|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
|
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
In article ,
Luke writes: Such was the fate of a Toronto cyclist this past week. http://www.ibiketo.ca/node/2183#comments What a needless and unfortunate death! Just because someone couldn't be bothered to look before heedlessly flinging a car door into a traffic stream. Now there's a big hue & cry about punishing the car-door-flinging offender, instead of fixing the root of the problem. I guess so many people endemically forget there is other traffic besides motor vehicles. That's why I appreciate how Critical Mass contributes toward reminding people that, y'know, there are other things out there besides motor vehicles, too. Like, for instance: /people/! And before anyone pipes up about how the rider should have taken the lane, I submit it's not always possible to do so on many urban arterial streets. It's so easy to be an armchair quarterback. It's not about what the rider should have done; it's about what the driver should /not/ have done. Actually, it's about how people should behave among ourselves, and that transcends any legalism. I find it most saddening and disappointing that so many people are so unwilling to look out for our fellows, to the point of unwittingly killing 'em in moments of blithe, self-centred ignorance. Whudda buncha pigs we people can be. Especially when seated behind a steering wheel and two or three actuating pedals. klahowya, Tom -- Shame is the ultimate punishment. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
On May 25, 4:30 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article , Luke writes: Such was the fate of a Toronto cyclist this past week. http://www.ibiketo.ca/node/2183#comments What a needless and unfortunate death! Just because someone couldn't be bothered to look before heedlessly flinging a car door into a traffic stream. Now there's a big hue & cry about punishing the car-door-flinging offender, instead of fixing the root of the problem. Punishing the car-door-flinger is one step that would help fix the root of the problem. The woman clearly violated the law. Her violation was the direct cause of a person's death. Should we give her an award? And before anyone pipes up about how the rider should have taken the lane, I submit it's not always possible to do so on many urban arterial streets. Why? Or more specifically, why could the cyclist not have taken the lane in this case? http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=Eglinto...ntario,+Canada or http://tinyurl.com/3uyo7n makes it look like a busy city street, probably with a low speed limit. Take the lane! It's better than trusting your life to a cell-phone-chatting motorist in a hurry. It's so easy to be an armchair quarterback. It's not about what the rider should have done; it's about what the driver should /not/ have done. It's about both. - Frank Krygowski |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
On May 25, 7:29 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Why? Or more specifically, why could the cyclist not have taken the lane in this case? http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=Eglinto...r+Ave,+Toronto,... orhttp://tinyurl.com/3uyo7nmakes it look like a busy city street, probably with a low speed limit. Take the lane! It's better than trusting your life to a cell-phone-chatting motorist in a hurry. It is a very busy city street. It does not have a low speed limit, although that particular stretch isn't particularly speedy. It's a major cross-town road in a city of 2.5 million (5 million in the metro area), and that intersection is about a 5 blocks off Yonge Street, which is Toronto's main street. Eglinton Avenue is also hilly and is a major bus route (thanks to a previous government killing a subway project that was already in progress.) As well, the north-south streets don't connect straight across from each other, so cars and trucks are constantly zig-zagging, passing buses, and accelerating up the slopes. I've never understood while parking is allowed there, but people seem to think it's a God-given right. God gives, God takes. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
In article ,
Frank Krygowski writes: On May 25, 4:30 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote: In article , Luke writes: Such was the fate of a Toronto cyclist this past week. http://www.ibiketo.ca/node/2183#comments What a needless and unfortunate death! Just because someone couldn't be bothered to look before heedlessly flinging a car door into a traffic stream. Now there's a big hue & cry about punishing the car-door-flinging offender, instead of fixing the root of the problem. Punishing the car-door-flinger is one step that would help fix the root of the problem. The woman clearly violated the law. Her ^^^^^^^ Maybe not so clearly. People have it so ingrained & engrammed into us to watch out for /cars/, we're often blindly oblivious to anything else. So the driver is apparently getting off scot-free because her misjudgement seems to be deemed "understandable." That's hardly a clear violation of the law. At any rate, she now has to live with herself. violation was the direct cause of a person's death. Should we give her an award? What do you wanna do -- hang her from the streelight standard nearest the incident, and feed her dead body to the crows? Maybe we should keel-haul her, or have her drawn 'n quartered by four bicycles, or inflict horrific Vlad The Impaler stuff on her. While you're at it, you could complain about how my massive snippage of your post destroys your context. -- Nothing is safe from me. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
In article ,
Frank Krygowski writes: And before anyone pipes up about how the rider should have taken the lane, I submit it's not always possible to do so on many urban arterial streets. Why? Or more specifically, why could the cyclist not have taken the lane in this case? http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=Eglinto...ntario,+Canada or http://tinyurl.com/3uyo7n makes it look like a busy city street, probably with a low speed limit. Take the lane! It's better than trusting your life to a cell-phone-chatting motorist in a hurry. It's so easy to be an armchair quarterback. It's not about what the rider should have done; it's about what the driver should /not/ have done. [snippage restored] Actually, it's about how people should behave among ourselves, and that transcends any legalism. You're just blaming the victim in a pathetic attempt to be argumentative for some obscure reason known only to yourself. I'm not gonna play [with you.] I guess the next sentence is so inferrable, I shouldn't have to utter it. -- Nothing is safe from me. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
On May 25, 10:20 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article , Frank Krygowski writes: On May 25, 4:30 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote: In article , Luke writes: Such was the fate of a Toronto cyclist this past week. http://www.ibiketo.ca/node/2183#comments What a needless and unfortunate death! Just because someone couldn't be bothered to look before heedlessly flinging a car door into a traffic stream. Now there's a big hue & cry about punishing the car-door-flinging offender, instead of fixing the root of the problem. Punishing the car-door-flinger is one step that would help fix the root of the problem. The woman clearly violated the law. Her ^^^^^^^ Maybe not so clearly. People have it so ingrained & engrammed into us to watch out for /cars/, we're often blindly oblivious to anything else. So the driver is apparently getting off scot-free because her misjudgement seems to be deemed "understandable." That's hardly a clear violation of the law. To paraphrase: The law makes it illegal to open a door in such a way as to harm others. She opened the door in a way that directly caused a death. Seems pretty clear to me! At any rate, she now has to live with herself. That could be said of every violator of every law in the land - except, perhaps, illegal suicides. It's meaningless. violation was the direct cause of a person's death. Should we give her an award? What do you wanna do -- hang her from the streelight standard nearest the incident, and feed her dead body to the crows? Maybe we should keel-haul her, or have her drawn 'n quartered by four bicycles, or inflict horrific Vlad The Impaler stuff on her. Drop the hyperbole. A little if OK for literary purposes. Going over the top just shows you're not willing to engage logically. If given a free hand, here's what I'd do: I'd say she could never, ever drive again. As I've said before, driving is a privilege, and that privilege should be permanently revoked any time any motorist causes a death. If you don't lose the privilege for that most grevious act, what act would be worse? Also, I'd have her face and that fact on billboards, newspapers and TV screens. Shame is under-utilized as a deterrent in our society. But I recognize our society is seriously twisted in the privileges it gives to motorists. So, realistically, I think she should be prosecuted as harshly as the law allows, and I think the entire process should receive maximum publicity. She should get the maximum possible penalty, and I hope it's enough that other motorists would say "Wow. I've _really_ got to be more careful." While you're at it, you could complain about how my massive snippage of your post destroys your context. I've never once complained about snipping posts. In fact, the only person I know that does so is the terminally inept Bill Sornson. - Frank Krygowski |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
I think you are underestimating the part about her having to live with it
for the rest of her life. Once, I went to pick up some boys to take to Cub Scouts, and a little boy ran out of his apartment house, hit some ice, and slid under my car! I didn't even run over him, but the memory of that has stayed with me since, and that was in 1984. Just thinking of what could have happened gives me shivers! And, I didn't even hit him! So, she will have those memories of causing someone's death in her head for the rest of her life--memories which come upon her at random times such as when she almost nods off to sleep. Yes, she should be prosecuted more severely. I'm just saying don't just brush off the memories she'll have to deal with. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
Maybe it's not the door opener but the runner over that would be
subject to punishment. I'm not sure that the bicyclist's sudden falling after hitting the door negates the motorist's obligation not to run over him. I doubt that the actual dooring bit of the incident would have been fatal without the running over bit. I wasn't there, didn't see it happen, and generally that's what the police are gonna say too... That's probably why so few motorists are ever held accountable for the damage that they do with their motors, we all say that since we didn't actually see what happened it may be that there is no way it could have been avoided. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Door prize and a ticket to hereafter
On May 27, 2:04 pm, DennisTheBald wrote:
... we all say that since we didn't actually see what happened it may be that there is no way it could have been avoided. This is one place where I'd like to reduce the strength of "innocent until proven guilty." IOW, the cops and the rest of the legal system seems to say "There may be some microscopic chance that it couldn't have been avoided, therefore we won't even bother giving you a ticket." IIRC (and IANAL) |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nobel Prize | [email protected] | General | 23 | December 18th 07 10:23 PM |
I've won a prize :-) | John B | UK | 2 | June 15th 07 10:22 PM |
Prize | Jim & Meg | Techniques | 14 | July 29th 04 06:24 PM |
Sierra Club Goes Door-to-Door Now?!? | Sorni | Mountain Biking | 9 | September 5th 03 12:57 AM |
TDF Once won a prize for..?? | Jan | Racing | 2 | July 27th 03 06:48 PM |