N8N wrote:
> On Feb 27, 3:40 pm, Larry Farrell > wrote:
>> N8N wrote:
>>> On Feb 27, 3:25 pm, Larry Farrell > wrote:
>>>> N8N wrote:
>>>> [snip]
>>>>> Why? If I hit another car because the driver did something illegal,
>>>>> or hit a cyclist because he did something illegal, I still hit
>>>>> something. I'm still inconvenienced, and I still have to deal with a
>>>>> lot of BS. Since my observations are that 100% of cyclists flagrantly
>>>>> violate the rules of the road, that seems like a real problem to me.
>>>> [snip]
>>>>> 100% of cyclists blatantly ignore stop signs.
>>>> Both of your 100%s are 100% BS.
>>> Feel free to ride with me someday and prove me wrong. You won't.
>>> You'll be shocked at what you see. I stand by my statement. 100% of
>>> cyclists that I encounter flagrantly violate the rules of the road.
>>> Most common infraction is blowing through stop signs at speed. It
>>> sounds incredible, but it is true - ALL cyclists that I encounter ride
>>> like they want to be hit. There's a fair number of cyclists around
>>> where I live, too - my commute to/from work takes me across a bike
>>> trail, so there's a lot of cyclists that I assume are getting on/off
>>> the bike trail and riding on the same roads on which I'm driving.
>>> nate
>> Your original statements were that 100% of bicyclists were doing
>> illegal things, not that 100% of the bicyclists you observed were
>> doing so. Therefore, your original statements were blatantly wrong.
>> I stand by *my* statement.
>
> So the ones I don't see are perfectly law-abiding? Somehow I doubt
> that.
>
> nate

No one said that. But you *did* say that 100% of bicyclists do
illegal things, and that is clearly false.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com