Why don't Roadies have bells on their bikes

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:35:55 -0500, dave wrote:

RV wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:31:13 -0500, dave wrote:


bjay wrote:

There is no excuse for not braking to avoid a pedestrian that a
magistrate will accept.
Nor should they.


Correct, but you are missing my point, the pedestrian didn't bother looking
before stepping off the curb. He initiated this incident. What would
happen if he had stepped out giving no time for the cyclist to brake? What
I am saying is that people need to take responsibility for their own actions
rather than expecting others to make allowances for them and then blaming
the other person for their own stupidity if something does go wrong.
Stepping out into the road without looking is just a plain stupid thing to
do.

bjay



Yeah. I cannot say how much I despise the attitude..."I didnt see the
'bike' 'truck', 'semi' , ' train' and obviously therefore it was the
'roads', 'intersection', 'level crossings fault.

He not only didn't look... he didnt listen.. in fact he showed the
spatial awareness of a light pole. And nearly the same intelligence.

These people IMHO are always going to have an accident. And if they
live it is only cos they are in the bigger vehicle.



Irrelevant
The rider of the bicycle broke the law by noit braking to avoid the
ped.
Any excuse is simply a denial of guilt and doesn't excuse the offence.


******

Crossing a road without due care and attention ... is actually an
offence ya dope.

And the law requires yout to avoid an accident.. Where the **** does it
say brake?

And I aint making any excuse, I am calling the guy an idiot. My care
factor about his life is non existant. When I read in the news tonight
about him getting cleaned up on a level crossing I will spare him zero
sympathy...


Foolish assumptions and complete ignorance of the_law.

I will watch to see if the train driver gets charged.

If a train driver takes no action to avoid the person, does not brake
or attempt to stop the train, he would certainly be charged with a
serious indictable offence..

In aus.bicycle on Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:22:14 +1000
Tamyka Bell wrote:

Doesn't the law state to give way to pedestrians at all time? Then the
fact that they were committing a crime does not absolve you of blame.


I think you will find it doesn't quite state that.

What it says is that you have a duty to do all you can to avoid a crash.

The law quite understands that someone else might do something stupid
and/or illegal. They'll get taken legal notice of in another trial.
But that they did wrong isn't a reason for you to do wrong.

If you were behaving legally, and couldn't reasonably avoid the crash,
then that's one thing. But legally includes "keeping a proper lookout"
amongst other things.

Zebee

"bjay" == bjay writes:

There is no excuse for not braking to avoid a pedestrian that a
magistrate will accept. Nor should they.
Correct, but you are missing my point, the pedestrian didn't
bother looking before stepping off the curb. He initiated this
incident.
Irrelevant The law is the same law for all of us Failure to
brake and avoid the ped is against the law, dont matter if you
are on a tricycle, a donkey or a car. End of story.


bjay Hmmm, it seems that you are never quite going to grasp the
bjay concept of accepting responsibility for your own actions. Ah
bjay well, I tried.

Seems to me he grasps the concept just fine. Cyclist does not take
action to avoid a crash, he's at fault regardless of who first broke the
law first.

Sometimes it's what we fail to do that counts.
--
Cheers
Euan

"dave" == dave writes:

dave Crossing a road without due care and attention ... is actually
dave an offence ya dope.

Haven't seen anyone argue otherwise.

dave And the law requires yout to avoid an accident.. Where the
dave **** does it say brake?

If the only way to avoid an accident is to brake then that is the action
that has to be taken. Only a dope wouldn't be able to grasp that.

dave And I aint making any excuse, I am calling the guy an
dave idiot. My care factor about his life is non existant. When I
dave read in the news tonight about him getting cleaned up on a
dave level crossing I will spare him zero sympathy...

And that's more a comment on your personality than anything else.
--
Cheers
Euan

Richard Sherratt wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 06:41:48 -0500, dave wrote:


Yesterday my training partner Ian had the nearest near miss I have ever
actually seen with a pedestrian.


Is this the beer making Ian?


This was on Station St Aspendale where
fast cyclists are sooo rare


And where Kath and Kim would be considered sophisticated socialites.

That's more or less where Zander T-boned a right turning P-plater a
couple of years ago.

Got to be careful when you go into the badlands :-)


yeah its the dead Zone all right.

I can;t believe he stayed up.. This being Ian we r talking about... Was
a great effort at dodging even by Lance standards... For Ian.. a sheer
flash of brilliance.

Dave

RV wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:31:13 -0500, dave wrote:


bjay wrote:

There is no excuse for not braking to avoid a pedestrian that a
magistrate will accept.
Nor should they.


Correct, but you are missing my point, the pedestrian didn't bother looking
before stepping off the curb. He initiated this incident. What would
happen if he had stepped out giving no time for the cyclist to brake? What
I am saying is that people need to take responsibility for their own actions
rather than expecting others to make allowances for them and then blaming
the other person for their own stupidity if something does go wrong.
Stepping out into the road without looking is just a plain stupid thing to
do.

bjay



Yeah. I cannot say how much I despise the attitude..."I didnt see the
'bike' 'truck', 'semi' , ' train' and obviously therefore it was the
'roads', 'intersection', 'level crossings fault.

He not only didn't look... he didnt listen.. in fact he showed the
spatial awareness of a light pole. And nearly the same intelligence.

These people IMHO are always going to have an accident. And if they
live it is only cos they are in the bigger vehicle.



Irrelevant
The rider of the bicycle broke the law by noit braking to avoid the
ped.
Any excuse is simply a denial of guilt and doesn't excuse the offence.


******

Crossing a road without due care and attention ... is actually an
offence ya dope.

And the law requires yout to avoid an accident.. Where the **** does it
say brake?

And I aint making any excuse, I am calling the guy an idiot. My care
factor about his life is non existant. When I read in the news tonight
about him getting cleaned up on a level crossing I will spare him zero
sympathy...

I will watch to see if the train driver gets charged.

Dave

Oh no I have to have a go here. What a f**** stupid thing to say.
Woth me on his arse Ian moved as much as 3 metres to dodge the moron.
hmmm tail-gating, your problem not the peds.
anyone ever been booked for that on a bike???