UK and Europe · Public discussion

Re: Cyclist kills pedestrian

Lord Turkey Cough · 2007-10-09T12:41:00+00:00

"The Todal" wrote in message news:[email hidden]... So evidently it can happen. This was a rather extreme example of bad cycling but in town I regularly see cyclists riding at top speed through red traffic lights and through pedestrian crossings when the pedestrians have a green signal to cross. I think the Community Support officers should give this a priority. And let it not be forgotten that cyclists aren't required to carry insurance. Maybe that ought to be changed. It some mindless moron crossed the road without looking to see if it safe to do so, or if he may cause a cyclist to break then he gets all he deserves in my opinion if he gets clobbered by a cyclist, or hopefully an articulated lorry. Why community support officers shoud waste their time bowing to the whims of crackpot predestrians with no road sense is beyond me. Futhermore why would a pedrestrian crossing turn red is a cyclist was approaching? Is it faulty? If that's the case it should be removed untill it is fixed. Maybe training for people unable to cross the road unaided should be arranged, although I managed to master this 'skill' when I was about 2 years old. http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2185062,00.html A cyclist who caused the death of a man he crashed into while riding on the pavement at 25mph was facing jail yesterday after admitting "wanton or furious" cycling. Messen mounted the kerb as he came down the hill on his Apollo mountain bike just as Mr Green, 41, who lived with his partner and her four children, walked across the pavement to fetch his glasses from his house. He was knocked to the ground unconscious and died four days later in the Royal Cornwall hospital from head injuries including multiple skull fractures. Appearing at Truro crown court yesterday, Messen, of Swindon, Wiltshire, pleaded guilty to causing bodily harm by wanton or furious cycling. The crime, brought under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, carries a maximum sentence of two years in jail. What a shocking case, fancy jailing a cyclist for a councils failure to provide adaquate cycle paths. It's the law gone mad. No wonder the country is in a shocking state with idots like this in charge. It's about time people in authority had to pass some sort of intelligence test. Especially if they are, for example, moderating a newsgroup.

Started by Lord Turkey Cough · 9 October 2007 · Last activity 18 October 2007 · 83 posts · 2,088 views

← Back to UK and Europe

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postRe: Cyclist kills pedestrianLord Turkey Cough · 9 Oct 2007 02 / This pagePosts 1–20Page 1 of 5 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #83Alex Heney · 18 Oct 2007

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section: UK and Europe
Published: 9 October 2007
Last activity: 18 October 2007
Original author: Lord Turkey Cough
Posts: 83
Discussion status: Public discussion
Total views: 2,088
Views / 30 days: 0
Topics: Concussion and head injury

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Original post
Lord Turkey Cough
Archived post

9 October 2007, 12:41 UTC #1

"The Todal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
So evidently it can happen. This was a rather extreme example of bad
cycling but in town I regularly see cyclists riding at top speed through
red traffic lights and through pedestrian crossings when the pedestrians
have a green signal to cross. I think the Community Support officers
should give this a priority. And let it not be forgotten that cyclists
aren't required to carry insurance. Maybe that ought to be changed.
It some mindless moron crossed the road without looking to
see if it safe to do so, or if he may cause a cyclist to break then
he gets all he deserves in my opinion if he gets clobbered by a cyclist, or
hopefully an articulated lorry.
Why community support officers shoud waste their time bowing to the whims
of crackpot predestrians with no road sense is beyond me.
Futhermore why would a pedrestrian crossing turn red is a cyclist was
approaching?
Is it faulty? If that's the case it should be removed untill it is fixed.
Maybe
training for people unable to cross the road unaided should be arranged,
although
I managed to master this 'skill' when I was about 2 years old.
Quoted message said:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2185062,00.html
A cyclist who caused the death of a man he crashed into while riding on
the pavement at 25mph was facing jail yesterday after admitting "wanton or
furious" cycling.
Messen mounted the kerb as he came down the hill on his Apollo mountain
bike just as Mr Green, 41, who lived with his partner and her four
children, walked across the pavement to fetch his glasses from his house.
He was knocked to the ground unconscious and died four days later in the
Royal Cornwall hospital from head injuries including multiple skull
fractures.
Appearing at Truro crown court yesterday, Messen, of Swindon, Wiltshire,
pleaded guilty to causing bodily harm by wanton or furious cycling. The
crime, brought under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, carries a
maximum sentence of two years in jail.
What a shocking case, fancy jailing a cyclist for a councils failure to
provide
adaquate cycle paths. It's the law gone mad.
No wonder the country is in a shocking state with idots like this in charge.
It's about time people in authority had to pass some sort of intelligence
test.
Especially if they are, for example, moderating a newsgroup.
Quoted message said:

Report
David
Archived post

9 October 2007, 17:59 UTC #2

Quoted message said:
It some mindless moron crossed the road without looking to
see if it safe to do so, or if he may cause a cyclist to break then
he gets all he deserves in my opinion if he gets clobbered by a cyclist,
or
hopefully an articulated lorry.
Why community support officers shoud waste their time bowing to the whims
of crackpot predestrians with no road sense is beyond me.
Futhermore why would a pedrestrian crossing turn red is a cyclist was
approaching?
Is it faulty? If that's the case it should be removed untill it is fixed.
Maybe
training for people unable to cross the road unaided should be arranged,
although
I managed to master this 'skill' when I was about 2 years old.
He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em. You should have
learned to read a few years after you learned to cross the road!!

Report
Colonel Colt
Archived post

9 October 2007, 20:18 UTC #3

"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:

It some mindless moron crossed the road

He wasn't crossing the road. He was crossing the pavement, on which the
cyclist had no business to be.

Report
Lord Turkey Cough
Archived post

9 October 2007, 20:51 UTC #4

"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:
It some mindless moron crossed the road without looking to
see if it safe to do so, or if he may cause a cyclist to break then
he gets all he deserves in my opinion if he gets clobbered by a cyclist,
or
hopefully an articulated lorry.
Why community support officers shoud waste their time bowing to the whims
of crackpot predestrians with no road sense is beyond me.
Futhermore why would a pedrestrian crossing turn red is a cyclist was
approaching?
Is it faulty? If that's the case it should be removed untill it is fixed.
Maybe
training for people unable to cross the road unaided should be arranged,
although
I managed to master this 'skill' when I was about 2 years old.
He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em. You should
have learned to read a few years after you learned to cross the road!!
Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from dangerous
traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an artic?
Quoted message said:

Report
Colonel Colt
Archived post

9 October 2007, 21:01 UTC #5

"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:

"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:
It some mindless moron crossed the road without looking to
see if it safe to do so, or if he may cause a cyclist to break then
he gets all he deserves in my opinion if he gets clobbered by a cyclist,
or
hopefully an articulated lorry.
Why community support officers shoud waste their time bowing to the
whims
of crackpot predestrians with no road sense is beyond me.
Futhermore why would a pedrestrian crossing turn red is a cyclist was
approaching?
Is it faulty? If that's the case it should be removed untill it is
fixed. Maybe
training for people unable to cross the road unaided should be arranged,
although
I managed to master this 'skill' when I was about 2 years old.
He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em. You should
have learned to read a few years after you learned to cross the road!!
Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from dangerous
traffic. What do you expec him to do?

If he can't use it lawfully, not use his cycle.
Quoted message said:
Get crushed by an artic?

We can but hope.

Report
Periander
Archived post

9 October 2007, 22:29 UTC #6

"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em. You
should have learned to read a few years after you learned to cross
the road!!
Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
artic?
Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
--
Regards or otherwise,
Periander

Report
Lord Turkey Cough
Archived post

9 October 2007, 23:38 UTC #7

"Periander" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em. You
should have learned to read a few years after you learned to cross
the road!!
Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
artic?
Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
school.
Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
considerate guy" -not.
The stupidity of some people never ceases to amazes me.
Some people stupidity and inconsideration seems so deeply ingrained I
actually wonder if
it is an undiognosed nmental illness.
Quoted message said:

--
Regards or otherwise,
Periander

Report
JNugent
Archived post

10 October 2007, 09:52 UTC #8

Lord Turkey Cough said:
Periander said:
"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
artic?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
Quoted message said:
Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
school.
Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to
something illegal.
What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
considerate guy" -not.
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Is cycling on the footway illegal? Yes.
Quoted message said:
The stupidity of some people never ceases to amazes me.
It amazes us all at times. Would you believe that there are some
people so stupid that they can't tell the difference between a legal
and an illegal act? But it appears that there such people. Either
that, or they are prepared to entirely overlook the illegality of an
action (let alone the danger it causes to other, more vulnerable,
people) if it makes them feel safer whilst committing it.
Quoted message said:
Some people stupidity and inconsideration seems so deeply ingrained I
actually wonder if it is an undiognosed nmental illness.
You took the words right out...

Report
Email address hidden
Archived post

10 October 2007, 12:19 UTC #9

On Oct 10, 10:52 am, JNugent <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough said:
Periander said:
"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>artic?
Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.

Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
school.
Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to
something illegal.
What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
considerate guy" -not.
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Can even 20mph be excessive speed near a school? Yes.
Are there a lot of drivers who habitually ignoer speed limits? Yes.

Report
JNugent
Archived post

10 October 2007, 12:36 UTC #10

Quoted message said:
On Oct 10, 10:52 am, JNugent <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough said:
"Periander" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
>>
>>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>>artic?
>
>Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
>even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
school.
Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to
something illegal. What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
considerate guy" -not.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Quoted message said:
Can even 20mph be excessive speed near a school? Yes.
It certainly can be (as it can be anywhere, even -given bad enough
conditions - on a motorway).
But is it automatically excessive (or illegal)? No.
Is riding on the footway automatically illegal? Yes (and no
qualification needed).
Quoted message said:
Are there a lot of drivers who habitually ignoer speed limits? Yes.
What's that got to do with anything?
Does it justify riding on the footway?

Report
Alex Heney
Archived post

10 October 2007, 21:36 UTC #11

JNugent said:
Quoted message said:
On Oct 10, 10:52 am, JNugent <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough wrote:
>"Periander" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
>>>
>>>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>>>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>>>artic?
>>
>>Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
>>even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
>
>Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
>school.
>Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to
something illegal. What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
>actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
>considerate guy" -not.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Quoted message said:
Can even 20mph be excessive speed near a school? Yes.
It certainly can be (as it can be anywhere, even -given bad enough
conditions - on a motorway).
But is it automatically excessive (or illegal)? No.
Is riding on the footway automatically illegal? Yes (and no
qualification needed).
Except that it isn't.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Creditors have much better memories than debtors.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Report
Lord Turkey Cough
Archived post

10 October 2007, 21:52 UTC #12

"JNugent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough said:
Periander said:
"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>artic?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
Quoted message said:
Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
school.
Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to something
illegal.
What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
considerate guy" -not.
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Is cycling on the footway illegal? Yes.
Quoted message said:
The stupidity of some people never ceases to amazes me.
It amazes us all at times. Would you believe that there are some people so
stupid that they can't tell the difference between a legal and an illegal
act? But it appears that there such people. Either that, or they are
prepared to entirely overlook the illegality of an action (let alone the
danger it causes to other, more vulnerable, people) if it makes them feel
safer whilst committing it.
The fact that you think something is right and proper just because
it is illegal just shows what brainless moron some people are.
Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:
Some people stupidity and inconsideration seems so deeply ingrained I
actually wonder if it is an undiognosed nmental illness.
You took the words right out...
Oh the irony.

Report
Lord Turkey Cough
Archived post

10 October 2007, 21:55 UTC #13

"JNugent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
On Oct 10, 10:52 am, JNugent <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough wrote:
>"Periander" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
>>>
>>>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>>>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>>>artic?
>>
>>Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
>>even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
>
>Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
>school.
>Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to
something illegal. What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
>actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
>considerate guy" -not.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Quoted message said:
Can even 20mph be excessive speed near a school? Yes.
It certainly can be (as it can be anywhere, even -given bad enough
conditions - on a motorway).
But is it automatically excessive (or illegal)? No.
Is riding on the footway automatically illegal? Yes (and no qualification
needed).
Quoted message said:
Are there a lot of drivers who habitually ignoer speed limits? Yes.
What's that got to do with anything?
Does it justify riding on the footway?
I think Jnugget is jus pretending to be a cretin just to wind people up.
No one can be that thick, surely?

Report
Alex Heney
Archived post

10 October 2007, 22:13 UTC #14

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:41:00 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip drivel>
OK, usually I think you are actually stupid enough to believe what you
post, rather than deliberately trolling.
But it is not *possible* for anybody who believes that [censored] to be able
to type understandable English, so that *must* have been a pure troll.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
How do you make Windows faster ? Throw it harder
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Report
JNugent
Archived post

10 October 2007, 22:55 UTC #15

Alex Heney said:
JNugent said:
Quoted message said:
On Oct 10, 10:52 am, JNugent <[email hidden]>
wrote:
>Lord Turkey Cough wrote:
>
>
>>"Periander" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
>>>>
>>>>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>>>>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>>>>artic?
>>>
>>>Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
>>>even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
>>
>>Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
>>school.
>>Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
Quoted message said:
>AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to
>something illegal. What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
>>"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
>>actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
>>considerate guy" -not.
Quoted message said:
>Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Quoted message said:
Can even 20mph be excessive speed near a school? Yes.
It certainly can be (as it can be anywhere, even -given bad enough
conditions - on a motorway).
But is it automatically excessive (or illegal)? No.
Is riding on the footway automatically illegal? Yes (and no
qualification needed).
Except that it isn't.
Cycling along a footway (a paved route reserved for pedestrians) is
always illegal. That you don't know that should surprise me. But it
somehow doesn't.

Report
JNugent
Archived post

10 October 2007, 22:57 UTC #16

Lord Turkey Cough said:
"JNugent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough said:
"Periander" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
>>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
Quoted message said:
>>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>>artic?
Quoted message said:
>Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
>even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
Quoted message said:
Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
school.
Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to something
illegal.
What was wrong with that?
Quoted message said:
"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
considerate guy" -not.
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Is cycling on the footway illegal? Yes.
Quoted message said:
The stupidity of some people never ceases to amazes me.
It amazes us all at times. Would you believe that there are some people so
stupid that they can't tell the difference between a legal and an illegal
act? But it appears that there such people. Either that, or they are
prepared to entirely overlook the illegality of an action (let alone the
danger it causes to other, more vulnerable, people) if it makes them feel
safer whilst committing it.
The fact that you think something is right and proper just because
it is illegal just shows what brainless moron some people are.
Er... you got that wrong by 180°.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Some people stupidity and inconsideration seems so deeply ingrained I
actually wonder if it is an undiognosed nmental illness.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
You took the words right out...
Quoted message said:
Oh the irony.
There is no irony at all in observing that cycling along the footway
is not only illegal, but also stupid and inconsiderate.

Report
Alex Heney
Archived post

11 October 2007, 00:01 UTC #17

JNugent said:
Alex Heney said:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:36:32 +0100, JNugent

<snip>
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:

Is riding on the footway automatically illegal? Yes (and no
qualification needed).
Except that it isn't.
Cycling along a footway (a paved route reserved for pedestrians) is
always illegal. That you don't know that should surprise me. But it
somehow doesn't.
If you want to redefine "footway" to mean only those reserved for
pedestrians, then you would indeed be correct (obviously).
But that isn't the definition of "footway". Many "footways" are shared
use.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
I'm not lost, I'm "locationally challenged."
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Report
Lord Turkey Cough
Archived post

11 October 2007, 05:31 UTC #18

"JNugent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough said:
"JNugent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Lord Turkey Cough wrote:
>"Periander" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>"Lord Turkey Cough" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>>He was riding on the PATH - oh dear, some mothers do 'av em...
>>>Yes because there was no adaquate cycle path to protect him from
>>>dangerous traffic. What do you expec him to do? Get crushed by an
>>>artic?
>>Get off his bike and push it along the path, buy a car, stay at home or
>>even use the bloody road like he should have been doing.
>Oh yes just like you get out of your car and push it past a childrens
>school.
>Do you [censored]. Can't you see what an effing hypocrite you are?
AIUI, the PP was suggesting doing something legal as opposed to something
illegal.
What was wrong with that?
>"Oh no I will slow down to 20 mph, because guess what - some kids can
>actually survive being hit by a car at 20 mph so I am being a really
>considerate guy" -not.
Is driving at 20mph past a school illegal? No.
Is cycling on the footway illegal? Yes.
>The stupidity of some people never ceases to amazes me.
It amazes us all at times. Would you believe that there are some people
so stupid that they can't tell the difference between a legal and an
illegal act? But it appears that there such people. Either that, or they
are prepared to entirely overlook the illegality of an action (let alone
the danger it causes to other, more vulnerable, people) if it makes them
feel safer whilst committing it.
The fact that you think something is right and proper just because
it is illegal just shows what brainless moron some people are.
Er... you got that wrong by 180°.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>Some people stupidity and inconsideration seems so deeply ingrained I
>actually wonder if it is an undiognosed nmental illness.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
You took the words right out...
Quoted message said:
Oh the irony.
There is no irony at all in observing that cycling along the footway is
not only illegal, but also stupid and inconsiderate.
That's garbage. If the conditions dictate it is right and proper a bicycle
on a pavement is no more dangerous than a pram. Just because some
stupid pedestrian thinks they can cross the pavement without
looking to see if it is safe to do so, does not make it wrong.
If you can't be bothered to look where you are going then you only
have yourself to blame if someone runs into you, it is people who
do that who are stupid and inconsiderate. No law can protect people
like that, and people should not be punished to protect people who are
devoid of any common sense. You need to learn to be responsible for
your own actions, and the consequences of mindlessly going about what
you are doing, otherwise you are likely to end up in hospital or worse.
No laws can protect you from your own stupidity I am afraid.
Key words - *Think* - Check - Act.. They have always but me in
good stead and learning some wisdom from me will do you no harm.

Report
David Hansen
Archived post

11 October 2007, 08:01 UTC #19

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:01:56 +0100 someone who may be Alex Heney
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-
Quoted message said:
If you want to redefine "footway" to mean only those reserved for
pedestrians, then you would indeed be correct (obviously).
But that isn't the definition of "footway". Many "footways" are shared
use.
Indeed. On the A90, where the "cycle friendly" City of Edinburgh
Council banned cyclists from using the road a few years ago, the
signs say that "cyclists must use the footway".
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Report
Matt B
Archived post

11 October 2007, 08:39 UTC #20

David Hansen said:

On the A90, where the "cycle friendly" City of Edinburgh
Council banned cyclists from using the road a few years ago,
Is that /all/ roads or /a/ road?
Quoted message said:
the
signs say that "cyclists must use the footway".
Did the measure(s) cause a step-change in cyclist and/or pedestrian
casualties?
--
Matt B

Report

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.

Jump through the discussion

What we know about this thread

Continue through CyclingForums

Active in this thread