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

Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrong sideof road is jailed - LONG



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old September 16th 20, 11:11 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrong side of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 00:22, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2020 20:33, TMS320 wrote:
On 15/09/2020 12:09, JNugent wrote:


Do traffic lights apply to cyclists (must cyclists comply with them)?

Yes, or no?

Which is it?


It is in the rules.


Is that a "Yes" or a "No"?


Sigh.

What is the end benefit expected by the rule?


Safety.

For all, including for those passing lawfully through such a junction on
"green".


Then you're assuming the intention of the law. There is nothing special
about you so stop trying to tell others that they should not.

Yes, a driver taking 1.5 - 44 tonnes through at 30mph is dangerous. It
is easy for any observer to see that without any knowledge of the
written rules.

Rephrase. What is the expected benefit of applying the rule to cyclists?
Ads
  #152  
Old September 16th 20, 11:35 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 11:11, TMS320 wrote:

On 16/09/2020 00:21, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2020 20:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 15/09/2020 10:54, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2020 09:32, TMS320 wrote:
On 15/09/2020 00:19, JNugent wrote:
On 14/09/2020 20:44, TMS320 wrote:
On 14/09/2020 16:17, JNugent wrote:

[ ... ]

All court does is to decide whether Her Majesty gives the driver a
smacked botty.


So you "think" that passing cyclists (or perhaps even keyboard
warrior cyclists such as yourself) should be able to decide on
whether drivers have committed an offence.

Obviously. The difference is that when a "decision" is made, unlike
Her Majesty, your "keyboard warrior" has no power or means to give
the culprit a smacked botty.


Er... exactly.

Should it be otherwise?

And if it were, would it be equally acceptable for a normal citizen to
peremptorily find cyclists guilty of causing danger to pedestrians
whose only crime was to be walking along a footway?

Take your time.


Expressing an opinion is the not the same thing as finding guilty.


Indeed it is not.

But perhaps I can remind you that this tangent was entered into by
*you*, with your complaint that the courts don't convict drivers of
dangerous driving sufficiently often for your taste. Posters here are
already well aware of your opinion on such matters - and you must be
well aware of just how highly I value it.

You still have the problem that the difference between drivers causing
danger and cyclists causing danger is the difference between statistics
and perception.


Not at all. Some cyclists seem to have fairly significant problems with
perception; that much is clear.

But aside from that, "causing danger" and "dangerous driving" are not
necessarily the same thing.

As you may be aware (one can never be certain of what you do know), it
is, for instance, dangerous (and a clear and absolute offence) to leave
a parked vehicle within the zig-zag lines on the approach side to a
pedestrian crossing. It is punished by a fine and an endorsement because
of the danger it can cause. But it is not "dangerous driving" within the
meaning of Section 2 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

You (and certain others hereabouts) need to stop bandying words about
and start understanding the law and the issues.

Back to "perception"... Perhaps your perception is simply faulty. That
would explain the dislocation between your odd views of what constitutes
danger (and dangerous driving) and that of the law (and of society in
general) and would also fall in line with the precepts set out by
William of ockham.

Failing to stop and kow-tow to every fairy-cycle on the road 9still less
the footway) is not dangerous driving, or even dangerous.

Even you would support that as a general principle, I expect.

I doubt that even you dare to put pavement cycling in the same
category. Particularly as any argument falls flat in light of
the many places where the mix of cyclist and pedestrian is
allowed.

Where did that come from? What does it have to do with the
rolling review, amendment and consolidation of statute law?

Pavement cycling has been mentioned by you in this thread.

But not within this topic.

If you were to read your posts back you would notice how the matter
frequently and randomly pops up.

Irrelevant.

It is not.

Oh, you mean just because one person does something, it doesn't
"justify" another doing it.


That is a well-established principle.


Well, it is also an established principle that when a cyclist recounts
the occasion of having to dodge actual mortal danger caused by a driver,
trying to counter it by recalling an occasion of seeing a cyclist
breaking the law is rather pathetic.


Who established that?

And see above re the often hyperbolic reactions of cyclists who seem to
be object to the presence of other forms of traffic.

Do you wish to try to state that cycling along pedestrian footways
(which you call "pavement cycling") is lawful?

To remind you, the topic had moved into intention of law and issues
of safety.

On the topic of law and safety, do you wish to try to state that
cycling along pedestrian footways (which you call "pavement
cycling") is lawful?

Some places it is, some places it is not.


I am speaking of *footways* where only walking is allowed in a linear
direction (like the one that runs past my house).

Do you wish to try to claim that cycling along such a footway, some 4'
wide, is lawful or acceptable?


If you tell us where your house is it might be be possible to find out
for you.


Wriggle, wriggle.

  #153  
Old September 16th 20, 11:39 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 11:11, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/09/2020 00:22, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2020 20:33, TMS320 wrote:
On 15/09/2020 12:09, JNugent wrote:


Do traffic lights apply to cyclists (must cyclists comply with them)?

Yes, or no?

Which is it?

It is in the rules.


Is that a "Yes" or a "No"?


Sigh.


Why are you so frightened to answer the question?

What is the end benefit expected by the rule?


Safety.

For all, including for those passing lawfully through such a junction
on "green".


Then you're assuming the intention of the law. There is nothing special
about you so stop trying to tell others that they should not.


The law with respect to traffic lights, give-way markings and signage,
etc, etc, is *clearly* related to the maintenance of safety and the
prevention of conflict between vehicle trajectories. It could have no
other purpose.

Yes, a driver taking 1.5 - 44 tonnes through at 30mph is dangerous. It
is easy for any observer to see that without any knowledge of the
written rules.

Rephrase. What is the expected benefit of applying the rule to cyclists?


Safety.

For all, including for those passing lawfully through such a junction
on "green".

Do you wish to try to assert that it is lawful for a cyclist to pass
through (what is, for him) a red traffic light, despite the priority
being accorded to others (including other cyclists and pedestrians) at
that moment?



  #154  
Old September 16th 20, 07:08 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 11:35, JNugent wrote:

You (and certain others hereabouts) need to stop bandying words about
and start understanding the law and the issues.


This is not a cycling group, not a legal one so there is no need
whatsoever to restrict words to legal definitions.
  #155  
Old September 16th 20, 08:09 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 11:39, JNugent wrote:
On 16/09/2020 11:11, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/09/2020 00:22, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2020 20:33, TMS320 wrote:
On 15/09/2020 12:09, JNugent wrote:

Do traffic lights apply to cyclists (must cyclists comply with them)?

Yes, or no?

Which is it?

It is in the rules.

Is that a "Yes" or a "No"?


Sigh.


Why are you so frightened to answer the question?


Why are you so obsessed with the minutiae of traffic law, rather than
using thought and intelligence?

What is the end benefit expected by the rule?

Safety.

For all, including for those passing lawfully through such a junction
on "green".


Then you're assuming the intention of the law. There is nothing
special about you so stop trying to tell others that they should not.


The law with respect to traffic lights, give-way markings and signage,
etc, etc, is *clearly* related to the maintenance of safety and the
prevention of conflict between vehicle trajectories. It could have no
other purpose.

Yes, a driver taking 1.5 - 44 tonnes through at 30mph is dangerous. It
is easy for any observer to see that without any knowledge of the
written rules.

Rephrase. What is the expected benefit of applying the rule to cyclists?


Safety.


Yesterday I cycled 37km. I went through one set of traffic lights -
twice. I passed something like 100 other junctions (I lost count before
I was a quarter of the way through the gps track), either at t-junctions
or passing the mouth of t-junctions, plus a few roundabouts.

In one direction at the lights, had I ignored a red light, any objective
observer would have seen that there was no safety issue for anybody.
Going in the other direction it would have been very dangerous - for me.
This traffic light has only been in place for about three years so I
have successfully navigated the junction several hundred times
previously, purely under my own wits.

Don't even imagine that you can instruct me about safety.

For all, including for those passing lawfully through such a junction
on "green".

Do you wish to try to assert that it is lawful for a cyclist to pass
through (what is, for him) a red traffic light, despite the priority
being accorded to others (including other cyclists and pedestrians) at
that moment?


I couldn't care less if a cyclist uses a red light as a give way. In my
years as pedestrian, cyclist, driver I have never had to make allowances
for a cyclist.

But when cycling, I have dealt with pedestrians wandering across my path
against a red man and had to wait after my light has gone green for
drivers to go past at speed.
  #156  
Old September 16th 20, 08:15 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 19:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/09/2020 11:35, JNugent wrote:

You (and certain others hereabouts) need to stop bandying words about
and start understanding the law and the issues.


This is not a cycling group, not a legal one so there is no need
whatsoever to restrict words to legal definitions.


....This is a cycling group...
  #157  
Old September 16th 20, 08:41 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 19:08, TMS320 wrote:

On 16/09/2020 11:35, JNugent wrote:

You (and certain others hereabouts) need to stop bandying words about
and start understanding the law and the issues.


This is not a cycling group,


No, I haven't thought so for a long time, either.

not a legal one so there is no need
whatsoever to restrict words to legal definitions.


If you are keen to see convictions for dangerous driving, you need to
realise that that is a legal matter.



  #158  
Old September 16th 20, 08:41 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 20:15, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/09/2020 19:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/09/2020 11:35, JNugent wrote:

You (and certain others hereabouts) need to stop bandying words about
and start understanding the law and the issues.


This is not a cycling group, not a legal one so there is no need
whatsoever to restrict words to legal definitions.


...This is a cycling group...


Which is it (in your opinion)?
  #159  
Old September 16th 20, 08:47 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 20:09, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/09/2020 11:39, JNugent wrote:
On 16/09/2020 11:11, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/09/2020 00:22, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2020 20:33, TMS320 wrote:
On 15/09/2020 12:09, JNugent wrote:

Do traffic lights apply to cyclists (must cyclists comply with them)?

Yes, or no?

Which is it?

It is in the rules.

Is that a "Yes" or a "No"?

Sigh.


Why are you so frightened to answer the question?


Why are you so obsessed with the minutiae of traffic law, rather than
using thought and intelligence?


The detail of the law in important because if you are prepared to let
anyone just disobey the law as a result of their own assessment of what
is dangerous, hazardous, risky or "sensible", you have to let *everyone*
do so.

I am not prepared to accept that in respect of scofflaw chavs such as
drunken drivers or footway cyclists.

What is the end benefit expected by the rule?

Safety.

For all, including for those passing lawfully through such a
junction on "green".

Then you're assuming the intention of the law. There is nothing
special about you so stop trying to tell others that they should not.


The law with respect to traffic lights, give-way markings and signage,
etc, etc, is *clearly* related to the maintenance of safety and the
prevention of conflict between vehicle trajectories. It could have no
other purpose.

Yes, a driver taking 1.5 - 44 tonnes through at 30mph is dangerous.
It is easy for any observer to see that without any knowledge of the
written rules.


Rephrase. What is the expected benefit of applying the rule to cyclists?


Safety.


Yesterday I cycled 37km. I went through one set of traffic lights -
twice. I passed something like 100 other junctions (I lost count before
I was a quarter of the way through the gps track), either at t-junctions
or passing the mouth of t-junctions, plus a few roundabouts.

In one direction at the lights, had I ignored a red light, any objective
observer would have seen that there was no safety issue for anybody.


That's *NOT* your judgment to make. What you are doing there is called
arrogation.

Arrogant people do it.

Going in the other direction it would have been very dangerous - for me.
This traffic light has only been in place for about three years so I
have successfully navigated the junction several hundred times
previously, purely under my own wits.


Passing through red traffic lights?

Seriously?

You're self-obsessed and do not have a thought for others.

Don't even imagine that you can instruct me about safety.


In the circumstances, my neighbour's hamster could usefully instruct you
on safety.

For all, including for those passing lawfully through such a junction
on "green".

Do you wish to try to assert that it is lawful for a cyclist to pass
through (what is, for him) a red traffic light, despite the priority
being accorded to others (including other cyclists and pedestrians) at
that moment?


I couldn't care less if a cyclist uses a red light as a give way. In my
years as pedestrian, cyclist, driver I have never had to make allowances
for a cyclist.

But when cycling, I have dealt with pedestrians wandering across my path
against a red man and had to wait after my light has gone green for
drivers to go past at speed.


Is your criminal behaviour excused because a few bigger boys did it?
  #160  
Old September 16th 20, 08:50 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Driver on drugs who mowed down group of cyclists while on wrongside of road is jailed - LONG

On 16/09/2020 20:41, JNugent wrote:
On 16/09/2020 19:08, TMS320 wrote:

On 16/09/2020 11:35, JNugent wrote:

You (and certain others hereabouts) need to stop bandying words about
and start understanding the law and the issues.


This is not a cycling group,


No, I haven't thought so for a long time, either.

not a legal one so there is no need whatsoever to restrict words to
legal definitions.


If you are keen to see convictions for dangerous driving, you need to
realise that that is a legal matter.


I vote for this to be entered for stupid comment of the year.
 




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
Driver jailed for over 2 years after injuring cyclist - LONG Simon Mason[_6_] UK 2 June 26th 20 11:07 AM
Car driver on wrong side of the road causes danger Simon Mason[_6_] UK 1 January 9th 20 10:12 AM
Car driver high on drugs gets jailed [email protected] UK 0 July 2nd 18 09:20 AM
Driver jailed for putting child cyclists at risk Alycidon UK 1 October 25th 15 06:15 PM
US driver jailed for 5 years for assaulting cyclists Simon Mason UK 210 January 14th 10 08:54 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.