Electric Vehicles - Really?

[WESTLOWER]

Anyway, a road is simply for travelling from A to B, not for casual unprepared sporting events round every other blind corner.
Those packs of day glow, testosterone clubs that zoom around the country roads are just plain dangerous.
Velodromes are where sport cycling belongs.

[WESTLOWER]

It's not mandatory, but many cyclists do have insurance. I did at one time.

Dubious the word 'many'... Few i'd guess.

[Macca]

The lycra is the dead giveaway, anyone prepared to get dressed up like that is clearly taking it and themselves way too seriously.

Worst are the ones who reckon they are somehow holy and blessed because they think that by choosing to cycle they are doing their bit for the environment. I'd run them over, then reverse back and run them over again.

[WESTLOWER]

When I was a kid I took my Cycling Proficiency Test, and passed We were taught how to ride safely on the roads, use traffic lights and generally obey the rules of the road like any other vehicle.

Since then, what happened?

Ha! It's like Wacky Races through Islington in the mornings!

[Macca]

Ha! It's like Wacky Races through Islington in the mornings!

I'd like to see that, especially when they find out that the entrance to the Dartford tunnel is just painted on.

[walpurgis]

Amazing how anti-cyclist the mood seems. It almost makes me want to buy another bike, just to piss everybody off!

Mind you, I can be just as annoying on my motorbike.

[mikmas]

Why is it bollocks? Under the current set up, if You use the road, you pay. Simple.
It's not about wear and tear, it's about usage.

In a sense it is about 'wear and tear' but crucially it's about maintenance. Potholes (for instance) are not simply a product of usage but a deterioration largely caused by natural developments occurring under the surface. They are a major source of irritation and a danger to all road users (bar pedestrians) and cost millions to put right every year. Only fair that the users who are most affected and benefit most from the upkeep should bear the brunt of the cost rather than burden the general taxpayer. I see no reason why cyclists should be exempt from this at all.

Insurance is the other one that gets my goat - cyclists can and do cause accidents that impact on other people's lives in sometimes quite drastic ways (as the Alliston case shows) and yet are immune from the requirement of cover for injury/damage to third parties..... ridiculous.

[martian sunrise]

[edit - i'm out]

[walpurgis]

I'll start looking for another bike I think.

[mikmas]

Amazing how anti-cyclist the mood seems. It almost makes me want to buy another bike, just to piss everybody off!

Actually I'm not really that 'anti-cyclist' but am completely against the idea of liberalising the restrictions placed on the use of electric vehicles that seemed to be the gist of the thread at the beginning.
Bad enough, as a pedestrian, that we have had to submit to the social terrorism of cyclists using the footpath rather than the road (where they belong) - god forbid that we get a lot more of the same but motor powered