little rant
- Thread starter Lister
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
And any vehicle designed to exceede the national speed limit ... basically anything featured on Top Gear!
Oh and "Chelsea Tractors"!
Oh and "Chelsea Tractors"!
makes me laugh if your dog craps on the grass verge you can get fined yet horses crap anywhere and they just walk of and leave it how's that fair. nothing against horses or riders just doesn't seem fair to me
Sent from my GT-I9100
Sent from my GT-I9100
Definately argee on that point, if you use the road, irrespective of your vehicle, you should pay towards the maintenance of said road (pedestrians pay to use the pavement in form of council tax thinking about it)
That would be any car in current production then?
Agree with barking badger here, it's 1 rule for some and 1 for others, humans get fined for crapping in public, dogs get the owners fined if it's not cleaned up so why are horses not treated the same? because they're bigger? because it's good for the garden, if you'll excuse the pun, it's utter horse****.
Unless you slip on it
.............it's good stuff though, Findus use it in their lasagne & my old man used to put it on his rhubarb.... I prefer custard myself but each to his own. 
The building, maintaining and repair of roads is funded from general and local government so anyone who pays any form of tax helps to pay for maintaining roads ~ Car / Vehicle Tax (correct term is Vehicle Excise Duty) has not been ring-fenced for use on the roads since the 1937. And why should cyclists, horse riders etc pay more than drivers of Band A* cars?
ipayroadtax.com
Closeness of posting means Rik'll have missed my posting, but it's such a widely believed myth that it needs to be said over and over
Road Tax doesn't exist ~ roads are paid for by all. Why should a horse rider or cyclist pay more 'vehicle' tax than drivers of Band A cars?
If you road tax horses can you please do the same for cyclists
Road Tax doesn't exist ~ roads are paid for by all. Why should a horse rider or cyclist pay more 'vehicle' tax than drivers of Band A cars?
But the car drivers continue paying tax every time they top up the fuel tank. Fuel taxes are generally the single largest source of road maintanance funding.
That said, it's a complicated issue. Roads are built for ALL traffic, not just cars. Would you charge a pedestrian for walking on along a B road? However one poster's suggestion wasn't about banning them from all roads, just A roads. Certainly you wouldn't want them on the motorway, country lanes would be pushing it too far. But where in between to draw a line?
Horses are quite normal in towns and there should be more of them. When I lived in Lambeth there were several stableyards and stables, just like that one of Steptoe and Son. I knew the last common carrier in Newbury whose sister conducted their business with horse and trap. Anytime anywhere there can be a slow moving or stationery vehicles. keep your speed reasonable and LOOK through your windscreen. Amazing but true that a horse is quite large and should be visible.
They should invent a sort of frame to constantly have an opened garbage bag under a horses backside.
I agree with barking badger you shouldn't leave a truck load of horse crap in the streets. Horse crap also decomposes a lot slower than a dog's.
I agree with barking badger you shouldn't leave a truck load of horse crap in the streets. Horse crap also decomposes a lot slower than a dog's.
I'm not sure but I think it's been done and is used on hansom cabs in the big cities.
Closeness of posting means Rik'll have missed my posting, but it's such a widely believed myth that it needs to be said over and over
Road Tax doesn't exist ~ roads are paid for by all. Why should a horse rider or cyclist pay more 'vehicle' tax than drivers of Band A cars?
I think you know what I meant by 'road tax'
"Most motor vehicles used or kept on the public road are required to display a non-transferable vehicle licence ("tax disc")."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Excise_Duty
How about compulsory insurance then for cyclists and horse riders who use the road system? Happy with that? Paying a couple of quid a week is better than someone like me suing them if they cause an accident and having them pay me each month for potentially the rest of their lives?
VED has mostly been used to try and promote the design, sale and use of lower emission vehicles. Fuel tax escalator too but also to reduce the use of whatever vehicle you have. Both are welcome to whichever party(s) are in power. As said they are not ring fenced only a tax to go into public coffers.
Another point is cycles are not a major cause of road damage or wear. I'm sure horses have similar levels of road damage.
Cyclists create less carbon pollution than cars both in use and for production of their bikes, kit and consumables. Cycling also helps with fitness and health thus making regular cyclists less likely to be a burden on the NHS than a lot of car users. There is even an argument that the exercise carried out during regular cycling km makes you fitter and reduces your CO2 when not cycling.
My points are all reasons IMHO why cycles have very little cost burden on the state if any.
Dog originated fetal matter (dog****) has a parasite I believe that can harm humans. It is spread from dog to dog by faeces and to humans too. It can also potentially harm the dogs too I believe I once read. Horse **** has never been linked to anything that is a known cause of health issues in horse, hound or human. I could of course be wrong. This is one possible justification for the discriminatory fining of the owners of dogs that do not scoop after the poop.
Speeding will always be an issue. It is a rare driver who never speeds. I was recently caught despite my normal habit of being at or around the speed limit (if it is safe). It was a moment of absent mindedness after driving for more than the recommended 2 hours between breaks at the end of a long day. 22 years clean driving record down the drain. Having said that, those vests would not change my driving. Around me there are many stables and horses on the road. It is the horse I tend to notice before the rider. My speed around horses tends to be excessively slow on small roads and I make sure the rider is aware of me passing them. I think on smaller roads that's good practise. Larger roads I move completely into the other lane. Horses are skittish in ways other road users are not so need more care around them.
I also give cyclists space having done a lot of cycling myself.
Another point is cycles are not a major cause of road damage or wear. I'm sure horses have similar levels of road damage.
Cyclists create less carbon pollution than cars both in use and for production of their bikes, kit and consumables. Cycling also helps with fitness and health thus making regular cyclists less likely to be a burden on the NHS than a lot of car users. There is even an argument that the exercise carried out during regular cycling km makes you fitter and reduces your CO2 when not cycling.
My points are all reasons IMHO why cycles have very little cost burden on the state if any.
Dog originated fetal matter (dog****) has a parasite I believe that can harm humans. It is spread from dog to dog by faeces and to humans too. It can also potentially harm the dogs too I believe I once read. Horse **** has never been linked to anything that is a known cause of health issues in horse, hound or human. I could of course be wrong. This is one possible justification for the discriminatory fining of the owners of dogs that do not scoop after the poop.
Speeding will always be an issue. It is a rare driver who never speeds. I was recently caught despite my normal habit of being at or around the speed limit (if it is safe). It was a moment of absent mindedness after driving for more than the recommended 2 hours between breaks at the end of a long day. 22 years clean driving record down the drain. Having said that, those vests would not change my driving. Around me there are many stables and horses on the road. It is the horse I tend to notice before the rider. My speed around horses tends to be excessively slow on small roads and I make sure the rider is aware of me passing them. I think on smaller roads that's good practise. Larger roads I move completely into the other lane. Horses are skittish in ways other road users are not so need more care around them.
I also give cyclists space having done a lot of cycling myself.
There is a kind of mesh sack you can fit under the horse to collect solid waste. Handsome cabs like in NYC, some mounted police and I think the household cavalry use them either on parade or on practice sessions. Cheap and easy solution.
Rik - I know where you're coming from but disagree with insurance aspect. If a cyclist causes you harm on the roads you can sue no matter what your method of motion. Car drivers have insurance which if you have legal cover pays for you to sue the cyclist or other roads user causing you harm. The cyclist just doesn't have any insurance to cover this. However some are through membership of cycling bodies , their car or other insurance. However cyclists are most likely to be victims of other road users however lack of insurance often results in ludicrous cases where they get a proportion of the blame on them for not having lights on when its day and sunny or without a helmet.
Also you went from cyclists paying for wear of roads then flip to insurance which doesn't contribute to road maintenance. Makes a fuddled argument IMHO that sounds like you have an axe to grind against cyclists.
Rik - I know where you're coming from but disagree with insurance aspect. If a cyclist causes you harm on the roads you can sue no matter what your method of motion. Car drivers have insurance which if you have legal cover pays for you to sue the cyclist or other roads user causing you harm. The cyclist just doesn't have any insurance to cover this. However some are through membership of cycling bodies , their car or other insurance. However cyclists are most likely to be victims of other road users however lack of insurance often results in ludicrous cases where they get a proportion of the blame on them for not having lights on when its day and sunny or without a helmet.
Also you went from cyclists paying for wear of roads then flip to insurance which doesn't contribute to road maintenance. Makes a fuddled argument IMHO that sounds like you have an axe to grind against cyclists.
Sorry for long posts and defensive nature. It's just that I see this country's attitude to cycling and cyclists as being mostly negative. It contrasts sharply with the goodwill earnt by our highly successful cycling team. I look to the attitudes of Netherland and Denmark. Cycling is mainstream and part of the lives of the majority in those countries. A dream we should wish to achieve IMHO.
There are a LOT of bad cyclists Paul, to be honest down here they are a danger to themselves and others, stupid idiots on mountain bikes et el crossing lanes without a care in the world, no lights, no helmets and if I have to carry insurance to cover my bottom so should they, why should I subsidise their stupidity.
