A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 6th 19, 11:55 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,730
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 06/09/2019 11:46, JNugent wrote:
On 06/09/2019 08:38, TMS320 wrote:
On 06/09/2019 00:31, JNugent wrote:
On 06/09/2019 00:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 12:15, JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2019 00:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway,
on a bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?

The "victim" was threatened by the "offender's" dangerous
behaviour, of course.

(Note I have put back the quotes.)

You can do as you like. It doesn't make cycling along the "pavement"
lawful.


Whether or not they did something against the rules is irrelevant to
final situation.


What "final situation"?


Oh, you didn't finish reading the article. No wonder you got victim and
offender the wrong way round.

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.

Ask the victim whether he was in danger from the illegal cycling, not
me. He's the only one who can judge it. And he had a right to
remonstrate at the very least.


I was telling you not asking.


That's even sillier than your previous position.


What was my previous position?

There's a reason why cycling along footways is not allowed. Have a
think and see whether you can guess what it is.


The reason is a law going back to 1835. The basic idea being to
provide an area that would be clear of animal ****.


You're really scraping that barrel.


Or was it 1885? I can't remember. Either way it was long before
bicycles, cars and 44t lorries.

Ads
  #22  
Old September 7th 19, 12:10 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,730
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 06/09/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 8:38:21 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

Whether or not they did something against the rules is irrelevant
to final situation.


You are wasting your time. Nugents will never admit he is wrong. They
will keep reducing the discussion to the tiny, tiny kernel of
argument he has not lost and pretend that was what the argument was
all about.


Yes, but eventually it falls into a vortex of its own anti-logic.
Unfortunately it's not possible to do anything about it reappearing on
the other side.

There is no evidence in the report that the victim was
cycling on the footway. 'Pushed into the road' could mean many
things.


Well, it means that the person was going slowly and carefully. It is
only possible to attack that sort. A woman too.
  #23  
Old September 7th 19, 12:14 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Jester
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,375
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On Saturday, September 7, 2019 at 12:10:04 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 06/09/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote:


There is no evidence in the report that the victim was
cycling on the footway. 'Pushed into the road' could mean many
things.


Well, it means that the person was going slowly and carefully. It is
only possible to attack that sort. A woman too.


It could be just sloppy reporting by a motorist.
The victim was most likely cycling along the edge of the carriageway and was pushed over into the part of the carriageway used by 'traffic'.
The police are calling the cyclist the victim and absent evidence to the contrary we must assume the victim was cycling legally.



  #24  
Old September 7th 19, 02:22 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Jester
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,375
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 12:20:40 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Good point. The Nugents and the Pounders rant about pavement cyclists until the council workers and their can of Magic White Paint create a shared use path, then we are told cyclists should not be on the carriageway.
  #25  
Old September 7th 19, 03:18 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,467
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 07/09/2019 14:22, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 12:20:40 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Good point. The Nugents and the Pounders rant about pavement cyclists until the council workers and their can of Magic White Paint create a shared use path, then we are told cyclists should not be on the carriageway.


Not by me, you aren't. Footways are sometimes used - lazily and cheaply
- as cycle routes by local authorities, but no-one sensible agrees with
it. Cyclists belong on the carriageway, taking their chances with the
rest of the traffic and complying with traffic law.
  #26  
Old September 7th 19, 04:29 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mr Pounder Esquire
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,426
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

JNugent wrote:
On 07/09/2019 14:22, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 12:20:40 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Good point. The Nugents and the Pounders rant about pavement
cyclists until the council workers and their can of Magic White
Paint create a shared use path, then we are told cyclists should not
be on the carriageway.


Not by me, you aren't. Footways are sometimes used - lazily and
cheaply - as cycle routes by local authorities, but no-one sensible
agrees with it. Cyclists belong on the carriageway, taking their
chances with the rest of the traffic and complying with traffic law.


Is it not fun to watch the cyclists squirm?


  #27  
Old September 7th 19, 04:30 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,730
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 07/09/2019 14:22, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 12:20:40 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by
the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Good point.


Thank you.
  #28  
Old September 7th 19, 09:26 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,730
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 07/09/2019 15:18, JNugent wrote:
On 07/09/2019 14:22, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 12:20:40 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.

Good point. The Nugents and the Pounders rant about pavement cyclists
until the council workers and their can of Magic White Paint create a
shared use path, then we are told cyclists should not be on the
carriageway.


Not by me, you aren't. Footways are sometimes used - lazily and cheaply
- as cycle routes by local authorities,


And I bet you never walk along any of them.
  #29  
Old September 7th 19, 11:44 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,467
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 07/09/2019 21:26, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/09/2019 15:18, JNugent wrote:
On 07/09/2019 14:22, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 12:20:40 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.

Good point. The Nugents and the Pounders rant about pavement cyclists
until the council workers and their can of Magic White Paint create a
shared use path, then we are told cyclists should not be on the
carriageway.


Not by me, you aren't. Footways are sometimes used - lazily and
cheaply - as cycle routes by local authorities,


And I bet you never walk along any of them.


Assuming you know (perhaps not the safest of assumptions), what are you
talking about?

  #30  
Old September 9th 19, 10:17 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kerr-Mudd,John[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 201
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On Sat, 07 Sep 2019 15:29:00 GMT, "Mr Pounder Esquire"
wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 07/09/2019 14:22, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 12:20:40 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Good point. The Nugents and the Pounders rant about pavement
cyclists until the council workers and their can of Magic White
Paint create a shared use path, then we are told cyclists should not
be on the carriageway.


Not by me, you aren't. Footways are sometimes used - lazily and
cheaply - as cycle routes by local authorities, but no-one sensible
agrees with it. Cyclists belong on the carriageway, taking their
chances with the rest of the traffic and complying with traffic law.


Is it not fun to watch the cyclists squirm?

Perv.



--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Giro d'Italia Stage 3: Goss takes win as crash brings downCavendish and takes out leader Phinney too Simon Mason[_4_] UK 0 May 8th 12 12:43 PM
Hands gagtape Unicycling 13 August 9th 07 12:00 AM
Look Ma! No hands! Paul Weaver UK 33 August 4th 06 05:29 PM
Look, Ma. No hands! Henry Recumbent Biking 18 August 13th 04 07:36 PM
ok, hands up jim beam Techniques 58 September 13th 03 03:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.