Cyclists win police court battle!



ian henden wrote:

> "John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
>
> > Or this one
> > http://freespace.virgin.net/jpb.design/drivingonpavemen.html
> >
> > John B
> >
> Careful, John.... whilst I don't condone driving on pavements, one can CROSS
> a pavement to gain access to off-road areas, (otherwise I couldn't park in
> my drive!!)

i suspect you may have a dropped kerb, which will have the approprate
permissions, as would other premises where forecourt parking is permitted
The example shown does not.
This prat bounced his vehicle up the kerb and drove over the pavement, then
obstructed part of it.

Of course in NugentWorld this never happens.

John B
 
Brimstone wrote:

> JNugent said:
>>Brimstone wrote:
>>>JNugent said:

>>>>You don't "suspect" any of that at all. You know what everyone knows
>>>>- the footway cyclists are just bloody selfish - happy to pose a
>>>>danger to others.

>>>So, no different to most car drivers then?

>>Do very many car drivers routinely make their way on the footway on
>>your planet?

> Actions might be different, attitudes are the same, as in "just bloody
> selfish - happy to pose a danger to others".

I don't know - and neither do you - that any car drivers are happy to pose
a danger to others in the sense that they deliberately and routinely
arrogate (as a route) the space reserved (to a nicety) for pedestrian use.
But many cyclists do so every time they travel on their bikes, don't they?
Not all do (heck, a few even stop at red traffic lights), but a very
significant proportion - probably even a majority of those in urban areas.
 
John B wrote:
>
> ian henden wrote:
>
>
>>"John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>Or this one
>>>http://freespace.virgin.net/jpb.design/drivingonpavemen.html
>>>
>>>John B
>>>
>>
>>Careful, John.... whilst I don't condone driving on pavements, one can CROSS
>>a pavement to gain access to off-road areas, (otherwise I couldn't park in
>>my drive!!)
>
>
> i suspect you may have a dropped kerb, which will have the approprate
> permissions, as would other premises where forecourt parking is permitted
> The example shown does not.
> This prat bounced his vehicle up the kerb and drove over the pavement, then
> obstructed part of it.
>
> Of course in NugentWorld this never happens.

Not sure where that is - presumably it's on Brimstone's planet (where he
also claims to see drivers driving along the footway - in the manner of
cyclists).

Of course, driving over a normal (raised) kerb is not necessarily unlawful,
as long as it is done to gain access to land within a certain (limited)
distance of the highway. In fact, I bet you already know that, even though
you apparently choose to ignore it in your writings above.

But you are right about vehicles overhanging the footway - they shouldn't
do that, even where crossing the footway is allowed. Still less should
anyone make their way in or on a vehicle along the length of the footway as
opposed to across its width, as I'm sure you will the first to agree.
 
In news:[email protected],
JNugent said:
> Brimstone wrote:
>
>> JNugent said:
>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>> JNugent said:
>
>>>>> You don't "suspect" any of that at all. You know what everyone
>>>>> knows - the footway cyclists are just bloody selfish - happy to
>>>>> pose a danger to others.
>
>>>> So, no different to most car drivers then?
>
>>> Do very many car drivers routinely make their way on the footway on
>>> your planet?
>
>> Actions might be different, attitudes are the same, as in "just
>> bloody selfish - happy to pose a danger to others".
>
> I don't know - and neither do you - that any car drivers are happy to
> pose a danger to others in the sense that they deliberately and
> routinely arrogate (as a route) the space reserved (to a nicety) for
> pedestrian use. But many cyclists do so every time they travel on
> their bikes, don't they? Not all do (heck, a few even stop at red
> traffic lights), but a very significant proportion - probably even a
> majority of those in urban areas.

The actions people take are governed by their circumstances. Through
arrogance, laziness or simple incompetence many car drivers put others in
danger. The particular surface, and its designated purpose, they drive upon
is irrelevant.
 
In news:[email protected],
JNugent said:

> Not sure where that is - presumably it's on Brimstone's planet (where
> he also claims to see drivers driving along the footway - in the
> manner of cyclists).

Nugent World is nowhere near mine, in any way shape or form. NW is otherwise
known as Harddonebyscouser.
 
Brimstone wrote:

> JNugent said:
>>Brimstone wrote:
>>>JNugent said:
>>>>Brimstone wrote:
>>>>>JNugent said:

>>>>>>You don't "suspect" any of that at all. You know what everyone
>>>>>>knows - the footway cyclists are just bloody selfish - happy to
>>>>>>pose a danger to others.

>>>>>So, no different to most car drivers then?

>>>>Do very many car drivers routinely make their way on the footway on
>>>>your planet?

>>>Actions might be different, attitudes are the same, as in "just
>>>bloody selfish - happy to pose a danger to others".

>>I don't know - and neither do you - that any car drivers are happy to
>>pose a danger to others in the sense that they deliberately and
>>routinely arrogate (as a route) the space reserved (to a nicety) for
>>pedestrian use. But many cyclists do so every time they travel on
>>their bikes, don't they? Not all do (heck, a few even stop at red
>>traffic lights), but a very significant proportion - probably even a
>>majority of those in urban areas.

> The actions people take are governed by their circumstances. Through
> arrogance, laziness or simple incompetence many car drivers put others in
> danger. The particular surface, and its designated purpose, they drive upon
> is irrelevant.

Is it?

I can't remember ever encountering a car coming at me along the footway.
Not once, not ever.

But arrogant, lazy, incompetent (your terms - I hope you don't mind if I
borrow them) bike-riders present my family and me with that threat more or
less every day, in suburban streets as well as in more downtown locations -
even in fully pedestrianised areas.

It's a funny old world, Planet Earth, isn't it? It must be different where
you are for you not to have noticed these basic facts for yourself.
 
In news:[email protected],
JNugent said:
> Brimstone wrote:
>
>> JNugent said:
>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>> JNugent said:
>>>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>>>> JNugent said:
>
>>>>>>> You don't "suspect" any of that at all. You know what everyone
>>>>>>> knows - the footway cyclists are just bloody selfish - happy to
>>>>>>> pose a danger to others.
>
>>>>>> So, no different to most car drivers then?
>
>>>>> Do very many car drivers routinely make their way on the footway
>>>>> on your planet?
>
>>>> Actions might be different, attitudes are the same, as in "just
>>>> bloody selfish - happy to pose a danger to others".
>
>>> I don't know - and neither do you - that any car drivers are happy
>>> to pose a danger to others in the sense that they deliberately and
>>> routinely arrogate (as a route) the space reserved (to a nicety) for
>>> pedestrian use. But many cyclists do so every time they travel on
>>> their bikes, don't they? Not all do (heck, a few even stop at red
>>> traffic lights), but a very significant proportion - probably even a
>>> majority of those in urban areas.
>
>> The actions people take are governed by their circumstances. Through
>> arrogance, laziness or simple incompetence many car drivers put
>> others in danger. The particular surface, and its designated
>> purpose, they drive upon is irrelevant.
>
> Is it?
>
> I can't remember ever encountering a car coming at me along the
> footway. Not once, not ever.
>
> But arrogant, lazy, incompetent (your terms - I hope you don't mind
> if I borrow them) bike-riders present my family and me with that
> threat more or less every day, in suburban streets as well as in more
> downtown locations - even in fully pedestrianised areas.
>
> It's a funny old world, Planet Earth, isn't it? It must be different
> where you are for you not to have noticed these basic facts for
> yourself.

Personally I don't see such things, but I'm willing to accept that they
happen. However, in your haste to condemn one section of society you're
overlooking the fact that people in other sections of society behave with
similar disregard for the welfare of others.

As is common, you're getting hung up on the detail rather than addressing
the general issue which is that, in the main, most people don't give a toss
about anyone else.

I'd be interested to learn exactly what threat bike-riders present to you
and your family.
 
On 2006-07-01, Brimstone <[email protected]> wrote:
> In news:[email protected],
> JNugent said:
>
>> You don't "suspect" any of that at all. You know what everyone knows
>> - the footway cyclists are just bloody selfish - happy to pose a
>> danger to others.
>
> So, no different to most car drivers then?

Well, the comparison is fallacious, but no.


--
"Other people are not your property."
[email me at huge [at] huge [dot] org [dot] uk]
 
On 2006-07-01, Brimstone <[email protected]> wrote:
>

> Personally I don't see such things, but I'm willing to accept that they
> happen. However, in your haste to condemn one section of society you're
> overlooking the fact that people in other sections of society behave with
> similar disregard for the welfare of others.

So what? That is of no relevance whatsoever, although it is a favourite
logical fallacy of cyclists.



--
"Other people are not your property."
[email me at huge [at] huge [dot] org [dot] uk]
 
In article <[email protected]>, Tom Crispin
says...
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 21:19:26 +0100, Conor <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >> You claim a lack of a licence is the reason why some cyclists ride
> >> through red lights or use the pavements.
> >>
> >I'm saying the lack of a registration plate and registration system
> >means they're less likely to get caught.
>
> OK. So you explain the small number of traffic light and pavment
> abuses by cyclists as a lack of a licence and registration system.
>
It's not small by any stretch of the imagination. Yes the prosecution
figures are small but only for the reasons I highlighted.

> That still doesn't explain motor vehicle drivers' far more frequent
> law breaking and parking regulations' infringments. How do you
> explain it?

Well as you're obviously an idiot try:

1) 26 million cars.
2) 12,000 miles per annum average per vehicle.
3) Registration system making automated policing easy (Speed Cameras,
ANPR).


--
Conor
Sig under construction. Please check back when Duke Nukem Forever ships
and/or Windows Vista is released.

Cashback on online purchases:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
 
In article <[email protected]>, Tom Crispin
says...

> The photograph came to be taken by me going outside my front door and
> taking it. Parking on the footway is not allowed or encouraged
>
Why have you not reported it to the Police then? You're condoning it in
other words. I wonder which car is yours.


> What I have never seen (and neither have you) is a bicycle being
> ridden *onto* the footway in the manner of a typical car, mounting the
> kerb at left turn junctions, cracking pavestones with wanton abandon,
> and parking without consideration to the disabled and those with
> prams.
>
Then you must be blind. I see these daily. If you really want me to
embarass you, I'll start keeping a video record.


--
Conor
Sig under construction. Please check back when Duke Nukem Forever ships
and/or Windows Vista is released.

Cashback on online purchases:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
 
In uk.rec.cycling Tom Crispin <[email protected]> wrote:

> What I have never seen (and neither have you) is a bicycle being
> ridden *onto* the footway in the manner of a typical car, mounting the
> kerb at left turn junctions, cracking pavestones with wanton abandon,
> and parking without consideration to the disabled and those with
> prams.

I've lived in my current house for ten years. The council are
currently in the process of completely relaying the pavement outside
with new paving stones. They do this every two to three years, because
that's how long it takes for pavement parkers to to turn it into a
crazy paving of cracked and tipped slabs which the very old and very
young often stumble on. It would last in good condition for at least
many decades were it not for these illegal pavement parkers.

Do they book the illegal pavement parkers? No. Have they decided to
relay the pavement with strong enough foundations to take the weight
of cars? No.

--
Chris Malcolm [email protected] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
 
Chris Malcolm wrote:
> In uk.rec.cycling Tom Crispin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>What I have never seen (and neither have you) is a bicycle being
>>ridden *onto* the footway in the manner of a typical car, mounting the
>>kerb at left turn junctions, cracking pavestones with wanton abandon,
>>and parking without consideration to the disabled and those with
>>prams.
>
>
> I've lived in my current house for ten years. The council are
> currently in the process of completely relaying the pavement outside
> with new paving stones. They do this every two to three years, because
> that's how long it takes for pavement parkers to to turn it into a
> crazy paving of cracked and tipped slabs which the very old and very
> young often stumble on. It would last in good condition for at least
> many decades were it not for these illegal pavement parkers.

Then they should re-surface with tarmac, like the foot way outside my
house. Cheaper and better.

> Do they book the illegal pavement parkers? No. Have they decided to
> relay the pavement with strong enough foundations to take the weight
> of cars? No.

Are these your neighbours, friends, relatives and visitors of whom you speak?
 
Conor wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Mark
> Thompson says...
> > > Thankyou for demonstrating that cyclists are unfit to be on the road. I
> > > guess such lack of basic instruction explains why so many cyclists go
> > > through red lights and ride on the pavement.
> >
> > With most schools not providing training, most/many/some are unfit to be on
> > the road. We need better training for school kids. Hopefully we'll see an
> > improvement when they get behind the wheel of a car too.
> >
> THe training is there...my son is currently doing a cycling proficiency
> course at school. What there isn't is any interest from the kids and
> their parents can't see why it is needed.
>
Yet another of blaming the (potential) victim.

" Sorry mate that I run over and killed your kid but they weren't
sufficiently trained and I was on my mobile at the time while gojng
through red light at 40 mph in a 20 mph zone while drunk and drugged".
Tough **** !

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
The only opposition is on the streets.
 
In news:[email protected],
Huge said:
> On 2006-07-01, Brimstone <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>
>> Personally I don't see such things, but I'm willing to accept that
>> they happen. However, in your haste to condemn one section of
>> society you're overlooking the fact that people in other sections of
>> society behave with similar disregard for the welfare of others.
>
> So what?

What's the point in complaining about one section of society when their
behaviour is caused by the same attitudes as everyone else has?

> That is of no relevance whatsoever, although it is a
> favourite logical fallacy of cyclists.

Is that the word of the day, week, month or year?
 
Brimstone wrote:

> Huge said:
>>Brimstone <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>Personally I don't see such things, but I'm willing to accept that
>>>they happen. However, in your haste to condemn one section of
>>>society you're overlooking the fact that people in other sections of
>>>society behave with similar disregard for the welfare of others.

>>So what?

> What's the point in complaining about one section of society when their
> behaviour is caused by the same attitudes as everyone else has?

Look... what CAN you mean by that?

Do you, for instance, meant that because we all have the capacity to steal
(and have probably had an apple off next door's tree and a paper-clip or
two from the office), that we shouldn't complain about being burgled - and
certainly not criticise the burglar?

Or that because we sometimes go over 70 on the motorway that we have no
room to talk when a speeding driver wraps his Corsa around nice tree in the
front garden, demolishing the wall in the process?

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is alright in theory. But
no-one is without sin, yet some things need to be deterred, punished and/or
both.

>>That is of no relevance whatsoever, although it is a
>>favourite logical fallacy of cyclists.

> Is that the word of the day, week, month or year?

"that"?
 
Conor wrote:
> Well as you're obviously an idiot try:
>
> 1) 26 million cars.
> 2) 12,000 miles per annum average per vehicle.

Citation? Last I read, it was 6000 miles per vehicle.
 
Ambrose Nankivell wrote:

> Conor wrote:

>>Well as you're obviously an idiot try:
>>1) 26 million cars.
>>2) 12,000 miles per annum average per vehicle.

> Citation? Last I read, it was 6000 miles per vehicle.

Transport 1895's website claims the following:

"The average annual mileage of a petrol car in Britain in 1999/2001 was
8700 miles, compared with 13,100 miles for diesel cars. The average annual
mileage of a company car was 21,300 miles, compared with 8100 miles for
privately owned cars.
Source: National Travel Survey 2001"

That's at least 30% higher than the figure you remember. But T1895 and
their source may not be excluding laid-up cars, historic cars, cars up for
sale on forecourts, "collection cars", etc. And the mean average takes in
shopping cars and those used by city commuters (mainly at the weekend an at
holiday times). The mean may not be the most suitable averaging method for
such things. Modal - or typical - averaging may well be better.

The true (ie, modal) average - for cars actually in use as the primary
means of transport - especially transport to work - is probably the 12,000
cited by Conor. Glass's Guide reckons 10,000 pa, but that is probably
designed to allow traders a greater bargaining lever when negotiating for
trade-ins.

Of course, the average masks a good deal of variance. My wife's car (new in
June 2003) has done 23,000 miles. My last car, bought new in March 2000 and
sold last Saturday on delivery of a replacement [goodbye to a faithful,
reliable car, BTW], had 145,000 on the clock. Our joint average over three
years would be about 18,500 pa per vehicle. I have done almost every one of
those 145,000 miles BTW, along with about 20% of the mileage on the other
car and its predecessor.
 
In message <[email protected]>, JNugent
<[email protected]> writes

>I can't remember ever encountering a car coming at me along the
>footway. Not once, not ever.

I've seen a car drive along the pavement once, when someone used it as a
slip road to join a 40mph road. It was a sufficiently gobsmackingly rare
act of idiocy that it still sticks in my mind.

--
Steve Walker
 
Steve Walker wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>, JNugent
> <[email protected]> writes
>
>> I can't remember ever encountering a car coming at me along the
>> footway. Not once, not ever.
>
>
> I've seen a car drive along the pavement once, when someone used it as a
> slip road to join a 40mph road. It was a sufficiently gobsmackingly rare
> act of idiocy that it still sticks in my mind.

Exactly.

And would it have stuck in your mind had it been a push-bike?

(That's a rhetorical question.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Oxford cyclists win again
Replies
20
Views
1K
UK and Europe
Andrew Chadwick
A
C
Oxford cyclists win again
Replies
20
Views
851
UK and Europe
Andrew Chadwick
A
Carlo Pancaldi
Shrine Of Madonna Del Ghisallo - The Patroness Of Cyclists
Replies
0
Views
2K
UK and Europe
Carlo Pancaldi
Carlo Pancaldi
Starfish
Calling all spinners & cyclists! Take on a 24 or 12 hour challenge!
Replies
0
Views
1K
UK and Europe
Starfish
Starfish
Tetiana
Help of cyclists from France and Austria needed!
Replies
0
Views
1K
UK and Europe
Tetiana
Tetiana
Top Bottom Back