Dangerous cyclists

[Bassman62]

so lets say if some one rides into a pedestrian and hurts them but it doesn't seem serious at first.but becomes a problem soon after.What will that hurt person do to track them? take notes of his number plates?

Of course not it's the pedestrians place to nursemaid the cyclist, if the cycle is damaged then the pedestrian should pay for the repairs and any compensation awarded to the cyclist. The numpty cyclist will no doubt be advised to come on SF and advertise for 'Silly cyclist none witnesses' who'll vouch it was the other partys fault.

 

Cyclists now reading this topic will be going round running into people as well as making sudden manoevers without Mirror, signal, manoever.

 

http://www.injurylawyers4u.co.uk will be employing more telephonists now that word has got out.

 

"Did you have an accident because a silly pedestrian got in your way on the pavement or walked out into a road whilst you were cycling the wrong way in a one way street? If you did go to our website"

[Bassman62]

Not hypothetical for me. It happened this evening as I drove down Westbourne Road. Westbourne Road is one way from the junction with Southbourne Road, down to Brocco Bank. The bottom is clearly marked with "No Entry" signs. There is no contraflow for cyclists.

 

Then I went about my business. People like him give cyclists a bad name. It happens a lot on that stretch of road. It isn't any further to go to Southbourne Road and ride up there, just like the cars do.

 

It is a common site to see cyclist failing to observe one way signs especialy in Chesterfield.

 

Bramhall lane Sheffield has cycle lanes I often see cyclists riding on the pavement but I've yet to see one using the cycle lanes.

[Bassman62]

Does this mean I've now got to read through this old thread to see if Bassman told us whether or not he signalled before passing a parked vehicle?

When you post a topic about 'Dangerous dtivers I'll answer but this topic is about Dangerous cyclists of which it has now been well established that none actualy exist only dangerous drivers, pedestrians, cats, dogs, martians and anything else that gets in their way.

[Eater Sundae]

What if they're colour blind or have only just arrived and can't read English?

 

Doesn't this support the call for a profficiency test?

 

...and what if they've been driving for years but have not bothered to learn about, for example, contraflow cycle lanes, despite there being plenty of them about. Shouldn't these people be retested?

[mattleonard]

so lets say if some one rides into a pedestrian and hurts them but it doesn't seem serious at first.but becomes a problem soon after.What will that hurt person do to track them? take notes of his number plates?

 

I would suggest that if any accident occurs full stop it is just politeness for the cyclist to give their details, and the pedestrian is completely within their rights to ask for them if the cyclist doesn't take the initiative - regardless of whether the injuries seem serious at the time

 

At the very least the cyclist should be stopping to see that the pedestrian is OK. Any cyclist who isn't willing to do these things is a scumbag.

 

I take the bigger point of "what's the pedestrian supposed to do if the cyclist does none of these things and rides off?". I admit that that is a problem - there are idiots about and I think such actions are beyond defence.

[Bassman62]

I would suggest that if any accident occurs full stop it is just politeness for the cyclist to give their details, and the pedestrian is completely within their rights to ask for them if the cyclist doesn't take the initiative - regardless of whether the injuries seem serious at the time.

As Claud Greengrass would say "And pigs might fly":loopy:

[mattleonard]

When you post a topic about 'Dangerous dtivers I'll answer but this topic is about Dangerous cyclists of which it has now been well established that none actualy exist only dangerous drivers, pedestrians, cats, dogs, martians and anything else that gets in their way.

 

Well, as I mentioned in post 484, when you first brought the subject up on a post which was about dangerous drivers you still failed to answer the questions, so we've got no reason to believe you now.

[Bassman62]

...and what if they've been driving for years but have not bothered to learn about, for example, contraflow cycle lanes, despite there being plenty of them about. Shouldn't these people be retested?

And how many languages should the contra flow signs be in for immigrants/visitors who can't speak English and have never read the Highway Code.

There should in my opinion be a compulsory profficiency test for all cyclists on our increasingly crowded roads, afetr all I recently saw police officers being given cycling tuition in Hillsborough Park.

[Bassman62]

Well, as I mentioned in post 484, when you first brought the subject up on a post which was about dangerous drivers you still failed to answer the questions, so we've got no reason to believe you now.

 

Believe what?

[mattleonard]

And how many languages should the contra flow signs be in for immigrants/visitors who can't speak English and have never read the Highway Code.

There should in my opinion be a compulsory profficiency test for all cyclists on our increasingly crowded roads, afetr all I recently saw police officers being given cycling tuition in Hillsborough Park.

 

You really are descending into uncharted depths of nonsense now. So the way to solve the problem of drivers who have never read the Highway Code is for a compulsory cycling proficiency test?

 

You are now saying it's absolutely OK for drivers to not have any knowledge of the Highway Code, the very thing that you have repeatedly, wrongly accused us of doing for cyclists.