|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtakingcyclist
On 17/05/2020 08:56, Kelly wrote:
colwyn wrote: On 16/05/2020 14:44, Kelly wrote: Pamela wrote: The greater misdemeanor was to flout the Covid regulations completely unnecessarily. The man was no doubt reacting to this unwaranted breach of his safety and to the injury caused to him by the bike. What injury caused by the bike? The bike could hardly have touched him - it was more a case of the girl collapsing into his outer thigh: https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/...8195.jpg?w=620 I wonder if a citizen can make a private proscution of the father under the Covid regulations if the police fail to take action to ensure his safety. Are you joking? That couple live in the area - they were already deeply concerned about 'the bad press' they we getting when they contacted the police to protect themselves. I hardly think they want to be seen as the local pariahs by prosecuting the father of that little girl for her having a mishap on her barbie bike. Well, this newsgroup claims to encourage participants interested in cycling to express opinions,however, you may have noticed that many contributors are only here to cause controversy and are basically just trolling. Yes... I'm making a list. It is astounding how some writers are resorting to insults and abuse just for the purpose of self-gratification. I don't know what is wrong with some people - I have to keep reminding myself that I'm imperfect too (albeit in a better way than them, of course). My motto : "Have thick skin but a soft heart!" It's a great motto. I have three usenet rules which I try to adhere to, and they amount to very much the same as your motto: 1. Be kind. 2. Don't take anything personally. 3. Don't take anything too seriously (especially yourself). Words can be powerful, written or spoken, so you need to use them with awareness. I think it's easy to forget that somewhat on usenet. Which is why you sometimes need to be able to defend yourself from what other people may carelessly say, and you have to be careful with what you say too. The 'be kind' thing is so easy, you never regret being kind in the short, medium or long term - you will never come back and say to yourself, 'I wish I hadn't been kind'. You will never think that. Your mind is your most powerful asset, and it's up to you to protect it. Just to say, I like the motto. -- Bod |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist
Pamela wrote:
On 14:14 16 May 2020, Kelly said: You read the newspaper report from the following day, after the incident, though, and it's basically all about a couple who knocked a 6 year old girl off her bike when they refused to move. The police say they "reviewed the footage and do not believe this was a criminal offence. The couple involved called us about the incident and we are satisfied that what took place was a misunderstanding between the two parties", and that no action will be taken. What else can it be, other than the outrage that this dog walking man has caused on social media, that has overridden the social distancing regulations being taken into account? There is no mention of the police even criticising the father and daughter over their behaviour. This is all a bit more nuanced than you might expect from the letter of the law. I still don't understand why the father thought it was more important to continue taking his video than step forward and supervise his daughter. Didn't he simply failed to envisage what could go wrong? He was too far behind the action and hadn't properly considered the risks, so everything was alright just as long as nothing went wrong. Then when it did go wrong and the couple up ahead failed to step aside to leave space for his daughter to pass by them, there was nothing he could do to rescue the situation. She's such a poor cyclist that she could easily have fallen over all on her own, especially as her bike has no stabiliser wheels and she can't use the brakes. If the father wants to train his daughter to cycle, he should do it in his back garden rather than a public path where she and he will inevitably closely approach members of the public at a time of Covid distancing. Yes, to all that. And if he didn't have a suitable back garden then, as another poster on the group here as already said, with the benefit of hindsight, he should have been doing all this in a more open space rather than that narrow path which allowed his daughter no room for error. The father is so irresponsible that he can't see how foolish his behaviour is (a) for taking the girl out unsupervised... He must have thought he could do all the supervising she needed and video the whole thing into the bargain... yet another poster to this group has cast doubt over whether he'll know any better should there be a next time. ...and (b) approaching the couple. Yes, this is where it all came unstuck, isn't it? Unlike the mother, I don't think this couple knew the girl was approaching, they weren't aware of her presence until she was actually trying to squeeze through between them, that's what it looked like to me anyway. I don't think they were deliberately trying to block her off. And instead of trying to justify what had just happened, what if the father had immediately apologised for both his daughter and himself, maybe then the dogwalking guy may well have reacted very differently too? Thank goodness the couple reported the incident to the police before the man and his troublemaking Facebook-stirring wife Michelle, got up to more mischief. Were they seeking vigilantes to take up the matter for them? I think they were encouraged to do what they did. The trouble is that Facebook gives you immediate access to a multitute of your friends - can you liken that to almost kind of being in a mob? You know, that thing about how a group of people will often engage in actions that are contrary to the personal moral standards of each individual in that group. So, instead of giving yourself a chance to calm down and think things through, you are straight away looking for your pitchfork to march on Frankenstein's Castle. Who knows? |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtakingcyclist
On 17/05/2020 09:12, Kelly wrote:
Pamela wrote: She's such a poor cyclist that she could easily have fallen over all on her own, especially as her bike has no stabiliser wheels and she can't use the brakes. If the father wants to train his daughter to cycle, he should do it in his back garden rather than a public path where she and he will inevitably closely approach members of the public at a time of Covid distancing. Yes, to all that. And if he didn't have a suitable back garden then, as another poster on the group here as already said, with the benefit of hindsight, he should have been doing all this in a more open space rather than that narrow path which allowed his daughter no room for error. I don't agree that she didn't know how to control the bike. What she had little experience with was about dealing with eventualities. She had clearly done the stabiliser and back garden stuff. Besides, anybody with experience of stabilisers knows that they only help before balance is learnt and don't do anything about loss of control (if anything, they make it worse). |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist
On Sat, 16 May 2020 18:52:15 GMT, Simon Mason
wrote: On Saturday, May 16, 2020 at 7:43:34 PM UTC+1, colwyn wrote: Well, this newsgroup claims to encourage participants interested in cycling to express opinions,however, you may have noticed that many contributors are only here to cause controversy and are basically just trolling. A non exhaustive list of known trolls over the years: Mr Benn The Medway Handyman Mr Cheerful Mr Pounder Nuxx Bar J Nugent Marie Judith (1946 posts 18/06/08 - 17/02/09) keith.hill (23 posts 07/07/08 - 09/07/08) freddy (3 posts 09/07/08 - 17/01/09) [more nyms from a decade a go] Pam (1 post 02/11/11) These are mostly dated trolls. The was a major nym- shifter. I think the Judith troll now prefers ULM, but it might be here as Pamela. I don't recall 'Marie' Pounder, "Cheerful" and Nugent are here for the full 10 year argument. (but should really go to "abuse") -- Bah, and indeed, Humbug. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist
On 09:12 17 May 2020, Kelly said:
Pamela wrote: On 14:14 16 May 2020, Kelly said: You read the newspaper report from the following day, after the incident, though, and it's basically all about a couple who knocked a 6 year old girl off her bike when they refused to move. The police say they "reviewed the footage and do not believe this was a criminal offence. The couple involved called us about the incident and we are satisfied that what took place was a misunderstanding between the two parties", and that no action will be taken. What else can it be, other than the outrage that this dog walking man has caused on social media, that has overridden the social distancing regulations being taken into account? There is no mention of the police even criticising the father and daughter over their behaviour. This is all a bit more nuanced than you might expect from the letter of the law. I still don't understand why the father thought it was more important to continue taking his video than step forward and supervise his daughter. Didn't he simply failed to envisage what could go wrong? He was too far behind the action and hadn't properly considered the risks, so everything was alright just as long as nothing went wrong. Then when it did go wrong and the couple up ahead failed to step aside to leave space for his daughter to pass by them, there was nothing he could do to rescue the situation. She's such a poor cyclist that she could easily have fallen over all on her own, especially as her bike has no stabiliser wheels and she can't use the brakes. If the father wants to train his daughter to cycle, he should do it in his back garden rather than a public path where she and he will inevitably closely approach members of the public at a time of Covid distancing. Yes, to all that. And if he didn't have a suitable back garden then, as another poster on the group here as already said, with the benefit of hindsight, he should have been doing all this in a more open space rather than that narrow path which allowed his daughter no room for error. The father is so irresponsible that he can't see how foolish his behaviour is (a) for taking the girl out unsupervised... He must have thought he could do all the supervising she needed and video the whole thing into the bargain... yet another poster to this group has cast doubt over whether he'll know any better should there be a next time. ...and (b) approaching the couple. Yes, this is where it all came unstuck, isn't it? Unlike the mother, I don't think this couple knew the girl was approaching, they weren't aware of her presence until she was actually trying to squeeze through between them, that's what it looked like to me anyway. I don't think they were deliberately trying to block her off. And instead of trying to justify what had just happened, what if the father had immediately apologised for both his daughter and himself, maybe then the dogwalking guy may well have reacted very differently too? Thank goodness the couple reported the incident to the police before the man and his troublemaking Facebook-stirring wife Michelle, got up to more mischief. Were they seeking vigilantes to take up the matter for them? I think they were encouraged to do what they did. The trouble is that Facebook gives you immediate access to a multitute of your friends - can you liken that to almost kind of being in a mob? You know, that thing about how a group of people will often engage in actions that are contrary to the personal moral standards of each individual in that group. So, instead of giving yourself a chance to calm down and think things through, you are straight away looking for your pitchfork to march on Frankenstein's Castle. Who knows? Your sensible and balanced comments are welcome. Cyclists in this group have taken the side of the father because the girl was riding a bike but what if she was on a scooter or skateboard and fell over after being unable to slow down for a couple on the footpath? Would they still think she and her father was in the right? |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 10:41:02 AM UTC+1, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
These are mostly dated trolls. The was a major nym- shifter. I think the Judith troll now prefers ULM, but it might be here as Pamela. I don't recall 'Marie' Here is Marie, aka Judith. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/uk.r...0/7kr5DEOO74cJ |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist
TMS320 wrote:
On 17/05/2020 09:12, Kelly wrote: Pamela wrote: She's such a poor cyclist that she could easily have fallen over all on her own, especially as her bike has no stabiliser wheels and she can't use the brakes. If the father wants to train his daughter to cycle, he should do it in his back garden rather than a public path where she and he will inevitably closely approach members of the public at a time of Covid distancing. Yes, to all that. And if he didn't have a suitable back garden then, as another poster on the group here as already said, with the benefit of hindsight, he should have been doing all this in a more open space rather than that narrow path which allowed his daughter no room for error. I don't agree that she didn't know how to control the bike. What she had little experience with was about dealing with eventualities. Fair enough. She had clearly done the stabiliser and back garden stuff. Besides, anybody with experience of stabilisers knows that they only help before balance is learnt and don't do anything about loss of control (if anything, they make it worse). I remember I did have stabilisers on my bike if I take my memory back far enough - but can only remember wanting to have them removed as soon as possible. So, stabilisers are helpful until balance is learnt then but they don't help prevent control loss... okay. I'll try to retain that bit of knowledge this time around, it may yet come in useful for me again some day. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist
Pamela wrote:
On 09:12 17 May 2020, Kelly said: Pamela wrote: On 14:14 16 May 2020, Kelly said: You read the newspaper report from the following day, after the incident, though, and it's basically all about a couple who knocked a 6 year old girl off her bike when they refused to move. The police say they "reviewed the footage and do not believe this was a criminal offence. The couple involved called us about the incident and we are satisfied that what took place was a misunderstanding between the two parties", and that no action will be taken. What else can it be, other than the outrage that this dog walking man has caused on social media, that has overridden the social distancing regulations being taken into account? There is no mention of the police even criticising the father and daughter over their behaviour. This is all a bit more nuanced than you might expect from the letter of the law. I still don't understand why the father thought it was more important to continue taking his video than step forward and supervise his daughter. Didn't he simply failed to envisage what could go wrong? He was too far behind the action and hadn't properly considered the risks, so everything was alright just as long as nothing went wrong. Then when it did go wrong and the couple up ahead failed to step aside to leave space for his daughter to pass by them, there was nothing he could do to rescue the situation. She's such a poor cyclist that she could easily have fallen over all on her own, especially as her bike has no stabiliser wheels and she can't use the brakes. If the father wants to train his daughter to cycle, he should do it in his back garden rather than a public path where she and he will inevitably closely approach members of the public at a time of Covid distancing. Yes, to all that. And if he didn't have a suitable back garden then, as another poster on the group here as already said, with the benefit of hindsight, he should have been doing all this in a more open space rather than that narrow path which allowed his daughter no room for error. The father is so irresponsible that he can't see how foolish his behaviour is (a) for taking the girl out unsupervised... He must have thought he could do all the supervising she needed and video the whole thing into the bargain... yet another poster to this group has cast doubt over whether he'll know any better should there be a next time. ...and (b) approaching the couple. Yes, this is where it all came unstuck, isn't it? Unlike the mother, I don't think this couple knew the girl was approaching, they weren't aware of her presence until she was actually trying to squeeze through between them, that's what it looked like to me anyway. I don't think they were deliberately trying to block her off. And instead of trying to justify what had just happened, what if the father had immediately apologised for both his daughter and himself, maybe then the dogwalking guy may well have reacted very differently too? Thank goodness the couple reported the incident to the police before the man and his troublemaking Facebook-stirring wife Michelle, got up to more mischief. Were they seeking vigilantes to take up the matter for them? I think they were encouraged to do what they did. The trouble is that Facebook gives you immediate access to a multitute of your friends - can you liken that to almost kind of being in a mob? You know, that thing about how a group of people will often engage in actions that are contrary to the personal moral standards of each individual in that group. So, instead of giving yourself a chance to calm down and think things through, you are straight away looking for your pitchfork to march on Frankenstein's Castle. Who knows? Your sensible and balanced comments are welcome. Thank you. Cyclists in this group have taken the side of the father because the girl was riding a bike but what if she was on a scooter or skateboard and fell over after being unable to slow down for a couple on the footpath? Would they still think she and her father was in the right? It could be that many cyclists feel they face regular prejudice based upon negative stereotyping and misunderstanding, and consequently they do tend to see the best in other cyclists - I know I do. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtakingcyclist
On 17/05/2020 11:48, Kelly wrote:
Pamela wrote: Cyclists in this group have taken the side of the father because the girl was riding a bike but what if she was on a scooter or skateboard and fell over after being unable to slow down for a couple on the footpath? Would they still think she and her father was in the right? It could be that many cyclists feel they face regular prejudice based upon negative stereotyping and misunderstanding, and consequently they do tend to see the best in other cyclists - I know I do. You (and they) should not do so when it's not justified. And it isn't justified in this case. Automatically taking the side of whoever is using one's preferred mode of transport - irrespective of how bad their behaviour - is wrong anyway. Some would say, for instance, that it would have meant my taking the side of that van driver who failed to give way at a roundabout and hit a cyclist who was using the roundabout properly. This was in a video link posted here a few days ago. It was obvious that the van driver was in the wrong, just as it is obvious that the child's parent is in the wrong in the footpath case. That other video link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8311279/Moment-cyclist-left-sprawling-floor-crashing-van-wrong.html |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 10:42:21 AM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
Cyclists in this group have taken the side of the father because the girl was riding a bike but what if she was on a scooter or skateboard and fell over after being unable to slow down for a couple on the footpath? My issue was with the chavvy potty mouthed bloke telling the 6 year old child that he couldn't "give a f***" after kicking her bike. Exactly the same as if he had kicked her scooter or skateboard and said the same to her. Nasty piece of work. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EX_tawzX...pg&name=medium |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Motorist who punched cyclist into oncoming traffic jailed for twoyears | Bod[_5_] | UK | 0 | October 27th 18 07:31 AM |
Video: Moment driver 'with cloudy windscreen' hits cyclist | Bod[_5_] | UK | 12 | April 7th 18 11:50 AM |
Driver caged for 8 months after overtaking cock up | Alycidon | UK | 7 | April 29th 16 12:07 PM |
Idiot bus driver hits idiot cyclist | [email protected] | UK | 112 | March 7th 12 10:14 AM |
Idiot bus driver hits idiot cyclist | Mr. Benn[_9_] | UK | 36 | March 7th 12 07:52 AM |