Fair enough
But in London, the more cyclists the better really.
( corington, Wed 11 Aug 2004, 11:22, archived)

Speaking as someone who cycles in London (sometimes)
I would like to point out that almost all of us bastards are dangerous twunts. Practically none have any concept of the highway code; all skip lights (I know I do). The major problem is that there's a sizable minority who seem to think that just because they're on a bike and "saving the environment" they have a right to do what they like. I'm not saving the environment, I'm saving money (and the stress of the tube), and it fucks me off when some driver or pedestrian ends up acting like a cunt towards me because other cyclists have acted as cunts to them in the past.

Oh yeah, and anyone who cycles in London without a helmet deserves to be hit by a fucking bus. Maniacs.

/mild rant
( TV's Nosemonkey, Wed 11 Aug 2004, 11:31, archived)

I can't afford a helmet
because I'm too poor. I accept I am putting myself at risk, possibly being extremely stupid, but it doesn't give other people the right to hit me with a bus.
( Newington HM Time Corps: Quo vadimus non requirimus vias, Wed 11 Aug 2004, 11:38, archived)

My problem with non-helmeted cyclists
(other than their apparent suicidal tendencies) is that they always tend to go very slowly, which they think will stop them getting into trouble, or being hurt as much when they come off. This means I constantly have to overtake them, thus putting myself at greater risk. I don't cycle fast (my bike's too shit to get much above 20), but helmetless bastards might as well walk.
( TV's Nosemonkey, Wed 11 Aug 2004, 11:44, archived)

I don't think I cycle any slower without a helmet
unless it's a subconscious risk thang.

Getting hit by a bus is likely to hurt whatever speed you're going at.
( Newington HM Time Corps: Quo vadimus non requirimus vias, Wed 11 Aug 2004, 11:47, archived)