3 year old mown down on the pavement

On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html

This comment provides the truth:

"Can afford cctv at home but not able to afford a front gate get ur priorities straight"

If their toddler is so ****ing stupid to run out of the gate without looking what's coming, she could do the same into the road. Which will earn her a Darwin Award.

--
Worlds most powerful nob enlarger - a space suit with a fly zip

On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html

What would be your thinking if that was someone jogging or running along the pavement at a similar speed?

--
Worlds most powerful nob enlarger - a space suit with a fly zip

On Saturday, 6 June 2015 22:49:09 UTC+2, David Lang wrote:
On 06/06/2015 19:27, Alycidon wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 18:39:59 UTC+2, David Lang wrote:
On 06/06/2015 09:53, Alycidon wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 10:23:56 UTC+2, Adia wrote:

It could be that quite a few cyclists are still of the opinion that
they may ride on the footway provided they do so considerately, and
feel that in such circumstances police officers should exercise their
discretion.

In the same way that many drivers believe it is acceptable to drive along the footpath until they find a nice parking spot which will then restrict access for pedestrians, prams and disabled carriages. Luckily, spot fines are a good deterrent for these law breakers.

Drivers don't drive along footpaths, idiot.

How did this get here then, idiot?
Selfish gits.

http://www.wirralpedestrians.org.uk/...rking_news.jpg

Too dim to understand the difference between 'onto' and 'along'.

Did that car in the photo drive along the footway to get that spot in which it totally blocks the footway forcing the mother and child onto the road? Yes or no?

No wriggling.

On 06/06/15 21:56, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful
wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html


What would be your thinking if that was someone jogging or running along
the pavement at a similar speed?


They weren't wearing a helmet?

On Sat, 06 Jun 2015 22:07:33 +0100, Tosspot wrote:

On 06/06/15 21:56, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful
wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html


What would be your thinking if that was someone jogging or running along
the pavement at a similar speed?


They weren't wearing a helmet?

How would this affect the injuries of the stupid toddler?

--
Jack and Jill went up the hill
And planned to do some kissing.
Jack made a pass, and grabbed her ass
Now two of his teeth are missing.

On 06/06/2015 22:02, Alycidon wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 22:49:09 UTC+2, David Lang wrote:
On 06/06/2015 19:27, Alycidon wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 18:39:59 UTC+2, David Lang wrote:
On 06/06/2015 09:53, Alycidon wrote:
On Saturday, 6 June 2015 10:23:56 UTC+2, Adia wrote:

It could be that quite a few cyclists are still of the
opinion that they may ride on the footway provided they do
so considerately, and feel that in such circumstances
police officers should exercise their discretion.

In the same way that many drivers believe it is acceptable to
drive along the footpath until they find a nice parking spot
which will then restrict access for pedestrians, prams and
disabled carriages. Luckily, spot fines are a good deterrent
for these law breakers.

Drivers don't drive along footpaths, idiot.

How did this get here then, idiot? Selfish gits.

http://www.wirralpedestrians.org.uk/...rking_news.jpg



Too dim to understand the difference between 'onto' and 'along'.

Did that car in the photo drive along the footway to get that spot in
which it totally blocks the footway forcing the mother and child onto
the road? Yes or no?
He drove 'onto' the footway, not 'along it. Cyclists frequently pedal
'along' pavements.

No wriggling.


Don't need to. I'm not a cyclist.

On 06/06/2015 21:55, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful
wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html


This comment provides the truth:

"Can afford cctv at home but not able to afford a front gate get ur
priorities straight"

If their toddler is so ****ing stupid to run out of the gate without
looking what's coming, she could do the same into the road. Which will
earn her a Darwin Award.

They have an absolute right to expect that their child could run onto a
pedestrian only pavement safely.

The cyclists broke the law. Game over. The Fat Lady has sung.

David Lang wrote:

On 06/06/2015 21:55, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful
wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html


This comment provides the truth:

"Can afford cctv at home but not able to afford a front gate get ur
priorities straight"

If their toddler is so ****ing stupid to run out of the gate without
looking what's coming, she could do the same into the road. Which will
earn her a Darwin Award.

They have an absolute right to expect that their child could run onto a
pedestrian only pavement safely.

I am not too sure about that. It is true that the only vehicles
allowed on pavements are "invalid carriages" and unpowered scooters
and skateboards cannot legally be used on pavements, footpaths or
cycle tracks as they have no right of way. But the Department of
Transport admits it is not very practical trying to enforce the law,
although local bye-laws can be created banning them in certain cases.

Then the rules concerning roller skates are not entirely clear. I
read that it hasn't been established in case law whether these are
classed as vehicles or not. If they are, they cannot legally be used
on pavements, footpaths or cycle tracks. But, as with unpowered
scooters and skateboards, again I read, enforcement is not considered
very practical.

I would have thought parents have a responsibility for their young
children's welfare even on pavements.

The cyclists broke the law. Game over. The Fat Lady has sung.

I don't see how anyone can argue against that.

On Sun, 07 Jun 2015 13:31:31 +0100, David Lang wrote:

On 06/06/2015 21:55, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful
wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html


This comment provides the truth:

"Can afford cctv at home but not able to afford a front gate get ur
priorities straight"

If their toddler is so ****ing stupid to run out of the gate without
looking what's coming, she could do the same into the road. Which will
earn her a Darwin Award.

They have an absolute right to expect that their child could run onto a
pedestrian only pavement safely.

In your opinion.

The cyclists broke the law. Game over. The Fat Lady has sung.

What would be your opinion if a runner (who can go cycling speed) did the same thing to the stupid child?

--
The scientific name for an animal that doesn't either run from or fight its enemies is "Lunch."

On 07/06/2015 16:18, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 07 Jun 2015 13:31:31 +0100, David Lang
wrote:

On 06/06/2015 21:55, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:13:10 +0100, Mrcheerful
wrote:

The cyclist then swore at the parents and rode away, he is now facing
charges, I hope he has fridge freezer insurance to pay the child's
family plenty of compo. Video is incontrovertible evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pool-home.html



This comment provides the truth:

"Can afford cctv at home but not able to afford a front gate get ur
priorities straight"

If their toddler is so ****ing stupid to run out of the gate without
looking what's coming, she could do the same into the road. Which will
earn her a Darwin Award.

They have an absolute right to expect that their child could run onto a
pedestrian only pavement safely.

In your opinion.

In English law.

The cyclists broke the law. Game over. The Fat Lady has sung.

What would be your opinion if a runner (who can go cycling speed) did
the same thing to the stupid child?

Runners have more common sense than cyclists and would have been able to
stop/swerve.