how about shouting "get out of the way" (twice) and applying (non-existent) front brakes?
Arrogant cyclist slaughters innocent mother
- Thread starter Pseudonym Number 1
- Start date
- Status
Lambchops
Striker
It'll have to do I suppose
monkeytassle
Striker
I have just yelled out the way out the way in my front room. Confirmed at 0.68 seconds. Fingers couldn't keep pace with voice actually.
scraff
Striker
I do anywhere between 15 and 30 mph on the roads on my bike, now I'm no spelk at 14 stone, and have on many occasions had pedestrians walk right out in front me, sometimes like last week at shields they made direct eye contact and just stepped out in front of me anyway and then proceeded to walk slowly across the road so I had to swerve round them, i also see this type of behaviour more and more when driving (the ones who act the big one are usually young to middle aged males, and would hazard a guess drive like pricks when they get in their cars). Now if I hit one of these people i am going to do them a lot of damage, 14 stone hitting you at 20 odd mile an hour is going to put you on your arse and may do serious injury. Do i ever try to hit anyone? No but i have elbowed some chinese lad who walked straight at me on cycle path and wouldnt move. Would I be sorry for their plight? Yes as i would not like to harm anyone, would i feel guilty? Not on your f***ing nelly. I would also dispute if you include reaction time that the stopping distance is 3 metres, this seems very optimistic especially with caliper brakes.
If that person steps directly in front of you then you really aren't same as if you were driving and someone walked out straight in front of your car. What we need on this thread is more victim blaming like on cycling threads. Was she wearing headphones? Was she looking at her phone? Was she wearing hi-viz clothing?
Last edited:
as i said previously - lost all credibility with your desire to defend the indefensible.
That's ignoring the woman's actions entirely.
The only hysteria I can see is the Mail's headline and the clamour to burn this lad at the stake. The lad could go to jail for what was essentially having no front brake on a pedal bike. That is grossly disproportionate to the offence. He's a little prick, no doubt, but assuming the woman stepped out in front of him, this should be put down as a tragic accident and he should face a fine or community service. A manslaughter conviction for a death that wasn't solely his fault (my assumption based on what has been reported, granted), isn't fair, IMHO.
For all his arrogance and bluster, I'm reasonably confident that he'll be suffering on the inside. People write all sorts of bollocks to puff themselves up on forums, etc. If we judged SMBers' real selves by what they write on here, they'd be screwed!
If he goes on in court like he does on his forum, at least some of the jury are going to sway towards guilty, though. He doesn't help himself with his attitude.
scraff
Striker
I would think the laws of probability are immune to psych profiling.
mutley
Striker
Is that a posh description of domestic chores?
Good grief, you just can't argue with that 'logic'.
Rick O Shea
Striker
That's ignoring the woman's actions entirely.
The only hysteria I can see is the Mail's headline and the clamour to burn this lad at the stake. The lad could go to jail for what was essentially having no front brake on a pedal bike. That is grossly disproportionate to the offence. He's a little prick, no doubt, but assuming the woman stepped out in front of him, this should be put down as a tragic accident and he should face a fine or community service. A manslaughter conviction for a death that wasn't solely his fault (my assumption based on what has been reported, granted), isn't fair, IMHO.
For all his arrogance and bluster, I'm reasonably confident that he'll be suffering on the inside. People write all sorts of bollocks to puff themselves up on forums, etc. If we judged SMBers' real selves by what they write on here, they'd be screwed!
If he goes on in court like he does on his forum, at least some of the jury are going to sway towards guilty, though. He doesn't help himself with his attitude.
If this was a motorist that hit someone, driving a car that was unroadworthy, then he would expect (quite rightly) to go to jail. This lad should be treated no differently.
royaldragon
Winger
I hope he gets bummed in prison, then he can claim, it wasn't his fault he got f****d up the arse in the shower, saying that he'd probably enjoy it.
D
Deleted member 6694
Guest
Wrong! He reacted at a minimum 6.65 metres to stop the bike so had more time. I'll hoy it up again as you completely ignored me showing your previous comment to be selective quoting and this new comment is just trying to suit your posting agenda
Also note he swerved and took evasive action rather than attempting to slow down (this fits in with his Lucas stunt rider wannabe comment).https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...outed-charlie-alliston-pedestrian-lay-wounded
"The defendant had been travelling at an average of 18mph before he noticed Briggs step into the road, jurors heard. He was a minimum of 6.65 metres (21.8ft) away when he swerved and tried to take evasive action.
Tests on a conventional mountain bike found a stopping distance of about three metres, but Alliston’s model had a stopping distance of about 12 metres, the court heard."
Aye you may travel some distance when registering a hazard but they are claiming he'd done that prior to being 6.65 metres away as it was then that he started swerving. Even if 3 metres is extreme for stopping are you trying to tell the SMB that you can't stop a bike with front brakes within 6.65M?
If you are try looking at the bicycle braking videos again, here's one and watch it from 35 seconds to the see how effective they are. The reaction time isn't included in the stopping distance as he started to swerve at 6.65 metres away (I assume they got this from CCTV) so would have been further away to register the hazard. @monkeytassle is just saying stuff to keep his lame argument going
I agree with what you say about pedestrians but only in certain circumstances so don't let that cloud your judgement on this incident. Some of the info isn't being looked at before comments are made or some are just choosing to ignore it. It was a busy lunchtime for example so it's not as if she was the only potential pedestrian who could have stepped out and given the amount of people that do then surely you'd be more aware in a busy area given you can't focus on everyone? He claims she was on her phone and there was a crossing less than 10m away.
If a person steps out in front of you on a busy high street, should you not be travelling slightly slower due to increased potential hazards? What if they did step out but you couldn't stop in time? It's their fault but what if you did stop in time as it was further away? It's still their fault the incident happened but you stopped thankfully. Now if you were travelling at 30mph had shitty brakes/tyres and your stopping distance was at least double and speed halved so go through them at 15mph then is the pedestrian fully responsible for the accident?
he deliberately went out on an illegal bike without consideration of the consequences.That's ignoring the woman's actions entirely.
The only hysteria I can see is the Mail's headline and the clamour to burn this lad at the stake. The lad could go to jail for what was essentially having no front brake on a pedal bike. That is grossly disproportionate to the offence. He's a little prick, no doubt, but assuming the woman stepped out in front of him, this should be put down as a tragic accident and he should face a fine or community service. A manslaughter conviction for a death that wasn't solely his fault (my assumption based on what has been reported, granted), isn't fair, IMHO.
For all his arrogance and bluster, I'm reasonably confident that he'll be suffering on the inside. People write all sorts of bollocks to puff themselves up on forums, etc. If we judged SMBers' real selves by what they write on here, they'd be screwed!
If he goes on in court like he does on his forum, at least some of the jury are going to sway towards guilty, though. He doesn't help himself with his attitude.
Dave Herbal
Striker
I like to play chicken with the bellends who walk on cycle paths. Or ride up behind them and swerve past at the last second so they feel the draught and shit themselves.
I'm even bigger than you, so as you say that is going to knack one way or the other.
Pseudonym Number 1
Striker
So you've just admitted to racially aggravated assault, nice...
It wasn't a motorist, though. They face stringent safety checks on their cars because of their mass and speed, and bikes aren't tested at all. They are nowhere near as dangerous as cars, and that is reflected in legislation. If and when they are registered and face compulsory testing, then maybe they can roll out harsh penalties for riding unroadworthy bikes.
The more I think about this case, the more it doesn't add up. I'm struggling to see how the hell a direct collision was the outcome. Did she end up moving the same way as the cyclist swerved? Its like neither of them would yield out of a matter of principle! Of course, that's not the case, but Christ, if I saw I cyclist approaching, I'd at least avoid a direct hit, and if I were a cyclist, it'd be no different. Bikes are extremely manoeuvrable, as is an able bodied person.
If the pedestrian didn't see him it all, the scenario is more plausible, but it seems she did, and the cyclist had time to shout at her to get out of the way. It reminds me of movie scenes where implausible amounts of time elapse between people spotting a hazard and a collision occurring.
I know, and I'm not saying for a second that he shouldn't be punished for that.
ErichZann
Striker
He didn't elbow him because he was Chinese...
Ha'way, man! You never gone on a Chinese-elbowing bike ride? We've all done it.
Pseudonym Number 1
Striker
Why was it necessary to point out his victims race?
- Status
