Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look quite normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate you, do look very silly indeed.

--
Tower: "Delta 351, you have traffic at 10 o'clock, 6 miles!"
Delta 351: "Give us another hint! We have digital watches!"

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:19:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:51, Uncle Peter wrote:


How does your argument change the fact that a bike is nowhere near as
dangerous as a car?

It is on the pavement.

Bicycles are safer on the pavements, then they are out of the bloody way
of the cars. Now if only buses would fit on pavements....

Pedestrians however are at a huge risk of being injured by an
inconsiderate, serial law breaking, silent menace. A cyclist on the
pavement.

Why is it every time I've been walking along a pavement and a cyclist comes along, one or both of us move to the side to let each other past, just like two pedestrians would. I see no problem.

--
English German
Indicators ---- Die Blinkenleiten Tickentocken
Bonnet ---- Pullnob und Knucklechopper
Exhaust ---- Die Spitzenpoppenbangentuben
Speedometer ---- Der Egobooster und Linenshooter
Clutch ---- Die Kuplink mit schlippen und shaken
Puncture ---- Die Phlatt mit Bludy****en
Learner Driver ---- Die ****ten mit Elplatz
Estate Car ---- Der Bagmooroomfurshagginauto
Parking Meter ---- Der Tennerpinscher und Klockenwerr
Windscreen Wiper ---- Der Flippenflappenmuckenschpredder
Footbrake ---- Der Edbangeronvindschreen Stoppend
Gear Lever ---- Biggen Sticken fur Kangaroochoppen
Breathalyser ---- Die Pu titintem fur Pistenarsen
Seat Belt ---- Der Klunkenklikker Frauleintrapper
Headlights ---- Das Dippendontdazzleyubastad
Exhaust Fumes ---- Der Koffenundschpittpoluter
Highway Code ---- Der Wipan fur Arsen
Fog Warning ---- Die Puttenlegdownen und Fukkit
Traffic Jam ---- Die Bluddifukkink Dammundblast
Rear Seat ---- Der Schpringentester
Backfire ---- Der Lowdenbangenmekkenjumpen
Articulated Lorry ---- Der Fukkengrett Trukken
Accident ---- Der Bleedinmess
Near Accident ---- Der Fukken Near Schittsenselfen
Service Station ---- Der Heiway Robberungen
Cyclist ---- Der Pedallpushink Pilloken
Double White lines ---- Overtakenund Krunchen

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:06:49 +0100, Bob Henson wrote:

Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:19:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:51, Uncle Peter wrote:


It is on the pavement.

Bicycles are safer on the pavements, then they are out of the bloody way
of the cars. Now if only buses would fit on pavements....

Pedestrians however are at a huge risk of being injured by an
inconsiderate, serial law breaking, silent menace. A cyclist on the
pavement.

Why is it every time I've been walking along a pavement and a cyclist
comes along, one or both of us move to the side to let each other past,
just like two pedestrians would. I see no problem.

Try just tipping one end of their handlebars as they pass you - they learn
that it is a) illegal and b) stupid much quicker that way.

It;s not stupid to ride on a fairly clear pavement instead of a busy road. If someone did that to me, I'd get off my bike if I hadn't already fallen off it, and slam the wheel over their head to make a nice ornament with the head shaped spokes.

--
The most ejaculatory orgasms ever recorded in 1 hour for a boy is 16.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 24/08/2014 13:40, Uncle Peter wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

No cyclist ever looks normal.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 24/08/2014 16:48, Uncle Peter wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:06:49 +0100, Bob Henson wrote:

Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:19:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:51, Uncle Peter wrote:


It is on the pavement.

Bicycles are safer on the pavements, then they are out of the
bloody way
of the cars. Now if only buses would fit on pavements....

Pedestrians however are at a huge risk of being injured by an
inconsiderate, serial law breaking, silent menace. A cyclist on the
pavement.

Why is it every time I've been walking along a pavement and a cyclist
comes along, one or both of us move to the side to let each other past,
just like two pedestrians would. I see no problem.

Try just tipping one end of their handlebars as they pass you - they
learn
that it is a) illegal and b) stupid much quicker that way.

It;s not stupid to ride on a fairly clear pavement instead of a busy
road. If someone did that to me, I'd get off my bike if I hadn't
already fallen off it, and slam the wheel over their head to make a nice
ornament with the head shaped spokes.

No you wouldn't. Cyclists are wimps. You couldn't lift your bike high
enough.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 18:55:15 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

No cyclist ever looks normal.

I am really honoured to be considered abnormal by the Medway Handyman.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Or don't like getting fat.

If I were a manual labourer and got enough exercise in everyday life I
wouldn't bother cycling, but I sit on my arse all day.

Cycling to and from work is more hassle than taking the train or
driving, but it takes about the same time and the advantage is I don't
need to spend any extra time doing exercise.

Also unlike driving it means I'm not adding to the congestion.

I try to avoid the rainy days more for safety than the wet factor.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:01:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:





Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.

"Appropriate" clothes are for pussies. Skin is completely 100% waterproof.

--
My sister-in-law sat on my glasses and broke them. It was my own fault. I should have taken them off.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 11:37, Uncle Peter wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:01:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:





Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.

"Appropriate" clothes are for pussies. Skin is completely 100% waterproof.

Indeed, fine if you cycle naked in the rain.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

Mr Pounder wrote:

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.





Careful, being truthful will get you all sorts of abuse!

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


If you don't don't mind getting wet, of course it is.

Of course it is. So what would you say to the people who have a bicycle
as their *only* form of transport? There are many.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


Of course it is. So what would you say to the many people who have a
bicycle as their *only* form of transport?

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


Of course it is. So what would you say to the many people who have a
bicycle as their *only* form of transport?

I would say that it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.
The fact that you do not cycle in the rain supports this.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

"Capitol" wrote in message
...
Mr Pounder wrote:

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.

Careful, being truthful will get you all sorts of abuse!

This is a very polite group which is only spoilt by cyclists posting to it.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


If you don't don't mind getting wet, of course it is.

Of course it is. So what would you say to the people who have a bicycle
as their *only* form of transport? There are many.



Top Gear answered your question. Work harder and get a car!

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
Mr Pounder wrote:

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.

Careful, being truthful will get you all sorts of abuse!

This is a very polite group which is only spoilt by organ donors posting to it.



There, corrected that for you!

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

"Capitol" wrote in message
...
Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
Mr Pounder wrote:

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.

Careful, being truthful will get you all sorts of abuse!

This is a very polite group which is only spoilt by organ donors posting
to it.



There, corrected that for you!

I stand corrected.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 17:24, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


Of course it is. So what would you say to the many people who have a
bicycle as their *only* form of transport?

I would say that it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.
The fact that you do not cycle in the rain supports this.


I wasn't talking for other people, just my preference. I also choose to
have a car, many choose not to have a car.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 17:27, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me
and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


If you don't don't mind getting wet, of course it is.

Of course it is. So what would you say to the people who have a bicycle
as their *only* form of transport? There are many.



Top Gear answered your question. Work harder and get a car!

I do have a car.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 17:24, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to
me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they
look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same
goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry
weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


Of course it is. So what would you say to the many people who have a
bicycle as their *only* form of transport?

I would say that it is not really a viable and practical means of
transport.
The fact that you do not cycle in the rain supports this.


I wasn't talking for other people, just my preference. I also choose to
have a car, many choose not to have a car.


Are they the ones who vote for Gordon Brown?

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 17:24, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me
and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they
look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same
goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry
weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


Of course it is. So what would you say to the many people who have a
bicycle as their *only* form of transport?

I would say that it is not really a viable and practical means of
transport.
The fact that you do not cycle in the rain supports this.


I wasn't talking for other people, just my preference. I also choose to
have a car, many choose not to have a car.

Are you really suggesting that apart from yourself other cyclepaths actually
like to ride in the ****ing down rain?
I would dispute your statement that "many choose not to have a car".

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 17:24, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to
me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they
look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same
goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry
weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


Of course it is. So what would you say to the many people who have a
bicycle as their *only* form of transport?

I would say that it is not really a viable and practical means of
transport.
The fact that you do not cycle in the rain supports this.


I wasn't talking for other people, just my preference. I also choose to
have a car, many choose not to have a car.


Are they the ones who vote for Gordon Brown?

Probably the ones that are incapable of drawing an X on a ballet paper.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 21:03, Mr Pounder wrote:


Are you really suggesting that apart from yourself other cyclepaths actually
like to ride in the ****ing down rain?
I would dispute your statement that "many choose not to have a car".


In London a lot of people choose not to have cars. You shouldn't judge
everyone by your own parochial existence.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 20:32, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 17:24, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 15:55, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 25/08/2014 14:24, Capitol wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to
me and
most
others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they
look
quite
normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate
you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same
goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I too have done both, but now I've retired I only cycle in dry
weather.
If it's wet, I'll use the car.

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.


Of course it is. So what would you say to the many people who have a
bicycle as their *only* form of transport?

I would say that it is not really a viable and practical means of
transport.
The fact that you do not cycle in the rain supports this.


I wasn't talking for other people, just my preference. I also choose to
have a car, many choose not to have a car.


Are they the ones who vote for Gordon Brown?

Good grief no! the others are not Lizardroids.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 21:15, Nick wrote:
On 25/08/2014 21:03, Mr Pounder wrote:


Are you really suggesting that apart from yourself other cyclepaths actually
like to ride in the ****ing down rain?
I would dispute your statement that "many choose not to have a car".


In London a lot of people choose not to have cars. You shouldn't judge
everyone by your own parochial existence.

In London a lot of people are forced to NOT have cars, it is not a
choice thing.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 22:12, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 25/08/2014 21:15, Nick wrote:
On 25/08/2014 21:03, Mr Pounder wrote:


Are you really suggesting that apart from yourself other cyclepaths
actually
like to ride in the ****ing down rain?
I would dispute your statement that "many choose not to have a car".


In London a lot of people choose not to have cars. You shouldn't judge
everyone by your own parochial existence.

In London a lot of people are forced to NOT have cars, it is not a
choice thing.

What measure of force? Physical, mentall, emotional? Threats of violence?

With night buses and subsidised transport 24/7 it can only be a choice,
a financial one. If I could get around quicker and cheaper using public
transport where I live I would but I can't.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

fred wrote
Rod Speed wrote

If there are a few people around a shout
is not going to have great significance

It will get their attention.

It may and it may not.

Corse it will.

A shout among a scattering of people could easily be ignored.

Bull****.

whereas the distinct sound of a bell generally brings attention.

So will a shout.

Beside, I would regard two or three 'tings' on a
bell more civilised and friendly that a great shout.

No one said anything about a great shout.

Wrong. I just did

Pathetic.

So what do all you people who shout actually shout ?

I just say hi, or something like that. Works fine.

WTF Bicycle bells have been in existence
for years so have proved their usefulness.

Not when most say something instead of using the bell.

Why take the chance that a shout might be
mis-interpreted whereas a bicycle bell is a very
distinctive and is the acknowledged way to do it.

Because its nothing even remotely like the
acknowledged way to do it, particularly with
kids and isnt as easy to do when it matters.

Bicycle bells are not that expensive.

Sure, the problem isnt the price.

And if it doesn't work then you can holler like a pikey.

You're the only one silly enough to be
rabbiting on about hollering like a pikey.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 23:27, Fredxxx wrote:
On 25/08/2014 22:12, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 25/08/2014 21:15, Nick wrote:
On 25/08/2014 21:03, Mr Pounder wrote:


Are you really suggesting that apart from yourself other cyclepaths
actually
like to ride in the ****ing down rain?
I would dispute your statement that "many choose not to have a car".


In London a lot of people choose not to have cars. You shouldn't judge
everyone by your own parochial existence.

In London a lot of people are forced to NOT have cars, it is not a
choice thing.

What measure of force? Physical, mentall, emotional? Threats of violence?

With night buses and subsidised transport 24/7 it can only be a choice,
a financial one. If I could get around quicker and cheaper using public
transport where I live I would but I can't.

Forced by financial and physical means.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On 25/08/2014 23:27, Fredxxx wrote:
On 25/08/2014 22:12, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 25/08/2014 21:15, Nick wrote:
On 25/08/2014 21:03, Mr Pounder wrote:


Are you really suggesting that apart from yourself other cyclepaths
actually
like to ride in the ****ing down rain?
I would dispute your statement that "many choose not to have a car".


In London a lot of people choose not to have cars. You shouldn't judge
everyone by your own parochial existence.

In London a lot of people are forced to NOT have cars, it is not a
choice thing.

What measure of force? Physical, mentall, emotional? Threats of violence?

With night buses and subsidised transport 24/7 it can only be a choice,
a financial one. If I could get around quicker and cheaper using public
transport where I live I would but I can't.

Having nowhere to keep one is a consideration. Many houses in London are
so narrow that the only car short enough to park outside a single house
is a Smart car or G-Whiz, and the latter requires you to run a cable to
it every night. Most of these house contain two or more households. At
one time, the only place I could park a car near where I lived was a
five minute walk away, and even that wasn't guaranteed.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 10:17:39 +0100, Capitol wrote:

Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

No problem.
I get wet on about 5% of trips.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:24:52 +0100, Capitol wrote:

Bod wrote:
On 25/08/2014 10:17, Capitol wrote:
Peter Keller wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:40:36 +0100, Uncle Peter wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 10:21:46 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 23/08/2014 20:45, Uncle Peter wrote:




Then compare walking with cycling.

No. Because it's comfortable to run.

The percussive effect of running on ones knees suggest to me and
most others that is not the case.

Or don't you have knees?

Then why do so many people run for exercise?

Because runners look less of a tit than cyclists.

If cyclists wear everyday clothes like jeans and tshirt, they look
quite normal. But a hi-vis jacket, a helmet, and shorts designed to
castrate you, do look very silly indeed.

Agreed. Bicycling is a very good everyday means of transport.

If you like getting wet.

Only if you don't wear appropriate wet weather clothes, the same goes
for motorcyclists.


I've done both, you still get wet.

I also.
For me getting wet is not a problem provided I can get dry at the other
end.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 15:55:30 +0100, Mr Pounder wrote:

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.

Oh yes it is for many things. Very economical, enjoyable, convenient
and viable.

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:26:38 +0100, Mr Pounder wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
...
Mr Pounder wrote:

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.

Careful, being truthful will get you all sorts of abuse!

This is a very polite group which is only spoilt by cyclists posting to
it.

Is that why it is called uk.rec.cycling?

Bicycle, crash hat and accident
 

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:31:52 +0100, Capitol wrote:

Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
Mr Pounder wrote:

So it is not really a viable and practical means of transport.

Careful, being truthful will get you all sorts of abuse!

This is a very polite group which is only spoilt by organ donors
posting to it.



There, corrected that for you!

They should post to alt.rec.organ-donors.misc.