Cyclist in accident drives off

Marc wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote:
nully considered Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:26:02 +0100 the
perfect time to write:

judith wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:13:11 +0100, "Clive George"
wrote:

"nully" wrote in message
...

Do me a favour, Marc. Please cycle into *my* dog and ride off. Or
rather, attempt to.
Nice - that's more than once you've threatened violence against
members of this NG.

That is completely unacceptable.


And your views on Marc's post:

"With even more luck the turd dispenser got lost forever, died and
the owner got put off buying another one."

You're wasting your time. As someone (you?) previously said "there's
none so blind as those that will not see". My dog is a fully paid-up
member of my family. Someone injures it, and attempts to leg it from
the scene, that person gonna have to go *through* me first. I
challenge the nutters here to find *any* 'decent' dog owner with a
different mindset.

I look forward to the news reports from lincoln - after all, you've
already admitted to it having a liking for human flesh, which is more
than enough for it to be destroyed under the dangerous dogs act.
Errr not quite right.

A dog needs to be one of a number of limited defined "breeds" to be a
"dangerous dog" What does worry me is a same person thinking that an
animal is part of the family. I was brought up with working dogs, they
slept in the shed , were transported in the boot of the car, were
trained, used as a tool. I can't understand the concept of a dog as a
pet, ****ting on other peoples (or communal) land , fed off a plate ,
cuddled, thought of as a surrogate child etc...

A dog is a tool , much like a knife, there is a use for a knife in the
woods, not much on a urban street, there is a use for a dog in the
fields/woods, none whatsoever in an urban area.

This started with some dog owner complaining that her little
doogiewoogie was scared by a cyclist in a "field" in Llandaff. What she
failed to mention was that this "field" was a recreation area, full of
football and rugby fields.
Now can anyone tell me why there should be a reason for a doggiewoggie
to be in an area where people will be grubbing around in the grass at
dog**** level?

No doubt some doggiewoggie lover will come along and say that they
"always" pick up after their animal, but how much do they pick up, is it
enough so that there is no trace whatsoever, so that when the next
doggiewoggie comes along, not on a lead, not controlled, with an owner
who doesn't give a **** there isn't the slightest trace to convince that
dog ( the more common one) that it hasn't found a midden?
I doubt it, but I'm sure that some doggiewoggie owner will try to
convince themselves that it is so, there is no arguing with people who
think that animals are "family"

Well thanks for your armchair diagnosis. Fortunately, I get a much more
professional opinion at least every 12 months, and surprisingly enough
they're more than happy with my concepts and beliefs.

Marc wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote:
Marc considered Sun, 17 Aug 2008
19:35:11 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Peter Grange wrote:
In my experience,
as I have said already, dogs are often not "Under Control".
No-one's commented on my comments about the picture in the article.
Does that look like someone who is showing consideration for other
users of the path?
I looks like a dog walker, ipso facto someone not "showing
consideration" for other members of society.

I wouldn't say that all dog walkers fall into this category,

No people who use dogs as tools don't, but they aren't "dog walkers"
Dog walkers are people who need to take their dog out for "a walk" , "a
walk" is a euphanism for "taking the dog for **** somewhere else" dogs
that are owned for a use don't need walking for excercise, dogs owned as
an emotional crutch( or as fashion accesorry) are something else.

but in
the picture, the dog is one side of the path, the pushchair is the
other, and if there is a lead, it's blocking the path between them.
There is clearly no room for anyone else to use the path.
The dog should be either at close heel, or on the grass side, leaving
enough room for people to pass.

You really think that the dog is trained to, heel?

I see nothing in the article saying that the dog was on the lead at
the time of the incident, which I believe would have been mentioned if
it was the case.
Of course it would, if it had been injured it would have been mentioned,
the devil is in the detail and is in what's not mentioned.

Marc, what percentage of dogs in the UK do you think are kept as working
animals, such as on a farm, engaged in police/rescue work, etc?

Marc wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Marc wrote:
Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:52:07 +0100, nully wrote:

Marc wrote:
HarryHill wrote:
big snips

Out of common courtesy the cyclist should have stopped, IMO. Please
don't extend the act of one person to "all cyclists are beyond fault,
right?".

Stopped to be bitten?
Stopped to be attacked by the "aggrieved" owner?

Loose turd dispenser,
Loose turd dispenser is scared but unhurt by cyclist
Loose turd dispenser learns lesson
Turd dispenser's owner doesn't learn lesson and starts a petition to
spend £100,000s rather than her buying a lead

What possible help would it have been for the cyclist to have stopped?

He could have aplogised. It often goes a long way to assuage injury and
hurt.

Does he/she speak doggiewoggie?

dogs are very good at working out our meaning.

But you make a valid point about potential fear of reprisals.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

Roger Merriman wrote:
Marc wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Marc wrote:
Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:52:07 +0100, nully wrote:

Marc wrote:
HarryHill wrote:
big snips
Out of common courtesy the cyclist should have stopped, IMO. Please
don't extend the act of one person to "all cyclists are beyond fault,
right?".
Stopped to be bitten?
Stopped to be attacked by the "aggrieved" owner?

Loose turd dispenser,
Loose turd dispenser is scared but unhurt by cyclist
Loose turd dispenser learns lesson
Turd dispenser's owner doesn't learn lesson and starts a petition to
spend £100,000s rather than her buying a lead

What possible help would it have been for the cyclist to have stopped?
He could have aplogised. It often goes a long way to assuage injury and
hurt.
Does he/she speak doggiewoggie?

dogs are very good at working out our meaning.
Then maybe he/she did apologise , to the dog, and the owner didn't get told?

HarryHill wrote:
‘There may be serious consequences if a cyclist hits a child’

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wa...1466-21415408/

I hit a dog (Alsation) about 3-4 years ago on the B2B, the dog was not
on a lead, and went from walking on one side of the path, to leaping
underneath my front wheel on the other side. Dogs do not seem to have
any idea about self preservation around vehicles.
In my case I did stop, primarily due to skidding along the ground.

OTOH children[1] if old enough, will try and avoid cyclists, and if too
young, the parents will keep a tight grip on them. However, taking this
into account, there is no excuse not to slow down, or stop for children.

When I do see dogs on e.g. the B2B, I think about 50% are out of
control. (and that includes dogs on those trip wire things).

CALLS have been made for the widening of a pedestrian and cycle path
after a dog was hit by a bicycle.

That won't help, if the dog was out of control, then it can just shoot
from side to side.

Anne-Marie Wilkins, 37, from Llandaff North, is starting a petition
calling for the Taff Trail to be widened through Hailey Park after her
dog Bonny was run over by a cyclist, who then immediately rode off.

Well he should have stopped.
The dog owner should also have had the animal under control.



[1] I am not talking about youths, who might deliberately try something.

"Marc" wrote in message
...
judith wrote:



Excellent - when I first saw the OP - I knew that there would be one
of the resident ****wits along soon with that sort of question.


Yes, but you, like your mate, are a troll. What trolls believe , know,
think or say isn't important.

So why the **** do you continue to respond to them?

Rob Oldfield wrote:
"Marc" wrote in message
...
judith wrote:


Excellent - when I first saw the OP - I knew that there would be one
of the resident ****wits along soon with that sort of question.

Yes, but you, like your mate, are a troll. What trolls believe , know,
think or say isn't important.

So why the **** do you continue to respond to them?

It entertains me. I stop when I find them boring.

Response to nully :

it isn't a lesson in manners you need, its some serious therapy. May
I recommend someone from CAMHS - they're quite good at digging out
hidden hate issues.

I think you'd better try and get your money back.


--
Mark, UK.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:52:07 +0100, nully wrote:

Marc wrote:
HarryHill wrote:
‘There may be serious consequences if a cyclist hits a child’

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wa...1466-21415408/



CALLS have been made for the widening of a pedestrian and cycle path
after a dog was hit by a bicycle.

Anne-Marie Wilkins, 37, from Llandaff North, is starting a petition
calling for the Taff Trail to be widened through Hailey Park after her
dog Bonny was run over by a cyclist, who then immediately rode off.

My money is on the little turd dispenser either being on a 35ft
extendable lead or not being on one at all.

Which gives the cyclist the right to simply ride off and ignore the
incident then? Cycles should be required to carry reg plates to avoid
cowardly behaviour such as this. Be nice to see some posters condemn the
cyclist leaving the scene *irrespective of fault*, but I guess I'm
asking for too much there - after all, cyclists are beyond fault, right?

Whilst I agree with your sentiment that it is cowardly behaviour by
the cyclist, I am not convinced that a bike registration scheme is the
answer.

I was once bitten by a dog. The owner just walked off. Do you think
that dogs should carry registration plates also?

Mark McNeill wrote:
Response to nully :

it isn't a lesson in manners you need, its some serious therapy. May
I recommend someone from CAMHS - they're quite good at digging out
hidden hate issues.

I think you'd better try and get your money back.


Why? I haven't paid them anything?