Re: Interesting viewpoint

in message <[email hidden]>, Wicked Uncle Nigel

(') said:

Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Simon Brooke
<[email hidden]> typed

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Wicked Uncle Nigel

(') said:

If it was (or should have been) obvious to the car driver that the road
was in a hazardous condition, then it should have been at *least* as
obvious to the cyclists.

The cyclists didn't lose control, didn't crash. They were crashed into.
That's a fact. The road was safe to use; it just wasn't safe to use at an
unreasonable speed for the conditions.

And the driver could tell that his speed was 'unreasonable' because...?

(Hint: The CPS, not noted for their reticence in these matters, decided
not to prosecute).

Hint: the Coroner said in his official conclusion:

"The evidence shows classic signs that Robert Harris was driving without
due care and attention and to his credit he admitted his responsibility
in going too fast.

"I fail to understand why no proceedings were brought against him."

....or in other words, that particular CPS prosecutor will be getting his
P45 shortly.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"The motorcyclist was using the road on a fine summers day when the artic
driven by a drunken fourteen-year-old joy rider went over the top of him.
This was clearly the motorcyclists fault as he shouldn't have been on the
road during the school holidays"

I'd say "Well done, have the 'Non-sequitur of the Year Award'".

Exactly. And the difference between that and what you wrote is...?

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; all in all you're just another click in the call
;; -- Minke Bouyed

in message <[email hidden]>, Wicked Uncle Nigel

(') said:

What I'm *trying* to say, is that *if* it was clearly dangerous to be
out driving, then it could be argued that the cyclists could be said to
have been unwise to be on the road at all.

I don't think anyone's suggested it was unsafe to be out driving. It was
unsafe to be driving at 50 mph, which is a very different thing.

Quoted message said:

I would argue that it was *not* clearly unsafe to be out and about. I'd
file this one under "[censored] happens". But, no. Someone has to be "to
blame", hence the narrative verdict.

Someone is to blame. Someone who was driving too fast for the conditions.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

The trouble with Simon is that he only opens his mouth to change feet.
;; of me, by a 'friend'

in message <[email hidden]>, Hog

(') said:

Dentist said:

The short answer is no. There is no evidence that the driver of the
car, or the cyclists, did not take reasonable care. A lack of
clairvoyance and an inability to see black ice are not offences and,
IMHO, should not even provoke mild criticism.

My take on it completely. I have been surprised by black ice, bike and
car. I've dropped a bike a couple of times and slid a car off to the edge
once. The roads had been fine up to those points, even though it was
cold.

This guy did not 'slide a car off to the edge'. He slid the car off to the
edge, across eight feet of grass verge, bounced off a wall, back across
the eight feet of verge again, right across the whole width of the road,
and ended on the other verge. If he had 'slid a car off to the edge' it's
unlikely anyone would have died. If you have reasonable reason to believe
there's ice about (hint: five minutes on his own evidence scraping it off
his windscreen), then you drive sufficiently slowly that losing control
isn't catastrophic. If you don't drive slowly, then you are criminally and
culpably negligent.

Quoted message said:

I think very carefully about taking a bike out of town when it's
icy/frosty. I would dwell even longer on cycling out of town.

Why?

Quoted message said:

Where the driver gets a bit caught out is the state of his tyres. I
haven't read whether they were short of tread or under inflated but there
are no excuses.

According to the police evidence, three of them were bald. Not a bit short
of tread, bald. It is said that this did not contribute to the crash, but
it is evidence of how responsible the driver was.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Generally Not Used
;; Except by Middle Aged Computer Scientists

in message <[email hidden]>, Wicked Uncle Nigel

(') said:

Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Pete Fisher
<[email hidden]> typed

Quoted message said:

In communiqué <[email hidden]>, Wicked Uncle Nigel
<[email hidden]> cast forth these pearls of wisdom

Quoted message said:

I would argue that it was *not* clearly unsafe to be out and about.
I'd file this one under "[censored] happens". But, no. Someone has to be "to
blame", hence the narrative verdict.

One can only wonder what clues there were to the iciness of the road
which might have alerted a more conscientious driver to the danger of
skidding. Was it an isolated patch of 'black ice' or had he got away
with other slides before the incident? What lead the coroner to say
"The evidence shows classic signs that Robert Harris was driving
without due care and attention and to his credit he admitted his
responsibility in going too fast."?

Who knows? It's interesting to note that the same news report says "The
cyclists had set out on a 60-mile trip between Great Orme and Llanrwst,
in what they believed was fine weather."

'Fine' and 'icy' are not opposites. They are perfectly compatible. I rode
last winter on several fine but icy days.

Quoted message said:

If we accept the evidence that the cyclists believed the weather was
fine, why should the same not be true of the car driver?

He scraped ice of his windscreen. He said so.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; When all else fails, read the distractions.

In article said:

And the driver could tell that his speed was 'unreasonable' because...?

Because he knew it was icy, and he was travelling at a speed where, if
he did lose control, he was going fast enough to cross the road, cross a
verge, bounce off a wall, and back into the road.

Quoted message said:

(Hint: The CPS, not noted for their reticence in these matters

Ho bloody ho.
http://coppersblog.blogspot.com/2005/11/cut-out-and-stick-on-duty-prosecutors.html

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why should there be? What would you say to someone who wrote:

"The motorcyclist was using the road on a fine summers day when the artic
driven by a drunken fourteen-year-old joy rider went over the top of him.
This was clearly the motorcyclists fault as he shouldn't have been on the
road during the school holidays"

I'd say "Well done, have the 'Non-sequitur of the Year Award'".

Well done. Now try applying the same logic to the cyclists.

in message <[email hidden]>, Adrian

(') said:

Tony Raven ([email hidden]) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If we accept the evidence that the cyclists believed the weather was
fine, why should the same not be true of the car driver?

Quoted message said:

You seem to assume that riding a bike on an icy road is the same as
driving a car. It isn't. Note the cyclists did not slip and slide and
fall over. The car did. That is because riding a bike on a frost road
is not much of a problem. Driving a car as events have shown is.

It's a damn sight easier to drive a car on a truly slippery surface than
it is to ride a bike on the same surface. Perhaps the two sides of the
road were affected unequally?

Bollocks. I've never fallen off a bike because of ice. You (obviously) have
to be more gentle with your braking and steering, but there's nothing
enormously difficult about it. I've certainly ridden across ice surfaces
which I would not have liked to drive across.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
[ Disclaimer: This is a work displacement exercise. Please feel free ]
[ to reply either on or off group. Expect lengthy replies until the ]
[ deadline has passed. Thank-you for your cooperation. ]

In article said:

Simon Brooke said:

Why should there be? What would you say to someone who wrote:

"The motorcyclist was using the road on a fine summers day when the
artic driven by a drunken fourteen-year-old joy rider went over the
top of him. This was clearly the motorcyclists fault as he shouldn't
have been on the road during the school holidays"

Congratulations: The best example of a straw man I have seen in years!

"Whoosh".

Dan L said:

Bicycle couriers are the worst, they are selfish [censored]

Why do you think they ride like that?

It's not for the fun of it, or for the thrill, it's because someone
sat in an office somewhere has told them that the package they're
carrying needed to be there yesterday.

They're put in that position by their customers. Us. Not by
themselves. Same applies to motorcycle couriers, or just about anyone
in a delivery role.
--
ZX-10R

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Hog

(') said:

Dentist said:

The short answer is no. There is no evidence that the driver of the
car, or the cyclists, did not take reasonable care. A lack of
clairvoyance and an inability to see black ice are not offences

and, >> IMHO, should not even provoke mild criticism.

Quoted message said:

My take on it completely. I have been surprised by black ice, bike
and car. I've dropped a bike a couple of times and slid a car off
to the edge once. The roads had been fine up to those points, even
though it was cold.

This guy did not 'slide a car off to the edge'. He slid the car off
to the edge, across eight feet of grass verge, bounced off a wall,
back across the eight feet of verge again, right across the whole
width of the road, and ended on the other verge.

So? There's nothing remotely strange about that if you hit a patch of
black ice at 50mph.

Quoted message said:

If you
have reasonable reason to believe there's ice about (hint: five
minutes on his own evidence scraping it off his windscreen)

You really need to stop flogging that point - it's *completely*
irrelevant to the road conditions at the accident site.

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tigtona 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

Krusty said:

You really need to stop flogging that point - it's *completely*
irrelevant to the road conditions at the accident site.

So it's cold enough for ice a few miles up the road, but that few miles
*completely* removes any possibility at the accident site? While it
doesn't ensure there will be black ice there it suggests it's a real
possibility that it's worth accounting for.

Or are you happy blasting along untreated roads on frosty days at those
sorts of speeds, knowing that the mere presence of freezing temperatures
is *completely* irrelevant to the chances of a slide on the bit of road
you're at now?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On 28 Jun, 08:41, Tom Crispin <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:44:23 +0100, BGN <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 00:16:32 +0100, Tony Raven
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> If we accept the evidence that the cyclists believed the weather was
> fine, why should the same not be true of the car driver?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You seem to assume that riding a bike on an icy road is the same as
driving a car. It isn't. Note the cyclists did not slip and slide and
fall over. The car did. That is because riding a bike on a frost road
is not much of a problem. Driving a car as events have shown is.

Quoted message said:

I've never had problems driving a car or riding a motorcycle on an icy
road. What's wrong with your car?

Possibly nothing is wrong with his car, but the car driven by the man
who killed the four innocent cyclists had bald tyres.

No, they were *defective*. Not quite the same thing.

Simon Brooke said:

Hint: the Coroner said in his official conclusion:

"The evidence shows classic signs that Robert Harris was driving
without due care and attention and to his credit he admitted his
responsibility in going too fast.

"I fail to understand why no proceedings were brought against him."

...or in other words, that particular CPS prosecutor will be getting
his P45 shortly.

You really don't know anything about how decisions like this are made, do
you? As for imagining that some civil servant somewhere would be dismissed
on the basis of a remark by the Coroner, come on - the prosecutor will deal
with hundreds of cases a year. One of his (or her) decisions has been
questioned. So what? If the CPS choses to respond to the crticism, it will
do, and that will be the end of the matter. Any criticism of an individual
would be an internal performance management issue, and will be handled
appropriately, not by instant dismissal.

--
platypus

"It was not yet obvious that the war
would bring misery to the whole world,
but it seemed probable that it would do
no one any good - except the contractors."

In news:[email hidden],
Adrian <[email hidden]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:

Quoted message said:

It's a damn sight easier to drive a car on a truly slippery surface
than it is to ride a bike on the same surface. Perhaps the two sides
of the road were affected unequally?

Earlier this year I had cause to cycle along a country lane which was
wall-to-wall ice. The sight of the Vauxhall Vectra embedded in the hedge
halfway along the four hundred yard ruler straight section with which said
road starts showed that care would be needed.

I didn't fall off, unlike the Mercedes half a mile further on.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Oxymoron: spot cream for chavs.

Peter Clinch said:

Krusty said:

You really need to stop flogging that point - it's completely
irrelevant to the road conditions at the accident site.

So it's cold enough for ice a few miles up the road,

Ice on a windscreen doesn't equal ice on the road. If you don't know
that, you've obviously never owned a car.

Quoted message said:

but that few
miles completely removes any possibility at the accident site?

Obviously not.

Quoted message said:

While
it doesn't ensure there will be black ice there it suggests it's a
real possibility that it's worth accounting for.

OK so you get up in the morning & have to scrape your windscreen. You
then start driving at 15mph on roads that are completely free of ice.
How far do you go before you decide it's safe to drive faster - 1 mile,
10 miles, all the way? You drive at a speed you judge to be safe based
on the conditions. If those conditions suddenly change without any
warning, you may get away with it, you may not. This guy didn't.

Quoted message said:

Or are you happy blasting along untreated roads on frosty days at
those sorts of speeds, knowing that the mere presence of freezing
temperatures is completely irrelevant to the chances of a slide on
the bit of road you're at now?

Oh FFS - 'blasting along at those sorts of speed'? If you genuinely
drive everywhere at 10mph whenever the temperature drops below zero, I
feel really sorry for all the people sat in the queue behind you.

I'll leave you to work out how long it would take me to get from
Swindon to Birmingham at 10mph - bearing in mind this was my daily
commute for three years.

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tigtona 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

Krusty said:

Peter Clinch said:

Or are you happy blasting along untreated roads on frosty days at
those sorts of speeds, knowing that the mere presence of freezing
temperatures is completely irrelevant to the chances of a slide on
the bit of road you're at now?

Oh FFS - 'blasting along at those sorts of speed'? If you genuinely
drive everywhere at 10mph whenever the temperature drops below zero, I
feel really sorry for all the people sat in the queue behind you.

Bad form, but as you're presumably a cyclist, I'm sure you'll be aware
of the sudden drops in air temperature you get on certain bits of road.
It's highly possible for the air temp to be a few degrees above zero,
but suddenly drop to below zero for a short stretch. I'm sure you take
this into account when you're driving, & crawl along at walking pace
whenever it's below 5 degrees, /just in case./

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tigtona 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

Quoted message said:

On 28 Jun, 08:41, Tom Crispin <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Possibly nothing is wrong with his car, but the car driven by the man
who killed the four innocent cyclists had bald tyres.

No, they were *defective*. Not quite the same thing.

Exectly the same thing in this case. They were defective in the sense
that they had no tread on them. They were bald.

--
Dave...

Krusty said:

Bad form, but as you're presumably a cyclist, I'm sure you'll be aware
of the sudden drops in air temperature you get on certain bits of
road. It's highly possible for the air temp to be a few degrees
above zero, but suddenly drop to below zero for a short stretch. I'm
sure you take this into account when you're driving, & crawl along at
walking pace whenever it's below 5 degrees, /just in case./

My car (like most I guess these days) displays the ambient temperature
and when it's below 5 degrees, a little 'snow flake' symbol is also
shown so I know when to crawl along at 5mph.

--
Chris

CT said:

Krusty said:

I'm
sure you take this into account when you're driving, & crawl along at
walking pace whenever it's below 5 degrees, /just in case./

My car (like most I guess these days) displays the ambient temperature
and when it's below 5 degrees, a little 'snow flake' symbol is also
shown so I know when to crawl along at 5mph.

Mine has one of these too, and generally I take it to mean I shouldn't
exceed 119mph, as that's the max speed rating for the winter tyres.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`

in message <[email hidden]>,
TOG@toil,[email hidden], ([email hidden]'😉

Quoted message said:

On 28 Jun, 08:41, Tom Crispin <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Possibly nothing is wrong with his car, but the car driven by the man
who killed the four innocent cyclists had bald tyres.

No, they were *defective*. Not quite the same thing.

The police evidence was that they were bald. Do you know something the
police didn't?

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

IMHO, there aren't enough committed Christians, but that's care
in the community for you. -- Ben Evans

Ace said:

CT said:

Krusty said:

I'm
sure you take this into account when you're driving, & crawl along
at walking pace whenever it's below 5 degrees, /just in case./

My car (like most I guess these days) displays the ambient
temperature and when it's below 5 degrees, a little 'snow flake'
symbol is also shown so I know when to crawl along at 5mph.

Mine has one of these too, and generally I take it to mean I shouldn't
exceed 119mph, as that's the max speed rating for the winter tyres.

*nice*

--
Hog