Brutal driver walks
On 06/02/2016 11:10, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote On 05/02/2016 19:39, TMS320 wrote: There was also the little turd in Lancashire (Preston?) who deliberately rode (at speed) along a footway and mowed down (not too strong a term) a small girl in front of her horrified parents. Who says it was "deliberate"? Oh, it was you. And does the word "deliberate" appear in the official records for Jason Howard? Are you suggesting that the cyclist did not know he was on the pavement, or had been magically transported onto it, against his will? The cyclist chose to, and therefore was, deliberately riding on the pavement. I have no doubt that he had no prior intention of running into anyone or anything, but he deliberately chose a path (pun intended) that was very likely to bring him into close proximity to people. Where are your cases of drivers getting worse punishment than cyclists? This is a cycling group, but a driver doing a similar thing would be heavily fined, possibly imprisoned , likely to be banned from further driving forsome time, receive points on their licence, maybe be made to take an enhanced driving test, and have their compulsory insurance increased in price dramatically. None of those except the fine were applied to the cyclist just a total bill of 829, despite his deliberate actions leading to the injured child. |
Brutal driver walks
"MrCheerful" wrote in message ... On 06/02/2016 11:10, TMS320 wrote: "MrCheerful" wrote On 05/02/2016 19:39, TMS320 wrote: There was also the little turd in Lancashire (Preston?) who deliberately rode (at speed) along a footway and mowed down (not too strong a term) a small girl in front of her horrified parents. Who says it was "deliberate"? Oh, it was you. And does the word "deliberate" appear in the official records for Jason Howard? Are you suggesting that the cyclist did not know he was on the pavement, or had been magically transported onto it, against his will? The cyclist chose to, and therefore was, deliberately riding on the pavement. I have no doubt that he had no prior intention of running into anyone or anything, but he deliberately chose a path (pun intended) that was very likely to bring him into close proximity to people. Where are your cases of drivers getting worse punishment than cyclists? This is a cycling group... ....and you made a comparison with driving. but a driver doing a similar thing would be heavily fined, possibly imprisoned , likely to be banned from further driving forsome time, receive points on their licence, maybe be made to take an enhanced driving test, and have their compulsory insurance increased in price dramatically. None of those except the fine were applied to the cyclist just a total bill of 829, despite his deliberate actions leading to the injured child. Is that so? You made a claim. Now go away until you have something to support it. |
Brutal driver walks
On 06/02/2016 12:03, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote in message ... On 06/02/2016 11:10, TMS320 wrote: "MrCheerful" wrote On 05/02/2016 19:39, TMS320 wrote: There was also the little turd in Lancashire (Preston?) who deliberately rode (at speed) along a footway and mowed down (not too strong a term) a small girl in front of her horrified parents. Who says it was "deliberate"? Oh, it was you. And does the word "deliberate" appear in the official records for Jason Howard? Are you suggesting that the cyclist did not know he was on the pavement, or had been magically transported onto it, against his will? The cyclist chose to, and therefore was, deliberately riding on the pavement. I have no doubt that he had no prior intention of running into anyone or anything, but he deliberately chose a path (pun intended) that was very likely to bring him into close proximity to people. Where are your cases of drivers getting worse punishment than cyclists? This is a cycling group... ...and you made a comparison with driving. but a driver doing a similar thing would be heavily fined, possibly imprisoned , likely to be banned from further driving forsome time, receive points on their licence, maybe be made to take an enhanced driving test, and have their compulsory insurance increased in price dramatically. None of those except the fine were applied to the cyclist just a total bill of 829, despite his deliberate actions leading to the injured child. Is that so? You made a claim. Now go away until you have something to support it. Cyclists have very low punishments for incidents of pavement cycling, whereas motor vehicle drivers suffer comparatively draconian punishments for the same offence. Compare the man that cycled on the pavement quite deliberately and ran into that toddler: he got the highest punishment possible of 500 qui, 829 total fine, end of. With: Non deliberately drove on the pavement, injured no-one: 420 quid fine, banned for a year and made to take an extended test, and no doubt his compulsory insurance increased. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-30003418 |
Brutal driver walks
MrCheerful wrote:
Cyclists have very low punishments for incidents of pavement cycling, whereas motor vehicle drivers suffer comparatively draconian punishments for the same offence. That's because it's not 'the same offence', you infantile spastic. Just as shooting someone with a water pistol is not 'the same offence' as firing a Glock 17 at their chest. You ****ing arsehole. -- john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons) 'It never gets any easier. You just get faster' (Greg LeMond (1961 - )) |
Brutal driver walks
On 06/02/2016 13:11, John Smith wrote:
MrCheerful wrote: Cyclists have very low punishments for incidents of pavement cycling, whereas motor vehicle drivers suffer comparatively draconian punishments for the same offence. That's because it's not 'the same offence', you infantile spastic. Just as shooting someone with a water pistol is not 'the same offence' as firing a Glock 17 at their chest. You ****ing arsehole. Driving or cycling on footways is illegal. So, yes, it is the same offence. |
Brutal driver walks
On 06/02/2016 12:03, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote in message ... On 06/02/2016 11:10, TMS320 wrote: "MrCheerful" wrote On 05/02/2016 19:39, TMS320 wrote: There was also the little turd in Lancashire (Preston?) who deliberately rode (at speed) along a footway and mowed down (not too strong a term) a small girl in front of her horrified parents. Who says it was "deliberate"? Oh, it was you. And does the word "deliberate" appear in the official records for Jason Howard? Are you suggesting that the cyclist did not know he was on the pavement, or had been magically transported onto it, against his will? The cyclist chose to, and therefore was, deliberately riding on the pavement. I have no doubt that he had no prior intention of running into anyone or anything, but he deliberately chose a path (pun intended) that was very likely to bring him into close proximity to people. Where are your cases of drivers getting worse punishment than cyclists? This is a cycling group... ...and you made a comparison with driving. but a driver doing a similar thing would be heavily fined, possibly imprisoned , likely to be banned from further driving forsome time, receive points on their licence, maybe be made to take an enhanced driving test, and have their compulsory insurance increased in price dramatically. None of those except the fine were applied to the cyclist just a total bill of 829, despite his deliberate actions leading to the injured child. Is that so? You made a claim. Now go away until you have something to support it. STOP PRESS... ..... READ ALL ABOUT IT... TMS320 says that he doesn't believe that a driver (or motorcyclist) can be fined, receive points on his driving licence, be disqualified from driving or even be imprisoned for a motoring offence. And he wants proof of it before he will believe it. |
Brutal driver walks
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 2:21:16 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 03/02/2016 23:48, Tom Crispin wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-35472617 It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Can you imagine the public outcry if the owner of a bicycle whose vehicle was used to deliberately harm an innocent bystander was allowed to get away with failing to provide the rider's details? I wonder why we have never heard of such a case.. Forget the offence for a moment - it could be anything from picking the council's flowers to bank robbery - would you impose a draconian (not to say vindictive) penalty on somebody against whom there is no evidence, merely on the basis that there is no evidence against him and that you "think" that he should have confessed to something you suspect him of committing even though there is no evidence to support that belief to an acceptable standard of proof? Is that really what you mean? No. What I mean is that failing to give driver details should be treated the same way as perverting the course of justice. |
Brutal driver walks
On 06/02/2016 17:31, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 2:21:16 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/02/2016 23:48, Tom Crispin wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-35472617 It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Can you imagine the public outcry if the owner of a bicycle whose vehicle was used to deliberately harm an innocent bystander was allowed to get away with failing to provide the rider's details? I wonder why we have never heard of such a case.. Forget the offence for a moment - it could be anything from picking the council's flowers to bank robbery - would you impose a draconian (not to say vindictive) penalty on somebody against whom there is no evidence, merely on the basis that there is no evidence against him and that you "think" that he should have confessed to something you suspect him of committing even though there is no evidence to support that belief to an acceptable standard of proof? Is that really what you mean? No. What I mean is that failing to give driver details should be treated the same way as perverting the course of justice. And in a case where quite genuinely the owner does not know? Should he/she be liable to a max. sentence of life imprisonment? |
Brutal driver walks
On 06/02/2016 18:47, Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Sat, 06 Feb 2016 13:22:08 +0000 the perfect time to write: On 06/02/2016 13:11, John Smith wrote: MrCheerful wrote: Cyclists have very low punishments for incidents of pavement cycling, whereas motor vehicle drivers suffer comparatively draconian punishments for the same offence. That's because it's not 'the same offence', you infantile spastic. Just as shooting someone with a water pistol is not 'the same offence' as firing a Glock 17 at their chest. You ****ing arsehole. Driving or cycling on footways is illegal. So, yes, it is the same offence. Dangerous driving (which he admitted) and failure to stop after a collision )which they apparently didn't even bother to charge him with) is hardly the same as cycling on a footway. Even a half-wit can see that, but apparently you do not reach such lofty heights of intellect. So why did the driver receive a more severe punishment than the cyclist? Bear in mind that the cyclist injured someone. |
Brutal driver walks
On Saturday, February 6, 2016 at 5:37:13 PM UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 06/02/2016 17:31, Tom Crispin wrote: On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 2:21:16 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/02/2016 23:48, Tom Crispin wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-35472617 It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Can you imagine the public outcry if the owner of a bicycle whose vehicle was used to deliberately harm an innocent bystander was allowed to get away with failing to provide the rider's details? I wonder why we have never heard of such a case.. Forget the offence for a moment - it could be anything from picking the council's flowers to bank robbery - would you impose a draconian (not to say vindictive) penalty on somebody against whom there is no evidence, merely on the basis that there is no evidence against him and that you "think" that he should have confessed to something you suspect him of committing even though there is no evidence to support that belief to an acceptable standard of proof? Is that really what you mean? No. What I mean is that failing to give driver details should be treated the same way as perverting the course of justice. And in a case where quite genuinely the owner does not know? Should he/she be liable to a max. sentence of life imprisonment? It would not be for me to predetermine the outcome of a trial for perverting the course of justice. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com