That's it, I am no longer defending Cyclists!
Discussion
yonex said:
S1KRR said:
He's clearly more forgiving than I would be in that situation.
I'd be eating his f
king eyes!
It’s ok, the lorry driver cried in court (but kept his lincence) I'd be eating his f
king eyes! Schmed said:
By why was the retard cycling up the inside of a left turning truck? Forgiving the driver would be like forgiving gravity if you jump off a building.
the press said:
Philpott, who was heading for the M62 after making a delivery in Sutton Fields, was switching lanes to turn left onto Ferensway when he collided with Mr Peach
You really aren't the brightest little bulb are you?A dark parody account on Twitter comments on such cases
https://twitter.com/CrownServce/status/10956171619...
https://twitter.com/CrownServce/status/10956171619...
yonex said:
Schmed said:
By why was the retard cycling up the inside of a left turning truck? Forgiving the driver would be like forgiving gravity if you jump off a building.
the press said:
Philpott, who was heading for the M62 after making a delivery in Sutton Fields, was switching lanes to turn left onto Ferensway when he collided with Mr Peach
You really aren't the brightest little bulb are you?If I’m overtaking a LHD truck on the motorway (in a car) I’m going to leave a lot of room because I know he can’t see much of (his) offside. Conversely cutting up the inside of an RHD truck is not generally a good idea either, as evidenced here and time and time again on the roads with these cycling lemmings.
But hell, you are so biased towards the cycling mafia the cyclist will always be the victim regardless.
Schmed said:
By the sounds of it, neither is he.
If I’m overtaking a LHD truck on the motorway (in a car) I’m going to leave a lot of room because I know he can’t see much of (his) offside. Conversely cutting up the inside of an RHD truck is not generally a good idea either, as evidenced here and time and time again on the roads with these cycling lemmings.
But hell, you are so biased towards the cycling mafia the cyclist will always be the victim regardless.
Bloody hell.If I’m overtaking a LHD truck on the motorway (in a car) I’m going to leave a lot of room because I know he can’t see much of (his) offside. Conversely cutting up the inside of an RHD truck is not generally a good idea either, as evidenced here and time and time again on the roads with these cycling lemmings.
But hell, you are so biased towards the cycling mafia the cyclist will always be the victim regardless.
The driver has admitted that he drove carelessly.
The report says" Philpott, who was heading for the M62 after making a delivery in Sutton Fields, was switching lanes to turn left onto Ferensway when he collided with Mr Peach, an experienced cyclist who was wearing high visibility clothes and equipment, and had lights on his bike and helmet."
and
"Another witness said they saw the lorry "suddenly changing lanes", did not see it indicate, and after observing the aftermath of the crash heard Philpott repeatedly saying "I didn't see him".
And yet you deduce that the cyclist is still at fault.
I find it nothing short of phenomenal how the the cyclist, but only ever the cyclist, is *always* to blame in collisions.
I never see that the drivers are always to blame for their death and injury. I never see that motorcyclists are always to blame for their far higher death rate. Yet time and again I see that the cyclist is *always* to blame, somehow.
I'm not a cyclist and I've been a driver for 40 years, I have absolutely no explanation for barking comments like yours, I see so may barking comments and it's frightening that people like you drive.
There isn't one word in the report that even remotely suggests the cyclist was undertaking the truck - and you accuse others of bias!
My jaw remains agape at the things drivers say.
Schmed said:
But hell, you are so biased towards the cycling mafia the cyclist will always be the victim regardless.
You fking plumb."Nobody's saying you were not careful on the day in question," the judge said [to the cyclist].
Other than you Schmed - because you know so much more about the case.
If you bothered to read you would have noticed that the cyclist carried on in his lane (1) up next to a STATIONARY lorry in lane 2.
He wasn't "cutting up the inside".
heebeegeetee said:
Bloody hell.
The driver has admitted that he drove carelessly.
The report says" Philpott, who was heading for the M62 after making a delivery in Sutton Fields, was switching lanes to turn left onto Ferensway when he collided with Mr Peach, an experienced cyclist who was wearing high visibility clothes and equipment, and had lights on his bike and helmet."
and
"Another witness said they saw the lorry "suddenly changing lanes", did not see it indicate, and after observing the aftermath of the crash heard Philpott repeatedly saying "I didn't see him".
And yet you deduce that the cyclist is still at fault.
I find it nothing short of phenomenal how the the cyclist, but only ever the cyclist, is *always* to blame in collisions.
I never see that the drivers are always to blame for their death and injury. I never see that motorcyclists are always to blame for their far higher death rate. Yet time and again I see that the cyclist is *always* to blame, somehow.
I'm not a cyclist and I've been a driver for 40 years, I have absolutely no explanation for barking comments like yours, I see so may barking comments and it's frightening that people like you drive.
There isn't one word in the report that even remotely suggests the cyclist was undertaking the truck - and you accuse others of bias!
My jaw remains agape at the things drivers say.
Unfortunately there are people like Schmed that hate cyclists so much that they are blind to the reality, despite the driver admitting liability and the cyclist holding no grudge there are those that always know better.The driver has admitted that he drove carelessly.
The report says" Philpott, who was heading for the M62 after making a delivery in Sutton Fields, was switching lanes to turn left onto Ferensway when he collided with Mr Peach, an experienced cyclist who was wearing high visibility clothes and equipment, and had lights on his bike and helmet."
and
"Another witness said they saw the lorry "suddenly changing lanes", did not see it indicate, and after observing the aftermath of the crash heard Philpott repeatedly saying "I didn't see him".
And yet you deduce that the cyclist is still at fault.
I find it nothing short of phenomenal how the the cyclist, but only ever the cyclist, is *always* to blame in collisions.
I never see that the drivers are always to blame for their death and injury. I never see that motorcyclists are always to blame for their far higher death rate. Yet time and again I see that the cyclist is *always* to blame, somehow.
I'm not a cyclist and I've been a driver for 40 years, I have absolutely no explanation for barking comments like yours, I see so may barking comments and it's frightening that people like you drive.
There isn't one word in the report that even remotely suggests the cyclist was undertaking the truck - and you accuse others of bias!
My jaw remains agape at the things drivers say.
Just put it down to an irrational individual with a fear of something they know nothing about.
yonex said:
Unfortunately there are people like Schmed that hate cyclists so much that they are blind to the reality, despite the driver admitting liability and the cyclist holding no grudge there are those that always know better.
Just put it down to an irrational individual with a fear of something they know nothing about.
I know, but it's so widespread, especially here in the UK, for some reason. As a driver I feel completely at a loss to explain why there is so much utterly barking comments from driver. It's mental.Just put it down to an irrational individual with a fear of something they know nothing about.
""He was there to be seen in high visibility equipment and lights, and had you been paying proper attention you would have seen him, should have seen him, and therefore before you manoeuvred into the left hand lane you would have ensured he was not in the way of your lorry - that's your failing.""
Schmed said:
By the sounds of it, neither is he.
If I’m overtaking a LHD truck on the motorway (in a car) I’m going to leave a lot of room because I know he can’t see much of (his) offside. Conversely cutting up the inside of an RHD truck is not generally a good idea either, as evidenced here and time and time again on the roads with these cycling lemmings.
But hell, you are so biased towards the cycling mafia the cyclist will always be the victim regardless.
If I’m overtaking a LHD truck on the motorway (in a car) I’m going to leave a lot of room because I know he can’t see much of (his) offside. Conversely cutting up the inside of an RHD truck is not generally a good idea either, as evidenced here and time and time again on the roads with these cycling lemmings.
But hell, you are so biased towards the cycling mafia the cyclist will always be the victim regardless.
S1KRR said:
I've done this race several times btw and there are a lot of more "serious" competitors though. So I've seen several powerful director types riding like dicks.
What is this “Powerful director” thing I keep seeing on Pistonheads, can anyone enlighten me as to the source of the joke? I understand the image it portrays, but it seems unique to PHs, does it relate to something in particular?As someone who has cycled for many years and only just became a driver ... the attitude of some (seemingly experienced) drivers really does worry me.
I've lost count of the amount of times on two wheels that a driver has cut me up or failed to see me because they didn't check mirrors or blind-spots etc. When they realise it's a cyclist they almost ploughed into, many of them will slow alongside and shout abuse (further endangering themselves, passengers and other road-users since they're now concentrating on hurling abuse and not the road/roundabout etc that they were previously not paying enough attention to).
Cyclists and drivers have an equal right to be on the road. There are good drivers and bad drivers, good cyclists and bad cyclists. Good people and good road-users still make mistakes. Really ... is it so hard to respect all road users equally, and hell, maybe taking a *little* more care for the less protected ones? Or maybe not just *assume* all cyclists run red lights and hate drivers. Some of us are both drivers and cyclists. Maybe a few hours in the city on two wheels might be character-building for some who can only see one side of this debate.
Honestly if someone asked me if they should commute-cycle in cities (London specifically), I'd tell them to have a long hard think about it first.
I've lost count of the amount of times on two wheels that a driver has cut me up or failed to see me because they didn't check mirrors or blind-spots etc. When they realise it's a cyclist they almost ploughed into, many of them will slow alongside and shout abuse (further endangering themselves, passengers and other road-users since they're now concentrating on hurling abuse and not the road/roundabout etc that they were previously not paying enough attention to).
Cyclists and drivers have an equal right to be on the road. There are good drivers and bad drivers, good cyclists and bad cyclists. Good people and good road-users still make mistakes. Really ... is it so hard to respect all road users equally, and hell, maybe taking a *little* more care for the less protected ones? Or maybe not just *assume* all cyclists run red lights and hate drivers. Some of us are both drivers and cyclists. Maybe a few hours in the city on two wheels might be character-building for some who can only see one side of this debate.
Honestly if someone asked me if they should commute-cycle in cities (London specifically), I'd tell them to have a long hard think about it first.
Romcom said:
S1KRR said:
I've done this race several times btw and there are a lot of more "serious" competitors though. So I've seen several powerful director types riding like dicks.
What is this “Powerful director” thing I keep seeing on Pistonheads, can anyone enlighten me as to the source of the joke? I understand the image it portrays, but it seems unique to PHs, does it relate to something in particular?Amazing the lack of self preservation some of these cyclists have.
"He was in his lane, I was in my lane" is a case in point. I've lost track of the number of idiots (drivers) who've nearly sideswiped me due to not looking when changing lanes or whatever. It's painful enough in a car having to arrange a new side panel, but on a bike ? It's going to hurt. You must be mad.
"He was in his lane, I was in my lane" is a case in point. I've lost track of the number of idiots (drivers) who've nearly sideswiped me due to not looking when changing lanes or whatever. It's painful enough in a car having to arrange a new side panel, but on a bike ? It's going to hurt. You must be mad.
Lexington59 said:
Amazing the lack of self preservation some of these cyclists have.
"He was in his lane, I was in my lane" is a case in point. I've lost track of the number of idiots (drivers) who've nearly sideswiped me due to not looking when changing lanes or whatever. It's painful enough in a car having to arrange a new side panel, but on a bike ? It's going to hurt. You must be mad.
Mad? Mad how? For not being in a car? Or are you trying to suggest that cyclist should never be alongside a car in their own lane lest the motorist decides to change lanes without looking. "He was in his lane, I was in my lane" is a case in point. I've lost track of the number of idiots (drivers) who've nearly sideswiped me due to not looking when changing lanes or whatever. It's painful enough in a car having to arrange a new side panel, but on a bike ? It's going to hurt. You must be mad.
Because the lack of awareness on the cyclist’s part far outweighs the lack of awareness on the motorist’s part obviously.
idiotgap said:
Aha! Excellent. Many thanksGassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff