|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
"Tom Crispin" wrote in message I certainly think that there's an excellent case for relaxing the pavement cycling law for children of ten years and under. The Royal Parks prohibit all cycling on footpaths, other than marked cycle routes and roads, but their regulations allow for children of ten years and under to ride on paths when learning to ride safely. That seems very sensible. And surely is a /de facto/ law anyway? Kids 10 years old are below the age of criminal responsibility; nor have I heard of any parents ever being prosecuted for permitting their young kids to ride on a pavement. OTOH at age 10 I remember a bobby attending my primary school and giving us all a lecture about stuff you should not do like shoplifting or cycling on the pavement/in an anti social manner and that if you had an accident where a ped was hurt or hurt somebody in any way *you* were liable and could even end up at juvenile court. The school also encouraged people to take a Cycling Proficiency Test around age 10 and it was mentioned there about "legal responsibility". We all also got shown round a Police station (including the cells) and told that we would end up there if we did the aforementioned Bad Things, that our parents/guardians would be most displeased when they had to pick us up and our school would get notified as well, I am not *that* old either; this was in West Berkshire in 1982. Alex -- Mr R@T / General Lighting Ipswich, Suffolk, Untied Kingdom http://www.partyvibe.com |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
"David Hansen" wrote in message ... The unacceptable face of motoring (and some pedestrian groups who are not au fait with the real dangers those they claim to represent face) often imply that only cyclists ride along pavements. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4827894.stm is about a motorist driving along a pavement, in the course of which he injured six people, one very badly. No. It is NOT "driving" along the pavement. The car was apparently out of control (for reasons which may well have been, but not necessarily, the fault of the driver) True to form the police appear to have already gone out of their way to excuse the motorist. Other groups in the motoring lobby will no doubt follow their lead. True to form, certain cyclists choose misleading words in a miserable attempt to advance their cause, They do themselves no favours. Remember, the (majority of the) cyclists riding on the pavement do so deliberately, and would claim to be "in control".... -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
David Martin wrote:
You must be on Orkney or the Western Isles then. Everywhere else has deciduous trees which drop rather a lot of dead, decaying plant matter onto the roads every year. Nah, they've all been chopped down so they can't leap out and hit poor unsuspecting cars and their drivers. -- Tony "The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the right." - Lord Hailsham |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:34:05 -0000 someone who may be "Clive George"
wrote this:- as I said twice, I think the sentence referred to the rail crash, not the car crash. We will have to disagree. Face it, you're just getting all self-righteoously wound up about plod again - you do have a habit of doing this. Excellent, the swerve into a personal attack. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
"David Martin" wrote in message
ups.com... You must be on Orkney or the Western Isles then. Everywhere else has deciduous trees which drop rather a lot of dead, decaying plant matter onto the roads every year. Or do you not ride your bike in the autumn? I honestly haven't noticed many major problems with leaf litter and I do ride in autumn and sometimes semi-rural areas. There are some deciduous trees about but a lot of the roads just have fenced farmland next to them and comparatively few woods/trees. Either the leaves are swept up by someone before they cause a problem; or the woods are trimmed back / some distance behind a concrete pavement/driveway/grass verge and most of the leaves land there and not as many are blown on the road. This load of flowers I nearly skidded on ( I had seen them and slowed down, so perhaps there's at least some good to them) was on a route which switches between country road /dual carriageway on the route of Reading to Maidenhead - it was clearly the remains of a tribute to some RTC victims. Most of the flowers had already been run over a few times (by cars) by the look of it. There are also loads of yellow signs put up by highways authority saying "nn fatal accidents here" and (usually ignored) warnings to reduce drivers speed. Alex -- Mr R@T / General Lighting Ipswich, Suffolk, Untied Kingdom http://www.partyvibe.com |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
"David Hansen" wrote in message ... On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:34:05 -0000 someone who may be "Clive George" wrote this:- as I said twice, I think the sentence referred to the rail crash, not the car crash. We will have to disagree. Face it, you're just getting all self-righteoously wound up about plod again - you do have a habit of doing this. Excellent, the swerve into a personal attack. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 And a commendable swerve at that. Even your fellow cyclists think you are on a non-starter with this one, and all credit to them for that. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 19:43:49 -0000, "Mr R@t \(2.30 zulu-india\)"
wrote: I certainly think that there's an excellent case for relaxing the pavement cycling law for children of ten years and under. The Royal Parks prohibit all cycling on footpaths, other than marked cycle routes and roads, but their regulations allow for children of ten years and under to ride on paths when learning to ride safely. That seems very sensible. And surely is a /de facto/ law anyway? Kids 10 years old are below the age of criminal responsibility; nor have I heard of any parents ever being prosecuted for permitting their young kids to ride on a pavement. Presumably, then, children under the age of eleven don't have to pay to travel on public transport. I know they don't in London, except on most National Rail journeys, but London's an exception. The way it works is that a parents, or a person in loco parentis, /might/ be arrested on the child's behalf. Perhaps that's a good reason for not paying for children on National Rail journeys. I can have a nice warm cell and the police can take my class on a trip to the Science Museum. ....I wonder if the penalty would be £50 or thirty lots of £50? -- Let us have a moment of silence for all Americans who are now stuck in traffic on their way to a health club to ride a stationary bicycle. - Congressman Earl Blumenauer (Oregon) |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
David Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:34:05 -0000 someone who may be "Clive George" wrote this:- as I said twice, I think the sentence referred to the rail crash, not the car crash. We will have to disagree. on other bbc sites the inital text is preserved: #A man has been arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving. The police have confirmed the injured girl was air-lifted to the Royal London Hospital. Police are still investigating what happened to the boys, who were killed by the Stansted Express train while using a gated crossing in Edmonton, London. Detective Chief Inspector Mick Southerton, who is investigating the deaths said: "At the moment we are dealing with it as a very tragic accident but we are not ruling anything out." # pk |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:30:03 +0000 someone who may be Matt B
wrote this:- Why "ha, ha"? Have you /ever/ heard of the police /not/ investigating even the most minor of injury incidents involving a motorist? The assertion that the police will as usual spare no effort in an attempt to convict a motorist of the most serious offence possible can be given a reality check easily enough. Here is one example, from this group in 2001. The threads are "Busy Day" and "Update on Rob's Busy day..." ================================================== ===================== "Last Wednesday Rob was shunted from behind by a car. Not serious, no damage to trike or rider except that his foot was run over by the departing car. Duly reported to the police, though unfortunately he only got part of the registration number. "This morning, the police came to his office and arrested him for criminal damage on the car, claiming he'd smashed the windscreen and sod knows what else... They kept him in a cell for two hours before interviewing him. He is now out on bail." ================================================== ===================== "To update on my recent posts about my husband Rob, who was recently hit by a car while riding his trike and then arrested for alleged criminal damage to the car that hit him, his bail expired today and when he arrived at the police station he was charged and will appear in court on Thursday. "From what the police have told him, there is no evidence outside the two conflicting statements, so I've no idea how they can make a case of this. The driver is alleging that Rob did nearly £200 worth of damage to the car (God knows what he's supposed to have done this *with*....) which is apparently much more important than striking someone with a motor vehicle and then driving off without checking to see if they're hurt or not." ================================================== ===================== The above is far from being an isolated case. It is typically only those with the outlook of Daily Wail "journalists" who think that the police are keen to investigate motorists. The police are the usual blend of good bad and indifferent. As such they deserve bouquets and brickbats as appropriate. Anyone who defends them no matter what they do is not doing anyone a favour. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Motorist drives along pavement
On 2006-03-21 17:30:03 +0000, Matt B said:
David Hansen wrote: On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:45:54 +0000 someone who may be Matt B wrote this:- The car driver will, as usual be spared no effort in an attempt to convict him of the most serious offence possible, Ha, ha. Why "ha, ha"? Have you /ever/ heard of the police /not/ investigating even the most minor of injury incidents involving a motorist? If anyone is seriously injured the scene is closed and treated as a potential crime scene (which, of course it is). The road will be closed for hours whilst every stone is turned. If there is /any/ evidence found to support a charge you can be absolutely certain that one will be brought. OTOH, if all attempts to find evidence fail, what would /you/ like to happen? A kangaroo court? A lynching? I will tell you a story about the police and drivers. My brother in law, 4 years ago whilst cycling home from work was hit by a driver. My brother in law was knocked off his bike and had his leg dragged up into the wheel arch, shattering the lower leg and breaking the upper leg, along with concusion, brusing, cuts etc. The driver attempted to drive away which is partly why the injuries were as bad as they were. The driver was stopped by crashing into a lamp-post. The police came along and conducted a breathtest. the driver was 3 times over the limit, however this is not enough for a court so the driver was taken for a blood test, a test the police botched. The result no evidence that he had been drink driving. three and a half years later my brother in law takes the decision that due to his leg not healing that an amputation would probably be the only way to start over. this was done, but he has sinced developed a clot and is on wolfrine(SP?) in an effort to prevent the clot migrating and actually causing a problem or so i understand. What did the driver get? a two year ban, oh yeah, he had already been succesfully prosecuted for drink driving! just to round this happy story off, they aren't entitled to any benefits, i believe the little they have received has to be paid back when the compensation is paid, and still haven't received any compensation after 4 years. What a wonderful legal system MO |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
fined for cycling on the pavement | Ben Fitzgerald | UK | 163 | November 15th 05 10:05 AM |
Critical Mass causes Sacramento Motorist to drive off road | Ifoundmore | Social Issues | 2 | July 18th 05 04:18 PM |
Road tire life span | cheg | Techniques | 77 | June 25th 04 06:44 AM |
Shared pavement cycle paths | Allan | UK | 30 | June 17th 04 11:12 PM |