|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:25:13 -0800, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 8:58:30 AM UTC, Peter Parry wrote: On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 23:55:31 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin wrote: What is not acceptable in a moral society, that someone can drive a motor vehicle at an innocent third party, injure them, then drive away with impunity, knowing that when questioned by the police they can say, "I don't know who was driving". A variant of that occurred in a case I have mentioned before when a pedestrian on a canal path was kicked to the ground by one of a pack of cyclists out "training". A number of witnesses saw the event but couldn't tell which of the group of riders, all in identical Lycra, kicked the lady to the ground. All of the riders out that day simply denied having seen anything happen despite many cycling around her. The result, as in this case, was that no prosecution for assault was possible. In that case, all should be charged with perverting the course of justice, and face a punishment similar to that which their "friend" committed. By the way, the collective noun for cyclists is "peloton" not "pack". If the events described are indeed true then a "pack" of bicyclists is entirely appropriate. Like a "pack" of wolves. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
"MrCheerful" wrote in message ... On 06/02/2016 12:03, TMS320 wrote: "MrCheerful" wrote in message ... On 06/02/2016 11:10, TMS320 wrote: "MrCheerful" wrote On 05/02/2016 19:39, TMS320 wrote: There was also the little turd in Lancashire (Preston?) who deliberately rode (at speed) along a footway and mowed down (not too strong a term) a small girl in front of her horrified parents. Who says it was "deliberate"? Oh, it was you. And does the word "deliberate" appear in the official records for Jason Howard? Are you suggesting that the cyclist did not know he was on the pavement, or had been magically transported onto it, against his will? The cyclist chose to, and therefore was, deliberately riding on the pavement. I have no doubt that he had no prior intention of running into anyone or anything, but he deliberately chose a path (pun intended) that was very likely to bring him into close proximity to people. Where are your cases of drivers getting worse punishment than cyclists? This is a cycling group... ...and you made a comparison with driving. but a driver doing a similar thing would be heavily fined, possibly imprisoned , likely to be banned from further driving forsome time, receive points on their licence, maybe be made to take an enhanced driving test, and have their compulsory insurance increased in price dramatically. None of those except the fine were applied to the cyclist just a total bill of 829, despite his deliberate actions leading to the injured child. Is that so? You made a claim. Now go away until you have something to support it. Cyclists have very low punishments for incidents of pavement cycling, whereas motor vehicle drivers suffer comparatively draconian punishments for the same offence. Compare the man that cycled on the pavement quite deliberately and ran into that toddler: he got the highest punishment possible of 500 qui, 829 total fine, end of. With: Non deliberately drove on the pavement, injured no-one: 420 quid fine, banned for a year and made to take an extended test, and no doubt his compulsory insurance increased. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-30003418 £500 and £420 fines? The latter happens to be a smaller number. The only reason there weren't any pedestrian injuries is because they managed to get out of the way. From the descripton, his insurance would have been affected anyway. You seem to finding it very difficult to support your original claim. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Sat, 06 Feb 2016 17:37:14 +0000 the perfect time to write: On 06/02/2016 17:31, Tom Crispin wrote: On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 2:21:16 PM UTC, JNugent wrote: On 03/02/2016 23:48, Tom Crispin wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-35472617 It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Can you imagine the public outcry if the owner of a bicycle whose vehicle was used to deliberately harm an innocent bystander was allowed to get away with failing to provide the rider's details? I wonder why we have never heard of such a case.. Forget the offence for a moment - it could be anything from picking the council's flowers to bank robbery - would you impose a draconian (not to say vindictive) penalty on somebody against whom there is no evidence, merely on the basis that there is no evidence against him and that you "think" that he should have confessed to something you suspect him of committing even though there is no evidence to support that belief to an acceptable standard of proof? Is that really what you mean? No. What I mean is that failing to give driver details should be treated the same way as perverting the course of justice. And in a case where quite genuinely the owner does not know? Should he/she be liable to a max. sentence of life imprisonment? It is the absolute responsibility of the registered keeper of a shotgun to know where it is at all times and to ensure that it does not fall into the hands of someone not authorised to use it. The same should be true of motor vehicles. In the case under discussion, the vehicle is known to have been driven by one of two people. Now, if both had claimed the other was driving, that might be problematic under current legislation. That is not the case though - both claimed not to know, which shows that they are conspiring to pervert the course of justice. The person driving knows perfectly well that they were driving. The person not driving knows perfectly well that it was the other authorised driver. Therefore, both must be lying, and there is no dichotomy involved as there would be if both had claimed the other was driving, when one would be innocent and the other guilty, but there is no way of knowing which without the police looking at other evidence - like the original footage. I'm quite certain that if that was properly analysed, it would determine if the driver were male of female, which would be all that would be sufficient. You can almost tell from the version that's been folded, spindled, and mutilated by Youtube's compression, so it should be trivial on the original footage. Additionally, the whole area is awash with CCTV cameras, and given that the time of the assault is known, it should be trivial to search them for evidence. But as usual, the police couldn't give a **** when it's only a pleb on a bike. In not giving a ****, they have become a party to the conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Exactly correct. -- john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons) 'It never gets any easier. You just get faster' (Greg LeMond (1961 - )) |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
MrCheerful wrote:
On 06/02/2016 13:11, John Smith wrote: MrCheerful wrote: Cyclists have very low punishments for incidents of pavement cycling, whereas motor vehicle drivers suffer comparatively draconian punishments for the same offence. That's because it's not 'the same offence', you infantile spastic. Just as shooting someone with a water pistol is not 'the same offence' as firing a Glock 17 at their chest. You ****ing arsehole. Driving or cycling on footways is illegal. So, yes, it is the same offence. No it isn't, you ****ing illiterate, ignorant ****. The sanction is different because it's not the same offence, you sad, thick-as-**** troll. -- john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons) 'It never gets any easier. You just get faster' (Greg LeMond (1961 - )) |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On 08/02/2016 08:58, Peter Parry wrote:
Tom Crispin wrote: What is not acceptable in a moral society, that someone can drive a motor vehicle at an innocent third party, injure them, then drive away with impunity, knowing that when questioned by the police they can say, "I don't know who was driving". A variant of that occurred in a case I have mentioned before when a pedestrian on a canal path was kicked to the ground by one of a pack of cyclists out "training". A number of witnesses saw the event but couldn't tell which of the group of riders, all in identical Lycra, kicked the lady to the ground. All of the riders out that day simply denied having seen anything happen despite many cycling around her. The result, as in this case, was that no prosecution for assault was possible. I remember that case being reported. Oddly, it did not meet with a "So prosecute them all" response from any of the usual suspects. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On 08/02/2016 09:25, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 8:58:30 AM UTC, Peter Parry wrote: Tom Crispin wrote: What is not acceptable in a moral society, that someone can drive a motor vehicle at an innocent third party, injure them, then drive away with impunity, knowing that when questioned by the police they can say, "I don't know who was driving". A variant of that occurred in a case I have mentioned before when a pedestrian on a canal path was kicked to the ground by one of a pack of cyclists out "training". A number of witnesses saw the event but couldn't tell which of the group of riders, all in identical Lycra, kicked the lady to the ground. All of the riders out that day simply denied having seen anything happen despite many cycling around her. The result, as in this case, was that no prosecution for assault was possible. In that case, all should be charged with perverting the course of justice, and face a punishment similar to that which their "friend" committed. You didn't say that at the time, though, did you? By the way, the collective noun for cyclists is "peloton" not "pack". No, it isn't. That's just an affectation adopted by people who think it makes them sound somehow better than they actually are. "Pack" - not least because it a is a pukka English word [see what I did there?] is the correct term. Or at least, a correct term. "Peloton" has no place in the discourse of intelligent people. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
Phil W Lee wrote:
[ ... ] It is the absolute responsibility of the registered keeper of a shotgun to know where it is at all times and to ensure that it does not fall into the hands of someone not authorised to use it. The same should be true of motor vehicles. But it isn't. And neither could it ever be, any more than the owner of a bicycle could be expected to know exactly where it is at any moment when it has been loaned to someone else. And have you invented a way to completely prevent vehicle theft and hi-jacking? If you have, a handsome fortune awaits you, courtesy of the MIB. Tell them I sent you. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On 08/02/2016 13:56, JNugent wrote:
On 08/02/2016 09:25, Tom Crispin wrote: On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 8:58:30 AM UTC, Peter Parry wrote: Tom Crispin wrote: What is not acceptable in a moral society, that someone can drive a motor vehicle at an innocent third party, injure them, then drive away with impunity, knowing that when questioned by the police they can say, "I don't know who was driving". A variant of that occurred in a case I have mentioned before when a pedestrian on a canal path was kicked to the ground by one of a pack of cyclists out "training". A number of witnesses saw the event but couldn't tell which of the group of riders, all in identical Lycra, kicked the lady to the ground. All of the riders out that day simply denied having seen anything happen despite many cycling around her. The result, as in this case, was that no prosecution for assault was possible. In that case, all should be charged with perverting the course of justice, and face a punishment similar to that which their "friend" committed. You didn't say that at the time, though, did you? By the way, the collective noun for cyclists is "peloton" not "pack". No, it isn't. That's just an affectation adopted by people who think it makes them sound somehow better than they actually are. "Pack" - not least because it a is a pukka English word [see what I did there?] is the correct term. Or at least, a correct term. "Peloton" has no place in the discourse of intelligent people. peloton refers to the main group of cyclists in a race. a gang or pack of cyclists is quite appropriate. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On 08/02/2016 14:01, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2016 13:56, JNugent wrote: On 08/02/2016 09:25, Tom Crispin wrote: On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 8:58:30 AM UTC, Peter Parry wrote: Tom Crispin wrote: What is not acceptable in a moral society, that someone can drive a motor vehicle at an innocent third party, injure them, then drive away with impunity, knowing that when questioned by the police they can say, "I don't know who was driving". A variant of that occurred in a case I have mentioned before when a pedestrian on a canal path was kicked to the ground by one of a pack of cyclists out "training". A number of witnesses saw the event but couldn't tell which of the group of riders, all in identical Lycra, kicked the lady to the ground. All of the riders out that day simply denied having seen anything happen despite many cycling around her. The result, as in this case, was that no prosecution for assault was possible. In that case, all should be charged with perverting the course of justice, and face a punishment similar to that which their "friend" committed. You didn't say that at the time, though, did you? By the way, the collective noun for cyclists is "peloton" not "pack". No, it isn't. That's just an affectation adopted by people who think it makes them sound somehow better than they actually are. "Pack" - not least because it a is a pukka English word [see what I did there?] is the correct term. Or at least, a correct term. "Peloton" has no place in the discourse of intelligent people. peloton refers to the main group of cyclists in a race. I would never have the need to refer to such a group of people. a gang or pack of cyclists is quite appropriate. Exactly. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
JNugent
On 08/02/2016 09:25, Tom Crispin wrote: By the way, the collective noun for cyclists is "peloton" not "pack". No, it isn't. The OED seems to think it is. Now, whom should we believe... Oxford Dictionaries? Or a petrolhead troll who has no ****ing clue how Usenet works? Hmm ..... that's a tough one. -- john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons) 'It never gets any easier. You just get faster' (Greg LeMond (1961 - )) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Partner's anger as death crash driver walks free | David Hansen | UK | 32 | May 9th 10 07:46 PM |
Lorry driver who killed cyclist walks free from court with 'ludicrous' £275 fine | [email protected] | UK | 102 | July 13th 08 11:36 PM |
Lorry driver on mobile kills cyclist, walks free from court. | spindrift | UK | 0 | April 8th 08 08:42 AM |
Killer driver walks free | spindrift | UK | 0 | May 22nd 07 09:52 AM |
Brutal breach of rider's rights! | Bill C | Racing | 9 | September 16th 05 04:41 AM |