Bad crash at my local boy racer meet
Discussion
donkmeister said:
Victim blaming. Your response suggests that you (quite rightly) thought it wrong in the case I quoted there, so why do you think bystanders are responsible for getting runover?
Because they’re not merely bystanders, for one, not to my eyes at least.Bystanders suggests complete innocence, such as your “girl dressed in provocative clothing” specious comparison. A bystander in the traditional sense of the word just happens to be at an event, or in the area, not making it worse or less safe by their presence.
The spectators (not bystanders) in this case weren’t just minding their own business, going about their day, they were there specifically for this event, standing in non pedestrianised areas like on embankments, encouraging the antics, etc.
I’m not saying their share of blame for the outcome is 50/50 with the drivers, but I don’t feel that it is 0% either.
Edited by Durzel on Sunday 23 August 11:06
Durzel said:
Because they’re not merely bystanders, for one, not to my eyes at least.
Bystanders suggests complete innocence, such as your “girl dressed in provocative clothing” specious comparison. A bystander in the traditional sense of the word just happens to be at an event, or in the area, not making it worse or less safe by their presence.
The spectators (not bystanders) in this case weren’t just minding their own business, going about their day, they were there specifically for this event, standing in non pedestrianised areas like on embankments, encouraging the antics, etc.
I’m not saying their share of blame for the outcome is 50/50 with the drivers, but I don’t feel that it is 0% either.
Out of interest, what did you think about the darts comparison that was the point of the post you quoted? If you were playing darts and someone stood close to the board would you take your throw regardless?Bystanders suggests complete innocence, such as your “girl dressed in provocative clothing” specious comparison. A bystander in the traditional sense of the word just happens to be at an event, or in the area, not making it worse or less safe by their presence.
The spectators (not bystanders) in this case weren’t just minding their own business, going about their day, they were there specifically for this event, standing in non pedestrianised areas like on embankments, encouraging the antics, etc.
I’m not saying their share of blame for the outcome is 50/50 with the drivers, but I don’t feel that it is 0% either.
Edited by Durzel on Sunday 23 August 11:06
No, I wouldn’t take the throw. This sounds like some kind of gotcha question though.
Has there ever been an incidence of a crowd member standing in front of the board, much less having a dart thrown at them?
Notwithstanding that, darts spectators are sat well back from the playing area, so unless a player turns around and throws the dart into the crowd it’s never reasonably going to be a risk. Also darts matches are regulated, legitimate events covered by PLI etc.
Has there ever been an incidence of a crowd member standing in front of the board, much less having a dart thrown at them?
Notwithstanding that, darts spectators are sat well back from the playing area, so unless a player turns around and throws the dart into the crowd it’s never reasonably going to be a risk. Also darts matches are regulated, legitimate events covered by PLI etc.
Durzel said:
No, I wouldn’t take the throw. This sounds like some kind of gotcha question though.
Has there ever been an incidence of a crowd member standing in front of the board, much less having a dart thrown at them?
Notwithstanding that, darts spectators are sat well back from the playing area, so unless a player turns around and throws the dart into the crowd it’s never reasonably going to be a risk. Also darts matches are regulated, legitimate events covered by PLI etc.
I don't think a darts match is a very good comparison/analogy.Has there ever been an incidence of a crowd member standing in front of the board, much less having a dart thrown at them?
Notwithstanding that, darts spectators are sat well back from the playing area, so unless a player turns around and throws the dart into the crowd it’s never reasonably going to be a risk. Also darts matches are regulated, legitimate events covered by PLI etc.
donkmeister said:
Durzel said:
Because they’re not merely bystanders, for one, not to my eyes at least.
Bystanders suggests complete innocence, such as your “girl dressed in provocative clothing” specious comparison. A bystander in the traditional sense of the word just happens to be at an event, or in the area, not making it worse or less safe by their presence.
The spectators (not bystanders) in this case weren’t just minding their own business, going about their day, they were there specifically for this event, standing in non pedestrianised areas like on embankments, encouraging the antics, etc.
I’m not saying their share of blame for the outcome is 50/50 with the drivers, but I don’t feel that it is 0% either.
Out of interest, what did you think about the darts comparison that was the point of the post you quoted? If you were playing darts and someone stood close to the board would you take your throw regardless?Bystanders suggests complete innocence, such as your “girl dressed in provocative clothing” specious comparison. A bystander in the traditional sense of the word just happens to be at an event, or in the area, not making it worse or less safe by their presence.
The spectators (not bystanders) in this case weren’t just minding their own business, going about their day, they were there specifically for this event, standing in non pedestrianised areas like on embankments, encouraging the antics, etc.
I’m not saying their share of blame for the outcome is 50/50 with the drivers, but I don’t feel that it is 0% either.
Edited by Durzel on Sunday 23 August 11:06
Your dart analogy is a bit off. The two events are very different and I don’t think it works. In the darts game, your asking if the thrower should wait should an absent minded person at the same venue strays too close. You would, just out of civility. It’s arguably not even about the risk of harm but about it being unnecessary and rude to give them a scare etc.
Switch to this kind of ‘motorsport’ event and the scenario is actually very different. To be analogous to the darts game you’d be looking at a situation where Mrs Miggins was out walking her dog and you wait until she has crossed the road and is well away. But in reality you have hundreds of people specifically choosing to get as close as possible precisely to adopt risk in exchange for excitement. Just like the chaps who opt to stand on the outside of the apex at a rally stage. It’s more thrilling than standing on the inside or well back. The thrill stems entirely from the excitement that if it goes wrong then your head is going to be batted for a six.
Would you then argue that it’s different for these spectators because they are too thick to have understood the decisions they were making? Of course not. Firstly they aren’t stupid and secondly even the medically moronic retain the concept of personal safety in general.
Can you specifically blame the ‘crowd’? No. But they were an integral part of the whole event, were an integral part of the incident and specifically chose to do and be where they were, knowing the risks involved and so are not specifically innocent. They are a factor. It’s up to the courts to decide how much of a factor and whether that factor mitigates any part of the impending sentences that both drivers are likely to receive.
In my view every individual who attended in any form is guilty. It is just that a few are infinitely more so than the majority, whose guilt is practically negligible.
Drumroll said:
carl_w said:
Of course for an MSA-organized event you have to sign the "motorsport is dangerous" disclaimer even as a spectator.
When do spectators actually sign a disclaimer? You go at your own risk.DonkeyApple said:
donkmeister said:
Durzel said:
Because they’re not merely bystanders, for one, not to my eyes at least.
Bystanders suggests complete innocence, such as your “girl dressed in provocative clothing” specious comparison. A bystander in the traditional sense of the word just happens to be at an event, or in the area, not making it worse or less safe by their presence.
The spectators (not bystanders) in this case weren’t just minding their own business, going about their day, they were there specifically for this event, standing in non pedestrianised areas like on embankments, encouraging the antics, etc.
I’m not saying their share of blame for the outcome is 50/50 with the drivers, but I don’t feel that it is 0% either.
Out of interest, what did you think about the darts comparison that was the point of the post you quoted? If you were playing darts and someone stood close to the board would you take your throw regardless?Bystanders suggests complete innocence, such as your “girl dressed in provocative clothing” specious comparison. A bystander in the traditional sense of the word just happens to be at an event, or in the area, not making it worse or less safe by their presence.
The spectators (not bystanders) in this case weren’t just minding their own business, going about their day, they were there specifically for this event, standing in non pedestrianised areas like on embankments, encouraging the antics, etc.
I’m not saying their share of blame for the outcome is 50/50 with the drivers, but I don’t feel that it is 0% either.
Edited by Durzel on Sunday 23 August 11:06
Your dart analogy is a bit off. The two events are very different and I don’t think it works. In the darts game, your asking if the thrower should wait should an absent minded person at the same venue strays too close. You would, just out of civility. It’s arguably not even about the risk of harm but about it being unnecessary and rude to give them a scare etc.
Switch to this kind of ‘motorsport’ event and the scenario is actually very different. To be analogous to the darts game you’d be looking at a situation where Mrs Miggins was out walking her dog and you wait until she has crossed the road and is well away. But in reality you have hundreds of people specifically choosing to get as close as possible precisely to adopt risk in exchange for excitement. Just like the chaps who opt to stand on the outside of the apex at a rally stage. It’s more thrilling than standing on the inside or well back. The thrill stems entirely from the excitement that if it goes wrong then your head is going to be batted for a six.
Would you then argue that it’s different for these spectators because they are too thick to have understood the decisions they were making? Of course not. Firstly they aren’t stupid and secondly even the medically moronic retain the concept of personal safety in general.
Can you specifically blame the ‘crowd’? No. But they were an integral part of the whole event, were an integral part of the incident and specifically chose to do and be where they were, knowing the risks involved and so are not specifically innocent. They are a factor. It’s up to the courts to decide how much of a factor and whether that factor mitigates any part of the impending sentences that both drivers are likely to receive.
In my view every individual who attended in any form is guilty. It is just that a few are infinitely more so than the majority, whose guilt is practically negligible.
Darts and speeding are both activities that are almost always carried out without incident, but they carry a risk with low probability and high impact that is easily mitigated by the actions of the participant. Non-participants are outside the control of the participant, and it is therefore down to the participant to minimise that risk.
When you throw a dart, you intend to throw it at the dartboard and you hit the dartboard each and every time (Cf. you can drive your car for many many thousands of miles without crashing into anyone, and could prat about at cruises for years without hitting anyone). If someone is stood slightly off to the side of the dartboard, the risk that you will hit them seems incredibly low because you have never missed the dartboard before (Cf. If people are stood slightly off to the side of the road, the probability that you will hit them seems incredibly low because you have never mounted a kerb before, even when pratting about). However... If something happens that results in your throw being off (perhaps someone trips and falls into you. Perhaps you have a funny turn, perhaps you're distracted. So many possibilities), you might end up throwing your dart off to the side and hitting someone (Cf. what happened in Stevenage on that night). Now... that person went to a pub where they knew people would be playing darts. They knew they were stood next to a dartboard with a game in progress. Does that make them culpable if an unlikely accident results in them getting hit by a dart? My view is that it's a stupid place to stand, but the dart thrower shouldn't have thrown the dart. To compare it with this case though, the equivalent dart thrower would have blindfolded himself and lobbed a handful of darts in the vague direction of the board.
Likewise, if you attend a cruise and there's people stood about, if you are driving close to them you don't muck about. If you do, you're responsible for the outcome.
Just a reminder that the Nissan that crashed was doing about 60-70mph up that hill, knowing full well there were peds either side. There's also video that shows other cars going through at much less than the 40mph speed limit because of those peds either side. So that throws out the rally analogy because at a rally you EXPECT people to be blasting through with a risk of coming off. Just because one bell-end decides to show off should not mean that those caught out should be given even 0.000000001% of the blame.
WJNB said:
Am waiting for it to happen outside Goodwood after a Breakfast meet & Wilton House after a Wake-Up meet.
Where the hell was Plod? At the nearest burger van or hassling a black guy in a Mercedes no doubt.
One or two idiots really can spoil it for everyone... Unlikely for all of Goodwood to get shutdown forever due to the whole business model being based around car events, but I'm aware of an event at an MOD site getting permanently shutdown because of dWhere the hell was Plod? At the nearest burger van or hassling a black guy in a Mercedes no doubt.
heads dheading. Terminal Velocity used to run events on the runway at RAF Woodbridge until some bell-ends, not content with being able to drive as fast as they liked all day long up a 2 mile runway decided that they would race on the roads after leaving the event. An innocent motorist was forced off the road, and as a result the organiser (who had nothing to do with the racing) was banned from doing any future events at any MOD sites. In short, the MOD felt that if these events attracted that element then they couldn't run the risk of being seen to be complicit if someone ended up injured or worse.
fatboy18 said:
Drumroll said:
carl_w said:
Of course for an MSA-organized event you have to sign the "motorsport is dangerous" disclaimer even as a spectator.
When do spectators actually sign a disclaimer? You go at your own risk.carl_w said:
fatboy18 said:
Drumroll said:
carl_w said:
Of course for an MSA-organized event you have to sign the "motorsport is dangerous" disclaimer even as a spectator.
When do spectators actually sign a disclaimer? You go at your own risk.Drumroll said:
carl_w said:
fatboy18 said:
Drumroll said:
carl_w said:
Of course for an MSA-organized event you have to sign the "motorsport is dangerous" disclaimer even as a spectator.
When do spectators actually sign a disclaimer? You go at your own risk.Starfighter said:
I would be concerned that the legal culpability for the driving offences could be mitigated by the actions of the spectators. The driver is totally responsible for what they do with the vehicle.
At the end of the day, surely the fact that the accident happened on a public road, with those laws applying, rather than in the private car park at an organised event means that it's down to the drivers not the spectators - you could have a 1000 people standing along that road at any normal time and someone sticking to the 40MPH limit wouldn't injure anyone in all probability?It’s like the pathetic monkeys that spend their time at Le Mans standing by a roundabout shouting ‘spin it!’ It is incredulous that at the turn of the century people began to travel 500+ miles to stand at a roundabout trying to spew out some words while salivating. But even more incredulous were the number of drivers who followed the orders of the crowd. So endemic became these Magaluf Muppets that many gave up on the event and switched to the Classic to swerve that whole abomination.
Over the years I have ended up at several meets where the exit was a fiasco of priapismic teenage spods and very odd looking fully grown men slobbering at the exit while circus chimps performed for them, leaving at speed with heavily compromised views because of the weirdos loitering.
And the cultural and moral wasteland of Kensington & Chelsea is already almost unbearable but to see grown men spinning up cars for kids in the vain hope of being on YoiTube is just truly ghastly. And if you drive something through there you get these fools leaping out in front of you or actually standing, blocking the side road you’re turning into.
I made the mistake of being at Blenheim Palace with the children when that Salon Prive rubbish was going on and it was the usual tools in their HMO wedding cars who were piling down the exit drive at high speed past children in pushchairs. It beggared belief.
There is not a lot you can do regarding the more public events but events such as the one at the RAF base could probably be easily dealt with by taking a £500 deposit from each driver that is either returned/not drawn or the net handed to the person who supplies the video evidence of them being a selfish, immature dick and risking ruining the entire event for everyone else in the vicinity of the venue.
Nothing works better than money to snap people into line and help them behave in public as expected.
All a bit boring but if official meets are at risk because of these childlike, selfish little schmucks then the only solution is to specifically target them and their credit limits to help them to behave properly.
Over the years I have ended up at several meets where the exit was a fiasco of priapismic teenage spods and very odd looking fully grown men slobbering at the exit while circus chimps performed for them, leaving at speed with heavily compromised views because of the weirdos loitering.
And the cultural and moral wasteland of Kensington & Chelsea is already almost unbearable but to see grown men spinning up cars for kids in the vain hope of being on YoiTube is just truly ghastly. And if you drive something through there you get these fools leaping out in front of you or actually standing, blocking the side road you’re turning into.
I made the mistake of being at Blenheim Palace with the children when that Salon Prive rubbish was going on and it was the usual tools in their HMO wedding cars who were piling down the exit drive at high speed past children in pushchairs. It beggared belief.
There is not a lot you can do regarding the more public events but events such as the one at the RAF base could probably be easily dealt with by taking a £500 deposit from each driver that is either returned/not drawn or the net handed to the person who supplies the video evidence of them being a selfish, immature dick and risking ruining the entire event for everyone else in the vicinity of the venue.
Nothing works better than money to snap people into line and help them behave in public as expected.
All a bit boring but if official meets are at risk because of these childlike, selfish little schmucks then the only solution is to specifically target them and their credit limits to help them to behave properly.
DonkeyApple said:
It’s like the pathetic monkeys that spend their time at Le Mans standing by a roundabout shouting ‘spin it!’ It is incredulous that at the turn of the century people began to travel 500+ miles to stand at a roundabout trying to spew out some words while salivating. But even more incredulous were the number of drivers who followed the orders of the crowd. So endemic became these Magaluf Muppets that many gave up on the event and switched to the Classic to swerve that whole abomination.
Over the years I have ended up at several meets where the exit was a fiasco of priapismic teenage spods and very odd looking fully grown men slobbering at the exit while circus chimps performed for them, leaving at speed with heavily compromised views because of the weirdos loitering.
And the cultural and moral wasteland of Kensington & Chelsea is already almost unbearable but to see grown men spinning up cars for kids in the vain hope of being on YoiTube is just truly ghastly. And if you drive something through there you get these fools leaping out in front of you or actually standing, blocking the side road you’re turning into.
I made the mistake of being at Blenheim Palace with the children when that Salon Prive rubbish was going on and it was the usual tools in their HMO wedding cars who were piling down the exit drive at high speed past children in pushchairs. It beggared belief.
There is not a lot you can do regarding the more public events but events such as the one at the RAF base could probably be easily dealt with by taking a £500 deposit from each driver that is either returned/not drawn or the net handed to the person who supplies the video evidence of them being a selfish, immature dick and risking ruining the entire event for everyone else in the vicinity of the venue.
Nothing works better than money to snap people into line and help them behave in public as expected.
All a bit boring but if official meets are at risk because of these childlike, selfish little schmucks then the only solution is to specifically target them and their credit limits to help them to behave properly.
First thing that sprang to mind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03wOaO3CkasOver the years I have ended up at several meets where the exit was a fiasco of priapismic teenage spods and very odd looking fully grown men slobbering at the exit while circus chimps performed for them, leaving at speed with heavily compromised views because of the weirdos loitering.
And the cultural and moral wasteland of Kensington & Chelsea is already almost unbearable but to see grown men spinning up cars for kids in the vain hope of being on YoiTube is just truly ghastly. And if you drive something through there you get these fools leaping out in front of you or actually standing, blocking the side road you’re turning into.
I made the mistake of being at Blenheim Palace with the children when that Salon Prive rubbish was going on and it was the usual tools in their HMO wedding cars who were piling down the exit drive at high speed past children in pushchairs. It beggared belief.
There is not a lot you can do regarding the more public events but events such as the one at the RAF base could probably be easily dealt with by taking a £500 deposit from each driver that is either returned/not drawn or the net handed to the person who supplies the video evidence of them being a selfish, immature dick and risking ruining the entire event for everyone else in the vicinity of the venue.
Nothing works better than money to snap people into line and help them behave in public as expected.
All a bit boring but if official meets are at risk because of these childlike, selfish little schmucks then the only solution is to specifically target them and their credit limits to help them to behave properly.
Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLLqcwESjLE
Which came first, the bellend drivers or the crowd?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff