Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (on theback)

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

MrCheerful wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

The gross stupidity of cyclists will never cease to amaze me.

On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

Far too many motorists think Green Means GO.
In reality a green light means you are permitted to enter the junction if it is safe to do so.
In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a read+amber light but the junction was not clear.
No evidence the primary road user rode through a red light.

Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

Far too many motorists think Green Means GO.
In reality a green light means you are permitted to enter the
junction if it is safe to do so.
In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a read+amber
light but the junction was not clear. No evidence the primary road
user rode through a red light.

Prick.

On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 9:30:10 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

Far too many motorists think Green Means GO.
In reality a green light means you are permitted to enter the
junction if it is safe to do so.
In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a read+amber
light but the junction was not clear. No evidence the primary road
user rode through a red light.

Prick.

I appreciate that your intra-cranial neuronal deficiency is a chronic condition, but can you at least point out which part of my analysis you disagree with.

On 23/09/2017 21:51, Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 9:30:10 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

Far too many motorists think Green Means GO.
In reality a green light means you are permitted to enter the
junction if it is safe to do so.
In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a read+amber
light but the junction was not clear. No evidence the primary road
user rode through a red light.

Prick.

I appreciate that your intra-cranial neuronal deficiency is a chronic condition, but can you at least point out which part of my analysis you disagree with.

Did you ever manage to reach the minimum standard of English required of
an entrant on the CSE course?

Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 9:30:10 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder
Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

Far too many motorists think Green Means GO.
In reality a green light means you are permitted to enter the
junction if it is safe to do so.
In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a
read+amber light but the junction was not clear. No evidence the
primary road user rode through a red light.

Prick.

I appreciate that your intra-cranial neuronal deficiency is a chronic
condition, but can you at least point out which part of my analysis
you disagree with.

What part of you being a prick do you disagree with?
Please tell us.

On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 10:47:49 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 9:30:10 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder
Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

Far too many motorists think Green Means GO.
In reality a green light means you are permitted to enter the
junction if it is safe to do so.
In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a
read+amber light but the junction was not clear. No evidence the
primary road user rode through a red light.

Prick.

I appreciate that your intra-cranial neuronal deficiency is a chronic
condition, but can you at least point out which part of my analysis
you disagree with.

What part of you being a prick do you disagree with?
Please tell us.

W5

On 24.09.2017 10:47, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 9:30:10 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder
Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510

Far too many motorists think Green Means GO.
In reality a green light means you are permitted to enter the
junction if it is safe to do so.
In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a
read+amber light but the junction was not clear. No evidence the
primary road user rode through a red light.

Prick.

I appreciate that your intra-cranial neuronal deficiency is a chronic
condition, but can you at least point out which part of my analysis
you disagree with.

What part of you being a prick do you disagree with?
Please tell us.



I love being called a prick by the likes of you.

After all I ride a bicycle, a very convenient delightful economical
viable means of transport, and we all know that YOU think bicyclists are
the ****witted pits of humanity.
I really feel complimented by that, because YOU said it.

On 23/09/17 18:23, Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:46:00 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510


Far too many motorists think Green Means GO. In reality a green light
means you are permitted to enter the junction if it is safe to do
so. In this case not only did the moronist illegally move on a
read+amber light but the junction was not clear.

Most drivers stop short of the stop line (as this one appeared to do) so
it is often reasonable to start rolling before green. (If the way is
clear to do so.)

No evidence the
primary road user rode through a red light.

On balance the rider probably did go through the light. People on foot
do it all the time and it is accepted. The fuss is only because a
"cyclist" did it even though the nature of an obstacle in adriver's way
makes no practical difference. The question is whether the driver would
have been hauled in front of a court had he/she caused a collision. The
betting is not.