Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

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.

No, but being "wrong" does make it illegal.

Considerable latitude is given to the car culture to leave their bulky
machines lying about all over the place

It's a lovely soundbite, Duhg, but you're in danger of wearing it out.

and of course motorists often park and drive illegally on pavements.

Outside London, it is not inherently illegal to park on a pavement.
If an obstruction is caused - whether on the road or the pavement - then
it automatically becomes illegal, since obstruction is illegal.

Don't forget also, the motorist only needs to drive a few feet slowly
to kill someone who has collapsed, unlike cyclists.

Sorry, are you really suggesting that an average person would drive
slowly, a few feet forward, straight over somebody lying unconscious on
the pavement?

If they did, I think you'll find that would most certainly be charged as
murder.

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

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

And I cheerfully condemn the arrogant and selfish prick behind the wheel
of that vehicle.

Doug wrote:
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.


Perhaps you would care to explain the cracked paving in my road, where I
have never seen a road vehicle on the footway (except strret cleaners &
grass cutters)

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.


Please explain, I don't recall that being stated (other than a few
extremists & then tounge in cheek)

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


--
Tony Dragon

The Medway Handyman 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.

Sadly it happens every day at my school .. when parents are dropping
off or collecting their kids they do park absolutely stupidly,
illegally and selfishly ..

Mind, to be fair, it also happens outside school hours. If you haven't
seen it then you're either not looking or simply denying it happens, in
much the same way that Doug and Hansen don't see that there's anything
wrong with what some cyclists do ...

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

"Paul - xxx" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

If you haven't seen it then you're either not looking or simply denying
it happens, in much the same way that Doug and Hansen don't see that
there's anything wrong with what some cyclists do ...

Well, quite. I tend to think of the Medway ****ywit as being the internal-
combustion powered equivalent of the Hansen & Bollen show.

Adrian wrote:

"Paul - xxx" gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

If you haven't seen it then you're either not looking or simply
denying it happens, in much the same way that Doug and Hansen don't
see that there's anything wrong with what some cyclists do ...

Well, quite. I tend to think of the Medway ****ywit as being the
internal- combustion powered equivalent of the Hansen & Bollen show.

It does look that way ...

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Paul - xxx" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

If you haven't seen it then you're either not looking or simply denying
it happens, in much the same way that Doug and Hansen don't see that
there's anything wrong with what some cyclists do ...

Well, quite. I tend to think of the Medway ****ywit as being the internal-
combustion powered equivalent of the Hansen & Bollen show.

You're being excessively kind, go and see the doctor, now!

At least H&B don't resort to continue unprovoked abuse in every post.

Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

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

Wrong.

No, Doug has that one correct.

Duhg can't even get his own name correct.

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

Maybe you should check the construction standards before making yourself
look foolish.
There is a CONSIDERABLE difference in the standard required for a
section of footway with a dropped kerb, as you'd find out if you ever
had to have one installed (say, for a new driveway).

There's about three inches difference.

As you'd know if you'd ever had to pay for one. All they do is remove the
top layer and kerbstones, then relay.

And - oooh, look - it works just fine.

Phil W Lee wrote:
"Mrcheerful" considered Thu, 10 Jun 2010
18:35:29 +0100 the perfect time to write:

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.

I thought "causing an obstruction" was the law in all parts of the UK?
Of course, actually getting the police to do something about it is
another matter, unless it's they that are being obstructed.

I think we need to go back to the old system whereby anyone who acts
outside the law ceases to be protected by it.
Then we could simply ride/climb over illegally/obstructively parked
vehicles.
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.

It is unless you pushed the car there, or had it craned in.

No, it isn't.

Not unless there is a local law agin it. And there isn't such a law in many
places.

That's not to say that it is OK to simply drive along the footway to get
somewhere else (eg, a street several miles away). That would be as wrong as
cycling along the footway.

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.

Yet compare the statistics for the number of pedestrians killed on the
pavement by cars and bicycles respectively.

How many of them involve cars being driven *along* footways (to get somewhere
else) in the manner of bicycles?

[Hint: the answer is either "none" or so close to "none" as makes no
practical differnce.]

Phil W Lee wrote:

I think we need to go back to the old system whereby anyone who acts
outside the law ceases to be protected by it.

I don't think it was ever legal to shoot road users at night who don't
have lights on.

Then we could simply ride/climb over illegally/obstructively parked
vehicles.

What is stopping you? (Apart from the difficulty with a road bike).