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

Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 5th 19, 12:18 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 05/09/2019 09:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 07:47, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 12:06:28 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway,
on a bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?


He pushed her into the road. The report clearly states the victim was
cycling along the road.


Indeed, that is the way it was reported. I was enquiring about what
happened in Nugent's alternative universe.


"He pushed her into the road."

So she was not "in the road". She was cycling on the footway. That's an
offence. She is the offender.

Ads
  #12  
Old September 5th 19, 12:38 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mr Pounder Esquire
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,896
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2019 09:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 07:47, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 12:06:28 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway,
on a bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?

He pushed her into the road. The report clearly states the victim
was cycling along the road.


Indeed, that is the way it was reported. I was enquiring about what
happened in Nugent's alternative universe.


"He pushed her into the road."

So she was not "in the road". She was cycling on the footway. That's
an offence. She is the offender.


You are replying to a couple of silly suicyclists that will do say anything
to defend their silly hobby.


  #13  
Old September 5th 19, 05:27 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Jester
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,727
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 9:24:07 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 07:47, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 12:06:28 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway,
on a bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?


He pushed her into the road. The report clearly states the victim was
cycling along the road.


Indeed, that is the way it was reported. I was enquiring about what
happened in Nugent's alternative universe.


Why bother asking. In Nugents' world the cyclist is always at fault.
Go easy on them otherwise it will be "I'll scwean and scweam and scweam until we're sick".
  #14  
Old September 6th 19, 12:20 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 05/09/2019 12:15, JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2019 00:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway, on a
bicycle.


What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?


The "victim" was threatened by the "offender's" dangerous behaviour, of course.


(Note I have put back the quotes.)

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.

There's a reason why cycling along footways is not allowed. Have a think
and see whether you can guess what it is.

But in any event, any citizen is entitled to point out that an
offender's illegal behaviour is... er... illegal, and to remonstrate
with the offender.


That is true. That is not the same as attempted murder.

Not that offending cyclists are susceptible to any
sense of shame or social responsibility, of course.

It certainly is not peculiar to cyclists.

  #15  
Old September 6th 19, 12:31 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 06/09/2019 00:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 12:15, JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2019 00:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway, on a
bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?


The "victim" was threatened by the "offender's" dangerous behaviour,
of course.


(Note I have put back the quotes.)


You can do as you like. It doesn't make cycling along the "pavement" lawful.

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Ask the victim whether he was in danger from the illegal cycling, not
me. He's the only one who can judge it. And he had a right to
remonstrate at the very least.

There's a reason why cycling along footways is not allowed. Have a
think and see whether you can guess what it is.

But in any event, any citizen is entitled to point out that an
offender's illegal behaviour is... er... illegal, and to remonstrate
with the offender.


That is true. That is not the same as attempted murder.


Have you got any other little gems from your CSE in "The Bleedin'
Obvious" that you'd like to share? But preferably ones that have
something to do with the case.

Not that offending cyclists are susceptible to any sense of shame or
social responsibility, of course.


Â*It certainly is not peculiar to cyclists.


No-one said it was.

But as you know, it is very characteristic of far too many cyclists.
  #16  
Old September 6th 19, 08:38 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 06/09/2019 00:31, JNugent wrote:
On 06/09/2019 00:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 12:15, JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2019 00:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway, on
a bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?

The "victim" was threatened by the "offender's" dangerous behaviour,
of course.


(Note I have put back the quotes.)


You can do as you like. It doesn't make cycling along the "pavement"
lawful.


Whether or not they did something against the rules is irrelevant to
final situation.

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Ask the victim whether he was in danger from the illegal cycling, not
me. He's the only one who can judge it. And he had a right to
remonstrate at the very least.


I was telling you not asking.

There's a reason why cycling along footways is not allowed. Have a
think and see whether you can guess what it is.


The reason is a law going back to 1835. The basic idea being to provide
an area that would be clear of animal ****.

But in any event, any citizen is entitled to point out that an
offender's illegal behaviour is... er... illegal, and to remonstrate
with the offender.


That is true. That is not the same as attempted murder.


Have you got any other little gems from your CSE in "The Bleedin'
Obvious" that you'd like to share? But preferably ones that have
something to do with the case.

Don't be stupid.

Not that offending cyclists are susceptible to any sense of shame or
social responsibility, of course.


It certainly is not peculiar to cyclists.


No-one said it was.


It is clear enough.

But as you know, it is very characteristic of far too many cyclists.


They don't need to be better than everybody else.
  #17  
Old September 6th 19, 10:45 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Peter Keller[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,736
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 05/09/2019 23:38, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2019 09:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 07:47, Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 12:06:28 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway,
on a bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?

He pushed her into the road. The report clearly states the victim
was cycling along the road.

Indeed, that is the way it was reported. I was enquiring about what
happened in Nugent's alternative universe.


"He pushed her into the road."

So she was not "in the road". She was cycling on the footway. That's
an offence. She is the offender.


You are replying to a couple of silly suicyclists that will do say anything
to defend their silly hobby.


Pounder is widely considered the most disgusting animal in the ocean, if
not on earth. The eel-shaped creature uses four pairs of thin sensory
tentacles surrounding its mouth to find food—including carcasses of much
larger animals.
  #18  
Old September 6th 19, 11:46 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 06/09/2019 08:38, TMS320 wrote:
On 06/09/2019 00:31, JNugent wrote:
On 06/09/2019 00:20, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/09/2019 12:15, JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2019 00:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/09/2019 12:37, JNugent wrote:

The report clearly states that the victim was on foot on the
"pavement" (properly known as the "footway" for good and rather
obvious reasons) and that the offender was also on the footway, on
a bicycle.

What did the "offender" do to the "victim"?

The "victim" was threatened by the "offender's" dangerous behaviour,
of course.

(Note I have put back the quotes.)


You can do as you like. It doesn't make cycling along the "pavement"
lawful.


Whether or not they did something against the rules is irrelevant to
final situation.


What "final situation"?

You're making a rather big leap to assume that if something is not
permitted it is necessarily dangerous. Shared paths, created by the
stroke of a bureaucrat's pen on previously ordinary footways,
demonstrate it is not so.


Ask the victim whether he was in danger from the illegal cycling, not
me. He's the only one who can judge it. And he had a right to
remonstrate at the very least.


I was telling you not asking.


That's even sillier than your previous position.

There's a reason why cycling along footways is not allowed. Have a
think and see whether you can guess what it is.


The reason is a law going back to 1835. The basic idea being to provide
an area that would be clear of animal ****.


You're really scraping that barrel.

But in any event, any citizen is entitled to point out that an
offender's illegal behaviour is... er... illegal, and to remonstrate
with the offender.

That is true. That is not the same as attempted murder.


Have you got any other little gems from your CSE in "The Bleedin'
Obvious" that you'd like to share? But preferably ones that have
something to do with the case.

Don't be stupid.

Not that offending cyclists are susceptible to any sense of shame or
social responsibility, of course.


It certainly is not peculiar to cyclists.


No-one said it was.


It is clear enough.

But as you know, it is very characteristic of far too many cyclists.


They don't need to be better than everybody else.


And there is, as we all know, very little danger of that.

  #19  
Old September 6th 19, 04:12 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Jester
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,727
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 8:38:21 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:


Whether or not they did something against the rules is irrelevant to
final situation.


You are wasting your time.
Nugents will never admit he is wrong.
They will keep reducing the discussion to the tiny, tiny kernel of argument he has not lost and pretend that was what the argument was all about.
There is no evidence in the report that the victim was cycling on the footway.
'Pushed into the road' could mean many things.
  #20  
Old September 6th 19, 04:59 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Pedestrian takes the law into his own hands

On 06/09/2019 16:12, Simon Jester wrote:

On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 8:38:21 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

Whether or not they did something against the rules is irrelevant to
final situation.


You are wasting your time.
Nugents will never admit he is wrong.
They will keep reducing the discussion to the tiny, tiny kernel of argument he has not lost and pretend that was what the argument was all about.
There is no evidence in the report that the victim was cycling on the footway.


'Pushed into the road' could mean many things.


It means the cyclist was not "in the road" in the first place. It cannot
mean anything else, since one cannot be pushed from the road into the
road. Not in ordinary English, at any rate.

But you can twist and turn as much as you like. The cyclist was on the
footway.

Or maybe... perhaps... they were levitating above the road and were
forced down onto the surface by the pedestrian. That would be one of the
"many" things you are trying to insist that "pushed into the road" might
mean.

 




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
Giro d'Italia Stage 3: Goss takes win as crash brings downCavendish and takes out leader Phinney too Simon Mason[_4_] UK 0 May 8th 12 12:43 PM
Hands gagtape Unicycling 13 August 9th 07 12:00 AM
Look Ma! No hands! Paul Weaver UK 33 August 4th 06 05:29 PM
Look, Ma. No hands! Henry Recumbent Biking 18 August 13th 04 07:36 PM
ok, hands up jim beam Techniques 58 September 13th 03 03:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:35 PM.


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.