|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
|
Ads |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
Matt B wrote:
the law applies the principle that not only are motorists only minimally responsible for their actions, most often they should not be held to be at all responsible for the consequences of their actions. No, I disagree with that. The law has historically (rightly IMHO) distinguished between the intention, and the consequences, of an action. Disagree with what? The legal situation is as I state it, and it seems you agree with it. Whilst this is the case with motoring law it is not universally applied. For example, stab someone without the intention of killing them, and they non-the less die, you will face a manslaughter charge, not a wounding charge. In any case, the consequences of an act are not the only factor, the degree of culpability is vital too, and in most road crashes, drivers are to culpable to a high degree. Speed limit enforcement is controversial everywhere, and its impact on road casualties is by no means clear-cut. There are more ways to reduce traffic speeds than by applying arbitrary speed limits. It would surely be better to tackle the 'disease' rather than the 'symptoms'. Pray tell, which motoring lobby group do you subscribe to? The ABD? ... the early motorists were drawn from the 'social elite', and as such both expected to be able to act as they more or less pleased and were able to use their considerable social power to 'protect their interests' as motorists, in particular ensuring that no one would hold them properly to account should one of 'the lower orders' 'get in the way' and be killed as they sped along. Slightly disingenuous, perhaps, but certainly it was felt that motor vehicles should be allowed to progress, unhindered by other road users. Not 'disingenuous' at all. A matter of historical record. To Quote Ruth Brandon (another cyclist-hater by the way) from her book 'Automobile' '...motorists behavior invited excess [punishment]. And no one seemed able or willing to curb it. For the section of society from which motorists were drawn was the very section accustomed to do the curbing. They were the ones who made the rules and set the standards of behaviour. Any attempt to regulate them was seen as an insult, and they used all their considerable muscle to defeat such socialist notions.' Plenty of the original sources I have on file paint exactly the same picture. and the law itself is part of the environment in which the driver operates. Yes, and motoring is quite unique in the quantity of unnecessary legislation created in an attempt to control it and at the same time liberalise it. Good God, you are not another 'libertarian' crank are you. If so that would explain a lot. However, unless drivers know that they will be held to be properly responsible if the run someone down, a simple reduction in speed will not encourage motorists to drive with greater consideration. Is that why you don't knock over old people and children willy-nilly in pedestrian plazas - because you know that the law will punish you heavily? No. You don't (I assume ;-)) because it is not socially acceptable and, anyway, you're a decent considerate sort of chap! That might be so in my case, but plenty of people out there are NOT 'decent considerate' chaps, and I have no doubt that in many cases the known laxity of the law, for example in relation to 'hit and run' offences, is a major reason why the occurance of such offences is so high. Changing the environment can only go so far. Again, think pedestrian plazas. What controls the behaviour of the crowds during Christmas shopping peaks? Laws? Regulations? Punishments? Enforcement? How many times do you hold a door open for someone, or accept an open door from someone else - with thanks? Do you think motorists are made of different stuff - or could someof it possibly be down to the position they are given. The main difference is that a motorist sits in a tin and glass box, in their own space and psychologically separated from the external world. Plus cars can have a very powerful 'empowering' effect, in fact this is the message most often used by advertisers. Being in a car has a powerful effect on its user, something which is well documented. Marsh and Collett in 'Driving Passion; the psychology of the car (1986) write that the car: 'conjures up images of speed, excitement and vitality. At the same time it also communicates a sense of cosy seclusion- a womb-like refuge. Its potential deadliness gives it an air of aggression whilst its power and shape endow it with a sense of sexual potency... 'It is precisely because the car can communicate such a variety of messages that it has captured our imagination. As if this were not enough, we have provided the automobile with the potential for communicating a second set of symbolic messages. These are to do with the style and class, status, elegance and personal taste of the individual. This combination of both types of symbols makes the car the most psychologically expressive object that has so far been devised.' In short, once in a car people tend to become 'motorists', or as more recent research suggests, simply themselves: '... the on-road environment is conducive to impatience and aggression, and the fact of being in a car makes many people less concerned about the social and physical consequences of displaying this type of behaviour. This combination of environment and security means that many people are prone to act in a more 'primal' way than they otherwise would. Indeed, it does seem possible that people have a latent capacity to be disrespectful, but are persuaded to be respectful by fear of the consequences and social inhibition. By removing this danger and inhibition, the driving situation allows them to fulfil their 'natural' urge to be disrespectful.' From Respect on the road: Qualitative research to explore public attitudes towards, and participation in anti-social behaviour on the roads. Published: 12 June 2006. Seven Dials is in London (UK) - and it seems to work. Britain is one of the most socially responsible nations on the planet! Which planet is that? It's certainly not planet Earth where I live. After the Thatcher/Blairite program of social engineering I feel it can now be truly said that in the UK 'there is no such thing as society'. The core problem is that, as any group in a position of power, motorists are generally resistant to ANY changes which erode their power base, Where and how did they resist the Seven Dials scheme? Do they rebel against it? Do they ignore it? No, it is a given, and so is accepted 'as is'. I wouldn't be in the least surprised if the local authority was deluged with objections from motorists. The ABD encourages it's members to object to any sort of traffic calming on principle, calling the 'traffic jamming' schemes and so on. When I worked in a local authority highways team the objections to any sort of traffic calming, or pedestrianised or similar scheme were voluminous. We even used to get response from drivers to consultations saying things like 'Put in any more traffic calming schemes and I will come down there, find who is responsible and punch their face from one end of the road to the other, then back again,' To recall one memorable response. or the creation of 'woonerfs' These are widespread in the UK as 'homezones', and welcomed practically everywhere they are created. By residents yes. By drivers generally no. Just look at 'Safespeed's views on homezones and 20 Mph zones... Crime is crime. We don't need special crimes created to target motorists when we already have shed-loads of generic crimes. Your 'libertarian' agenda is showing again. What would be the appropriate charge for driving whilst uninsured or driving under the influence of alcohol, theft? Also just consider the difficulties in proving many 'generic' offences, even motoring ones such as 'dangerous driving', to the required degree... and as you point out, as long as motorists continue to maintain their power base, they will also continue to abuse it. So remove it - simple. At last something we can agree on. If, as a motorist (or as a cyclist or pedestrian), you had to negotiate by eye-contact, with every pedestrian, every cyclist, every motorist, and every other road user, who goes first into the piece of road that you plan to use next, do you think that you would be driving at much more than walking pace in a bust street environment? It is nothing but the priorities given to motorised traffic that causes all the problems. And the way to ensure that motorists DO drive in such a manner is to change the law so that any driver who hits a pedestrian or cyclist is always held to be at least party responsible, as is the case in Continental Europe. (And perhaps the introduction of automated speed enforcement). |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
spindrift wrote:
Matt B wrote: "We see the exact opposite at Seven Dials in London, where there are no lines, signs, or signals. Cars, lorries, taxis stop half-way round the roundabout to wait for cyclists or pedestrians taking the shortest route across the junction, or taking photos, or talking." You've clearly never negotiated this roundabout by bike. This junction is a nightmare, cars and vans edge out Ah, "edge out". and block the roundabout so that you have to slam your brakes on in the middle of the roundabout. Not if you use it with the same respect as the motorists and "edge out" yourself. There is anarchy at this roundabout, That is the idea. no driver takes a blind bit of notice of cyclists Respect is mutual. If a yob pushes past you as a pedestrian would you not treat him with contempt. I have seen taxis and lorries waiting whilst a tourist photographed his partner posing in the middle of the road in front of the monument on the roundabout. No aggression was displayed. I've observed cyclists crossing that junction - most do it cautiously, some go around the roundabout the 'wrong' way, I've never seen a problem. I've seen a disrespectful cyclist zooming across with no regard for other users - zig-zagging between stationary taxis and chatting pedestrians - but he was tolerated as a typical high-spirited asbo candidate. here and accidents are common, Can you cite sources? Are they more common and more (or less) serious than at a similar junction with conventional traffic management? including the florist's van that sideswiped me. Did you report it? Was it your or their 'fault'? Have you ever been involved in a similar, or worse, incident elsewhere? -- Matt B |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
Matt B wrote: spindrift wrote: Matt B wrote: "We see the exact opposite at Seven Dials in London, where there are no lines, signs, or signals. Cars, lorries, taxis stop half-way round the roundabout to wait for cyclists or pedestrians taking the shortest route across the junction, or taking photos, or talking." You've clearly never negotiated this roundabout by bike. This junction is a nightmare, cars and vans edge out Ah, "edge out". and block the roundabout so that you have to slam your brakes on in the middle of the roundabout. Not if you use it with the same respect as the motorists and "edge out" yourself. There is anarchy at this roundabout, That is the idea. no driver takes a blind bit of notice of cyclists Respect is mutual. If a yob pushes past you as a pedestrian would you not treat him with contempt. I have seen taxis and lorries waiting whilst a tourist photographed his partner posing in the middle of the road in front of the monument on the roundabout. No aggression was displayed. I've observed cyclists crossing that junction - most do it cautiously, some go around the roundabout the 'wrong' way, I've never seen a problem. I've seen a disrespectful cyclist zooming across with no regard for other users - zig-zagging between stationary taxis and chatting pedestrians - but he was tolerated as a typical high-spirited asbo candidate. here and accidents are common, Can you cite sources? Are they more common and more (or less) serious than at a similar junction with conventional traffic management? including the florist's van that sideswiped me. Did you report it? Was it your or their 'fault'? Have you ever been involved in a similar, or worse, incident elsewhere? -- Matt B You've never cycled this roundabout, have you? I obey the rules of the road, the vehicles ignore them and place me in danger. Meet up one day this week on a bike and I'll show you. Maybe when you see it for yourself you'll understand how dangerous it is. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
|
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
spindrift wrote:
Matt B wrote: spindrift wrote: You've never cycled this roundabout, have you? I obey the rules of the road, the vehicles ignore them and place me in danger. The only useful rule there is that there are no rules. That is why it is such an elegant solution. What 'rules' are you obeying, and which are the motorists ignoring? Meet up one day this week on a bike and I'll show you. Maybe when you see it for yourself you'll understand how dangerous it is. I've seen it - but never seen the dangers you describe. Can you cite any news reports? -- Matt B |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
Matt B wrote: spindrift wrote: Matt B wrote: "We see the exact opposite at Seven Dials in London, where there are no lines, signs, or signals. Cars, lorries, taxis stop half-way round the roundabout to wait for cyclists or pedestrians taking the shortest route across the junction, or taking photos, or talking." You've clearly never negotiated this roundabout by bike. This junction is a nightmare, cars and vans edge out Ah, "edge out". and block the roundabout so that you have to slam your brakes on in the middle of the roundabout. Not if you use it with the same respect as the motorists and "edge out" yourself. There is anarchy at this roundabout, That is the idea. no driver takes a blind bit of notice of cyclists Respect is mutual. If a yob pushes past you as a pedestrian would you not treat him with contempt. I have seen taxis and lorries waiting whilst a tourist photographed his partner posing in the middle of the road in front of the monument on the roundabout. No aggression was displayed. I've observed cyclists crossing that junction - most do it cautiously, some go around the roundabout the 'wrong' way, I've never seen a problem. I've seen a disrespectful cyclist zooming across with no regard for other users - zig-zagging between stationary taxis and chatting pedestrians - but he was tolerated as a typical high-spirited asbo candidate. here and accidents are common, Can you cite sources? Are they more common and more (or less) serious than at a similar junction with conventional traffic management? including the florist's van that sideswiped me. Did you report it? Was it your or their 'fault'? Have you ever been involved in a similar, or worse, incident elsewhere? -- Matt B Nice equation of cyclists with yobs there. You plainly don't cycle and you have no idea what cycling is like at this roundabout. You are told that a van pulls out in front of a cyclist who has right of way and you ask if the cyclist is at fault. You are a gibbering idiot, a trenchant buffoon and an irredeemable dickcheese. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
spindrift wrote:
You've never cycled this roundabout, have you? I obey the rules of the road, the vehicles ignore them and place me in danger. Meet up one day this week on a bike and I'll show you. Maybe when you see it for yourself you'll understand how dangerous it is. You won't convince him spin. It is interesting, however, to how similar the 'thought process' and obsessive behaviour of those with a 'libertarian' outlook tend to be, be they Paul you know who, our friend Matt B or, to take a classic example, libertarian nut 'par excellence' Sean Gabb. It's all rather scary really, a bit like doing a web search and discovering all those right-wing BNP supporters who live a few streets away and the dawning realisation that looking at the world though sane eyes does not reveal the insanity which lurks beyond. To be honest MattB's 'shared space' obsession rather sounds as though it is just another in the long line of attempts made by motorists to absolve drivers of responsibility for their actions. (The propagation of the myth of 'dangerous roads' for example, actually meaning roads on which it is more than averagely dangerous to drive dangerously). In tune with this Matt's assertion that 'We cannot 'blame' those who obey the laws of nature'. What was it that quote from 'The African Queen', Oh yes: Bogart: A man takes a drop too much once in a while, it's only human nature. Katharine Hepburn: Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above. Despite Matt's view that most drivers are at heart 'decent considerate sort of chaps' in reality far too many people couldn't give a flying what-not about the well-being of those who 'get in their way' when they are driving. As Richard Freeman of the AA, said in The Guardian of 27 June 2003 regarding the lack of interest in pedestrian safety features on the part of motorists when buying a car "Occupant safety is something they can sell to the consumer. But the attitude too often is that 'if somebody's stupid enough to walk in front of my car, I don't give a monkey's what happens to them'." |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
wrote: spindrift wrote: You've never cycled this roundabout, have you? I obey the rules of the road, the vehicles ignore them and place me in danger. Meet up one day this week on a bike and I'll show you. Maybe when you see it for yourself you'll understand how dangerous it is. You won't convince him spin. It is interesting, however, to how similar the 'thought process' and obsessive behaviour of those with a 'libertarian' outlook tend to be, be they Paul you know who, our friend Matt B or, to take a classic example, libertarian nut 'par excellence' Sean Gabb. It's all rather scary really, a bit like doing a web search and discovering all those right-wing BNP supporters who live a few streets away and the dawning realisation that looking at the world though sane eyes does not reveal the insanity which lurks beyond. To be honest MattB's 'shared space' obsession rather sounds as though it is just another in the long line of attempts made by motorists to absolve drivers of responsibility for their actions. (The propagation of the myth of 'dangerous roads' for example, actually meaning roads on which it is more than averagely dangerous to drive dangerously). In tune with this Matt's assertion that 'We cannot 'blame' those who obey the laws of nature'. What was it that quote from 'The African Queen', Oh yes: Bogart: A man takes a drop too much once in a while, it's only human nature. Katharine Hepburn: Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above. Despite Matt's view that most drivers are at heart 'decent considerate sort of chaps' in reality far too many people couldn't give a flying what-not about the well-being of those who 'get in their way' when they are driving. As Richard Freeman of the AA, said in The Guardian of 27 June 2003 regarding the lack of interest in pedestrian safety features on the part of motorists when buying a car "Occupant safety is something they can sell to the consumer. But the attitude too often is that 'if somebody's stupid enough to walk in front of my car, I don't give a monkey's what happens to them'." Hi Howard Hope things are good in France. We've met MattB in various forms before, I fully expect his latest humiliation to deter him not one jot from his defence of killer drivers and speedophiles. This is the man, remember, who DEFENDED Smith's perversion of justice posts that gained exposure on Cycling Plus recently. Why a speedophile clogs up cycling forums when he plainly doesn't use a bike is beyond me, although i would heartily recommend he puts the famous London drivers' tolerance to the test on the Seven Dials Roundabout he keeps wanking over. Give us all a break if nothing else. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
83 year old woman assaulted by cyclist - can anyone help with Police enquiries? | [email protected] | Australia | 4 | August 24th 06 11:19 AM |
Cyclist assaulted in Sheffield | Simon Geller | UK | 104 | May 6th 06 07:53 PM |
Bus driver assaulted by cyclist in Brisbane | [email protected] | Australia | 6 | May 20th 05 08:40 AM |
I've just been assaulted by a motorist | Simonb | UK | 138 | August 29th 04 08:18 PM |
cyclist shoots motorist | Steven M. O'Neill | General | 145 | February 19th 04 01:49 AM |