|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 09/12/2019 16:34, JNugent wrote:
On 09/12/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfNVCw431Ss Did he also report the cyclist seen to pass around the wrong side of the previous island? Is there anything in the Highway Code about it? I couldn't find anything in a quick scan. I have been overtaken on a couple of occasions by somebody going the wrong side. On which occasions that it was perfectly safe to do so. Or was that Totally Different [TM]? Yes, one of them wasn't following rule 144. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 6:23:23 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 09/12/2019 18:20, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 6:14:55 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 17:58, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 5:20:46 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 17:02, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 4:34:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfNVCw431Ss Did he also report the cyclist seen to pass around the wrong side of the previous island? Or was that Totally Different [TM]? Do you condone or condemn the drivers actions? Whichever it was, I would treat the cyclist and the driver in the same way. Wouldn't you? Condoning or condemning the drivers actions are the only options available to you. Which is it? I haven't got all the evidence. Have you? I repeat, though: I would treat the cyclist and the driver in the same way. But you wouldn't, would you? Once again do you condone or condemn the drivers actions? It is a simple question and all necessary evidence is in the video. What is the evidence? Once again do you condone or condemn the drivers actions? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 09/12/2019 18:14, JNugent wrote:
On 09/12/2019 17:58, Simon Jester wrote: Condoning or condemning the drivers actions are the only options available to you. Which is it? I haven't got all the evidence. Have you? You always demand that a cyclist's action is condoned or condemned without evidence. Do be consistent. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 09/12/2019 19:27, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 6:23:23 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 18:20, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 6:14:55 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 17:58, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 5:20:46 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 17:02, Simon Jester wrote: On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 4:34:52 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfNVCw431Ss Did he also report the cyclist seen to pass around the wrong side of the previous island? Or was that Totally Different [TM]? Do you condone or condemn the drivers actions? Whichever it was, I would treat the cyclist and the driver in the same way. Wouldn't you? Condoning or condemning the drivers actions are the only options available to you. Which is it? I haven't got all the evidence. Have you? I repeat, though: I would treat the cyclist and the driver in the same way. But you wouldn't, would you? Once again do you condone or condemn the drivers actions? It is a simple question and all necessary evidence is in the video. What is the evidence? Once again do you condone or condemn the drivers actions? On what evidence? Obviously, you will condemn anyone on no evidence at all, but most of us are not prepared to do that. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 09/12/2019 19:55, TMS320 wrote:
On 09/12/2019 18:14, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 17:58, Simon Jester wrote: Condoning or condemning the drivers actions are the only options available to you. Which is it? I haven't got all the evidence. Have you? You always demand that a cyclist's action is condoned or condemned without evidence. That's a lie. Another one from you. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 09/12/2019 19:01, TMS320 wrote:
On 09/12/2019 16:34, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfNVCw431Ss Did he also report the cyclist seen to pass around the wrong side of the previous island? Is there anything in the Highway Code about it? I couldn't find anything in a quick scan. Then do a slow scan. I have been overtaken on a couple of occasions by somebody going the wrong side. On which occasions that it was perfectly safe to do so. Highway signage is there to be complied with. That particularly applies to "Keep Left" and "No Entry" signs. You... er... do know what those are, do you? Many cyclists seem not to. Or was that Totally Different [TM]? Yes, one of them wasn't following rule 144. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 10/12/2019 01:41, JNugent wrote:
On 09/12/2019 19:55, TMS320 wrote: On 09/12/2019 18:14, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 17:58, Simon Jester wrote: Condoning or condemning the drivers actions are the only options available to you. Which is it? I haven't got all the evidence. Have you? You always demand that a cyclist's action is condoned or condemned without evidence. That's a lie. Another one from you. Only in your imagination. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 10/12/2019 01:43, JNugent wrote:
On 09/12/2019 19:01, TMS320 wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:34, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfNVCw431Ss Did he also report the cyclist seen to pass around the wrong side of the previous island? Is there anything in the Highway Code about it? I couldn't find anything in a quick scan. Then do a slow scan. Can't be bothered. It's only an arrow on a post. I have been overtaken on a couple of occasions by somebody going the wrong side. On which occasions that it was perfectly safe to do so. Highway signage is there to be complied with. That particularly applies to "Keep Left" and "No Entry" signs. You... er... do know what those are, do you? I can recognise when a road user does something "wrong" safely and when doing something "right" unsafely. I always prefer the former. Many cyclists seem not to. Sigh ...the usual it's the driver doing something wrong but it's the cyclist's fault. Or was that Totally Different [TM]? Yes, one of them wasn't following rule 144. That's an unusual but pleasant silence. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 10/12/2019 09:38, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/12/2019 01:43, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 19:01, TMS320 wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:34, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfNVCw431Ss Did he also report the cyclist seen to pass around the wrong side of the previous island? Is there anything in the Highway Code about it? I couldn't find anything in a quick scan. Then do a slow scan. Can't be bothered. It's only an arrow on a post. And a traffic island. In fact, the offence would be exactly the same in either case. I have been overtaken on a couple of occasions by somebody going the wrong side. On which occasions that it was perfectly safe to do so. Highway signage is there to be complied with. That particularly applies to "Keep Left" and "No Entry" signs. You... er... do know what those are, do you? I can recognise when a road user does something "wrong" safely and when doing something "right" unsafely. I always prefer the former. You don't know what they are or what they mean? That at least explains something about you and people like you. Many cyclists seem not to. Sigh ...the usual it's the driver doing something wrong but it's the cyclist's fault. Wake up! Whatever the driver is alleged to have done was also done by a cyclist a couple of seconds earlier (it's there on the video). Or was that Totally Different [TM]? Yes, one of them wasn't following rule 144. That's an unusual but pleasant silence. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
But Mummy it was the cyclists fault.
On 10/12/2019 11:10, JNugent wrote:
On 10/12/2019 09:38, TMS320 wrote: On 10/12/2019 01:43, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 19:01, TMS320 wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:34, JNugent wrote: On 09/12/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfNVCw431Ss Did he also report the cyclist seen to pass around the wrong side of the previous island? Is there anything in the Highway Code about it? I couldn't find anything in a quick scan. Then do a slow scan. Can't be bothered. It's only an arrow on a post. And a traffic island. Shrug. The straightforward thing don't blunder through when it is not clear. In fact, the offence would be exactly the same in either case. I have been overtaken on a couple of occasions by somebody going the wrong side. On which occasions that it was perfectly safe to do so. Highway signage is there to be complied with. That particularly applies to "Keep Left" and "No Entry" signs. You... er... do know what those are, do you? I can recognise when a road user does something "wrong" safely and when doing something "right" unsafely. I always prefer the former. You don't know what they are or what they mean? I know what an arrow means, thank you. I also know that the shape and colour of a sign emphasises its official importance. I also have sufficient sense to recognise when failing to follow the sign actually matters. That at least explains something about you and people like you. You have no idea about me or people like me. But perhaps some people don't come across as the stickler you claim to be. It would be interesting to know whether you really are the stickler you claim to be. Given the maxim "rules are for the guidance of the wise and the obedience of fools", one has wonder where you think you place yourself. Many cyclists seem not to. Sigh ...the usual it's the driver doing something wrong but it's the cyclist's fault. Wake up! Is that the best you can do? Whatever the driver is alleged to have done was also done by a cyclist a couple of seconds earlier (it's there on the video). The driver not only broke rule 144 but also intended to cross the mouth of a junction on the wrong side of the road. The latter is a folly on its own even without the risk of causing a head on crash. You're condoning a driver's dangerous manouevre. Or was that Totally Different [TM]? Yes, one of them wasn't following rule 144. That's an unusual but pleasant silence. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Only in America: Cyclists are never at fault are they? | Mrcheerful[_3_] | UK | 15 | June 22nd 12 07:48 PM |
Its the motorists fault when cyclists race on the road | Mrcheerful[_3_] | UK | 12 | March 3rd 12 07:56 PM |
A report showing that 76 per cent of accidents are the cyclists fault, good case for training | Mrcheerful[_2_] | UK | 17 | October 22nd 11 11:57 AM |
It was the cyclists' fault | Justin[_3_] | UK | 1 | December 9th 10 08:11 PM |
Mummy, what is it??? | saam | Unicycling | 27 | August 2nd 06 06:00 PM |