Coroner lashes cyclists

DaveB Wrote:


Should we have different speeds for wagons and sedans. No that would
be
stupid (as you well know).

DaveBWhy? They are vastly different. A sedan is desinged to carry a small
number of passengers, a wagon is primarily desgned to carry cargo. One
is much heavier.

What about cars that are 30 or 40 years old? They are nothing like the
modern motor car in terms of desing, handling and safety. An FJ in a
front on crash is far more dangerous than a modern Merc. Same goes for
a Hyundai Getz Vs a bently. I know which is designed to take an impact
better and which I'd feel safer in...

Maybe we could have a system of speed limits where the limit is 60km/h
minus the age of the car. That would make sense.

Scotty


--
scotty72

"TimC" wrote in message
...
On 2007-03-28, Bean Long (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
FYI

http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...761567956.html

"Mr Kelsall was riding with a group of five friends when they were
swept up in a group of about 100 Hell Ride cyclists."

Isn't that the kind of rider frequently complained about in the hell
ride? I do hope he stayed back from the group. And I do hope that
the guy who hit Mr Gould was not of like mind, as has been alledged in
the past.

"He described seeing one cyclist strike Mr Gould "at excessive
speed".

and

http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...761535017.html

"The cyclist was one of a large group participating in a so-called
'Hell Ride', a weekly 75-kilometre high speed ride through
Melbourne's bayside suburbs."
...
"He told the court that as he faced south he saw a group of about
100 cyclists ride four abreast down the hill towards him at an
estimated speed of 50 km/h."
...
"Three or four riders behind them braked as the cyclists behind them
swerved around them "at excessive speed."

I'm not quite sure whether all these "excessive speed" and "they were
going fast" comments are made because anything faster than 0 is
excessive when a red light is involved (TRUE; same could be said of
anyone, driver or not, running a red light; but that's usually put
down to "red light running", not "excessive speed"), or the riders
were allegedly speeding. If they are trying to make a point of the
latter, then they're bull****ting (yes, even The Age is capable of
bull****ting).

They've already mentioned "estimated speed of 50 km/h". As far as I
am aware, that's 10km/h lower than the speed having been prior judged
as being excessive for that road. If they feel 50km/h is excessive,
I'm fully expecting the speed limit for that road to be changed to
40km/h next week. FOR ALL ROAD USERS.

--
TimC

That's codswallop. As has been discussed ad nauseum, 60km/h is a speed
LIMIT; i.e. it's the speed you are allowed to go up to if it's safe to do
so. That's the part that applies to all road users.

I can't comment on 50km/h being safe in the circumstance. I wasn't there and
don't know the conditions.

Me

"Terryc" wrote in message
...
Brendo wrote:

Without seeing the incident, obviously we all rely on what other
people saw. But, if light was red, and Mr Gould was crossing within
the prescribed area, then the blame lies only with the gentleman who
struck him.

This tells me that thr bunch was broken anyway; obviously he had time to
walk onto and part way across the crossing and thus the cyclist who
deliberately struck him was in a group trying to catch up to the bunch

Deliberately? You mean William Raisin-Shaw meant to hit Mr Gould?

Geez - some of us need to be a little more careful with the use of words
like "deliberately", and others need a few lessons in CONTEXT. The fact
here is, a poor old bugger was cut down in a place where he should have
been safe, and not by one of the deadly objects that often cut US down
- but indeed one of US. Had this been a rider felled by a car we'd all
be angry and upset, and rightly so - yet here we are getting angry and
upset over the context and/or opinions of safe riding speeds in bunches
!

IMO, a pedestrian felled by an aggressive entity of cyclist is NO
DIFFERENT to a cyclist felled by an aggressive entity of motorist. And
NO DIFFERENT is the fact that, like some drivers, some of US need to
take a good, hard look at the way we operate our machinery.

gm


--
gravelmuncher

scotty72 wrote:

Maybe we could have a system of speed limits where the limit is 60km/h
minus the age of the car. That would make sense.

How fast is my dad's 1927 Model T Ford allowed to go under those rules?

Theo

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
scotty72 wrote:

Maybe we could have a system of speed limits where the limit is
60km/h
minus the age of the car. That would make sense.

How fast is my dad's 1927 Model T Ford allowed to go under those
rules?

Theo

Easy! 20km/h in the other direction!


--
gplama

gravelmuncher wrote:
Geez - some of us need to be a little more careful with the use of words
like "deliberately", and others need a few lessons in CONTEXT. The fact
here is, a poor old bugger was cut down in a place where he should have
been safe, and not by one of the deadly objects that often cut US down
- but indeed one of US. Had this been a rider felled by a car we'd all
be angry and upset, and rightly so - yet here we are getting angry and
upset over the context and/or opinions of safe riding speeds in bunches
!

IMO, a pedestrian felled by an aggressive entity of cyclist is NO
DIFFERENT to a cyclist felled by an aggressive entity of motorist. And
NO DIFFERENT is the fact that, like some drivers, some of US need to
take a good, hard look at the way we operate our machinery.

gm


I couldn't agree more. What I find interesting, however, is that we may
never have heard of the tragic death of James Gould had he been struck
by a car. This is somewhat irrelevant of course since it was one of US
that was responsible and the incident needs to be highlighted to get the
point across.

--
Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

gplama Wrote:
Easy! 20km/h in the other direction!

It would be allowed to remain stationary on 80 kmh freeways.

SteveA


--
SteveA

On 2007-03-30, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
scotty72 wrote:

Maybe we could have a system of speed limits where the limit is 60km/h
minus the age of the car. That would make sense.

How fast is my dad's 1927 Model T Ford allowed to go under those rules?

What's the ratio of your reverse gear?

--
TimC
The path to enlightenment_0.16.5-6 is through apt-get

TimC wrote:
Theo Bekkers wrote
scotty72 wrote:

Maybe we could have a system of speed limits where the limit is
60km/h minus the age of the car. That would make sense.

How fast is my dad's 1927 Model T Ford allowed to go under those
rules?

What's the ratio of your reverse gear?

Not sure it would get to 60 km/h in a forward direction.
Model Ts have a slightly weird gearbox, basically an automatic gearbox by
design but operated manually by two pedals and the handbrake lever
activating the bands.

Theo