View Single Post
  #14  
Old August 12th 17, 04:48 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Driver killed by brick weapon.

On 12/08/2017 15:48, Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, August 12, 2017 at 3:03:32 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/08/2017 14:25, Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, August 12, 2017 at 2:17:06 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 11/08/2017 14:42, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2017 at 1:04:46 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 10/08/2017 19:06, Simon Jester wrote:

On Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 4:51:06 PM UTC+1, Tony Dragon wrote:
On 10/08/2017 15:54, wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-van-M11.html


Unless you are saying it was a cyclist who through the concrete, I can
see no connection to cycling.

When this happened
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/m...de/4212619.stm
It was treated as murder.

Manslaughter (can you not read?).

Originally treated as murder.

That hardly matters.

Why?
The case was originally treated as murder, that is a fact.


"Treating" a suspicious or other sudden death as murder does not mean
that it was, or will turn out to be, murder.


So why did you say
'Manslaughter (can you not read?).'
I look forward to reading your public apology.


For what?

Getting it right when you got it wrong?

You'll be waiting a fair while.

When this happened
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/...rrific-6782055
It was treated as a childish prank.

A rope stretched right across Egrement Promenade?

Are you claiming it didn't happen?

Not at all.

I am at least as aware as you of the regard in which cyclists are held
by the majority of people.

And that is OK with you?
If 'the majority of people' decided to exterminate all left handed redheads what should the authorities do?
Supply names, addresses and weapons? Or protect the minority?


It must be sixty feet
wide between possible anchoring points and the rope would be very
visible at normal approach speeds.

At night?

Don't cyclists use their low powered version of headlights at night, then?

The vast majority do, thanks for your support.


Or doesn't it matter whether or not they do use lights because they
stare at the ground below the front wheel in an effort to achieve and
maintain speed?

The primary vehicle is question is pictured in the article.


Translation?


No translation should be necessary.


That's a truism.

Now, what about a translation?

Anyone with a brain bigger than that of a fruit fly can see it is designed for an upright riding position.


All bicycles are meant to be ridden with the cyclist looking ahead (and
occasionally around him). All cyclists are meant to keep a look out for
obstruction of all sorts (just like drivers are).


So you agree your comment about cyclists riding with their heads down was pure bigotry and you are now moving the goalposts to avoid admitting you are wrong.


There are two things at play he

(a) what should happen, and

(b) what does happen.

Cyclists *should* look where they're going. But sometimes - frequently,
in fact - they *don't*, especially when trying to break their personal
worst speed or similar.

Did you read what the lady in question said?

QUOTE:
“If I was going any faster I could’ve been killed.

“I usually do go quite fast because it’s a straight run and you can pick
up a lot of speed."
ENDQUOTE

She might or might not have been intently concentrating on the ground
below the front wheel. Only she knows which.

But she failed to see the rope. This was a life-belt rope, by the way.
Not a wire and not a thin cord. It must be the best part of an inch thick.

As it happens, I distinctly remember that cycling was banned on the prom
(yes, all the way from Seacombe to New Brighton) when I was a boy.


http://tinyurl.com/yd44mc9v


The picture shows a cycle lane.


And?


You admit cyclists can use the prom in question.


They always could.


Your words


....are used correctly and accurately:

"As it happens, I distinctly remember that cycling was banned on the prom
(yes, all the way from Seacombe to New Brighton) when I was a boy."

Make your mind up


But yours aren't.

English isn't your strong subject, is it?

English isn't your strong subject, is it?


Did Merseyside Police ever manage to trace the alleged prankster?


Do your own research.


It was unjustified and all that, but I'm really not that bothered about
the case.


So you think it is OK to attempt to murder cyclists?


There you go with your defective English. Which bit of "unjustified" did
you fail to understand?


One might have expected yopu to be a bit more exercised about it.
But clearly not.


Have a problem with women, do you?


Unlike you I am not sexist or racist or religionist or vehicleist, people are people.


Unless they are women, when, as far as you are concerned, they've got it
coming?


I assume you have evidence to support this claim.


Only how you claim to be bothered about the case but don't seem
concerned enough to have researched the outcome. If it had been Bradders
you'd have been beavering away at the web trying to get up to date info.

I was surprised when you confirmed your lack of interest in the medical
outcome. There has to be an explanation of some sort.
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home