Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: Tony Dragon on 30 Nov 2009 17:45 Steve Firth wrote: > mileburner <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > >> Blame is not the issue. The issue is whether the driving was dangerous. >> >> If someone dies as a result of it, the driving must have been dangerous. > > Some years ago a friend of mine was driving along a busy high street. A > pedestrian jumped in front of the car when the car was approximately > three feet from the pedestrian. The pedestrian was killed. > > The police investigated the affair thoroughly including use of CCTV, > multiple witness statements and a forensic examination of vehicle, marks > left at the scene and a full clinical chemistry assessment of the > driver, with particular emphasis on drugs of abuse including alcohol. > The police made a rcommendation to the CPS that there was no case to > answer, that no blame attached to the driver in any way and that no > drivr could have avoided the collision. > > According to you the driving was "dangerous". > > About twenty years ago a motorcyclist failed to stop at a junction and > rode into the side of my car. I was moving at about 3mph at the time. > Fortunately although seriously injured the motorcyclist did not die. Had > he died presumably you would claim that I was "driving dangerously". > > In short, you're a fuckwit. Are you sure that you should not be using 'the definite article' in your assesment? -- Tony Dragon
From: Adrian on 30 Nov 2009 17:45 Tony Dragon <tony.dragon(a)btinternet.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Using the same logic a collision involving a cycle must result in the > cyclists being at least partially to blame. No, because all cyclists are inherently perfect, according to Lee, Mileburner, Spindrift and - of course - Duhg. They do their "cause" no good at all.
From: DavidR on 30 Nov 2009 17:47 "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote > In article <hetmta$sme$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, mileburner says... > >> People own cars through choice. > > There speaks someone who lives in an urban area with decent public > transport. Does it? I have a bus stop outside my house with a half hourly 2.5 mile trip into town for �1.50. I rarely use it because a bike is faster and more convenient. If I've got off the train in town there might be a wait for the next bus. Walking it often adds less than 5 minutes to the journey time. > One string of villages up the road from me get two buses a week. But how many buses a week (or trains) were there before people bought cars? And there's still the option of a tax free bicycle.
From: JNugent on 30 Nov 2009 17:55 DavidR wrote: > "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >> mileburner says... >>> People own cars through choice. >> There speaks someone who lives in an urban area with decent public >> transport. > Does it? I have a bus stop outside my house with a half hourly 2.5 mile trip > into town for �1.50. I rarely use it because a bike is faster and more > convenient. If you live only 2.5m from town, that's urban. You'd call Speke (SE Liverpool) or Wythenshawe (S Manchester) urban, and each is seven miles or more from town. > If I've got off the train in town there might be a wait for the > next bus. Walking it often adds less than 5 minutes to the journey time. That's because it's hardly any distance. >> One string of villages up the road from me get two buses a week. > But how many buses a week (or trains) were there before people bought cars? You might as well ask how many horse-drawn coaches served them before the invention of the bus and/or the bicycle.
From: Steve Firth on 30 Nov 2009 17:56
Tony Dragon <tony.dragon(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > According to the poor dear, if a collision occurs involving a car, the > motorist must be at least partially to blame because the car was there. So according to "mileburner" it seems obvious that when Robert Lambert crashed into Dora Thompson killign her that by definition his actions were "dangerous". That when Jason Howard crashed into Rhiannon Bennet killing her, his actions were "dangerous". That when Peter Messen crashed into Gary Green killing him, his actions were "dangerous". When Darren Hall crashed into Ronald Turner killing him, that his actions were "dangerous". And yet the same individual apears to believe that cycling on the pavement, cycling through red lights and cycling at speed in close proximity to pedestrians cannot possibly be "dangerous". Yet each of the incidents referred to above involves one or more of those activities. |