) he said 'Buy yourself a car you retard'
> 
> My answer 'When I have saved up £50 I will buy two cars just like yours'





I like that


----------



## Downward (19 Jan 2009)

SCSimlett said:


> 'You dont pay road tax'
> Rebuttal 'I know, but thanks for reminding me'




And I don't pay Car Insurance or for Petrol

Kerching !

(Although I do - About £1200 for Petrol, Insurance and VED per annum)


----------



## dataretriever (20 Jan 2009)

I generally get satisfaction by pure verbal abuse interlaced with bursts from the Airzound as in: "Why don't you just concentrate on driving / walking / thinking / your phonecall you stupid (airzound), moronic (airzound)."

Whilst not a particularly intellectual, witty, or cutting retort, it tends to shut them up and gives me a warm glow of satisfaction and is great for stress relief!


----------



## arallsopp (26 Jan 2009)

Actually collected a chuckle from a driver in Streatham today.

Him: "Why don't you get a car?"
Me: "This is cheaper, and has twice as many accelerator pedals."
Him: "... fair on."


----------



## hackbike 666 (30 Jan 2009)

Ped standing on edge of pavement with phone in handand looking/typing into same.

Me: As I cycle past make a so called comedic snatch at phone saying "that's mine".

I wonder if the ped woke up after that.


----------



## ultraviolet (13 Apr 2009)

ChrisKH said:


> For the slightly portly cyclists on being called 'fat' by a passing motorist
> 
> "Well of course I'm fat; everytime I shag your wife she gives me a biscuit".



that is utter class :-)


----------



## Randochap (22 Apr 2009)

I had a chance to rebut the old "cyclists don't pay their way" canard today, with this letter in the newspaper, also posted on my website.


----------



## WindyRob (22 Apr 2009)

FatFellaFromFelixstowe said:


> Myth: You don't pay road tax
> Rebuttal: F off lard arse



very very funny


----------



## smokie36 (25 Apr 2009)

marinyork said:


> Can we add RLJing as a myth. That it's an extremely rare event outside of London, that most cyclists don't condone it, that it's not comparing like for like and motor vehicle RLJing is far more common and dangerous. Oh and it's exaggerated by people with an excitable disposition for political points perhaps wanting to raise their blood pressure?



erm...not that rare in Bristol. I have to drive into Bristol for work (25 miles is just too far to cycle at the moment). Since I've got back on my bike I've been paying a lot more attention to the behaviour of cyclist and I'd estimate at least a third of bikes I see will go through red lights during rush hour.


----------



## Array (26 Apr 2009)

smokie36 said:


> erm...not that rare in Bristol... at least a third of bikes I see will go through red lights during rush hour.



To be fair the timing of the red lights is usually not set for cyclists. It's actually timed to try and keep cars flowing when they're moving at about 30mph. It's what is called a "green wave" (sorry if this sounds condescending if people already know this). The idea is if you go through a green light in a car and then travel 30mph the next lights you reach should also be green to keep traffic flowing. Problem is the traffic in Bristol never really reaches 30mph, so it doesn't benefit cars. It definatley isn't timed for cyclists either and there are so many lights I can understand why some people find it frustrating waiting at all of them.

I don't condone red light jumping either. I never do it. I am also a pedestrian a lot of the time with a push chair, so I know what it's like to try to cross pedestrian crossings on the green man ( and starting to teach my son to wait for them) and then a cyclist (usually travelling fast) nipping through because they think they can judge it just right to just miss you. Equally I also know how frustrating it can be to have cars, or worse still, lorries and buses advance across and block the pedestrian crossing and then it goes to green for pedestrians to cross.


----------



## marinyork (10 May 2009)

smokie36 said:


> erm...not that rare in Bristol. I have to drive into Bristol for work (25 miles is just too far to cycle at the moment). Since I've got back on my bike I've been paying a lot more attention to the behaviour of cyclist and I'd estimate at least a third of bikes I see will go through red lights during rush hour.



Yawn. If you want to become a false advocate, if you want to get your blood pressure up, if you want to take on the cyclist's burden, then be my guest just don't expect everybody else to agree with you and expect opposition. The excitable people like who you exaggerate things and keep the debate about cycling centred on RLJing do nothing whatsoever for cycling. It's why in my eyes it should be a myth and get a standardised response to move the debate off and forward rather than joining in . Do people not think a vast amount of time is wasted out there in the media on childish arguments about RLJing. Cycling is so much more than that.


----------



## stoatsngroats (10 May 2009)

marinyork said:


> Cycling is so much more than that.



Hear hear....sweat, heart beating fast, sweat, panting.....


----------



## Twanger (17 Jun 2009)

Straw poll on Brixton Road on my ride home tonight at about 6.45. The lights by the nick. 

Cyclists stopping at the red light= 1 (me)
Cyclists not stopping at the red light = 17 (everyone else)

I must be a real plonker.


----------



## downfader (17 Jun 2009)

Twanger said:


> Straw poll on Brixton Road on my ride home tonight at about 6.45. The lights by the nick.
> 
> Cyclists stopping at the red light= 1 (me)
> Cyclists not stopping at the red light = 17 (everyone else)
> ...



Nah, you've just set a good example!


----------



## downfader (17 Jun 2009)

...actually, heard one the otherday from two other cyclists at work.

Guy got a smidsy, cyclist protested and the driver leant out the window saying "..you're wearing the wrong shade of yellow!"


----------



## gb155 (21 Jun 2009)

ultraviolet said:


> that is utter class :-)



Im having that one


----------



## Suerdusty (6 Aug 2009)

RLJing here in Plymouth isnt too bad, historically most sailors are pretty good at finding and stopping at Red Lights!


----------



## thomas (10 Aug 2009)

Haven't said it yet but I'd like to if a women driver is getting all moody behind.

"Calm down dear! I'm only a cyclist!"


----------



## semislickstick (10 Aug 2009)

Suerdusty said:


> RLJing here in Plymouth isnt too bad, historically most sailors are pretty good at finding and stopping at Red Lights!



Ho ho ho!


----------



## Twenty Inch (13 Oct 2009)

Motorist "You should be on the cyclepath!"

Cyclist "You should be on the bus!"

From my own modest repertoire.


----------



## magnatom (13 Oct 2009)

Twenty Inch said:


> Motorist "You should be on the cyclepath!"
> 
> Cyclist "You should be on the bus!"
> 
> From my own modest repertoire.




Depending on the girth of said motorist you could change the reply to...

You should be on Orlistat!


----------



## BentMikey (13 Oct 2009)

Twenty Inch said:


> Motorist "You should be on the cyclepath!"
> 
> Cyclist "You should be on the bus!"
> 
> From my own modest repertoire.




More accurately, "You should be on the motorway". That one's been around for many years.


----------



## hackbike 666 (14 Oct 2009)

You should be on in the scrapyard more like.


----------



## Goldfang (21 Oct 2009)

My latest one, from female motorist on mini roundabout, "you dont have to give way to the right if it is only a cyclist" ??
Regards, Goldfang.


----------



## downfader (21 Oct 2009)

Goldfang said:


> My latest one, from female motorist on mini roundabout, "you dont have to give way to the right if it is only a cyclist" ??
> Regards, Goldfang.



Further down the road she prolly though "..really..? Thanks!"


----------



## dondare (8 Nov 2009)

Goldfang said:


> My latest one, from female motorist on mini roundabout, "you dont have to give way to the right if it is only a cyclist" ??
> Regards, Goldfang.



A suitable reply to that:- "You do if you're only a woman driver."


----------



## Davidc (8 Nov 2009)

Yesterday evening...

"It's illegal to have a light that bright"

I couldn't think of a suitable reply in time  but should have said "must be just right - you actually noticed it."

Makes a change from "You know thase flashing lights are illegal don't you" and similar. 

(and I only had one of the two 0.5w Smarts going at the time.)


----------



## downfader (8 Nov 2009)

Davidc said:


> Yesterday evening...
> 
> "It's illegal to have a light that bright"
> 
> ...



People have said similar to me.. For example on filtering.. my response is usually a straight-faced "quote the relevant legislation or name the section of law, then?"

They never can.


----------



## downfader (26 Nov 2009)

So a mate of mine is bimbling along he says and this car appears behind him revving away. No space to overtake so driver has to wait... which annoys Mr Driver... so Mr Driver does what Mr Driver knows will solve this little connundrum - he presses his magic button and sounds his horn. 

My mate said he turned around and shouted "Whats your problem, son!" and carried on riding. Mr Driver wasnt having any of that, now was he, so he drives past my mate with an inch to spare at the earliest opportunity only to get stuck at a red light with an ASL.

My mate said he rode around the car and sat in front of Mr Driver, who then winds down his window and makes some kind of threat of violence. Strangely, when offered a chance to actually take up this little challenge, he wont get out of the car (my mate is well into his 60s, Mr Driver in his 30s) which leads to the classic put down:

"So why are you in such a f***ing rush anyway, baby need a poo?! Do you want to get home quick and use the toilet?" 

I so wish I had been there. I doubt very much if he would have had the guts to threaten violence to me if he is willing to pick on an old man. I was laughing about that put down all the way home yesterday and the day before.


----------



## thomas (27 Nov 2009)

driver: "haven't you read the highway code...."

Me: "Yeah, I probably know it better than you!"

Driver "...It says cyclists have to cycle 2 feet from the kerb...try fking reading it"

me: "You read the highway code mate, I assure you you're wrong"

blah blah blah..

me: "I think 25mph with these [my legs] is pretty impressive"

him: "I couldn't give a fk about your legs'

me: "At least I'm not a balding little "twit" "


----------



## downfader (28 Nov 2009)

thomas said:


> driver: "haven't you read the highway code...."
> 
> Me: "Yeah, I probably know it better than you!"
> 
> ...



Did you get it on camera? Driver fail! As the kiddies say 

I think any distance is defined as a guide, and only in cyclecraft. I can find no real info in the actual HC about this tbh. I thought there had been as I remember being told 2 feet in my old cycle prof many years back.


----------



## thomas (28 Nov 2009)

downfader said:


> Did you get it on camera? Driver fail! As the kiddies say
> 
> I think any distance is defined as a guide, and only in cyclecraft. I can find no real info in the actual HC about this tbh. I thought there had been as I remember being told 2 feet in my old cycle prof many years back.



Yep:

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMobtFE0W54


When I did my cycling prof' we were told to be 1 foot from the kerb, about where the drain covers would end. There's no legal distance...otherwise I would be between a rock and a hard place when I wanted to turn right


----------



## PBancroft (28 Nov 2009)

thomas said:


> Yep:
> 
> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMobtFE0W54
> 
> ...




The manual which came with my Giant advised riders to cycle as far to the edge of the road as possible.


----------



## downfader (28 Nov 2009)

Kaipaith said:


> The manual which came with my Giant advised riders to cycle as far to the edge of the road as possible.



..hmmm.. seriously tempted to do a comedy video about "the real highway code" or something..  Thought of it a couple of days back but Thomas and you have brought it back.


----------



## The Evil Rock DJ (6 Dec 2009)

Cycling at the edge of the road is a bit difficult around here. There are cars parked everywhere. Facing forwards, backwards, upside down, you name it. Honestly if they could park on top of each other, they would. Although it has to be said, a bicycle like a monster truck that can ride over cars does sound like fun.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (9 Dec 2009)

I very rarely ride on footpaths unless there is no other viable option, so I don't get told "Get off the pavement". However I have shouted several times to pedestrians "Get off the ****ing cycle track." I can't have been the only one.


----------



## BentMikey (9 Dec 2009)

thegrumpybiker said:


> However I have shouted several times to pedestrians "Get off the ****ing cycle track." I can't have been the only one.



Except of course that pedestrians are allowed on the cycle path, which would make those shouting this sort of thing louts at best.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (9 Dec 2009)

Maybe pedestrians are allowed to be on the cycle paths but when there's a perfectly good pavement next to it they're just dickheads who deserve to be shouted at.


----------



## Theseus (9 Dec 2009)

Nope, only 1 dickhead in this situation & it isn't the pedestrian.


----------



## thomas (9 Dec 2009)

Touche said:


> Nope, only 1 dickhead in this situation & it isn't the pedestrian.




+1

Because 'excuse me' is so hard.


----------



## SavageHoutkop (9 Dec 2009)

are pedestrians allowed on cycle paths?


----------



## Bman (9 Dec 2009)

Pedestrians are allowed anywhere, except motorways. 

It would be nice if the "Cycle Highways" copied that rule


----------



## downfader (9 Dec 2009)

thegrumpybiker said:


> I very rarely ride on footpaths unless there is no other viable option, so I don't get told "Get off the pavement". However I have shouted several times to pedestrians "Get off the ****ing cycle track." I can't have been the only one.



Perhaps you should remember that next time a motorist tells you to use the cyclepath, after you've used the road due to glass everywhere on the cp. 

My tact is to politely say "excuse me".


----------



## BentMikey (9 Dec 2009)

thegrumpybiker said:


> Maybe pedestrians are allowed to be on the cycle paths but when there's a perfectly good pavement next to it they're just dickheads who deserve to be shouted at.



I'd accept that the pedestrians might not be very considerate, although the chances are they didn't even notice. However, your fault is far worse. +1 to Touche's comment.


----------



## PBancroft (9 Dec 2009)

BentMikey said:


> I'd accept that the pedestrians might not be very considerate, although the chances are they didn't even notice. However, your fault is far worse. +1 to Touche's comment.



Indeed - I was walking along a pavement the other day when I saw an arrow pointing opposite to the direction I was travelling.

It took me a few moments before I realised I was walking on a cycle lane. The segregation of cycle lane and footpath was marked by slightly different coloured paving slabs.

I think the myth here is "Cycle Lanes are just for Cycles"

The rebuttal is "Don't be a dick"


----------



## PBancroft (13 Dec 2009)

Kaipaith said:


> The manual which came with my Giant advised riders to cycle as far to the edge of the road as possible.



Found it!

[quote name='Owner's Manual' date=' Giant, Version 8.0']B. Riding Safely
[...]
4. Ride in designated bike lanes, on designated bike paths or as close to the edge of the road as possible...[/QUOTE]


----------



## hackbike 666 (18 Dec 2009)

BentMikey said:


> I'd accept that the pedestrians might not be very considerate, although the chances are they didn't even notice. However, your fault is far worse. +1 to Touche's comment.



I find peds really irritating sometimes but I still try and be polite.
Sometimes they are nice back...sometimes they aren't.


----------



## GrasB (18 Dec 2009)

thegrumpybiker, imo you're an idiot! yes peds can be annoying & totally oblivious to what they are actually walking on but as a car driver has a responsibility to take extra care around more vulnerable road users as cyclists we have a responsibility to take extra care around the vulnerable users of multi-use facilities.

I've always thought that segregated cycle ways should be cyclists only. Not that I believe this will ever happen. I also think that any path where you've got less than 2m width should never have anything resembling a recommendation for cyclists to use!.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (18 Dec 2009)

Consider myself well and truly chided.
Admittedly I've only ever been annoyed to this level by a pedestrian on a CP once, although I see and experience it on many occasions. Most of the time I do just ring my bell. Agreed it can be easy for a ped to wander onto a CP without realising it. I try to ride roads wherever possible as most cycle lanes seem to be a half arsed effort that stop without warning and are poorly maintained. Maybe it's just because I'm a cyclist that in ped mode I actually notice CPs and don't walk on them out of a) respect to cyclists and  my own safety. I just wish most peds would notice and respect them too, even if they have got the right to walk on them, it just makes sense not too.


----------



## hackbike 666 (29 Dec 2009)

i had one with a Ped the other day (Monday) on the commute in at Cheapside (Bank)...

I could see the ped jaywalking off of the pavement (with her back to me) suddenly as I cycled up but wasn't sure what was behind me as this happened.I blew the horn fitted on my bike and the bloke who was with her dragged her back onto the pavement.

The look on his face when he saw me though was absolutely priceless.

Obviously with the sound of the horn he thought I was a car as I now have a proper car horn fitted...which has lead to me making a modification in the future and fitting the motorcycle horn on the pavement side fork for the benfit of the peds as the car horn on the right hand fork is a bit sharp.

I have had peds more then once been looking the wrong way and I have done this (when the motorcycle horns were fitted) which has been useful for the ped as they then realise that cars are coming from the same direction as me.This happened recently where the Warldorf Hotel is.(and other places)

I actually thought the horns I had fitted before were car horns but I still noticed a difference between my horns and a car horn.(They were actually motorcycle horns) By accident on ebay I ordered the wrong horn and got the car horn which is now fitted.

I take it I will get chided for this but it's a warning device more in mind fitted for the comedians in those metal boxes but if need be I would use it to warn peds.Even advance warning if I see a potential conflict.


----------



## thomas (29 Dec 2009)

hackbike 666 said:


> I take it I will get chided for this but it's a warning device more in mind fitted for the comedians in those metal boxes but if need be I would use it to warn peds.Even advance warning if I see a potential conflict.



I don't have my airzound on atm because I'm not commuting, and find that a whistle can work well with making peds look.

I'm not against using a horn on them though, but do think that it shouldn't always be a first resort.


----------



## BentMikey (29 Dec 2009)

Don't see anything wrong with using a horn if it's in genuine warning. One minor point though - pedestrians don't jaywalk in this country, because there's no offence of jaywalking. That's a piece of horibiliousness from Leftpondia.


----------



## hackbike 666 (29 Dec 2009)

BentMikey said:


> Don't see anything wrong with using a horn if it's in genuine warning. One minor point though - pedestrians don't jaywalk in this country, because there's no offence of jaywalking. That's a piece of horibiliousness from Leftpondia.



I know,it was a figure of speech.(Jaywalking)

I'd much rather avoid a potential conflict.Remeber I have had two peds collsions so peds make me a bit twitchy as they can be unpredicatable sometimes.

I can't see me whistling...what do I whistle? Colonel Bogey?
Seriously I dont think whistling would work if I could whistle loud enough.
Shouting doesn't work for me because at the heat of the moment I shout something I shouldn't have so it's best I keep my mouth shut.

I also said I was going to do a modification as the car horn was more for motorists than peds.

Duel tone thingy,Motorbike horn pavement side car horn rh fork.


----------



## thomas (29 Dec 2009)

hackbike 666 said:


> *I can't see me whistling...what do I whistle? Colonel Bogey?*
> Seriously I dont think whistling would work if I could whistle loud enough.
> Shouting doesn't work for me because at the heat of the moment I shout something I shouldn't have so it's best I keep my mouth shut./QUOTE]
> 
> Just whistle with your mouth. It certainly doesn't always work, but I found most people would turn their head around when doing it through town the other day.


----------



## hackbike 666 (29 Dec 2009)

thomas;1059258][QUOTE=hackbike 666 said:


> *I can't see me whistling...what do I whistle? Colonel Bogey?*
> Seriously I dont think whistling would work if I could whistle loud enough.
> Shouting doesn't work for me because at the heat of the moment I shout something I shouldn't have so it's best I keep my mouth shut./QUOTE]
> 
> Just whistle with your mouth. It certainly doesn't always work, but I found most people would turn their head around when doing it through town the other day.


[/quote]

No point,I have a horn which does a perfect job.

I don't have to use ith when near a ped...only when I see a situation developing...and generally I don't unless I have to.

Also I can't whistle half the time so that's out of the window...can't see me doing it when im out of breath.


----------



## thomas (29 Dec 2009)

hackbike 666 said:


> No point,I have a horn which does a perfect job.
> *
> I don't have to use ith when near a ped...only when I see a situation developing...and generally I don't unless I have to.*
> 
> Also I can't whistle half the time so that's out of the window...can't see me doing it when im out of breath.




I just use it when in an area where people are likely to jump out without looking. Certainly, if they were jumping out I'd be yelling (or use a horn if I had one later).


----------



## hackbike 666 (29 Dec 2009)

How ironic had a ped step off the pavement right in front of me today on inward commute..hood up looking the other way.No time to sound the horn whistle,shout write autographs.

I really think it is a problem now.Obviously nobody learns anything at school.


----------



## downfader (29 Dec 2009)

hackbike 666 said:


> How ironic had a ped step off the pavement right in front of me today on inward commute..hood up looking the other way.No time to sound the horn whistle,shout write autographs.
> 
> I really think it is a problem now.Obviously nobody learns anything at school.



I think you need to now put spartan blades on your wheels, LOL! Or stick a card and peg over the wheel


----------



## hackbike 666 (30 Dec 2009)

Luckily I was pootling up to a red traffic signal but I wasn't covering the brakes.Had to make a grab for the front btake and stopped a few inches short.Also it was pi55ing down with rain.

All I said to ped is "you just stepped out in front of me"....I think he was ok about it so it was no problem....I haven't really got a problem with it but I think it is a bit lax with this crossing lark sometimes.

I have seen peds lying in the road after an incident with a car more than once and it doesn't tend to make my day.

Plus I got run over when I was a kid.(My own fault...I will still say that to this day)
Probably lucky to get through that one unscathed...but I did learn from it.


----------



## thegrumpybiker (14 Jan 2010)

hackbike 666 said:


> I think it is a bit lax with this crossing lark sometimes.



Yep, How often do you see people totally absorbed into their phone/mp3 player and just step out into the road? I had one of those just before christmas. On my bike at the traffic lights, which turn green, just as I pull away i have to slam the brakes on because some dozy prick was too busy texting to even look at the red "don't cross" man. I tut and roll my eyes (a very mild reaction for me) and his response; "F**k off!" My response "Fair enough, I'll watch where you're going for both of us shall I? self-gratification artist."
Hopefully he'll either reflect on his actions and change his outlook or do it again and have his idiocy from removed from the gene pool forever courtesy of a double decker.


----------



## hackbike 666 (17 Jan 2010)

Had one today near Blackfriars,shocking....blokes girlfriend crossed over and stood in the middle of the road....perhaps due to the fact there were cars coming the other way.He stands in the bike lane in front of me looking the other way so I pootle up to him and at no time do I have my finger in the horn button....He was still unaware that I was there and as it was dodgy I was preparing to stop....then he makes a movement and gets beeped by a moton...Moton was going to fast IMHO anyway.

He miraculaously got safely to the other side.

As I said there is a real problem with the peds in London?

Are we all in so much of a hurry that we have to rush across the road and rlj whatever mode of transport we are in?


----------



## hackbike 666 (17 Jan 2010)

Had one today near Blackfriars,shocking....blokes girlfriend crossed over and stood in the middle of the road....perhaps due to the fact there were cars coming the other way.He stands in the bike lane in front of me looking the other way so I pootle up to him and at no time do I have my finger in the horn button....He was still unaware that I was there and as it was dodgy I was preparing to stop....then he makes a movement and gets beeped by a moton...Moton was going to fast IMHO anyway.

He miraculaously got safely to the other side.

As I said there is a real problem with the peds in London?

Are we all in so much of a hurry that we have to rush across the road and rlj whatever mode of transport we are in?


----------



## Andy 71 (21 Jan 2010)

Many peds (quite rightly so) remind RLJers that the lights mean STOP, but then fail to take their own advice, walking out when the little man is red.


----------



## Andy 71 (21 Jan 2010)

Another thing peds seem to do nowadays is something really counter-intuitive, i.e. look away from the direction of traffic when crossing the road.

When I was a kid, we had David Prowse in a spandex suit and Kevin Keegan, running through a well-rehearsed drill that seems to have disappeared into the vaults of history. I'm a little too young to remember the one with Alvin Stardust though.


----------



## Wheeledweenie (21 Jan 2010)

I had a group of men in suits walk right in front of me when I had a green light a couple of months ago. A couple of them noticed and were shuffling the others across so I called out 'Tell you what boys, I'll respect the reds if you respect the greens yeah?'

They had the good grace to giggle and apologise


----------



## jimboalee (21 Jan 2010)

I was in the Tufty Club.


----------



## Dan B (21 Jan 2010)

Andy 71 said:


> Many peds (quite rightly so) remind RLJers that the lights mean STOP, but then fail to take their own advice, walking out when the little man is red.


Which, incidentally, is perfectly legal to do (and long may it remain so)


----------



## downfader (21 Jan 2010)

coruskate said:


> Which, incidentally, is perfectly legal to do (and long may it remain so)



Beat me to it!


----------



## hackbike 666 (23 Jan 2010)

coruskate said:


> Which, incidentally, is perfectly legal to do (and long may it remain so)



You wont say that when they throw themselves under your wheels.

Still the thousand pound bike I wrecked in the process was easily replaceable.(Not)



Andy 71 said:


> Another thing peds seem to do nowadays is something really counter-intuitive, i.e. look away from the direction of traffic when crossing the road.



Yes I have noticed that and it's very worrying.


----------



## Wheeledweenie (25 Jan 2010)

coruskate said:


> Which, incidentally, is perfectly legal to do (and long may it remain so)



Legal, but intensely irritating


----------



## hackbike 666 (1 Feb 2010)

Legal but a right royal pain in the bot.


----------



## SavageHoutkop (2 Feb 2010)

Andy 71 said:


> Another thing peds seem to do nowadays is something really counter-intuitive, i.e. look away from the direction of traffic when crossing the road.


What, yours look at all?!?  
The ones I come across seem to just drift out into the road...


----------



## hackbike 666 (28 Feb 2010)

There was a game I used to play which was a bit like that.

Lemmings or was it Lemons?


----------



## JiMBR (11 Mar 2010)

jimboalee said:


> I was in the Tufty Club.




Must......resist.......


----------



## hackbike 666 (11 Mar 2010)

Cycling to work yesterday got to Mile End just past the tube station and traffic light junction heading towards Whitechapel.

I glance to my right and this huge 4x4 with a bloke driving adorns the scene.

I notice the bloke is filing his nails even though he is following a car in front (no hands on steering wheel)...So I shout "Lovely nails dear" and just sort of wave and then notice he throws the nail file down onto the passenger seat.

Don't make too much of it because I have been there before where the driver turns into a total imbecile and tries to take my life or at least intimidate me by cutting me up.


----------



## gouldina (19 Mar 2010)

Andy 71 said:


> Another thing peds seem to do nowadays is something really counter-intuitive, i.e. look away from the direction of traffic when crossing the road.



Particularly if it's one way. You only need to look the way the traffic won't be coming.


----------



## rustychisel (27 Apr 2010)

dunno if this qualifies, but it was a good way to shut up the fat f**kstick in the 4WD.


Him: YOU SHOULDN'T BE ON THE ROAD!!


Me: You should be back at home...


Him: [scratches head]... huh???


Me: Yes, I'm just going 'round there to f**k your wife.


----------



## downfader (27 Apr 2010)

rustychisel said:


> dunno if this qualifies, but it was a good way to shut up the fat f**kstick in the 4WD.
> 
> 
> Him: YOU SHOULDN'T BE ON THE ROAD!!
> ...



Now now... lets be fair...











We've all f***ed his wife.


----------



## Shut Up Legs (27 Apr 2010)

Cab said:


> Myth: "You should be in the cycle lane!"
> 
> Rebuttal: No, its your choice as to whether or not to use a cycle lane. If it is safer and convenient then do so, otherwise you're not obliged to use the cycle lane or any other facility.
> 
> ...


Agree with your comments on cycle lanes; they're generally a dumping ground for detritus of all description 

Interestingly enough, the Victorian Road Rules make use of cycle lanes compulsory, but also add the safety caveat, so we can choose whether or not it's appropriate to use them (not that it stops some f'wit motorists yelling at me when I avoid unsafe cycle lanes, but unfortunately idiots form part of every population demographic). The Victorian Road Rules state:


> The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.


----------



## Armegatron (1 May 2010)

Guy gave me abuse of road tax etc... I made my valid points that I pay road tax and have insurance. He then called me a knob - my reply "At least my knob is bigger than yours, and your wife loves it"


----------



## 400bhp (7 May 2010)

I pay two lots of road tax on 2 cars, I race another in my spare time and am an IaM member. I love cars, just not the pr1cks who drive them.


----------



## Ste T. (7 May 2010)

Moron"You dont pay any bleedin road tax!"
Me " Yeh I know....it's great is'nt it?" accompanied by a big beaming smile.
or, 
as they slowly pass with the window down
Moron" You've got to use the cycle path,it's the law"
Me "Eh?"
Moron "YOU'VE GOT TO USE THE PATH...ITS THE LAW!!!"
Me "I can't hear you mate. What you saying?"
Moron " Oh f**k off"
Me , " Bye" with a big smile and a wave as he drives off, steam coming from his ears.
or,
My latest one, copied from my daughter. Raise your palm "Talk to the hand cos the face aint lissenin" accompanied ,as ever, with a beaming smile.


----------



## Vikeonabike (8 May 2010)

Driver " You shouldn't be on the road you don't pay road Tax!"
Cyclist "I don't pay for fuel either"


----------



## downfader (8 May 2010)

Said to me just the other week:

"Why aint you FAT!!?? You sit there eating chocolate and cake and you AINT FAT!!!!?"

"I work for it. Get off your fat a*** and you can eat cake too."


----------



## zoxed (10 May 2010)

Arch said:


> no, I think it's a twist on a remark made by George Bernard Shaw? to a Lady Something or other. When she said "Mr Shaw, you're drunk!" , he replied, "yes, madam, and you are stupid, but I will be sober in the morning..." or something like that...



> [to Lady Astor] I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly. 
Winston Churchill


(at another meeting) 
> Lady Astor: If you were my husband Winston, I should poison your soup. 
> Winston Churchill: And if you were my wife, I'd drink it.


----------



## BentMikey (10 May 2010)

I wonder if Eddo Brandes retort isn't better and still more of a put-down:

McGrath "Why are you such a fat c@nt"
Brandes "Because every time I shag your wife she gives me a biscuit"


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (13 May 2010)

moton: oi fat b*****d ride faster

rebuttal: course i'm fat....it's all the after sex biscuits your missus gives me


----------



## hackbike 666 (18 May 2010)

Vikeonabike said:


> Driver " You shouldn't be on the road you don't pay road Tax!"
> Cyclist "I don't pay for fuel either"



heh!


----------



## benb (8 Jun 2010)

zoxed;1242583][QUOTE=Arch said:


> no, I think it's a twist on a remark made by George Bernard Shaw? to a Lady Something or other. When she said "Mr Shaw, you're drunk!" , he replied, "yes, madam, and you are stupid, but I will be sober in the morning..." or something like that...
> 
> Ugly and slimmer aren't connected, it's just that if one is fat, one can do something about it, whereas if one is the sort of person who shouts random nonsense at people, one is probably doomed for good...
> 
> I'd rather call someone in the situation thick, I think, than ugly, as i'm not sure I've got much to crow about in the looks department, but I do know I'm fairly bright...



> [to Lady Astor] I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly. 
Winston Churchill


(at another meeting) 
> Lady Astor: If you were my husband Winston, I should poison your soup. 
> Winston Churchill: And if you were my wife, I'd drink it.[/QUOTE]

The Bernard Shaw one is:

Lady something: "Mr Shaw, you and I should make love. With your brains and my looks, we would have the prefect children"
Shaw: "But what if the child was born with my looks and your brains?"

He was later heard to comment "I can't believe I just blew out a definite shag for the sake of a witty epigram!"


----------



## spen666 (4 Jul 2010)

BentMikey said:


> I'd take the opposite view - I'll praise those who did bother to pull over when taking a call. Sure, you're right technically, but I think it's minor compared with the idiocy of driving whilst still on the phone.



Alternatively, they could drive legally and not answer the call when driving. Then find a safe and legal place to stop and return the call.

I'll not priase them for breaking the law.

to praise them for breaking one law and not breaking another is a bit like praising a gunman for shooting one person and then not shooting a second


----------



## spen666 (4 Jul 2010)

benb said:


> The Bernard Shaw one is:
> 
> Lady something: "Mr Shaw, you and I should make love. With your brains and my looks, we would have the prefect children"
> Shaw: "But what if the child was born with my looks and your brains?"
> ...



Thought these were Winston Churchill to Bessie Braddock


----------



## PBancroft (5 Jul 2010)

spen666 said:


> Thought these were Winston Churchill to Bessie Braddock



Are you sure you're not thinking of the following exchange:-

Braddock: "Winston, you are drunk, and what's more you are disgustingly drunk."
Churchill: "Bessie, my dear, you are ugly, and what's more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly."


----------



## dondare (5 Jul 2010)

"Bikes are for kids. Grown-ups drive cars."

"When my legs stop working I'll get a car; and when my cock stops working I'll get a car just like yours."


----------



## magnatom (6 Jul 2010)

dondare said:


> "Bikes are for kids. Grown-ups drive cars."
> 
> "When my legs stop working I'll get a car; and when my cock stops working I'll get a car just like yours."




I'll need to remember that one!


----------



## ramses (6 Jul 2010)

I'm all for having a go back at drivers, as some are just plain ignorant.

I have clipped one cars wing mirror, mainly because the driver gave me no room as he veered towards the curb, whilst passing me. I gave him a foul mouthed response, and left him to his queue of traffic. Always a nice feeling!

However I then read this article which is quite shocking, and makes you wonder if it's worth doing anything.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...led-cyclist-revenge-knocking-wing-mirror.html


----------



## dondare (6 Jul 2010)

magnatom said:


> I'll need to remember that one!



Personally, I wouldn't use it anywhere North of Watford Gap. 

Northerners can be a bit touchy.


----------



## Sapper (7 Jul 2010)

The number of cars who have hit my funny bone with their wing mirrors is quite shocking...

And when it is at 30MPH plus, it tingles for quite a few hours.

Adrian 



ramses said:


> I'm all for having a go back at drivers, as some are just plain ignorant.
> 
> I have clipped one cars wing mirror, mainly because the driver gave me no room as he veered towards the curb, whilst passing me. I gave him a foul mouthed response, and left him to his queue of traffic. Always a nice feeling!
> 
> ...


----------



## MontyVeda (27 Aug 2010)

dondare said:


> Personally, I wouldn't use it anywhere North of Watford Gap.
> 
> *Northerners can be a bit touchy.*



What's tha mean by that yer soft southern &*@£$%&$


----------



## MontyVeda (27 Aug 2010)

ramses said:


> I'm all for having a go back at drivers, as some are just plain ignorant.
> 
> I have clipped one cars wing mirror, mainly because the driver gave me no room as he veered towards the curb, whilst passing me. I gave him a foul mouthed response, and left him to his queue of traffic. Always a nice feeling!
> 
> ...



At the end of the day it's not worth 'having a go' at anyone... you never know who's going to turn psycho!


So... are bells a legal requirement or not?


----------



## dondare (13 Sep 2010)

MontyVeda said:


> At the end of the day it's not worth 'having a go' at anyone... you never know who's going to turn psycho!
> 
> 
> *So... are bells a legal requirement or not?*



Only on new bikes at the point of sale.


----------



## Bluescouse1 (6 Nov 2010)

I always find that if you totlay ignore any tossers that insult you
or suggest you dont pay road tax
it really kills them more if you don't answer them what so ever
in fact don't even look their way
there is nowt more degrading than being totaly ignored

myth,,you dont pay road tax so you should not use the road
rebuttal.. shrug your shoulders and smile

piss them right off


----------



## AuraTodd (13 Feb 2011)

Get off the %^&$ road

Rebuttal: Same to you you fat arshed lardy overwight halfwit.


----------



## Davidc (13 Feb 2011)

Yesterday. Just after stopping at a set of lights. Driver I'd prevented from getting past me by riding through obstructions in 'primary' put his window down.

Driver. You should be on the cycle path

Me. You should be at the Gym

Driver. You calling me fat?

Me. No just using my eyes.

Driver. At least I pay road tax.

Me. At least I dont pay fuel tax. (a certain amount of licence here as I do also drive a car)

Driver. Only 'cos you can't afford a f****ng car.

Me. Neither can you by the look of it.

At which point the lights changed, and I headed on into town. He tried but never did catch me up. I waved at him while locking my bike to a stand. I think his wave suggested that he was going to buy 2 bikes but I may have misinterpreted it.


----------



## BentMikey (1 Mar 2011)

"Get a 'kin car"

"I've got one, and my front wheel is worth more than that piece of sh1t you're driving mate"


----------



## thomas (2 Mar 2011)

Davidc said:


> Yesterday. Just after stopping at a set of lights. Driver I'd prevented from getting past me by riding through obstructions in 'primary' put his window down.
> 
> Driver. You should be on the cycle path
> 
> ...





_*LOL*_!




...If I was drinking tea you'd of owed me a new laptop. thankfully I wasn't; my house mates just think I had a laughing spasm


----------



## lcjohnny (4 Apr 2011)

User482 said:


> Here in Bristol, I'd say about 50% of cyclists RLJ. My usual response to a motorist pointing this out is "you're quite right about RLJing. Most motorists break the speed limit - which do you think is more dangerous?".



Yep in Bristol tons of cyclists RLJ and very very few cars or other vehicles RLJ

But imho this is much much worse than breaking a speed limit - yes that is illegal but not activley endangering others. 

but crossing against the lights? These prats are either doing it for the adrenalin or pissed or stoned so as far as I can see no other road user should give them any consideration?


----------



## martynjc1977 (26 Apr 2011)

lcjohnny said:


> Yep in Bristol tons of cyclists RLJ and very very few cars or other vehicles RLJ
> 
> But imho this is much much worse than breaking a speed limit - yes that is illegal but not activley endangering others.
> 
> but crossing against the lights? These prats are either doing it for the adrenalin or pissed or stoned so as far as I can see no other road user should give them any consideration?



Please go back under your bridge/rock. You cant possibly believe that speeding is ok, when it's a factor in most road collisions involving a death. The speed limit is just that, a limit, not a target.


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2011)

martynjc1977 said:


> Please go back under your bridge/rock. You cant possibly believe that speeding is ok, when it's a factor in most road collisions involving a death. The speed limit is just that, a limit, not a target.



+1

I suppose he might believe speeding is OK, but that would make him a James Blunt. And of course it's complete rubbish that hardly any motorvehicles jump red lights. On my commute, I see more doing it than cyclists. Fine all of them as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Alessandro Petacchi (4 May 2011)

"Oi Baldy","get off the road".
Answer- "This is not a bald head,it's a Solar Panel for a sex machine". 
Mike.


----------



## subaqua (4 May 2011)

Alessandro Petacchi said:


> "Oi Baldy","get off the road".
> Answer- "This is not a bald head,it's a Solar Panel for a sex machine".
> Mike.




that is a myth


----------



## funnymummy (17 Jun 2011)

'Debating' with a friends husband at a BBQ about bikes/cyclists...

Him "You should only ride on cycle paths"
Me "How do I turn right then?"

Him "You don't pay road tax"
Me "Neither do you"
Him "Yes I do"
Me "No you don't - Google it"

Him "Well, you don't have insurance"
Me "Actualy, I do"

The conversation then turned to enviromental issues, he claimed that his car was 'green' as....
Him "My car does 40+mpg"
Me *slaps legs* "These babies can double that, on a litre of H2O"

He then raised the helmet/HiVis should be legal requirement, At this point his wife told him to stop being a pompous arse & STFU!


----------



## Ace Demon (25 Jun 2011)

Myth: "You don't pay road tax so..."

Rebuttal: "If you want to avoid tax too, take up cycling. Oh, you prefer paying tax?"


----------



## julesdavis1965 (27 Jun 2011)

Arch said:


> no, I think it's a twist on a remark made by George Bernard Shaw? to a Lady Something or other. When she said "Mr Shaw, you're drunk!" , he replied, "yes, madam, and you are stupid, but I will be sober in the morning..." or something like that...
> 
> Ugly and slimmer aren't connected, it's just that if one is fat, one can do something about it, whereas if one is the sort of person who shouts random nonsense at people, one is probably doomed for good...
> 
> I'd rather call someone in the situation thick, I think, than ugly, as i'm not sure I've got much to crow about in the looks department, but I do know I'm fairly bright...


----------



## julesdavis1965 (27 Jun 2011)

i like " beauty fades, dumb is forever" judge judy sheindlin .


----------



## thehairycycler (4 Aug 2011)

funnymummy said:


> 'Debating' with a friends husband at a BBQ about bikes/cyclists...
> 
> Him "You should only ride on cycle paths"
> Me "How do I turn right then?"
> ...



Did his wife take his shovel off of him and help him out that hole? 

and funnymummy its not fair to pick on those less fortunate than yourself  


Driver - Get off the F'ing road
Myself - This is a Road Bike it belong on roads what your in is a car which belong in a scrapyard! 

He was not ammused but I took on this idiot at the traffic lights next to the police station in town! rule one of warfare pick your battlefield


----------



## chris grace (8 Aug 2011)

bonj2 said:


> "You should be in the cycle lane!"
> 
> "So should you."
> 
> ...




Class,Pure Class.


----------



## Cubist (28 Aug 2011)

Overweight apoplectic purply-faced-man. "Get out of the middle of the road!"

Me "Give my regards to St Peter."


----------



## sabian92 (22 Nov 2011)

I'm waiting for a woman to have a go at me to use this one:

Least this is something I can ride with my legs shut!


----------



## Toshiba Boy (20 Dec 2011)

subaqua said:


> that is a myth


 
Oh no it isn't!


----------



## Arjimlad (10 Feb 2012)

Fat driver "You should be on the cycle path"

Me "You should be on an exercise bike"


----------



## Bassjunkieuk (21 Feb 2012)

This isn't one I can claim personally myself but did read it on another forum, excellent response IMHO to one of those "classic" heckles:

Driver: "Your wheel is going round" 

Rider: "So's your wife/missus/girlfriend"

IIRC the story as told originally had the heckler in the car with mates so thought he was being rather clever until he got shot down in flames, much to the amusement of his mates :-)


----------



## Speedywheelsjeans (5 Mar 2012)

Bassjunkieuk said:


> This isn't one I can claim personally myself but did read it on another forum, excellent response IMHO to one of those "classic" heckles:
> 
> Driver: "Your wheel is going round"
> 
> ...


 
I had some lass shout that at me the other day... the 'your wheels going round' part

My initial reaction was literally just ... WTF?? Did someone seriously just heckle that at me... possibly the worst heckle ever, wish I had that response written above


----------



## TonyEnjoyD (24 Mar 2012)

My disk brakes are squealing like cr*p at the mo and on my Thursday commute a group of teen schoolkids were blocking the cycle-path. "Scuse me" I shouts to be just let through.Just through and one lad shouts "your brakes are crap mate".
I responded " yup - modelled on your face" to the amusements of his mates.
Usually I only manage a mumbled Feck Orf!


----------



## Ian Cooper (23 Apr 2012)

Comment: Your right to the road won't mean much if a lorry is bearing down on you.

Rebuttal: The same applies to you.

The comment assumes that motorists are invincible, whereas studies show that in practice they are no safer than cyclists on the road. In fact, the data suggests that over a lifetime, cycling is nearly twice as safe as driving.


----------



## Manifietso (24 Apr 2012)

Cab said:


> Myth: "You should be in the cycle lane!"
> 
> Rebuttal: No, its your choice as to whether or not to use a cycle lane.


 
I would reply "you should be in the Netherlands" - where it is indeed law to use the cycle lane if there is one, and where indeed there is no need to consider doing otherwise!


----------



## downfader (25 Apr 2012)

Manifietso said:


> I would reply "you should be in the Netherlands" - where it is indeed law to use the cycle lane if there is one, and where indeed there is no need to consider doing otherwise!


 
citation needed...


----------



## BentMikey (25 Apr 2012)

Yeah, Manifietso is wrong on that one.


----------



## Manifietso (26 Apr 2012)

> citation needed...


 
Best I can do is refer you to Wikipedia reference, but I'm afraid that page too is asking for a citation. Have seen claim made several times by Dutch commentators.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_in_the_Netherlands

With regards to "no need", that is a simple opinion based on observations on the standard of cycle facilities in a number of Dutch cities. The widely quoted figure is that 27% of journeys in the Netherlands are made by bike. I spent two days in the Netherlands in March and did not observe any cyclists using anything other than the correct facilities - ie no pavement riding, no riding on the roads when a cycle lane existed.

Sorry I can't be more specific, but I think both these claims are reasonably well accepted.


----------



## downfader (26 Apr 2012)

Manifietso said:


> Best I can do is refer you to Wikipedia reference, but I'm afraid that page too is asking for a citation. Have seen claim made several times by Dutch commentators.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_in_the_Netherlands
> 
> ...


 
Karl (of Karl On Sea blog and tweeter) did have some corrospondence from the Dutch cycling body that dealt with the pro riders out there that seemed to suggest there is still a right to the road. 

I thought there was no right myself a few years back, but was given short shrift from a Dutchman on another forum.


----------



## Manifietso (26 Apr 2012)

I only heard it recently from a different Dutchman in a different forum and then read the Wikipedia article. As we all know, strange men in forums and Wikipedia references are not always accurate, so I am happy to stand corrected in the absense of a definitive answer from the Dutch government!


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2012)

If your bike is wider than 75cm then you definitely don't have to use the path in the Netherlands.


----------



## Manifietso (26 Apr 2012)

Well they also allow scooters (30mph tops?), something I found a little off-putting when over there, but I imagine you would get used to them fairly quickly. There must be some good discussion on why this is (presumably it is a lot safer for the scooters), but I would see it as a small price to pay if everything else was up to their standards.


----------



## Ian Cooper (26 Apr 2012)

I was also under the impression that bike facility use was mandatory (where such facilities exist) in NL. This site says use is mandatory:

http://amsterdam.angloinfo.com/information/37/cycling.asp

"Rules for Cyclists
*Cycling paths*: cyclists must use the cycling path if there is one. Cycling paths that are marked with rectangular blue signs, marked * fietspad* are not compulsory. Where there is no cycling path, cyclists may cycle on the road along with cars."

Thankfully, even in the NL, bike facilities are still not ubiquitous. Most of the cycling space in the NL is roads - and long may it be so.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Apr 2012)

I used to quite regularly see club rides done on roads that had cycle paths alongside.


----------



## Manifietso (13 May 2012)

> Thankfully, even in the NL, bike facilities are still not ubiquitous. Most of the cycling space in the NL is roads - and long may it be so.


 
It isn't a question of most or of them being ubiquitous. What matters is that you can make a safe journey from A to B without having to mix with dangerous traffic. In the Netherlands, you will find an alternative option to almost all heavily trafficked highways, and in the newer towns you will also see cycle tracks running parallel to _most_ of the _through_ roads. In Amsterdam, where space is tighter, sharing of the roads is more common.

The argument about usage of these facilities being compulsory does not seem to be a big deal if the facilities are provided and if they are of a good enough quality for cyclists to be happy to use them. From my brief observations, the road bikers, whilst rare, were happy to use the parallel lanes too.


----------



## BentMikey (13 May 2012)

Better try a bit harder then.


----------



## Ian Cooper (14 May 2012)

Manifietso said:


> What matters is that you can make a safe journey from A to B without having to mix with dangerous traffic.


 
I don't see traffic as 'dangerous' any more than I see stairs or electricity as 'dangerous'. Sure, these things can kill, but I've negotiated all of them without accident for over 40 years. I'm not about to avoid roads simply because some timid cyclists see them as deadly - and I'm certainly not going to sit quietly while some government tries to force me off the road (which we in the UK and the US use by right).



> In the Netherlands, you will find an alternative option to almost all heavily trafficked highways...


 
You assume I want an alternative option. I don't. I'm a grown-up - I can handle the road just fine. I commute on a six-lane highway every weekday - I'm perfectly comfortable handling complicated lane-changes on such roads on a regular basis..



> From my brief observations, the road bikers, whilst rare, were happy to use the parallel lanes too.


 
I'm sure many are - I'd say most cyclists have been gulled into being happy to use such 'apartheid' facilities - the equivalent of a 'blacks only' drinking water fountain, such as could be found in South Africa until quite recently. Many sincerely believe that bike facilities are built for the convenience of cyclists. I don't feel that way. I've cycled a good thousand miles in the Netherlands, and I can assure you, I was not 'happy to use the parallel lanes' - the parallel lanes were slow, dangerously narrow and had a surface which was generally of poorer quality compared to the road. Dutch roads are perfectly good - so if I prefer the road, why should I be forced to use the bike lane?

Segregation, whether race-based or vehicle-based, is founded in bigotry. It cannot serve the needs of the group it subjugates. Sadly, there are plenty of 'Uncle Tom' cyclists who are glad to cowtow to 'Massa' and stay off the roads.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (14 May 2012)

Ian Cooper said:


> You assume I want an alternative option. I don't. I'm a grown-up - I can handle the road just fine. I commute on a six-lane highway every weekday - I'm perfectly comfortable handling complicated lane-changes on such roads on a regular basis.


 
I'm a chicken: if you don't want the alternative, motor traffic free route, give me it, I'll take it gladly


----------



## hoopdriver (2 Jul 2012)

Nobody pays road tax. Nobody at all. Not cars, not bicycles, not horses, not anybody. It doesn't exist and has not existed in any form in Britain since 1937, and even then it was a minor impost covering certain local roads. The money that is extorted from motorists and which they so bitterly resent is Vehicle Emission Duty (VED) and is based on carbon emissions. Even if VED was extended to include bicycles we would still be paying zero - as indeed do a good many motorists who drive low-emissions cars.


----------



## Jehannum (10 Jul 2012)

Sorry, but VED is Vehicle Excise Duty. It has only reletively recently been linked to vehicle emmisions. Please, let's not start creating more misnomers about "car tax".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Excise_Duty


----------



## downfader (10 Jul 2012)

Jehannum said:


> Sorry, but VED is Vehicle Excise Duty. It has only reletively recently been linked to vehicle emmisions. Please, let's not start creating more misnomers about "car tax".
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Excise_Duty


 
It isnt a misnomer when it is a condition they have to adhere to. It doesnt matter what it used to be, its what it is now that counts - as i said before - people dont still bang on about window tax or poll tax - they know its council tax (and they know why they pay it)


----------



## benb (10 Jul 2012)

I was cycling in the Netherlands a couple of weeks ago, and a policeman told us we had to use the path if one existed (although he was very nice about it, and didn't give us aggro)


----------



## BentMikey (10 Jul 2012)

benb said:


> I was cycling in the Netherlands a couple of weeks ago, and a policeman told us we had to use the path if one existed (although he was very nice about it, and didn't give us aggro)


 
That is why the Quest and Mango are made 76.5cm wide - under 75cm and bicycles have to use the path, over, and they don't.


----------



## benb (10 Jul 2012)

BentMikey said:


> That is why the Quest and Mango are made 76.5cm wide - under 75cm and bicycles have to use the path, over, and they don't.


 
So next time, I'll strap a piece of 76cm wide wood to my bike!


----------



## hoopdriver (10 Jul 2012)

Jehannum said:


> Sorry, but VED is Vehicle Excise Duty. It has only reletively recently been linked to vehicle emmisions. Please, let's not start creating more misnomers about "car tax".
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Excise_Duty


Yes but it IS linked to emissions, recently or not. There is nothing misleadng about that!


----------



## User269 (10 Jul 2012)

Cab said:


> Myth: "You don't pay road tax so..."
> 
> Rebuttal: It doesn't matter what follows the above statemet. No, we don't pay road tax, but neither does a motorist.


 
Yes we do. All roads except motorways and some trunk roads are paid for out of your council tax.


----------



## hoopdriver (10 Jul 2012)

User269 said:


> Yes we do. All roads except motorways and some trunk roads are paid for out of your council tax.


That is not a road tax.


----------



## Ian Cooper (10 Jul 2012)

benb said:


> I was cycling in the Netherlands a couple of weeks ago, and a policeman told us we had to use the path if one existed (although he was very nice about it, and didn't give us aggro)


 
Here we see the reality of the Netherlands bicycle dystopia: the police tell you nicely that you can't cycle on a perfectly good road. Sounds awesome!

He was nice about it, but the reality is that he's not going to allow you to use the road.


----------



## benb (10 Jul 2012)

Ian Cooper said:


> Here we see the reality of the Netherlands bicycle dystopia: the police tell you nicely that you can't cycle on a perfectly good road. Sounds awesome!
> 
> He was nice about it, but the reality is that he's not going to allow you to use the road.


 
I agree it's wrong, but the cycle lanes are at least good enough to use without feeling like a second class citizen.


----------



## Ian Cooper (10 Jul 2012)

benb said:


> I agree it's wrong, but the cycle lanes are at least good enough to use without feeling like a second class citizen.


 
I'm sure the back of the bus was a perfectly fine place to sit, and I'm sure many black people in the age of US racial segregation didn't feel like sitting there made them second-class citizens. But you don't have to feel discrimination for it to exist.

The problem is not that bike paths in the Netherlands aren't usable. It's that we don't have a choice not to use them.


----------



## Simba (11 Jul 2012)

Cyclists create emissions, CO2 from breathing out and methane from farting.


----------



## BentMikey (11 Jul 2012)

...and from the environmental effects of bike manufacture, maintenance, and transport of parts.


----------



## Jehannum (11 Jul 2012)

downfader said:


> It isnt a misnomer when it is a condition they have to adhere to. It doesnt matter what it used to be, its what it is now that counts - as i said before - people dont still bang on about window tax or poll tax - they know its council tax (and they know why they pay it)


 
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean there: it's a misnomer because it's not Vehicle Emissions Duty, it's Vehicle Excise Duty. Perhaps I mean malaproprism, not misnomer? I just wanted to make clear what the letters stand for. Just because other people use the wrong term for something, doesn't make it right, and if we're going to use the argument "no-one pays road tax" we should try to get our terminology correct elsewhere too, surely.

I don't dispute that it is related to emissions. Perhaps I wan't clear enough in not disputing that.


----------



## Drago (24 Jul 2012)

My rebuttal to any of these glib and cliched statements is to...

Go cross eyed, pull a funny face and start dribbling down my chin. No bugger has yet come up with a good comeback to my "escaped mental patient" act.


----------



## beany_bot (19 Aug 2012)

How about....don't rise to it?

Does seem to me as a "newbie" that there is a strong element in cycling of "wanting to be pissed off at drivers". It's a shame because as a "car driver" I had heard that cyclists hate motorists and loved any exscuse to scream and argue with them but didn't really believe it. From what I have seen though, cyclists hate motorists far more than the other way round.

I say live and let live, if someone insults you, grow up and stop memorising certain portions of the highway code for goodness sake... 

The only way cyclists/motorists/horses/pedestrians will be able to use the roads in harmony is by not being aggressive, either in the start, or in rebuttal.


----------



## Crosstrailer (7 Sep 2012)

^^^^^^^^^^^ This

Quite surprised at some of the pettyness and anger at car drivers from certain users on here to be honest. I would be willing to wager a large number of them don't drive and see the car as some instrument of satan.........


----------



## subaqua (7 Sep 2012)

Drago said:


> My rebuttal to any of these glib and cliched statements is to...
> 
> Go cross eyed, pull a funny face and start dribbling down my chin. No bugger has yet come up with a good comeback to my "escaped mental patient" Chief Constable act.


 
not fixed but possibly more accurate


----------



## Adasta (16 Sep 2012)

beany_bot said:


> It's a shame because as a "car driver" I had heard that cyclists hate motorists and loved any exscuse to scream and argue with them


 
Lots of "us" are still car drivers. It's not an us vs. them situation.

Also, the opinion you reference is somewhat tainted in that it concentrates only on the effects rather than the causes. It's perfectly legitimate to "scream and argue" with someone in a car if that car's driver had threatened your safety through negligent driving or verbal/physical abuse.

It is usually better to leave things, but it is extremely hard to overcome the human fight or flight response.


----------



## P_Dalen (2 Oct 2012)

dondare said:


> "Bikes are for kids. Grown-ups drive cars."
> 
> "When my legs stop working I'll get a car; and when my cock stops working I'll get a car just like yours."


Thanks, dondare! I remembered this one.



> hahaa buy yourself a car and stop whining
> asdsdffasdf
> 
> Do you really have a car, asdsdffasdf? What kind of car is that?
> ...


http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=6tOaBwU4fxU&feature=em-comment_reply_received


----------



## BentMikey (3 Oct 2012)

Hahahahaha! You pwned him properly there.


----------



## P_Dalen (3 Oct 2012)

...thanks to dondare.


----------



## Electric_Andy (3 Oct 2012)

beany_bot said:


> How about....don't rise to it?
> 
> Does seem to me as a "newbie" that there is a strong element in cycling of "wanting to be ****ed off at drivers". It's a shame because as a "car driver" I had heard that cyclists hate motorists and loved any exscuse to scream and argue with them but didn't really believe it. From what I have seen though, cyclists hate motorists far more than the other way round.
> 
> ...


I think 99% of cyclists would NOT get angry with car drivers if it were simply a comment or argument at the lights about not paying VED etc. However, confrontations/arguments initiated by car drivers in my experience are nearly always preceded by a close pass or cut-up.


----------



## Cycling Dan (14 Oct 2012)

BentMikey said:


> ...and from the environmental effects of bike manufacture, maintenance, and transport of parts.


however that is taxed through other methods. Like cooperation environment tax


----------



## chewy (20 Oct 2012)

Drago said:


> My rebuttal to any of these glib and cliched statements is to...
> 
> Go cross eyed, pull a funny face and start dribbling down my chin. No bugger has yet come up with a good comeback to my "escaped mental patient" act.


 
Yeah, nice one. But you can stop now

I SAID YOU CAN STOP NOW


----------



## Devonshiredave (12 Nov 2012)

[QUOTE 299454, member: 45"]Myth: You're holding me up and making my drive into work longer.

Rebuttal: "And how long do you think your journey would take if all of us cycling commuters drove in separately?"[/quote]
Or, " If you'd got up 5/10 minutes earlier, you'd have missed me"!


----------



## Shut Up Legs (19 Feb 2013)

beany_bot said:


> From what I have seen though, cyclists hate motorists far more than the other way round.


There may be some truth in that, and I think it's probably due to the fact that motorists can simply by negligence threaten our lives, whereas the reverse is much rarer. It's easy to feel negative emotions towards someone who, by letting their attention wander a bit, can cause you considerable damage with their large and heavy machine. I personally find it difficult to remain objective towards Australian motorists, when I see every single day some of them doing incredibly stupid things that put the more vulnerable road users, not to mention other motorists, at risk. I do keep reminding myself that they're not all idiots, but can't help the fact that I just don't trust any of them, and this has kept me collision free so far (_hope I didn't just jinx myself with that_).

I'd be more than happy to just be treated as another road user, and I'm happy to accept the responsibilities that go with this, but I have yet to see any society that grants cyclists the corresponding rights. I have briefly visited Denmark and never been to the Netherlands, but I'm told they have the closest thing to such a society; it must be nice.


----------



## chernij (10 Apr 2013)

I got told off by a driver because my front light was too bright and blinded him.
My rebuttal: "Yours is a heck of a lot brighter!"


----------



## fudgepanda (24 Apr 2013)

tdr1nka said:


> Said to Nancy Astor.
> 
> The duo also giving us the equally wonderful;
> 
> ...


Was it not Bessie Braddock? There seem to be various accounts of the exact words, but appears to be on the lines of:
"Winston, you are drunk, (and what's more you are disgustingly drunk)"
"Bessie, my dear, you are ugly, (and what's more you are disgustingly ugly). But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be (disgustingly ugly)"
There are loads of slightly different versions of this exchange, as there are with Nancy Astor's joust with Winnie.
"If I were your wife/you were my husband I'd poison your tea/coffee."
"If you were my wife/I were your husband I'd drink it"

Because of the variations in quotes and the fact that each quote had been attributed to each of the ladies in question, it's possible neither exchange actually took place. I really hope they did because they're really funny and their kind are sadly lacking in modern politics.


----------



## Cycling Dan (4 May 2013)

BentMikey said:


> ...and from the environmental effects of bike manufacture, maintenance, and transport of parts.


Covered through VED and Industrial emissions tax


----------



## Ming the Merciless (26 May 2013)

You don't pay road tax...

Rebuttal

Why don't you fix the roads you cheapskate?


----------



## Profpointy (26 May 2013)

Perhaps not quite a "myth & rebuttal", but I rather like the Spartan's response to a threat ending "if I enter your city with my army, I will raze it", I think from the Persian king.

Sparta's reply: one word, "If".


----------



## PedalCat (24 Jun 2013)

Re "road tax".
Just as the NHS is free at the point of delivery, the roads are free for all to use. Worded a bit more snappily, this just might help some people understand.


----------



## Profpointy (30 Jun 2013)

re "road tax"....

rebuttal: "so how much extra should I have to pay for not using my car today?"


----------



## 3outof5 (12 Aug 2013)

_"Bloody cyclists, you think you own the bloody road"._
_"You're right, I do*."_

*Can be easily qualified by obvious argument re. I pay income tax, I pay road tax (for two cars actually), I pay VAT, etc., etc., so yes, I do actually own the road**.

NB. do not use under the following circumstances:

You are on a private road not owned by yourself
You are in a foreign country
You have never paid any taxes in your life and have no intention of doing so.


----------



## TwickenhamCyclist (13 Aug 2013)

fudgepanda said:


> Was it not Bessie Braddock? There seem to be various accounts of the exact words, but appears to be on the lines of:
> "Winston, you are drunk, (and what's more you are disgustingly drunk)"
> "Bessie, my dear, you are ugly, (and what's more you are disgustingly ugly). But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be (disgustingly ugly)"
> There are loads of slightly different versions of this exchange, as there are with Nancy Astor's joust with Winnie.
> ...


One of my favorites, but possibly apocryphal, was Churchill's reply, whilst in his bathroom, on being told the Lord Privy Seal wanted to meet with him: “Tell the Lord Privy Seal I am sealed in my privy, and can only deal with one shoot at a time.”


----------



## TwickenhamCyclist (15 Aug 2013)

Slightly positive road tax is a myth piece on the bbc


----------



## Dave the Smeghead (10 Sep 2013)

Cab said:


> Myth: "You should be in the cycle lane!"
> 
> Rebuttal: No, its your choice as to whether or not to use a cycle lane. If it is safer and convenient then do so, otherwise you're not obliged to use the cycle lane or any other facility.
> 
> ...


And sometimes full of broken glass from the morons drinking alcopops and then thinking its cool to smash the bottles on the ground.


----------



## HB_Dude (22 Mar 2014)

4F said:


> Myth: You don't pay road tax
> Rebuttal: F off lard arse



Better rebuttal: The Tax has nothing to do with roads, its actually called '*Vehicle Excise Duty* (VED)' , your taxed for owning a car dumb-ass! ( insert appropriate expletives here if you wish )


----------



## User16625 (6 Apr 2014)

Cab said:


> Myth: *"You don't pay road tax so...*"
> 
> Rebuttal: It doesn't matter what follows the above statemet. No, we don't pay road tax, but neither does a motorist. 'Road tax' has been 'VED' since 1936, and is completely unlinked to spending on road maintenance and road building. We have every bit as much right to be on the road as motorists, there is no taxation or payment argument.
> 
> ...



Whatever it is called, motorists also have the option of getting on a bicycle to avoid paying road tax (unless they're fat). 

Myth: Riding bicycles makes you impotent.

Rebuttel: Riding your wife counters it.


----------



## hoopdriver (6 Apr 2014)

RideLikeTheStig said:


> Whatever it is called, motorists also have the option of getting on a bicycle to avoid paying road tax (unless they're fat).
> 
> Myth: Riding bicycles makes you impotent.
> 
> Rebuttel: Riding your wife counters it.


classy


----------



## Acesand8s (22 May 2014)

This is an international forum. In Colorado USA a road tax is purchased when you buy a new bike. In CO USA you are not required to ride in a bike lane when one is provided, BUT IT IS ILLEGAL for a motorist of any kind motor electric or gas of any size to *park* or ride in a bike lane when one is there.


----------



## glenn forger (27 May 2014)

We should copy that law, also the cannabis vending machines you guys have.


----------



## Acesand8s (4 Jun 2014)

glenn forger said:


> We should copy that law, also the cannabis vending machines you guys have.


Actually cannabis is strictly illegal to grow in the US, Mary Jane is legal in CO as a federal pardon, but is still illegal in the US, and is not at all cannabis, as cannabis has a THC content of 1 100th of what is in weed.


----------



## glenn forger (4 Jun 2014)

WHAT?


----------



## Acesand8s (4 Jun 2014)

Yes thats right. So when we have a new president if he or she wants they could terminate all weed sales in CO.


glenn forger said:


> WHAT?


----------



## Acesand8s (4 Jun 2014)

Maz said:


> Rebuttal: Worms don't come in cans.


Yea they do, for fishermen. Duh!


----------



## Acesand8s (4 Jun 2014)

Myth: yelling at cyclist will make him upset so lets scream at him. 
Rebuttal: headphones! ...


----------



## Enis Baysal (10 Jul 2014)

Not many will agree but im finding myself fighting fire with fire more often.. if they are ignorant im getting my message across.

Myth: Hey a biker! Im going to change lanes and cut him up within inches.

Rebuttal: Give the wingmirror a slap at the next set of lights so it faces the wrong way.

My reasons for this.. causes no damage, seriously pisses them off, and once in a blue moon makes them think twice.
As tesco say, Every little helps.


----------



## Das (20 Jul 2014)

_Cyclists don't pay road tax either... 
_
Why do you want me to pay something no one else does?.


_Car drivers pay insurance in case they cause an accident. Cyclists do not.
_
Really? Give British Cycling a call and ask them how many Members they have.....


_Car drivers have to have their vehicles prepared to a minimum safety standard. Cyclists do not._

True, but do a Freedom of Information Request to the Police and ask them how many Motorists were reported for not having their vehicles on the road with a valid MOT and get back to me.


Motorists do have to be trained and assessed as qualified to use the roads. Cyclists do not.

Aye? So whats your excuse?


----------



## Drago (25 Aug 2014)

I've spent some years now working on a response scenario for such a situation.

Now whenever someone says to me "cyclists don't[insert cliche]" I reply "shut the f*** up!"

Well, in my mind I do.


----------



## Hop3y (9 Sep 2014)

I got shouted "Get a job!" from a car this morning...


----------



## Drago (9 Sep 2014)

"Why don't you pay some road tax?"

"Why don't you pay higher rate income tax like I do?"

It usually leaves them floundering for a response.


----------



## Svendo (9 Sep 2014)

glenn forger said:


> WHAT?


I think 'Mericans usage to distinguish different varieties of the cannabis plant is that 'cannabis'='hemp' (low THC, for fibre or bio fuel or just ditch weed) or (possibly resin) and 'Mari-juana'=cannabis (but not resin) grown for drug content. But strictly speaking it is all hemp and it is all cannabis, although nearly everyone uses MaryJ. to refer to drug-varieties. Some of this usage is enshrined in different legal codes and that, but isn't botanically accurate, as cannabis is the family with 3 species/subspecies that for the most usage are hybridized.

FWI the flowers (buds) of all varieties (except maybe the modern commercial specialist fibre varieties*) will get you high, but with different efficiencies and limits. Resin should be stronger than herbal when properly made, as it is basically a refining process, and can get very strong when screens and water techniques are used.

*this may be propoganda to keep hippies and students out of fields.


----------



## noodle (16 Sep 2014)

beany_bot said:


> How about....don't rise to it?
> 
> Does seem to me as a "newbie" that there is a strong element in cycling of "wanting to be ****ed off at drivers". It's a shame because as a "car driver" I had heard that cyclists hate motorists and loved any exscuse to scream and argue with them but didn't really believe it. From what I have seen though, cyclists hate motorists far more than the other way round.
> 
> ...



im not new as such never really stopped riding but after seeing some of the vitriol towards motorists AND facilities laid out for cyclists AND laws pertaining to the use of such facilities ive a question

if so many are against the use of amenities provided for cyclists why then whinge when a car stops in one of them? or complain about choice motor vehicles down have the choice to use cycle routes do they 
as for red light jumping (took me a while to figure out rlj) both do it but cars etc tend to do it on 'dark amber' cyclists do it at all points of red.


----------



## Racing roadkill (23 Oct 2014)

I had one of my absolute fave's today. CAR DRIVER: You do know that blinky lights are illegal for road use dont you?
ME : NO Just NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO fark OFF NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, and breathe.


----------



## benb (23 Oct 2014)

Racing roadkill said:


> I had one of my absolute fave's today. CAR DRIVER: You do know that blinky lights are illegal for road use dont you?
> ME : NO Just NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO fark OFF NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, and breathe.



They used to be illegal (or rather, it was illegal to only have a flashing light with no solid), so it's not surprising some people think they still are.


----------



## semislickstick (17 Dec 2014)

Racing roadkill said:


> I had one of my absolute fave's today. CAR DRIVER: You do know that blinky lights are illegal for road use dont you?
> ME : NO Just NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO fark OFF NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, and breathe.



Reply: "The law changed in October 2005, what else aren't you up to date with?" That and/or "Fark off!"


----------



## winjim (17 Dec 2014)

semislickstick said:


> Reply: "The law changed in October 2005, what else aren't you up to date with?" That and/or "Fark off!"



Well yes, but people in glass houses really ought to make sure their lights are BS marked. And fit their pedal reflectors.


----------



## J1888 (18 Feb 2015)

Moped riders going into ASLs while traffic stopped at red...at dangerous junctions...'we're allowed to be here' - no, you aren't.

Funny enough, rarely (if ever) motorcyclists, just moped riders.


----------



## andrewsdad (8 Mar 2015)

4F said:


> Myth: You don't pay road tax
> Rebuttal: F off lard arse





GrahamG said:


> Right, I'm going for the 'same-level' rebuttal that is not confrontational and might appease the average Sun reader:
> 
> Cyclists don't pay road tax - "Don't worry mate - I still get fisted by Brown on everything else, believe me"
> 
> ...


Im going to use these lol


----------



## LeonBlack (2 Jun 2015)

If you can keep your cool in a situation and get into an argument with a driver the best thing to do is tell ask them, "Are you a bit thick" or "You're not very bright, are you".

I went past a stopped van at the lights once and he had his window down. He shouted at me, "You shouldn't be f%*kin' overtakin' me here". I just said, "woah, have you brushed your teeth this morning; you're breath smells like do sh!t"

The look on his face was a picture, I thought he was going to explode with rage.

The one caveat for all of the above is make sure you end up going a different way to the driver as they do get very angry.


It's not just cyclist who get abuse though. I used to ride a scooter. It was a 125cc, so was capable of going around 65mph and easily cruised around the streets at 30-35mph. An old man once overtook me, cut me up and forced me across to the pavement. I caught up with him at the lights, pulled alongside and knocked on the window. I realised it was an old man and thought I'd just tell him to be careful as he nearly knocked me off.

Before I had chance, he wound down the window, gave me a load of abuse and told me I shouldn't be riding in the middle of the lane. I should be riding by the pavement.


----------



## andrewsdad (2 Jun 2015)

LeonBlack said:


> If you can keep your cool in a situation and get into an argument with a driver the best thing to do is tell ask them, "Are you a bit thick" or "You're not very bright, are you".
> 
> I went past a stopped van at the lights once and he had his window down. He shouted at me, "You shouldn't be f%*kin' overtakin' me here". I just said, "woah, have you brushed your teeth this morning; you're breath smells like do sh!t"
> 
> ...


Hahahaha takes allsorts I suppose. My own put down is " I'll say this very slowly so you can understand ......." 
Works every time, or if I get abuse I respond with, do you kiss your kids with that mouth. Shuts them up instantly.


----------



## mustang1 (14 Jul 2015)

J1888 said:


> Moped riders going into ASLs while traffic stopped at red...at dangerous junctions...'we're allowed to be here' - no, you aren't.
> 
> Funny enough, rarely (if ever) motorcyclists, just moped riders.



Iirc road users other than cyclists arent allowed to be inside asl but are not breaking the law if they are. (Don't ask me idk how the law works either).


----------



## w00hoo_kent (14 Jul 2015)

When the light goes red the line at the beginning of the ASL is the stop line for all traffic, cycles can enter the ASL after that point, but must use the dotted line to enter. So if you are in slow moving traffic and the light turns red after you've crossed in to the ASL but before you've reached the far stop line of the ASL then you can stop inside the ASL legally no matter what you are. This happens in something like 0.005% of cases of non-bicycles being stopped in ASL's. This may be a made up statistic based on personal observation.


----------



## RMurphy195 (14 Jul 2015)

Myth: You don't pay road tax
Rebuttal: Yes I do, on those two cars in the driveway of that house. I also pay council tax on that property, which funds this road.


----------



## RMurphy195 (14 Jul 2015)

Myth: You want to keep out of the way of the traffic mate
Rebuttal: I'm part of the traffic mate


----------



## semislickstick (1 Aug 2015)

winjim said:


> Well yes, but people in glass houses really ought to make sure their lights are BS marked. And fit their pedal reflectors.


Mine are German B&M so probably better than BS and EU legal, yeah have those too. What else?


----------



## bozmandb9 (13 Sep 2015)

beany_bot said:


> How about....don't rise to it?
> 
> Does seem to me as a "newbie" that there is a strong element in cycling of "wanting to be pissed off at drivers". It's a shame because as a "car driver" I had heard that cyclists hate motorists and loved any exscuse to scream and argue with them but didn't really believe it. From what I have seen though, cyclists hate motorists far more than the other way round.
> 
> ...



Believe me, there's no element of wanting to be pissed off at drivers. There is sadly though a gap in understanding. As a driver myself, who I must confess, before I got back into cycling, I was almost certainly inconsiderate towards cyclists. I would have passed too close, and too fast. I think a lot of drivers think 'well I can hardly stop behind every cyclist I encounter and wait for space to overtake. I can squeeze past and so long as I don't hit them what's the problem'.

Maybe not quite that bad, but that was much more my mentality, and I think it's extremely common. Drivers tend to see the road as being theirs, and really do resent being held up by those using the roads for recreation (or even commuting by bike). 

Then there are some drivers who are just idiots, who thinks it's funny to assault cyclists, either verbally, or physically, whether by throwing things, or using fists out of their window. It's not just cyclists either. A mate of mine got beaten up whilst out running, by a bunch of lads, for no reason other than the fact that he was out running (this is in South Oxfordshire, so hardly a rough area).

So, I'm afraid I disagree with your post beany_bot. I believe that once enough motorists realise that they cannot get away with dangerous driving, or abuse of cyclists, the incidences will start to plummet. Whether it's because their car doors get dented at traffic lights, they get a visit from the Police as a result of reports of dangerous driving, they get named and shamed, or they just get a facefull of righteous rage and anger on the road, whatever it takes to make them realise that we will not be passive victims, not be bullied or abused, that is what we should do. 

Each of us can find our own way to deal with each incident. But I don't believe in tolerance of abuse, or people putting my life (or those of my children), in danger.


----------



## Drago (13 Sep 2015)

Myth - You don't pay road tax.

Rebuttal - No I don't. Get over it.


----------



## RoubaixCube (16 Sep 2015)

bozmandb9 said:


> Believe me, there's no element of wanting to be pissed off at drivers. There is sadly though a gap in understanding. As a driver myself, who I must confess, before I got back into cycling, I was almost certainly inconsiderate towards cyclists. I would have passed too close, and too fast. I think a lot of drivers think 'well I can hardly stop behind every cyclist I encounter and wait for space to overtake. I can squeeze past and so long as I don't hit them what's the problem'.
> 
> Maybe not quite that bad, but that was much more my mentality, and I think it's extremely common. Drivers tend to see the road as being theirs, and really do resent being held up by those using the roads for recreation (or even commuting by bike).
> 
> ...




Some people are just angry regardless of how polite you address them. Maybe it was your fault, Maybe it was theirs. They are just going to get all up in your face to intimidate you, even going as far as pushing/punching you etc etc. People who generally have a poor attitude is who we want to 'educate' or failing that, be banned from the road.
As *PEOPLE* we have every right as each other to be on the road, So why cant we respect each other as fellow human beings then drag things down by labeling people as 'cyclists' or 'drivers' as such - sure, you might ride a bike and you might drive a car but all that does is give people a reason to discriminate. 

I class everyone who uses the road as a _*'fellow road user' *_ and it dont matter if youre on a scooter you bought from argos pushing yourself in the cycle lane or one of them new two wheeled electric things that Usain Bolt got run over by. I could not care less - everyone has a right to be there though maybe not the scooters and such, but im still courteous to those who are trying to make it to their destination in the bus or cycle lane because we are share it. 

There is honestly no need for any sort of animosity or prejudice. Why cant we just share, and be most awesome to one another?

I do think that people who choose to commute should sit some sort of crash course on road safety and the Green Cross Code because Its not just drivers that need edumacating, Cyclists need some slaps on the wrists too to curb their bad behaviour. Just as there are bad drivers, there are bad cyclists but lets not forget who is the one driving a two tonne steel cage with wheels.

Im not saying cyclists need to be licensed to be on the road, but at least have a certain knowledge or understanding of how to obey the rules of the road. I was lucky, when I first started cycling on roads a few years back I had a friend who pretty much commuted to work all day erryday and he took me under his wing and gave me guidance.

My local council here runs cycle courses for free quite regularly. If you are a new to commuting via roads then I do recommend that you contact your local council and see what they have to offer you. Even If it costs a little money its still worth it.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (25 Sep 2015)

RMurphy195 said:


> Myth: You don't pay road tax
> Rebuttal: Yes I do, on those two cars in the driveway of that house. I also pay council tax on that property, which funds this road.


Technically you pay VED.


----------

