Pedestrian legally struck at 24mph on footpath

[Alycidon]

What another stupid OZ law.
QUOTE:
"A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward after police released a CCTV still of him.

Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.

The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was okay before heading on his way.

Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws introduced in October."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html

[MrCheerful]

On 14/04/2016 19:53, Alycidon wrote:
> What another stupid OZ law.
> QUOTE:
> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward after police released a CCTV still of him.
>
> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>
> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was okay before heading on his way.
>
> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws introduced in October."
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>

Cyclists are not legally allowed to run into and maim people, are they?
How can a cyclist know his speed?

and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK

[Anthony 'Piss_Taker' Janssen]

MrCheerful > wrote:

> and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK

Why are you posting here? You're not a cyclist.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[jnugent]

On 15/04/2016 11:25, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:

> MrCheerful > wrote:

>> and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK

> Why are you posting here? You're not a cyclist.

Why do you post in uk.politics.misc?

You're not a UK politician.

Come to that, why do you post in uk.politics.misc or in uk.rec.cycling?

You're (apparently) not in the UK and are not British.

[Nick[_4_]]

On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
> What another stupid OZ law.
> QUOTE:
> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward after police released a CCTV still of him.
>
> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>
> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was okay before heading on his way.
>
> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws introduced in October."
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>

Why was the cyclist roaring.

Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.

If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you aren't it
is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.

[MrCheerful]

On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
>> What another stupid OZ law.
>> QUOTE:
>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward
>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>
>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided
>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>
>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was
>> okay before heading on his way.
>>
>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same
>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws
>> introduced in October."
>>
>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>>
>>
>
> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>
> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>
> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you aren't it
> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.

Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
conditions.

[Anthony 'Piss_Taker' Janssen]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 11:25, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>> MrCheerful > wrote:

>>> and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK

>> Why are you posting here? You're not a cyclist.

> Why do you post in uk.politics.misc?
>
> You're not a UK politician.
>
> Come to that, why do you post in uk.politics.misc or in uk.rec.cycling?
>
> You're (apparently) not in the UK and are not British.

I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too many
big words?

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[jnugent]

On 15/04/2016 15:08, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
> JNugent > wrote:
>> On 15/04/2016 11:25, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>>> MrCheerful > wrote:
>
>>>> and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK
>
>>> Why are you posting here? You're not a cyclist.
>
>> Why do you post in uk.politics.misc?
>>
>> You're not a UK politician.
>>
>> Come to that, why do you post in uk.politics.misc or in uk.rec.cycling?
>>
>> You're (apparently) not in the UK and are not British.
>
> I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too many
> big words?

No, I just ignored you.

What did you "think" I was going to do?

Be impressed?

Take notice of you?

Grow up.

And stop posting in uk newsgroups.

[Anthony 'Piss_Taker' Janssen]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 15:08, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2016 11:25, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>>>> MrCheerful > wrote:
>>
>>>>> and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK
>>
>>>> Why are you posting here? You're not a cyclist.
>>
>>> Why do you post in uk.politics.misc?
>>>
>>> You're not a UK politician.
>>>
>>> Come to that, why do you post in uk.politics.misc or in uk.rec.cycling?
>>>
>>> You're (apparently) not in the UK and are not British.
>>
>> I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too many
>> big words?
>
> No, I just ignored you.

As usually happens when your face is held down the toilet and it's flushed,
then?

Like you 'ignore' me when I ask you to explain how I'm apparently some
British guy called 'Brian' who drinks too much, when I in fact have been
posting to Usenet for just shy of 25 years, and except for a few times
earlier this year just to **** you off, have never used the nym 'Brian'.

> What did you "think" I was going to do?

Well, I might have 'thinked' you were going to learn how to use quotation
marks properly, but then you're quite evidently a bit thick, so that's
probably going to be a waste of time.

> Be impressed?

With an ego like yours?

Please!

> Take notice of you?

You mean like you're doing now?

> Grow up.

You first.

> And stop posting in uk newsgroups.

I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too many
big words?

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[jnugent]

On 15/04/2016 15:42, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
> JNugent > wrote:
>> On 15/04/2016 15:08, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>> On 15/04/2016 11:25, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>>>>> MrCheerful > wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK
>>>
>>>>> Why are you posting here? You're not a cyclist.
>>>
>>>> Why do you post in uk.politics.misc?
>>>>
>>>> You're not a UK politician.
>>>>
>>>> Come to that, why do you post in uk.politics.misc or in uk.rec.cycling?
>>>>
>>>> You're (apparently) not in the UK and are not British.
>>>
>>> I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too many
>>> big words?
>>
>> No, I just ignored you.
>
> As usually happens when your face is held down the toilet and it's flushed,
> then?
>
> Like you 'ignore' me when I ask you to explain how I'm apparently some
> British guy called 'Brian' who drinks too much, when I in fact have been
> posting to Usenet for just shy of 25 years, and except for a few times
> earlier this year just to **** you off, have never used the nym 'Brian'.

Anything you say, Glug. <FX: eyes cast heavenward>

>> What did you "think" I was going to do?

> Well, I might have 'thinked' you were going to learn how to use quotation
> marks properly, but then you're quite evidently a bit thick, so that's
> probably going to be a waste of time.

I didn't expect you to do much thinking at all, hence the punctuation.

And I was right.

>> Be impressed?

> With an ego like yours?

No - with one like yours: very over-inflated, especially if you have
convinced yourself of yet another impossible thing before breakfast.

> Please!

Please what?

>> Take notice of you?

> You mean like you're doing now?

In the colloquial sense of "obey". You might not know that.

>> Grow up.

> You first.

Indeed.

>> And stop posting in uk newsgroups.

> I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too many
> big words?

No, I just ignored you.

What did you "think" I was going to do?

Be impressed?

Take notice of you?

Grow up.

[Nick[_4_]]

On 15/04/2016 13:16, MrCheerful wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
>> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
>>> What another stupid OZ law.
>>> QUOTE:
>>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward
>>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>>
>>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided
>>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>>
>>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was
>>> okay before heading on his way.
>>>
>>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same
>>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws
>>> introduced in October."
>>>
>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>>
>> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>>
>> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you aren't it
>> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
>> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.
>
> Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
> conditions.

The same be said of many motorists who hit a pedestrian on the road. I
was travelling under the speed limit, it wasn't my fault.

However for some reason cyclists in such collisions are subjected to a
higher level of scrutiny. If she had been hit by a car "roaring" past we
wouldn't have heard a whisper about it.

[jnugent]

On 15/04/2016 16:01, Nick wrote:

> On 15/04/2016 13:16, MrCheerful wrote:
>> On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
>>> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:

>>>> What another stupid OZ law.

>>>> QUOTE:
>>>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>>>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward
>>>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>>>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided
>>>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>>>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was
>>>> okay before heading on his way.
>>>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same
>>>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws
>>>> introduced in October."
>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>
>>> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>>> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>>> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you aren't it
>>> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
>>> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.
>
>> Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
>> conditions.
>
> The same be said of many motorists who hit a pedestrian on the road. I
> was travelling under the speed limit, it wasn't my fault.
>
> However for some reason cyclists in such collisions are subjected to a
> higher level of scrutiny. If she had been hit by a car "roaring" past we
> wouldn't have heard a whisper about it.

On a *footpath*, leaving a pedestrian with internal bleeding and a
fractured rib?

Are you serious?

[Nick[_4_]]

On 15/04/2016 16:08, JNugent wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 16:01, Nick wrote:
>
>> On 15/04/2016 13:16, MrCheerful wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
>
>>>>> What another stupid OZ law.
>
>>>>> QUOTE:
>>>>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>>>>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward
>>>>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>>>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>>>>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided
>>>>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>>>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>>>>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was
>>>>> okay before heading on his way.
>>>>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same
>>>>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws
>>>>> introduced in October."
>>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>>>>>
>>
>>>> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>>>> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>>>> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you
>>>> aren't it
>>>> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
>>>> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.
>>
>>> Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
>>> conditions.
>>
>> The same be said of many motorists who hit a pedestrian on the road. I
>> was travelling under the speed limit, it wasn't my fault.
>>
>> However for some reason cyclists in such collisions are subjected to a
>> higher level of scrutiny. If she had been hit by a car "roaring" past we
>> wouldn't have heard a whisper about it.
>
> On a *footpath*, leaving a pedestrian with internal bleeding and a
> fractured rib?
>
> Are you serious?

Compared to a car collision leaving a pedestrian road dead on the road,
which would only be a minor local story (town level).

This cyclist was in Adelaide.

Yes I'm serious, it is a very serious matter.

[Anthony 'Piss_Taker' Janssen]

Nick > wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 16:08, JNugent wrote:
>> On 15/04/2016 16:01, Nick wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/04/2016 13:16, MrCheerful wrote:
>>>> On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
>>>>> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
>>
>>>>>> What another stupid OZ law.
>>
>>>>>> QUOTE:
>>>>>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>>>>>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward
>>>>>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>>>>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>>>>>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided
>>>>>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>>>>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>>>>>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was
>>>>>> okay before heading on his way.
>>>>>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same
>>>>>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws
>>>>>> introduced in October."
>>>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>>>>> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>>>>> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you
>>>>> aren't it
>>>>> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
>>>>> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.
>>>
>>>> Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
>>>> conditions.
>>>
>>> The same be said of many motorists who hit a pedestrian on the road. I
>>> was travelling under the speed limit, it wasn't my fault.
>>>
>>> However for some reason cyclists in such collisions are subjected to a
>>> higher level of scrutiny. If she had been hit by a car "roaring" past we
>>> wouldn't have heard a whisper about it.
>>
>> On a *footpath*, leaving a pedestrian with internal bleeding and a
>> fractured rib?
>>
>> Are you serious?
>
> Compared to a car collision leaving a pedestrian road dead on the road,
> which would only be a minor local story (town level).
>
> This cyclist was in Adelaide.
>
> Yes I'm serious, it is a very serious matter.

There's little point, because you're dealing with a thicko troll who
genuinely believes that car drivers are 'hard done by', when compared to
cyclists.

That level of delusion is on a par with the flat-earthers.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[Alycidon]

On Friday, 15 April 2016 16:29:32 UTC+1, Nick wrote:

>
> Compared to a car collision leaving a pedestrian road dead on the road,
> which would only be a minor local story (town level).

Spot on!
Down the road from me only today - the driver was not injured, apparently.

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Police-appeal-91-year-old-hit-car-Pocklington/story-29116108-detail/story.html

Happens every day, as you say.

[jnugent]

On 15/04/2016 16:29, Nick wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 16:08, JNugent wrote:
>> On 15/04/2016 16:01, Nick wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/04/2016 13:16, MrCheerful wrote:
>>>> On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
>>>>> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
>>
>>>>>> What another stupid OZ law.
>>
>>>>>> QUOTE:
>>>>>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>>>>>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward
>>>>>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>>>>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>>>>>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and
>>>>>> collided
>>>>>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>>>>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>>>>>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> okay before heading on his way.
>>>>>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same
>>>>>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws
>>>>>> introduced in October."
>>>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>>>>> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>>>>> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you
>>>>> aren't it
>>>>> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
>>>>> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.
>>>
>>>> Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
>>>> conditions.
>>>
>>> The same be said of many motorists who hit a pedestrian on the road. I
>>> was travelling under the speed limit, it wasn't my fault.
>>>
>>> However for some reason cyclists in such collisions are subjected to a
>>> higher level of scrutiny. If she had been hit by a car "roaring" past we
>>> wouldn't have heard a whisper about it.
>>
>> On a *footpath*, leaving a pedestrian with internal bleeding and a
>> fractured rib?
>>
>> Are you serious?
>
> Compared to a car collision leaving a pedestrian road dead on the road,
> which would only be a minor local story (town level).

I don't accept that.

It is unfortunately true that "run of the mill" traffic accidents don't
get much attention in the media, but a case of a driver "roaring" down a
*footpath* (not even a footway, but a foot*path*) and injuring a
pedestrian would not be your everyday occurrence.

> This cyclist was in Adelaide.

Yes - and OT for that reason, though lack of topicality never stops
certain of the Usual Suspects from posting irrelevance.
>
> Yes I'm serious, it is a very serious matter.

Indeed it is.

[Nick[_4_]]

On 15/04/2016 23:36, JNugent wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 16:29, Nick wrote:
>> On 15/04/2016 16:08, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2016 16:01, Nick wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 15/04/2016 13:16, MrCheerful wrote:
>>>>> On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
>>>>>> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> What another stupid OZ law.
>>>
>>>>>>> QUOTE:
>>>>>>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>>>>>>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward
>>>>>>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>>>>>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>>>>>>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and
>>>>>>> collided
>>>>>>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>>>>>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>>>>>>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she
>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>> okay before heading on his way.
>>>>>>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the
>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling
>>>>>>> laws
>>>>>>> introduced in October."
>>>>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>>>>>> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>>>>>> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you
>>>>>> aren't it
>>>>>> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a foot
>>>>>> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.
>>>>
>>>>> Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
>>>>> conditions.
>>>>
>>>> The same be said of many motorists who hit a pedestrian on the road. I
>>>> was travelling under the speed limit, it wasn't my fault.
>>>>
>>>> However for some reason cyclists in such collisions are subjected to a
>>>> higher level of scrutiny. If she had been hit by a car "roaring"
>>>> past we
>>>> wouldn't have heard a whisper about it.
>>>
>>> On a *footpath*, leaving a pedestrian with internal bleeding and a
>>> fractured rib?
>>>
>>> Are you serious?
>>
>> Compared to a car collision leaving a pedestrian road dead on the road,
>> which would only be a minor local story (town level).
>
> I don't accept that.
>
> It is unfortunately true that "run of the mill" traffic accidents don't
> get much attention in the media, but a case of a driver "roaring" down a
> *footpath* (not even a footway, but a foot*path*) and injuring a
> pedestrian would not be your everyday occurrence.
>

Perhaps not everyday. But this is one I drove past last year.

<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12087616/Westerham-Costa-crash-victim-named-as-Valerie-Deakin-from-East-Sussex.html>

Although it's a little worse than just down the foot*path*, this was in
the coffee*shop* and of course the victims die rather than just get a
nasty bump.

I forget the figure, is it cars kill something like about 10 pedestrians
a year in the uk on the pavement. I'm pretty sure they must give a few
pedestrians bumps and scrapes too but I guess those cases aren't newsworthy.

[jnugent]

On 16/04/2016 09:05, Nick wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 23:36, JNugent wrote:
>> On 15/04/2016 16:29, Nick wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2016 16:08, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 15/04/2016 16:01, Nick wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 15/04/2016 13:16, MrCheerful wrote:
>>>>>> On 15/04/2016 12:44, Nick wrote:
>>>>>>> On 14/04/2016 18:53, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> What another stupid OZ law.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> QUOTE:
>>>>>>>> "A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which
>>>>>>>> left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come
>>>>>>>> forward
>>>>>>>> after police released a CCTV still of him.
>>>>>>>> Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of
>>>>>>>> Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and
>>>>>>>> collided
>>>>>>>> with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>>>>>>>> The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a
>>>>>>>> racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she
>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>> okay before heading on his way.
>>>>>>>> Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the
>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>> speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling
>>>>>>>> laws
>>>>>>>> introduced in October."
>>>>>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why was the cyclist roaring.
>>>>>>> Pavement cycling has always seemed quite simple to me.
>>>>>>> If you are going very slowly like a pedestrian it is ok if you
>>>>>>> aren't it
>>>>>>> is not. But it seems some people think it is not ok to ride on a
>>>>>>> foot
>>>>>>> path at 8kmph but is ok to ride on a shared path at 40kmph.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Either way it was dangerous cycling since it was too fast for the
>>>>>> conditions.
>>>>>
>>>>> The same be said of many motorists who hit a pedestrian on the road. I
>>>>> was travelling under the speed limit, it wasn't my fault.
>>>>>
>>>>> However for some reason cyclists in such collisions are subjected to a
>>>>> higher level of scrutiny. If she had been hit by a car "roaring"
>>>>> past we
>>>>> wouldn't have heard a whisper about it.
>>>>
>>>> On a *footpath*, leaving a pedestrian with internal bleeding and a
>>>> fractured rib?
>>>>
>>>> Are you serious?
>>>
>>> Compared to a car collision leaving a pedestrian road dead on the road,
>>> which would only be a minor local story (town level).
>>
>> I don't accept that.
>>
>> It is unfortunately true that "run of the mill" traffic accidents don't
>> get much attention in the media, but a case of a driver "roaring" down a
>> *footpath* (not even a footway, but a foot*path*) and injuring a
>> pedestrian would not be your everyday occurrence.
>>
>
> Perhaps not everyday. But this is one I drove past last year.
>
> <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12087616/Westerham-Costa-crash-victim-named-as-Valerie-Deakin-from-East-Sussex.html>
>
>
> Although it's a little worse than just down the foot*path*, this was in
> the coffee*shop* and of course the victims die rather than just get a
> nasty bump.

I remember that one being reported nationally (if it's the one in
Westerham, Kent). Probably even internationally.

> I forget the figure, is it cars kill something like about 10 pedestrians
> a year in the uk on the pavement. I'm pretty sure they must give a few
> pedestrians bumps and scrapes too but I guess those cases aren't
> newsworthy.

Taking no issue with the figure, I'd say that those ten cases are
definitely reported, at least nationally.

Of course, they aren't a real analog for cases where cyclists hit
pedestrians when both are travelling along off-road footpaths (as per
the instant case).

As you know, a footpath and a footway are quite different things.

The cases to which you allude are going to be footway cases in incidents
where - for whatever reason, from heart-attack to rebound from another
collision - the driver has involuntarily lost control of the vehicle
which runs onto the footway as one of the results.

Terrible cases with terrible consequences? Absolutely - but not the
result of deliberate action in driving onto a footway.

[Judith[_4_]]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:53:39 -0700 (PDT), Alycidon > wrote:

>What another stupid OZ law.
>QUOTE:
>"A cyclist wanted over a hit-and-run crash with a pedestrian which left her with internal bleeding and a fractured rib has come forward after police released a CCTV still of him.
>
>Rebecca Bradford, 24, was walking along a footpath in the heart of Adelaide's business district when the cyclist roared past and collided with her at an estimated speed of 40 kilometres per hour.
>
>The cyclist, wearing green and white Lycra bike clothing and with a racing style bicycle, was said to have spent a moment checking she was okay before heading on his way.
>
>Cyclists in Adelaide are legally allowed to use footpaths at the same speed limit shown on the adjacent street courtesy of new cycling laws introduced in October."
>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3540125/Cyclist-wanted-hit-run-crash-pedestrian-comes-forward-CCTV-footage-released.html

Subject : Pedestrian legally struck at 24mph on footpath
So cyclists can *legally* collide and strike pedestrians can they? Are you
sure about that? You have been known to be wrong before.

(Did you go the BP Shareholder meeting this year? Unfortunately I could not
make it)

[Anthony 'Piss_Taker' Janssen]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 15/04/2016 15:42, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2016 15:08, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>> On 15/04/2016 11:25, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
>>>>>> MrCheerful > wrote:

>>>>>>> and why are you so obsessed with foreign cycling? This is the UK

>>>>>> Why are you posting here? You're not a cyclist.

>>>>> Why do you post in uk.politics.misc?
>>>>>
>>>>> You're not a UK politician.
>>>>>
>>>>> Come to that, why do you post in uk.politics.misc or in
>>>>> uk.rec.cycling?
>>>>>
>>>>> You're (apparently) not in the UK and are not British.

>>>> I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too
>>>> many big words?

>>> No, I just ignored you.

>> As usually happens when your face is held down the toilet and it's
>> flushed, then?
>>
>> Like you 'ignore' me when I ask you to explain how I'm apparently some
>> British guy called 'Brian' who drinks too much, when I in fact have been
>> posting to Usenet for just shy of 25 years, and except for a few times
>> earlier this year just to **** you off, have never used the nym 'Brian'.

> Anything you say, Glug. <FX: eyes cast heavenward>

Is that the real Glug, or the time-travelling version?

>>> What did you "think" I was going to do?

>> Well, I might have 'thinked' you were going to learn how to use
>> quotation marks properly, but then you're quite evidently a bit thick,
>> so that's probably going to be a waste of time.

> I didn't expect you to do much thinking at all, hence the punctuation.

Is that 'I ****ed up' in your world?

> And I was right.

That would be a first.

>>> Be impressed?

>> With an ego like yours?

> No - with one like yours: very over-inflated, especially if you have
> convinced yourself of yet another impossible thing before breakfast.

What, like time travel, you mean?

>> Please!

> Please what?

See above.

>>> Take notice of you?

>> You mean like you're doing now?

> In the colloquial sense of "obey". You might not know that.

It must burn you that a non-Brit speaks and writes English better than you
do.

>>> Grow up.

>> You first.

> Indeed.

Is that a 'no'?

>>> And stop posting in uk newsgroups.

>> I told you about the nature of the Usenet hierarchy. Did I use too many
>> big words?

> No, I just ignored you.

As usually happens when your face is held down the toilet and it's
flushed, then?

Like you 'ignore' me when I ask you to explain how I'm apparently some
British guy called 'Brian' who drinks too much, when I in fact have been
posting to Usenet for just shy of 25 years, and except for a few times
earlier this year just to **** you off, have never used the nym 'Brian'.

> What did you "think" I was going to do?

Well, I might have 'thinked' you were going to learn how to use
quotation marks properly, but then you're quite evidently a bit thick,
so that's probably going to be a waste of time.

> Be impressed?

With an ego like yours?

Please!

> Take notice of you?

You mean like you're doing now?

> Grow up.

You first.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))