Danger to pedestrians?

On 04/06/2020 17:29, Pamela wrote:
On 15:35 4 Jun 2020, JNugent said:

On 04/06/2020 10:12, Pamela wrote:
On 20:13 3 Jun 2020, JNugent said:
On 03/06/2020 19:35, Simon Mason wrote:


Not a cyclist in sight. QUOTE: Two men have been taken to hospital
after being hit by a car in London's Sloane Square, police say.

Government minister Greg Hands tweeted a vehicle had "mounted the
pavement and struck pedestrians" before being abandoned nearby.

Cordons have been put around the area while the vehicle is searched
by officers. The Met said the incident was not terror-related.

A man has been arrested on suspicion of committing driving offences.
London Ambulance Service said it was called out at just after 12:00
BST to reports of a collision "involving pedestrians".

"We dispatched two ambulance crews and a medic in a car, with the
first of our crews arriving in under four minutes," it said in a
statement.

"We treated two men at the scene and took them both to hospital."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-52907361?
SThisFB&fbclid=I
wA R1MgPy72OIG6xvN2UC_TRS53BP63GGGis69uqdj-82FGDKgceZw2FQKUAU

Probably being used by a qualified cyclist (someone with no driving
licence).

Why "qualified"?

Anyone with no qualifications of any sort is still qualified to ride a
bicycle.

"Qualified to be a cyclist" (which is still stretching it) does not convey
quite the same meaning as "qualified cyclist".

Nevertheless it is a valuable point.

How much more qualified would someone with no qualifications of any sort
need to be before being allowed to ride a bicycle?

We all know what the answer is.

On 04/06/2020 18:07, Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 9:28:10 AM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Even though virtually anyone can be a
cyclist, that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone without a driving
licence has to be a cyclist.

An old workmate I used to go around with was banned from driving, but still continued to drive us around the local pubs in the 1970's. He had never ridden a bicycle in his life, only motorbikes and cars.

So he was an arrogant, dangerous, qualified cyclist.

That's if he existed outside your imagination, of course.

Surely you "dobbed him in"?

If not, why not?

On Thu, 04 Jun 2020 17:34:16 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 04/06/2020 17:51, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2020 14:35:13 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 04/06/2020 10:07, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2020 01:40:34 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 03/06/2020 20:40, Kelly wrote:
JNugent wrote:

[Snipped] Only trolls think length of post is a sign of winning.

Hmm.


Only for unlicensed drivers (ie, cyclists).

Did I mention how tedious you're getting on this?

Why are you so against truth?

You seem to be unable to do much but repeat your phrase.

This is merely repetition, not a proper argument.
[]

Do you have trouble assimilating the knowledge that the overwhelming
numbers of deaths and injuries on roads are caused by motor vehicles?
/rhetorical Q

Do you have trouble in seeing that that is nothing to the point?

Indeed, I see you wish not to address my point.

It does NOT justify cycling along footways.

No. Only a council can legalise that, by a thin strip of paint and some
signs.

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.

On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 8:40:19 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

"Where's the cyclist?" - the answer, of course, will be that he's
driving the motor vehicle for all we know.

Then why was he arrested for "driving offences" if he wasn't a driver?

QUOTE:
UK police arrest man for driving offense (SIC) after car collides with 2 in London. LONDON: British police arrested a man for driving offices (SIC) on Wednesday after a car collided with two people near Sloane Square in central London.

“Cordons were put in place and buildings in the surrounding area were evacuated as a precaution while officers searched the vehicle,� the Met police said in a statement. “A man was subsequently arrested for driving offenses (SIC).�
The lawmaker for the area, Greg Hands, had previously tweeted that he was hearing a vehicle had mounted the pavement and struck pedestrians.

https://www.arabnews.com/node/1684256/world

Simon Mason wrote:

On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 8:40:19 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

"Where's the cyclist?" - the answer, of course, will be that he's
driving the motor vehicle for all we know.

Then why was he arrested for "driving offences" if he wasn't a driver?

He was the driver, Simon, that is not in dispute by anyone.

It looks like you are going to have to unkillfile certain people if
you are going to follow this properly. The claim is being made that
certain drivers are unqualified to drive and as such are cyclists.
Essentially, that is true. But, nevertheless, that doesn't stop them
from being drivers.

The thing is this works both ways. Drivers are doing stupid things all
the time, as are cyclists of course, but there are far more drivers so
we'll get far more stories about them. That means, as long as we don't
know for certain that a driver doing a stupid thing is a qualified
driver we can post the story here on ukrc. And that story can be
claimed to be 100% on topic because all that needs to be said is we
don't know if that driver is qualified, for all we know, he may be a
cyclist. It's all just a silly bit of mischief really.


QUOTE:
UK police arrest man for driving offense (SIC) after car collides with 2 in London. LONDON: British police arrested a man for driving offices (SIC) on Wednesday after a car collided with two people near Sloane Square in central London.

Cordons were put in place and buildings in the surrounding area were evacuated as a precaution while officers searched the vehicle,� the Met police said in a statement. A man was subsequently arrested for driving offenses (SIC).�
The lawmaker for the area, Greg Hands, had previously tweeted that he was hearing a vehicle had mounted the pavement and struck pedestrians.

https://www.arabnews.com/node/1684256/world

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 8:12:01 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:
It's all just a silly bit of mischief really.

Indeed.
Why do you think I have a killfile? :-)

Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 8:12:01 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:
It's all just a silly bit of mischief really.

Indeed.
Why do you think I have a killfile? :-)

Sorry - I can be a bit slow sometimes, as we all know.

JNugent wrote:

On 04/06/2020 09:28, Kelly wrote:
JNugent wrote:

On 03/06/2020 21:25, Simon Mason wrote:

Even if he has no driving licence, MOT, insurance, bald tyres, no lights, dodgy number plate, faulty exhaust,
no seat belt on, using a mobile, has faulty eyesight, or any number of driving offences, he is still driving a car....

...but is a cyclist.

Well, not strictly speaking surely, what if they insist that they
don't and can't ride a bike? Even though virtually anyone can be a
cyclist, that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone without a driving
licence has to be a cyclist.

If you amended what you've said to: "...but is a cyclist, or probably
could be if they chose to be", then maybe that would be better.

You are right to express concern.

I should have said: "...but is a *qualified* cyclist".

You certainly can't call someone with no driving licence a qualified driver.

Isn't it amazing, really, that someone as anti-social and even
socio-pathic as described above by the PP is still qualified to ride a
bike, with those qualities being no bar to it?

It's a good point. You would think that in exceptional cases some
people would deserve to be, and could be, banned from using a car or a
bicycle as a safety measure for the rest of us. But I suppose as no
one needs a licence to ride a bicycle in the first place, there is
nothing to revoke in order to prevent anyone from riding one.

Simon Mason wrote:
On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 8:12:01 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:
It's all just a silly bit of mischief really.

Indeed.
Why do you think I have a killfile? :-)

Because you are a cowardly **** head of a cyclist.

Kelly wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 8:12:01 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:
It's all just a silly bit of mischief really.

Indeed.
Why do you think I have a killfile? :-)

Sorry - I can be a bit slow sometimes, as we all know.

I know who you are.