|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...l/article.html Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
Squashme wrote: http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...l/article.html Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. There's a mandatory cycle lane on both sides on that bridge too - so much for magic white paint. :-( |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
On 12 Aug, 23:25, Squashme wrote:
http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...-cyclist-face-... Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. I suppose there was no obvious excuse to blame the vulnerable victim to excuse the driver with this one. Be interesting to see how much shorter the prison sentence will be for killing someone compared to the 11 years for animal rights blackmail. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
On 13 Aug, 07:55, Doug wrote:
On 12 Aug, 23:25, Squashme wrote:http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...-cyclist-face-... Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. I suppose there was no obvious excuse to blame the vulnerable victim to excuse the driver with this one. Don't be more of an idiot than you have to, Doug. Yes, obviously the woman should not have been driving so fast she couldn't stop in the distance she could see to be clear. Yes, if he'd been a drunk walking home from the pub he wouldn't have had lights. I'm not arguing she's not guilty. But that's beside the point. If we expect others to behave well on the roads, we need to behave well on the roads ourselves - it's the old 'do as you would be done by' principle. It isn't excusing her to point out that his lack of lights was a contributory factor. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
Doug wrote:
On 12 Aug, 23:25, Squashme wrote: http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...-cyclist-face-... Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. I suppose there was no obvious excuse to blame the vulnerable victim to excuse the driver with this one. Be interesting to see how much shorter the prison sentence will be for killing someone compared to the 11 years for animal rights blackmail. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. Their appears to be no *reason* to blame the victim, because his lack of lights & riding on the pavement did not appear to have any affect on the incident. Are you saying the driver deliberately killed him or are you saying the ART's accidentally blackmailed people? -- Tony Dragon |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
On Aug 13, 4:41*pm, Simon Brooke wrote:
On 13 Aug, 07:55, Doug wrote: On 12 Aug, 23:25, Squashme wrote:http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...-cyclist-face-... Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. I suppose there was no obvious excuse to blame the vulnerable victim to excuse the driver with this one. Don't be more of an idiot than you have to, Doug. Yes, obviously the woman should not have been driving so fast she couldn't stop in the distance she could see to be clear. Yes, if he'd been a drunk walking home from the pub he wouldn't have had lights. I'm not arguing she's not guilty. But that's beside the point. If we expect others to behave well on the roads, we need to behave well on the roads ourselves - it's the old 'do as you would be done by' principle. It isn't excusing her to point out that his lack of lights was a contributory factor. I don't see in what way you can claim that this cyclist contributed anything by not having lights. For one thing, the driver saw the cyclist, and for another, she had to drive up onto the pavement to get him. Would you say that a pedestrian who was not carrying lights in the same situation had contributed to their own fate? James |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
On 13 Aug, 09:16, James wrote:
On Aug 13, 4:41*pm, Simon Brooke wrote: On 13 Aug, 07:55, Doug wrote: On 12 Aug, 23:25, Squashme wrote:http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...-cyclist-face-... Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. I suppose there was no obvious excuse to blame the vulnerable victim to excuse the driver with this one. Don't be more of an idiot than you have to, Doug. Yes, obviously the woman should not have been driving so fast she couldn't stop in the distance she could see to be clear. Yes, if he'd been a drunk walking home from the pub he wouldn't have had lights. I'm not arguing she's not guilty. But that's beside the point. If we expect others to behave well on the roads, we need to behave well on the roads ourselves - it's the old 'do as you would be done by' principle. It isn't excusing her to point out that his lack of lights was a contributory factor. I don't see in what way you can claim that this cyclist contributed anything by not having lights. For one thing, the driver saw the cyclist, and for another, she had to drive up onto the pavement to get him. Would you say that a pedestrian who was not carrying lights in the same situation had contributed to their own fate? On this occasion i withdraw; I hadn't appreciated that the collision took place on the pavement, and that does of course change things... Which is not to say that I condone cycling on the pavement (or without lights at night) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
On 13 Aug, 09:16, James wrote:
On Aug 13, 4:41*pm, Simon Brooke wrote: On 13 Aug, 07:55, Doug wrote: On 12 Aug, 23:25, Squashme wrote:http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...-cyclist-face-... Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. I suppose there was no obvious excuse to blame the vulnerable victim to excuse the driver with this one. Don't be more of an idiot than you have to, Doug. Yes, obviously the woman should not have been driving so fast she couldn't stop in the distance she could see to be clear. Yes, if he'd been a drunk walking home from the pub he wouldn't have had lights. I'm not arguing she's not guilty. But that's beside the point. If we expect others to behave well on the roads, we need to behave well on the roads ourselves - it's the old 'do as you would be done by' principle. It isn't excusing her to point out that his lack of lights was a contributory factor. I don't see in what way you can claim that this cyclist contributed anything by not having lights. For one thing, the driver saw the cyclist, and for another, she had to drive up onto the pavement to get him. Would you say that a pedestrian who was not carrying lights in the same situation had contributed to their own fate? James ********, she lost control of the car resulting in hitting him, she didn't drive up there to get him. Had he displayed lights correctly and been riding in the right direction on the correct side then he would have been where he was expected to be. Appearing, from the motorists point of view, from where he shouldn't have been may well have contributed to her disorientation. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
On Aug 13, 2:25*pm, NM wrote:
On 13 Aug, 09:16, James wrote: On Aug 13, 4:41*pm, Simon Brooke wrote: On 13 Aug, 07:55, Doug wrote: On 12 Aug, 23:25, Squashme wrote:http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk...-cyclist-face-... Mind you, he should have been safe, with no lights. Nothing for her to aim at. I suppose there was no obvious excuse to blame the vulnerable victim to excuse the driver with this one. Don't be more of an idiot than you have to, Doug. Yes, obviously the woman should not have been driving so fast she couldn't stop in the distance she could see to be clear. Yes, if he'd been a drunk walking home from the pub he wouldn't have had lights. I'm not arguing she's not guilty. But that's beside the point. If we expect others to behave well on the roads, we need to behave well on the roads ourselves - it's the old 'do as you would be done by' principle. It isn't excusing her to point out that his lack of lights was a contributory factor. I don't see in what way you can claim that this cyclist contributed anything by not having lights. For one thing, the driver saw the cyclist, and for another, she had to drive up onto the pavement to get him. Would you say that a pedestrian who was not carrying lights in the same situation had contributed to their own fate? James ********, she lost control of the car resulting in hitting him, she didn't drive up there to get him. Had he displayed lights correctly and been riding in the right direction on the correct side then he would have been where he was expected to be. Appearing, from the motorists point of view, from where he shouldn't have been may well have contributed to her disorientation. It's true, I often veer wildly across the road and onto the pavement if I see a cyclist riding on the footpath. Idiot. It could have been a mother and child, prams don't have lights, I guess you'd argue the mother was partly culpable for distracting the driver. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Pavements are not much protection
Quoting Simon Brooke :
not guilty. But that's beside the point. If we expect others to behave well on the roads, we need to behave well on the roads ourselves - Eh? Maybe we could expect people operating lethally dangerous machinery in public to behave well regardless of what other people do when they are _not_ operating lethally dangerous machinery in public? -- David Damerell Distortion Field! Yesterday was Gouday, July. Today is Chedday, July. Tomorrow will be Stilday, July - a weekend. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Driving on pavements. | Doug[_3_] | UK | 607 | October 7th 09 11:01 AM |
Cycling on pavements! | alan.holmes | UK | 241 | August 1st 09 12:34 PM |
Cyclists on Pavements | Judith M Smith | UK | 102 | July 24th 09 09:44 AM |
Cycling on pavements | Bod[_2_] | UK | 149 | June 7th 09 01:42 AM |
Cycling on Pavements | Tony Raven | UK | 12 | February 11th 04 12:37 AM |