Up Front: This is a Photograph of Me
181 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
Our lovely Danielle had a boy, Deborah. A bonny big one.
Lovely news! Can someone point me to the thread here, so I can join in the general rejoicing? I've been searching diligently, but short of reading every damn thread, even the sports ones, I can't find anything.
-
Oh and re the nondriving thing, I have a dear friend who doesn't drive, and I never did till I was 28 or so. My husband turned up one day with a car, and told me I was going to learn to drive. I'm not normally prone to being told what to do, but I did recognise it was a good idea. Whilst I love driving, though, I can see where nondrivers come from. Traffic is wearisome and somewhat stressful, petrol is expensive, and quite frankly, who wouldn't want to read a book on the way home from work? I like giving lifts to people, anyway. It's company in the car, and it gives you more time to yak - while keeping your eyes firmly on the road of course. I can't claim to be a perfect driver - I don't dawdle, is one way of putting it, but I know that most people like driving with me. Except my husband, funnily enough.
-
It's on her facebook page, Deborah!
-
Announcement is here, Deborah.
-
Have suggested you as her friend, so you can see all the bizzo.
-
Oops, my bad, Emma.
-
Thanks for the link, Emma, and for the news, Jackie. I had been reading that wallywood thread too, but not today. I'm so pleased for her and her partner and her wee boy.
Have suggested you as her friend, so you can see all the bizzo.
I've gone and asked to be her friend, but for some reason, she hasn't responded yet...
-
Moz,
to drag it back to ID... have you thought of getting a gun license? They're also photo ID issued by the government and are widely accepted. Accepted with raised eyebrows. but accepted :)
-
Kia ora Moz - see upthread-
-
I've gone and asked to be her friend, but for some reason, she hasn't responded yet...
Update: she has let me be her friend. What a champion. And the wee lad is gorgeous, as we would expect.
-
On the subject of photo ID, my partner just got his very first passport, at the grand old age of twenty-five. He regards it with great suspicion. I'm not sure what he thinks will happen now he has one, but apparently it portends ominous things.
Also, re: The Great Cycling Debate - I think we've done this before. Can we all just agree that some people are prone to dickishness while upon the roads, no matter their form of transport* and that it is imperative upon all concerned to do their best to use their particular form in a way that is safe for them and other road users?
*Pedestrians, this does include you. Especially those of you who think bicycles have magical instant stop buttons. You know who you are.
-
it is *physically impossible* to slow down sufficiently on some of the corners on SH63
At 20kph, you can stop in 10m, or about 2 car lengths. From my memory of driving that road, there aren't any corners where you can't see 2 car lengths ahead.
Is the actual problem that you feel you have a right to tool around at 80-90kph regardless of the road conditions?
If there was a single cyclist in their lane and a full width truck coming the other way, you'd still crash if you couldn't slow down. Same for a broken down vehicle, or a rock on the road.
Where I come from, there are many roads that are one lane wide between high banks. Better be prepared to stop on those, or hit an oncoming car.
-
When did you last drive SH 63 Rich of Observ.etc?
I've travelled it for 35 years - I've had precisely 2 accidents ( the cattlebeast(1987) & the campervan (2004)I detailed upthread.)
I have an absolute right to travel within the speed limit according to the road conditions.
And you are totally fucking wrong appropos incidents - I've stopped for a jack-knifed tanker, a rockfall (you get warned about these by weather conditions right?) but for meandering tourist cyclists - wild cards. Should be off SH 63.
And, quite seriously, do you know *any* driver who travels at *20 kph?
On a road they know extremely well? Have travelled through slips and floods and snowstorms?I think you are full of shit mate - when you are talking about my area, my roads, my experience.
And - o, the local cops- -
I got my motorcycle license. It was not a practical choice, but one based purely on the love of seizing one of the most joyous forms of transport every invented between my legs, and letting rip.
Snap.
Good to see so many bikers coming out of the woodwork. What's everyone riding?
I did my bike licence here from learners, through restricted, through full. My wife got knocked up and decided she needed a car licence for just making everyday chores and socialising that bit easier.
One of my bugbears is how easy it is to get a licence to drive or ride something so potentially lethal here.
The hardest thing was that neither of us liked Weetbix all that much, which made collecting the necessary tokens a bit difficult (badoom tish here all week etc).
I'd be more than happy to see a much harder set of restrictions in place before you're considered 'road-legal'. I reckon it'd just be safer for all road users - pedestrians, cyclists, scoots, etc. But I won't hold my breath. I'll just keep riding like I'm invisible and their all out to get me.
Oh, and the 'sorry, mate I didn't see you' phrase is so common it's become it's own acronym. Try googling 'SMIDSY' sometime.
-
Two anecdotes re: cycling and driving -
A friend of mine didn't learn to drive until her mid-20s, went for her first driving lesson and the tutor said after a while 'I can tell you're a cyclist'
It wasn't her strong thighs (although that may have been part of it) it was the way she read the road and anticpiated what other vehicles might do.
It back up my own experience. One of the things they emphasise in defensive driving - well, they did back in the '80s, when that grumpy Judge made me do a course - is reading the road ahead. And although I got the idea in principle I never fully understood its value until I got into cycling some years later. You tend to watch the next couple of cars ahead as well as the one directly in front, and also whether any parked cars have anyone in the driver's seat. It becomes automatic, after a while.
In short, my own experience is that cycling improved my vision and my awareness of the road far more than driving did.
-
it was the way she read the road and anticpiated what other vehicles might do.
It back up my own experience. One of the things they emphasise in defensive driving - well, they did back in the '80s, when that grumpy Judge made me do a course - is reading the road ahead. And although I got the idea in principle I never fully understood its value until I got into cycling some years later. You tend to watch the next couple of cars ahead as well as the one directly in front, and also whether any parked cars have anyone in the driver's seat. It becomes automatic, after a while.
Yes, because while a dent in your front bumper is inconvenient, a trip down the road on your arse is painful. Most two-wheelers learn that lesson plenty quick.
-
That's what a defensive *driving* course does - you learn to be aware of all of the stuff going on-
o, the one reason I dont extrapolate from my cycling experience is - I was a postie for 3 years,in Sockburn, Riccarton Road, central Christchurch, and the West Coast (most Greymouth runs.) When I got off my bike, on my last Boddytown run, I swore I'd *never* ride a bicycle again.
I never have.
-
Stamping ground...
On the subject of photo ID, my partner just got his very first passport... ...He regards it with great suspicion. I'm not sure what he thinks will happen now he has one, but apparently it portends ominous things.
well it's a doorway to interesting people and alien ideas alike, alot like PAS sport, which can be had 24/7 without even leaving home...
;- ) -
Apropos the defensive driving skills imparted by cycling -- it's sad that we have to develop them, isn't it? In a better managed environment, they would be unnecessary.
I am hoarding links for a monster blog post on this subject, but in the meanwhile...
Many people think that faster, larger vehicles are entitled to go as fast as they are capable, and that other smaller, slower users need to yield to them. If you hold up a car, that's rude. If you step in front of one by mistake, and the car couldn't stop in time, it's your fault.
Well, up until the 20th century, it was not. Custom (and English common law) dictated that fast and large road users had to defer to smaller, slower ones. If the fast and large hurt the slow and small, the former were at fault. If you were walking in the middle of a lane and milord's coach bowled you into the ditch, he was at fault, and you were exercising your rights.
If you look at a street scene from the 19th century, it is notable how many of the occupants are not in fact going anywhere. They are conversing, playing, conducting business, buying and selling in the street, amid foot and horse traffic.
When cars were first introduced, people were naturally horrified at these dangerous devices hurtling selfishly. on the public road. It took years of campaigning, politicking, marketing and advertising by manufacturers and motorists to effectively privatise the road for (at that time) the minority who were well off enough to own a car. Other road users, from cyclists to kids playing football to organ grinders to barrow-pushing peddlers were literally marginalised.
A century later, our ideas of what is natural is entirely opposite. But it is just a sense. It is not pre-ordained by nature -- it is the result of sustained effort by a privileged class to entrench their privilege in the law and the culture.
Why shouldn't cars yield? Why is the slow light party considered rude and culpable, rather than the dangerously fast heavy one? Although I am a motorist as well as a cyclist and a pedestrian, I enjoy posing the opposite view. For me it is by no means obvious that things should be or have to be the way they are.
-
Stephen Judd - let us put the current system down to simple economics. Our system of roading costs a lot: as the driver of a deisel vehicle I pay (appoximates) $450 insurance/ $390 every 10,000k,/$480 licence= (since I drive about 25000k a year) 0, plus WOF $90x2 plus any necesary repairs = approx. $2700 to keep my vehicle legal. And then, of course, there's the cost of fuel, mechanical repairs, tyre replacement = say, $6000? And that would be a low estimate. A substantial part of that money goes back to the government, and goes also to maintain the roading infrastructure.
Just how much does the average tourist-cyclist pay towards this?
(I am well aware that ANZ cyclists not only may pay because they own other vehicles, but also through rates- I havent factored that in.)
-
Just how much does the average tourist-cyclist pay towards this?
Towards what? Us having a basic road network?
How much do cars cost us in terms of accidents, breavements, safe driving campaigns, wear and tear on the roads, pollution, the massive imbalance in our import/export stakes caused by the necessity to import petrol and the cars themselves?...
-
Yup. But I was talking about maintaining a roading system (and that 'other stuff' is covered under seperate headings.) And rather than talking about cars - you should be looking at trucks...
I am being specific about tourist cyclists in an area where the roads arnt adequate to cater for them and normal vehicular traffic, and where they actually contribute very little to the local economy. It's fascinating to listen to the few tourist-cyclist operators here duck & dive when asked for cost-benefits to the local economies - aside from themselves.
-
I don't think the tax argument will fly. My understanding is that road user taxes don't cover the cost of roads in any case.
Where I do have some sympathy with Islander's point is that State Highway whatever-it-is down the West Coast is a major highway. Even though it may look like a quiet country road, it is a significant part of our national freight network, and it meets a critical economic need in our country. I do think that cyclists have a right to be there, but it's rather more like cycling along an autobahn than puddling along a lane, however much it may look like a lane.
Stephen, cars are no longer the preserve of the privileged rich. Most people own cars these days, not just the wealthy. I take your point about streets being for all citizens / residents / even tourists, but I think you need to give a bit of weight (in your monster post, and we will hold you to that promise!) to the different ways in which cars and other motor vehicles are used in the 21st century, c/f 100 years earlier.
-
They are on something that is extremely underengineered, low powered, has very little braking power, no ability to protect them in an accident whatsoever, wobbles from side to side, extremely slim profile lowering their visibility, requires no license to drive, and yet can actually go quite fast for all that. Furthermore, the rider is usually quite distracted because they are also concentrating on powering the bike, they are often tired, and they're thinking about the end of the ride. It is no surprise that cyclists are often injured. If they can put themselves in drivers shoes then they will be a lot safer.
I've got to ask here: when were you last on a bike? The modern bicycle is arguably overengineered, hence the current trend for "back to basics" bikes such as fixies. There's certainly a damn sight more engineering in a $5k carbon fibre race bike than there is in most cheap cars. Ditto braking power; my mountain bike is sufficiently well-braked that I've sent myself over the bars doing panic stops from 60kph. Slim profile? I'm higher on a bike than I am in the car, I'll say that! As to wobbling, that's down to the rider. Your speculation about the rider's psychology is a bit odd: yes, we may be distracted - so might the driver. So?
All that said: I've been hit by cars precisely twice while cycling. I've been an avid cyclist for over a decade. The worst car-related injuries I've suffered have been from being hit by a car as a pedestrian (where the driver ran a red light and plowed through 30-odd people on a crossing - three of us were hit) and as a driver (when we were rear-ended at some speed). Cycling is way, way safer than people imagine.
Which is part of the very reason the vision improves - it has to.
I think this does happen for good drivers. I don't think it happens as a matter of course. This seems to have some empirical support: for example, the UK driving test includes a "hazard perception" section where they test you on your ability to spot possible upcoming hazards, such as people stepping out into the road, cars pulling out of driveways, etc. You can fail your driving test by not spotting hazards. That implies to me that they're aware that this is a separate skill, and that they're requiring people to learn it rather than just assuming you get it in the package once you've been driving for a bit.
-
Islander: I'm aware of your specific beef with tourists on bikes, and I don't particularly disagree that directly, tourist on bikes don't contribute directly much to the roads they use.
But how many of them are there? What extra costs do they incur that others have to bear?
I mean, in my role as cyclist, I contribute bugger-all to the roads of Wellington -- on the other hand, I cause negligible wear and receive very little by way of special accommodation. I could be cluttering the place up with my car and its redundant three empty seats and boot, but I graciously choose not to, and all I ask is a reasonable margin when people pass and the same attention they give to other kinds of vehicle.
And to the extent that cycle tourists, like other tourists, spend lots of money while they're here, what if in making things safer for road-tripping cyclists we got a whole lot more of them?
I'm prepared to believe that from the perspective of a resident of Big O, a subset of cyclists don't have anything to offer but annoyance. But there is a bigger picture. Also, as a tongue-in-cheek militant cyclist, I just like to challenge the assumption that cars deserve the special treatment they get.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.