Jogger killed by cyclist
Discussion
Kermit power said:
No... There are 14 cases where a cyclist has been involved in an incident which has resulted in the death of a pedestrian. Of those 14, only one was on a pavement. Of the other 13, I'd give very good odds that at least half, if not more, were pedestrians stepping out into the road in front of a fast-moving cyclist without looking. This is, by an absolute mile, the most common cause of all the near misses I've had whilst commuting into London.
So you are saying that 13 cyclists would fail the hazard perception test and showed a very poor awareness of their surrounds and as a result rode an an unsuitable speed resulting in their failure to stop causing death.There have been many cases of car drivers prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian steeping into the road and I have even read of a police officer prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian that stepped into the road. why are cyclists exempt?
The answer has already been posted, there is no crime of causing death by reckless/dangerous/careless cycling so there can't be a prosecution for that crime.
NoNeed said:
Kermit power said:
No... There are 14 cases where a cyclist has been involved in an incident which has resulted in the death of a pedestrian. Of those 14, only one was on a pavement. Of the other 13, I'd give very good odds that at least half, if not more, were pedestrians stepping out into the road in front of a fast-moving cyclist without looking. This is, by an absolute mile, the most common cause of all the near misses I've had whilst commuting into London.
So you are saying that 13 cyclists would fail the hazard perception test and showed a very poor awareness of their surrounds and as a result rode an an unsuitable speed resulting in their failure to stop causing death.There have been many cases of car drivers prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian steeping into the road and I have even read of a police officer prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian that stepped into the road. why are cyclists exempt?
The answer has already been posted, there is no crime of causing death by reckless/dangerous/careless cycling so there can't be a prosecution for that crime.
Not pedestrians stepping out on a zebra crossing, not the motorist being on the phone, reading the paper, putting on their lipstick, speeding or being drunk or anything... Just a couple of documented examples of drivers being prosecuted after a pedestrian steps off the kerb without looking, a few feet in front of them. Let's see if you can find any more of those than you can examples of cyclists causing death through cycling dangerously.
NoNeed said:
my point was that all traffic laws appear to be for motorised vehicles as cyckists are rarely stopped even though to many of them the highway code is an alien magazine.
I would imagine that pretty much all traffic laws for motorised vehicles are indeed for motorised vehicles.Wonder if this is another mess that could have been avoided with a two-bob bell though.
WinstonWolf said:
Grumfutock said:
mdavids said:
Nothing adult or intelligent to add then?
What's the point mate, I suspect it would be a waste of time. Too many on hear refuse to see or acknowledge that a cyclist can ever do wrong.I have no problem other than the lunacy of the pro bike mob on here that cant not and will not acknowledge that once in a blue moon a cyclist is in the wrong! If you cant see that then I guess you are firmly in that camp.
Grumfutock said:
WinstonWolf said:
Grumfutock said:
mdavids said:
Nothing adult or intelligent to add then?
What's the point mate, I suspect it would be a waste of time. Too many on hear refuse to see or acknowledge that a cyclist can ever do wrong.I have no problem other than the lunacy of the pro bike mob on here that cant not and will not acknowledge that once in a blue moon a cyclist is in the wrong! If you cant see that then I guess you are firmly in that camp.
...Try to get this into your tiny thick skull. Most people on here are petrolheads who cycle. We've all passed our test and both drive and ride. When you say cyclists you include everyone, that's the reason you come across as a a t
t.Oh, and another thing, anyone who can maintain an elevated heart rate for over six hours can f
k for England. Ask your mum...WinstonWolf said:
And there you go again with your sweeping generalisations. I guess that's why a lot of people, me included, think you're a bit of a ...
Try to get this into your tiny thick skull. Most people on here are petrolheads who cycle. We've all passed our test and both drive and ride. When you say cyclists you include everyone, that's the reason you come across as a a tt.
Oh, and another thing, anyone who can maintain an elevated heart rate for over six hours can fk for England. Ask your mum...
Well generally I could not care less what you or any other keyboard warrior think of me. I don't know you, never will and never want to so you opinion is utterly irrelevant to me. I am baffled why you think it would?...Try to get this into your tiny thick skull. Most people on here are petrolheads who cycle. We've all passed our test and both drive and ride. When you say cyclists you include everyone, that's the reason you come across as a a t
t.Oh, and another thing, anyone who can maintain an elevated heart rate for over six hours can f
k for England. Ask your mum...How do I include everyone when I say cyclists? I refer, OBVIOUSLY, to cyclists, not everyone!
Fitness and sexual prowess do not go hand in hand. So you can pedal for 6 hours, well done. You are my hero. Do you have gay side burns like Wiggins?
Grumfutock said:
WinstonWolf said:
And there you go again with your sweeping generalisations. I guess that's why a lot of people, me included, think you're a bit of a ...
Try to get this into your tiny thick skull. Most people on here are petrolheads who cycle. We've all passed our test and both drive and ride. When you say cyclists you include everyone, that's the reason you come across as a a tt.
Oh, and another thing, anyone who can maintain an elevated heart rate for over six hours can fk for England. Ask your mum...
Well generally I could not care less what you or any other keyboard warrior think of me. I don't know you, never will and never want to so you opinion is utterly irrelevant to me. I am baffled why you think it would?...Try to get this into your tiny thick skull. Most people on here are petrolheads who cycle. We've all passed our test and both drive and ride. When you say cyclists you include everyone, that's the reason you come across as a a t
t.Oh, and another thing, anyone who can maintain an elevated heart rate for over six hours can f
k for England. Ask your mum...How do I include everyone when I say cyclists? I refer, OBVIOUSLY, to cyclists, not everyone!
Fitness and sexual prowess do not go hand in hand. So you can pedal for 6 hours, well done. You are my hero. Do you have gay side burns like Wiggins?
WinstonWolf said:
Grumfutock said:
WinstonWolf said:
And there you go again with your sweeping generalisations. I guess that's why a lot of people, me included, think you're a bit of a ...
Try to get this into your tiny thick skull. Most people on here are petrolheads who cycle. We've all passed our test and both drive and ride. When you say cyclists you include everyone, that's the reason you come across as a a tt.
Oh, and another thing, anyone who can maintain an elevated heart rate for over six hours can fk for England. Ask your mum...
Well generally I could not care less what you or any other keyboard warrior think of me. I don't know you, never will and never want to so you opinion is utterly irrelevant to me. I am baffled why you think it would?...Try to get this into your tiny thick skull. Most people on here are petrolheads who cycle. We've all passed our test and both drive and ride. When you say cyclists you include everyone, that's the reason you come across as a a t
t.Oh, and another thing, anyone who can maintain an elevated heart rate for over six hours can f
k for England. Ask your mum...How do I include everyone when I say cyclists? I refer, OBVIOUSLY, to cyclists, not everyone!
Fitness and sexual prowess do not go hand in hand. So you can pedal for 6 hours, well done. You are my hero. Do you have gay side burns like Wiggins?
I always fascinated and slightly shocked by some of the attitudes shown on these type of threads. I cycle, ride a motorbike and drive a car and although I’m sure I make mistakes I like to think I’m a responsible road user when using all three forms of transport. The blanket criticism of one or other mode just doesn’t make sense. Most of the time other road users are both safe and considerate and while all road use is a risk I seldom feel unsafe.
When I cycle I ride at my most defensive because I’m most vulnerable I won’t risk being knocked off just to prove I have the right of way. Riding defensively sometimes means being assertive and “owning” a piece of road, sometimes it means being passive. My main aim of every trip on the road in every mode of transport is to return home without injuring myself or others. Just because I share a form of transport with someone doesn’t mean I will defend them if they ride/drive badly.
There are selfish inconsiderate idiots on the roads and they’re not contained to one form of transport.
When I cycle I ride at my most defensive because I’m most vulnerable I won’t risk being knocked off just to prove I have the right of way. Riding defensively sometimes means being assertive and “owning” a piece of road, sometimes it means being passive. My main aim of every trip on the road in every mode of transport is to return home without injuring myself or others. Just because I share a form of transport with someone doesn’t mean I will defend them if they ride/drive badly.
There are selfish inconsiderate idiots on the roads and they’re not contained to one form of transport.
Janluke said:
I always fascinated and slightly shocked by some of the attitudes shown on these type of threads. I cycle, ride a motorbike and drive a car and although I’m sure I make mistakes I like to think I’m a responsible road user when using all three forms of transport. The blanket criticism of one or other mode just doesn’t make sense. Most of the time other road users are both safe and considerate and while all road use is a risk I seldom feel unsafe.
When I cycle I ride at my most defensive because I’m most vulnerable I won’t risk being knocked off just to prove I have the right of way. Riding defensively sometimes means being assertive and “owning” a piece of road, sometimes it means being passive. My main aim of every trip on the road in every mode of transport is to return home without injuring myself or others. Just because I share a form of transport with someone doesn’t mean I will defend them if they ride/drive badly.
There are selfish inconsiderate idiots on the roads and they’re not contained to one form of transport.
Precisely When I cycle I ride at my most defensive because I’m most vulnerable I won’t risk being knocked off just to prove I have the right of way. Riding defensively sometimes means being assertive and “owning” a piece of road, sometimes it means being passive. My main aim of every trip on the road in every mode of transport is to return home without injuring myself or others. Just because I share a form of transport with someone doesn’t mean I will defend them if they ride/drive badly.
There are selfish inconsiderate idiots on the roads and they’re not contained to one form of transport.
Grumfutock said:
WinstonWolf said:
Grumfutock said:
mdavids said:
Nothing adult or intelligent to add then?
What's the point mate, I suspect it would be a waste of time. Too many on hear refuse to see or acknowledge that a cyclist can ever do wrong.I have no problem other than the lunacy of the pro bike mob on here that cant not and will not acknowledge that once in a blue moon a cyclist is in the wrong! If you cant see that then I guess you are firmly in that camp.
.Since we had the comments from the police, your posts have been proven to be utter rubbish.
I suggest you stop acting like a plonker and give it a rest. If anything, you are just showing again how anti-cyclist you really are.
funkyrobot said:
Grumfutock said:
WinstonWolf said:
Grumfutock said:
mdavids said:
Nothing adult or intelligent to add then?
What's the point mate, I suspect it would be a waste of time. Too many on hear refuse to see or acknowledge that a cyclist can ever do wrong.I have no problem other than the lunacy of the pro bike mob on here that cant not and will not acknowledge that once in a blue moon a cyclist is in the wrong! If you cant see that then I guess you are firmly in that camp.
.Since we had the comments from the police, your posts have been proven to be utter rubbish.
I suggest you stop acting like a plonker and give it a rest. If anything, you are just showing again how anti-cyclist you really are.
Which bit of the above don't you get? I really thought I had made this obvious.
Grumfutock said:
But I am anti moron cycling. Never stated otherwise.
So are most cyclists, Grumfutock said:
I hate idiots that ignore traffic lights. I hate people that under take along the kerb. I hate idiots that ride on the pavement. I hate lunatics that weave in and out of traffic as if they are immortal. I hate muppets that think the highway code is only for cars.
Which bit of the above don't you get? I really thought I had made this obvious.
So basically lots of hate then. Try chilling out, most of the behavior you describe above is going to lead to the cyclist getting extremely hurt, that's their problem, why get so worked up about it you feel the need to impotently rant on a forum? It won't solve anything or change anyone's opinions or behavior, cyclists aren't going to disappear from the roads so get used to them or spend the rest of your life giving yourself a coronary every time you see some lycra.Which bit of the above don't you get? I really thought I had made this obvious.
mdavids said:
So basically lots of hate then. Try chilling out, most of the behavior you describe above is going to lead to the cyclist getting extremely hurt, that's their problem, why get so worked up about it you feel the need to impotently rant on a forum? It won't solve anything or change anyone's opinions or behavior, cyclists aren't going to disappear from the roads so get used to them or spend the rest of your life giving yourself a coronary every time you see some lycra.
Because it makes me feel better when the pills aren't working. If I don't the voices will tell me to kill again.mdavids said:
Grumfutock said:
But I am anti moron cycling. Never stated otherwise.
So are most cyclists, Grumfutock said:
I hate idiots that ignore traffic lights. I hate people that under take along the kerb. I hate idiots that ride on the pavement. I hate lunatics that weave in and out of traffic as if they are immortal. I hate muppets that think the highway code is only for cars.
Which bit of the above don't you get? I really thought I had made this obvious.
So basically lots of hate then. Try chilling out, most of the behavior you describe above is going to lead to the cyclist getting extremely hurt, that's their problem, why get so worked up about it you feel the need to impotently rant on a forum? It won't solve anything or change anyone's opinions or behavior, cyclists aren't going to disappear from the roads so get used to them or spend the rest of your life giving yourself a coronary every time you see some lycra.Which bit of the above don't you get? I really thought I had made this obvious.
Ever tried challenging a cyclist that runs a red light? Apparently they can do this because they need to preserve momentum........
Come on, be honest, if you have ever spent any time on any cycling forum you know that what I am saying here is right. Even then, it would not be such an issue were it not for the fact that:
1. Politicians and other people of influence listen to these people
2. The law is then skewed against the other road users in order to defend the actions of the (admittedly minority) cyclists who ride like t
tsI do concede (now that I have calmed down a bit!
) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users. andymadmak said:
mdavids said:
Grumfutock said:
But I am anti moron cycling. Never stated otherwise.
So are most cyclists, Grumfutock said:
I hate idiots that ignore traffic lights. I hate people that under take along the kerb. I hate idiots that ride on the pavement. I hate lunatics that weave in and out of traffic as if they are immortal. I hate muppets that think the highway code is only for cars.
Which bit of the above don't you get? I really thought I had made this obvious.
So basically lots of hate then. Try chilling out, most of the behavior you describe above is going to lead to the cyclist getting extremely hurt, that's their problem, why get so worked up about it you feel the need to impotently rant on a forum? It won't solve anything or change anyone's opinions or behavior, cyclists aren't going to disappear from the roads so get used to them or spend the rest of your life giving yourself a coronary every time you see some lycra.Which bit of the above don't you get? I really thought I had made this obvious.
Ever tried challenging a cyclist that runs a red light? Apparently they can do this because they need to preserve momentum........
Come on, be honest, if you have ever spent any time on any cycling forum you know that what I am saying here is right. Even then, it would not be such an issue were it not for the fact that:
1. Politicians and other people of influence listen to these people
2. The law is then skewed against the other road users in order to defend the actions of the (admittedly minority) cyclists who ride like t
tsI do concede (now that I have calmed down a bit!
) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users. andymadmak said:
I do concede (now that I have calmed down a bit! ) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users.
The bit in bold highlights the childishness of those who take this anti-cyclist stance, as you do in many threads.) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users. What exactly are the problems they cause?
Because if they were such a danger to the public then more would be done. I suspect that the 'problems' you refer to is actually envy of being able to make progress where motor vehicles can't.
oyster said:
andymadmak said:
I do concede (now that I have calmed down a bit! ) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users.
The bit in bold highlights the childishness of those who take this anti-cyclist stance, as you do in many threads.) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users. What exactly are the problems they cause?
Because if they were such a danger to the public then more would be done. I suspect that the 'problems' you refer to is actually envy of being able to make progress where motor vehicles can't.
So problems rule breaking cyclists cause for other road users...
1. Failure to observe traffic lights leading to near misses with other traffic and the knock on effects of motorists etc having to brake/swerve/take actions that endanger other road users as they strive to avoid the cyclists
2. Riding the wrong way down one way streets - repercussions as above
3. Riding on pavements, at speed, with no regard for pedestrians - see recent events
4. The inconvenience and financial losses incurred by road users who's vehicles are damaged as a result of accidents with cyclists and where the motorist is not to blame
5. Failure to ride with lights at night/poor visibility - see point one above for repercussions
6. Lack of respect for other road users - I am all for defensive riding techniques, but riding 5 abreast down the A6, with a mile of cars and lorries backed up behind you is not on
I could go on but I doubt you will have read this far. I'll await your response along the lines of "agh but car drivers do worse, lorry drivers do worse, pedestrians don't look where they are going, children should be walked across pavements to cars by their parents wearing high viz jackets and waving flashing lights etc etc etc,
andymadmak said:
oyster said:
andymadmak said:
I do concede (now that I have calmed down a bit! ) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users.
The bit in bold highlights the childishness of those who take this anti-cyclist stance, as you do in many threads.) that the majority of cyclists do not behave badly, but far too many do, and they seem to do so largely with impunity as far as the law is concerned and no sense of guilt for the problems they cause other road users. What exactly are the problems they cause?
Because if they were such a danger to the public then more would be done. I suspect that the 'problems' you refer to is actually envy of being able to make progress where motor vehicles can't.
So problems rule breaking cyclists cause for other road users...
1. Failure to observe traffic lights leading to near misses with other traffic and the knock on effects of motorists etc having to brake/swerve/take actions that endanger other road users as they strive to avoid the cyclists
2. Riding the wrong way down one way streets - repercussions as above
3. Riding on pavements, at speed, with no regard for pedestrians - see recent events
4. The inconvenience and financial losses incurred by road users who's vehicles are damaged as a result of accidents with cyclists and where the motorist is not to blame
5. Failure to ride with lights at night/poor visibility - see point one above for repercussions
6. Lack of respect for other road users - I am all for defensive riding techniques, but riding 5 abreast down the A6, with a mile of cars and lorries backed up behind you is not on
I could go on but I doubt you will have read this far. I'll await your response along the lines of "agh but car drivers do worse, lorry drivers do worse, pedestrians don't look where they are going, children should be walked across pavements to cars by their parents wearing high viz jackets and waving flashing lights etc etc etc,
Aren't we back to a simple point - it's not the mode of transport, it's the person in control?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff