Forum menu
As before, I think the strongest way to highlight the false arguments put forward by the vehicle duty / road tax right case is to state what happens.
So:
Driver comes round a bend on the wrong side of road and hits another road user. As other road user is not paying a vehicle tax. Lack of payment of such tax is cited as a justification as to why they have no rights on the road.
Therefore:
Cyclists, horse riders, pedestrians have no rights. Since we playing the emotive game how about changing cyclist to children on a Duke of Edinburgy expedition. Or mother with child in push chair walking along a country lane. Neither of these would be paying a transport related tax for what the are doing at the time. Logic of the anti campaign dictates they too are lesser people.
No one is really going to tweet they think they think they've just knocked over a child are they?
Pah, "Road Tax" / VED it seems like barely any bugger has to pay it these days.
[url] https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-exempt-from-car-tax [/url]
Why are there not more people not commuting by Ride on Mower or one of those diddy Renault Leccy efforts then, if the annual polution charge is such a ball ache?
I think I fancy a Traction Engine...
[I]"Go on then Billy big Bollocks in your Q7, Run my great big bastard Steam powered behemoth off the Road, I've not paid any "Road Tax" on it and it slower than costal errosion!!![/I]
Of course if you can get yourself a 40 year old car your laughing, pre '73 is exempt too...
Funnily enough because cyclists, horse riders and pedestrians do have a right to be there there don't need to pay the tax. It's only motor vehicles that need to pay this tax to permit them the use of the road. Even if cyclists did pay road tax it would be £0 as it's zero emission.Lack of payment of such tax is cited as a justification as to why they have no rights on the road.
Perhaps there should be a "Clarksons Law" in forums, similar to Godwins law, but every thread about bikes and cars on the road will eventually descend into "I pay road tax, you don't"?
Clarkson is better viewed as a character he plays, rather than his actual views. A bit like David Cameron plays a buffoon called "Prime Minister".
it's bigotry based on a fallacy, they hate cyclists and use a poor argument to defend that hate. Not sure using logic to dismantle their argument will make a lot of difference TBH. Needs a societal change to fix it.Lack of payment of such tax is cited as a justification as to why they have no rights on the road.
I think clarkson on road cycling is like strava on BW riding, no he/it is not the root of all evil but he/it certainly eggs on the dickheads.
Perhaps there should be a "Clarksons Law" in forums, similar to Godwins law, but every thread about bikes and cars on the road will eventually descend into "I pay road tax, you don't"?
Discussions would be pretty short as IME "road tax" is the opening gambit of the majority.
That or something about "going through red lights"
is anyone else listening to radio norfolk?
it's terrifying/hilarious in equal measure...
fella in my office from down asia pacific way takes great delight in telling me cycling is the preserve of the poor - which it may well be in his home country....ive never been
interesting point is that he views his 500 pound ford ka in a higher "social class" than my bicycle....
he also takes great delight in telling me i pay no road tax nor have any right to be on the road.
We have alot to learn from the netherlands and copenhagen though. It is the cars that should be banned from the city centres - park and ride/busses + bike lanes that would cut congestion a plenty 😉
[i]more on the beeb this morning
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-22602141 [/i]
I just can't get the image of Steve Buscemi out of my head for some reason...
is anyone else listening to radio norfolk?
Listened to Carlton's bit and a couple of callers after him. Then had to switch it off before I started shouting and throwing my laptop across the office. 😳
The law should make her cycle round London for the day - that would change her view on cyclists...
Looks like her facebook profile is still active 😈
'ere, he's got a james martin book on his shelf, thought he was still in the cyclist sin bin from his leccy car review!more on the beeb this morning
trail_rat - Memberfella in my office from down asia pacific way takes great delight in telling me cycling is the preserve of the poor - which it may well be in his home country...
Indian friend of mine was absolutely horrified when her son asked for a bike- she rode and walked everywhere as a child (in India and the UK) because it was the only option, and she busted her ass over here to make sure he didn't have to. Meanwhile he was mortified getting dropped off at school by his mum 
GrahamS - MemberDoes it?? Says "car tax" or "vehicle tax" on any .gov site I've seen.
just for fun, google "road tax"- first hit for me is "Tax discs and road tax" at https://www.gov.uk/browse/driving/car-tax-discs
Clarkson is better viewed as a character he plays, rather than his actual views.
Really?
I think he does believe what he says - at least the basis of it.
Same with Matthew Parris, Nigel Havers and James Martin.
He's in a position of power - looked up to by a hell of a lot of people.
I'd rather view him as a stupid ****, legitimising hatred and ignorance, if it's all the same to you.
fella in my office from down asia pacific way takes great delight in telling me cycling is the preserve of the poor - which it may well be in his home country....ive never been
Sadly this seems to be a commonly held belief too.
Ask him if Alan Sugar or Richard Branson (both keen cyclists) are poor or lower status than him in his Ford Ka.
just for fun, google "road tax"- first hit for me is "Tax discs and road tax" at https://www.gov.uk/browse/driving/car-tax-discs
Bah - They've changed it again recently then, presumably to make sure they get search engine hits on the new gov.uk site, but you will notice that the URL, sub-headings and body text only refers to it as "car tax" or "vehicle tax"
See also:
[url= https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables ][b]Vehicle tax[/b] rate tables (gov.uk)[/url]
[url= https://www.gov.uk/tax-disc ][b]Car tax[/b]: get a tax disc for your vehicle (gov.uk)[/url]
[url= https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-exempt-from-car-tax ]Vehicles exempt from [b]vehicle tax[/b] (gov.uk)[/url]
[url= http://www.postoffice.co.uk/vehicle-tax ][b]Vehicle Tax[/b] (Post Office)[/url]
fella in my office from down asia pacific way takes great delight in telling me cycling is the preserve of the poor - which it may well be in his home country....ive never been
Might be a view that took root in recent british culture as well - having a car is seen as having arrived. Those who cycle, recycle or maybe take the bus arent keeping up with Jones.
they clearly dont know how much a Jones costs
Funnily enough because cyclists, horse riders and pedestrians do have a right to be there there don't need to pay the tax. It's only motor vehicles that need to pay this tax to permit them the use of the road.
...and we don't need a license to be on the road either
This Tax/VED thing is all a diversion from the actual issue in this case of course (as those that trot it out each time intend). Any drivers "right" to use a motor vehicle on the road has nothing to do with the taxes or duty paid on their car.
You gain the right to drive on UK roads by passing a test and getting a driving licence. a component of this test being a theory test these days.
The princess in this case will have demonstrated her knowledge of the rules, her ability to observe and avoid vulnerable road users and appropriate judgement of when and where to overtake other vehicles (not on a blind bend for instance).
If she holds a licence gained within the last ~15 years (quite likely) then she cannot plead ignorance, her actions were outside of the law, she was fully aware of this at the time, as evidenced by her holding a UK driving licence... Open and Shut... Right?
Enough of the endless road tax debate.
The only thing I really care about here.... is she locked up yet???
Enough of the endless road tax debate.The only thing I really care about here.... is she locked up yet???
Her Twitter account has been deleted, could there be any greater punishment???
FFS!!! 🙄 - colleague (lady in 30s) has just joined in our conversation re this.
She was banging on re Tax and then launched into how it was illegal for bikes to ride two abreast and, if they did, they deserve everything they get as roads are for cars. I may just take her company car off her at her next review and replace it with a nice carbon fibre road bike.
appropriate judgement of when and where to overtake other vehicles (not on a blind bend for instance).
From the descriptions I've read she wasn't overtaking, she was coming from the opposite direction, at speed round a blind corner, and glanced the cyclist on his side of the road.
She was banging on re Tax and then launched into how it was illegal for bikes to ride two abreast
Send her on a driver education course as she doesn't know her Highway Code ([url= https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82/overview-59-to-71 ]Rule 66[/url] - two-abreast IS legal).
(Not that the Highway Code is exactly brimming with good advice for cyclists)
From the descriptions I've read she wasn't overtaking, she was coming from the opposite direction, at speed round a blind corner, and glanced the cyclist on his side of the road.
Oh that's alright then... 🙄
Rusty Spanner - MemberClarkson is better viewed as a character he plays, rather than his actual views.
Really?
I think he does believe what he says - at least the basis of it.
Same with Matthew Parris, Nigel Havers and James Martin.He's in a position of power - looked up to by a hell of a lot of people.
I'd rather view him as a stupid ****, legitimising hatred and ignorance, if it's all the same to you.
Im surprised at you rusty, its pretty obvious (well it is to me) that he's a comedian who's out to get a reaction on motoring etc.
His piece on cycling in London vs Copenhagen is quite intelligent.
Only the the truly stupid would take his word as truth, and they're likely to be the sort who wont listen to reasoned debate and logic anyway.
Statistically women are safer drivers, that's what I'm always told...
But then again.... Oh FFS!:
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
And yes of course my prejudices are showing...
I just want her absolutely hammered for this!
The rights & wrongs of VED/road tax are for another day. Its the attitude thats present in a person that causes them to have such low regard for another person that concerns me.
Road tax/VED/cyclists is just an excuse for these idiots to vent. If it wasnt cyclists it would be someone else they'd be having a go at..
Those pictures prove nothing as they do not show the driver. There really are some people who can only see stero types, those cars could all have been driven by persons on their way to a now legal wedding. 🙂
Do you think the driver of the Nova(?) that hit the Aston Martin read the garage sign and did one?
Road tax/VED/cyclists is just an excuse for these idiots to vent
Yes, get rid of that one and they'll spout the lack of insurance gem next...
Only the the truly stupid would take his word as truth, and they're likely to be the sort who wont listen to reasoned debate and logic anyway.
shall we start with the statement that half the population are of below average intellegence.
As IQ is a normal distribution the way it is defined 2.5% have an IQ below 70...
There are a lot of very stupid people about!
Yes, get rid of that one and they'll spout the lack of insurance gem next...
..or the license plates one.
(because we all know that having visible license plates means that drivers [i]never[/i] dare to break [i]any[/i] traffic laws)
I predict that very soon we will have the witch-hunt "look how mean cyclists are" damage limitation story.
Im surprised at you rusty, its pretty obvious (well it is to me) that he's a comedian who's out to get a reaction on motoring etc.
His piece on cycling in London vs Copenhagen is quite intelligent.
Really? You think he's actually a fluffy liberal who just 'happened' to pick the persona of a bigoted, ignorant, intolerant ****?
Don't be daft.
Well, from what I've read I completely disagree - his persona is an exaggeration of his own views, not some ironic commentary on middle class tosspottery.
Those who mock the views of others for comic effect are pretty much always at pains to point out that they are being ironic - even, when they are acting the role of a completely fictional character (Warren Mitchell/Alf Garnett springs to mind).
Not with Clarkson - he actually appears delighted to be in a position where he can say what he likes, when he likes.
He's not THAT good an actor.
Only the the truly stupid would take his word as truth, and they're likely to be the sort who wont listen to reasoned debate and logic anyway.
In that case, it doesn't matter whether he means it or not, does it?
The fact that he urges motorists to treat other road users with contempt must have an effect on the impressionable, mustn't it?
GrahamS - MemberYes, get rid of that one and they'll spout the lack of insurance gem next...
..or the license plates one.
(because we all know that having visible license plates means that drivers never dare to break any traffic laws)
The best response to that is
"You know who made cyclists have liscense plates? The [i]Nazis[/i] Timmy, that's who. You agree with the Nazis? DO YOU?!"
Given that it is the standard rhetoric from a Daily Mail reader I'm afraid their answer would be "Well, I think Hitler had some good ideas, I just disagree with some of his methods.."
Perhaps more concerning is that the Victim in this case wasn't initially planning to report the incident before the tweet gained such attention.
Mr Hockley said he was planning to keep the incident to himself so as not to worry his girlfriend but changed his mind after reading Twitter.
That suggests cyclists in the UK have become so acustomed to being victims on the road that some legitimate RTAs where a conviction could be pursued simply don't get reported...
But for her tweet, this girl would have gotten away with a hit and run... She may yet as the incident wasn't reported imediately...
Have some cyclists started to almost accept the perceived reduction in "Road status" that comes with not having an engine as a fact.
And if this is the case, then why precisely is that?
The media portrayal of cyclists/motorists?
Police reaction (or lack thereof) to reported incidents?
Our increasingly [I]"Car-centric"[/I] culture?
The comments on The Guardian coverage are depressingly familiar:
you don't pay road tax, you have no right to be on the road, getting in the way of [i]proper[/i] traffic, dangerous, running red lights, cycling on pavements, cycling on the roads, too fast, too slow, riding two abreast, riding single file, helmets, insurance, no test blah blah tedious misinformed blah
It's amazing that cyclists are such an evil societal menace yet they don't actually seem to be responsible for any deaths, whereas cars and other motor vehicles kill between 2,000 and 3,000 odd a year without anyone ever really mentioning it.
'thegrimsqueaker' posts a link:
[url= http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090126/text/90126w0003.htm#09012627000041 ]http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090126/text/90126w0003.htm#09012627000041[/url]
which suggests that 29 (his/her maths, not mine) people were killed by bikes between 1998 and 2007.
really?
That 'Hello Kitty' car is awesome.
I'm pretty sure it just means "killed in collision with" not "killed by". There could have been a car involved as well with those collisions, and even then, the statistics don't say who was at fault (if anyone).
'thegrimsqueaker' posts a link:which suggests that 29 (his/her maths, not mine) people were killed by bikes between 1998 and 2007.
really?
that's still ~3 per year, on a par with the number killed by 'contact with bees or wasps'
ie: vanishingly small
In most of the cases it was either due to head injury when falling as a result of being hit, or an associated medical condition. I'll try and dig the stats out but I'm sure more people are killed in simple punch-ups/drunken falls by basically the same thing, falling in an unfortunate manner as a a result of X.
Most cycle/ped collisions will happen at well under 20mh (if not < 10mph), which is generally considered a speed at which you still have a good chance of surviving when hit by a car.
I guess my point is that the pedestrian hit by cyclist deaths are generally the freak circumstances style accidents.
29 is pretty bad but almost pales into insignificance when compared to the thousands killed by motor vehicles. Wonder how that number compares to "freak" accidents, trampoline falls or slipping on a wet pavement or household trips/slips and all sorts of activities* that don't seem to warrant spleen venting and cries for more controls. Pretty sure we haven't earned this demonisation.
*such as picnicing thank you amedias.