Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

David Hansen gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

Theres a difference between driving/riding on the pavement and parking
there.
One may cause inconvenience, the other danger.

Yes. Parking on the pavement causes danger in several ways. Firstly by
forcing people, particularly those in wheelchairs, with large prams and
with lots of luggage out into the road.

There isn't necessarily a lack of space for such pedestrians - and, of
course, road furniture such as post boxes can similarly intrude and
inconvenience.

Secondly by damaging the pavement

Only if it's been thoroughly inadequately built and maintained.

Cycling on the pavement on the other hand mostly causes inconvenience.
It can cause danger, though this is easy to quantify by looking at the
number of pedestrians on the pavement killed by motorists and by
cyclists.

Ah, yes. Glossing over the difference between cyclists who deliberately
ride on the pavement and car crashes which spread onto the pavement from
the road - with absolutely no intent at all.

David Hansen wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:35:18 +0100 someone who may be "GT"
wrote this:-

some motorists do legally park on pavements.

Whether it is legal or not depends on where one is.

I know of no law in any part of the UK where the legality depends on
there being space for people to get past the obstruction.

However, in
my few hundred thousand miles of motoring, I have never seen a car
*driving* on a pavement.

An interesting example of motoring lobby sleight of hand. It is the
motorist who drives along the pavement, not the car, just as it is
the cyclist who rides along the pavement, not the bike.

If you haven't seen a motorist driving along the pavement then I am
glad you live such a sheltered life.

mounting a pavement to park is not the same as driving along the pavement.
I see thousands of cars every day parking and parked on pavements, I never
see cars driving along pavements on a continual basis .
I see many cyclists every day riding along pavements without a care for
pedestrians, often at quite high speed.

David Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 14:08:20 +0200 someone who may be "GT"
wrote this:-

*off* pavements 'for a change'. Actually driving along the pavement is 'for
a change'. The vaaaast majority of journeys are made along roads!

I checked the cyclists I saw in town yesterday. All were cycling
along the road, though a few used the pavement for a short period in
order to get to a parking place.

I do see cyclists using the pavements, but I see motorists using
them too and the scattering of motor vehicles on pavements shows
that many motorists use pavements while I'm not looking.




You should have been crossing the road outside the Old Vic today, you
would have to change your mind.

--
Tony Dragon

David Hansen wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:35:18 +0100 someone who may be "GT"
wrote this:-

some motorists do legally park on pavements.

Whether it is legal or not depends on where one is.

I know of no law in any part of the UK where the legality depends on
there being space for people to get past the obstruction.

However, in
my few hundred thousand miles of motoring, I have never seen a car *driving*
on a pavement.

An interesting example of motoring lobby sleight of hand. It is the
motorist who drives along the pavement, not the car, just as it is
the cyclist who rides along the pavement, not the bike.

If you haven't seen a motorist driving along the pavement then I am
glad you live such a sheltered life.




An interesting example of ignoring the points made.

--
Tony Dragon

David Hansen wrote:
On 10 Jun 2010 12:03:33 GMT someone who may be "Anon"
wrote this:-

Theres a difference between driving/riding on the pavement and
parking there.
One may cause inconvenience, the other danger.

Yes. Parking on the pavement causes danger in several ways. Firstly
by forcing people, particularly those in wheelchairs, with large
prams and with lots of luggage out into the road.

Does it ****. I've never seen a pavement obstucted to that extent and I
suspect neither have you. You made it up.

Secondly by
damaging the pavement and thus making trips and falls more likely,
elderly people are particularly vulnerable to life-threatening trips
and falls.

Clutching at straws again?

You are clearly too ****ing stupid to appreciate that parking 'partially' on
the pavement is perfectly legal in many cases.

Cycling on the pavement on the other hand mostly causes
inconvenience. It can cause danger, though this is easy to quantify
by looking at the number of pedestrians on the pavement killed by
motorists and by cyclists.

Cycling on the pavement is illegal, dangerous, anti social & terrorises
pedestrians on a daily basis.

Glad you made my point for me. Have a nice day.

Glad you are still a ****. Have a nice day.


--
Dave - intelligent enough to realise that a push bike is a kid's toy, not a
viable form of transport.

"The Medway Handyman" gurgled
happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Yes. Parking on the pavement causes danger in several ways. Firstly by
forcing people, particularly those in wheelchairs, with large prams and
with lots of luggage out into the road.

Does it ****. I've never seen a pavement obstucted to that extent and I
suspect neither have you. You made it up.

I certainly have - and, if you're honest, I'll bet you have, too.

The biggest culprit round here tends to be builders vans. Quite where
else they're meant to park is another question, of course.

On 10 June, 18:04, Adrian wrote:
David Hansen gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

Theres a difference between driving/riding on the pavement and parking
there.
One may cause inconvenience, the other danger.
Yes. Parking on the pavement causes danger in several ways. Firstly by
forcing people, particularly those in wheelchairs, with large prams and
with lots of luggage out into the road.

There isn't necessarily a lack of space for such pedestrians - and, of
course, road furniture such as post boxes can similarly intrude and
inconvenience.

True, something road users don't have to put up with, 'pavement' not
'road' furniture, but motorists sometimes do not leave sufficient
space for legitimate pavement users.


Secondly by damaging the pavement

Only if it's been thoroughly inadequately built and maintained.

Wrong. Ordinary pavements, where motorists drive and park illegally,
are not designed to carry the extra weight of a car. You can see them
almost anywhere, cracked and uneven paving slabs, which can hardly be
caused by pedestrians feet or bicycle wheels.

BTW, I often see cars on pavements beside double red lines. Obviously
trying to avoid getting done by police. I know one of the major
problems of car use is finding somewhere to leave such a bulky item in
a public place but leaving them on pavements is not the answer.

Cycling on the pavement on the other hand mostly causes inconvenience.
It can cause danger, though this is easy to quantify by looking at the
number of pedestrians on the pavement killed by motorists and by
cyclists.

Ah, yes. Glossing over the difference between cyclists who deliberately
ride on the pavement and car crashes which spread onto the pavement from
the road - with absolutely no intent at all.

So its OK to kill people as long as its not intentional? Yes that does
seem to be the common myth supported by many of the motorists here.

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

On 10 June, 18:35, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:35:18 +0100 someone who may be "GT"
wrote this:-

some motorists do legally park on pavements.

Whether it is legal or not depends on where one is.

I know of no law in any part of the UK where the legality depends on
there being space for people to get past the obstruction.

However, in
my few hundred thousand miles of motoring, I have never seen a car
*driving* on a pavement.

An interesting example of motoring lobby sleight of hand. It is the
motorist who drives along the pavement, not the car, just as it is
the cyclist who rides along the pavement, not the bike.

If you haven't seen a motorist driving along the pavement then I am
glad you live such a sheltered life.

mounting a pavement to park is not the same as driving along the pavement.
I see thousands of cars every day parking and parked on pavements, I never
see cars driving along pavements on a continual basis .
I see many cyclists every day riding along pavements without a care for
pedestrians, often at quite high speed.

Anecdotal.

I have seen cars driving along pavements, e.g. to get to a filling
station ahead during a traffic jam. So my anecdotal nullifies your
anecdotal.

Next?

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Theres a difference between driving/riding on the pavement and
parking there.
One may cause inconvenience, the other danger.

Yes. Parking on the pavement causes danger in several ways. Firstly
by forcing people, particularly those in wheelchairs, with large
prams and with lots of luggage out into the road.

There isn't necessarily a lack of space for such pedestrians - and, of
course, road furniture such as post boxes can similarly intrude and
inconvenience.

True, something road users don't have to put up with, 'pavement' not
'road' furniture

rolls eyes

but motorists sometimes do not leave sufficient space for legitimate
pavement users.

Very true. Sometimes, they don't. And - for that - I'll cheerfully
condemn their actions.

Secondly by damaging the pavement

Only if it's been thoroughly inadequately built and maintained.

Wrong. Ordinary pavements, where motorists drive and park illegally, are
not designed to carry the extra weight of a car.

Wrong.

You can see them almost anywhere, cracked and uneven paving slabs,
which can hardly be caused by pedestrians feet or bicycle wheels.

Yes, you can see them almost anywhere. Including places where it's
physically impossible to get a motor vehicle.

Do you really think that pavements are constructed markedly differently
at drop kerbs, specifically intended for vehicular access? They're not.

Cycling on the pavement on the other hand mostly causes
inconvenience. It can cause danger, though this is easy to quantify
by looking at the number of pedestrians on the pavement killed by
motorists and by cyclists.

Ah, yes. Glossing over the difference between cyclists who deliberately
ride on the pavement and car crashes which spread onto the pavement
from the road - with absolutely no intent at all.

So its OK to kill people as long as its not intentional? Yes that does
seem to be the common myth supported by many of the motorists here.

I don't think anybody's ever said that, Duhg - as I'm sure you damn well
know. If they have, then please provide a link - and, again, I'll
cheerfully condemn them for doing so.

On 11 June, 01:22, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On 10 Jun 2010 12:03:33 GMT someone who may be "Anon"
wrote this:-

Theres a difference between driving/riding on the pavement and
parking there.
One may cause inconvenience, the other danger.

Yes. Parking on the pavement causes danger in several ways. Firstly
by forcing people, particularly those in wheelchairs, with large
prams and with lots of luggage out into the road.

Does it ****. *I've never seen a pavement obstucted to that extent and I
suspect neither have you. *You made it up.

I have seen it and encountered it.

Secondly by
damaging the pavement and thus making trips and falls more likely,
elderly people are particularly vulnerable to life-threatening trips
and falls.

Clutching at straws again?

You are clearly too ****ing stupid to appreciate that parking 'partially' on
the pavement is perfectly legal in many cases.

Being legal doesn't necessarily make it right. Considerable latitude
is given to the car culture to leave their bulky machines lying about
all over the place and of course motorists often park and drive
illegally on pavements. Don't forget also, the motorist only needs to
drive a few feet slowly to kill someone who has collapsed, unlike
cyclists.

Cycling on the pavement on the other hand mostly causes
inconvenience. It can cause danger, though this is easy to quantify
by looking at the number of pedestrians on the pavement killed by
motorists and by cyclists.

Cycling on the pavement is illegal, dangerous, anti social & terrorises
pedestrians on a daily basis.

But much less dangerous and with a much lower death toll than cars
crashing on pavements. Due no doubt to the greater momentum of cars
and a much greater car population than bicycles. Doesn't it make more
sense to curb the biggest threat to road safety first instead of
targeting vulnerable road users instead?

Glad you made my point for me. Have a nice day.

Glad you are still a ****. *Have a nice day.

More personal abuse? Do you never tire of using this substitute for a
reasoned argument?

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.