0.045% of offences committed by cyclists

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 06:33:48 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 22:53:43 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


Just 0.045% of road traffic offences are committed by cyclists,
according to official police figures.

That's you telling a lie (the "official police figures" do not say
that), and a rather transparent one at that.

Yes they do.

You are pathetic.

The subject of this thread is "0.045% of offences committed by cyclists" which
implies in this newsgroup: throughout the United Kingdom.

It has been made quite clear, in the opening message, that the 0.045%
referred to NI. It should be equally clear to sentient humans that the
figure will be of a similar order for the rest of the UK.

Your claim is incorrect.

You are not fit to teach school children - never mind about the adults here

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 06:22:51 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 18:07:29 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


Just 0.045% of road traffic offences are committed by cyclists,
according to official police figures.


You are a fool Crispin.

If in a town of 5,000 residents two people were murdered by a cyclist in a
year, then that does not mean that 22,000 people are murdered in England every
year by cyclists.

Is that too difficult for you?

You are an imbecile Smith.

Northern Ireland has a population of 1.8 million, 3% of the UK
population; your town has a population of 5,000, 0.0083% of the UK
population.

But that is too difficult for you.

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message
...

Bertie Wooster considered Thu, 28 Nov 2013
22:50:54 +0000 the perfect time to write:

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 19:38:51 +0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:

On 28/11/2013 19:14, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 18:25:12 +0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:

On 28/11/2013 18:07, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 16:36:00 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 28/11/2013 08:48, Bertie Wooster wrote:

However you like to skew the figures, speeding by motorists is
endemic. RLJ by cyclists is ...

...even more common than that.

Haven't you read the subject line?

Just 0.045% of road traffic offences are committed by cyclists,
according to official police figures.



The figures show how many are prosecuted, nothing to do with how many
offend, nor how many possible offences each group can commit.

Irrelevant. Any who allegedly commit crimes are innocent until proven
guilty.


do you agree that there are far more motorists than there are cyclists?

I agree that there are more than 9 cyclists for every 20,000
motorists.

Very likely, since I don't believe there has ever been a year for
which motor vehicle sales exceeded those of pedal cycles.

do you agree that there are far more possible offences for motorists
than for cyclists?

I agree both cyclists and motorists have opportunity to commit
offences.

Do you agree that it is easier to identify car drivers as opposed to
cyclists?

No. A witness with good eyesight cannot always see motorists clearly
through glass, whereas cyclists are much more visible.

And of course, it is only in a few limited circumstances that the
driver of a motor vehicle can be identified, or the registered keeper
take the rap.

You make a very good case for the de-registration of motor vehicles, if it
really is only in a few limited circumstances that the system works.
(In the rather strange world of Phil Lee, of course.)

On 29/11/2013 09:34, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 06:27:59 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Irrelevant. Any who allegedly commit crimes are innocent until proven
guilty.


In court cases: yes.

In every day activities and in the view of sane and rational people : no.

I think you will find that the OED definition of guilty is:

"culpable of or responsible for a specified wrongdoing."

Spot that: no mention of a court case.

The fact that there were no court cases makes that definition quite appropriate
in this thread.

Is it up to you to decide who "culpable" then?

What do you mean by "who"?

Do you mean the specific name and address of the cyclist who cycles
straight through a set of red traffic lights?

Or maybe the national insurance number of the cyclist seen cycling the
wrong way along a one-way street?

The date of birth or blood group of the cyclist who nearly runs down a
nine-year-old on the footway?

Or perhaps - as any sentient being would be perfectly satisfied with -
you mean just the fact that it is a self-absorbed and self-centred
individual on a bicycle who commits each of those highly-visible (and
absolute) offences?

Take a look at that Youtube video - or perhaps multiple videos -
uploaded by the (London) Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association. It's a good
starting point.

"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 06:22:51 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 18:07:29 +0000, Bertie Wooster

wrote:

snip


Just 0.045% of road traffic offences are committed by cyclists,
according to official police figures.


You are a fool Crispin.

If in a town of 5,000 residents two people were murdered by a cyclist in a
year, then that does not mean that 22,000 people are murdered in England
every
year by cyclists.

Is that too difficult for you?

You are an imbecile Smith.

Why do people insult others?

For someone who has found the wrong outlet for their stress, insulting
others gives them comfort for their own imperfections, makes them feel
powerful, and helps them to feel better about themselves. Helplessness
for this individual is the root of all of his or her emotional problems
and insulting people is their outlet...

"Peter Keller" wrote in message ...

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 19:41:45 +0000, Tarcap wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 28 November 2013 15:06:15 UTC, Gefreiter Krueger wrote:

So you don't look like a ****t. It looks like you wrote what I did.
Do you want people to think you wrote my text?

It'll take a lot more than that to stop him looking like a ****.

Nothing could stop you sounding like a ****

I really think it is a great compliment to be accused of sounding like a
**** by the carprat.

Once again, a psycholist demonstrating their superior debating skills by
schoolboy name calling.

I think you mean that only 0.045% of successful prosecutions are against cyclists! Most of us see cyclists breaking the law all of the time - jumping red lights, riding on footpaths, riding at night without lights and riding recklessly or dangerously, but because unlike motor vehicles they don't have registration plates, they don't get caught by cameras!

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:05:32 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 29/11/2013 09:34, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 06:27:59 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Irrelevant. Any who allegedly commit crimes are innocent until proven
guilty.


In court cases: yes.

In every day activities and in the view of sane and rational people : no.

I think you will find that the OED definition of guilty is:

"culpable of or responsible for a specified wrongdoing."

Spot that: no mention of a court case.

The fact that there were no court cases makes that definition quite appropriate
in this thread.

Is it up to you to decide who "culpable" then?

What do you mean by "who"?

Do you mean the specific name and address of the cyclist who cycles
straight through a set of red traffic lights?

Or maybe the national insurance number of the cyclist seen cycling the
wrong way along a one-way street?

The date of birth or blood group of the cyclist who nearly runs down a
nine-year-old on the footway?

Or perhaps - as any sentient being would be perfectly satisfied with -
you mean just the fact that it is a self-absorbed and self-centred
individual on a bicycle who commits each of those highly-visible (and
absolute) offences?

Take a look at that Youtube video - or perhaps multiple videos -
uploaded by the (London) Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association. It's a good
starting point.

I see that our resident counsel, judge and jury has found those
supposedly errant cyclists guilty without hearing their case or
allowing a defence.

Have you considered asking the US government if you may condemn those
languishing in Guantanamo Bay? I understand they are looking for a
learned beak such as you.

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 02:56:15 -0800 (PST), Derek C
wrote:

I think you mean that only 0.045% of successful prosecutions are against cyclists! Most of us see cyclists breaking the law all of the time - jumping red lights, riding on footpaths, riding at night without lights and riding recklessly or dangerously, but because unlike motor vehicles they don't have registration plates, they don't get caught by cameras!

What percentage of motorists allegedly breaking the speed limit get
caught on camera?

I would guesstimate the number of speeding offences to be in the order
of tens of millions per day.

On Friday, 29 November 2013 12:14:06 UTC, Bertie Wooster wrote:

What percentage of motorists allegedly breaking the speed limit get
caught on camera?

A tiny percentage, owing to our spineless politicians allowing cameras to be painted bright yellow and their locations broadcast.