dawny1970 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Share Posted April 13, 2011 Yes it would seem ludicrous to a cyclist but I'm sorry to say it DID happen as I stated, and no they didn't have insurance, they had a go at me then got on their bike and rode off leavng me with a broken wing mirror and deep scratches in the passenger door, so yes, I agree with more laws against cyclists, they are using a road so should be covered by the same laws!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Do you want more laws or the same laws? Or are you just a bit sore that you are sitting in traffic and they are getting places faster and cheaper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawny1970 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Share Posted April 13, 2011 Look, let's get 1 thing straight here, I have no objections to cyclists, but they need to adhere to the rules of the road that others have to, or do you object to that and feel that it's your given right to do as you please and cause havoc to other road users?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I agree with you. In fact no cyclist on this thread has said that cyclists shouldn't follow the rules of the road but still we have to put up with a barrage of ill informed and made up nonsense on behalf of a group of road users that kill 8,000 times more people than cyclists every year. You'll excuse us if we feel a little bemused and the vehemence of the rhetoric. ... and "cause havoc" ? Errm a serious reality check is in order there, but you're not alone, it's par for the course. Meanwhile millions of motorists will jump in their car and mooan about pushbikes while having a damned good go at running cyclists off the road, killing a few hundred along the way every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawny1970 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Share Posted April 13, 2011 I agree with you. In fact no cyclist on this thread has said that cyclists shouldn't follow the rules of the road but still we have to put up with a barrage of ill informed and made up nonsense on behalf of a group of road users that kill 8,000 times more people than cyclists every year. You'll excuse us if we feel a little bemused and the vehemence of the rhetoric. ... and "cause havoc" ? Errm a serious reality check is in order there, but you're not alone, it's par for the course. Meanwhile millions of motorists will jump in their car and mooan about pushbikes while having a damned good go at running cyclists off the road, killing a few hundred along the way every year. i have never harmed a cyclist, but as a road user, i have seen how they behave on the road, cyclists HAVE killed people or because its less than car drivers, are you saying that its ok then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 i have never harmed a cyclist, but as a road user, i have seen how they behave on the road, cyclists HAVE killed people or because its less than car drivers, are you saying that its ok then? You mean how some behave-you are both generalising and exaggerating to make your case because it is fundementally flawed.At a mean weight of 15 kg it is very hard to envisage those circumstances where a bike might kill a person-it wwould be considered a freak occurence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meshuga Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Look, let's get 1 thing straight here, I have no objections to cyclists, but they need to adhere to the rules of the road that others have to, or do you object to that and feel that it's your given right to do as you please and cause havoc to other road users?? I don't get this - where is anyone saying that cyclists don't need to adhere to the rules of the road? I have nothing to fear from passing a dangerous cycling law, but just so long as the courts stop with this ridiculous "careless driving" thing they're doing. http://www.stop-smidsy.org.uk/case-study/careless-driver-gets-community-sentence-a435-cyclist-death-4810 http://www.stop-smidsy.org.uk/case-study/relatives-sob-court-50mph-death-crash-driver-escapes-prison-24609 http://www.stop-smidsy.org.uk/case-study/london-bus-driver-cycle-death-cleared-careless-driving-111109 http://road.cc/content/news/31254-careless-driving-charge-cyclists-hit-and-run-death http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4355384.Man_s_momentary_lapse_caused_death_of_cyclist/ So just as long as the "careless cycling" plea is available to cyclists then i guess that is fair. How anyone can kill another road user and have a sentence that is associated with "careless" rather than "dangerous" is beyond me. Bring it on, just so long as it's fair. It is clear to me what the real menace on the roads is. I cycle alot and drive a lot, the standard of driving that i see when both on my pushbike and in my car is truly appalling. Many road users are good, but it is the few bad ones that scare me, however they travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 You mean how some behave-you are both generalising and exaggerating to make your case because it is fundementally flawed.At a mean weight of 15 kg it is very hard to envisage those circumstances where a bike might kill a person-it wwould be considered a freak occurence. Never the less an MP is taking up the matter in parliament regarding there being no such charge as 'Death by Dangerous Cycling' because a young woman was killed when ridden into by a cyclist on the footpath yet his sentence was quite light compared to a motorist convicted of causing 'Death By Dangerous Driving'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 You can't even be bothered to read the report that you are using as your point. Nobody has said that the cyclist was on the pavement. The cyclist could quite reasonably have expected that they would have moved but the police say that she was standing in the road and there was suspicion that the group of youths that she was standing with had been drinking and might have had some of that youthful bravado that kids have when in a gang. Nobody is defending the cyclist but we're told that he's received a sentence that's double what a motorist would be like to receive under similar circumstances. So yea, let's have a level playing field eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattleonard Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Always expect the unexpected with cyclists because let's not foreget they're allowed onto the road without any mandatory form of prior knowledge or experience, they can be the cause of accidents yet they carry no insurance. Cyclists should be made to take a profficiency test and also take out third party insurance before they're allowed ont the public roads. We know from experience that when Bassman62 says "unexpected" he means things like when a cyclist approaches a parked car it would be unexpected for them to pull out in order to go around it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.