This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I note that Alan Sugar has suggested in the house of Lords that cyclists should have to carry ID with them whilst out cycling so that they can be accountable for their actions.
http://road.cc/content/news/48897-lord-sugar-asks-whether-cyclists-should-h...
Seems reasonable to me, especially if some of the Youtube videos I have seen of a-hole cyclists in London are anything to go by. Incidentally, I am a cyclist.
Any thoughts?
http://road.cc/content/news/48897-lord-sugar-asks-whether-cyclists-should-h...
Seems reasonable to me, especially if some of the Youtube videos I have seen of a-hole cyclists in London are anything to go by. Incidentally, I am a cyclist.
Any thoughts?
In reply to EeeByGum: how is that even enforceable? drivers don't have to carry their drivers licence with them.
No, we don't need to be told what to do by some computer salesman
No, we don't need to be told what to do by some computer salesman
In reply to higherclimbingwales:
Correction : a shit computer salesman.
> (In reply to EeeByGum) how is that even enforceable? drivers don't have to carry their drivers licence with them.
>
> No, we don't need to be told what to do by some computer salesman
>
> No, we don't need to be told what to do by some computer salesman
Correction : a shit computer salesman.
In reply to EeeByGum: Priceless. Libertarians (including presumably Sugar) were up in arms over invasion of provacy, compulsory ID cards, "big brother snooping" etc yet when it's one of "them" instead of one of "us" it's a brilliant idea.
What a bellend.
What a bellend.
In reply to lummox:
i am the man in orthopaedic shoes, thanks!
> (In reply to highclimber)
> [...]
>
> Correction : a shit computer salesman.
> [...]
>
> Correction : a shit computer salesman.
i am the man in orthopaedic shoes, thanks!
In reply to higherclimbingwales:
Errr - I believe that big number plate thingie on the front of your car counts as ID. And if you are found to have broken the law whilst driving, the police can confiscate you from your car (arrested) and in some cases confiscate your car from you.
Is it really right that we cyclists should not be accountable for our actions?
> (In reply to EeeByGum) how is that even enforceable? drivers don't have to carry their drivers licence with them.
Errr - I believe that big number plate thingie on the front of your car counts as ID. And if you are found to have broken the law whilst driving, the police can confiscate you from your car (arrested) and in some cases confiscate your car from you.
Is it really right that we cyclists should not be accountable for our actions?
In reply to EeeByGum:
Why would not carrying I.D. make one unaccountable ? Also, the vehicle registration plate is assigned to the vehicle... not the driver.
> (In reply to highclimber)
> Is it really right that we cyclists should not be accountable for our actions?
Why would not carrying I.D. make one unaccountable ? Also, the vehicle registration plate is assigned to the vehicle... not the driver.
In reply to EeeByGum:
I think we should all have to carry ID by Law.
I'm very suprised that no government has ever thought of it.
I think we should all have to carry ID by Law.
I'm very suprised that no government has ever thought of it.
In reply to EeeByGum:
Certainly Cyclist should be accountable for their actions, but the practicalities of enforcing this make it near impossible.
What ID are kids on bikes supposed to show?
What want to be gangsta on a bmx in london is going to carry ID?
You may think they aren't really the problem, but I would say they are, as they are the ones that terrorise pedestrians routinely as they wont cycle on the roads
Certainly Cyclist should be accountable for their actions, but the practicalities of enforcing this make it near impossible.
What ID are kids on bikes supposed to show?
What want to be gangsta on a bmx in london is going to carry ID?
You may think they aren't really the problem, but I would say they are, as they are the ones that terrorise pedestrians routinely as they wont cycle on the roads
In reply to EeeByGum:
Which piece of ID would you like cyclists to carry?
What if they don't have any ID - Quite legitimate, though less common in recent times, in the UK. Are they still allowed to ride a bike.
Which piece of ID would you like cyclists to carry?
What if they don't have any ID - Quite legitimate, though less common in recent times, in the UK. Are they still allowed to ride a bike.
In reply to EeeByGum:
From a purely practical point of view I always carry ID when I'm out cycling -- my club membership card that gives my home phone number and contact details - and my CTC membership card giving reference number for both legal and insurance purposes. In the event of an incident when I am out on my own, at least the authorities will know who I am and next of kin!
Carrying ID is second nature to me after working abroad for years. Whenever I went our running in Saudi, I always made sure I had a copy of my residence permit tucked inside my shorts. As a foreigner not having ID could mean a night in the cells!
From a purely practical point of view I always carry ID when I'm out cycling -- my club membership card that gives my home phone number and contact details - and my CTC membership card giving reference number for both legal and insurance purposes. In the event of an incident when I am out on my own, at least the authorities will know who I am and next of kin!
Carrying ID is second nature to me after working abroad for years. Whenever I went our running in Saudi, I always made sure I had a copy of my residence permit tucked inside my shorts. As a foreigner not having ID could mean a night in the cells!
In reply to EeeByGum:
in that case then, I'm a 25 yr old female!
> (In reply to highclimber)
> [...]
>
> Errr - I believe that big number plate thingie on the front of your car counts as ID
> [...]
>
> Errr - I believe that big number plate thingie on the front of your car counts as ID
in that case then, I'm a 25 yr old female!
In reply to Trangia:
Are you being deliberately thick?
> (In reply to EeeByGum)
>
> I think we should all have to carry ID by Law.
>
> I'm very suprised that no government has ever thought of it.
>
> I think we should all have to carry ID by Law.
>
> I'm very suprised that no government has ever thought of it.
Are you being deliberately thick?
In reply to Toby S:
Oh and I'd best get ID for my ten year old daughter for when she cycles to school. Sugar is a muppet.
Oh and I'd best get ID for my ten year old daughter for when she cycles to school. Sugar is a muppet.
In reply to Toby S:
do you not understand sarcasm?
> (In reply to Trangia)
> [...]
>
> Are you being deliberately thick?
> [...]
>
> Are you being deliberately thick?
do you not understand sarcasm?
In reply to balmybaldwin:
It's a good analogy with cars. the london bmx gangsta (?) is the equivalent of the stolen car, the pool car, the serial drink driver and the no insurance/tax/mot.
There's a fundemental disregard of the law that has to be properly enforced.
Then there's the routine red light/ zebra crossing running cyclist. More akin to the speeding/red light running driver. Mostly otherwise law abiding, and in the cars case can be dealt with by fixed cameras, mobile cameras and periodic purges. All of these are based on being able to quickly and easily identify the driver.
And there's the difference with persistent minor law breaking by cyclists. They don't perceive what they're doing as illegal, and there's no efficient sanction. So we have a persistent problem with cyclists for the same reason that there's a persistent problem with mobile phone using drivers.
> (In reply to EeeByGum)
>
> Certainly Cyclist should be accountable for their actions, but the practicalities of enforcing this make it near impossible.
>
> What ID are kids on bikes supposed to show?
>
> What want to be gangsta on a bmx in london is going to carry ID?
>
> You may think they aren't really the problem, but I would say they are, as they are the ones that terrorise pedestrians routinely as they wont cycle on the roads
>
> Certainly Cyclist should be accountable for their actions, but the practicalities of enforcing this make it near impossible.
>
> What ID are kids on bikes supposed to show?
>
> What want to be gangsta on a bmx in london is going to carry ID?
>
> You may think they aren't really the problem, but I would say they are, as they are the ones that terrorise pedestrians routinely as they wont cycle on the roads
It's a good analogy with cars. the london bmx gangsta (?) is the equivalent of the stolen car, the pool car, the serial drink driver and the no insurance/tax/mot.
There's a fundemental disregard of the law that has to be properly enforced.
Then there's the routine red light/ zebra crossing running cyclist. More akin to the speeding/red light running driver. Mostly otherwise law abiding, and in the cars case can be dealt with by fixed cameras, mobile cameras and periodic purges. All of these are based on being able to quickly and easily identify the driver.
And there's the difference with persistent minor law breaking by cyclists. They don't perceive what they're doing as illegal, and there's no efficient sanction. So we have a persistent problem with cyclists for the same reason that there's a persistent problem with mobile phone using drivers.
In reply to EeeByGum:
To see the ID the police need to catch the a-holes. If the police can catch the a-holes they already have sufficient powers to find out which a-hole they are, question them, arrest them and charge them. Non-issue.
More to the point, bit of a shame to find out that the Earl Attlee is a minister in this of all governments. That whirring sound is Old Grandpaw Clem spinning in his grave.
> Seems reasonable to me, especially if some of the Youtube videos I have seen of a-hole cyclists in London are anything to go by. Incidentally, I am a cyclist.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Any thoughts?
To see the ID the police need to catch the a-holes. If the police can catch the a-holes they already have sufficient powers to find out which a-hole they are, question them, arrest them and charge them. Non-issue.
More to the point, bit of a shame to find out that the Earl Attlee is a minister in this of all governments. That whirring sound is Old Grandpaw Clem spinning in his grave.
In reply to EeeByGum:
All his arguements also apply to pedestrians, so basically he is arguing to make carrying id at all times compulsory.
All his arguements also apply to pedestrians, so basically he is arguing to make carrying id at all times compulsory.
Why don't we just go for the full monty.
Get chips implanted and a number tattooed on our forehead.
Then we can be tracked and scanned 24 hours a day "JUST IN CASE".
"Freedom" is becoming a dirty word these days.
Get chips implanted and a number tattooed on our forehead.
Then we can be tracked and scanned 24 hours a day "JUST IN CASE".
"Freedom" is becoming a dirty word these days.
In reply to EeeByGum:
When I was listening to this with half an ear last night, I initially thought he meant that the ID was to make it easier to tell who had been smeared across the roundabout.
Hands up who paints their blood type on their helmet...
> I note that Alan Sugar has suggested in the house of Lords that cyclists should have to carry ID with them whilst out cycling so that they can be accountable for their actions.
When I was listening to this with half an ear last night, I initially thought he meant that the ID was to make it easier to tell who had been smeared across the roundabout.
Hands up who paints their blood type on their helmet...
In reply to EeeByGum: Alan Sugar can bite my cherry.
In reply to toad:
No they aren't. No matter how much you may disapprove of the london bmx gangsta, and how much they may (or may not) be implicated in other crimes, what laws are they breaking by riding around on a bmx with their pants hanging out?
From where I am sitting, a lot of kids in my neighbourhood push/ride/trip over bikes in the street. At what point does a child playing on a bike with stabilisers outside their house legally become 'riding a bike' and necessitate the carrying of ID?
> It's a good analogy with cars. the london bmx gangsta (?) is the equivalent of the stolen car, the pool car, the serial drink driver and the no insurance/tax/mot.
No they aren't. No matter how much you may disapprove of the london bmx gangsta, and how much they may (or may not) be implicated in other crimes, what laws are they breaking by riding around on a bmx with their pants hanging out?
From where I am sitting, a lot of kids in my neighbourhood push/ride/trip over bikes in the street. At what point does a child playing on a bike with stabilisers outside their house legally become 'riding a bike' and necessitate the carrying of ID?
In reply to Quiddity:
I don't believe this is such a no brainer. You are allowed by law to smoke and have sex at the age of 16, drive aged 17 and drink in a licensed premises aged 18. Pick a point and draw your line.
This thread is quite interesting. There was a thread the other day effectively calling for all drink drivers to be hanged. A troller whittering on about red light jumping was widely condemned by all the self-righteous out there and yet there is fierce resistance by most on this thread for any measures that mean we can't ride the roads autonomously and without regard for other road users.
> From where I am sitting, a lot of kids in my neighbourhood push/ride/trip over bikes in the street. At what point does a child playing on a bike with stabilisers outside their house legally become 'riding a bike' and necessitate the carrying of ID?
I don't believe this is such a no brainer. You are allowed by law to smoke and have sex at the age of 16, drive aged 17 and drink in a licensed premises aged 18. Pick a point and draw your line.
This thread is quite interesting. There was a thread the other day effectively calling for all drink drivers to be hanged. A troller whittering on about red light jumping was widely condemned by all the self-righteous out there and yet there is fierce resistance by most on this thread for any measures that mean we can't ride the roads autonomously and without regard for other road users.
In reply to EeeByGum:
or
how much of a problem actually are cyclist breaking the law vs the cost of making every single cyclist carry ID, a number plate, a tax disk and insurance... and who is going to pay for it?
i agree some cyclist are annoying in their behaviour but it seems like small beir compared to the cost of "fixing" it?
or
how much of a problem actually are cyclist breaking the law vs the cost of making every single cyclist carry ID, a number plate, a tax disk and insurance... and who is going to pay for it?
i agree some cyclist are annoying in their behaviour but it seems like small beir compared to the cost of "fixing" it?
In reply to EeeByGum:
I think Alan Sugar should be forced to wear a gag, the odius little sod never seems to say anything worth listening to. On the plus side he is doing his bit for humanity by removing the most inept and obnoxious people from middle management and collecting them all in one place.
I think Alan Sugar should be forced to wear a gag, the odius little sod never seems to say anything worth listening to. On the plus side he is doing his bit for humanity by removing the most inept and obnoxious people from middle management and collecting them all in one place.
In reply to EeeByGum:
On the matter of identification in the event of an accident I agree with the ID notion. It would make life easier for the medics to figure out if you have allergies for instance, for the police to get your nearest and dearest to the hospital etc. I know the same could be said for a car driver, but at least the car has a plate, that can be tracked to a house and cross-referenced through ANPR to insurance etc.
Even if was just a bit of paper giving your name, next of kin and blood group it would be a great help to the emergency services.
On the matter of identification in the event of an accident I agree with the ID notion. It would make life easier for the medics to figure out if you have allergies for instance, for the police to get your nearest and dearest to the hospital etc. I know the same could be said for a car driver, but at least the car has a plate, that can be tracked to a house and cross-referenced through ANPR to insurance etc.
Even if was just a bit of paper giving your name, next of kin and blood group it would be a great help to the emergency services.
In reply to rallymania:
Um - no need to go mad. He was only suggesting you carry ID. Do you not have a bank card / driving license etc? Who was suggesting you have a number plate, tax disk or insurance?
> how much of a problem actually are cyclist breaking the law vs the cost of making every single cyclist carry ID, a number plate, a tax disk and insurance... and who is going to pay for it?
Um - no need to go mad. He was only suggesting you carry ID. Do you not have a bank card / driving license etc? Who was suggesting you have a number plate, tax disk or insurance?
In reply to EeeByGum:
Seems pointless to me. Who is the ID to be used by? It is not for the benefit of other road users and only has some benefit to the police. If the police stopped a cyclist they would have the same powers to question their details in the same way any other pedestrian is. What makes a cyclist any different to someone walking about the street committing crimes? If you apply that logic to cyclists then you would need to apply the same logic to everyone because everyone has the ability to tell lies and defeat justice.
> (In reply to rallymania)
>
> [...]
>
> Um - no need to go mad. He was only suggesting you carry ID. Do you not have a bank card / driving license etc? Who was suggesting you have a number plate, tax disk or insurance?
>
> [...]
>
> Um - no need to go mad. He was only suggesting you carry ID. Do you not have a bank card / driving license etc? Who was suggesting you have a number plate, tax disk or insurance?
Seems pointless to me. Who is the ID to be used by? It is not for the benefit of other road users and only has some benefit to the police. If the police stopped a cyclist they would have the same powers to question their details in the same way any other pedestrian is. What makes a cyclist any different to someone walking about the street committing crimes? If you apply that logic to cyclists then you would need to apply the same logic to everyone because everyone has the ability to tell lies and defeat justice.
In reply to artif:
If you want the freedom to die anonymously whilst paramedics and police try and track down your next of kin, who am I to say you can't have it.
Your loved ones might not be so understanding.
> "Freedom" is becoming a dirty word these days.
If you want the freedom to die anonymously whilst paramedics and police try and track down your next of kin, who am I to say you can't have it.
Your loved ones might not be so understanding.
In reply to Lisa_K:
Are you kidding me? Are you seriously suggesting resticting freedom and liberty to "make life easier" for other people? If someone has allergies or specific medical information then it would be in their own interest to keep it on their persons regrdless of whether they were a cyclist, a swimmer, a climber or even a regular person walking down the street to pick up their shopping. Some cyclists will have wallets/purses/id, some will not just as some pedestrians will have wallets/purses/id. The idea of singling out one particular group to force them to carry ID is absolutely obscene.
> It would make life easier for the medics to figure out if you have allergies for instance, for the police to get your nearest and dearest to the hospital etc.
Are you kidding me? Are you seriously suggesting resticting freedom and liberty to "make life easier" for other people? If someone has allergies or specific medical information then it would be in their own interest to keep it on their persons regrdless of whether they were a cyclist, a swimmer, a climber or even a regular person walking down the street to pick up their shopping. Some cyclists will have wallets/purses/id, some will not just as some pedestrians will have wallets/purses/id. The idea of singling out one particular group to force them to carry ID is absolutely obscene.
In reply to EeeByGum:
I would have thought that carrying basic ID in case of a serious mishap was just common sense. Seems that it's not as common as I thought it was.
I would have thought that carrying basic ID in case of a serious mishap was just common sense. Seems that it's not as common as I thought it was.
In reply to Lord of Starkness:
You have the freedom to bugger off to another country where people did not die to give you those freedoms then.
> (In reply to artif)
>
> [...]
>
> If you want the freedom to die anonymously whilst paramedics and police try and track down your next of kin, who am I to say you can't have it.
>
> Your loved ones might not be so understanding.
>
> [...]
>
> If you want the freedom to die anonymously whilst paramedics and police try and track down your next of kin, who am I to say you can't have it.
>
> Your loved ones might not be so understanding.
You have the freedom to bugger off to another country where people did not die to give you those freedoms then.
In reply to Milesy:
Yes, agree.
As far as I know, the reason that there are quite a lot of cyclists out there committing minor traffic offences isn't that the police keep trying to stop them and being given false details, it's that the police don't think it's worth the effort pulling them over in the first place...
> (In reply to EeeByGum)
> [...]
>
> Seems pointless to me. Who is the ID to be used by? It is not for the benefit of other road users and only has some benefit to the police. If the police stopped a cyclist they would have the same powers to question their details in the same way any other pedestrian is. What makes a cyclist any different to someone walking about the street committing crimes? If you apply that logic to cyclists then you would need to apply the same logic to everyone because everyone has the ability to tell lies and defeat justice.
> [...]
>
> Seems pointless to me. Who is the ID to be used by? It is not for the benefit of other road users and only has some benefit to the police. If the police stopped a cyclist they would have the same powers to question their details in the same way any other pedestrian is. What makes a cyclist any different to someone walking about the street committing crimes? If you apply that logic to cyclists then you would need to apply the same logic to everyone because everyone has the ability to tell lies and defeat justice.
Yes, agree.
As far as I know, the reason that there are quite a lot of cyclists out there committing minor traffic offences isn't that the police keep trying to stop them and being given false details, it's that the police don't think it's worth the effort pulling them over in the first place...
In reply to EeeByGum:
I would characterise my attitude to compulsory ID, registration, etc.. for cyclists as "fierce resistance" simply because it strikes me as a stupid idea - almost on a par with trying to introduce such things for pedestrians.
Not only would it be a disproportionately oppressive measure to take to tackle a non-problem, it would also cost (a lot of) money and inevitably drain resources from more important policing.
Among other things, might this have been in response to the "How to deal with the police" video that seems to have gone viral? (The one in which two cyclists, one of whom is a policeman, make utter twunts of themselves.)
In that video the policeman had witnessed an offence taking place, threatened to make an arrest but subsequently turned out to be bluffing about that. Running a red light is already illegal, but the policeman in that video found himself unable (or unwilling) to enforce the law. How would introducing another law that the policeman presumably would also have failed to enforce, have changed the situation?
> and yet there is fierce resistance by most on this thread for any measures that mean we can't ride the roads autonomously and without regard for other road users.
I would characterise my attitude to compulsory ID, registration, etc.. for cyclists as "fierce resistance" simply because it strikes me as a stupid idea - almost on a par with trying to introduce such things for pedestrians.
Not only would it be a disproportionately oppressive measure to take to tackle a non-problem, it would also cost (a lot of) money and inevitably drain resources from more important policing.
Among other things, might this have been in response to the "How to deal with the police" video that seems to have gone viral? (The one in which two cyclists, one of whom is a policeman, make utter twunts of themselves.)
In that video the policeman had witnessed an offence taking place, threatened to make an arrest but subsequently turned out to be bluffing about that. Running a red light is already illegal, but the policeman in that video found himself unable (or unwilling) to enforce the law. How would introducing another law that the policeman presumably would also have failed to enforce, have changed the situation?
In reply to Milesy:
And I'm grateful for having the freedom to choose.
I'm not in favour of compulsion in carrying some form of ID - I've lived in countries where failure to carry ID could result in a spell in a hot crowded prison cell. At the same time I think it is eminently sensible for everyone to carry some basic form of ID in case of a serious incident.
> (In reply to Lord of Starkness)
> [...]
>
> You have the freedom to bugger off to another country where people did not die to give you those freedoms then.
> [...]
>
> You have the freedom to bugger off to another country where people did not die to give you those freedoms then.
And I'm grateful for having the freedom to choose.
I'm not in favour of compulsion in carrying some form of ID - I've lived in countries where failure to carry ID could result in a spell in a hot crowded prison cell. At the same time I think it is eminently sensible for everyone to carry some basic form of ID in case of a serious incident.
In reply to TeeBee:
Actually, my motorbike instructor has his next of kin details and blood type on a yellow sticker on his visor.
> Hands up who paints their blood type on their helmet...
Actually, my motorbike instructor has his next of kin details and blood type on a yellow sticker on his visor.
In reply to Milesy:
Er... chill before you rupture something honey.
Jesus, if you want to go take a nose dive off Beachy Head without ID go for it. I was simply saying that some basic ID would help other people help YOU. If you don't want to help them to help YOU when/if YOU'VE been turned into a smear on the road DON'T. Just make sure your family know how vehemently opposed to giving the medics / police any basic information YOU are so that they don't sue or complain because they weren't told you were dying in hospital because the police were trying to figure out who the hell you are.
I didn't address the notion of 'everyone' carrying basic ID because that wasn't in the OP statement. Infact I sidestepped the notion of ID for regulatory reasons in its entirety, simply giving an example of when the bare minimum of information may be of use.
> (In reply to Lisa_K)
> [...]
>
> Are you kidding me? Are you seriously suggesting resticting freedom and liberty to "make life easier" for other people? If someone has allergies or specific medical information then it would be in their own interest to keep it on their persons regrdless of whether they were a cyclist, a swimmer, a climber or even a regular person walking down the street to pick up their shopping. Some cyclists will have wallets/purses/id, some will not just as some pedestrians will have wallets/purses/id. The idea of singling out one particular group to force them to carry ID is absolutely obscene.
> [...]
>
> Are you kidding me? Are you seriously suggesting resticting freedom and liberty to "make life easier" for other people? If someone has allergies or specific medical information then it would be in their own interest to keep it on their persons regrdless of whether they were a cyclist, a swimmer, a climber or even a regular person walking down the street to pick up their shopping. Some cyclists will have wallets/purses/id, some will not just as some pedestrians will have wallets/purses/id. The idea of singling out one particular group to force them to carry ID is absolutely obscene.
Er... chill before you rupture something honey.
Jesus, if you want to go take a nose dive off Beachy Head without ID go for it. I was simply saying that some basic ID would help other people help YOU. If you don't want to help them to help YOU when/if YOU'VE been turned into a smear on the road DON'T. Just make sure your family know how vehemently opposed to giving the medics / police any basic information YOU are so that they don't sue or complain because they weren't told you were dying in hospital because the police were trying to figure out who the hell you are.
I didn't address the notion of 'everyone' carrying basic ID because that wasn't in the OP statement. Infact I sidestepped the notion of ID for regulatory reasons in its entirety, simply giving an example of when the bare minimum of information may be of use.
In reply to Lisa_K:
>so that they don't sue or complain because they weren't told you were dying in hospital because the police were trying to figure out who the hell you are.
You are in a fantasy now. Are you telling me you know of any specific cases where family has ever tried to sue or complain about this when the person chose not to carry ID?
>so that they don't sue or complain because they weren't told you were dying in hospital because the police were trying to figure out who the hell you are.
You are in a fantasy now. Are you telling me you know of any specific cases where family has ever tried to sue or complain about this when the person chose not to carry ID?
In reply to EeeByGum:
Alan Sugar is a cyclist by the way.
No, cyclists shouldn't have to carry ID. Cycling is one of the last bastions of freedom in this constrained world.
Alan Sugar is a cyclist by the way.
No, cyclists shouldn't have to carry ID. Cycling is one of the last bastions of freedom in this constrained world.
In reply to Milesy:
I have no family and have a DNR on my medical records, fantasy is not a luxury I afford myself as a biker.
I did not say that I knew anyone who had, but, given the increasingly litigous nature of society I suspect it is only a matter of time...
I have however come across several familes who were and still are, very firmly of the opinion that their nearest and dearest was a little angel who'd never do anything as stupid as pulling a wheelie on the motorway, taking acid etc and then blamed someone else for the resultant death.
I'm not arguing with you. You are entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine. I carry enough ID on me to ensure that my records are traced quickly enough for anything that's salvageable to be put to good use in someone else. What you do is up to you.
I have no family and have a DNR on my medical records, fantasy is not a luxury I afford myself as a biker.
I did not say that I knew anyone who had, but, given the increasingly litigous nature of society I suspect it is only a matter of time...
I have however come across several familes who were and still are, very firmly of the opinion that their nearest and dearest was a little angel who'd never do anything as stupid as pulling a wheelie on the motorway, taking acid etc and then blamed someone else for the resultant death.
I'm not arguing with you. You are entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine. I carry enough ID on me to ensure that my records are traced quickly enough for anything that's salvageable to be put to good use in someone else. What you do is up to you.
In reply to Lisa_K: Isn't this turning into an bit of a cross purposes argument between "everyone should carry ID, next of kin details etc" and "everyone should have to carry ID, next of kin details etc"? I can't really see what relevant point you two don't agree over...
In reply to Lisa_K:
Again, how to you propose to get primary age schoolkids to carry ID at all times? It's a non-starter.
I do believe cyclists (and I am one, as well as being a motorist) should be encouraged to carry ID but it should be legislated.
Strikes me that there's an awful lot of 'cyclists are bad' rhetoric out there and to be honest I'm just not seeing it. There's the odd one with numpty tendencies but when I'm driving the people that give me the most cause to go 'oh for f*cks sakes!!' are motorists.
Encouraging mutual respect between all road users is the way forward. Not starting bitch fights.
Again, how to you propose to get primary age schoolkids to carry ID at all times? It's a non-starter.
I do believe cyclists (and I am one, as well as being a motorist) should be encouraged to carry ID but it should be legislated.
Strikes me that there's an awful lot of 'cyclists are bad' rhetoric out there and to be honest I'm just not seeing it. There's the odd one with numpty tendencies but when I'm driving the people that give me the most cause to go 'oh for f*cks sakes!!' are motorists.
Encouraging mutual respect between all road users is the way forward. Not starting bitch fights.
In reply to Toby S: Sinister - I had hoped that this sh.te had died with New Labour. Cycling is a weakness in their total surveillance society - no plates for ANPR, no ID card being shown at ticket purchase and an ability to travel some distance without registering the journey. They are still at it.
Now I know there are issues with crap cyclists in London, but please control yourselves and not export your petty squabble to places where we can play nicely.
And who elected that person anyway?
Now I know there are issues with crap cyclists in London, but please control yourselves and not export your petty squabble to places where we can play nicely.
And who elected that person anyway?
In reply to Toby S:
Although you could argue that primary age kids are one group who could benefit from having ID on them, for those times when they get lost and haven't got a clue where they live, what their parent's phone number is, and so on. But then again, making it happen would be a bit difficult. Maybe all kids shoes should have Clark's Commandos-sty;e cut-outs in the heel for useful stuff.
> (In reply to Lisa_K)
>
> Again, how to you propose to get primary age schoolkids to carry ID at all times? It's a non-starter.
>
>
> Again, how to you propose to get primary age schoolkids to carry ID at all times? It's a non-starter.
>
Although you could argue that primary age kids are one group who could benefit from having ID on them, for those times when they get lost and haven't got a clue where they live, what their parent's phone number is, and so on. But then again, making it happen would be a bit difficult. Maybe all kids shoes should have Clark's Commandos-sty;e cut-outs in the heel for useful stuff.
In reply to Toby S:
> (In reply to Lisa_K)
>
>
> I do believe cyclists (and I am one, as well as being a motorist) should be encouraged to carry ID but it should be legislated.
>
should NOT be legislated. Sorry. >
In reply to Toby S:
Could someone please show me where I said that people should have to carry ID at any time let alone all times because I'm pretty damned confident that I didn't say that. I said it would be useful, not that anyone should or ought to but that it would be useful, also known as helpful, beneficial, not to be confused with manadatory, compulsory.
> (In reply to Lisa_K)
>
> Again, how to you propose to get primary age schoolkids to carry ID at all times? It's a non-starter.
>
> Again, how to you propose to get primary age schoolkids to carry ID at all times? It's a non-starter.
Could someone please show me where I said that people should have to carry ID at any time let alone all times because I'm pretty damned confident that I didn't say that. I said it would be useful, not that anyone should or ought to but that it would be useful, also known as helpful, beneficial, not to be confused with manadatory, compulsory.
In reply to tony:
But how often to kids get lost? Not counting the times when 'lost' actually means 'sorry I'm late home for tea, I was dawdling and mucking about so it took me 3 hours to walk one mile'
But how often to kids get lost? Not counting the times when 'lost' actually means 'sorry I'm late home for tea, I was dawdling and mucking about so it took me 3 hours to walk one mile'
In reply to Lisa_K:
I was responding to this:
* by - Lisa_K ? on - 13:56 Fri
In reply to EeeByGum:
On the matter of identification in the event of an accident I agree with the ID notion.
Even if was just a bit of paper giving your name, next of kin and blood group it would be a great help to the emergency services.
I assumed this meant you broadly agreed with the what was being said in the OP?
I was responding to this:
* by - Lisa_K ? on - 13:56 Fri
In reply to EeeByGum:
On the matter of identification in the event of an accident I agree with the ID notion.
Even if was just a bit of paper giving your name, next of kin and blood group it would be a great help to the emergency services.
I assumed this meant you broadly agreed with the what was being said in the OP?
In reply to Toby S:
No hun, I don't - sorry. I literally meant what I put, that the basics would help the emergency bods start putting you back together and contacting your family.
I'm an in an exceptionally bad mood today and Milesy deciding to sound off like McEnroe at my posts has made it worse. I'm sorry for grizzling at you too.
> (In reply to Lisa_K)
>
> I was responding to this:
>
>
> * by - Lisa_K ? on - 13:56 Fri
> In reply to EeeByGum:
>
> On the matter of identification in the event of an accident I agree with the ID notion.
>
> Even if was just a bit of paper giving your name, next of kin and blood group it would be a great help to the emergency services.
>
> I assumed this meant you broadly agreed with the what was being said in the OP?
>
> I was responding to this:
>
>
> * by - Lisa_K ? on - 13:56 Fri
> In reply to EeeByGum:
>
> On the matter of identification in the event of an accident I agree with the ID notion.
>
> Even if was just a bit of paper giving your name, next of kin and blood group it would be a great help to the emergency services.
>
> I assumed this meant you broadly agreed with the what was being said in the OP?
No hun, I don't - sorry. I literally meant what I put, that the basics would help the emergency bods start putting you back together and contacting your family.
I'm an in an exceptionally bad mood today and Milesy deciding to sound off like McEnroe at my posts has made it worse. I'm sorry for grizzling at you too.
In reply to Toby S:
Sorry.
TBH I could do with curling up in a ball with a stiff drink and someone to supply a dmaned good cuddle. Instead I've got a works party complete with LBD and heels... God help the bloke who tries it on eh?!
Sorry.
TBH I could do with curling up in a ball with a stiff drink and someone to supply a dmaned good cuddle. Instead I've got a works party complete with LBD and heels... God help the bloke who tries it on eh?!
In reply to EeeByGum:
well these are just some of the similar things being mooted by variously vocal persons both on here and in the press... just thought i'd throw them all into the melting pot
well these are just some of the similar things being mooted by variously vocal persons both on here and in the press... just thought i'd throw them all into the melting pot
In reply to lummox:
Is that a shit salesman of computers or a salesman of shit computers or both?
> (In reply to highclimber)
> [...]
>
> Correction : a shit computer salesman.
> [...]
>
> Correction : a shit computer salesman.
Is that a shit salesman of computers or a salesman of shit computers or both?
In reply to earlsdonhammer:
He seemed quite good at selling them, for a bit anyway, they were definitely shit though.
He seemed quite good at selling them, for a bit anyway, they were definitely shit though.
In reply to EeeByGum:
If there were cycle paths everywhere and drivers were more considerate, you'd have less cyclists doing thier own thing in an antisocial way.
People would be healthier happier and greener.
Better cycling infrastructure is the answer I think.
You get pedestrians doing antisocial things, and they're just as untracable.
If there were cycle paths everywhere and drivers were more considerate, you'd have less cyclists doing thier own thing in an antisocial way.
People would be healthier happier and greener.
Better cycling infrastructure is the answer I think.
You get pedestrians doing antisocial things, and they're just as untracable.
In reply to Lisa_K:
Why are you offering your dress and shoes around for blokes to try on?
> (In reply to Toby S)
>
> Instead I've got a works party complete with LBD and heels... God help the bloke who tries it on eh?!
>
> Instead I've got a works party complete with LBD and heels... God help the bloke who tries it on eh?!
Why are you offering your dress and shoes around for blokes to try on?
In reply to LastBoyScout:
Sorry for going off topic a bit, but I've often wondered about this. Do medical staff really take any notice of the blood type written on a sticker? Surely it's just too risky, in case the item was borrowed? It seems completely pointless to me, like those "baby on board" stickers.
Sorry for going off topic a bit, but I've often wondered about this. Do medical staff really take any notice of the blood type written on a sticker? Surely it's just too risky, in case the item was borrowed? It seems completely pointless to me, like those "baby on board" stickers.
In reply to EeeByGum:
Those are two separate issues.
> ride the roads autonomously and without regard for other road users.
Those are two separate issues.
In reply to jayme:
I'll be more comfy in their trousers and watching them in heels should be good for a laugh!!
> (In reply to Lisa_K)
> [...]
>
> Why are you offering your dress and shoes around for blokes to try on?
> [...]
>
> Why are you offering your dress and shoes around for blokes to try on?
I'll be more comfy in their trousers and watching them in heels should be good for a laugh!!
In reply to EeeByGum: I completely agree. In fact, I think pedestrians should also be required to carry ID. Just this morning I saw two pedestrians crossing the road in an unsafe place putting the lives of all other road users at risk.
These a-holes need to be made accountable for their actions.
These a-holes need to be made accountable for their actions.
In reply to BruceWee:
i don't disagree with this statement, but genuine question.
how will them carrying ID stop their behaviour?
they need to be caught doing it first, and that requires something like more police or CCTV not carrying ID. (unless your idea of carry ID is we all have a locator beacon installed and when someone reports bad behaviour the authorities can see who it was?)
>
> These a-holes need to be made accountable for their actions.
> These a-holes need to be made accountable for their actions.
i don't disagree with this statement, but genuine question.
how will them carrying ID stop their behaviour?
they need to be caught doing it first, and that requires something like more police or CCTV not carrying ID. (unless your idea of carry ID is we all have a locator beacon installed and when someone reports bad behaviour the authorities can see who it was?)
In reply to EeeByGum:
Does anyone happen to have numbers on:
- Deaths caused to others by negligent cyclists actions
- Deaths caused to others by negligent drivers actions
I think it'll become obvious why drivers should have licences. It's relatively easy to f*ck up in a car and kill 4 people.
Doing the same on a bicycle, well, that's pretty damn tricky.
(My general opinion of bicycles is that it's relatively hard to kill other people, but easy to kill yourself. This is why a cyclist running a red light is so very different to a car running a red light.)
Does anyone happen to have numbers on:
- Deaths caused to others by negligent cyclists actions
- Deaths caused to others by negligent drivers actions
I think it'll become obvious why drivers should have licences. It's relatively easy to f*ck up in a car and kill 4 people.
Doing the same on a bicycle, well, that's pretty damn tricky.
(My general opinion of bicycles is that it's relatively hard to kill other people, but easy to kill yourself. This is why a cyclist running a red light is so very different to a car running a red light.)
In reply to rallymania: Sorry, I should have put an irony smiley or something on that last post.
In reply to BruceWee:
ah ha
so what you're saying is...
you and your mate crossed the road in a dangerous place... for the good of society you should have been locked up, but
luckily you weren't carrying any ID so you got away with it!
ah ha
so what you're saying is...
you and your mate crossed the road in a dangerous place... for the good of society you should have been locked up, but
luckily you weren't carrying any ID so you got away with it!
In reply to rallymania:
Yes, I admit it. I'm a very reckless pedestrian. I should really start obeying the highway code before I cause serious injury.
Yes, I admit it. I'm a very reckless pedestrian. I should really start obeying the highway code before I cause serious injury.
In reply to EeeByGum: everyone should be fitted with microchips under the skin that can be read by a scanner that the police use, along side retinal id then they could find out who the bad man is riding his push bike on the path.
In reply to EeeByGum:
Has anyone mentioned yet that there's no actual requirement for drivers to carry ID with them?
(Clearly there's some measure of accountability inherent in the car having a number plate but that only technically identifies the owner of the car, not the driver, and even then only by accessing a database.)
Has anyone mentioned yet that there's no actual requirement for drivers to carry ID with them?
(Clearly there's some measure of accountability inherent in the car having a number plate but that only technically identifies the owner of the car, not the driver, and even then only by accessing a database.)
In reply to Luke90:
In reply to EeeByGum: how is that even enforceable? drivers don't have to carry their drivers licence with them.
No, we don't need to be told what to do by some computer salesman
> (In reply to EeeByGum)
>
> Has anyone mentioned yet that there's no actual requirement for drivers to carry ID with them?
>
>
> Has anyone mentioned yet that there's no actual requirement for drivers to carry ID with them?
>
In reply to EeeByGum: how is that even enforceable? drivers don't have to carry their drivers licence with them.
No, we don't need to be told what to do by some computer salesman
In reply to EeeByGum:
I read the title and thought "That's a good idea as it would speed up identification after a cyclist is knocked off by some idiot driver". But oh no Sir Alan sorry Lord Alan obviously thinks cyclists are barging motorists off the road in their thousands.
He's only recently started cycling after years of running killed his knees. So instead of suggesting a helpful idea such as compulsary helmets he decides on compulsary ID in order for more cyclists to be taken to court (I assume that's what he means by accountable for their actions).
Why not make cycling safer for those involved. Having sustained a serious concussion from falling from a standing posistion and hitting my head on chair. To having to wait four and half hours in A&E waiting for a nurse to clean and glue the injuries I sustained in a mountain bike crash (whilst wearing a helmet) because a child had been knocked off his bike not wearing a helmet and sustained serious head injuries and died in A&E (all available nurses were understandably attending that). Lord Sugar could do a lot worse than following a safety aspect instead of accountability. And don't most people store an In Case of Energency (ICE) number in their phone. In short, I don't agree!
I read the title and thought "That's a good idea as it would speed up identification after a cyclist is knocked off by some idiot driver". But oh no Sir Alan sorry Lord Alan obviously thinks cyclists are barging motorists off the road in their thousands.
He's only recently started cycling after years of running killed his knees. So instead of suggesting a helpful idea such as compulsary helmets he decides on compulsary ID in order for more cyclists to be taken to court (I assume that's what he means by accountable for their actions).
Why not make cycling safer for those involved. Having sustained a serious concussion from falling from a standing posistion and hitting my head on chair. To having to wait four and half hours in A&E waiting for a nurse to clean and glue the injuries I sustained in a mountain bike crash (whilst wearing a helmet) because a child had been knocked off his bike not wearing a helmet and sustained serious head injuries and died in A&E (all available nurses were understandably attending that). Lord Sugar could do a lot worse than following a safety aspect instead of accountability. And don't most people store an In Case of Energency (ICE) number in their phone. In short, I don't agree!
In reply to lummox:
Actually, he's a buyer not a salesman, and a very good one. He may well be a crap salesman though
> (In reply to highclimber)
> [...]
>
> Correction : a shit computer salesman.
> [...]
>
> Correction : a shit computer salesman.
Actually, he's a buyer not a salesman, and a very good one. He may well be a crap salesman though
In reply to lucie_b:
Draws up chair and opens popcorn.
> (In reply to EeeByGum)
>
> a helpful idea such as compulsary helmets
>
>
> a helpful idea such as compulsary helmets
>
Draws up chair and opens popcorn.
In reply to lucie_b:
Read the research, helmets are of dubious utility so should not be compulsory. http://www.cyclehelmets.org/
(I cycle a lot and wear a helmet mostly)
Read the research, helmets are of dubious utility so should not be compulsory. http://www.cyclehelmets.org/
(I cycle a lot and wear a helmet mostly)
In reply to blurty: i cycle a lot and dont wear a helmet, have been knocked off bike several times, always by inconsiderate/useless drivers,imo a helmet wont save you in a serious collision with a hgv for example but may give you a false sense of security. also the argument about helmet compulsion would then have to spread to pedestrians who are killed more frequently than cyclists on our roads.
In reply to blurty: The helmet thing is a red herring on both accounts. chances are if you come off your bike on the road it won't be your head that will hit the ground the hardest though you could concieveably hit your head hard enough to fracture it from even the most innocuous falls. I wear a helmet for this reason, not that it might save my life - just that I value my head and that I know it hurts when I bang it!
In reply to EeeByGum:Correct,so why is everybody going off on one?
The "cyclists" who need nicking are the "adults" who ride on the pavements. Usually wearing black tracksuits, woolly hats and a can of Tennants.
Bring back the bobby on foot.
The "cyclists" who need nicking are the "adults" who ride on the pavements. Usually wearing black tracksuits, woolly hats and a can of Tennants.
Bring back the bobby on foot.
In reply to EeeByGum:
I think everyone in the UK should have an individual bar code tattoo'd on their foreheads at birth. Police, civil servants and other officials like traffic wardens could then quickly bring up all your personal details using a hand held scanner, apply fines, amend your records and retrieve funds directly from your bank account making things much more convenient and easy for everybody. Lord Sugar could easily set this up.
I think everyone in the UK should have an individual bar code tattoo'd on their foreheads at birth. Police, civil servants and other officials like traffic wardens could then quickly bring up all your personal details using a hand held scanner, apply fines, amend your records and retrieve funds directly from your bank account making things much more convenient and easy for everybody. Lord Sugar could easily set this up.
In reply to Reach>Talent: Like very much
In reply to Milesy: Did you know that all those people who died defending your rights to freedom had to, compulsarily, carry I.D.
In reply to pcummins60:
I must have missed something - I didn't realise we were still at war.
Most people do carry some form of ID, or at least something that can be verified, I've my photo ID driving license with me for example. What benefit would another form of ID provide over that?
Anyone who currently has no desire to provide accurate ID to the police isn't going to worry about carrying something like this.
This is a solution in search of a non-existant problem.
ALC
I must have missed something - I didn't realise we were still at war.
Most people do carry some form of ID, or at least something that can be verified, I've my photo ID driving license with me for example. What benefit would another form of ID provide over that?
Anyone who currently has no desire to provide accurate ID to the police isn't going to worry about carrying something like this.
This is a solution in search of a non-existant problem.
ALC
In reply to EeeByGum: Here's a question: why should anybody give a flying f**k what Alan Sugar thinks? A tw*t with bags of money and a dubious title is still just a tw*t and his opinions should not carry any more weight than any other individuals.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...