Cyclist Attacked

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3495901.stm

Graham wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3495901.stm


the headline could equally well have been:

Cyclists ignore man attacked by thugs

pk

"PK" wrote in message
...
Graham wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3495901.stm


the headline could equally well have been:

Cyclists ignore man attacked by thugs

Thirty youths - two cyclists/witnesses would you intervene?

As someone who found himself between two warring factions of school
kids/young adults last Friday evening, the odds of 100 kids to three adults
was not favourable. The fact that I was with two colleagues who taught/knew
the majority of them was in our favour. It was a tad scary nevertheless.
I would not have fancied the chances of a public spirited member (or two) of
the public.

It's easy to condemn form afar but you simply have to sample the
environment/situation to understand the reluctance to get involved.

vernon levy wrote:
"PK" wrote in message
...
Graham wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3495901.stm


the headline could equally well have been:

Cyclists ignore man attacked by thugs

Thirty youths - two cyclists/witnesses would you intervene?



No, but it is just as relevant as focussing on the cyclist as victim.

Thugs attacked someone in a park. Why pick it up and post it to a cycling
news group?

pk

vernon levy wrote:
"PK" wrote in message
...
Graham wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3495901.stm


the headline could equally well have been:

Cyclists ignore man attacked by thugs

Thirty youths - two cyclists/witnesses would you intervene?


There was a time when the answer would have been an unequivocable yes. People
would intervene wherever someone was in danger without thought of risk to
themselves whether it be being attacked or drowning in the sea. Increasingly
now the atttitude is walk on by or stop and watch.

Tony

"Tony Raven" wrote in message
...
There was a time when the answer would have been an unequivocable yes.

There was also a time where the odds of being stabbed/seriously hurt for
almost no reason were lower.

dwb wrote:
"Tony Raven" wrote in message
...
There was a time when the answer would have been an unequivocable yes.

There was also a time where the odds of being stabbed/seriously hurt for
almost no reason were lower.

Maybe but the shift in attitude is that people now think of their personal
safety first and helping someone second where it used to be the reverse.

Tony

"Tony Raven" wrote in
:

Maybe but the shift in attitude is that people now think of their
personal safety first and helping someone second where it used to be
the reverse.


For understandable reasons.

I've never walked by in such a case because I have, luckily, never come
across such a situation. Unluckily, however, I have been on the receiving
end of such an event three times; twice with knives, once with a revolver
(which turned out to be a replica when the police caught the guy, but it
had me fooled!). In each of the events I am pretty certain that if I had
been a passer by, I would have done just that; passed by. I would have
then alerted the police as soon as possible, but I would certainly not
have got involved with what would have appeared to be a very dangerous
situation.

I was lucky in all three situations and the only physical injury
sustained was a small cut to the back of my neck when someone tried to
slash me with a knife as I bent down to pick up my spectacles which he'd
just punched off my face.


Graeme

"Graeme" wrote in message
4.51...

I've never walked by in such a case because I have, luckily, never come
across such a situation. Unluckily, however, I have been on the receiving
end of such an event three times; twice with knives, once with a revolver.....

Phew! Where on *earth* do you live??

"PK" wrote in message ...

Thugs attacked someone in a park. Why pick it up and post it to a cycling
news group?

You don't think it's relevant to cyclists when other cyclists appear
to be coming under random attack?

--
Dave...