Cyclist likely to be convicted of manslaughter..
Discussion
oyster said:
steveL98 said:
[
This is a landmark case and I for one hope it deeply affects cycling behaviour (severe penalties and destruction of bikes etc) throughout the UK to rein in the lunatic cycling fringe who think the rules don't apply to them. We're all just trying to get somewhere and we need to consider the other road users above ourselves, in short understand simple courtesy.
The rest of your post made sense.This is a landmark case and I for one hope it deeply affects cycling behaviour (severe penalties and destruction of bikes etc) throughout the UK to rein in the lunatic cycling fringe who think the rules don't apply to them. We're all just trying to get somewhere and we need to consider the other road users above ourselves, in short understand simple courtesy.
What specific behaviour would you like to see changed?
2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
Ive seen it alI. I use the same roads whether I'm in a car or on a cycle and the code is the same for both. If a moped/scooter/motorbike tried any of this stuff, they would be rightly penalised, so cyclists should befall the same fate.. Not much to ask.
CaptainSlow said:
Eric Mc said:
I'd still argue that the seller should brief the buyer on the legality of what they are buying.
I'm not saying it's the law - because it's not. But I'd argue that it should be.
Rubbish, it would turn into a case of he said, she said, especially on private sales.. John Lewis didn't tell me that I shouldn't use my new carving knife to do a killing rampage down my local high street.I'm not saying it's the law - because it's not. But I'd argue that it should be.
The user has to be aware of the laws surrounding the equipment they use and the responsibility is theirs alone.
Of course the user has to be aware. They are primarily responsible for what they do with the device. My point is that there is no culture of advice or instruction with buying bicycles. Maybe there should be.
It does seem many (if not most) people who cycle have never had much if any formal instruction beyond learning not to fall off.
Derek Smith said:
Some Gump said:
Bit of perspective for people that are calling for manslaughter:
http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/driv...
Disliking this d
head for his attitude can't trump legal precedent.
I thought the double charge was a bit out of order. If he could be done for manslaughter then so can vehicle drivers. But they aren't. Causing death by dangerous driving is indistinguishable from manslaughter in the vast majority of cases but never charged. Why pick on a cyclist?http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/driv...
Disliking this d
head for his attitude can't trump legal precedent.The sooner there is the better.
Zigster said:
The Surveyor said:
It's not right to simply compare this incident with any motoring accident, the correct comparison would be a motoring accident where the pedestrian died and the car was found to be knowingly defective. i.e. a driver in a car with no brakes or with seriously bald tyres who kills a pedestrian would face a more serious punishment than one in a perfectly legal car, that driver being more negligent.
£180 fine seems to be the going rate for killing four cyclists.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5241798.stm
Hardly. Plenty of motorists have been jailed for causing the deaths of cyclists by dangerous driving.
Eric Mc said:
And who is responsible for making them aware?
No one except themselves. Why does there need to be some form of blame shift or hand holding? If you want to use a bike with no brakes on the road you may wish to use some common sense and check whether it is legal to do so, let alone consider whether it's a good idea.REALIST123 said:
Zigster said:
The Surveyor said:
It's not right to simply compare this incident with any motoring accident, the correct comparison would be a motoring accident where the pedestrian died and the car was found to be knowingly defective. i.e. a driver in a car with no brakes or with seriously bald tyres who kills a pedestrian would face a more serious punishment than one in a perfectly legal car, that driver being more negligent.
£180 fine seems to be the going rate for killing four cyclists.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5241798.stm
Hardly. Plenty of motorists have been jailed for causing the deaths of cyclists by dangerous driving.
"Diane Williams, prosecuting, told the court that a police investigation found that Mr Harris's defective tyres - the front pair and rear nearside - were not the cause of the crash."
I cant understand the discussion here. He rode a bike reasonable fast in a heavily pedestrian area with no brakes, it wasn't an exception either, he was irresponsible and asking for trouble.
Due to rise in popularity, the sooner a law for something like "injury or death by dangerous cycling" is brought in to deter some of the more risky practices by cyclists the better.
To clarify, I'm not anti cycling and ride 4-5 times / week but abide by the law in all cases as I also have a family I want to get home too..........
Due to rise in popularity, the sooner a law for something like "injury or death by dangerous cycling" is brought in to deter some of the more risky practices by cyclists the better.
To clarify, I'm not anti cycling and ride 4-5 times / week but abide by the law in all cases as I also have a family I want to get home too..........
steveL98 said:
1. Not jumping red lights
2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
I saw all of those except the box junction done by the same cyclist within 300 yards this morning.2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
He shouted at me because I had the temerity to stop and let someone out of a side road (stop start traffic)
Vaud said:
steveL98 said:
1. Not jumping red lights
2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
I saw all of those except the box junction done by the same cyclist within 300 yards this morning.2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
He shouted at me because I had the temerity to stop and let someone out of a side road (stop start traffic)
As a cyclist it's quite irritating when a car directly ahead of you stops to let someone out of a side road, because basically the car that stops is inviting the car in the side road to pull out into your path. It can create a big hazard for a cyclist, which is why I always check my mirrors before stopping...
The Surveyor said:
And whilst trying to not let the facts get in the way of a good debate:-
"Diane Williams, prosecuting, told the court that a police investigation found that Mr Harris's defective tyres - the front pair and rear nearside - were not the cause of the crash."
Without wishing to second guess any of the experts or the legal process in this case. I am happy to vouch for the greater control of decent winter tyres in ice cold conditions. Especially when driving to snow resorts in the Alps (eg.)"Diane Williams, prosecuting, told the court that a police investigation found that Mr Harris's defective tyres - the front pair and rear nearside - were not the cause of the crash."
Whether they make a difference on black ice I truly don't know but my guess is that once traction is lost, black ice always wins?? There is however a parallel with this case in that if he were driving slower, taking more care and was aware of his defective tyres, then the speed would have been lower etc etc.
I think that the cyclist/Alliston has done himself absolutely no favours and that is clearly demonstrated on this thread?
Tw4t.
Vaud said:
steveL98 said:
1. Not jumping red lights
2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
I saw all of those except the box junction done by the same cyclist within 300 yards this morning.2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
He shouted at me because I had the temerity to stop and let someone out of a side road (stop start traffic)
glasgow mega snake said:
OK, but does this also apply to all of the motorists who kill pedestrians every year? because we have a well-known problem in this country that drivers of motor vehicles who kill or injure people tend to be sentenced very lightly.
It depends on the circumstances doesn't it? A car is inherently more dangerous than a bicycle and as such a higher standard of care and responsibility would be expected... hence this is why we have driving tests and licences... in the same way that large vehicles are potentially more dangerous than smaller ones, hence special conditions for HGV drivers. This was a freak accident with an unusually bad outcome. I don't really believe in making an example of one person to signal that it is 'game over' for cyclists, as some others have suggested here. I think the anti cycling hate is getting in the way of some views here.
Anyway, like I said really, his biggest mistake is not having or at least feigning some remorse. Has his attitude been different after the accident I doubt he would be in this situation now.
Edited by VolvoT5 on Thursday 24th August 16:16
Zod said:
Vaud said:
steveL98 said:
1. Not jumping red lights
2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
I saw all of those except the box junction done by the same cyclist within 300 yards this morning.2. Not cycling on the rhd side of the road against the flow of traffic especially around islands and mini roundabouts
3. Not weaving though pedestrians in pedestrian areas only (especially where it says No Cycling)
4. Not trying to squeeze between vehicles when there's obviously no room.
5. Not bouncing onto the pavement to avoid traffic restrictions (get off and walk like I do)
6. Not carving diagonally across crossroads (the box junction rule where you don't enter unless your exit route is clear, unless your turning right, where you can enter and wait til its clear for you.)
6. Not shouting profanities when impeded in any of the above.
He shouted at me because I had the temerity to stop and let someone out of a side road (stop start traffic)
CaptainSlow said:
Eric Mc said:
And who is responsible for making them aware?
No one except themselves. Why does there need to be some form of blame shift or hand holding? If you want to use a bike with no brakes on the road you may wish to use some common sense and check whether it is legal to do so, let alone consider whether it's a good idea.Just because PHers can claim this doesn't mean ordinary mortals can.
Eric Mc said:
CaptainSlow said:
Eric Mc said:
And who is responsible for making them aware?
No one except themselves. Why does there need to be some form of blame shift or hand holding? If you want to use a bike with no brakes on the road you may wish to use some common sense and check whether it is legal to do so, let alone consider whether it's a good idea.Just because PHers can claim this doesn't mean ordinary mortals can.
eta
and I don't believe for one moment that Alliston didn't know about or at least suspect the legalities prohibiting the riding of a track bike on the road.
Edited by CaptainSlow on Thursday 24th August 16:30
WestyCarl said:
I cant understand the discussion here. He rode a bike reasonable fast in a heavily pedestrian area with no brakes, it wasn't an exception either, he was irresponsible and asking for trouble.
Due to rise in popularity, the sooner a law for something like "injury or death by dangerous cycling" is brought in to deter some of the more risky practices by cyclists the better.
To clarify, I'm not anti cycling and ride 4-5 times / week but abide by the law in all cases as I also have a family I want to get home too..........
To what extent do you think that any new law would "deter" such behaviour any more than it is deterred already by (i) the risk posed to third parties and (ii) the laws already in place in respect of cyclists? People who already don't care still won't care whatever new law is put in place.Due to rise in popularity, the sooner a law for something like "injury or death by dangerous cycling" is brought in to deter some of the more risky practices by cyclists the better.
To clarify, I'm not anti cycling and ride 4-5 times / week but abide by the law in all cases as I also have a family I want to get home too..........
As it stands on the charge for which he was convicted he can go to prison for up to two years. Do many drivers who kill get much more custodial time than that?
Edited by will_ on Thursday 24th August 16:33
evilmunkey said:
Having never before heard of Furious cycling charge before, what would be the penalty ? would it be similar to causing death due to dangerous driving ? i have seen many cyclists going the wrong way down one way streets and going through red lights etc. just wondering if the consequences are similar to motorists. Thinking it may be time to have some sort of reg plate system on bicycles nowadays. i dont have issues with folks who ride them as long as they follow the rules of the road but there does need to be some form of tracing cyclists who do not care about the rules of the road and knowingly ignore them.
Even with the "consequences" associated with being licenced and registered, motorists still break laws all the time. We have 1,000,000 uninsured cars on the road! So it's not really very effective.The issue of registration for cyclists has been debated many times and on its face appears attractive but in reality the arguments against are three-fold:
1. Cycling has positive externalities so, even accounting for the minority of poor riders, it is something which should be encouraged (the opposite of what would incur if you increase regulation/red tape);
2. Cyclists are involved in very few accidents - is there any basis for registering cyclists but not pedestrians (who are also capable of causing accidents)?
3. The greatest issue is one of enforcement and resources - for any registration system to be effective it would need to be enforced - and the police already fail properly to enforce all the motoring laws, before adding to their burden with a new set of cycling regulations.
I very, very much doubt that there will ever by a system of licencing or registering cyclists in this country.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff