|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by animpatient motorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On Jul 6, 1:18*am, "Zapp Brannigan" wrote:
"Ian Smith" wrote in message . .. ["Followup-To:" header set to uk.rec.cycling.] On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 21:33:41 +0100, Zapp Brannigan wrote: *"Ian Smith" wrote in message ... On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 00:22:36 +0100, Zapp Brannigan wrote: *Given a choice between the person who forces their way through a *contested junction on green, and another who forces their way on *red, my sympathies are with the green. *I would say the same *whatever vehicles were involved. But you weren't given the choice between the person who forces their way through a contested junction on green, and another who forces their way on red. *I gave that choice to myself as a rhetorical scenario. So asked a question about whetehr you though a particular behaviour was right or wrong, your 'answer' is that some other behaviour you made up would be wrong. Great. *Really helpful. *Thank you for your input. Asking loaded "have you stopped beating your wife yet" questions and demanding yes/no answers is a rather tired debating tactic. * *A green light is not an unconditional licence to kill in all circumstances. The point here is that the junction is contested - ordinary travellers wish to use it for it's ordinary purpose, and demonstrators wish to obstruct it to inconvenience those travellers. * This isn't a yes/no situation. * If a protest held up traffic for a few minutes as they passed along a processional route, nobody could really complain. *But when they deliberately seek to goad and provoke, there comes a moral point where they bring the consequences on themselves. I would say the same about poppy-burners at Remembrance ceremonies, or that hideous right-wing church who picket "God loves Fags". *I would say the same about police being heavy-handed towards black citizens, or stupid kids street-racing in their Saxo's. * If you spend enough time ****ing enough people off, someone's going to slap you and you've only yourself to blame.. But according to Doug if you stop somebody infringing your rights it is not OK because it infringes their rights. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by animpatient motorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Scion wrote:
Doug spake thus: As a single rider you are virtually invisible. Try riding in a group if you want some attention from drivers. I wear bright clothing or a hi-vis, and use lights if necessary - even in daytime - so I'm plenty visible. The type of attention CM gets from drivers is not because they're in a group, it's because they deliberately set out to obstruct, inconvenience and annoy those drivers. And that includes the pedestrians that stop crossing the road & the pedestrians that have to dodge out the way because the 'procession' jumps red lights & uses pavements. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by animpatient motorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On Jul 6, 1:56*pm, Egbert wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 08:38:35 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: But how often does this deliberate ramming occur? Not often enough to scare the *******s away Doug would have pictures of this happening, but his 'magic camera' always stops working when the ramming happens. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by animpatient motorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On Jul 6, 11:05*am, Scion wrote:
Doug spake thus: On Jul 5, 10:52*am, NM wrote: On Jul 5, 7:07*am, Doug wrote: On Jul 4, 12:58*pm, Nightjar wrote: On 03/07/2012 08:14, Mrcheerful wrote: ... you cannot expect to keep annoying people without getting a re-action, if you are lucky it will be non violent, pick the wrong person and violence, possibly lethal, will ensue. I recall some years ago there was an incident where a motorist was forced to a halt by another motorist. The second driver got out of the car with a sawn-off shotgun and shot the first. The Police never found any evidence that it was anything other than a road rage incident. Avoiding the situation in the first place is the logical course of action to any rational person. This is Doug you are responding to. In effect he is saying cyclists should not take part in Critical Mass because motorists might ram them if they do. Doesn't this clearly demonstrate one of the several aims of CM? To assert the right of cyclists to use roads in safety without being attacked by impatient motorists who deliberately use their car as a weapon? Every time it happens is a record of bad behaviour on the part of motorists towards cyclists which should be dealt with by law but usually isn't. Critical mass sets out to be obstructive and confrontational, we all know that, why whinge when you reap the harvest you have sown for yourselves, Don't want to get rammed? Don't provoke, simples innit? Its some of the drivers who are obstructive and confrontational. They are too impatient to wait for the procession to pass and try to nose their way into it causing more delays. Obviously too, deliberately ramming cyclists is patently obstructive and confrontational. Let's try an analogy - I'd like you to answer the question I put honestly, without sidetracking or obfuscating. A 'yes' or 'no' followed by your reasoning would be appreciated. Assume that a group of pedestrians are fed up with what they see as aggressive and dangerous pavement cycling. They decide to hold a "procession". You are out on your bike (I believe you have one - if not, let's say you're out on foot), perhaps you are crossing the pavement between your house and the road, or using a shared cycle/footway. Perhaps you have an appointment or need to get to work. The pedestrians surround you, deliberately obstructing you and preventing you from getting where you want to go. They do this for, say, fifteen minutes. My question: Would you stand there passively? Your analogy is worthless. A group of pedestrians on a pavement is nothing like a Critical Mass procession. There are many demonstrations and processions that take place in London, some of them official, and people usually respect them and wait for them to pass. I too have been held up by some in the past and have waited passively. I have little doubt that the Royal Wedding and Jubilee also inconvenienced a very large number of people but we hear few complaints here about those. The difference with CM though is that they are mainly cyclists, who are obviously held in open contempt by some motorists, and are very vulnerable to being deliberately rammed by cars. -- . A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by an impatientmotorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On 08/07/2012 07:40, Doug wrote:
On Jul 6, 11:05 am, Scion wrote: Doug spake thus: On Jul 5, 10:52 am, NM wrote: On Jul 5, 7:07 am, Doug wrote: On Jul 4, 12:58 pm, Nightjar wrote: On 03/07/2012 08:14, Mrcheerful wrote: ... you cannot expect to keep annoying people without getting a re-action, if you are lucky it will be non violent, pick the wrong person and violence, possibly lethal, will ensue. I recall some years ago there was an incident where a motorist was forced to a halt by another motorist. The second driver got out of the car with a sawn-off shotgun and shot the first. The Police never found any evidence that it was anything other than a road rage incident. Avoiding the situation in the first place is the logical course of action to any rational person. This is Doug you are responding to. In effect he is saying cyclists should not take part in Critical Mass because motorists might ram them if they do. Doesn't this clearly demonstrate one of the several aims of CM? To assert the right of cyclists to use roads in safety without being attacked by impatient motorists who deliberately use their car as a weapon? Every time it happens is a record of bad behaviour on the part of motorists towards cyclists which should be dealt with by law but usually isn't. Critical mass sets out to be obstructive and confrontational, we all know that, why whinge when you reap the harvest you have sown for yourselves, Don't want to get rammed? Don't provoke, simples innit? Its some of the drivers who are obstructive and confrontational. They are too impatient to wait for the procession to pass and try to nose their way into it causing more delays. Obviously too, deliberately ramming cyclists is patently obstructive and confrontational. Let's try an analogy - I'd like you to answer the question I put honestly, without sidetracking or obfuscating. A 'yes' or 'no' followed by your reasoning would be appreciated. Assume that a group of pedestrians are fed up with what they see as aggressive and dangerous pavement cycling. They decide to hold a "procession". You are out on your bike (I believe you have one - if not, let's say you're out on foot), perhaps you are crossing the pavement between your house and the road, or using a shared cycle/footway. Perhaps you have an appointment or need to get to work. The pedestrians surround you, deliberately obstructing you and preventing you from getting where you want to go. They do this for, say, fifteen minutes. My question: Would you stand there passively? Your analogy is worthless. A group of pedestrians on a pavement is nothing like a Critical Mass procession. There are many demonstrations and processions that take place in London, some of them official, and people usually respect them and wait for them to pass. I too have been held up by some in the past and have waited passively. I have little doubt that the Royal Wedding and Jubilee also inconvenienced a very large number of people but we hear few complaints here about those. The difference with CM though is that they are mainly cyclists, who are obviously held in open contempt by some motorists, and are very vulnerable to being deliberately rammed by cars. -- . A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill. No the reason is because they deliberately hold up traffic by stopping in the middle of major junction holding their bikes in the air or holding picnics in the middle of a Thames bridge, riding on pavements & pedestrian areas, not obeying one way streets & keep left signs, RLJ (including pedestrian crossings) surrounding drivers in some cars with intent to intimidate them, etc. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by animpatient motorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On Jul 8, 7:40*am, Doug wrote:
On Jul 6, 11:05*am, Scion wrote: Doug spake thus: On Jul 5, 10:52*am, NM wrote: On Jul 5, 7:07*am, Doug wrote: On Jul 4, 12:58*pm, Nightjar wrote: On 03/07/2012 08:14, Mrcheerful wrote: ... you cannot expect to keep annoying people without getting a re-action, if you are lucky it will be non violent, pick the wrong person and violence, possibly lethal, will ensue. I recall some years ago there was an incident where a motorist was forced to a halt by another motorist. The second driver got out of the car with a sawn-off shotgun and shot the first. The Police never found any evidence that it was anything other than a road rage incident. Avoiding the situation in the first place is the logical course of action to any rational person. This is Doug you are responding to. In effect he is saying cyclists should not take part in Critical Mass because motorists might ram them if they do. Doesn't this clearly demonstrate one of the several aims of CM? To assert the right of cyclists to use roads in safety without being attacked by impatient motorists who deliberately use their car as a weapon? Every time it happens is a record of bad behaviour on the part of motorists towards cyclists which should be dealt with by law but usually isn't. Critical mass sets out to be obstructive and confrontational, we all know that, why whinge when you reap the harvest you have sown for yourselves, Don't want to get rammed? Don't provoke, simples innit? Its some of the drivers who are obstructive and confrontational. They are too impatient to wait for the procession to pass and try to nose their way into it causing more delays. Obviously too, deliberately ramming cyclists is patently obstructive and confrontational. Let's try an analogy - I'd like you to answer the question I put honestly, without sidetracking or obfuscating. A 'yes' or 'no' followed by your reasoning would be appreciated. Assume that a group of pedestrians are fed up with what they see as aggressive and dangerous pavement cycling. They decide to hold a "procession". You are out on your bike (I believe you have one - if not, let's say you're out on foot), perhaps you are crossing the pavement between your house and the road, or using a shared cycle/footway. Perhaps you have an appointment or need to get to work. The pedestrians surround you, deliberately obstructing you and preventing you from getting where you want to go. They do this for, say, fifteen minutes. My question: Would you stand there passively? Your analogy is worthless. A group of pedestrians on a pavement is nothing like a Critical Mass procession. There are many demonstrations and processions that take place in London, some of them official, and people usually respect them and wait for them to pass. I too have been held up by some in the past and have waited passively. I have little doubt that the Royal Wedding and Jubilee also inconvenienced a very large number of people but we hear few complaints here about those. The difference with CM though is that they are mainly cyclists, who are obviously held in open contempt by some motorists, and are very vulnerable to being deliberately rammed by cars. **** me are you stupid or what? It's very simple, don't want to get rammed, don't **** people off. "A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill." Good if that's so then we would be stupid not to have one. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by an impatientmotorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On 08/07/2012 07:40, Doug wrote:
The difference with CM though is that they are mainly cyclists, who are obviously held in open contempt by some motorists, Cyclists are held in open contempt by everyone, not just motorists. and are very vulnerable to being deliberately rammed by cars. So exactly how often does this happen WHERE ARE THE ****ING FIGURES TO BACK THIS STATEMENT UP ????????????????????????? -- 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 |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by animpatient motorist during London Critical Mass June ride.
On 8 jul, 12:01, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote: On 08/07/2012 07:40, Doug wrote: The difference with CM though is that they are mainly cyclists, who are obviously held in open contempt by some motorists, Cyclists are held in open contempt by everyone, not just motorists. and are very vulnerable to being deliberately rammed by cars. So exactly how often does this happen WHERE ARE THE ****ING FIGURES TO BACK THIS STATEMENT UP ????????????????????????? How often does what happen? Being vunerable? 100% of the time that a person is on a bike. What a stupid question. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Another stupid post by a thick Dutch twunt.
On 08/07/2012 11:05, Justin wrote:
On 8 jul, 12:01, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 08/07/2012 07:40, Doug wrote: The difference with CM though is that they are mainly cyclists, who are obviously held in open contempt by some motorists, Cyclists are held in open contempt by everyone, not just motorists. and are very vulnerable to being deliberately rammed by cars. So exactly how often does this happen WHERE ARE THE ****ING FIGURES TO BACK THIS STATEMENT UP ????????????????????????? How often does what happen? The subject is clearly in the sentence directly above the question you thick twunt. Being vunerable? 100% of the time that a person is on a bike. Then I suggest you switch to a viable form of transport thicko. What a stupid question. Oh. It's 'vulnerable' BTW. -- Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Not Dutch - say it to my face
On 8 jul, 13:10, The Medway Handyman
wrote: On 08/07/2012 11:05, Justin wrote: On 8 jul, 12:01, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 08/07/2012 07:40, Doug wrote: The difference with CM though is that they are mainly cyclists, who are obviously held in open contempt by some motorists, Cyclists are held in open contempt by everyone, not just motorists. and are very vulnerable to being deliberately rammed by cars. So exactly how often does this happen WHERE ARE THE ****ING FIGURES TO BACK THIS STATEMENT UP ????????????????????????? How often does what happen? The subject is clearly in the sentence directly above the question you thick twunt. Being vunerable? 100% of the time that a person is on a bike. Then I suggest you switch to a viable form of transport thicko. What a stupid question. Oh. *It's 'vulnerable' BTW. -- Dave - The Medway Handymanwww.medwayhandyman.co.uk You brave enough to say it to my face tomorrow? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Critical Mass London May 2011 ride. | Doug[_3_] | UK | 69 | June 9th 11 09:31 PM |
London Critical Mass October ride | Doug[_10_] | UK | 75 | November 6th 10 10:10 AM |
More on the London Critical Mass ride on Friday. | ashley filmer | UK | 11 | April 3rd 10 03:03 PM |
London Critical Mass June ride. | Doug[_3_] | UK | 68 | July 6th 09 05:34 PM |
Critical Mass Cycle Ride - 30th June Nottingham | Andy | UK | 135 | June 24th 04 01:00 PM |