|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 16th June 2010 18:23
Posts: 292,
Visits: 1,309
|
|
Must admit that should I have a need to visit the local shoping centre (Central Milton Keynes) I take the Trumpet, easy to get there and free easy parking. The normal cost and problems with car parking are just too much.
Don't slide unless you mean too.Be sure, ride safe and enjoy 
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 23rd August 2010 20:19
Posts: 1,002,
Visits: 1,795
|
|
| Yes, bikes are, in the popular mind, both "fun" and "dangerous". Doing something because it's fun is clearly a sign of an enemy of all things multicultural and diverse and hand-knitted, and we all know how we deal with things that are "dangerous", don't we children? We ban them. I think of the Puritans, who banned bear-baiting in the 17C. Not because of any harm that befell the bear - they couldn't care less about that - but because people enjoyed it. Just imagine - all the commuters in London getting everywhere at 30mph with no delays, and everyone doing 120mpg. Congestion gone, pollution down, journey times down - it can't be allowed!
--
2003 ST1300 Pan Euro
1995 Yam XT600E
http://goingfastgettingnowhere.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 16th June 2010 18:23
Posts: 292,
Visits: 1,309
|
|
I think we should put our point accross as a new group, Association of safe,sound,economical saddle riders up standing. (Took me a while to think of that one and now don't know why I did) That will be ASSES R US then for putting up with the crap the local and national government puts out about motorbikes and cycles in general. Still if we all went for bikes there would not be the income from those 4x4s n other gas gusslers/large vehicles to make our roads better would there?
Don't slide unless you mean too.Be sure, ride safe and enjoy
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 16th May 2010 15:09
Posts: 637,
Visits: 1,168
|
|
| I thought all the income from that was going on paying the banks (with our money, at low interest) to lend us it back (at high interest, obviously)...? Plus, if everyone went for bikes, there'd be hordes of dead ex-car drivers who'd just discovered the hard way that they shouldn't answer the phone, or why it is you want to check both ways at junctions before pulling out. From a purely Darwinist point of view, I'm not necessarily opposed to that, only to the raft of new safety legislation that would inevitably follow!
>> ex silens nox noctis <<
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 23rd August 2010 20:19
Posts: 1,002,
Visits: 1,795
|
|
Yes, transport Darwinism. I like it. Put everyone onto a 50cc moped for a full 12 months. Those that are still alive at the end get their car licenses back and are allowed to drive again.
There's a serious point here, though. Back in the 50s/60s, most people (well, most men anyway) owned a bike at some stage, purely because they couldn't afford a car. A lot of guys had a bike from age 16, through their early years getting to work and going on holiday, and often only got a car when they got married and a baby was on the way (some kept the faith and added a third wheel, but we won't discuss that). The end result was that nearly all car drivers had some 2-wheel experience and realised that it really mattered if they didn't check for bikes when pulling out of a junction. As a consequence, bikes were generally treated with some respect.
Nowadays, a learner driver generally jumps into something which is air-conditioned, with power steering, comfortable, with excellent crash protection and a decent stereo, and driving is easier than it ever has been. They start their driving careers completely insulated from the outside world, and continue to behave as if everything else on the road is just a movie played for them.
I have a nice car I can use if I need to, but I still prefer the bike, cos riding it feels real. In my head is a loop, playing those wonderful words from the start of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance:
[i]
You see things vacationing on a motorcycle in a way that is completely different from any other. In a car you're always in a compartment, and because you're used to it you don't realize that through that car window everything you see is just more TV. You're a passive observer and it is all moving by you boringly in a frame.
On a cycle the frame is gone. You're completely in contact with it all. You're in the scene, not just watching it anymore, and the sense of presence is overwhelming. That concrete whizzing by five inches below your foot is the real thing, the same stuff you walk on, it's right there, so blurred you can't focus on it, yet you can put your foot down and touch it anytime, and the whole thing, the whole experience, is never removed from immediate consciousness.
[/i]
That says it all for me.
--
2003 ST1300 Pan Euro
1995 Yam XT600E
http://goingfastgettingnowhere.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 16th May 2010 15:09
Posts: 637,
Visits: 1,168
|
|
| Yep, brilliant quote. Just about conjures up the whole deal with biking in two short paragraphs. With simulator technology being what it is these days, I can't help but think it would be a positive improvement to the driving test to put learners behind the wheel/in the saddle of various different vehicles so they do get some idea of what a driver/rider can and can't see, how fast a bike can accelerate, how long it takes a truck to slow down from 70 and so on. I'm sure it would be expensive to install and maintain, but, hey - when it comes to safety arguments, "if it saves just one life it's worth it"*. Or is that only when it works to the detriment of the general public? * Actually, according to the Criminal Injuries Compensation board, if it saves just one life it's actually worth about £50,000. Which would be a much more reasonable guideline as to the value-for-money element of elf'n'safety lunacy.
>> ex silens nox noctis <<
|
|
|
|