Pounder seems to have missed this one

On 22/11/2019 16:40, JNugent wrote:
On 22/11/2019 14:12, TMS320 wrote:

On 21/11/2019 22:13, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, November 21, 2019 at 9:14:26 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

I accept that there are parallels with several cycling cases we have
heard about recent years, notably of the "I'm not stopping - so get out
of my way" variety.

Please cite these cases.

He doesn't think it through. It takes 3 seconds to say the phrase. If
attempted in the heat of the moment it would turn into "I'm not....
oomph".

You are both well aware of the cases. You are just being childish, as
per usual.

I am sad to say that I find cyclists to be like the majority of
criminals, especially drug users and sex offenders, they can see nothing
wrong with their own actions, and can justify the actions they carry out
to make everything right in their own minds, any attempt at reasoning is
met with a violent outburst, either verbal or physical.
The old, 'but X is much worse' argument is used a lot as well, so that
they do not have to actually examine the crystal clear evidence of their
own misdeeds.

On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 4:59:08 PM UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 22/11/2019 16:40, JNugent wrote:
On 22/11/2019 14:12, TMS320 wrote:

On 21/11/2019 22:13, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, November 21, 2019 at 9:14:26 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

I accept that there are parallels with several cycling cases we have
heard about recent years, notably of the "I'm not stopping - so get out
of my way" variety.

Please cite these cases.

He doesn't think it through. It takes 3 seconds to say the phrase. If
attempted in the heat of the moment it would turn into "I'm not....
oomph".

You are both well aware of the cases. You are just being childish, as
per usual.

I am sad to say that I find cyclists to be like the majority of
criminals, especially drug users and sex offenders, they can see nothing
wrong with their own actions, and can justify the actions they carry out
to make everything right in their own minds, any attempt at reasoning is
met with a violent outburst, either verbal or physical.
The old, 'but X is much worse' argument is used a lot as well, so that
they do not have to actually examine the crystal clear evidence of their
own misdeeds.

Even if this was true I doubt you would be sad to say it. In fact if you had any independently verifiable evidence you would be flaunting it.

On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 4:40:21 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 22/11/2019 14:12, TMS320 wrote:

On 21/11/2019 22:13, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, November 21, 2019 at 9:14:26 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

I accept that there are parallels with several cycling cases we have
heard about recent years, notably of the "I'm not stopping - so get out
of my way" variety.

Please cite these cases.

He doesn't think it through. It takes 3 seconds to say the phrase. If
attempted in the heat of the moment it would turn into "I'm not.... oomph".

You are both well aware of the cases.

Which means you should have no problem citing these cases.

You are just being childish, as per usual.

Even more reason for you to cite the relevant cases to educate us 'children'.
I particularly look forward to the case where the cyclist is quoted as saying "I am not stopping so get out of my way". I assume you have evidence to support this claim.

On 22/11/2019 16:59, MrCheerful wrote:

I am sad to say that I find cyclists to be like the majority of
criminals, especially drug users and sex offenders, they can see
nothing wrong with their own actions, and can justify the actions
they carry out to make everything right in their own minds, any
attempt at reasoning is met with a violent outburst, either verbal or
physical.

If you want to believe that social issues are anything to do with
getting on a bike, you are one that's insulting, irrational and beyond
reasoning.

The old, 'but X is much worse' argument is used a lot as well, so
that they do not have to actually examine the crystal clear evidence
of their own misdeeds.

Ah yes, the old drivers don't mean to crash, therefore their casualties
don't count.

As well as going by bicycle, I travel by car and on foot. Where are all
these evil cyclists carrying out misdeeds that need to be examined?

On 22/11/2019 16:58, TMS320 wrote:
On 22/11/2019 16:40, JNugent wrote:
On 22/11/2019 14:12, TMS320 wrote:

On 21/11/2019 22:13, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, November 21, 2019 at 9:14:26 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

I accept that there are parallels with several cycling cases we have
heard about recent years, notably of the "I'm not stopping - so get
out
of my way" variety.

Please cite these cases.

He doesn't think it through. It takes 3 seconds to say the phrase. If
attempted in the heat of the moment it would turn into "I'm not....
oomph".

You are both well aware of the cases. You are just being childish, as
per usual.

You raised it so it's up you to deliver.

Even if you can, what about the 100 drivers a day that run pedestrians
over. You have proof they never do it?

You are both well aware of the cases. You are just being childish, as
per usual.

On 22/11/2019 23:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 22/11/2019 16:59, MrCheerful wrote:

I am sad to say that I find cyclists to be like the majority of
criminals, especially drug users and sex offenders, they can see
nothing wrong with their own actions, and can justify the actions
they carry out to make everything right in their own minds, any
attempt at reasoning is met with a violent outburst, either verbal or
physical.

If you want to believe that social issues are anything to do with
getting on a bike, you are one that's insulting, irrational and beyond
reasoning.

The old, 'but X is much worse' argument is used a lot as well, so
that they do not have to actually examine the crystal clear evidence
of their own misdeeds.

Ah yes, the old drivers don't mean to crash, therefore their casualties
don't count.

As well as going by bicycle, I travel by car and on foot. Where are all
these evil cyclists carrying out misdeeds that need to be examined?

Indeed, I don't see any of it in my area.

--
Bod

On 23/11/2019 01:44, JNugent wrote:
On 22/11/2019 16:58, TMS320 wrote:
On 22/11/2019 16:40, JNugent wrote:
On 22/11/2019 14:12, TMS320 wrote:
On 21/11/2019 22:13, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, November 21, 2019 at 9:14:26 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

I accept that there are parallels with several cycling cases we have
heard about recent years, notably of the "I'm not stopping - so
get out
of my way" variety.

Please cite these cases.

He doesn't think it through. It takes 3 seconds to say the phrase.
If attempted in the heat of the moment it would turn into "I'm
not.... oomph".

You are both well aware of the cases. You are just being childish, as
per usual.

You raised it so it's up you to deliver.

Even if you can, what about the 100 drivers a day that run pedestrians
over. You have proof they never do it?

It is noted you haven't answered this question.

You are both well aware of the cases. You are just being childish, as
per usual.

I remember discussion of one case where there was mention of some
shouting. If you're trying to make a point, stop being childish and
either deliver or shut up.

On 23/11/2019 06:51, Bod wrote:
On 22/11/2019 23:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 22/11/2019 16:59, MrCheerful wrote:

I am sad to say that I find cyclists to be like the majority of
criminals, especially drug users and sex offenders, they can see
nothing wrong with their own actions, and can justify the actions
they carry out to make everything right in their own minds, any
attempt at reasoning is met with a violent outburst, either verbal or
physical.

If you want to believe that social issues are anything to do with
getting on a bike, you are one that's insulting, irrational and beyond
reasoning.

The old, 'but X is much worse' argument is used a lot as well, so
that they do not have to actually examine the crystal clear evidence
of their own misdeeds.

Ah yes, the old drivers don't mean to crash, therefore their
casualties don't count.

As well as going by bicycle, I travel by car and on foot. Where are
all these evil cyclists carrying out misdeeds that need to be examined?

Indeed, I don't see any of it in my area.

According to Nugent, the fact that I use a bicycle means that I am blind
or biased to such things when travelling on foot. Whereas, of course,
when observations are made by a (self assessed) careful, law abiding
individual that only sees the world from behind a windscreen there is no
such pollution.

On 23/11/2019 12:36, TMS320 wrote:
On 23/11/2019 06:51, Bod wrote:
On 22/11/2019 23:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 22/11/2019 16:59, MrCheerful wrote:

I am sad to say that I find cyclists to be like the majority of
criminals, especially drug users and sex offenders, they can see
nothing wrong with their own actions, and can justify the actions
they carry out to make everything right in their own minds, any
attempt at reasoning is met with a violent outburst, either verbal or
physical.

If you want to believe that social issues are anything to do with
getting on a bike, you are one that's insulting, irrational and
beyond reasoning.

The old, 'but X is much worse' argument is used a lot as well, so
that they do not have to actually examine the crystal clear evidence
of their own misdeeds.

Ah yes, the old drivers don't mean to crash, therefore their
casualties don't count.

As well as going by bicycle, I travel by car and on foot. Where are
all these evil cyclists carrying out misdeeds that need to be examined?
Â*
Â* Indeed, I don't see any of it in my area.

According to Nugent, the fact that I use a bicycle means that I am blind
or biased to such things when travelling on foot. Whereas, of course,
when observations are made by a (self assessed) careful, law abiding
individual that only sees the world from behind a windscreen there is no
such pollution.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist-charlie-alliston-jailed-for-18-months-over-death-of-pedestrian

QUOTE:
A cyclist jailed for knocking over and killing a woman as he sped
through east London on a bike with no front brakes was told he was “an
accident waiting to happen� as he received an 18-month sentence. Charlie
Alliston, 20, who collided with Kim Briggs as she crossed Old Street,
was told by judge Wendy Joseph QC at the Old Bailey that the victim
“could have been any pedestrian� and that he had shown no remorse for
her death.

“You have throughout sought to put your blame on her,� the judge said.
“Perhaps one of the most shocking things about this case is that you
could not and apparently cannot still see any fault in your cycling or
judgment.

“You chose to ride at a speed and on a bike which you could not stop,
your attitude being that everyone else would just have to get out of
your way,� Joseph added. "Of course you did not set out to cause the
harm you did – but the jury have found that you were aware of the risks
and went on to take them.�

Alliston was travelling at 18mph on his secondhand fixed-gear bike on 12
February 2016 when he collided with Kim Briggs, 44, as she stepped out
into Old Street. Briggs, a mother of two, who was on her lunch break,
suffered “catastrophic� head injuries and died in hospital a week later.

Alliston was cleared of manslaughter but found guilty of causing bodily
harm by “wanton and furious driving�, a crime under the 1861 Offences
Against the Person Act, which carries a maximum sentence of two years in
jail. During the trial, jurors heard that Alliston, a fan of “dangerous�
bike racing videos, had been riding a black Planet X carbon-frame track
bike, a model more commonly seen ridden by top cyclists such as Sir
Chris Hoy and Laura Trott at the Olympic velodrome. Alliston had not
fitted the bicycle with a front brake, as is required to make them legal
to ride on the road.
ENDQUOTE


Note the second paragraph in particular: "“You have throughout sought to
put your blame on her,� the judge said. “Perhaps one of the most
shocking things about this case is that you could not and apparently
cannot still see any fault in your cycling or judgment".

Alliston may or may not have been heard shouting at the victim before
the collision, but "Get out of my way, I'm not stopping" was his
attitude. Indeed, it could even have been "Get out of my way, I can't stop".

And of course, there was an earlier case where another innocent
pedestrian victim was killed by a cyclist in too much of a hurry to even
think of being considerate to other road-users... and he *was* heard to
shout at the victim "Get out of my way, I'm not stopping" (or the same
words in a slightly different order, to exactly the same effect).

We see the same attitude in play every time a cyclist fails to stop at a
red light at a pelicon crossing, or even sails through a red light at a
road junction. But some of us are apparently determined to deny it.

On 01/12/2019 21:41, JNugent wrote:
On 23/11/2019 12:36, TMS320 wrote:

According to Nugent, the fact that I use a bicycle means that I am
blind or biased to such things when travelling on foot. Whereas, of
course, when observations are made by a (self assessed) careful, law
abiding individual that only sees the world from behind a windscreen
there is no such pollution.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist-charlie-alliston-jailed-for-18-months-over-death-of-pedestrian

Two pedestrians are killed by drivers every day.