Cyclist Killed by "Good" Pothole

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm

Those who were/are of the opinion that potholes are a good thing because
they "slow traffic down" should HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME. It just goes
to show the deplorable mentality of the car-haters: *anything* goes just
as long as motorists suffer. Potholes are A Good Thing because they
inconvenience drivers, and *nothing* else matters, be it the danger
posed to cyclists or anything else. Persecuting motorists is the top,
the *only* priority. It's the same with speed cameras: who cares if all
road users are being endangered by them as long as the cager scum are
being bullied sufficiently?

These car-haters are in no way "pro-cycling" or "pro-safety": they're
quite the opposite in that they frequently advocate hazards that they
know to be KILLING CYCLISTS. They are worse enemies of proper cyclists
than any "petrolhead" could ever be. They have BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS.

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:14:01 +0100, Guy Cuthbertson
wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm

Those who were/are of the opinion that potholes are a good thing because
they "slow traffic down" should HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME. It just goes
to show the deplorable mentality of the car-haters: *anything* goes just
as long as motorists suffer. Potholes are A Good Thing because they
inconvenience drivers, and *nothing* else matters, be it the danger
posed to cyclists or anything else. Persecuting motorists is the top,
the *only* priority. It's the same with speed cameras: who cares if all
road users are being endangered by them as long as the cager scum are
being bullied sufficiently?

These car-haters are in no way "pro-cycling" or "pro-safety": they're
quite the opposite in that they frequently advocate hazards that they
know to be KILLING CYCLISTS. They are worse enemies of proper cyclists
than any "petrolhead" could ever be. They have BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS.

Three names in an hour, you should really seek help or you might
forget who you really are. Do Zen allow you to post under as many
false names?

PhilO wrote:
On 31 Mar, 08:58, bugbear wrote:
Guy Cuthbertson wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm
I think a lorry was also involved.

BugBear

and given the width of the road and the double white lines down the
middle of it, the pothole may have been irrelvant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-the-A338.html

Does anyone think there is enough room for a lorry to overtake a
cyclist without crossing the centre lines here (even with the pothole
filled in)?

PhilO
No, there isn't enough room. Especially with that grate there now. I
wonder if the driver was one of those who think that they're not allowed
to cross the double white lines.

--
Roger Thorpe

....Wait a minute, It's stopped raining/
Guys are swimming, guys are sailing.....

On 31 Mar, 16:15, Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:
PhilO considered Wed, 31 Mar 2010 05:07:06
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:





On 31 Mar, 08:58, bugbear wrote:
Guy Cuthbertson wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm

I think a lorry was also involved.

* * BugBear

and given the width of the road and the double white lines down the
middle of it, the pothole may have been irrelvant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage..._boys/2912830/...

Does anyone think there is enough room for a lorry to overtake a
cyclist without crossing the centre lines here (even with the pothole
filled in)?

Certainly not legally.

The legality of the manuouver at that point would depend on the speed
of a cyclist.

On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:15:33 +0100, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

PhilO considered Wed, 31 Mar 2010 05:07:06
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On 31 Mar, 08:58, bugbear wrote:
Guy Cuthbertson wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm

I think a lorry was also involved.

* * BugBear

and given the width of the road and the double white lines down the
middle of it, the pothole may have been irrelvant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-the-A338.html

Does anyone think there is enough room for a lorry to overtake a
cyclist without crossing the centre lines here (even with the pothole
filled in)?

Certainly not legally.


Oh - really?

Feel free to explain - I know that you are an expert on the law.

--

"wearing helmets can sometimes increase the chance of a cyclist being
involved in an accident."

That august body The CTC

(They've already had a slap for lying by the ASA)

On Apr 1, 10:51*pm, Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk
wrote:
Roger Thorpe considered Wed, 31
Mar 2010 13:48:02 +0100 the perfect time to write:



PhilO wrote:
On 31 Mar, 08:58, bugbear wrote:
Guy Cuthbertson wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm
I think a lorry was also involved.

* * BugBear

and given the width of the road and the double white lines down the
middle of it, the pothole may have been irrelvant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage..._boys/2912830/....

Does anyone think there is enough room for a lorry to overtake a
cyclist without crossing the centre lines here (even with the pothole
filled in)?

PhilO
No, there isn't enough room. Especially with that grate there now. I
wonder if the driver was one of those who think that they're not allowed
to cross the double white lines.

If the cyclist was doing more than 10mph, they'd be right.
And there doesn't seem to be any particular reason to suspect that a
young, fit (literally fighting fit) member of HM forces would be
dawdling along at such a slow speed.

A properly driven vehicle would have waited until it was safe and
legal to pass, instead of killing someone for getting in the way.

Yet again PhilWLee accuses people because of his inside knowlwdge.,
"he was killed for getting in the way"

WSR

On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 22:53:44 +0100, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

ash considered Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:10:28
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On 31 Mar, 16:15, Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:
PhilO considered Wed, 31 Mar 2010 05:07:06
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:





On 31 Mar, 08:58, bugbear wrote:
Guy Cuthbertson wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm

I think a lorry was also involved.

* * BugBear

and given the width of the road and the double white lines down the
middle of it, the pothole may have been irrelvant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage..._boys/2912830/...

Does anyone think there is enough room for a lorry to overtake a
cyclist without crossing the centre lines here (even with the pothole

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

filled in)?

Certainly not legally.

The legality of the manuouver at that point would depend on the speed
of a cyclist.

Already noted - see above (in a fixed font)


No - not already - 24 hours plus after you were corrected on yet
another legal point.

Wot an Anchor.




--

"wearing helmets can sometimes increase the chance of a cyclist being
involved in an accident."

That august body The CTC

(They've already had a slap for lying by the ASA)

On 1 Apr, 22:51, Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:
Roger Thorpe considered Wed, 31
Mar 2010 13:48:02 +0100 the perfect time to write:





PhilO wrote:
On 31 Mar, 08:58, bugbear wrote:
Guy Cuthbertson wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/8594682.stm
I think a lorry was also involved.

* * BugBear

and given the width of the road and the double white lines down the
middle of it, the pothole may have been irrelvant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage..._boys/2912830/....

Does anyone think there is enough room for a lorry to overtake a
cyclist without crossing the centre lines here (even with the pothole
filled in)?

PhilO
No, there isn't enough room. Especially with that grate there now. I
wonder if the driver was one of those who think that they're not allowed
to cross the double white lines.

If the cyclist was doing more than 10mph, they'd be right.
And there doesn't seem to be any particular reason to suspect that a
young, fit (literally fighting fit) member of HM forces would be
dawdling along at such a slow speed.

A properly driven vehicle would have waited until it was safe and
legal to pass, instead of killing someone for getting in the way.

With greatest respect to the guy, it was stated it was raining hard,
and he was negotiating a very badly potholed road. Any assumption he
was going like a bat out of hell is just that - an assumption