A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Another deliberate hit and run ramming of a cyclist by an impatientmotorist during London Critical Mass June ride.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old July 6th 12, 04:05 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
francis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 723
Default 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  
Old July 6th 12, 04:06 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
francis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 723
Default 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  
Old July 6th 12, 04:08 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
francis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 723
Default 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  
Old July 8th 12, 07:40 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Doug[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,104
Default 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  
Old July 8th 12, 09:15 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Tony Dragon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,715
Default 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  
Old July 8th 12, 09:16 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
NM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,854
Default 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  
Old July 8th 12, 11:01 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Dave - Cyclists VOR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,703
Default 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  
Old July 8th 12, 11:05 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Justin[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,530
Default 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  
Old July 8th 12, 12:10 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
The Medway Handyman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,359
Default 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  
Old July 8th 12, 05:12 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Justin[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,530
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.