On 30 Jul, 07:27, Fod
googlemail.com> wrote:> On Jul 30, 6:57 am, Doug
riseup.net> wrote:
>>> On 29 Jul, 18:56, Conor
hotmail.com> wrote:> In article <63312615-b398-415d-93ab-ad92792ebcb6>>>> that most cops are motorists who, like the motorists who dominate this
>>>> transport newsgroup, don't like cyclists. Its called 'mob rule'.
>
>>> But you're pro mob-rule, Doug, as you've stated repeatedly in the past.
>>> Can't have it all ways.
>
>> No you obviously fail to understand. Aristotle called democracy 'mob
>> rule' where majorities dominate. The all pervasive mass car culture
>> can be regarded as such a mob, which can influence the system for its
>> own benefit but perhaps to the detriment of minority cyclists.
>
> Hence why cars are heavily regulated while cyclists are not.
> Hence why laws against drivers are regularly enforced while cyclists
> break them with little fear of arrest.
>
I don't regard cars as heavily regulated. A majority of motorists get
away with breaking speed limits and are allowed to kill and injure
with relative impunity and many are also allowed to street garage
their cars on public roads 24/7. To make matters worse they can do all
of this for a nominal sum which they wrongly describe as 'road tax'.
>
> Oh wait... that kind of shoots your point in both kneecaps?
>
> Sorry about that. Us pedestrians are not overly sympathetic to
> motorists or cyclists to be honest but at least we are subjective.
>
Yes I do sympathise with peds, who are herded like sheep behind
barriers amid a clutter of street furniture and are actively
discouraged from using our public roads, ostensibly in the interests
of their own safety, but more likely to allow drivers to travel even
faster. Such is the dominance of the car culture.
