Why can't cyclists slow down?

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:
"Tony Dragon" wrote in message
...
On 15/08/2012 16:03, wrote:
On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 3:41:56 PM UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
John Benn wrote:

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

...

A 66-year-old man is critically ill in hospital following a

collision with a cyclist in Liverpool, police have said.





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-19268415





How do you know the cyclist was travelling fast?



because of the extent of the pedestrians injuries. If the cyclist
had been

travelling at a reasonable speed then he would have been able to
stop before

the collision.

Not if the ped stepped out in front of him without warning. You're
making assumptions based on your prejudices.


A certain person on this group, tell us that the vulnerable victim
can never be to blame, as a vehicle should always be able to stop in
time.

So even if the cyclist was travelling slowly and the ped just stepped
in front of him when the cyclist was just a few inches away without
the ped looking first, it's the cyclists fault?

yes.

So you do not do much wallking then?

Alan

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 15/08/2012 19:12, Alan Holmes wrote:

"Tony Dragon" wrote:
wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:
John Benn wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote:

A 66-year-old man is critically ill in hospital following a
collision with a cyclist in Liverpool, police have said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-19268415

How do you know the cyclist was travelling fast?

because of the extent of the pedestrians injuries. If the cyclist had
been travelling at a reasonable speed then he would have been able to
stop
before the collision.

Not if the ped stepped out in front of him without warning. You're
making
assumptions based on your prejudices.

A certain person on this group, tell us that the vulnerable victim can
never be to blame, as a vehicle should always be able to stop in time.

So even if the cyclist was travelling slowly and the ped just stepped in
front of him when the cyclist was just a few inches away without the ped
looking first, it's the cyclists fault?

The cyclist is unlikely to have been travelling slowly, given that both of
them were admitted to hospital.

I didn't read that bit!



So your two separate "ifs" seem unrelated to what is so far known of the
case.

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 3:41:56 PM UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
John Benn wrote:

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

...

A 66-year-old man is critically ill in hospital following a

collision with a cyclist in Liverpool, police have said.





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-19268415





How do you know the cyclist was travelling fast?



because of the extent of the pedestrians injuries. If the cyclist
had been

travelling at a reasonable speed then he would have been able to
stop before

the collision.

Not if the ped stepped out in front of him without warning. You're
making assumptions based on your prejudices.


pedestrians NEVER materialise in front of you, they can always be
seen in advance (which IS your warning) and avoided IF the
rider/driver is travelling at a suitable speed and is sufficiently
attentive.

You obviously have never riden a bike!

You obviously cannot appreciate the skills needed to ride and drive safely
nowadays.

Go on then, tell me!

On 18/08/2012 18:44, Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 3:41:56 PM UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
John Benn wrote:

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

...

A 66-year-old man is critically ill in hospital following a

collision with a cyclist in Liverpool, police have said.





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-19268415





How do you know the cyclist was travelling fast?



because of the extent of the pedestrians injuries. If the cyclist
had been

travelling at a reasonable speed then he would have been able to
stop before

the collision.

Not if the ped stepped out in front of him without warning. You're
making assumptions based on your prejudices.


pedestrians NEVER materialise in front of you, they can always be
seen in advance (which IS your warning) and avoided IF the
rider/driver is travelling at a suitable speed and is sufficiently
attentive.

You obviously have never riden a bike!

You obviously cannot appreciate the skills needed to ride and drive safely
nowadays.

Go on then, tell me!






In your case;

a) have brain fitted.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:
"Tony Dragon" wrote in message
...
On 15/08/2012 16:03, wrote:
On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 3:41:56 PM UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
John Benn wrote:

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

...

A 66-year-old man is critically ill in hospital following a

collision with a cyclist in Liverpool, police have said.





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-19268415





How do you know the cyclist was travelling fast?



because of the extent of the pedestrians injuries. If the
cyclist had been

travelling at a reasonable speed then he would have been able to
stop before

the collision.

Not if the ped stepped out in front of him without warning. You're
making assumptions based on your prejudices.


A certain person on this group, tell us that the vulnerable victim
can never be to blame, as a vehicle should always be able to stop
in time.

So even if the cyclist was travelling slowly and the ped just
stepped in front of him when the cyclist was just a few inches away
without the ped looking first, it's the cyclists fault?

yes.

So you do not do much wallking then?

Alan

I have no idea what wallking is, could it be some sort of paint? or plaster?

Anyway, why would the cyclist not warn of his approach?

"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 18/08/2012 18:44, Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 3:41:56 PM UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
John Benn wrote:

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

...

A 66-year-old man is critically ill in hospital following a

collision with a cyclist in Liverpool, police have said.





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...yside-19268415





How do you know the cyclist was travelling fast?



because of the extent of the pedestrians injuries. If the cyclist
had been

travelling at a reasonable speed then he would have been able to
stop before

the collision.

Not if the ped stepped out in front of him without warning. You're
making assumptions based on your prejudices.


pedestrians NEVER materialise in front of you, they can always be
seen in advance (which IS your warning) and avoided IF the
rider/driver is travelling at a suitable speed and is sufficiently
attentive.

You obviously have never riden a bike!

You obviously cannot appreciate the skills needed to ride and drive
safely
nowadays.

Go on then, tell me!






In your case;

a) have brain fitted.

When are you going to have your brain fixed?