Impaired judgment

The public’s outlook on cyclists is not, according to complaints in your pages, all peace and harmony really, is it, even without this?

I passed my cycling proficiency test as an eight-year-old at New Marston School, at about the same time the breathalyser was introduced, or shortly after.

Mr Cox (our headmaster) encouraged us to learn the ‘rules of the road’ as youngsters.

Without claiming to be an angelic cyclist, motorcyclist or driver for all of that time, I’ve nonetheless grown up through the never-ending campaigns to remove, reduce and deter the number of drivers who drink and drive.

This column though goes out of its way to encourage cyclists to do exactly the same. How stupid is that?

Never mind the comment of cycling and drinking being “not for everyone”, it shouldn’t really be for anyone at all, should it?

To then say: “We sampled a lot of ale and then cycled 25 miles” is more than a slap in the face for those doing their very best to discourage people from drink driving.

Some cyclists wobble about enough, let alone with a bellyful of strong ale. It matters not a jot if you’re on a bike track, towpath, quiet lane, or the standard route favoured by cyclists, the pavement, you’re under the influence just the same, so you’re going to have impaired judgment just the same, no matter how experienced you are at drinking, cycling or both.

Is this then another good example of some cyclists just thumbing their noses at the rest of us by lauding to us all “cycling and drinking is legal, cycling drunk is not”.

Oh that’s okay for the rest of us then, is it? What odds would a local bookie give I wonder – when the first of these clowns get killed or made more of a cabbage – on the car/bus/truck driver involved being convicted of causing it? Less than evens I bet! (pun intended) This is not best clever but if a certain Danish brewery wants to use a really stupid idea for its next advertisement, this is probably it.

DAVID WILLIAMS David Walter Close Oxford