Quote:
Originally Posted by accyman
for most of my life like many others i was under the false impression that road tax was collected for the maintainance and buildning of new roads and that myth has been deep routed into my memory.I later remembered that road tax is not used for that and is merely a tax which gets spent on anything but roads.This argument arose a few years ago on here about road tax and somone fished out the relevant information proving road tax isnt for road maintainance and is merely the name given to the tax and not a descriptoion of its purpous.Hence my two contradicting remarks 
regardless cyclists should have cover to protect people from the damage they do to cars or personal injuries they cause to pedestrians,i dont see why cyclists shoudl get off scott free when they are negligent on teh roads |
but not all cyclists get off scott free - the damage they may do to cars or pedestrians is sometimes caused by them hitting the car or person? and more often than not any personal injury is sustained by the cyclist..and I know of quite a few cyclists who have insurance so obviously the ones you know? dont have and dont care..
and what about the uninsured driver who hits me?
and inregards to pedestrians - if someone walks out infront of me and doesnt stop why should I swerve into the traffic on my right to get out the way and cause a possible accident to myself/car/bus etc..like I mentioned earlier - I had a woman who stepped out infront of - who saw me coming - tell me she wouldnt have walked infront of me if I were a car but did cos I was on a bike..which to me beggars belief..