monkeytassle
Striker
All 4 of mine are.
Arrogant cyclist slaughters innocent mother
- Thread starter Pseudonym Number 1
- Start date
- Status
D
Deleted member 6694
Guest
Ignoring the rest of my post?
Anyway as I said, it's obvious that @Pseudonym Number 1 didn't mean the 30 years. Most will know it will be a few years at most the cyclist will get yet you are taking a exaggerated comment at face value and trying to get an argument out of it and playing the 'some SMBrs hate cyclists' card also
A poor lass was killed by some f***ing arsehole riding illegally (possibly knowingly but not yet proven) and if he was legal may not have even hit her yet you earlier came out with shite such as "was she on a crossing" for example.Yes the lass could be to blame in some way if she stepped out while messing about on her phone but given the information so far I'd dare she's quite innocent. I say that as it has been suggested he could have stopped plus given hazard perception he should have been aware of it. If he'd had brakes then the collision may not have happened but certainly would have been less so possibly less injury if at all.
What do you do when you are driving and you pass pedestrians on the kerb facing away from you but close to the edge? Do you still just whizz past at the speed limit in the same road position not expecting them to suddenly attempt to cross or even fall over? I've a feeling you do fuck all given your comments in this thread but maybe I'm wrong. Personally I'd move closer to the middle of the road (safely of course) and if it's a tight road then slow down slightly by a few mph. At most it's a few seconds delay that will probably be made up the next time traffic slows down or stops anyway. You don't need to do it all the time but there are many times when drivers should be doing this but don't.
Other examples of twats who don't are the ones who go past inches away at speed when you've got out of your car but haven't yet got on the kerb yet they were 100 yards away when you first got out so should be giving way or approaching with caution. The simple fact is there are twats on the roads in many forms be it as cyclists, motorbike riders, drivers etc and there are also pedestrians who don't pay attention. The problem is that some road users don't pay enough attention themselves or aren't as hazard aware as they should be and it seems in this case the cyclist is a bit of a twat regardless of the lass stepping out.
Equally culpable?
I disagree given what info in said in that article but maybe you haven't read through it. Even if you don't, read my post above about the baldy tyres example as it's a very similar scenario due to the longer stopping distance given he had no brakes. Do you still reckon the baldy tyres car driver and pedestrian would be equally culpable even if a driver with legal tyres would have been able to stop in time?
IAmZlatan
Winger
In what way? Genuinely interested, had no idea that front brakes were a requirement before this thread.
Walter Ego
Striker
There's loads of bollocks regulations which are just not feasible. I.e. Pedals must have reflectors on them.
Yer da claims JSA
Midfield
Ignoring the rest of my post?
Anyway as I said, it's obvious that @Pseudonym Number 1 didn't mean the 30 years. Most will know it will be a few years at most the cyclist will get yet you are taking a exaggerated comment at face value and trying to get an argument out of it and playing the 'some SMBrs hate cyclists' card also
Yes the lass could be to blame in some way if she stepped out while messing about on her phone but given the information so far I'd dare she's quite innocent. I say that as it has been suggested he could have stopped plus given hazard perception he should have been aware of it. If he'd had brakes then the collision may not have happened but certainly would have been less so possibly less injury if at all.
What do you do when you are driving and you pass pedestrians on the kerb facing away from you but close to the edge? Do you still just whizz past at the speed limit in the same road position not expecting them to suddenly attempt to cross or even fall over? I've a feeling you do fuck all given your comments in this thread but maybe I'm wrong. Personally I'd move closer to the middle of the road (safely of course) and if it's a tight road then slow down slightly by a few mph. At most it's a few seconds delay that will probably be made up the next time traffic slows down or stops anyway. You don't need to do it all the time but there are many times when drivers should be doing this but don't.
Other examples of twats who don't are the ones who go past inches away at speed when you've got out of your car but haven't yet got on the kerb yet they were 100 yards away when you first got out so should be giving way or approaching with caution. The simple fact is there are twats on the roads in many forms be it as cyclists, motorbike riders, drivers etc and there are also pedestrians who don't pay attention. The problem is that some road users don't pay enough attention themselves or aren't as hazard aware as they should be and it seems in this case the cyclist is a bit of a twat regardless of the lass stepping out.
Equally culpable?
If I step out in front of a car without looking, baldy tires or not, it's my fault if I get ran ower
Billy Rocket
Winger
Ignorance of the law isn't a defence.
(I assume you didn't mean not knowing there were no front brakes, as that would be unbelievable).
Not if the car could have stopped in time had it not been illegal.
sidneyeric
Striker
You could be given some blame yes but if you're killed because the driver/rider was driving/riding something illegal and there's a chance you may not have been killed that is the driver/riders fault.
Walter Ego
Striker
It's an interesting one. People have been riding bikes in cities without brakes for a loooong time. NYC messengers started using track bikes without brakes in the 80s, maybe earlier.
IAmZlatan
Winger
Ah right
r@mside
Striker
How far away should the car be for you to be classed as stepping out in front of it?
D
Deleted member 6694
Guest
Billy Rocket
Winger
To me it's like driving pissed. Loads of people do it, but that doesn't make it right, lawful or an excuse/defence if it's the cause of someone's death
D
Deleted member 6694
Guest
How are pedal reflectors not feasible? Is something like that not just down to cosmetics of the bicycle or is there a genuine reason for this? Now you mention it, I haven't seen that many reflectors on bikes but do recall them years ago (along with the shin scraper grips!) but maybe I'm mistaken.
:EDIT: It seems that it's only at night time you need reflectors. I don't ride a bike these days but it took me all of 30 seconds to find this and more info of various rules when riding a bike on the road. Therefore in my opinion there's not really any excuse for unknowingly riding a bike unless you can't use anything that accesses online info or any other special circumstance.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82#overview-rules-59-to-71
Rule 60
At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Flashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tadger
Striker
I think you've missed the point marra.
The bike had no front brake which is a legal requirement and he knew that. I'd imagine a car driver that knowingly drove a car with faulty breaks that ran someone over would be facing a similar charge.
His negligence has caused the death of a woman. And he's being a callous little prick about it.
The lad could end up doing 3 or 4 years in prison but not because of reflectors.
Tadger
Striker
If the state of my vehicle meant that it didn't stop when it should have done, I think a bit of remorse would be expected.
Walter Ego
Striker
This investigation. What did it investigate?
Did they investigate stopping distances of a typical bike with two brakes as opposed to one with a fixed gear?
I'm not clicking on the Daily Mail link as I'm not a xenophobic little shithouse thank you very much.
Clipless pedals. Google them.
Tadger
Striker
Why are you arguing the toss about this? His bike didn't have proper brakes on, he couldn't stop and he clattered someone.
Walter Ego
Striker
It's a simple question like.
r@mside
Striker
You're not forced to buy them or use them when cycling at night.
I'm not sure you can buy a bike with pedals unless they have reflectors, don't you have to buy them separately?
- Status
