SUV driver attempts to kill cyclist, smashes into salon
Discussion
J4CKO said:
You know when you see another driver do something cockish and you shake your head, well, us who ride bikes do the same when we see someone else on a bike do something cockish.
It isnt a club, its a mode of transport, we dont have an AGM where we all agree to jump every red light and ride six abreast to piss drivers off.
There are a couple of guys at work who decide to harass me for any problem they have with a cyclist, like I am the bloody Shop Steward for cyclists, apprantely they are "Your lot", whats that then, humans, British people, Road Users, members of the public, males, Lynx Africa Users ?
That's really going to help the PH perception of cyclists...It isnt a club, its a mode of transport, we dont have an AGM where we all agree to jump every red light and ride six abreast to piss drivers off.
There are a couple of guys at work who decide to harass me for any problem they have with a cyclist, like I am the bloody Shop Steward for cyclists, apprantely they are "Your lot", whats that then, humans, British people, Road Users, members of the public, males, Lynx Africa Users ?
static2010 said:
0markymark0 said:
I'm a cyclist and I have insurance.
If cyclists cycled as badly as car drivers drove they'd need insurance. Just read today about a driver who, you know, drove according to the conditions etc etc mounted the pavement and killed school kids walking to school.
In fact, by the time the day is out, some more people will be killed today by drivers. Probably more today by drivers than this decade by cyclists. That's why the government is learning to love us and the 'war on motorists' is increasing.
Loving the way it is going
So you are clearly "Anti motorist"... Why are you on this forum?If cyclists cycled as badly as car drivers drove they'd need insurance. Just read today about a driver who, you know, drove according to the conditions etc etc mounted the pavement and killed school kids walking to school.
In fact, by the time the day is out, some more people will be killed today by drivers. Probably more today by drivers than this decade by cyclists. That's why the government is learning to love us and the 'war on motorists' is increasing.
Loving the way it is going
I personally don't like fanatics whatever they may be fanatical about.
IroningMan said:
J4CKO said:
You know when you see another driver do something cockish and you shake your head, well, us who ride bikes do the same when we see someone else on a bike do something cockish.
It isnt a club, its a mode of transport, we dont have an AGM where we all agree to jump every red light and ride six abreast to piss drivers off.
There are a couple of guys at work who decide to harass me for any problem they have with a cyclist, like I am the bloody Shop Steward for cyclists, apprantely they are "Your lot", whats that then, humans, British people, Road Users, members of the public, males, Lynx Africa Users ?
That's really going to help the PH perception of cyclists...It isnt a club, its a mode of transport, we dont have an AGM where we all agree to jump every red light and ride six abreast to piss drivers off.
There are a couple of guys at work who decide to harass me for any problem they have with a cyclist, like I am the bloody Shop Steward for cyclists, apprantely they are "Your lot", whats that then, humans, British people, Road Users, members of the public, males, Lynx Africa Users ?
Its been said by someone else before, but I think they made a good point at the time:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
There really is NO justification for anyone doing it - even if they are riding a gold plated Zebra.
(Yes, there probably are a small number of motorists (Lorry/bus/motorbike/car/van) who run a red light, long after it has changed. But they are extremely rare as a percentage of vehicles on the road - unlike the cycling equivalent).
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
There really is NO justification for anyone doing it - even if they are riding a gold plated Zebra.
(Yes, there probably are a small number of motorists (Lorry/bus/motorbike/car/van) who run a red light, long after it has changed. But they are extremely rare as a percentage of vehicles on the road - unlike the cycling equivalent).
Edited by Hol on Friday 4th July 08:40
Hol said:
Its been said by someone else before, but I think they made a good point at the time:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
There really is NO justification for anyone doing it - even if they are riding a gold plated Zebra.
(Yes, there probably are a small number of motorists (Lorry/bus/motorbike/car/van) who run a red light, long after it has changed. But they are extremely rare as a percentage of vehicles on the road - unlike the cycling equivalent).
You need to get your head around the idea that it's the same people in each case; the only thing that stops the twerps from doing it when they're behind the wheel is that the car in front of them has stopped at the lights - and no, there is no justification for doing it.There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
There really is NO justification for anyone doing it - even if they are riding a gold plated Zebra.
(Yes, there probably are a small number of motorists (Lorry/bus/motorbike/car/van) who run a red light, long after it has changed. But they are extremely rare as a percentage of vehicles on the road - unlike the cycling equivalent).
Edited by Hol on Friday 4th July 08:40
Edited by IroningMan on Friday 4th July 10:01
Hol said:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
Exactly. Two different things.A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
Hol said:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
The thing they have in common is that they both choose to break the law based on their perception of risk. The significant difference is the damage they do to other road users if they get it wrong.A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Johnnytheboy said:
Hol said:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
Exactly. Two different things.A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
Personally I don't see a difference between red light jumpers, cyclists and drivers are as bad as each other. But if you are trying to make a distinction then yes, red light jumping in a car is significantly more dangerous.
Mave said:
walm said:
Which is essentially the stock PH attitude to speed limits.
Yes, but you need to consider what we as cyclists are trying to achieve. If it is simply to reaffirm that we are less of a problem than motorists then fine, keep on doing the same. But if we want to influence motorists' behaviour then we need to stop giving them evidence that supports their existing bias.However the existing bias shouldn't make a difference. I don't care if people don't much like me being on the road, that shouldn't matter.
But if that bias means they take more risks with my life then the authorities and society needs to come down harder on it.
And I have no doubt that over time they will.
Hol said:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Both scum in my opinion. Both should have the law come down hard on them.A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Naturally, the car driver would get greater punishment as our law takes consequence into account.
mygoldfishbowl said:
Me?
Yes. You've dismissed a whole class of traffic as "fanatics", because you don't understand what it's like to be them.It's a classic Daily Mail technique- "Mad Mullahs!" etc etc, and you can see the hard of thinking using it in this thread- "Lycra Louts!"
Give a group of people a demeaning name and you dehumanise them ever so slightly, which allows you to distance yourself from both them, and logical reasoning when it comes to dealing with them.
As I've said before, if someone else is going to kill me and get away with it I'd rather they meant it- the sad reality is they're likely to be reading a text on their phone, or not paying attention in some other way.
Cyclists are incredibly vulnerable - more so than pedestrians due to the cyclists own speed adding more kinetic energy to an accident, yet we have utter cretins like TopOnePercent suggesting that you can just "nerf them off". I mean, you can, but they'll have a lot of broken bones and significant skin loss.
Which points to TOP being a sociopath, of course, but sadly his view seems to be shared by many others who just haven't thought about it.
Which is why it's easy to shout "FANATIC! DIRTY DIRTY FANATIC!" at people who are not unreasonably asking not to be killed due to inattention.
Maybe if we make a bit of noise motorists might see us?
oyster said:
Hol said:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Both scum in my opinion. Both should have the law come down hard on them.A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Naturally, the car driver would get greater punishment as our law takes consequence into account.
Intentionally shooting a red light is intentionally shooting a red light, it doesn't matter how long it's been red for. I've seen far more close calls and accidents because moronic drivers have decided to accelerate at amber lights rather than brake than because cyclists have gone through red lights. JQ said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Hol said:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
Exactly. Two different things.A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Yet, we always see those two scenarios being directly compared, as some form of justification for a cycle running a light.
Personally I don't see a difference between red light jumpers, cyclists and drivers are as bad as each other. But if you are trying to make a distinction then yes, red light jumping in a car is significantly more dangerous.
Johnnytheboy said:
I would have said it's more dangerous to the red light jumper if they are on a bike rather than in a car, but that wasn't my point.
He did say that.But the car is also infinitely more dangerous to OTHERS - hence in aggregate RLJing in a car is far worse - as the accident stats, punishment when caught and common sense show us.
Mave said:
Hol said:
There is a significant difference between a stupid motorist who zips through a red light, just as it changes, and..
A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
The thing they have in common is that they both choose to break the law based on their perception of risk. The significant difference is the damage they do to other road users if they get it wrong.A cyclist who does not stop for a red light, that has been that way (RED) for a number of seconds before they reached the line.
Dependent on the evasive moves that others may need to do to avoid him, he could cause physical trauma to others, who were actively following the rules.
Is it not much betetr for everyone, to follow the same rules, as laid out in statute, and not pass a red light at all???
I personally think it is. And I wont be in the minority.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff