|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (on the back)
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. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
On 23/09/2017 20:31, Nick wrote:
On 23/09/2017 19:44, MrCheerful wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:18, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 14:45, MrCheerful wrote: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510 So the BMW accelerates at the cyclist, although the cyclist crossing is clearly visible from the start. If the cyclist had stopped or gone back on him self his the BMW would have hit him. So a bit like Alliston's offence. Maybe a bit worse because the car driver accelerates. Nothing like, one crashed into a pedestrian, causing her death, while screaming obscenities and riding an illegal bicycle. You mean trying to alert the pedestrian of his presence. The other did not collide with or verbally assault a cyclist that clearly has no thought for himself or others.Â* He could have done so, but did not. AIUI Alliston only collided with the pedestrian because she moved unexpectedly. If the cyclist had moved unexpectedly there would have been a collision. I see the BMW jumped the light too, he didn't wait for green. That seems to me to be as significant as Alliston's lack of a front brake. The green light for the car is clearly visible. Therefore the cyclist went over a red light. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
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 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 11:26:29 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote:
On 23/09/2017 20:31, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:44, MrCheerful wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:18, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 14:45, MrCheerful wrote: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510 So the BMW accelerates at the cyclist, although the cyclist crossing is clearly visible from the start. If the cyclist had stopped or gone back on him self his the BMW would have hit him. So a bit like Alliston's offence. Maybe a bit worse because the car driver accelerates. Nothing like, one crashed into a pedestrian, causing her death, while screaming obscenities and riding an illegal bicycle. You mean trying to alert the pedestrian of his presence. The other did not collide with or verbally assault a cyclist that clearly has no thought for himself or others.Â* He could have done so, but did not. AIUI Alliston only collided with the pedestrian because she moved unexpectedly. If the cyclist had moved unexpectedly there would have been a collision. I see the BMW jumped the light too, he didn't wait for green. That seems to me to be as significant as Alliston's lack of a front brake. The green light for the car is clearly visible. After the subsidised road user entered the junction and after the paying road user was already in the junction. Therefore the cyclist went over a red light. Where in the video can we see this? Don't wriggle, just tell us at which point we can where 'the cyclist went over a red light'. Or grow up and admit you are wrong. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
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. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
On 23/09/2017 23:26, MrCheerful wrote:
On 23/09/2017 20:31, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:44, MrCheerful wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:18, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 14:45, MrCheerful wrote: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510 So the BMW accelerates at the cyclist, although the cyclist crossing is clearly visible from the start. If the cyclist had stopped or gone back on him self his the BMW would have hit him. So a bit like Alliston's offence. Maybe a bit worse because the car driver accelerates. Nothing like, one crashed into a pedestrian, causing her death, while screaming obscenities and riding an illegal bicycle. You mean trying to alert the pedestrian of his presence. The other did not collide with or verbally assault a cyclist that clearly has no thought for himself or others.Â* He could have done so, but did not. AIUI Alliston only collided with the pedestrian because she moved unexpectedly. If the cyclist had moved unexpectedly there would have been a collision. I see the BMW jumped the light too, he didn't wait for green. That seems to me to be as significant as Alliston's lack of a front brake. The green light for the car is clearly visible.Â* Therefore the cyclist went over a red light. We are talking about it from the perspective of the BMW. He jumped the light, Alliston didn't. He accelerated at the person in the road, Alliston decelerated. The BMW can claim he had right of way, just like Alliston did, but we know that wouldn't be true. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
On 24/09/2017 08:59, Nick wrote:
On 23/09/2017 23:26, MrCheerful wrote: On 23/09/2017 20:31, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:44, MrCheerful wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:18, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 14:45, MrCheerful wrote: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510 So the BMW accelerates at the cyclist, although the cyclist crossing is clearly visible from the start. If the cyclist had stopped or gone back on him self his the BMW would have hit him. So a bit like Alliston's offence. Maybe a bit worse because the car driver accelerates. Nothing like, one crashed into a pedestrian, causing her death, while screaming obscenities and riding an illegal bicycle. You mean trying to alert the pedestrian of his presence. The other did not collide with or verbally assault a cyclist that clearly has no thought for himself or others.Â* He could have done so, but did not. AIUI Alliston only collided with the pedestrian because she moved unexpectedly. If the cyclist had moved unexpectedly there would have been a collision. I see the BMW jumped the light too, he didn't wait for green. That seems to me to be as significant as Alliston's lack of a front brake. The green light for the car is clearly visible.Â* Therefore the cyclist went over a red light. We are talking about it from the perspective of the BMW. He jumped the light, Alliston didn't. He accelerated at the person in the road, Alliston decelerated. The BMW can claim he had right of way, just like Alliston did, but we know that wouldn't be true. The car did not collide with the bicycle, which HAD gone over a stop line/red light. The cyclist not only endangered himself but also a child, that shows incredible stupidity/selfishness. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
On 24/09/2017 08:59, Nick wrote:
On 23/09/2017 23:26, MrCheerful wrote: On 23/09/2017 20:31, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:44, MrCheerful wrote: On 23/09/2017 19:18, Nick wrote: On 23/09/2017 14:45, MrCheerful wrote: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...clist-13643510 So the BMW accelerates at the cyclist, although the cyclist crossing is clearly visible from the start. If the cyclist had stopped or gone back on him self his the BMW would have hit him. So a bit like Alliston's offence. Maybe a bit worse because the car driver accelerates. Nothing like, one crashed into a pedestrian, causing her death, while screaming obscenities and riding an illegal bicycle. You mean trying to alert the pedestrian of his presence. The other did not collide with or verbally assault a cyclist that clearly has no thought for himself or others.Â* He could have done so, but did not. AIUI Alliston only collided with the pedestrian because she moved unexpectedly. If the cyclist had moved unexpectedly there would have been a collision. I see the BMW jumped the light too, he didn't wait for green. That seems to me to be as significant as Alliston's lack of a front brake. The green light for the car is clearly visible.Â* Therefore the cyclist went over a red light. We are talking about it from the perspective of the BMW. He jumped the light, Alliston didn't. He accelerated at the person in the road, Alliston decelerated. The BMW can claim he had right of way, just like Alliston did, but we know that wouldn't be true. How did you find out that the BMW had no brakes? And please enlighten us as to what the driver had posted on social media and other websites about his intentions towards other road-users. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
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. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist jumps red light for safety, but what about the child? (onthe back)
On 24/09/2017 10:00, MrCheerful wrote:
The BMW can claim he had right of way, just like Alliston did, but we know that wouldn't be true. The car did not collide with the bicycle, Yes I already discussed that. If the bike had moved erratically it could have caused a collision which the BMW would have been unable to avoid. This is similar to the Alliston case. Some people on these groups present the argument that people should be punished based upon their level of culpability rather than the outcome. Without considering the outcome the BMW driver appears to be at least as culpable as Alliston. If you would prefer not to consider culpability but just the outcome, I agree it would be a good deterrent to see all vehicle drivers who kill a pedestrian jailed. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cyclist mows down a child, blames the child and clears off. | MrCheerful | UK | 3 | November 30th 16 04:44 PM |
Cyclist batters child cyclist after crash in a park | MrCheerful | UK | 30 | October 21st 16 08:03 AM |
Child maimed by pavement cyclist, guess what? The cyclist rode away. | MrCheerful | UK | 17 | March 31st 16 02:51 PM |
Like it or not, most Americans must go around with the bike on theback of the car to get somewhere | ComandanteBanana | Social Issues | 101 | July 20th 09 05:31 PM |
A Poster Child for Safety Gear I Am.... | Trapper | Unicycling | 4 | September 12th 05 02:13 PM |