lunatics

[turbotommy]

It looks like people seem to be getting a *little upset* at other people expressing their (democratic) right to hold an opinion. Best of all, it seems that abuse and offence seem to be the chosen methods of response which is most likely to give these people more justification for their cause (as well as confirming to them that 4x4 owners are abusive !!!!s).

Congratulations, keep going, you may help these people succeed.

Democracy; living in a society where the rules are determined by the majority. Living up to the stereotype of bad 4x4 drivers will mean that more people will support extra tax on these vehicles. IMO, that would be a shame, but it may be precipitated by the stupid.

[silvtr1000]

Who's side are you on?

What's said here is likely not what's used in communications with the group in question, nor in the the communications with the governments.

I know my letter wasn't abusive or offensive.

Go ahead and sit back and let others speak up in defence of your right to drive a 4x4, but don't get all sarky with those who do speak up...

As an ex-biker, I note that there are more than a few other bikers on here, and that's a group that really knows what the effects of complacency regarding their rights has on their chosen minority interest...

Stay silent and watch your rights slip away, fine - nobody fights if they don't really care. But if you're going to open your mouth at all (or put pixels to memory), let it be for the good, and not to attack your own from within the ranks...

"precipitated by the stupid"? Very clever.

Maybe I'm being over sensitive about your comments - certainly no-one else seems to be answering, unless I've missed a separate thread elsewhere on the forum...

Mark

[turbotommy]

Whose side am i on; responsible 4x4 owners. The ones that listen to their critics, and ACT accordingly rather than petulantly.

It's pretty obvious that my opinion is somewhat different from others on this site (see Bullbar posts etc.). IMO, it's more considered than reactionary and consequently less popular...

I drive a 4runner, and know that i'd be more environmentally acceptable in a Prius (or smart). However, i also realise that there's more that just MPG to consider (eg how long your vehicle lasts and what you need/use it for). Unfortunately, the MPG argument isn't really winnable 20-25 just doesn't do it, though the more thoughtful posts have put forward some mitigating arguments. What's really troubling, given the sensationalism around urban 4x4s, is the stereotypically aggressive rants puts forward that will help divert attention from the important issues and reinforce the image of 4x4 owners as knuckle-dragging underachievers or bimbos on the school run (sic; emotive terminology for emphasis...).

It might be better to remind people that luxury vehicles use lots of fuel, and they might remember that these are merely (and only) for status rather than function (as a minority of 4x4s). No, no i reeeeally need a seven series every year or two...

BTW, i am a 'former' biker, exactly what rights have they had taken away?

[Maverick]

The right to use the road as others would without being pulled regularly even whilst doing the speed limit, so as some person who has never riden a motorcycle can give you a lecture about the dangers. To fill up at a petrol station without the attendant insisting which pump you use as you must be in full veiw of the camera at all times. I could go on and on, but I won't because I still ride, even though I get looks from people suggesting that I'm about to sprout a third head or eat chickens raw. The motorcycle license has been altered continually whereas the car license remains unaltered. I have emailed the anti 4x4's, but I asked them to divert their attention from the type of vehicle to the driver, as if you take a dangerous driver out of a 4x4 and put him in a smart car, you still have a dangerous driver on the road. In fact following tests carried out on 5th Gear you have a more dangerous driver, did you see the hole that the Smart car punched through the front of the Mercedes saloon.
The main offence I take is that because of my types of vehicle I automatically become a danger to the public, I don't drive down pavements so have no intention of mowing over innocent pedestrians. I drive slowly through towns to allow for people born after we were taught how to cross the road (anyone remember the good old green cross man). I try to leave a good braking distance between me and the car in front. So why must I be attacked by the do gooders. I live my live as queitly as I can, I interfer with as few others as I can, so why should they have the right to condem me. Yes now is the time, the voices of others are becoming to loud, laws are starting to be passed that should never be (most of them without our knowledge). It is time I made my voice heard, and if my law abiding actions are wrong, what is right?
This is a subject that will inflame all, and I have to accept others veiws, I just don't have to agree with them.

[Slugsie]

One thing that everyone seems to miss out (and is often the point of the various 'lobby' groups) is padestrian safety. Most of the arguments given out are about how our big vehicles cause more harm/damage to 'innocent' padestrians. Now, no-one can deny that the 4ft high (often bull barred) front of the average 2 ton 4x4 is going to hurt a human more than the soft plastic front of a tiny Smart car. However, if padestrians were better educated and paid more attention to what was happening on the roads rather than just stepping out and assuming that everyone else is paying attention then there would be less accidents all round. I see so many padestrians who just seem to assume that they can just walk onto a road and everyone is going to get out of their way. WAKE UP!!!!! Roads are for cars, we have right of way on them. But even on occasions when we don't (zebra crossings etc) there is still a duty on the padestrian to make sure that it is safe to cross, rather than just assume that they have been spotted and the cars will stop.

Yes, there are plenty of careless and inconsiderate drivers around who should be removed from the roads (BTW, to a certain extent I am in favour of everyone having to do a retest every few years to make sure their driving is still up to scratch) - irrespective of what they drive, but there are also plenty of careless and inconsiderate padestrians around too.

Road safety is not just an issue for car drivers, it involves everyone who comes near a road, and some people would do well to remember that.

[Guest]

Actually well said and it's interesting to see that finally they have started some public info adverts for pedestrians looking where they are going. When I was younger, pedestrian safety was primarily the responsibility of the pedestrian, we all have a responsibility for ourselves out there.

That being said, I also agree with Turbotommy, we have to be carefull about how we make our points, valid though they might be. Negotiation and tact are the bywords when you have people who are making a heartfelt point whether it is well thought out or not.

4x4s are not the first and won't be the last area that someone with an agenda tries to get rid of. As a once keen rambler and climber, I remember a time when people tried to get that banned or controlled after a spate of accidents causing the rescue services to be called out costing large amounts of taxpayers money (supposedly although most of the mountain rescue services are volunteers - apart from the RAF).

What we mustn't come across as is "knuckle dragging baby killers" and if we aren't careful this is exactly how we will be perceived.

After a couple of years, another band wagon will probably be jumped on, we've had anti people carriers, anti 4x4s, anti custom cars, anti imports, someone else will be next.

Lets all just hold our nerve, ride any changes which will probably be limited in scope, make our points in a reasonable manner, come across as the adults that we surely all are and eventually the special interest groups - who generally jump on the band wagon as an easy way to gain power and influence - will move onto another easy target. Lets not make 4x4s an easy target, lets be responsible on the lanes, drive like angels, help old ladies across the road etc etc.

Cheers

[turbotommy]

I couldn't agree more...

One thing that also seems to have changed a bit these days is that pedestrians are expected to look out more, though it is worth remembering that in any crash with a ped the vehicle driver is automatically at fault (or have i got this wrong ?). Now i know there are a lot of muppets out there that pay little heed to the traffic (through ignorance or deliberate stupidity) but any driver is encased in metal, and it is the ped who will sustain the injuries. I'm not trying to excuse stupid pedestrian behaviour, but you should be sufficiently grown up to deal with it; if the misconception grows that 4x4 drivers don't give a **** then there will be more consensus to marginalise them.

I think that i'm correct in stating that pedestrians have right of way at yield lines at junctions (when they have started to cross), but how many times do road users seem to think that it is legitimate to try to run them down, because they are on the road ? If you want to improve the reputation of 4x4 drivers then stop and let people cross. I do. You may find that it happens so rarely that people actually remember that some big vehicle (a 4x4!) actually stopped, and was polite (OK, so the X5s/lexus/cayennes never will). It might even help the reputation that we have collectively 'acquired'. Now a lot of people will complain 'oh but i'm so busy; i don't have time to stop for all of these people'. Well, a while ago BMW did an experiment with 2 of their cars. They both started in Berlin and had to get to Munich; one driver was told to go as fast as humanly possible and the other was told to go at the prevailing traffic speed and to enjoy the drive. The 'fast' driver got there barely half an hour faster, having used lots more fuel, brake lining and feeling much more stressed. Was it worth it ?

Perhaps you should think of courtesy to other car drivers (and pedestrians) as the extra karma you need to make up for the lower mpg you are getting (yes, i'm taking the **** now...). I'm delighted to say that those of you that get all wound up will be on this planet for less time than your relaxed colleagues...(now there's an environmetal benefit you could point out...)

[dazzo23]

Marvellous innit, I’m now in two groups that some people want to legislate off the road! When I’m not out with the dogs in the Surf what’s my preferred mode of transport?
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yep…. a bike!
-
A statement springs to mind that's been around biking circles for some time - When we do right, nobody remembers, when we do wrong, nobody forgets.

[turbotommy]

The right to use the road as others would without being pulled regularly even whilst doing the speed limit, so as some person who has never riden a motorcycle can give you a lecture about the dangers. To fill up at a petrol station without the attendant insisting which pump you use as you must be in full veiw of the camera at all times. I could go on and on, but I won't because I still ride, even though I get looks from people suggesting that I'm about to sprout a third head or eat chickens raw. The motorcycle license has been altered continually whereas the car license remains unaltered. .

I rode a variety of bikes in the '80s growing up in london, and getting 'producers' is now a fond memory. I'm even thinking of joining the ranks of the rubbies (well, a sort of poor urban biker actually...). I'm afraid that i rather sympathise with plod on this one; pulling over youngsters on 'streetfighters' (or anything similar; OK two wheels and an engine; OK including honda express's...) is probably a good thing. They seem to be lunatic powefurful machines, and the death rate on bikes used to be pretty high. Most emergency room docs still regard bikers as the prime source of organs for donation. If young lads had the wisdom and experience to ride these things carefully there wouldn't be an issue (but how do you get experience ?....). I would also suggest that the parents of most of these kids are secretly delighted that plod is doing their best to ensure that their little darlin doesn't end up a statistic by strenously dissauding them from riding (note; any similarities with smoking ?). Not that i'd suggest that youngsters migh be riding about on vehicles sans MOTs, insurance etc. No, no, no, shurley shome mishtake....rant continues on pg 94...

[Maverick]

I rode a variety of bikes in the '80s growing up in london, and getting 'producers' is now a fond memory. I'm even thinking of joining the ranks of the rubbies (well, a sort of poor urban biker actually...). I'm afraid that i rather sympathise with plod on this one; pulling over youngsters on 'streetfighters' (or anything similar; OK two wheels and an engine; OK including honda express's...) is probably a good thing. They seem to be lunatic powefurful machines, and the death rate on bikes used to be pretty high. Most emergency room docs still regard bikers as the prime source of organs for donation. If young lads had the wisdom and experience to ride these things carefully there wouldn't be an issue (but how do you get experience ?....). I would also suggest that the parents of most of these kids are secretly delighted that plod is doing their best to ensure that their little darlin doesn't end up a statistic by strenously dissauding them from riding (note; any similarities with smoking ?). Not that i'd suggest that youngsters migh be riding about on vehicles sans MOTs, insurance etc. No, no, no, shurley shome mishtake....rant continues on pg 94...

I am a youngster? Is a VFR750 a street fighter?
No, and no.
The death rate for motorcyclists has been falling every year, as more people take advanced training, and due to the increase in track days where people can go with their lunitic machines and trash them in reletive safety. There was a blip about five years back when alot of 40 year olds decided to start riding again and found the machines had changed slightly, this has been dealt with by advanced rider training. A motorcyclist is well aware that a simple bump that would put a small dent in a car, could be a broken bone or worse for them, and most of us ride accordingly.
Unfortunately the Government wanted to make motorcycling antisocial (sound familier) and started releasing manipulated statistics, press releases, and making demands for us to clean up our act (which we were allready doing).
With every thing you have to remember the Government will only release what it wants you to know, and will bury everything else. You have to exert alot of effort not to allow others biggotted veiws to cloud you until you have accurate information.
I will say it again a dangerous driver is a dangerous driver, it doesn't matter what they are driving.
Me I ride a lunatic powerful machine, and drive a people mower, but have had one motorcycle accident (mechanical failure), and one car accident (my fault, no injuries).

[dazzo23]

I am a youngster? Is a VFR750 a street fighter?
No, and no.
The death rate for motorcyclists has been falling every year, as more people take advanced training, and due to the increase in track days where people can go with their lunitic machines and trash them in reletive safety. There was a blip about five years back when alot of 40 year olds decided to start riding again and found the machines had changed slightly, this has been dealt with by advanced rider training. A motorcyclist is well aware that a simple bump that would put a small dent in a car, could be a broken bone or worse for them, and most of us ride accordingly.
Unfortunately the Government wanted to make motorcycling antisocial (sound familier) and started releasing manipulated statistics, press releases, and making demands for us to clean up our act (which we were allready doing).
With every thing you have to remember the Government will only release what it wants you to know, and will bury everything else. You have to exert alot of effort not to allow others biggotted veiws to cloud you until you have accurate information.
I will say it again a dangerous driver is a dangerous driver, it doesn't matter what they are driving.
Me I ride a lunatic powerful machine, and drive a people mower, but have had one motorcycle accident (mechanical failure), and one car accident (my fault, no injuries).

Nicely said

[stimpy30]

h,m

right not going to rant my little surf pulls about 24mpg approx transports me missus a child soon 2 be 2 two dogs and a cat and all lugage for said occupants .also my little surf takes me on days off road and on a call out in the mornings in low range i drag start 10 tonne trucks with it so if you can point me in the direction of a smart or small car that can do this i,ll buy it .
p.s. some little stats on cars i used to have
renault f16 22 mpg
jag xjs 2 seater 16 mpg
uncles volvo 740 16 mpg
rover 820 auto 22 mpg (longer than a surf)
ya seeing the picture these sound quite like the sort of cars some politicians drive big car low mpg only one type of use hope there gonna tax them as well
any how going looking for me 10 tonne pulling smart car lol

[turbotommy]

I am a youngster?
Unfortunately the Government wanted to make motorcycling antisocial (sound familier) and started releasing manipulated statistics, press releases, and making demands for us to clean up our act (which we were allready doing).
With every thing you have to remember the Government will only release what it wants you to know, and will bury everything else. You have to exert alot of effort not to allow others biggotted veiws to cloud you until you have accurate information.
I will say it again a dangerous driver is a dangerous driver, it doesn't matter what they are driving.
Me I ride a lunatic powerful machine, and drive a people mower, but have had one motorcycle accident (mechanical failure), and one car accident (my fault, no injuries).

Maverick

I don't doubt your driving abilities (bikers learn fast or get selected out of the gene pool) or dispute your choice of transport. I rode from ''82-'91 in london with no major shunts (one, v minor; they 'didn't see me' despite making eye contact...) and my only car/4x4 shunts have been deer (2, and 1 of those with 'deerscares') in the middle of nowhere, at night.

Bikers are easy targets because there's a few bikes out there which are loud, loud, loud. This makes them stand out, and an obvious target. I'd bet that virtually every driver has at least one or two clear examples of some noisy biker making a stupid move. Alas, i'd have to admit that a couple of my rides were two stroke 250s, natch with expansion pipes (oh, and a 750 without any kind of cans, really). It was fun, but rather selfish/stupid.As there seem to be more people doing this (or are we less tolerant?) it can easily become a target issue. The same applies to 4x4s. Now i think it is obvious that in any large group (bikers or 4x4s) there will be some 'less thoughtful' and there's little (well, restictive laws...) that can easily be done about that. The best way forwards is for the sensible/smart ones to make sure that there are plenty of good examples (eg towing stuck cars out of ditches, stopping for old ladies or people with kids/prams).The karma thing again....

[silvtr1000]

Turbotommy,

Some of your points are interesting and well made.

RE loud cans on bikes: A reasonable person will deduce that THAT bike has a loud can. That's all. Not that the rider is a killer - it may not be his bike, he may be on his way to have it replaced. Not that ALL bikes have loud cans. Not that ALL bikers are killers.

As I understand it, biking in England has changed greatly in the last 10 years. 10 years ago, bikes were used as commuter transport AND Sunday fun AND weekends away with the missus AND tinkering with in the evenings, and on and on... THAT you rode a bike and WERE a biker were more important than WHAT you rode and that you SEEMED to be a biker. Now the opposite seems true.

In Ireland, the situation is still in 10-year-ago mode (unfortunately, so are car drivers).

To my point...

Over this 10 years, proposed and actual restrictions (including the famous Martin Bangemann and his 100hp limit proposal, someone else's compulsory leg protectors, increasingly complicated and off-putting licencing structure (as previously mentioned)), have diluted the biking experience. More and more bikers new to biking AGREE with speed limits, power restrictions, compulsory dayglo clothing, etc, because the establishment has forced it down their throats to the extent that they think it's all reasonable.

It's not, and if this generation of bikers don't speak up, their kids' biking experience may be a very different one to theirs.

I've given up biking because the standard of driving on Irish roads greatly increases the likelihood of me being hit by a bad driver while on a bike. The likelihood of me being seriously hurt by coming off a bike is very high. I have a lovely wife and two lovely kids, and I like them. I want to spend a long time with them.

But the fact is that it is not a car or a truck or a 4x4, or even a bike that's going to hit me - it's the driver of the vehicle that will hit me. And no amount of whizzbang protective clothing, airbags, ABS, crush cans, power restrictions, or removal of specific vehicle types (4x4, bike, HGV - whatever) will change that.

It's bad driving that kills. Nothing else.

Mark


PS - Good comments made about the safe cross code - I drill it into my kids, but the ads should be resurrected.

[turbotommy]

RE loud cans on bikes: A reasonable person will deduce that THAT bike has a loud can. That's all. Not that the rider is a killer - it may not be his bike, he may be on his way to have it replaced. Not that ALL bikes have loud cans. Not that ALL bikers are killers.

It's bad driving that kills. Nothing else.

As part of trying to be a careful driver, i'm always trying to be sure that i can spot all two wheeled traffic (My 4runner has few blind spots if you're careful with the mirrors; though it's no substitute for what used to be the 'lifesaver' look). In my observations on bikers, my experience is that rather a lot of them are sporting noisy exhausts, as well as super small (camera invisible) number plates.The proportion of these seems to be going up, perhaps, as you say, because fewer people use bikes as essential transport and that is what is skewing the proportions.I agree that it is down to individuals, and one shouldn't generalise about the group as a whole, but i and 'we' do. I suppose that one could generalise that whenever a minority group achieve a certain level of socially unacceptable behaviour (and the threshold for this changes) then the entire group can expect some legislative action. Let's be nice (knitted yoghurt, anyone? and where's my copy of the Guardian got to?).

I have two young kids, and would like to re-live a bit of my two-wheeled youth (wife doesn't agree...). Given todays' road conditions, it isn't realistic to expect that they'd be able to share anything like the same experience (and we've stopped sending them up chimneys too!).

I completely agree that driving standards should be raised. Though is it our place to interfere with natural selection ? (erm, yes...if only 'cos the young will be paying 'your' pension).