prioryx Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 ....er, according to his brother he stopped for the red light but then proceeded through it because he thought it was safe to do so, ie he didn't see the car that hit him. To try to justify his action is both pityfull and shows a reckless disregard for safety, so you either should be ashamed of yourself or take another test as I fear you are not competent to drive. I was not trying justify his action and there is no need for you to make comments about my road knowledge or ability to drive. Maybe it was safe when he looked but with a car exceeding the the speed limit his judgement was wrong. I did not say he was right in what he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfstalin Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I was not trying justify his action and there is no need for you to make comments about my road knowledge or ability to drive. Maybe it was safe when he looked but with a car exceeding the the speed limit his judgement was wrong. I did not say he was right in what he did. Its like watching The Marathon Man, is it safe, is it safe, well I would have thought that it was obvious to anyone of any level of sense that it wasn't safe given that he is dead. I've always found that there death thing to be fairly conclusive evidence that something wasn't quite as safe as some idiot believed it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldershelf Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Every other road user like horse riders? They should be prosecuted for breaking the law, the rest of your post doesn't stand up to rational analysis. Horses on the road are another argument entirely. lets stick to vehicles shall we, specifically the way cyclists interact with cars (and lorries and buses) which is the subject of this thread. All other vehicles are subject to controls, rules and punitive punishments for not following the rules, cyclists should be subject to the same regime, whats so complicated or wrong with that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 one hit me when I was crossing a road at a crossing a while back I've been hit on three seperate occasions, all on crossings (my right of way - on the green man), by cyclists. The last one took "flying lessons" when I spun round and booted the moron off his bike. Hey, if was down to me you'd get a free tax disk for every cyclist you nailed jumping a red light. Brilliant:thumbsup: What does one get for pulling someone from their car and beating the crap out of them when they are using their mobile phone? A round of applause:clap: Let's make it closer to home and take the cyclist out of the equation... Bit of difference between the story you linked to and the one under discussion. For a start, the victim hadn't "jumped" a red light (thus contributing to their own demise). Yet the sentence is half that of the one meted out to the woman in the original story.. whereas cyclist use the roads Of course they do, never seen a cycle on the pavement:rolleyes: Please reply, and tell me driving is something you can do with both eyes shut. You can drive with both eyes closed, just not very well (or not for very long) what's the point? Because it is what you should do as a responsible cyclist. Your attitude shows what a poor cyclist (and danger to other road users) you are:| I am totally in the wrong. Except for this occasion:D It seems that the only penalty they can receive for cycling offences is a £30 fixed penalty (might have gone up now) which they can receive for running red light and cycling on pavement amongst other things. Cyclist can also be prosecuted if they are drunk whilst riding (I know this for a fact, as a freind has been "done" for this very "crime"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
531c Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Using mobile phones and texting is a hyped-up anti-brigade craze. Some people are quite capable of multi-tasking while carrying out the simple task of driving a car and remaining observant. Others can barely drive even if they concentrate 100% of their feeble minds to the task in hand. It’s all down to capacity, and the ability to take on more mental work rate. Oh dear. The familiar arrogant driver argument: "I should have the freedom to drive however I want so long as I feel that I'm in control and all these PC do-gooders should leave me alone in my little private world" The argument usually embraces speeding, overtaking regardless of road markings and drinking - "because even with a few beers I'm still a better driver than most other incompetent drivers"... What is the pint in having a law that says you can't text while.. <snip> What is your pint Slurper? Lager is my guess. Prosecute people who cause accidents, not people who can safely use a phone, insert a CD or have a chat. As for this case, he ran a red light, end of story – his fault, the driver shouldn’t have had to do more than give a statement at the side of the road and should have been able to claim for damages to her vehicle from insurance that he, as a cyclist, obviously would not have had. Thankfully you're not a judge so your ill informed, Jeremy Clarkson spoon-fed opinion only counts to people who already share your opinion and are as incapable of rational thought and reasoned debate as you. Slurper typifies the attitude of most of the 'anti-cyclist' boys that vent their anger and regurgitate other people's arguments in these forum discussions. I say reguritate because they haven't the capacity for the independent thought needed to form their own argument. And I say boys because generally they are - or boys in men's clothing. These boys don't just hate cyclists - they hate anyone who gets in their way on the road. Horses, vans, buses, motorbikes, ice cream vans, milk floats and, ironically, most of all other car drivers. They get wound up in stuck in the traffic and the testosterone that most men's brains can deal with wreaks havoc inside their little throwback brains and the slightest provocation makes them lose control. Because most of the traffic on the road is cars, most of the time it's other car drivers who are on the dangerous end of their loss of control with aggressive, intimidating driving, erratic overtaking, surging and braking on the motorway and obviously road rage. (I always have a laugh to myself when I overtake a 'fat piped' car driven by one of these goons stuck in a line of traffic after they have roared past me on the bike a few seconds before.) Societies intolerance should be firmly directed at these selfish plebs because they are the cause of the thousands of road related deaths and serious injury that ruins thousands more lives every year. I'd like to see them pulled out of their cars and pushed into a more suitable, painful environment for venting testosterone - a boxing ring, a rugby pitch or a bike race. I don't need to wonder how long most of them would last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Societies intolerance should be firmly directed at these selfish plebs because they are the cause of the thousands of road related deaths and serious injury that ruins thousands more lives every year. You mean like cyclists, who decide traffic signals do not apply to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddeckerslyke Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Oh dear. The familiar arrogant driver argument: [...] I'd like to see them pulled out of their cars and pushed into a more suitable, painful environment for venting testosterone - a boxing ring, a rugby pitch or a bike race. I don't need to wonder how long most of them would last. A heartfelt post . I do like the bit about bike racing. ISTM that in any discussion there are going to be people you will never reach, mainly because their decisions are based on emotion and not reason but generally in this thread and out on the road most people seem reasonable. I'd like to go for a more harmonious relationship. Like I said, for instance getting out of the way where possible so as not to slow up traffic and not wearing self-righteous One Less Car*/The Zero Emission Option** gear *One Less Car One More T*sser **But you're emitting quite a lot of dangerously obnoxious piety Jumping lights safely for 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfstalin Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Post 114). Great post, ROTFLMFAO!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbees Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Oh dear. The familiar arrogant driver argument:.............I don't need to wonder how long most of them would last.What utter rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 im sorry but that is absolutely disgraceful. a young mans life is cut short just by one person thinking they are above the law. Quite, though it takes two to tango, and the cyclist had just ridden straight through a red light. one moment of her stupidity and that young mans family are affected forever.... Again, the cyclist is not beyond any blame in the matter. i know she will have to live with what she has done forever but IMO she deserved a longer sentence than the one she got I think it's about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.