Critical Mass London May 2011 ride.

On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR.
"Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Jun 6, 6:31*pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold number
below which it no longer matters?

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Doug wrote:
On Jun 6, 6:31 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold number
below which it no longer matters?


well, things like being hit by a lightning bolt or a bit off a plane or a
meteor do happen, but their infrequency means that nothing is done about
them as their likelihood is too low to be guarded against or planned for.

On Jun 7, 9:23*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 6, 6:31 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold number
below which it no longer matters?

well, things like being hit by a lightning bolt or a bit off a plane or a
meteor do happen, but their infrequency means that nothing is done about
them as their likelihood is too low to be guarded against or planned for.

Unlike lightening, meteors and bits off planes, ramming of cyclists is
a deliberate act on the part of drivers which should be easily
prevented but isn't. The best way to prevent rammers is to punish them
severely as a deterrent and give this serious malpractice involving
the use of a dangerous weapon wide publicity, instead of it being
ignored.

So now what about your comment on how often it happens?

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 4:47 pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:23 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 6, 6:31 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold number
below which it no longer matters?

well, things like being hit by a lightning bolt or a bit off a
plane or a meteor do happen, but their infrequency means that
nothing is done about them as their likelihood is too low to be
guarded against or planned for.

Unlike lightening, meteors and bits off planes, ramming of cyclists
is a deliberate act on the part of drivers which should be easily
prevented but isn't. The best way to prevent rammers is to punish
them severely as a deterrent and give this serious malpractice
involving the use of a dangerous weapon wide publicity, instead of
it being ignored.

So now what about your comment on how often it happens?

How often does it happen? You have not given any figures for me to
consider.

Have you forgotten already? What has frequency got to do with it?

There are already plenty of laws which can be used if/when it
happens. The infrequency of it means that there is no requirement
for any new law specifically to cover it.

No the problem is the police do not take it seriously enough. They
watch it happen and then blame the cyclist for getting in the way of
the rammer motorist. The police, of course, are using their discretion
and are probably motorists themselves anyway.

Unlike for instance: mobile phone use by drivers, there were already
laws which covered it, but it became so frequent that a specific law
was brought in just for that.

The law already exists and its called 'careless or dangerous driving'.


I cannot comment on how often it happens unless it is possible to find out
how often it does! I believe deliberate ramming of cycles by cars is very
rare in normal traffic.

If you are talking about CM riders getting nudged out of the way, well there
is an easy answer: 'don't try to stop traffic unlawfully'. It is self
inflicted and therefore easy to avoid. No wonder the Police ignore it, same
as they ignore cm's law breaking. You can't have it both ways. Ride
legally and it won't happen. Ride like an arse and it will.

Tonight in Skopje.
Looked like CM.
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/8466/019jtp.jpg

But it was an anti Govt demo which I steered clear of as per FCGO
advice.

http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/2613/020mtu.jpg

--
Simon Mason

On Jun 7, 5:12*pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 4:47 pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:23 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 6, 6:31 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold number
below which it no longer matters?

well, things like being hit by a lightning bolt or a bit off a
plane or a meteor do happen, but their infrequency means that
nothing is done about them as their likelihood is too low to be
guarded against or planned for.

Unlike lightening, meteors and bits off planes, ramming of cyclists
is a deliberate act on the part of drivers which should be easily
prevented but isn't. The best way to prevent rammers is to punish
them severely as a deterrent and give this serious malpractice
involving the use of a dangerous weapon wide publicity, instead of
it being ignored.

So now what about your comment on how often it happens?

How often does it happen? You have not given any figures for me to
consider.

Have you forgotten already? What has frequency got to do with it?

There are already plenty of laws which can be used if/when it
happens. The infrequency of it means that there is no requirement
for any new law specifically to cover it.

No the problem is the police do not take it seriously enough. They
watch it happen and then blame the cyclist for getting in the way of
the rammer motorist. The police, of course, are using their discretion
and are probably motorists themselves anyway.

Unlike for instance: mobile phone use by drivers, there were already
laws which covered it, but it became so frequent that a specific law
was brought in just for that.

The law already exists and its called 'careless or dangerous driving'.

I cannot comment on how often it happens unless it is possible to find out
how often it does! *I believe deliberate ramming of cycles by cars is very
rare in normal traffic.

If you are talking about CM riders getting nudged out of the way, well there
is an easy answer: 'don't try to stop traffic unlawfully'. *It is self
inflicted and therefore easy to avoid. *No wonder the Police ignore it, same
as they ignore cm's law breaking. *You can't have it both ways. *Ride
legally and it won't happen. *Ride like an arse and it will.

Oh the same old arguments, "be compliant and submissive and nothing
nasty will happen to you" and "one good crime deserves another" and
"might is right!".

What about proportionality? Should merely holding up a motorist for a
few minutes justify them physically ramming you, which at the very
least might damage your bike or at worst kill you?

Do you advocate this sort of behaviour generally? Would impeding a
group of louts on a pavement justify them knocking you down and
kicking you nearly to death? Why is it that behavioural norms seem not
to apply to people as soon as they are in their precious cars?

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 5:12 pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 4:47 pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:23 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 6, 6:31 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold
number below which it no longer matters?

well, things like being hit by a lightning bolt or a bit off a
plane or a meteor do happen, but their infrequency means that
nothing is done about them as their likelihood is too low to be
guarded against or planned for.

Unlike lightening, meteors and bits off planes, ramming of
cyclists is a deliberate act on the part of drivers which should
be easily prevented but isn't. The best way to prevent rammers is
to punish them severely as a deterrent and give this serious
malpractice involving the use of a dangerous weapon wide
publicity, instead of it being ignored.

So now what about your comment on how often it happens?

How often does it happen? You have not given any figures for me to
consider.

Have you forgotten already? What has frequency got to do with it?

There are already plenty of laws which can be used if/when it
happens. The infrequency of it means that there is no requirement
for any new law specifically to cover it.

No the problem is the police do not take it seriously enough. They
watch it happen and then blame the cyclist for getting in the way of
the rammer motorist. The police, of course, are using their
discretion and are probably motorists themselves anyway.

Unlike for instance: mobile phone use by drivers, there were
already laws which covered it, but it became so frequent that a
specific law was brought in just for that.

The law already exists and its called 'careless or dangerous
driving'.

I cannot comment on how often it happens unless it is possible to
find out how often it does! I believe deliberate ramming of cycles
by cars is very rare in normal traffic.

If you are talking about CM riders getting nudged out of the way,
well there is an easy answer: 'don't try to stop traffic
unlawfully'. It is self inflicted and therefore easy to avoid. No
wonder the Police ignore it, same as they ignore cm's law breaking.
You can't have it both ways. Ride
legally and it won't happen. Ride like an arse and it will.

Oh the same old arguments, "be compliant and submissive and nothing
nasty will happen to you" and "one good crime deserves another" and
"might is right!".

What about proportionality? Should merely holding up a motorist for a
few minutes justify them physically ramming you, which at the very
least might damage your bike or at worst kill you?

Do you advocate this sort of behaviour generally? Would impeding a
group of louts on a pavement justify them knocking you down and
kicking you nearly to death? Why is it that behavioural norms seem not
to apply to people as soon as they are in their precious cars?


it is the cyclists that start the problem, they don't like it when someone
retaliates. It is akin to walking into a pub and saying 'right, who wants
some? You are likely to get a good kicking.

On 09/06/2011 09:16, Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 5:12 pm, wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 4:47 pm, wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:23 am, wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 6, 6:31 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold number
below which it no longer matters?

well, things like being hit by a lightning bolt or a bit off a
plane or a meteor do happen, but their infrequency means that
nothing is done about them as their likelihood is too low to be
guarded against or planned for.

Unlike lightening, meteors and bits off planes, ramming of cyclists
is a deliberate act on the part of drivers which should be easily
prevented but isn't. The best way to prevent rammers is to punish
them severely as a deterrent and give this serious malpractice
involving the use of a dangerous weapon wide publicity, instead of
it being ignored.

So now what about your comment on how often it happens?

How often does it happen? You have not given any figures for me to
consider.

Have you forgotten already? What has frequency got to do with it?

There are already plenty of laws which can be used if/when it
happens. The infrequency of it means that there is no requirement
for any new law specifically to cover it.

No the problem is the police do not take it seriously enough. They
watch it happen and then blame the cyclist for getting in the way of
the rammer motorist. The police, of course, are using their discretion
and are probably motorists themselves anyway.

Unlike for instance: mobile phone use by drivers, there were already
laws which covered it, but it became so frequent that a specific law
was brought in just for that.

The law already exists and its called 'careless or dangerous driving'.

I cannot comment on how often it happens unless it is possible to find out
how often it does! I believe deliberate ramming of cycles by cars is very
rare in normal traffic.

If you are talking about CM riders getting nudged out of the way, well there
is an easy answer: 'don't try to stop traffic unlawfully'. It is self
inflicted and therefore easy to avoid. No wonder the Police ignore it, same
as they ignore cm's law breaking. You can't have it both ways. Ride
legally and it won't happen. Ride like an arse and it will.

Oh the same old arguments, "be compliant and submissive and nothing
nasty will happen to you" and "one good crime deserves another" and
"might is right!".

What about proportionality? Should merely holding up a motorist for a
few minutes justify them physically ramming you, which at the very
least might damage your bike or at worst kill you?

Do you advocate this sort of behaviour generally? Would impeding a
group of louts on a pavement justify them knocking you down and
kicking you nearly to death? Why is it that behavioural norms seem not
to apply to people as soon as they are in their precious cars?

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.


Doug you still have not answered these question about the link you posted

Well you posted a link to a video, that showed a group of trouble makers.
Riding on the wrong side of the street,
Riding on pavements
Obstructing the highway
Obstructing a pedestrian crossing.
Interfering with a motor vehicle.
Ignoring red lights
Stopping pedestrians using crossings
Riding without lights

Do you agree with what the video shows?

On 09/06/2011 09:16, Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 5:12 pm, wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 4:47 pm, wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:23 am, wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 6, 6:31 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 06/06/2011 11:03, Doug wrote:

Drivers ram cyclists because they can and its easy to do.

Do you have any figures for how often this happens?

No. Why is its frequency important? Is there some threshold number
below which it no longer matters?

well, things like being hit by a lightning bolt or a bit off a
plane or a meteor do happen, but their infrequency means that
nothing is done about them as their likelihood is too low to be
guarded against or planned for.

Unlike lightening, meteors and bits off planes, ramming of cyclists
is a deliberate act on the part of drivers which should be easily
prevented but isn't. The best way to prevent rammers is to punish
them severely as a deterrent and give this serious malpractice
involving the use of a dangerous weapon wide publicity, instead of
it being ignored.

So now what about your comment on how often it happens?

How often does it happen? You have not given any figures for me to
consider.

Have you forgotten already? What has frequency got to do with it?

There are already plenty of laws which can be used if/when it
happens. The infrequency of it means that there is no requirement
for any new law specifically to cover it.

No the problem is the police do not take it seriously enough. They
watch it happen and then blame the cyclist for getting in the way of
the rammer motorist. The police, of course, are using their discretion
and are probably motorists themselves anyway.

Unlike for instance: mobile phone use by drivers, there were already
laws which covered it, but it became so frequent that a specific law
was brought in just for that.

The law already exists and its called 'careless or dangerous driving'.

I cannot comment on how often it happens unless it is possible to find out
how often it does! I believe deliberate ramming of cycles by cars is very
rare in normal traffic.

If you are talking about CM riders getting nudged out of the way, well there
is an easy answer: 'don't try to stop traffic unlawfully'. It is self
inflicted and therefore easy to avoid. No wonder the Police ignore it, same
as they ignore cm's law breaking. You can't have it both ways. Ride
legally and it won't happen. Ride like an arse and it will.

Oh the same old arguments, "be compliant and submissive and nothing
nasty will happen to you" and "one good crime deserves another" and
"might is right!".

What about proportionality? Should merely holding up a motorist for a
few minutes justify them physically ramming you, which at the very
least might damage your bike or at worst kill you?

So how often does this ramming occur?

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University