Advanced Driving Hub

Imsensible wrote:

Silk wrote:

Imsensible wrote:The attitude seems to be that cyclists are somehow second class citizens.

It's not an attitude, it's a fact. The roads are there primarily for motor vehicles; which makes cyclists secondary users. HTH

Yep, it definitely helps. It confirms that you are indeed an idiot.

Whether or not I'm an idiot is immaterial. Roads are primarily for motor vehicles, with some being for motor vehicle only - that's a simple fact. You're not required to like it. Calling me names will not change it.

Roads are maintained and built to carry motor vehicle traffic, but all are free to use them, subject to certain constraints - one of which you mention above.

IIRC you are, or were, an Observer for the IAM. Do you teach your candidates this same intolerant attitude to other types of road user? For example, do you teach them to expect cyclists to, as you put it, "voluntarily move into the ditch to make way for them"? How do you coach them to encourage this self-abasement? By aggressive use of the horn, perhaps?

FWIW, consider that pedestrians and cyclists can use the roads unlicensed and uninsured, without any ongoing costs, apart from using motorways. They have a right to use them.

Motorists however, do not have those rights. They can have permission to gain access and use a vehicle removed.

So how does the case for 'roads for motor vehicles' stand up then?

Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:IIRC you are, or were, an Observer for the IAM. Do you teach your candidates this same intolerant attitude to other types of road user? For example, do you teach them to expect cyclists to, as you put it, "voluntarily move into the ditch to make way for them"? How do you coach them to encourage this self-abasement? By aggressive use of the horn, perhaps?

What do you think? Seriously now.

You also need to look up the word "voluntarily". I'm just glad I didn't end up with someone like you for an associate. I'd most likely have passed you over to one of our more senior people, authorised to use corporal punishment.

Horse wrote:So how does the case for 'roads for motor vehicles' stand up then?

If there were no motor vehicles, we simply wouldn't have the roads we have today. It's what they were/are designed for. Secondary road users are welcome to use these roads, but on the understanding that they have to respect primary users. Nothing wrong with that.

Silk wrote:

Horse wrote:So how does the case for 'roads for motor vehicles' stand up then?

If there were no motor vehicles, we simply wouldn't have the roads we have today.

What, do you mean well-constructed, smooth-surfaced and well-drained direct routes between major conurbations?

Considering that we still use routes laid out by the Romans, and some surfaces laid by them are still in existence, either you know something about their use of vehicles which has been well hushed-up elsewhere, or you're wrong



Blackstone Edge, Rishworth Moor in Greater Manchester






And if you weren't aware of this aspect of history, then I'm very sorry for ridiculing you

Silk wrote:

Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:IIRC you are, or were, an Observer for the IAM. Do you teach your candidates this same intolerant attitude to other types of road user? For example, do you teach them to expect cyclists to, as you put it, "voluntarily move into the ditch to make way for them"? How do you coach them to encourage this self-abasement? By aggressive use of the horn, perhaps?

What do you think? Seriously now.

You also need to look up the word "voluntarily".

What do I think? Well, you're either telling porkies, or you're a hypocrite who preaches one thing and practises another.

What do you do when the cyclist doesn't understand your hierarchy of road users and kneel by the roadside, bowing down as you pass - follow them, swearing to yourself, or something more aggressive?

Horse wrote:

Blackstone Edge, Rishworth Moor in Greater Manchester

Lovely that - I remember walking along it on the Pennine Way, reading in my guide book about Daniel Defoe using it nearly 400 years ago, and Lady Celia Fiennes too.

It's not Roman, though, reportedly.

Horse wrote:

Silk wrote:

Horse wrote:So how does the case for 'roads for motor vehicles' stand up then?

If there were no motor vehicles, we simply wouldn't have the roads we have today.

What, do you mean well-constructed, smooth-surfaced and well-drained direct routes between major conurbations?

Considering that we still use routes laid out by the Romans, and some surfaces laid by them are still in existence, either you know something about their use of vehicles which has been well hushed-up elsewhere, or you're wrong



Blackstone Edge, Rishworth Moor in Greater Manchester






And if you weren't aware of this aspect of history, then I'm very sorry for ridiculing you

Nice pictures. Point being?

Blimey - only 280 years old. So well into the era of the motor vehicle.