A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old June 11th 10, 09:16 PM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

Nick Finnigan wrote:

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.


But come to think of it, it would be a very useful sanction against footway
cyclists.

And the beauty of the situation is that Phil W Lee is the one who
told/reminded us about it.

If anyone complains about the possible (re?)introduction of such a legal
settlement, just say PWL said it was alright and would be preferable to the
current position.
Ads
  #52  
Old June 12th 10, 01:29 AM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

Phil W Lee wrote:
JNugent considered Fri, 11 Jun 2010
15:21:42 +0100 the perfect time to write:

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.


Then how the hell else did you get it there?
Driving on the footway is illegal, and it's only because some
brainless idiot of a judge at some time in the distant past decided
that the presence of a vehicle on the footway was not evidence that it
had been driven there (apparently the prosecution failed to prove it
hadn't been craned or pushed) that the law is no longer enforced -
except, of course, against bicycles.
Not unless there is a local law agin it. And there isn't such a law in many
places.


I don't know which "many places" you are on about, but the local law
in the UK is that you cannot drive a carriage on the footway, except
to access adjacent property (i.e. not just the footway itself, but
something beyond the boundary of the highway).
Other countries (or indeed planets, such as the aforementioned judge
must have been an inhabitant of) may be different.
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?


Far more than involve bicycles, even if you ignore the ones who claim
to have arrived there through no fault of their own.
[Hint: the answer is either "none" or so close to "none" as makes no
practical differnce.]


Maybe you should look it up?


"The local law in the UK"?

Where would one look that up?
  #53  
Old June 12th 10, 08:16 AM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
Doug[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,927
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

On 11 June, 07:21, Adrian wrote:
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.

Not necessarily.

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.

I know, Adrain, but until something better comes along...

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.

Its wrong too. Parking on pavements is obviously wrong but it is
sometimes legal.

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?

Sometime backwards too, though not necessarily knowingly.

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

Not if there were no witnesses or it wasn't intentional. The point you
are evading is that cars are much bigger and heavier than bicycles and
that is why they damage pavements and out pedestrians at more serious
risk there.

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.
  #54  
Old June 12th 10, 09:07 AM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
Brimstone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,111
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!


"Doug" wrote in message
...
On 11 June, 07:21, Adrian wrote:
Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:


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.

I know, Adrain, but until something better comes along...


There is already something available ..... silence.



  #55  
Old June 12th 10, 05:38 PM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

Phil W Lee wrote:
JNugent considered Sat, 12 Jun 2010
01:29:40 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Phil W Lee wrote:
JNugent considered Fri, 11 Jun 2010
15:21:42 +0100 the perfect time to write:

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.
Then how the hell else did you get it there?
Driving on the footway is illegal, and it's only because some
brainless idiot of a judge at some time in the distant past decided
that the presence of a vehicle on the footway was not evidence that it
had been driven there (apparently the prosecution failed to prove it
hadn't been craned or pushed) that the law is no longer enforced -
except, of course, against bicycles.
Not unless there is a local law agin it. And there isn't such a law in many
places.
I don't know which "many places" you are on about, but the local law
in the UK is that you cannot drive a carriage on the footway, except
to access adjacent property (i.e. not just the footway itself, but
something beyond the boundary of the highway).
Other countries (or indeed planets, such as the aforementioned judge
must have been an inhabitant of) may be different.
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?
Far more than involve bicycles, even if you ignore the ones who claim
to have arrived there through no fault of their own.
[Hint: the answer is either "none" or so close to "none" as makes no
practical differnce.]
Maybe you should look it up?

"The local law in the UK"?

Where would one look that up?


In this case, you could try
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatut..._18470089_en_1

Section 28

Which tells us that:

"Every person who causes any public carriage, sledge, truck, or
barrow, with or without horses, or any beast of burden, to stand
longer than is necessary for loading or unloading goods, or for taking
up or setting down passengers (except hackney carriages, and horses
and other beasts of draught or burthen, standing for hire in any place
appointed for that purpose by the commissioners or other lawful
authority), and every person who, by means of any cart, carriage,
sledge, truck, or barrow, or any animal, or other means, wilfully
interrupts any public crossing, or wilfully causes any obstruction in
any public footpath or other public thoroughfa"

and

"Every person who leads or rides any horse or other animal, or draws
or drives any cart or carriage, sledge, truck, or barrow upon any
footway of any street, or fastens any horse or other animal so that it
stands across or upon any footway:"

"shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding [F1level 3 on the standard
scale] for each offence, or, in the discretion of the justice before
whom he is convicted, may be committed to prison, there to remain for
a period not exceeding fourteen days,"


That is NOT (got it? ***NOT***) "local law", unless "local law" means "local
to England and Wales".

Wher is this "local law" you tried to cite?


  #56  
Old June 12th 10, 06:09 PM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

JNugent wrote:

Phil W Lee wrote:
JNugent :
Phil W Lee wrote:


[ ... ]

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?


Far more than involve bicycles, even if you ignore the ones who claim
to have arrived there through no fault of their own.


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


Maybe you should look it up?


"The local law in the UK"?
Where would one look that up?


And how, come to think of it, would looking up a piece of law - whether
"local" or otherwise - tell us how how many pedestrian injuries are caused by
drivers of motor vehicles drivinmg along the footway?

In this case, you could try
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatut..._18470089_en_1


Section 28
Which tells us that:


"Every person who causes any public carriage, sledge, truck, or
barrow, with or without horses, or any beast of burden, to stand
longer than is necessary for loading or unloading goods, or for taking
up or setting down passengers (except hackney carriages, and horses
and other beasts of draught or burthen, standing for hire in any place
appointed for that purpose by the commissioners or other lawful
authority), and every person who, by means of any cart, carriage,
sledge, truck, or barrow, or any animal, or other means, wilfully
interrupts any public crossing, or wilfully causes any obstruction in
any public footpath or other public thoroughfa"

and

"Every person who leads or rides any horse or other animal, or draws
or drives any cart or carriage, sledge, truck, or barrow upon any
footway of any street, or fastens any horse or other animal so that it
stands across or upon any footway:"

"shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding [F1level 3 on the standard
scale] for each offence, or, in the discretion of the justice before
whom he is convicted, may be committed to prison, there to remain for
a period not exceeding fourteen days,"


That is NOT (got it? ***NOT***) "local law", unless "local law" means
"local to England and Wales".
Wher is this "local law" you tried to cite?


Perhaps I was being a little unkind to you there.

The Town Police Clauses Act 1847 is national (and certainly not "local") law,
but it is not law which actually applies anywhere unless a council which
administers a town or borough adopts it, piecemeal. They don't have to have
the whole menu. They can adopt á la carte.

It is because not every council has adopted it - and because not every
council which has adopted some of of it has adopted all of it - that the
legal position is different from place to place.

In order for placing a vehicle on a footway to be illegal, the council has to
have adopted that part of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 which relates to
such activities and which creates the "offence" (where none otherwise applies).

So it is national law which may - or may not - apply locally.

You cannot quote it and say "It applies everywhere". And that is because it
simply doesn't.

  #57  
Old June 12th 10, 06:24 PM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
Derek C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,431
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

On Jun 12, 6:09*pm, JNugent wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote:
JNugent :
Phil W Lee wrote:


[ ... ]

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?
Far more than involve bicycles, even if you ignore the ones who claim
to have arrived there through no fault of their own.
[Hint: the answer is either "none" or so close to "none" as makes
no practical differnce.]
Maybe you should look it up?
"The local law in the UK"?
Where would one look that up?


And how, come to think of it, would looking up a piece of law - whether
"local" or otherwise - tell us how how many pedestrian injuries are caused by
drivers of motor vehicles drivinmg along the footway?





In this case, you could try
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatut...cukpga_1847008....
Section 28
Which tells us that:
"Every person who causes any public carriage, sledge, truck, or
barrow, with or without horses, or any beast of burden, to stand
longer than is necessary for loading or unloading goods, or for taking
up or setting down passengers (except hackney carriages, and horses
and other beasts of draught or burthen, standing for hire in any place
appointed for that purpose by the commissioners or other lawful
authority), and every person who, by means of any cart, carriage,
sledge, truck, or barrow, or any animal, or other means, wilfully
interrupts any public crossing, or wilfully causes any obstruction in
any public footpath or other public thoroughfa"


and


"Every person who leads or rides any horse or other animal, or draws
or drives any cart or carriage, sledge, truck, or barrow upon any
footway of any street, or fastens any horse or other animal so that it
stands across or upon any footway:"


"shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding [F1level 3 on the standard
scale] for each offence, or, in the discretion of the justice before
whom he is convicted, may be committed to prison, there to remain for
a period not exceeding fourteen days,"

That is NOT (got it? ***NOT***) "local law", unless "local law" means
"local to England and Wales".
Wher is this "local law" you tried to cite?


Perhaps I was being a little unkind to you there.

The Town Police Clauses Act 1847 is national (and certainly not "local") law,
but it is not law which actually applies anywhere unless a council which
administers a town or borough adopts it, piecemeal. They don't have to have
the whole menu. They can adopt á la carte.

It is because not every council has adopted it - and because not every
council which has adopted some of of it has adopted all of it - that the
legal position is different from place to place.

In order for placing a vehicle on a footway to be illegal, the council has to
have adopted that part of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 which relates to
such activities and which creates the "offence" (where none otherwise applies).

So it is national law which may - or may not - apply locally.

You cannot quote it and say "It applies everywhere". And that is because it
simply doesn't.- Hide quoted text -


Just looking at the 'offence' itself, in narrow streets it is often
sensible to park your car partly on the footpath so that it doesn't
block the road too much. I always leave enough room on the footpath
for a pram to to pass.

I hate driving in London, because it is very difficult to find
anywhere to park your car without paying a small fortune to NCP, and
the whole place is covered by confusing local byelaws that you don't
know if you don't live there. In some boroughs you can park partly on
the pavement, but in others you can't.

Derek C



  #58  
Old June 12th 10, 06:44 PM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
Nick Finnigan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

Derek C wrote:

Just looking at the 'offence' itself, in narrow streets it is often
sensible to park your car partly on the footpath so that it doesn't
block the road too much. I always leave enough room on the footpath
for a pram to to pass.

I hate driving in London, because it is very difficult to find
anywhere to park your car without paying a small fortune to NCP, and
the whole place is covered by confusing local byelaws that you don't
know if you don't live there. In some boroughs you can park partly on
the pavement, but in others you can't.


And I expect that where there are signs to park partly on the pavement, a
car parked completely on the carriageway is prima facie an obstruction.
  #59  
Old June 12th 10, 09:52 PM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
The Medway Handyman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,074
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

Phil W Lee wrote:
Adrian considered 11 Jun 2010 06:05:16 GMT the
perfect time to write:


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).


This, from the ****wit who thinks I could run my business using a push bike.


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


  #60  
Old June 13th 10, 01:05 AM posted to uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default Another one killed on a pavement and a wall smashed!

Phil W Lee wrote:

JNugent :


[huge snip]

PWL:
I don't know which "many places" you are on about, but the local law
in the UK is that you cannot drive a carriage on the footway, except
to access adjacent property (i.e. not just the footway itself, but
something beyond the boundary of the highway). ...
Maybe you should look it up?


"The local law in the UK"?
Where would one look that up?


In this case, you could try
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatut..._18470089_en_1


Section 28


[Quoted Town Police Clauses Act 1847]

Wher is this "local law" you tried to cite?


You were the one who claimed that any such laws would only be local.


Indeed they are, as I pointed out in another post.

I simply pointed out that "local" in that case must be England and
Wales (although I actually said UK, so apologies to those in Scotland
and Ulster who probably have their own equivalents).


I gave you that get-out and so you have tried to use it, but it is beyond the
bounds of credibility that you meant national law when you said "local law".

I'll paste a copy of that below, in case you can't manage to remember
it or look through the quoted text above:


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


I don't know which "many places" you are on about, but the local law
in the UK is that you cannot drive a carriage on the footway, except
to access adjacent property (i.e. not just the footway itself, but
something beyond the boundary of the highway).
Other countries (or indeed planets, such as the aforementioned judge
must have been an inhabitant of) may be different.


See the parallel post (from earlier).

The law you cited does not apply everywhere in E&W. Even where it applies,
not every part of it need apply.

That means that my point that there isn't such a law (against footway
parking) in many places is correct.

But we all knew that in the first place. You appear not to understand how the
TPCA 1847 works.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Two killed in pavement collision. D.M. Procida UK 6 September 28th 09 10:31 PM
"Boy killed as car mounts pavement" Doug[_3_] UK 435 May 10th 09 02:40 PM
Two pavement deaths by killer motorist who also destroyed a wall Doug[_3_] UK 31 February 27th 09 06:25 PM
Another pedestrian killed on the pavement David Hansen UK 24 June 5th 07 09:54 AM
Pavement cyclist killed Tony Raven UK 1 November 4th 06 08:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.