"Car crashes through window of Middlesbrough house"

On 30/05/2011 11:46, webreader wrote:

What you do not understand is that Doog posts these events to warn
'real cyclists' of danger, quite why he has to do this as he is the
only 'real cyclist' amazes me.

IIRC he uses the term 'Pure cyclist' that excludes car drivers (even ex
car drivers), 'green' car drivers, people who drive electric vehicles
powered by solar energy and probably people who take medicines that were
tested on animals.
That just leaves him as a 'pure cyclist' despite the fact that he does
not cycle, used to drive a gas-guzzling landy, currently tootles along
in an electric buggy and takes medicines that were tested on animals.

Andy

On May 30, 10:48*am, JNugent wrote:
On 30/05/2011 07:09, Doug wrote:



On May 28, 4:48 pm, *wrote:
On 28/05/2011 07:55, Doug wrote:

On May 26, 2:29 pm, * *wrote:
Doug wrote:
It was lucky no cyclists were in the way.
Are you really stupid enough to think that a little
piece off waffle like that at the start makes your
ludicrous post "on topic" for u.r.c. ?
No it is on topic because drivers behaving badly pose a serious threat
to cyclists and cyclists need to know about it so that they can follow
the usual advice and take preventative measures.

What would those measures be?

Don't cycle near houses?

See the text you have deleted.

I'm sure I didn't delete any suggestion you made about cyclists "following
advice" (ha!) or taking "preventative measures".

Perhaps you could kindly remind everyone of what those suggestions were?

"No it is on topic because drivers behaving badly pose a serious
threat
to cyclists and cyclists need to know about it so that they can follow
the usual advice and take preventative measures. Though what they
could do in this case eludes me as even a helmet doesn't offer much
protection against a crashing car which is capable of smashing a wall.
Only full body protection might help a little."

Here is the full text, some of which dealing with preventative
measures you deleted.

(ha!)

Doug.

On May 30, 11:34*am, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere
wrote:
On 30/05/2011 07:08, Doug wrote:

On May 28, 3:57 pm, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere *wrote:
On 28/05/2011 07:55, Doug wrote:

...Though what they
could do in this case eludes me as even a helmet doesn't offer much
protection against a crashing car which is capable of smashing a wall.....

Where, in the link you posted, does it mention smashing a wall? It only
says the car crashed into the window. As this is a straight road with
bay windows sticking out of the house front, over the pavement, it would
quite possible to hit the window without even touching the wall.

Which, it appears is exactly what happened - see link below.

The sum total of damage appearing to be the outer skin of the wall below
the window being knocked down and a radiator being dislodged inside.



In similar cases, where a car is allowed by the driver to leave the
road at speed,

Nothing in any report about this happening 'at speed'.

cross a pavement and front garden

No front garden here.

and crash into the
wall of a house,

The car didn't even touch the front wall of the house.

considerable damage may be caused to that wall

Very rarely if it is a car. More often if it is a lorry or bus.

and at
the same time endangering those inside the house or in the front
garden or on the pavement.

No garden, as I said, and Google Streeview shows the street as virtually
deserted.

This just happened to be a more minor example.

In fact, nothing like the picture you are trying to paint.

However, you do seem to have a soulmate in the reporter for this link:

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/te.../26/tot-s-esca...

who manages to get 'Tot's escape as car hits Middlesbrough home' out
of the fact that there was a child playing in a part of the house that
was not involved in or even threatened by the accident.

Are you seriously trying to deny that cars sometimes crash through
walls and endanger the lives of those inside?

"Two children suffered minor injuries when a car ploughed into their
home in Caversham.

The crash happened at 12.43pm on Saturday when the black Peugeot 206,
travelling along Briants Avenue, careered into the house which was in
South View Avenue..."

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2...e_in_caversham

Interesting photo too showing extent of damage a car can cause.

BTW, how do we know the kids were not cyclists?

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

On 31/05/2011 05:27, Doug wrote:
On May 30, 11:34 am, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere
wrote:
On 30/05/2011 07:08, Doug wrote:

On May 28, 3:57 pm, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere wrote:
On 28/05/2011 07:55, Doug wrote:

...Though what they
could do in this case eludes me as even a helmet doesn't offer much
protection against a crashing car which is capable of smashing a wall....

Where, in the link you posted, does it mention smashing a wall? It only
says the car crashed into the window. As this is a straight road with
bay windows sticking out of the house front, over the pavement, it would
quite possible to hit the window without even touching the wall.

Which, it appears is exactly what happened - see link below.

The sum total of damage appearing to be the outer skin of the wall below
the window being knocked down and a radiator being dislodged inside.



In similar cases, where a car is allowed by the driver to leave the
road at speed,

Nothing in any report about this happening 'at speed'.

cross a pavement and front garden

No front garden here.

and crash into the
wall of a house,

The car didn't even touch the front wall of the house.

considerable damage may be caused to that wall

Very rarely if it is a car. More often if it is a lorry or bus.

and at
the same time endangering those inside the house or in the front
garden or on the pavement.

No garden, as I said, and Google Streeview shows the street as virtually
deserted.

This just happened to be a more minor example.

In fact, nothing like the picture you are trying to paint.

However, you do seem to have a soulmate in the reporter for this link:

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/te.../26/tot-s-esca...

who manages to get 'Tot's escape as car hits Middlesbrough home' out
of the fact that there was a child playing in a part of the house that
was not involved in or even threatened by the accident.

Are you seriously trying to deny that cars sometimes crash through
walls and endanger the lives of those inside?

No. I am saying this incident came nowhere near doing that and that the
reporter had to stretch the truth to breaking point to make a story.


"Two children suffered minor injuries when a car ploughed into their
home in Caversham.

The crash happened at 12.43pm on Saturday when the black Peugeot 206,
travelling along Briants Avenue, careered into the house which was in
South View Avenue..."

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2...e_in_caversham

Interesting photo too showing extent of damage a car can cause.

BTW, how do we know the kids were not cyclists?

The BBC report tells us it was one child, who was inside the house, so
probably was not cycling.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-12590938

It is also reported in local forums that the driver may be charged with
attempted murder for deliberately driving his car into the house of a
girlfriend who had dumped him. So, not an accident and nothing like the
one we started with.

Colin Bignell

On May 31, 10:02*am, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere
wrote:

It is also reported in local forums that the driver may be charged with
attempted murder for deliberately driving his car into the house of a
girlfriend who had dumped him. So, not an accident and nothing like the
one we started with.

Colin Bignell- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He was having a bad day like this bloke.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...l/article.html

--
Simon Mason

On Tue, 31 May 2011 03:36:10 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason
wrote:

snip


He was having a bad day like this bloke.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...l/article.html


Relevance to cycling : nil

Simple really


--

Pyscholist Rule Number 6a

If people are continually getting the better of you in arguments - fall back on the "But what about motorists, they are much worse ....".
Respond to a post - or start a new thread with some irrelevant item.
It does no good to the actual argument - but it shows you up as a real prat - and hence you are living up to the psycholist creed.

On 31/05/2011 11:36, Simon Mason wrote:
On May 31, 10:02 am, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere
wrote:

It is also reported in local forums that the driver may be charged with
attempted murder for deliberately driving his car into the house of a
girlfriend who had dumped him. So, not an accident and nothing like the
one we started with.

Colin Bignell- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He was having a bad day like this bloke.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...l/article.html

22 previous convictions, the second conviction for drink driving and he
escaped jail?

Colin Bignell

On May 31, 12:32*pm, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere
wrote:
On 31/05/2011 11:36, Simon Mason wrote:

On May 31, 10:02 am, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere
wrote:

It is also reported in local forums that the driver may be charged with
attempted murder for deliberately driving his car into the house of a
girlfriend who had dumped him. So, not an accident and nothing like the
one we started with.

Colin Bignell- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He was having a bad day like this bloke.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...ed-high-speed-...

22 previous convictions, the second conviction for drink driving and he
escaped jail?

Colin Bignell

Sadly very common - a lot of drivers just get a slap on the wrist.
Then people moan about pavement cyclists as being the real danger!
--
Simon Mason

On May 31, 12:32*pm, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere
wrote:
On 31/05/2011 11:36, Simon Mason wrote:

On May 31, 10:02 am, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere
wrote:

It is also reported in local forums that the driver may be charged with
attempted murder for deliberately driving his car into the house of a
girlfriend who had dumped him. So, not an accident and nothing like the
one we started with.

Colin Bignell- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He was having a bad day like this bloke.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...ed-high-speed-...

22 previous convictions, the second conviction for drink driving and he
escaped jail?

Colin Bignell

Loved these comments:

Despite three police cars surrounding his car he still tried to evade
capture and reversed his car into a traffic island and a lamppost.
When Holiday was arrested, he told officers: "You are dangerous, not
me."

Classic denial.

"Mr Bury (defending) added: "Whilst the defendant was exceeding the
speed limit for a long period of time it is simply him driving fast.
This was a bad day for him."

Classic wriggle.

--
Simon Mason

On 31/05/2011 05:18, Doug wrote:
On May 30, 10:48 am, wrote:
On 30/05/2011 07:09, Doug wrote:



On May 28, 4:48 pm, wrote:
On 28/05/2011 07:55, Doug wrote:

On May 26, 2:29 pm, wrote:
Doug wrote:
It was lucky no cyclists were in the way.
Are you really stupid enough to think that a little
piece off waffle like that at the start makes your
ludicrous post "on topic" for u.r.c. ?
No it is on topic because drivers behaving badly pose a serious threat
to cyclists and cyclists need to know about it so that they can follow
the usual advice and take preventative measures.

What would those measures be?

Don't cycle near houses?

See the text you have deleted.

I'm sure I didn't delete any suggestion you made about cyclists "following
advice" (ha!) or taking "preventative measures".

Perhaps you could kindly remind everyone of what those suggestions were?

"No it is on topic because drivers behaving badly pose a serious
threat
to cyclists and cyclists need to know about it so that they can follow
the usual advice and take preventative measures. Though what they
could do in this case eludes me as even a helmet doesn't offer much
protection against a crashing car which is capable of smashing a wall.
Only full body protection might help a little."

Here is the full text, some of which dealing with preventative
measures you deleted.

(ha!)

Doug.

So in fact, there weren't any "preventative measures" and I didn't delete
oany of those non-existent "preventative measures".

Thanks for clearing that up.

Sorry for suggesting that a cyclist might ever follow advice.