On Aug 17, 1:30*pm, Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:43:26 -0700 (PDT), aquachimp





wrote:
On Aug 17, 6:27*pm, HarryHill wrote:
‘There may be serious consequences if a cyclist hits a child’

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wa.../there-may-be-....

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.

A curious segment from that article;
"In May, Friends of Hailey Park and sustainable transport charity
Sustrans supported a bike safety event at the park, encouraging
cyclists to respect other path-users"

I note it's not, Cyclists of Hailey Park *and sustainable transport
charity Sustrans supported a bike safety event at the park,
encouraging dog owners and childminders to respect path-users.

It takes a lot of abuse to get people up of their collective ass and
engage in such a protest. Those cyclists must be a right bunch of
arseholes and little wonder given how in here they selfishness is
defended tooth and nail at every hands turn.

I did say the cyclist should have stopped, and so did another poster.
hardly defending they (sic) selfishness at every hands turn. Also we
do not know the details of the particular incident. In my experience,
as I have said already, dogs are often not "Under Control".

No-one's commented on my comments about the picture in the article.
Does that look like someone who is showing consideration for other
users of the path?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Looks like a standard formation for person/child/stroller/dog
combination and one of the reasons I avoid using shared paths and
stick to the road.

To the OP, poor show on the cyclist for not stopping.