cradle route

[slowpoke]

leet22, what amazes me is that just over a year ago i had a "go to" with one of them after a bike accident - he was calling me all sorts of shyte for saying it's a public road so they can't ban bikers while i was standing there in my lycra. he seemed to think that because i'm a cyclist i should not be in support of bikers using the road and i must be insane for saying that while there are bikers who abuse it the majority don't and you can't judge them all by the actions of the few. he stated then that the majority of locals wanted the bikers banned but still allow cyclists. now the apparent view seems to be they want cyclists banned as they "block the road" - so an implicit allowal/approval of the "they are noisy and upset livestock" and "they always speed" bikers. obviously their moods rock as a cradle rocks - one day one thing another the next but all the time being as babies are - self centred and not able to see the bigger picture of community

[leet22]

Pity im in CT anywise I would be with you on the road on my motorbike Slowpoke .

Sad state of affairs that some people try ruin life for everyone else.

to rally stir things up i would get 50 cyclist to ride single file in the road as they supposed to and not in the yellow line and let the cradle residents sit behind them and see who breaks the law first.

but that is not going to help anyone.

 

"Be the change you want to see in the world.? Ghandi

[Myra]

Ok, I didn't want to say anything but there are just way too many fallacies (denkfoute) in this post to ignore.

 

Hi Bruce and Mark' date=' the letter you refer to, not maybe, will come back to bite you. Such a letter must apply to all (that includes you guys in your car who may bump a cyclist accidentally anywhere in the world), and not be used to discriminate against residents of the Cradle (residents with-in a geographical area). We as residents will file such correspondence for future reference. Should two roads users be involved in an accident, then we as residents will use the letter likewise, in and outside the Cradle area. This will include, two cyclists colliding, a tourist that collides with a cyclist, a cyclist that looses control and collides with any other road user, a cyclists that spooks a horse and it's rider and so on. [/quote']

You didn't read the letter, did you?  Or did you just not understand it?  The letter points out that cyclists also have the right to use the road and the gist of the letter is that INTENTIONALLY harming cyclists is illegal.

If any cyclist, motorist, tourist, horse rider INTENTIONALLY harms another cyclist, motorist, tourist horse rider the letter is applicable and such action is illegal.

The letter is not applicable to "bump[ing] a cyclist accidentally anywhere in the world", a "cyclist that looses control" or any other "accident" (you do know what an accident is, don't you?).

Under the circumstances you can file "such correspondence for future reference" until you are blue in the face - it is completely irrelevant to your above ranting.

 

We will likewise have to a draft a letter for any organised races' date=' that puts such constraints on an event, that we all sit and wait for someone to slip, then all hell is going to break loose.  Such rules and regs will be distributed far and wide, and soon no Community will be willing to entertain any races in their area.

[/quote']

 

Constraints and rules and regs to the effect that the participants must not intentionally harm each other or other road users?  That's common sense.  The organisers will laugh at you.

 

Obviously' date=' any future applications to run a race in the Cradle area will be met with resistance from the locals.

[/quote']

 

Why?  Its your Mr X who is trying to INTENTIONALLY harm fellow human beings.  You, Cradleresident and Cradlelandowner are sticking up for this behaviour.  If all the locals are like the four of you - don't you want the races to be held there so you have more potential victims?

 

I will attend the up and coming meeting' date=' and this letter of discrimination must be tabled as the first item on the agenda, and if not withdrawn, The local Cradle residents may walk out, and start a process of resistance.

[/quote']

How does the letter discriminate?  By saying that anyone who wants to harm cyclists shouldn't?  Where's the discrimination in that?

  Do not accuse any Cradle resident in advance of being a criminal. You sure are creating enemies very fast.

 

Where does the letter say this?  By the way' date=' anyone who intends to harm another human being, whether a cyclist or motorist IS a criminal.  The fact that you condone the criminal actions of Mr X is disconcerting to say the least.

 

  Furthermore, many residents have been assaulted by Cyclists, we have many such SAPS case numbers on file. Your in appropriate actions will now turn every Resident into a policeman. Guess you taking the pleasure out of riding in the Cradle area.

 

The fact that "many" residents have been assaulted by cyclists does not entitle the residents to harm other cyclists.  Taking the law into your own hands is illegal.

 

  Oh by the way' date=' the average farm in Kromdraai cost about R10 mil, some of which is owned by some very successful lawyers. [/quote']

 

Next time, speak to them before coming here and trying to justify illegal behaviour.

 

  I am not a avid gambler' date=' nor am I bluffing. I am respectfully requesting all to re-consider their stance in these matters. I am also appealing to the vast majority of law abiding road users, and in specific those cyclists who want to enjoy to Cradle route, engage with the Cradle residents in a meaningful manner to sort out these issues and move forward. 'Are You in or Out?' Regards Trevor.[/quote']

 

This is about the only part of your post which makes sense.  But how can anyone meaningfully engage with someone who isn't prepared to listen and take the law into their own hands?

[Guest Big H]

Slly people in the Cradle. I spent some time there before coming to Nigeria...... heck I even fished some trout in Dave's ponds next to Ken Cradle (anybody still remmeber him??????....... he started all of this), visited the Lion an Rhino Park, went to Teak as well as Kunjara..... I will rather go to the Dros and Kruger when I visit SA again soon. Big H2010-01-17 09:51:23

[mr ples]

Good Day Nothingness. Commenting on this lawyers letter must be read together with comments made in this thread todate.

 

In the beginning, there were 3 very experienced law abiding cyclists who apparently were nearly taken out by someone who said 'so what' telephonically, who was trying to kill them by blowing his hooter but failed in doing so with-in the speed limit, and passed them by a mere 2cm which is now 10cm, and the gap is getting larger. Mr X , the 'so what' guy, has been named and ID from whence he comes, has also been convicted along with other 'residents' (plural - is this 2 or 2000 residents, none of which have been named), who should attend a meeting, to be told what??

 

As we know there are 3 sides to this story (yours/ Mr X and the truth), of which we have only heard yours. So now a letter is written, based on your truth, which as per the letter says Mr X, who probably does not waste his time accessing this forum, must circulate this letter to Cradle Residents, and all are invited to attend. We may need to use the Riumsig sport arena should we disseminate notice of this meeting. Hell you going to get peoples backs up.

 

Mr X arrives with a whole lot of other residents as witnesses, numerous residents who have been victim to cyclist attacks, and his truth, one very long detailed lawyers letter that disputes all allegations, 'so what now'?

 

 

 

Point is, we have an one sided letter and a half cocked story, which must still be tested. Are you prepared to jump into the trench and fight someone else's fight based on their perception, which is their truth, or should we put this issue one side and find solutions to the bigger picture?

 

 

 

That why, I have said that the meeting of the 20th must discard this letter, lets these guys go fight their fight, so to remove all emotions, as opposed to stirring where we dont need it and resulting in no progress. Make sense?

 

 

 

My 2nd request, which you agree with! I am respectfully requesting all to re-consider their stance in these matters. I am also appealing to the vast majority of law abiding road users, and in specific those cyclists who want to enjoy to Cradle route, engage with the Cradle residents in a meaningful manner to sort out these issues and move forward. 'Are You in or Out?' Regards Trevor.

 

 

 

 

[Edge_Design]

So 10cm is a big enough gap for you? 3 witnesses plus what could be construed as a confession from "Mr X" (do we seriously have to call him this?) is insufficient? Whether you like it or not, the facts seem to indicate that he did indeed endanger these cyclists lives intentionally.

 

I don't see why they shouldn't discard the letter. It is now public knowledge that he has been formally warned so you can cut it up and burn it, it makes no difference.

 

Do you genuinely feel it is incorrect to say to someone (in a civilized manner) that if they injure or kill a person, criminal charges will be laid against them? Surely the simplest solution is that he should just be careful when driving and thus not injure or kill anyone - shouldn't we all?

[BELL BOY]

I see nothing has changed in the last day. I think if this thread goes on let`s stop calling him Mr X and call him Mr I for idiot. That`s all he is. If he does it again he WILL pay the price for being a ****.

END OF STORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bruce]

mr ples, nowhere have I admitted to riding in the middle of the road.  I have said that we were riding 2 abreast.

 

The width of a bicycles handlebars is between 40cm and 45cm.  Mine are 44cm and the person that was riding next to me is 40cm.

 

As experienced cyclists, we tend to ride about 20cm apart.  The person next to me was as close as possible to the side of the road.  Which means the edge of his handlebars would be in line with the edge of the road, his wheel being 20cm into the road.

 

This gives a sum total of approx 105cm into the road.

 

You guys have posted a newspaper article earlier in this thread, to support your argument.  Maybe you should go back and read that article carefully, particularly the last paragraph.

 

As I have said.  I have said exactly what I was doing.  If that constitutes an offence, and I am fined by the authorities, then I will pay that fine and admission of guilt.

[linnega]

I'm curious to know how a cyclist "assaults" a resident in an oversized gas-guzzler? 

 

Anyway, what exactly is the issue at the Cradle?  Seems a little thoughtful driving by the motorists of the area would resolve everything.  I understand that cyclists often don't ride to the letter of the law (thank goodness, or many would be dead), but the don't pose a serious threat to other road users, unlike the far more commonplace drinking, speeding, light jumping, stop street rolling average motorist out there.  Perhaps a sense of perspective can be gained by the residents being open to discussion, but my sense is that they have no interest in a mutually beneficial solution.

 

[Cradleresident]

Trevor, The forum gives you a general idea of the type of cyclyst you are dealing with. Forget it, u wont get through. Like i have always said, these guys have the same mentality as taxi drivers. As per the teak meeting, the residents wanted a solution , but not at any cost.  If cyclysts are going to make our lives a nightmare, show no respect for the law, well then the authorities have to pe pushed to take action and we must spend time and effort in this arena and not waste time with cyclyst clubs ect. All proposed events must be met with strong resistance and petitions. Who wants to ride in an area where you are unwelcome.

[Flowta]

 

Good Day Nothingness. Commenting on this lawyers letter must be read together with comments made in this thread todate.

 

In the beginning' date=' there were 3 very experienced law abiding cyclists who apparently were nearly taken out by someone who said 'so what' telephonically, who was trying to kill them by blowing his hooter but failed in doing so with-in the speed limit, and passed them by a mere 2cm which is now 10cm, and the gap is getting larger. Mr X , the 'so what' guy, has been named and ID from whence he comes, has also been convicted along with other 'residents' (plural - is this 2 or 2000 residents, none of which have been named), who should attend a meeting, to be told what??

 

As we know there are 3 sides to this story (yours/ Mr X and the truth), of which we have only heard yours. So now a letter is written, based on your truth, which as per the letter says Mr X, who probably does not waste his time accessing this forum, must circulate this letter to Cradle Residents, and all are invited to attend. We may need to use the Riumsig sport arena should we disseminate notice of this meeting. Hell you going to get peoples backs up.

 

Mr X arrives with a whole lot of other residents as witnesses, numerous residents who have been victim to cyclist attacks, and his truth, one very long detailed lawyers letter that disputes all allegations, 'so what now'?

 

 

 

Point is, we have an one sided letter and a half cocked story, which must still be tested. Are you prepared to jump into the trench and fight someone else's fight based on their perception, which is their truth, or should we put this issue one side and find solutions to the bigger picture?

 

 

 

That why, I have said that the meeting of the 20th must discard this letter, lets these guys go fight their fight, so to remove all emotions, as opposed to stirring where we dont need it and resulting in no progress. Make sense?

 

 

 

My 2nd request, which you agree with! I am respectfully requesting all to re-consider their stance in these matters. I am also appealing to the vast majority of law abiding road users, and in specific those cyclists who want to enjoy to Cradle route, engage with the Cradle residents in a meaningful manner to sort out these issues and move forward. 'Are You in or Out?' Regards Trevor.

 

 

 

[/quote']

 

 

I believe this is the 10cm reference you are referring to.

 

Am I right?

 

 

 

i doubt they can - considering that if your wheels are 10cm' date=' let

alone the legally recommended 1m, in from the left hand of the lane

they call it "riding in the middle of the road"

 

also, as a biker who prefers not to speed i have almost been run

off the road there by 4x4's due to riding "too slow" (ie at 60-80kmph)

so cyclists (riding slower than that) will definitely be seen as "fair

game" for "blocking their (sic) road"

 

this is why i am willing to give up my cycling time in order to

escort cyclists (on my bike) so that when these local vigillante's do

try anything i can at least keep up with them long enough to get a

registration number

[/quote']

 

[no.one.knows]

 

Good Day Nothingness. Commenting on this lawyers letter must be read together with comments made in this thread todate.

 

In the beginning' date=' there were 3 very experienced law abiding cyclists who apparently were nearly taken out by someone who said 'so what' telephonically, who was trying to kill them by blowing his hooter but failed in doing so with-in the speed limit, and passed them by a mere 2cm which is now 10cm, and the gap is getting larger. Mr X , the 'so what' guy, has been named and ID from whence he comes, has also been convicted along with other 'residents' (plural - is this 2 or 2000 residents, none of which have been named), who should attend a meeting, to be told what??

 

As we know there are 3 sides to this story (yours/ Mr X and the truth), of which we have only heard yours. So now a letter is written, based on your truth, which as per the letter says Mr X, who probably does not waste his time accessing this forum, must circulate this letter to Cradle Residents, and all are invited to attend. We may need to use the Riumsig sport arena should we disseminate notice of this meeting. Hell you going to get peoples backs up.

 

Mr X arrives with a whole lot of other residents as witnesses, numerous residents who have been victim to cyclist attacks, and his truth, one very long detailed lawyers letter that disputes all allegations, 'so what now'?

 

 

 

Point is, we have an one sided letter and a half cocked story, which must still be tested. Are you prepared to jump into the trench and fight someone else's fight based on their perception, which is their truth, or should we put this issue one side and find solutions to the bigger picture?

 

 

 

That why, I have said that the meeting of the 20th must discard this letter, lets these guys go fight their fight, so to remove all emotions, as opposed to stirring where we dont need it and resulting in no progress. Make sense?

 

 

 

My 2nd request, which you agree with! I am respectfully requesting all to re-consider their stance in these matters. I am also appealing to the vast majority of law abiding road users, and in specific those cyclists who want to enjoy to Cradle route, engage with the Cradle residents in a meaningful manner to sort out these issues and move forward. 'Are You in or Out?' Regards Trevor.

 

 

 

[/quote']

 

Good day nothingness????

 

Not only are you insulting every member on this forum, including those on your side. also every human being reading this post. please leave this forum. its not neccessary, your comments. please deactivate your account. you have overstayed your welcome by insulting everyone.

 

[no.one.knows]

 

Trevor' date=' The forum gives you a general idea of the type of cyclyst you are dealing with. Forget it, u wont get through. Like i have always said, these guys have the same mentality as taxi drivers. As per the teak meeting, the residents wanted a solution , but not at any cost.  If cyclysts are going to make our lives a nightmare, show no respect for the law, well then the authorities have to pe pushed to take action and we must spend time and effort in this arena and not waste time with cyclyst clubs ect. All proposed events must be met with strong resistance and petitions. Who wants to ride in an area where you are unwelcome.[/quote']

 

same mentality as taxi drivers????

 

Same said for you as i said to mr ples. please deactivate your account and leave. cause now you're insulting everyone on this forum

 

[Wannabe]

Can't Admin close this topic? Arguments are being repeated, with no solution to be found here. Can only be sorted out by involved parties in a face to face meeting with a facilitator present.

[Flowta]

 

Trevor' date=' The forum gives you a general idea of the type of cyclyst you are dealing with. Forget it, u wont get through. Like i have always said, these guys have the same mentality as taxi drivers. As per the teak meeting, the residents wanted a solution , but not at any cost.  If cyclysts are going to make our lives a nightmare, show no respect for the law, well then the authorities have to pe pushed to take action and we must spend time and effort in this arena and not waste time with cyclyst clubs ect. All proposed events must be met with strong resistance and petitions. Who wants to ride in an area where you are unwelcome.[/quote']

 

Yes, cyclists are at fault for causing you an "inconvenience" (majority of those are beginners/inexperienced ones at that) and technically can be given a fine for it.

That does not give you the right to threaten and intimidate others.

 

You are both LEGALLY allowed to be on the road.

Is this true or false?

 

Is it legal or "right" to ride 2 or more abreast? NO

 

Is it legal to drive at speeds above the speed limit? NO

 

Is it legal to cross a white line, especially on a blind rise? NO

 

 

Get where I'm going with this?

 

 

There people who want to solve these things and are trying. Not because they legally have to but because they are trying to help so that everyone is happy and SAFE.

 

 

 

As has been said again and again, a bit of thought and respect for the other parties from both sides is what is needed.

 

 

 

[Delgado]

Trevor' date=' The forum gives you a general idea of the type of cyclyst you are dealing with. Forget it, u wont get through. Like i have always said, these guys have the same mentality as taxi drivers. As per the teak meeting, the residents wanted a solution , but not at any cost.  If cyclysts are going to make our lives a nightmare, show no respect for the law, well then the authorities have to pe pushed to take action and we must spend time and effort in this arena and not waste time with cyclyst clubs ect. All proposed events must be met with strong resistance and petitions. Who wants to ride in an area where you are unwelcome.[/quote'] With respect I don't accept with the notion "the type of cyclyst (sic) you are dealing with"!! You have never met so refrain from generalizing! I am for your consumption the first to castigate fellow cyclists that behave like prats! The materiality that you sadly are missing is that this is not purely a general cyclist phenomena but sadly a South African delusion of grandeur!! We behave simply as we please because we are not mature enough to accept that democracy comes with responsibility and accountability!

 

Whilst on the subject of taxi's why don't you implement similar blockades and aggresive tactics to stop them? I'm sure they utilize "your" road and are de facto also an automatic bloody nuisance?? Let me answer why! Because it is easier to address softer issues at the expense of material ones that plague lawlessness in the rainbowland. Much the same as our futile government and its policing. Secondly and most importantly it is because you do not wish to have an AK47 shoved up the ringpiece! My my how brave!