[Closed] UKIP: Ban cyclists and the unemployed from our roads!

Edit: Happened

Because not allowing people to drive to their new job is going to help stop them from being unemployed.

It's okay he thought of that. He says they can take the bus.

If you have a job then you are not unemployed*

The UKIP candidates logic is matched only by his empathy

I'm f@&/#ed.I'm BOTH!! 😯

You have to ride on the pavement with a bell attached to you like a cow bell so we all know what you are.

GrahamS - Member

Swivel-eyed UKIP candidate's leaflet suggests banning cyclists and the unemployed from using the road to ease congestion!

Some logic there but difficult to enforce therefore pointless to mention ... 🙄

You know you are ****ed when chewk sees your logic

Makes a change from writing crap about immigration.

And always good for a laugh.

****ing **** the ****ing lot of them, ****ing ****s.

It's strange how the idiots always think it's cyclist causing congestion despite me overtaking more cars than overtake me on my commute and my Saturday ride into work being significantly faster 'cos of the lack of cars holding me up...I enjoy pointing this out to the hard of thinking though.

Classic case of forgetting about your core electorate, 'banning benefits claimants from driving'...

..People in receipt of Old Age Pensions are 'benefits claimants', they are also most likely to vote UKIP - DOH!!

I'm waiting for the phrase that pays [i]"Zombie Maggots"[/i] to be used in anger again....

Also:

[img] [/img]
Excellent choice of publicity shot...

That daft old duffer who said it is a pensioner, he should get himself off the road so people with jobs can use it.

I assume to enforce this the unemployed will need to wear some sort of badge so they can be easily identified.....

If that is the case will all UKIP Voters (Make it easy U-Kippers) should wear a nice big badge so we know who they all are.

Wtf is a "past-time" ?

What about if I work from home?

I mean if my job doesn't require me to use a car on the road, should I be allowed to drive purely for "Social and Domestic" purposes? wouldn't I also be contributing to the traffic congestion holding up all these gainfully employed motorists?

the opposite of future time?

Ok. Thanks 🙂

Junkyard - lazarus

You know you are **** when chewk sees your logic

I mean that UKIP member is taking rubbish because such rules cannot be enforced so they are rather pointless for that UKIP member/politician to open his/her big mouth.

Anything that is not enforceable or pointless to enforce is useless really ...

Logic in argument, yes, but logic in reality no. 😯

cookeaa - Member

I'm waiting for the phrase that pays "Zombie Maggots" to be used in anger again....

No, no I have to be self censored to avoid making some feel sick on STW forum, some people might even puke upon hearing that description, if I use it again ... better not use such description for a while.

[s]I mean the UKIP member is taking rubbish because it cannot be enforced so it is pointless for that UKIP member/politician to open his/her big mouth.

Anything that is not enforceable or pointless to enforce is useless really ...

Logic in argument, yes, but[/s] logic in reality no.

the scarey thing is 20% of mirror readers agree with him !

I assume to enforce this the unemployed will need to wear some sort of badge so they can be easily identified.....

Why not just tattoo them with some sort of ID number?
Might make sense to round them up too possibly put them all in some sort of camp, just so we can keep track of them.
All for the greater good of course, nothing sinister... Honest.

Junkyard - lazarus
FTFY and also for UKIP

No, no there must be UKIP to balance the power there is.

No single party should have a free ride to power and no career politicians should free ride their ways to retirement.

They must feel the stresssssss ... they must work for it ... they must make to beg for their jobs.

Oh no ... you don't.

😈

only white anglo saxons with right wing political views should be allowed to use english roads!

Wtf is a "past-time" ?

It'll take a lot more cars than that. When child benefits are taken into account.

He refers to road tax as well which as we all know doesn`t exist

"Cycles should go [b]back to the pavements[/b] yet give priority to pedestrians."

The whole thing is so bastardly nasty you have to question anyone who gives it more than a couple of seconds thought.

If you're unemployed, how do you get about? A bike would be a great idea but this nobber wants to restrict those.
if you're in between jobs, he still wants to restrict you so bang goes any chance of looking for a new job.
Presumably his main focus is people on long term benefits, who don't, despite his crazy thoughts, don't actually swan about in rolls royces all day long. They scrimp and scrape and struggle constantly. Really, this guy is a total ****.

You vote UKIP, you vote wassocks.

I wonder what people who had to work with him before he became a politician thought of him - with that kind of 'commonsense' and ability to think his ideas through, he must've been an absolute nightmare! Can't quite imagine how he held any kind of job down...

Scarily, a significant proportion of the British public appear to intend to give their vote for people like him. We get the politician's we deserve...

Dammit, if only I wasn't getting an early night! Can someone please Photoshop some maggots into his head? And zombie eyes.

and for clarity what is the difference between unemployed and so loaded I don't need to work?

Ahh Charnwood. What a pillock.

Actually thinking about it, the guy that dropped a gear and buzzed me on the way home today looked a bit like that.

and for clarity what is the difference between unemployed and so loaded I don't need to work?

No, no there must be UKIP to balance the power there is.

Is "Balancing power" really UKIP's agenda?

The foil to fat cats and politicians with vested interests?

It's just that in the same week we hear that [i][url= http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/1-of-people-in-the-world-have-half-of-global-wealth-307654.html ]"The richest 1% of people in the world will have more wealth than all the rest of us combined by next year..."[/url][/i]

A UKIP candidate start telling us they want to restrict the freedoms available to the poorest in our society on the grounds of them, well basically, being poor...

To me it seems like a really clumsy take on the same old "undeserving poor" spiel that the Tory's started spouting towards the start of the latest recession... So why are they a better choice?

cookeaa - Member
Is "Balancing power" really UKIP's agenda?

It is Not what they think it is the voter.

The foil to fat cats and politicians with vested interests?

They All have vested interest otherwise they would not be career politicians.

Come on we all know Nige is simply a Back bench Tory who's face didn't fit when the Oxbridge lot, the likes of Cameron and Letwin started to move up in the party in the late 90s...

Without Farage the Kippers would have nobody to rally round and there would be no party, they're barely organised as it is, and they can't keep their candidates on a set of consistent messages, I'm still not entirely sure what the party's policies are because every one of their representatives decides for themselves...

UKIP is a shambles, I pray to God they don't end up as Power brokers come May, Christ alone knows what harebrained concessions they might ask for...

I love stories like this as it shows the level of logic UKIP are running with.

It will be interesting and instructive to see what action - if any - UKIP take against him.

Any idea how many people cycle to work each day?

Well anyway whatever the figure is, if we all drive our cars to work instead that'll ease congestion.

Maybe we should have a working cyclists drive to work day but all make a weekend of it and then drive to work in/via his constituency on the Monday morning. I think maybe a nice wet windy winter morning would be a good idea so we can not only bask in the warmth of our air conditioned cars but also with no cyclists out that day we will be at work in just a few minutes.

Did he mention something about the roads becoming twice as clogged, so the same amount as drive cars?

He did. But with bikes being so much smaller than cars the ratio must be at least 4 bikes to every car I reckon.
The obvious solution would be to let the bikes have the roads and put cars on the pavement.

I think everyone should be banned from the roads but me! 😉

Skimmed the thread so maybe missed someone making the point; I don't think the unemployed contribute to congestion do they? Seeing as most congestion is caused by commuters going to and coming back from work. During the day and evenings, the roads are nice and quiet (apart from London).

It's UKIP. You're thinking too hard.

ohnohesback - Member

It will be interesting and instructive to see what action - if any - UKIP take against him.

Farage will say "LOL, what a character eh? Good old Charny"

It's impressively like the Al Murray vid though. "We'll do something ridiculous- that's common sense"

gofasterstripes - Member

It's UKIP. You're thinking too hard.

BOOOOM!

Asked whether he was concerned about any knock on effect such a policy might have on road tax receipts, he said: "What do you want, less cars on the road or not? Road tax is ridiculous anyway. It should have been put on fuel."

Erm... 🙄

Bloody Zombie Maggot. There. I said it.

Oh I do hope Lynton knocks on my door whilst campaigning, what an utter bellsniff!

So, can someone explain something to me, this chap has said some things which don't stand up to even the slightest bit of logical scrutiny, which means one of three things:

1> he hasn't thought any of it through, done any research etc. blah blah blah - basically being demonstrably incompetent as his 'job'

2> he believes these things he says would work - basically demonstrably batty, ergo not fit to do his 'job' and possibly requiring medial care.

3> he knows it's bonkers, knows it's unworkable and has no intention of following through on it - basically lying his backside off (some might argue no different to any other politician then...) for some press exposure.

So which is it?

In any kind of employment there are normally competency and disciplinary policies in place to deal with all 3 cases, sadly I doubt any such policies exist, let alone are enforced in politician land 🙁

4: He's a plant.

There was a brilliant comment on one of the news sites covering this. the guy said that if we banned cyclists from roads, there would be no need for the HS2 high speed rail link.

Now I'm no expert but blaming motorway congestion on bicycles seemed a little harsh.

On the plus side...if you move cyclists onto pavements presumably that means we can hoon about on the footpaths as well 😉

Even Norman Tebbit thought it was a good idea for the unemployed to "Get on their bike" and look for work.

Norman Tebbit too moderate for UKIP? I haven't heard anything so funny since I was told that Mark Thatcher was too dodgy to be allowed to live in Monaco.

The scary thing is that I bet theres a serious amount of Tory backbenchers nodding in agreement with this 'common sense' proposal

Oh, I don't know. Ever thought about what a zombie maggot might look like?

useful policy!

wasted some of my life reading the comments on one of the many click bait news articles moaning about the traffic chaos etc etc etc caused by the 1m minimum vehicle passing cyclist trial law in Queensland.

need to remember that operating the brake and then the accelerator is difficult and requires written permission from the drivers of following vehicles and also that all roads always have continous solid white lines so there were many "but I won't be able to pass" posts

....and then..... it's like Luther has arrived someone posts "what if someone is late for a job interview because they are stuck behind a cyclist?"

Well that's it. A seminal argument and all hell breaks out and the issue becomes an unbelievable pile of toss.

With the UKIP policy its all sorted! The cyclist would be on the pavement and the car driver on the bus!

I had been so worried about this

No, no there must be UKIP to balance the power there is.

Ha ha! If UKIP squeeze into the next government, there is probably NO ISSUE where they can help improve on the policies of any party they share power with. I can see no way that they could be anything over than more damaging to the economy, society, or management of public services than a single party government, or any coalition that doesn't include them. Not a single way. I appreciate the idea that you may want any future Labour or Tory PM to have to negotiate with others, rather than dogmatically follow just their own party interests, but, no, not with UKIP thanks. Please no.

The roads/country if UKIP get their way

[img] [/img]

What does Lynton drive, do we think? I'm going with Jaguar.

I'd be interested to know how he defines "benefits claimants" and where he gets that "six million cars" figure from.

[url= http://ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/january-2015/sty-labour-market-statistics--january-2015.html ]According to the ONS[/url] there are currently only 1.91 million unemployed, and [b]only 870,000 of them are currently claiming Jobseeker's Allowance[/b].

And I seriously doubt that all of them can afford to run cars.

So maybe he means ALL benefit claimants, which would be [url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths ]around 64% off all families in the UK[/url]?

Personally I'm all for it.

Can we also remove pensioners from supermarkets at weekends?

I mean they have nothing better to do on a Thursday morning - the queues at the post office aren't that long. So why do they insist on shopping on a Saturday and getting in my way.

Commonsense policies from a commonsense party

As someone who commutes by bike and whose houshold receives child benefit, I guess I'm the cause of all the congestion on the roads.

Sorry about that.

Seems like the UKIPers want to have this land all to themselves to do with as they please despite being in a massive minority.

I'm all for removing anyone who feels a sense of entitlement because they're wealthy/read the Daily Heil/Tory/frothy-mouthed/etc and relocating them to a small island somewhere along with like minded folk.

If we establish a twenty mile exclusion zone around said island and machine gun any escaping refugees then reckon we've an election winning policy right here...

Actually [url= http://www.****/news/article-2921327/Ban-6million-benefits-claimants-driving-says-Ukip-election-candidate-people-really-catch-bus.html ]even the Daily Heil thinks he is going a bit far[/url] which should probably give him a bit of a clue!

richmtb for prime minister, can we especially ban them from self scan, 24/7

We need a blanket ban, duvets have made them obsolete.

can we especially ban them from self scan, 24/7

Ahh Charnwood. What a pillock.

Hmmm, yes. Also from that fair borough here.

By and large it's a nice place, but there is a significant sub-set of the population that are red-faced bigots who can't stand the thought of sharing with anyone other than their mates.

It is not a coincidence that before UKIP came along it was a BNP stronghold. Now UKIP have come along with most of the same policies (but delivered by the 'right' kind of chap), it is not surprising.

Depressing, but not surprising.

The scary thing is that this pillock does actually already have a small amount of power, he is on Leicestershire council's transport committee.

People like this are the reason we don't have a decent bike infastructure. And also pays testament to the logic that people who want to be politicians shouldn't be allowed to be them.

"Not surprising"? Really? For me it *is* surprising that a real person with some genuine pretensions to politics actually spouts this fascist vapid crap. I'm an affable chap with a 'live and let live' attitude - folks are entitled to their opinions however batshit they may be etc etc. But this hateful scumbag is entitled to nothing but a smack in the bollocks

Appears he's been suspended by UKIP - for being batshit mental or just being off-message I wonder?
Now he's unemployed can we take his car off him?

Quite funny watching UKIP apologists claim that it is some kind of conspiracy to discredit UKIP.

Like they need any help!

Appears he's been suspended by UKIP - for being batshit mental

muddydwarf - Member

Now he's unemployed can we take his car off him?

We won't need to, he's a principled man and it's Just Common Sense.

Gaaawwd bless UKIP..

This thread has made my day. 😆