On 04/07/2019 23:31, JNugent wrote:
On 04/07/2019 17:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/07/2019 14:32, JNugent wrote:

It is ABSOLUTELY clear that the cycling ban in the place in question
is there to protect pedestrians (all of us).

It is never absolutely clear that getting off to walk a bike is better
for pedestrians.

So you (think you) know better than the owners / operators of the land
in question.

The owners / operators of the land don't know anything. They're just
applying a widely held belief.



The cyclist was still partly the author of her own misfortune. Had she
obeyed the signage, it wouldn't have happened. I don't see how you can
deny that. Not if you want to make sense anyway (I readily accept that
you don't always even want to make sense).

You're still justifying the perpetrator's action.