|
|
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slowdown"
****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try
to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote:
****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists. What are the chances, eh? |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 12/4/18 10:33 AM, MrCheerful wrote:
****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 Thank God he was not wearing a helmet. Otherwise if he had crashed into a pedestrian he would have killed her too. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:13:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists. What are the chances, eh? Is there a street view image of the entrance to this 'byway for pedestrians'? Since it is not beside a carriageway then, absent a TRO prohibiting cycling, it is fair game. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 04/12/2018 16:32, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:13:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists. What are the chances, eh? Is there a street view image of the entrance to this 'byway for pedestrians'? Since it is not beside a carriageway then, absent a TRO prohibiting cycling, it is fair game. You can easily find it on Google Streetview. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 04/12/2018 18:32, JNugent wrote:
On 04/12/2018 16:32, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:13:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists. What are the chances, eh? Is there a street view image of the entrance to this 'byway for pedestrians'? Since it is not beside a carriageway then, absent a TRO prohibiting cycling, it is fair game. You can easily find it on Google Streetview. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. If you're interested, I think this is it: /data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJVDkaYo3gQksvl3fwaUeUQ!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656?hl=en It looks like the northern end of a footpath (with v=at least one branch) linking Ranworth Road to Dereham Road. It's a modern-ish housing estate in a fairly flat part of the country, but there nevertheless does seem to be quite an incline in the immediate area. The site treatment reminds me of a place not far from where I was brought up (all demolished now) where the site sloped so much (with the effect intensidied by the need to cut terraces for housing) that the Victorian builders laid out several streets linked to others (at one end at least) only by steep stone and brick outdoor staircases. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 04/12/2018 16:32, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:13:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists.. What are the chances, eh? Is there a street view image of the entrance to this 'byway for pedestrians'? Since it is not beside a carriageway then, absent a TRO prohibiting cycling, it is fair game. You can easily find it on Google Streetview. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote:
On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 04/12/2018 16:32, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:13:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists. What are the chances, eh? Is there a street view image of the entrance to this 'byway for pedestrians'? Since it is not beside a carriageway then, absent a TRO prohibiting cycling, it is fair game. You can easily find it on Google Streetview. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifI am fatally injured". OK. But don't take anyone innocent with you while you're doing it. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 3:25:34 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 04/12/2018 16:32, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:13:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists. What are the chances, eh? Is there a street view image of the entrance to this 'byway for pedestrians'? Since it is not beside a carriageway then, absent a TRO prohibiting cycling, it is fair game. You can easily find it on Google Streetview. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifI am fatally injured". Nope, entirely the cyclist's fault. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 05/12/2018 15:25, JNugent wrote:
On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifIÂ* am fatally injured". I expect the way an inquest works is that contributory and mitigating factors have to mentioned. It doesn't mean that any one tries to "blame" the council as Cheerless suggested above. One would expect that anybody attempting to get compensation would be talked out of it before reaching court. But if it's a poorly designed cycle facility... OK. But don't take anyone innocent with you while you're doing it. That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 00:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/12/2018 15:25, JNugent wrote: On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifIÂ* am fatally injured". I expect the way an inquest works is that contributory and mitigating factors have to mentioned. It doesn't mean that any one tries to "blame" the council as Cheerless suggested above. One would expect that anybody attempting to get compensation would be talked out of it before reaching court. But if it's a poorly designed cycle facility... OK. But don't take anyone innocent with you while you're doing it. That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. All they need to be doing is walking up those steps with an armful of shopping or infant child. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 00:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/12/2018 15:25, JNugent wrote: On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifIÂ* am fatally injured". I expect the way an inquest works is that contributory and mitigating factors have to mentioned. It doesn't mean that any one tries to "blame" the council as Cheerless suggested above. Well... I'm not so sure. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 That URL has been edited out in later posts, but the story on the BBC site runs like this: QUOTE: The family of a cyclist who died of serious brain injuries after crashing down steep steps claimed he would still be alive if the steps had been visible. WD, 32, was cycling home in Norwich at 00:18 BST on 28 May when he failed to see the steps ahead. An inquest heard the path was poorly lit, overgrown and that the steps could not be seen before their approach. Coroner Yvonne Blake concluded a narrative verdict at Norwich Coroner's Court. She said the medical cause of death was multiple traumatic head injuries, due to after falling down steps while on a bicycle and having consumed alcohol. Mr D had not been wearing a cycle helmet and was declared dead at the scene by paramedics, having also had a cardiac arrest. He had a blood alcohol level of 216mg per 100ml. The legal limit for driving is 80mg. ENDQUOTE Come on, let's be honest about this... he was reportedly "cycling home" after midnight along a route that will not be marked on maps as a road and over which a satnav would not direct a cyclist (maybe a pedestrian). It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). One would expect that anybody attempting to get compensation would be talked out of it before reaching court. But if it's a poorly designed cycle facility... Well, it certainly doesn't look like a cycling facility. Not with those two (or more) flights of steps. OK. But don't take anyone innocent with you while you're doing it. That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 01:51:21 GMT, JNugent wrote:
On 06/12/2018 00:20, TMS320 wrote: On 05/12/2018 15:25, JNugent wrote: On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifIÂ* am fatally injured". I expect the way an inquest works is that contributory and mitigating factors have to mentioned. It doesn't mean that any one tries to "blame" the council as Cheerless suggested above. One would expect that anybody attempting to get compensation would be talked out of it before reaching court. But if it's a poorly designed cycle facility... OK. But don't take anyone innocent with you while you're doing it. That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. All they need to be doing is walking up those steps with an armful of shopping or infant child. Will no-one think of the children? Let's look again at the (UK) Death-toll; ah, we can't; they're mere Road Traffic "Accidents", no blame apportioned. -- Bah, and indeed, Humbug. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC, TMS320 wrote:
That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. Indeed - Tom Crispin of this parish once used the wriggle in court that he could not possibly have been drunk and capable of riding a bike as well. He left the court a free man. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote:
On 06/12/2018 00:20, TMS320 wrote: On 05/12/2018 15:25, JNugent wrote: On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifIÂ* am fatally injured". I expect the way an inquest works is that contributory and mitigating factors have to mentioned. It doesn't mean that any one tries to "blame" the council as Cheerless suggested above. Well... I'm not so sure. Exactly. QUOTE: ... ENDQUOTE You're quoting a reporter's version. Come on, let's be honest about this... he was reportedly "cycling home" after midnight along a route that will not be marked on maps as a road and over which a satnav would not direct a cyclist (maybe a pedestrian). It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring. When they refurbished M4 junction 11 they also provided a maze of foot/cycle bridges. In one direction one rides up a ramp up where it is necessary to turn sharp right. Directly straight on, steps go down. https://goo.gl/maps/JbFGrfxVES52 It cannot be seen until the platform is reached and there is nothing except a little sign attached to the railing (the back of which can be seen in the picture). I know this trap exists somewhere in the maze but no matter how many times I have used it, I still have to think about it. Things also look different in the dark (even when well lit) compared to day. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote:
On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 00:20, TMS320 wrote: On 05/12/2018 15:25, JNugent wrote: On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifIÂ* am fatally injured". I expect the way an inquest works is that contributory and mitigating factors have to mentioned. It doesn't mean that any one tries to "blame" the council as Cheerless suggested above. Well... I'm not so sure. Exactly. QUOTE: ... ENDQUOTE You're quoting a reporter's version. Come on, let's be honest about this... he was reportedly "cycling home" after midnight along a route that will not be marked on maps as a road and over which a satnav would not direct a cyclist (maybe a pedestrian). It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ....whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? When they refurbished M4 junction 11 they also provided a maze of foot/cycle bridges. In one direction one rides up a ramp up where it is necessary to turn sharp right. Directly straight on, steps go down. https://goo.gl/maps/JbFGrfxVES52 It cannot be seen until the platform is reached and there is nothing except a little sign attached to the railing (the back of which can be seen in the picture). I know this trap exists somewhere in the maze but no matter how many times I have used it, I still have to think about it. Things also look different in the dark (even when well lit) compared to day. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 09:49, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 01:51:21 GMT, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 00:20, TMS320 wrote: On 05/12/2018 15:25, JNugent wrote: On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet. Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifIÂ am fatally injured". I expect the way an inquest works is that contributory and mitigating factors have to mentioned. It doesn't mean that any one tries to "blame" the council as Cheerless suggested above. One would expect that anybody attempting to get compensation would be talked out of it before reaching court. But if it's a poorly designed cycle facility... OK. But don't take anyone innocent with you while you're doing it. That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. All they need to be doing is walking up those steps with an armful of shopping or infant child. Will no-one think of the children? Not cycliusts on footways, that much is certain. Let's look again at the (UK) Death-toll; ah, we can't; they're mere Road Traffic "Accidents", no blame apportioned. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote:
On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
TMS320 wrote:
On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. Most people actually are. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
|
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
|
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 14:13, TMS320 wrote:
On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. I am surprised that you go sightseeing around your home area after midnight in the dark whilst ****ed, but I have no choice but to believe you... or something. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 14:37, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote: ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. Most people actually are. Err... which means not everybody. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 14:58, JNugent wrote:
On 06/12/2018 14:13, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. I am surprised that you go sightseeing around your home area after midnight in the dark whilst ****ed, but I have no choice but to believe you... or something. Some people like watching 22 men in fancy chase a leather ball round a lawn. How weird. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 2:41:01 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC, TMS320 wrote: That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. Indeed - Tom Crispin of this parish once used the wriggle in court that he could not possibly have been drunk and capable of riding a bike as well. He left the court a free man. Cyclists wriggle all of the time. And yes, I remember Crispin. Is he still around? Inspired by me, he is on a grand tour of Europe in a VW camper before his lads have to go to school next year. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...o/yFwPdVZuAAAJ |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
TMS320 wrote:
On 06/12/2018 14:58, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 14:13, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. I am surprised that you go sightseeing around your home area after midnight in the dark whilst ****ed, but I have no choice but to believe you... or something. Some people like watching 22 men in fancy chase a leather ball round a lawn. How weird. On footballing I have to agree with you, even though it does go against the grain. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 4:18:33 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 2:41:01 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC, TMS320 wrote: That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. Indeed - Tom Crispin of this parish once used the wriggle in court that he could not possibly have been drunk and capable of riding a bike as well. He left the court a free man. Cyclists wriggle all of the time. And yes, I remember Crispin. Is he still around? Inspired by me, he is on a grand tour of Europe in a VW camper before his lads have to go to school next year. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...o/yFwPdVZuAAAJ This is three years ago. From 6MAY18. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...g/xmHTHtd7AAAJ |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 15:41, TMS320 wrote:
On 06/12/2018 14:58, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 14:13, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. I am surprised that you go sightseeing around your home area after midnight in the dark whilst ****ed, but I have no choice but to believe you... or something. Some people like watching 22 men in fancy chase a leather ball round a lawn. How weird. That they do so is rather more credible than your thesis on heavily-intoxicated cyclists sightseeing after midnight in their home areas. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 3:25:34 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 05/12/2018 08:29, Simon Jester wrote: On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 6:32:10 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 04/12/2018 16:32, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:13:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/12/2018 21:33, MrCheerful wrote: ****ed cyclist on an unlit footpath at midnight, no helmet.Â*Â* Family try to blame the council for their ****wit's death from head injuries. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-46433610 QUOTE: "The Loke" is a byway for pedestrians but Mr Warren's father said they had been told by locals that it was used regularly by cyclists. ENDQUOTE Gerraway! It must be the only pedestrian footway in the country used by cyclists. What are the chances, eh? Is there a street view image of the entrance to this 'byway for pedestrians'? Since it is not beside a carriageway then, absent a TRO prohibiting cycling, it is fair game. You can easily find it on Google Streetview. Good luck trying to find a sign encouraging cyclists to negotiate a flight of concrete stairs, up or down. I don't need to find a sign encouraging cyclists to use it, the fact there is no sign prohibiting cyclists from using it is enough. "There's no sign prohibiting me from cycling down this concrete staircase so I'm going to do it and it's the council's fault ifI am fatally injured". OK. But don't take anyone innocent with you while you're doing it. He was 32, he has been indoctrinated from birth to expect a law or a rule or an authority figure to tell him what to do at all times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMhURei8N6Q |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
wrote:
On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 4:18:33 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 2:41:01 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC, TMS320 wrote: That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. Indeed - Tom Crispin of this parish once used the wriggle in court that he could not possibly have been drunk and capable of riding a bike as well. He left the court a free man. Cyclists wriggle all of the time. And yes, I remember Crispin. Is he still around? Inspired by me, he is on a grand tour of Europe in a VW camper before his lads have to go to school next year. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...o/yFwPdVZuAAAJ This is three years ago. From 6MAY18. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...g/xmHTHtd7AAAJ Nobody gives a **** anyway. The guy is a ******. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 18:16:06 GMT, "Mr Pounder Esquire"
wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 4:18:33 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 2:41:01 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC, TMS320 wrote: That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. Indeed - Tom Crispin of this parish once used the wriggle in court that he could not possibly have been drunk and capable of riding a bike as well. He left the court a free man. Cyclists wriggle all of the time. And yes, I remember Crispin. Is he still around? Inspired by me, he is on a grand tour of Europe in a VW camper before his lads have to go to school next year. He's home now. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...sldo/yFwPdVZuA AAJ This is three years ago. From 6MAY18. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...cg/xmHTHtd7AAA J Nobody gives a **** anyway. The guy is a ******. Another quality post from the home of rational thought. Or maybe that should be "rationed". -- Bah, and indeed, Humbug. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 18:16:06 GMT, "Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 4:18:33 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 2:41:01 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC, TMS320 wrote: That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. Indeed - Tom Crispin of this parish once used the wriggle in court that he could not possibly have been drunk and capable of riding a bike as well. He left the court a free man. Cyclists wriggle all of the time. And yes, I remember Crispin. Is he still around? Inspired by me, he is on a grand tour of Europe in a VW camper before his lads have to go to school next year. He's home now. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...sldo/yFwPdVZuA AAJ This is three years ago. From 6MAY18. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...cg/xmHTHtd7AAA J Nobody gives a **** anyway. The guy is a ******. Another quality post from the home of rational thought. Or maybe that should be "rationed". Don't be silly. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them to slow down"
On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 19:31:32 GMT, "Mr Pounder Esquire"
wrote: Kerr-Mudd,John wrote: On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 18:16:06 GMT, "Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote: [] Nobody gives a **** anyway. The guy is a ******. Another quality post from the home of rational thought. Or maybe that should be "rationed". Don't be silly. You didn't use an epiphet. Fail. -- Bah, and indeed, Humbug. |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 06/12/2018 16:49, JNugent wrote:
On 06/12/2018 15:41, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 14:58, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 14:13, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 13:10, JNugent wrote: On 06/12/2018 11:05, TMS320 wrote: On 06/12/2018 02:01, JNugent wrote: It is vanishingly unlikely that he had never used the route before if he was using it to "cycle home" at 2:15 am. It is reasonable to suppose that he knew full well that this pedestrian access had at least two flights of steps along its length (he'll have been at least as aware as anyone else of the local changes in level and the need for steps or ramps). I don't think it is "vanishingly unlikely" that a person can know about a route but has no reason to use it normally. It was the middle of May and a warm night, after all, and probably no rush to get home. It's a nice time to be out exploring... ...whilst around three times over the alcohol limit (for driving). Yes - what could be more natural or normal than exploring in the dark (which is exactly the point) whilst ...er ... inebriated? Fortunately not everybody is like you. I am surprised that you go sightseeing around your home area after midnight in the dark whilst ****ed, but I have no choice but to believe you... or something. Some people like watching 22 men in fancy chase a leather ball round a lawn. How weird. That they do so is rather more credible than your thesis on heavily-intoxicated cyclists sightseeing after midnight in their home areas. Is there a law that says that cyclists must go home after dark by the shortest route? |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 7:10:41 PM UTC, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
He's home now. Probably checking out his property portfolio! |
"councils could not "babysit everyone on a bike or urge them toslow down"
On 12/7/18 8:31 AM, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Kerr-Mudd,John wrote: On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 18:16:06 GMT, "Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 4:18:33 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 2:41:01 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: wrote: On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC, TMS320 wrote: That is one very important difference between a drunk cyclist and a drunk driver. Indeed - Tom Crispin of this parish once used the wriggle in court that he could not possibly have been drunk and capable of riding a bike as well. He left the court a free man. Cyclists wriggle all of the time. And yes, I remember Crispin. Is he still around? Inspired by me, he is on a grand tour of Europe in a VW camper before his lads have to go to school next year. He's home now. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...sldo/yFwPdVZuA AAJ This is three years ago. From 6MAY18. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...cg/xmHTHtd7AAA J Nobody gives a **** anyway. The guy is a ******. Another quality post from the home of rational thought. Or maybe that should be "rationed". Don't be silly. K-M,John's post was very reasonable and very true. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com