Lancashire cyclist Bradley Wiggins home after crash (From Lancashire Telegraph)

It's sad he got injured being knocked off his bike, but come on now it's big news "What can be done to protect THE CYCLIST"? well for a start they could read the Highway code, ride in single file not chatting to their mate/spouse while riding 6 abreast on country roads, Your just waiting to die with that riding style.
What about PROTECTING THE MOTORIST for a change? im sick of it its always the motorist who has to change because cyclists cant obey the law, and parents cant control their kids on the roadside, maybe because its the mobole phone culture we live in, Tuffty adverts and the green cross code were around when I was a kid, Time for a shake up make cyclists have a basic 3rd party insurance so we can claim from them when they mess up.
the country is hell bent on introducing cycle lanes but cyclists wont use them

Mikeee47 wrote:
It's sad he got injured being knocked off his bike, but come on now it's big news "What can be done to protect THE CYCLIST"? well for a start they could read the Highway code, ride in single file not chatting to their mate/spouse while riding 6 abreast on country roads, Your just waiting to die with that riding style.
What about PROTECTING THE MOTORIST for a change? im sick of it its always the motorist who has to change because cyclists cant obey the law, and parents cant control their kids on the roadside, maybe because its the mobole phone culture we live in, Tuffty adverts and the green cross code were around when I was a kid, Time for a shake up make cyclists have a basic 3rd party insurance so we can claim from them when they mess up.
the country is hell bent on introducing cycle lanes but cyclists wont use them

It's a sad indictment on the prevailing state of the education system in this country when people like Mikeee47 exist and are, incredibly, entitled to vote. Surely there should be some form of IQ test to pass to enable people to demonstrate sufficient intellect to be entrusted with a pencil in a voting booth? When they froth at the mouth like this one over imagined problems that don't exist so have to be invented, would euthanasia be considered too punitive?

I don't know who he is or who was at fault for the collision (though probably the cyclist, as is usually the case)...but what the hell is up with those sidies?!

Get them shaved!

Mr Burns would have a fit!

No matter who they are or how famous they are, they'll all lycra wearing louts.
Look at that 'pleb' MP > Typical example.
How many pedestrians have been injured by these thugs jumping red lights?

Chris P Bacon wrote:

Mikeee47 wrote:
It's sad he got injured being knocked off his bike, but come on now it's big news "What can be done to protect THE CYCLIST"? well for a start they could read the Highway code, ride in single file not chatting to their mate/spouse while riding 6 abreast on country roads, Your just waiting to die with that riding style.
What about PROTECTING THE MOTORIST for a change? im sick of it its always the motorist who has to change because cyclists cant obey the law, and parents cant control their kids on the roadside, maybe because its the mobole phone culture we live in, Tuffty adverts and the green cross code were around when I was a kid, Time for a shake up make cyclists have a basic 3rd party insurance so we can claim from them when they mess up.
the country is hell bent on introducing cycle lanes but cyclists wont use them

It's a sad indictment on the prevailing state of the education system in this country when people like Mikeee47 exist and are, incredibly, entitled to vote. Surely there should be some form of IQ test to pass to enable people to demonstrate sufficient intellect to be entrusted with a pencil in a voting booth? When they froth at the mouth like this one over imagined problems that don't exist so have to be invented, would euthanasia be considered too punitive?

Porky Bacon slice
Everything i wrote is fact!!! I have to deal with it every day, and have to PAY through the nose for the privilige, High time cyclists were BANNED of the high way until reach a certain legal requierment ie working brakes, lights, cycling proficiency test too,(everyone else does why not cyclists) it seems it's never the cyclists fault,
oh yeah and a compulsory 3rd party insurance,

GET A LIFE SADDO

Mikeee47 wrote:

Chris P Bacon wrote:

Mikeee47 wrote:
It's sad he got injured being knocked off his bike, but come on now it's big news "What can be done to protect THE CYCLIST"? well for a start they could read the Highway code, ride in single file not chatting to their mate/spouse while riding 6 abreast on country roads, Your just waiting to die with that riding style.
What about PROTECTING THE MOTORIST for a change? im sick of it its always the motorist who has to change because cyclists cant obey the law, and parents cant control their kids on the roadside, maybe because its the mobole phone culture we live in, Tuffty adverts and the green cross code were around when I was a kid, Time for a shake up make cyclists have a basic 3rd party insurance so we can claim from them when they mess up.
the country is hell bent on introducing cycle lanes but cyclists wont use them

It's a sad indictment on the prevailing state of the education system in this country when people like Mikeee47 exist and are, incredibly, entitled to vote. Surely there should be some form of IQ test to pass to enable people to demonstrate sufficient intellect to be entrusted with a pencil in a voting booth? When they froth at the mouth like this one over imagined problems that don't exist so have to be invented, would euthanasia be considered too punitive?

Porky Bacon slice
Everything i wrote is fact!!! I have to deal with it every day, and have to PAY through the nose for the privilige, High time cyclists were BANNED of the high way until reach a certain legal requierment ie working brakes, lights, cycling proficiency test too,(everyone else does why not cyclists) it seems it's never the cyclists fault,
oh yeah and a compulsory 3rd party insurance,

GET A LIFE SADDO

So you revert to lies to cover up the inadequacies of your original post? I bet your nose bashed against the computer screen there.

I drive 35,000 miles a year and have done for more than 20 years and yet to this date, I have never seen one single example of the nonsense you've obviously lifted from the Daily Heil or another equally despicable rag.

Nothing you wrote (badly) there is 'fact!!!' You do not have to deal with it AT ALL, never mind 'every day'. That's a lie, pure and simple. You have to pay through the nose for what 'privilige' (sic) exactly?

How may cyclists be banned 'of' (sic) the highway until...I won't go on; the rest is worthless and meaningless gobblydook that sense cannot be made of.

There are two types of people in the world, by and large; those who ARE cyclists and those who are jealous of cyclists. You don't need to declare your party on that one; it's all too clear.

AndyW wrote:
I don't know who he is or who was at fault for the collision (though probably the cyclist, as is usually the case)...but what the hell is up with those sidies?!

Get them shaved!

Mr Burns would have a fit!

Completely and utterly wrong.

The motorist is deemed at fault in around 60 - 75% of the case.

I just don't understand the anti-cycling thought process.

If you are suffering due to illegal behaviour report it to the police. It's pretty simple.

Cyclists are always running people over according to some posters. Amazingly there aren't any statistics to show this. It turns out that it's motorists injuring people (over 1,500 people killed every year).

Hey Mikeee47

How much of a moron are you? You seem to struggle to be able to tell the difference between fact and fiction. I suggest you follow your own advice and read the Highway Code yourself, particularly the part which states cyclists are permitted to ride two abreast.

Oh dear I touched a nerve did I?
With the head up the ar$e brigade you'll never learn 35,000miles a yr you must drive with your eyes shut
Muppet cyclists get insured and pass a test,

Chumba Wumba wrote:
Hey Mikeee47

How much of a moron are you? You seem to struggle to be able to tell the difference between fact and fiction. I suggest you follow your own advice and read the Highway Code yourself, particularly the part which states cyclists are permitted to ride two abreast.

Snot wipe
dont want to sound SMUG here but it's says

Not more than 2 abreast, single file on Narrow, & Busy roads, and on Bends, take a leaf out of your own book and get the facts before you write your own rules. I think it's yourself who needs to read the rules

@ Mikeee47
It's amazing how bizarre peoples opinions can be. I mean "What about PROTECTING THE MOTORIST for a change?"
Really? You actually think that the people wrapped in a 1 tonne metal box need the protection from those mean and nasty cyclists?
Not all cyclists are perfect, nor are motorists but to suggest that the main problems on the road are due to cyclists is just provably false.

Mikeee47 wrote:

Chumba Wumba wrote:
Hey Mikeee47

How much of a moron are you? You seem to struggle to be able to tell the difference between fact and fiction. I suggest you follow your own advice and read the Highway Code yourself, particularly the part which states cyclists are permitted to ride two abreast.

Snot wipe
dont want to sound SMUG here but it's says

Not more than 2 abreast, single file on Narrow, & Busy roads, and on Bends, take a leaf out of your own book and get the facts before you write your own rules. I think it's yourself who needs to read the rules

I think it's YOURself (sic) who needs to read, and then apply the rules of grammar correctly. It's amusing to see people on this topic queueing up to be idiots led, drum-roll please, by Mikeee47. Like the idiots who blamed the Hillsborough dead, head idiot Mikeee47 blames the VICTIM of the traffic incident. They don't get much dimmer than that, do they?