wanted and furious driving(riding). Court case.

[Retroman]

Pica-Pica said:

..and green means go if the way is clear.

Indeed. And you don't step out into the road if it's not safe to do so, regardless of what colour the lights are.



So this lad, killed a woman by accident, whilst riding an unsafe bicycle and his sentence is still to be determined.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/driver-...

This guy ran into an elderly cyclist and knocked him off his bike on purpose after swerving towards the rest of the group which had children amongst it but he'll be out in 8 weeks and there are lots of drivers still defending his actions. Unreal

[will_]

BMWBen said:

Yes really... Either you have a point to make or you don't. If you have a point, make it. All you've done is state assertions, which admittedly is better than your previous post.

I wouldn't hold your breath....

[will_]

Retroman said:

Pica-Pica said:

..and green means go if the way is clear.

Indeed. And you don't step out into the road if it's not safe to do so, regardless of what colour the lights are.



So this lad, killed a woman by accident, whilst riding an unsafe bicycle and his sentence is still to be determined.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/driver-...

This guy ran into an elderly cyclist and knocked him off his bike on purpose after swerving towards the rest of the group which had children amongst it but he'll be out in 8 weeks and there are lots of drivers still defending his actions. Unreal

And you cannot ride or drive on the assumption that a pedestrian might step immediately into your path, or you wouldn't move at all.

The reason why it's perfectly acceptable for a driver to use their car as a weapon against cyclists is because they were committing the heinous crime of riding TWO ABREAST! They should all have been shot, obviously.

[anonymous-user]

Hey heebee,

A 73 year old sadly died yesterday on Oxford St in London after being struck by a cyclist, the cyclist stopped and had a legal bike and didn't blame the OAP.. no arrests made... no internet rebellion against the cyclist!!!!

Maybe now you can start to see why the imbecile that is the subject of this thread has annoyed people so much ... it's not, as you infer, because he's a cyclist, it's because he's a selfish tt.

Hope you can finally get this!!!

[heebeegeetee]

cb1965 said:

Hey heebee,

A 73 year old sadly died yesterday on Oxford St in London after being struck by a cyclist, the cyclist stopped and had a legal bike and didn't blame the OAP.. no arrests made... no internet rebellion against the cyclist!!!!

Maybe now you can start to see why the imbecile that is the subject of this thread has annoyed people so much ... it's not, as you infer, because he's a cyclist, it's because he's a selfish tt.

Hope you can finally get this!!!

It's you that's struggling mate. I've never inferred such a thing, and reference to another comment of yours, neither I nor anyone else has defended him.

However I don't think you'll get this.

[heebeegeetee]

cb1965 said:

Hey heebee,

A 73 year old sadly died yesterday on Oxford St in London after being struck by a cyclist, the cyclist stopped and had a legal bike and didn't blame the OAP.. no arrests made... no internet rebellion against the cyclist!!!!

Maybe now you can start to see why the imbecile that is the subject of this thread has annoyed people so much ... it's not, as you infer, because he's a cyclist, it's because he's a selfish tt.

Hope you can finally get this!!!

Cyclist was arrested https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/woman-dies-...

[giantdefy]

heebeegeetee said:

Cyclist was arrested https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/woman-dies-...

Fake News

The cyclist stopped at the scene and was arrested after police checks showed he was wanted in connection with an unrelated alleged offence involving criminal damage, Scotland Yard said

[mygoldfishbowl]

heebeegeetee said:

cb1965 said:

Hey heebee,

A 73 year old sadly died yesterday on Oxford St in London after being struck by a cyclist, the cyclist stopped and had a legal bike and didn't blame the OAP.. no arrests made... no internet rebellion against the cyclist!!!!

Maybe now you can start to see why the imbecile that is the subject of this thread has annoyed people so much ... it's not, as you infer, because he's a cyclist, it's because he's a selfish tt.

Hope you can finally get this!!!

Cyclist was arrested https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/woman-dies-...

your link said:

The cyclist stopped at the scene and was arrested after police checks showed he was wanted in connection with an unrelated alleged offence involving criminal damage, Scotland Yard said.

So not arrested for killing a pedestrian.

And...

your link said:

A video has since emerged of the cyclist arguing with officers as he is arrested for the alleged unrelated offence. He can be seen shouting to the officers trying to restrain him: “You’re breaking my arm, what are you holding me for? You are trying to make a show of me. That’s what police do.”

Just another cyclist with a bad case of victim.

[heebeegeetee]

giantdefy said:

Fake News

No, posted in haste, I had to zip off.

Just a quick reply to the chap who said no one was arrested.

[yellowjack]

mygoldfishbowl said:

Just another cyclist with a bad case of victim.

No. Yet another case of a nasty piece of work riding a bicycle. Just as there are many angry, aggressive, ignorant fkwits driving cars.

As a self-identifying "cyclist", I do not see myself as being in any way similar to that halfwit being arrested and shouting the odds. Nor do I identify with the many idiots I see riding bicycles in the pitch dark with no lights as the days get shorter.

But then again, as a self-identifying "driver" I see no similarities between me and some cretin driving around at 0600hrs on a September morning with all of their car lights off. Nor with morons who drive around with a single working headlight seemingly stuck on high beam. Nor the semingly inexhaustable supply of knuckle dragging twunts who'll happily glue themselves to the rear of the car in front of them and flow through a traffic calming pinch-point as though they were a single vehicle, despite signs telling them that I have priority from my direction. I don't identify with selfish, arrogant fktards who obstruct lanes by pulling out halfway across a road to turn right either, but that's apparently an acceptable "thing" in some circles now.

[BMWBen]

mygoldfishbowl said:

heebeegeetee said:

cb1965 said:

Hey heebee,

A 73 year old sadly died yesterday on Oxford St in London after being struck by a cyclist, the cyclist stopped and had a legal bike and didn't blame the OAP.. no arrests made... no internet rebellion against the cyclist!!!!

Maybe now you can start to see why the imbecile that is the subject of this thread has annoyed people so much ... it's not, as you infer, because he's a cyclist, it's because he's a selfish tt.

Hope you can finally get this!!!

Cyclist was arrested https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/woman-dies-...

your link said:

The cyclist stopped at the scene and was arrested after police checks showed he was wanted in connection with an unrelated alleged offence involving criminal damage, Scotland Yard said.

So not arrested for killing a pedestrian.

And...

your link said:

A video has since emerged of the cyclist arguing with officers as he is arrested for the alleged unrelated offence. He can be seen shouting to the officers trying to restrain him: “You’re breaking my arm, what are you holding me for? You are trying to make a show of me. That’s what police do.”

Just another cyclist with a bad case of victim.

Do you not see how your final comment somewhat undermines any point you may think you had about cyclists being treated equally with other road users? What has it got to do with the fact he was riding a bike beforehand? Nothing. Nothing at all. Yet because he was, you call him a "cyclist" and apply all your prejudices against that group to him, and use his behaviour to reinforce those prejudices to yourself.

You may benefit from taking a step back and having a think about this.

[Retroman]

Here's another i remember.
Rather than brake and slow down to allow a cyclist to turn right, the Peugeot driver decided to beep the horn and knock them off thier bike by driving into them.

Rather than help or check the cyclist on the ground is ok, they abuse him then decline to give him their details unless he waits there for them all to come back after the funeral.

Police decided to take little action. Caution for the woman, driver awareness course for the driver.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/...

Edited by Retroman on Thursday 14th September 13:24

[surveyor_101]

mygoldfishbowl said:

Just another cyclist with a bad case of victim.

Appears to be another upstanding chap just like the last who know doubt with his way with words has won many a charm contest.

Fed up with these chumps riding bikes like the only people who care are them!

[mygoldfishbowl]

BMWBen said:

Do you not see how your final comment somewhat undermines any point you may think you had about cyclists being treated equally with other road users? What has it got to do with the fact he was riding a bike beforehand? Nothing. Nothing at all. Yet because he was, you call him a "cyclist" and apply all your prejudices against that group to him, and use his behaviour to reinforce those prejudices to yourself.

You may benefit from taking a step back and having a think about this.

I called him a cyclist because he's a cyclist. If he was a motorist I would have called him a motorist. If he was in a space ship I would have called him an astronaut etc etc etc.

[BMWBen]

mygoldfishbowl said:

BMWBen said:

Do you not see how your final comment somewhat undermines any point you may think you had about cyclists being treated equally with other road users? What has it got to do with the fact he was riding a bike beforehand? Nothing. Nothing at all. Yet because he was, you call him a "cyclist" and apply all your prejudices against that group to him, and use his behaviour to reinforce those prejudices to yourself.

You may benefit from taking a step back and having a think about this.

I called him a cyclist because he's a cyclist. If he was a motorist I would have called him a motorist. If he was in a space ship I would have called him an astronaut etc etc etc.

Except that's not true is it. You didn't call him a cyclist because he was a person who happened to be riding a bike, you attached him to a group of people that you call "cyclists" and you assume behaviours and attributes about that group other than those related to physically riding a bike.

You said:
"Just another cyclist with a bad case of victim."

Which is not doing what you said above.


Anyway if we're going to be really clever and play silly games, he wasn't a cyclist when he was arrested, because he wasn't riding a bike and it wasn't related to him riding a bike

Edited by BMWBen on Thursday 14th September 15:43

[mygoldfishbowl]

Believe whatever you want. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

[BMWBen]

mygoldfishbowl said:

Believe whatever you want. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

So.. I was right then . Why don't you just come out and say it? If you're ashamed of it yet you choose to carry on thinking the way you do, then you're very strange. If you're not, why wouldn't you proudly proclaim it?

[heebeegeetee]

mygoldfishbowl said:

Believe whatever you want. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

From the moment he got off his bike, presumably at the point of the collision, and at the time of his arrest, he would have been a pedestrian.

You'd be applying your theory to a cockerel, I reckon.

[yellowjack]

mygoldfishbowl said:

Believe whatever you want. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

Does that make you a tt then? For the benefit of moderators, I'm not saying you are, but if it looks like a...

I'm a bike mad "MAMIL Lycra Lout" according to certain newspaper columnists, and because I identify myself as a 'Cyclist', it must be true, right?

Yet I see plenty of oafs on bikes. Just last night two of them riding down a shared use path, unlit, hands in pockets, wearing hoodies and perched on Sports Direct's finest Dunlop "full suspension mountain bikes". But they would no more describe themselves as "cyclists" than I would be able to lay claim to the title of Airline Pilot, and I see nothing in common between me and them apart from the fact that I breathe air and st through a hole in my arse. Both of which things I presume I also have in common with you?

I also define myself as a 'Driver'. I have a hatfull of licenses and specialist qualifications, and take an interest in driving to as high a standard as possible. Yet I encounter "people in cars" every single day. Most of them with no more interest in the act of driving than they have in practicing heart surgery as a sideline to a cleaning job.

YOU can believe whatever you want, but wishing something to be true doesn't make it so. Quit trying to define and label people so they can be neatly stacked in 'boxes' of similar people. Everyone is different, and acts/reacts differently in any given situation. And as you keep getting told, MANY people have multiple interests, so find themselves with a foot in both camps when it comes to the 'driving v cycling' debate. You won't catch me blindly defending idiots on bicycles, nor even fellow "cyclists", any more than I'll blindly defend some aggressive retard behaving dangerously in a car. With all these sweeping generalisations you keep throwing around, you really do begin to come across as a bit of a swivel-eyed lunatic. Step back, take a breath, and think it through, FFS...

[mygoldfishbowl]

heebeegeetee said:

From the moment he got off his bike, presumably at the point of the collision, and at the time of his arrest, he would have been a pedestrian.

You'd be applying your theory to a cockerel, I reckon.

A pedestrian knocked down a pedestrian will have to become the title for these threads in the future in your strange world.

As you're someone who constantly brings drivers into these threads.. If a driver knocks down a cyclist he's a pedestrian because he has exited his vehicle after the incident, and as you've just said, the unseated cyclist is now a pedestrian also? No, don't be ridiculous, at the time of the incident *one was an evil individual driving a vehicle probably drunk with no insurance on his way to a drugs deal & the other was innocently cycling along on their European style bicycle with their wicker basket full of cuddly toys for the orphaned children.*

• Does that suit you better BMWBen?