{"id":14458,"date":"2013-12-09T01:05:16","date_gmt":"2013-12-09T01:05:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.diaryofanadi.co.uk\/?p=14458"},"modified":"2013-12-09T01:05:16","modified_gmt":"2013-12-09T01:05:16","slug":"cycling-activists-attempt-to-sell-votes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/diaryofanadi.co.uk\/?p=14458","title":{"rendered":"Cycling Activists Attempt To Sell Votes"},"content":{"rendered":"

I\u2019m not sure if this is legal<\/a> \u2013 but even if it is, it\u2019s totally wrong from a moral standpoint. It\u2019s a story in The Independent about how \u201ccycling activists\u201d are attempting to sway the results of local council elections by offering their votes to \u201cbike-friendly candidates\u201d.<\/p>\n

Various activist groups are involved. To quote one:<\/p>\n

\n

Chris Peck, campaigns co-ordinator at national cycling charity CTC, said the elections were a “major opportunity to ensure that cycling is still seen as a high priority”. “Councils have huge budgets and huge power,” he said. “They are places where we need to spend a lot more effort on converting people to support cycling.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Note how this comedian misses the point completely \u2013 as do all these radical cycling numpties. His aim is to get cyclists on roads whether it\u2019s safe or not \u2013 and he\u2019ll sell his vote to get his way.<\/p>\n

The article also mentions a Birmingham cell who are calling for changes on a major link road on the strength of a single fatality of a 13-year old over two years ago, even though the driver of the lorry was jailed for dangerous driving. Again, they miss the point entirely \u2013 if the driver was at fault, what is wrong with the road? What is there that specifically needs to be changed that would have prevented the incident?<\/p>\n

The problem is that if you asked any<\/strong> Spandex-wearing activist, they would have every single road in the country changed. None of them can understand that roads are dangerous by virtue of the fact that big, heavy machinery travels on them. There are those whose political maturity is still in the womb on this topic, and who seriously see banning those nasty machines from roads as a genuine solution. They forget that there are already \u201croads\u201d where traffic is banned. Those roads are called \u201ccycle paths\u201d, and many of these Spandex-wearing politicos refuse point blank to go anywhere near them.<\/p>\n

Those last two articles I wrote concerning cyclists have generated a lot of blog traffic via Twitter and Facebook. As I\u2019ve pointed out before, I don\u2019t allow comments on this blog because they\u2019re just an excuse for juvenile prats to swear and post links to pornography sites. And the contact form makes it clear that any abuse through that will immediately be reported to the sender\u2019s ISP (and you CAN be traced, so don\u2019t kid yourself that you can\u2019t), and I guess that\u2019s why hits to that page also skyrocketed, but only produced one actual submission.<\/p>\n

The reader who responded refers to the \u201cidiotic\u201d cyclist shown in the photograph in the post about HGV drivers being forced to take mandatory cycling lessons<\/a> in Islington. He asks where I think he should ride instead (I\u2019ve included the picture again). Well, the answer is simple: anywhere else \u2013 just not there!\"London<\/p>\n

Cyclists seem unable to comprehend anything that doesn\u2019t go 100% in their favour. In this case, it just amazes me that they cannot understand that although the cyclist in the picture may well have every right to do what he\u2019s doing, he would have to be a complete and utter pillock to actually do it.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s like sticking your hand in a blender or an open fire \u2013 yes, you have every right to do it if you choose to do so, but if you get injured (and even if you don\u2019t) you\u2019re going to have to accept that you\u2019re still a prat.<\/p>\n

Irrespective of who would be to blame, if one of those lorries swerved \u2013 to avoid another cyclist, for example \u2013 the cyclist would be dead. And no doubt the Spandex-clad fingers would then start pointing at the HGVs again.<\/p>\n

The simple fact is that the degree of danger for a cyclist varies from nothing to almost total, depending on where (and how<\/strong>) he rides. Riding between lorries, or in among large numbers of lorries, is right up at the bad end.<\/p>\n

Nothing can alter that, including the ridiculous idea from the Greenies that lorries should be constructed out of glass to give 360\u00b0 vision in all three dimensions (or possibly all four dimensions if it\u2019s an activist-led idea). Even if that ever happened \u2013 and it won\u2019t – it would take decades to implement.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s also worth me repeating what I said to that reader in response to various other accusations:<\/p>\n