Marc wrote:
Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:52:07 +0100, nully wrote:

Marc wrote:
HarryHill wrote:
‘There may be serious consequences if a cyclist hits a child’

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wa...1466-21415408/



CALLS have been made for the widening of a pedestrian and cycle
path after a dog was hit by a bicycle.

Anne-Marie Wilkins, 37, from Llandaff North, is starting a petition
calling for the Taff Trail to be widened through Hailey Park after
her dog Bonny was run over by a cyclist, who then immediately rode
off.

My money is on the little turd dispenser either being on a 35ft
extendable lead or not being on one at all.
Which gives the cyclist the right to simply ride off and ignore the
incident then? Cycles should be required to carry reg plates to avoid
cowardly behaviour such as this. Be nice to see some posters condemn
the cyclist leaving the scene *irrespective of fault*, but I guess
I'm asking for too much there - after all, cyclists are beyond fault,
right?

Out of common courtesy the cyclist should have stopped, IMO. Please
don't extend the act of one person to "all cyclists are beyond fault,
right?".

Stopped to be bitten?
Stopped to be attacked by the "aggrieved" owner?

Loose turd dispenser,
Loose turd dispenser is scared but unhurt by cyclist
Loose turd dispenser learns lesson
Turd dispenser's owner doesn't learn lesson and starts a petition to
spend £100,000s rather than her buying a lead

What possible help would it have been for the cyclist to have stopped?

He could have aplogised. It often goes a long way to assuage injury and
hurt.

But you make a valid point about potential fear of reprisals.