["Followup-To:" header set to uk.rec.cycling.]
On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:09:49 +0100, Cynic wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 16:42:49 +0100, JNugent wrote:
>
> >> 2) The cyclist will get out of the way of the traffic rather than
> >> keeping to the middle of the road and holding it up.
>
> >He can do that *anyway*.
>
> But unlike the head-on situation, he is not obliged to do so.
So in your opinion contraflow cycling is better because it obliges
cyclists to get out of the way of the 'traffic'? In other words, you
regard cyclists as, by definition, inferior road users who should
defer to everyone else.
Some news for you:
Cyclists are traffic.
Cyclists have at least as much right to make as full use of almost all
roads as do drivers of motor vehicles. (Some would argue more right).
> It was the rule where I lived in South Africa some years ago.
As was apartheid. Were you a big supporter of that too?
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \| |