Driver who killed cyclist told to expect jail.

boulder wrote:
I also find it disappointing that the Times article on this mentioned
the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

no, he died of head injuries..


Fair enough, but being T-boned at 45mph is pretty lethal even if you're
sitting in a car.

"boulder" wrote in message
...


Yeah! I vote we lock his body up for 6 months - that's what these
people need, a taste of prison, that'll learn him.

And repeat offenders - string em up. Anyone killed twice going
through a red light, automatic death penalty I reckon.

Twit.

do be so ridiculous. It would have been enough just to tie his body up
for a few days on the traffic lights he ignored.
Some people have to try to make light of everything

Twit ? Ouch
You make the mistake of confusing the offence of using a hand-held mobile
whilst driving with that of causing death by dangerous driving. The woman is
not being imprisoned for using the mobile, but for not looking where she was
going. All other contributory factors, the mobile use , the red-light
jumping, are secondary to this.

In article , boulder
says...

I also find it disappointing that the Times article on this mentioned
the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

no, he died of head injuries..

A helmet is designed to provide protection if you fall off a bike, not
if you're hit with a ton of metal doing 45mph.

On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 10:11:32 +0000 someone who may be Paul Boyd
usenet.is.worse@plusnet wrote this:-

She was doing 45mph in a 30mph limit, through a junction, whilst texting
on her phone.

Apparently she also had a long criminal career before this crash,
involving several cases of exceeding the speed limit.



--
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

On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 10:30:22 -0000 someone who may be "boulder"
wrote this:-

I also find it disappointing that the Times article on this mentioned
the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

no, he died of head injuries..

Cycle helmets might provide some protection at speeds up to around
12mph. At roughly four times that speed they are immaterial. "The
Times" was victim blaming in mentioning what clothes the cyclist was
not wearing.



--
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

David Hansen wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 10:30:22 -0000 someone who may be "boulder"
wrote this:-


I also find it disappointing that the Times article on this mentioned
the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

no, he died of head injuries..


Cycle helmets might provide some protection at speeds up to around
12mph. At roughly four times that speed they are immaterial. "The
Times" was victim blaming in mentioning what clothes the cyclist was
not wearing.

He was his own victim. Had he waited at the red lights, the outcome
would have been completely different. But he knew better than to wait
at red lights.

On 3 Feb, 11:05, JNugent
wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 10:30:22 -0000 someone who may be "boulder"
wrote this:-

I also find it disappointing that the Times article on this mentioned
the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

no, he died of head injuries..

Cycle helmets might provide some protection at speeds up to around
12mph. At roughly four times that speed they are immaterial. "The
Times" was victim blaming in mentioning what clothes the cyclist was
not wearing.

He was his own victim. Had he waited at the red lights, the outcome
would have been completely different. But he knew better than to wait
at red lights.


Thats true, but not the full story though. The driver was an accident
waiting to happen. Texting while driving is lunacy and getting 9
points on your licence by speeding on the same stretch of road shows a
complete lack of awareness of one's surroundings.

However by jumping the red light the cyclist was partly to blame and
will give her a discount on her sentence

Sir Jeremy wrote:

JNugent wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
"boulder" wrote:

I also find it disappointing that the Times article on this mentioned
the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

no, he died of head injuries..

Cycle helmets might provide some protection at speeds up to around
12mph. At roughly four times that speed they are immaterial. "The
Times" was victim blaming in mentioning what clothes the cyclist was
not wearing.

He was his own victim. Had he waited at the red lights, the outcome
would have been completely different. But he knew better than to wait
at red lights.

Thats true, but not the full story though. The driver was an accident
waiting to happen. Texting while driving is lunacy and getting 9
points on your licence by speeding on the same stretch of road shows a
complete lack of awareness of one's surroundings.

Absolutely.

However by jumping the red light the cyclist was partly to blame and
will give her a discount on her sentence.

Quite. As someone else has said, there wouldn't have been a collision
(on that occasion, at least) if the unfortunate cyclist had not gone
through the red light.

On Feb 3, 9:43 am, David Hansen
wrote:
On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 10:11:32 +0000 someone who may be Paul Boyd
usenet.is.worse@plusnet wrote this:-

She was doing 45mph in a 30mph limit, through a junction, whilst texting
on her phone.

Apparently she also had a long criminal career before this crash,
involving several cases of exceeding the speed limit.

The fact she had been caught 3 times on that stretch of road before
indicates she wasn't aware of her surroundings, I doubt she even knew
what the speed limit was, or what speed she was traveling at.

Had it been a pedestrian just walking, across the road, the same thing
would have happened, but there would be no blame for crossing without
a green man, and no complaints about a pedestrian not wearing a helmet
(which pedestrians should do when crossing, or walking near, the road
IMO)

Had it been a pedestrian just walking, across the road, the same thing
would have happened, but there would be no blame for crossing without
a green man, and no complaints about a pedestrian not wearing a helmet
(which pedestrians should do when crossing, or walking near, the road
IMO)

if there was a usenet group uk.rec.pedestrian, full of militant people who
like
to cross a road now and again, maybe things would be different