-
Poor fucker can't even get some support from the Torygraph BTLers. I liked this one:
I really do not understand all this calling for licences, mirrors etc. The misguided motorist's logic seems to be:
1) For safety reasons, all cycles should be equiped with mirrors.
2) It is dangerous for cyclists to cycle 2 or 3 abreast so bikes should be fitted with a side seat and back seat(s) so that other cyclists can travel as passengers and remove road congestion
3) In wet conditions, having only 2 wheels is dangerous. All bikes should therefore be equipped with 4 wheels as standard.
4) For additional comfort, the bike should have a roof
5) Cyclists go so much slower than the other traffic so should be equipped with motors to propel them faster.
6) Cycles should be renamed cars.
You are reading a single comment by @kl and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
kl
JWestland
i see that cowardly dullard andrew critchlow has been allowed to vomit forth his worthless, half-formed shitpinions on the torygraph again. note how they file their cycling articles under 'men' - tells you all you need to know about this shitrag and its attitude to cycling.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/recreational-cycling/11166498/Are-number-plates-for-cyclists-inevitable.html