Cyclists should do a theory test!

07Lapierre wrote: »

:rolleyes:

go back to your cycling forum and bring all the other mid life crisis/cannot afford a car oddballs with you.

Galway K9

Rabble rabble rabble

jimgoose wrote: »

It's Motor Tax, i.e. a tax on owning a motor vehicle (as opposed to on "using" a motor vehicle more's the pity, but that's a whole 'nother tin of beans! )

This "...therefore get out of our way" mindset is no use and does no-one any good. And that's coming from a fairly die-hard motoring enthusiast who believes the only two reasons to own a bicycle are a) you're poor and b) you're ten years old.

they can call it what they want - its road tax, always will be to norms.

Something seems amiss,
you say "therefore get out of our way" is of no use And than
make a comment about Poverty.
A Rose by any other name.

Spook_ie wrote: »

However, I have said that if cyclists were to pay something, then motorists wouldn't be able to throw the old chestnut of "I pay roadtax" into any arguments, a win for the cyclists but a win you should contribute to

To be honest, paying an extra €100 or two a year in a road tax on my bikes would amount to a very small addition to my overall motoring and cycling expenses, so wouldn't be much skin off my nose.

A contribution to road construction/maintenance, yes. But I seriously doubt it would make any difference to the level of hostility some people show towards cyclists.

jimgoose

tipparetops wrote: »

they can call it what they want - its road tax, always will be to norms.

Something seems amiss,
you say "therefore get out of our way" is of no use And than
make a comment about Poverty.
A Rose by any other name.

There's nothing "amiss". I respect and accommodate other road users, for everyone's safety including my own. And that's irrespective of their age or socio-economic status.

07Lapierre

tipparetops wrote: »

go back to your cycling forum and bring all the other mid life crisis/cannot afford a car oddballs with you.

What car do you drive?

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

To be honest, paying an extra €100 or two a year in a road tax on my bikes would amount to a very small addition to my overall motoring and cycling expenses, so wouldn't be much skin off my nose.

A contribution to road construction/maintenance, yes. But I seriously doubt it would make any difference to the level of hostility some people show towards cyclists.

A tax on cyclists would only increase the level of hostility cyclists feel towards motorists and pedestrians, but I think it is required, nothing is free in this country.
the vast majority of cyclists are arrogant, the only way to change this is through education, cyclists need to do the theory test and made do a 13 week Bike test.

tipparetops wrote: »

go back to your cycling forum and bring all the other mid life crisis/cannot afford a car oddballs with you.

LOL. You should've been at the Wicklow 200 on Sunday - some very nice cars there with very expensive bikes on very expensive bike racks.

You do realize that a lot of cyclists are in the ABC1 social group? As for a mid-life crisis, well I can run 10km in under 50 minutes and cycle a tough 200km course in just over 7.5 hours. I'll be 44 in 2 weeks. That to me is preferable than being told by a doctor I'm obese and knocking years of my life due to my sedentary life style.

Thirteen weeks is very short IMHO. We need to move away from this idea that once you pass a test, that's it, you've nothing more to learn.

I'd favour a system of continuous education. Resit your driving test/cycling test once every five years.

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Thirteen weeks is very short IMHO. We need to move away from this idea that once you pass a test, that's it, you've nothing more to learn.

I'd favour a system of continuous education. Resit your driving test/cycling test once every five years.

The only way you're going to change the "them and us" mindset, and the one that seems to exist among motorists that they paid for the roads through road tax (sic) and therefore have sole access to them, is to start training children young.

On-road cycle training in cycle proficiency - theory and practice. Perhaps a test children can take at each stage - the basics followed by more advanced lessons at secondary school level. Making it mandatory to cycle for a period prior to gaining their first provisional licence. That way, the children will see the roads as for the use of all - not just one section of users - and see the perspective from a more vulnerable road users.

The brigade that are calling for cyclists to be taxed, chipped, pinned and other ideas have no idea what they're talking about - they've graduated from a car when they could afford it without any intermediate steps.

At the moment, it is not unusual for a child to drive their own car to school or more likely college - so it's easy to see where the mindset sets in.

Pinch Flat wrote: »

The only way you're going to change the "them and us" mindset, and the one that seems to exist among motorists that they paid for the roads through road tax (sic) and therefore have sole access to them, is to start training children young.

Totally agree with this. If I was to start anywhere, it would be there. Even if kids don't cycle in later life, it's great preparation for learning to drive. As someone who was a regular road user on a bike before I started driving, I found that all the experience I'd built up from years of cycling really helped me when I did get behind the wheel.

ThisRegard

Pinch Flat wrote: »

The brigade that are calling for cyclists to be taxed, chipped, pinned and other ideas have no idea what they're talking about - they've graduated from a car when they could afford it without any intermediate steps.

At the moment, it is not unusual for a child to drive their own car to school or more likely college - so it's easy to see where the mindset sets in.

I think you've made a great point there. We're not too far apart in age and I know since I was a kid right up until my 20s I cycled everywhere, friends, college, work, random places for the craic or just knocked about on them. And nobody called social services on us for being on the roads, like some have called for.

We even visited the old driver training place in Dublin as part of a school trip.

So we come from a culture where bikes were the norm to us, and have a better understanding of cyclists and road craft in general.

Pinch Flat wrote: »

LOL. You should've been at the Wicklow 200 on Sunday - some very nice cars there with very expensive bikes on very expensive bike racks.

You do realize that a lot of cyclists are in the ABC1 social group? As for a mid-life crisis, well I can run 10km in under 50 minutes and cycle a tough 200km course in just over 7.5 hours. I'll be 44 in 2 weeks. That to me is preferable than being told by a doctor I'm obese and knocking years of my life due to my sedentary life style.

you are suffering a mid life crisis, deal with it.
The vast majority who get dressed up are suffering a mid life crisis.
You can do exercise like a normal person without pretending you are in the tour de france.

CramCycle

tipparetops wrote: »

A tax on cyclists would only increase the level of hostility cyclists feel towards motorists and pedestrians, but I think it is required, nothing is free in this country.
the vast majority of cyclists are arrogant, the only way to change this is through education, cyclists need to do the theory test and made do a 13 week Bike test.

Please tell us how this will be achieved, remember, as with all good policy, cite examples, weigh up the potential issues caused to other areas of society and present a balanced view.

At the least, you will need a quango to draw up the standards, then the test, then the implementation times, how long will people have to get this theory test, your not going to get everyone through the doors immediately.

Who will implement this? Who will pay for it, the cost of licensing motorists is justified because the cost to the state if there was a surge in unfit drivers or people who simply were completely incapable of driving tried it, accidents would sky rocket. The cost to the state would be phenomenal. Whereas the number of cyclist accidents and there cost to the state, to the best of my knowledge is minimal in comparison.

So far the cost of it is more than will ever be recouped, unless you counter that by increasing the cost to cover it, congratulations, you have not only immediately breached one of the fundamental tenants of Public Health, you have increased traffic, by some miracle you might get improved PT, but the money you could and should have used for that has already been thrown down the drain of a quango that serves no purpose as there are less cyclists on the road.

So traffic increases, business suffers, foreign investment in branches or start ups declines due to increasingly obvious issues with infrastructure that cannot be fixed with a simple road resurfacing.

Health suffers with an increase in colds and minor illnesses directly attributable to lower exercise levels and increased traffic levels, which also has been shown to increase stress levels.

Hooray, the economy suffers more as sick days increase, the government suffer more as businesses suffer, unemployment starts to rise, social welfare bills increase.

13 week bike test? I passed my driving test, first time in about 45 minutes. I had two lessons before that as people warned me there are things you have to do that may not seem logical eg I move my eyes to look in the mirror with little head movement but if the examiner doesn't notice, I will fail so I have to make big sweeping gestures so no one is confused. My mother in law got handed one, my uncle has a license for every vehicle but the largest he has driven is a van.

I have not caused an accident while driving yet, this in no way implies I am a good driver, at best it implies I am a statistically safe driver but that's it.

The only suggestion here that has made sense, is education in schools, it is easier to implement, it covers a wide base of the population that over time will becoming an increasingly larger cross section of the population, in no way costs as much as a theory test for cyclists. It's not an immediate solution but its the most sensible one so far. It also covers everyone, pedestrians, cyclists and future motorists. Hopefully will help a few of them see that Mamai and Daddys bad habits are exactly that and not the way people should act on the roads. Socially, it will spread like a slow virus, kids will infect other kids, who will infect their parents or their friends parents, who once a critical mass is reached, start to infect other road users. Include re training, maybe have a retraining every year as part of the national school curriculum and the junior cert cycle curriculum, maybe even make it a JC subject.

If I'm going to suffer a mid-life crisis, I might as well look fabulous while doing so.

beauf

tipparetops wrote: »

tax on fuel and road tax means motorists pay for the roads and therefore get out of our way.

So if I pay more tax (its not a deductable), you should get out of mine, when I'm cycling.

Boom_Bap

tipparetops wrote: »

you are suffering a mid life crisis, deal with it.
The vast majority who get dressed up are suffering a mid life crisis.
You can do exercise like a normal person without pretending you are in the tour de france.

MOD NOTE
tipparetops - you appear to be on a mission to ruffle feathers in this thread. If you cannot post in a civil manner, then please dont post.

tipparetops wrote: »

you are suffering a mid life crisis, deal with it.
The vast majority who get dressed up are suffering a mid life crisis.
You can do exercise like a normal person without pretending you are in the tour de france.

So, if I'm in the gym am I prohibited from wearing the appropriate clothing? Or if I decide to take up golf - should I not dress as a golfer? What about horse riding -I'm assuming a pair of jeans and a jumper is okay, rather than the specific clothing? A complete non argument - try and cycle 200km across the Wicklow mountains in a pair of GAA shorts and cotton t-shirt, and report back to us.

I've done a stage of the Tour De France - BTW there's many more challenging cycles otu there, the Vuelta, Giro, Lombardy, Classics like Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo and Liege Bastogne Liege, but for some reason people focus on the TDF.

Anyway, used to love the banter at the traffic lights. "Oi, where do you think you're going - the Tour de France"..."Well, yes actually".

The Dark Side

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Oh, and I'be done a stage of the Tour De France - very challenging traverse of the alps a few years ago.

Way to go on batting back the 'suffering a mid-life crisis' jibe.

As too often with boards, when certain precious groups are questioned about their dangerous activities, other powerful but equally precious groups come in to stop the debate.
Shame on you all.
this forum had one poster calling another a ****, no warnings there.
Another cycling forum poster replied to a MOD here, no warnings again.

Fairness for all or no one.

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

So you're happy with the free ride you get, but hate it that you think cyclists also get one. So petty.

I don't have a free ride, I run a business, perhaps you should get a rickshaw and stop your moaning

Boom_Bap

tipparetops wrote: »

As too often with boards, when certain precious groups are questioned about their dangerous activities, other powerful but equally precious groups come in to stop the debate.
Shame on you all.
this forum had one poster calling another a ****, no warnings there.
Another cycling forum poster replied to a MOD here, no warnings again.

Fairness for all or no one.

Dont post in this thread again

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

No better person than our taxi driving friend to try muddy the water on these type of threads.

His logic is that the tax payer should not be funding facilities for cyclists, as they don't pay a form of motor tax on bikes, it's as if VAT and taxes on the money they earned to buy them doesn't exist.

However he has no problems with taxi drivers paying a small annual fee of €95 in motor tax, of which he continually points out is deductible anyway. But yet they're provided with the use of bus lanes and ranks, and without a doubt cause more wear and tear on the roads as they make their living on it. So if they deduct their motor tax anyway, they're being provided with more facilities than cyclists and directly contributing as much as a cyclist does under his tax all road users ideology.

So according to his own logic taxi drivers are bigger, his own words, parasites.

You really need to get a rickshaw and start a business, maybe you could actually get away with using a tandem, then you wouldn't be a parasite but a business, transporting people on the infrastructure that paying extra tax and duties on will help fund

The Dark Side wrote: »

Way to go on batting back the 'suffering a mid-life crisis' jibe.

Ha yeah, for some people a mid-life crisis is a doctor telling them they're grossly overweight or obese, and it's likely to curtail their lifespan or kill them. They end up being a burden on our health services, their families and their quality of life is severely curtailed.

This is apparently is in the majority of men my age. I take a different approach. Anyway, the thread has yet again been derailed - not sure what relevant this has to theory tests, but I've set my own thoughts out on this over several posts.

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

I don't have a free ride, I run a business, perhaps you should get a rickshaw and stop your moaning

I'm not moaning, you're the one with a bee in his bonnet for years on this forum over the fact there's no 'motor' tax on cyclists, despite you being in a more 'parasitic' (again, I'm just using your words) situation.

You appear in every thread to do with cyclists pushing your same ill thought out arguments.

Qualitymark

Properly separated cycle lanes, with barriers to stop cars entering them or parking in them, are the only way to go.

The red lights business - like a red rag to a bull to many motorists - is a bit of a nothing; in many cases it's safer for a cyclist to go through a red light http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/more-idaho-stop-and-why-cyclists-should-be-able-roll-through-stop-signs.html

07Lapierre

Qualitymark wrote: »

Properly separated cycle lanes, with barriers to stop cars entering them or parking in them, are the only way to go.

The red lights business - like a red rag to a bull to many motorists - is a bit of a nothing; in many cases it's safer for a cyclist to go through a red light http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/more-idaho-stop-and-why-cyclists-should-be-able-roll-through-stop-signs.html

It is NEVER safer to run a red light! There may be situations where running a red light does not result in an accident, but doing so is both illegal and stupid! When cycling I hate have to stop at pedestrian lights when no pedestrians are crossing. But hey, it's an opportunity to practice a track stand!

jimgoose

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

If I'm going to suffer a mid-life crisis, I might as well look fabulous while doing so.

If I'm going to suffer a mid-life crisis, I'm going to do my damnedest to suffer it in a Lambo!