Bicyclist Charged With Manslaughter After Hitting, Killing Pedestrian

[dessiato]

I'm surprised that a cyclist managed to cycle down the M25 without being pulled over tbh... and I think we're probably coming from the same place... obviously if someone is acting dangerously then they should be brought to account and I think that cyclists are very often pulled over. You probably just don't notice it..

I see cyclists being pulled over at least once a week on my commute to and from work .. I see cars being pulled over with about the same frequency - and as much as I see cyclists breaking lights etc.. I see people driving dangerously. This morning I avoided being shunted off my bike by a woman turning left in front of me whilst looking to the right and talking on her mobile phone. I stopped short of the lights.. along with about 5 other cyclists.. she never even knew we were there when she turned, if we hadn't have stopped she'd have taken us all out! This is so common I just can't tell you... I'd love for every one of these people to be pulled over, probably as much as you'd like every cyclist who breaks a red light to be pulled over... so you see, it's really not helpful to start such a polarised argument..

I've never seen a cyclist stopped for an offence. I think that the sort of reckless driving that you describe should be appropriatley punished. I have no argument to defend dangerous/reckless driving as I said above. I posted the original to see what responses I got. I am suprised by the ferocity of some of the replies. Some of the posters seem to feel that this is a personal attack. However, I stand by my original statement that cyclists should be held accountable for their reckless actions, in exactly the same way that motorists should/are. I do not consider that the fact that the injuries sustained in pedestrian/cyclist collisions are worse than those inflicted by cars. But, I do not see that they can be considered to be of no note at all. The fact that a cyclist breaks my leg, rather than kills me, does not lessen the argument that the cyclists should be brought to book. I can't see where my priorities are wrong. Recklessness is recklessness regardless of the severity of the injuries caused.

 

[William of Walworth]

I am a cyclist as well as a motorist by the way.

You could have fooled me, you fucking bigot.

ALL your anger in this thread has been directed against cyclists, as if we are ALL routinely breaking the law. Your cretinous assertion that 'cyclists routinely break the law' was challenged by gaijin girl who quite rightly suggested you add the word 'some'. You then asserted that the term 'IME' was adequate qualification. It was IN NO WAY a qualification, it was an attempt to justify a sweeping generalisation. It is NOT IN ANY WAY your 'experience' that 'cyclists' routinely break the law ; it's your FLAWED PERCEPTION of the cyclists you see and notice (and not the far greater number of non law breakers that you seem so desparately anxious to pretend don't exist).

And before you assume that I'm an apologist for dangerous cycling, read my comments in the other thread**. I've been a regular cyclist in London for around 24 years, my experience is that a conspicuous minority of cyclists are dangerous and break the law. I'm as opposed to that minority of dangerous cyclists as anyone else, I freequently criticise other cyclists on the road, mainly because they give us a bad name and encourage cretins like you to feel justified in their bigotry.

**Harassment you've suffered from cyclists

 

[William of Walworth]

And your argument is built upon the false premise that cycling is inherently a dangerous activity on a par with car driving, which is just plain wrong. I am sure that the vast majority here would agree that cyclists should be accountable for any damage caused by recklessness or negligence, I certainly do.

You will not find much sympathy with your false assumption that "car drivers are much more likely to be prosecuted in these circumstances". Fact is that cyclists very, very rarely kill people, while unfortunately with motorists it is much more common.

Spot on.

 

[Hollis]

The fact that a cyclist breaks my leg, rather than kills me, does not lessen the argument that the cyclists should be brought to book. I can't see where my priorities are wrong. Recklessness is recklessness regardless of the severity of the injuries caused.

Your priorities are wrong in the sense that policing and enforcing penalties for reckless driving, and changing the culture of car drivers will save far more death and injuries than concentraing the equivalent resources on dangerous cycling.

Whats your real concern here?

 

[newbie]

I've never seen a cyclist stopped for an offence.

As I said, and as you ignored, I was stopped and told off a week or so ago.

 

[dessiato]

You could have fooled me, you fucking bigot.


And before you assume that I'm an apologist for dangerous cycling, read my comments in the other thread**. I've been a regular cyclist in London for around 24 years, my experience is that a conspicuous minority of cyclists are dangerous and break the law. I'm as opposed to that minority of dangerous cyclists as anyone else, I freequently criticise other cyclists on the road, mainly because they give us a bad name and encourage cretins like you to feel justified in their bigotry.

**Harassment you've suffered from cyclists

If the only way you can start to argue your point is to be offensive please don't respond. I would ask you to withdraw your personal and offensive remarks.

If you have followed my argument you will see that I am not offering any defence of recklessness..

 

[dessiato]

As I said, and as you ignored, I was stopped and told off a week or so ago.

Yes I had lost sight of that in the general heat of the developing argument. You will note that I said that I hadn't seen anyone being stopped. While I continue with my assertion that recklessness is wrong, I can see your argument that in your situation, in US there is the safe turn on red rule. However, in the UK what you did is wrong. If I'd done it in my car I would be prosecuted, you were not. Is this equitable treatment? Would it have been more reckless/dangerous in my car?

 

[dessiato]

Your priorities are wrong in the sense that policing and enforcing penalties for reckless driving, and changing the culture of car drivers will save far more death and injuries than concentraing the equivalent resources on dangerous cycling.

Whats your real concern here?

I don't disagree with your first point.

My real concern is that, in my experience, which I accept is possibly flawed, but is none-the-less my experience, cyclists flout the law with impunity. IME they seem to think that they have the right to flout the law, and seem to think that they should not be held accountable for their actions. My assertion is that cyclists should be held responsible for their reckless/dangerous actions in the same way that motorists should/are. Simple as that really.

 

[gaijingirl]

Some of the posters seem to feel that this is a personal attack. .

Well of course they do... you stated that IYE all cyclists blatantly flout the law (having told us that you yourself are a cyclist.. so I guess that includes you too)... there are lots of cyclists here who will oject to that and wish to tell you that your experience is flawed.... you can't seriously think that you can come on to a public BB with such a generalised statement and not upset someone!

 

[newbie]

Yes I had lost sight of that in the general heat of the developing argument. You will note that I said that I hadn't seen anyone being stopped. While I continue with my assertion that recklessness is wrong, I can see your argument that in your situation, in US there is the safe turn on red rule. However, in the UK what you did is wrong. If I'd done it in my car I would be prosecuted, you were not. Is this equitable treatment? Would it have been more reckless/dangerous in my car?

Yes massively, and completely without excuse.

You claim to be a cyclist. So you know about the wobble as you start off. You're also a motorist, and you'll have seen the way other vehicles take off from lights- foot down acceleration is commonplace. Certainly commonplace enough that no cyclist can expect that the car just behind them will take off gently. I, and presumably you, have had cars within an inch of hospitalising me during that wobble. That is the reason why some cyclists get away when lights are red (& the junction clear): it's safer.

You'll also have noticed a general lack of interest amongst (some) motorists in the cycle refuges now painted on junctions, which they'll pull into without thought. Drivers not leaving us space is why some of us are well out in front of the lights at junctions: it's safer.

You'll also have noticed that if one driver starts to move, the others assume the lights have changed and automatically start to move as well. They don't react in that way to cyclists moving off. That's why car drivers should obey red lights: it's safer.

And I haven't mention the consequences of an accident caused by someone on a bike (hey we're very vulnerable and occasionally we all get very scared) and someone cocooned in a metal box.

Please actually study the way city traffic works before spouting off about some group that's getting away with something you're not.

Oh, and also notice just how many people drive whilst concentrating on the phone pressed to their ear. One in ten sometimes. That is far, far more dangerous than most cyclists flouting some regulation, even the aggressive sort.

 

[dessiato]

Well of course they do... you stated that IYE all cyclists blatantly flout the law (having told us that you yourself are a cyclist.. so I guess that includes you too)... there are lots of cyclists here who will oject to that and wish to tell you that your experience is flawed.... you can't seriously think that you can come on to a public BB with such a generalised statement and not upset someone!

I don't cycle in cities, I don't cycle on pavements, I give way to pedetrians. Most of my cycling is in the country and I have done some long distance cycling in EU. Yes, I break the law, and yes I would expect to take responsibility for my actions, in the same way as I would if I flouted traffic regulations in my car.

Yes I expect to upset someone, I don't expect personal and offensive, insulting behaviour.

 

[gaijingirl]

I don't cycle in cities, I don't cycle on pavements, I give way to pedetrians. Most of my cycling is in the country and I have done some long distance cycling in EU. Yes, I break the law, and yes I would expect to take responsibility for my actions, in the same way as I would if I flouted traffic regulations in my car.

Yes I expect to upset someone, I don't expect personal and offensive, insulting behaviour.

Well some people may find it offensive, insulting and personal to be lumped in an all encompassing group of cyclists who blatantly flout the law along with a story about a man who killed a 70 year old woman..

 

[dessiato]

Yes massively, and completely without excuse.

You claim to be a cyclist. So you know about the wobble as you start off. You're also a motorist, and you'll have seen the way other vehicles take off from lights- foot down acceleration is commonplace. Certainly commonplace enough that no cyclist can expect that the car just behind them will take off gently. I, and presumably you, have had cars within an inch of hospitalising me during that wobble. That is the reason why some cyclists get away when lights are red (& the junction clear): it's safer.

You'll also have noticed a general lack of interest amongst (some) motorists in the cycle refuges now painted on junctions, which they'll pull into without thought. Drivers not leaving us space is why some of us are well out in front of the lights at junctions: it's safer.

You'll also have noticed that if one driver starts to move, the others assume the lights have changed and automatically start to move as well. They don't react in that way to cyclists moving off. That's why car drivers should obey red lights: it's safer.

And I haven't mention the consequences of an accident caused by someone on a bike (hey we're very vulnerable and occasionally we all get very scared) and someone cocooned in a metal box.

Please actually study the way city traffic works before spouting off about some group that's getting away with something you're not.

Oh, and also notice just how many people drive whilst holding a phone to their ear. One in ten sometimes. That is far, far more dangerous than most cyclists flouting some regulation, even the aggressive sort.

As I drive in to work today I will try to take especial notice of cyclists and motorists to see how wrong I am. I agree with you about the faults of the car driver, and offer no defence. I never use my phone when driving, and always try to give room to cyclists.

I am not perfect, but try to be cosiderate to other road users, and expect to take responsibility for my actions as both a motorist and cyclist.

 

[gaijingirl]

As I drive in to work today I will try to take especial notice of cyclists and motorists to see how wrong I am. I agree with you about the faults of the car driver, and offer no defence. I never use my phone when driving, and always try to give room to cyclists.

I am not perfect, but try to be cosiderate to other road users, and expect to take responsibility for my actions as both a motorist and cyclist.

So what is your point? You yourself are a blatant law breaking cyclist and you are calling for other such cyclists to be called to account for breaking the law.. to which everyone pretty much agrees..

 

[newbie]

As I drive in to work today I will try to take especial notice of cyclists and motorists to see how wrong I am. I agree with you about the faults of the car driver, and offer no defence. I never use my phone when driving, and always try to give room to cyclists.

I am not perfect, but try to be cosiderate to other road users, and expect to take responsibility for my actions as both a motorist and cyclist.

Of course, and I'm not suggesting otherwise. But you have to see these issues in the round, not just you and your standard of driving, but also the post office vans, the boy racers, the time-is-money execs on the phone and all the rest. We, city cyclists, have to contend with people to whom we're invisible or who see us as a massive nuisance- and threads like this expose those attitudes, even if the resentment is not revealed in your, personal, driving style most of the time....

The vast majority of cyclists pedal along fairly slowly and very defensively causing no problems to anyone, whether or not they flout odd bits of the Highway Code.

 

[dessiato]

So what is your point? You yourself are a blatant law breaking cyclist and you are calling for other such cyclists to be called to account for breaking the law.. to which everyone pretty much agrees..

My point is 'A car and a bicycle are both vehicles and if they are operated in a way that could be criminal, then charges are filed equally in both situations' as said in the original post. Cyclists and motorists should have to account for their reckless and dangerous actions.

 

[Hollis]

My real concern is that, in my experience, which I accept is possibly flawed, but is none-the-less my experience, cyclists flout the law with impunity. IME they seem to think that they have the right to flout the law, and seem to think that they should not be held accountable for their actions. My assertion is that cyclists should be held responsible for their reckless/dangerous actions in the same way that motorists should/are. Simple as that really.

Yes. In an ideal world I'd agree. I'd have police staioned on every canal path making sure that cyclists cycled considerately etc. But the resources simply aren't there - so you have to concentrate your resources on the greater danger.

 

[gaijingirl]

My point is 'A car and a bicycle are both vehicles and if they are operated in a way that could be criminal, then charges are filed equally in both situations' as said in the original post. Cyclists and motorists should have to account for their reckless and dangerous actions.

No, your original post was a story about a pedestrian killed by a cyclist. When I pointed out that the reason this warranted a thread is because it is so unusual.. your second post asserted that:

"It is time that cyclists were reminded that they too must account for their actions"

You then went on to say that IYE all cyclists blatantly flout the law.

Then you complained about being insulted by other posters who took offence at this.

Now you are are saying the much more sensible and reasonable "Cyclists and motorists should have to account for their reckless and dangerous actions".. which I don't think there is a great deal of disagreement with tbh..

 

[dessiato]

Yes. In an ideal world I'd agree. I'd have police staioned on every canal path making sure that cyclists cycled considerately etc. But the resources simply aren't there - so you have to concentrate your resources on the greater danger.

We don't live in that perfect would, unfortunately. If we did the many stupid and dangerous car drivers would also disappear.

 

[dessiato]

No, your original post was a story about a pedestrian killed by a cyclist. When I pointed out that the reason this warranted a thread is because it is so unusual.. your second post asserted that:

"It is time that cyclists were reminded that they too must account for their actions"

You then went on to say that IYE all cyclists blatantly flout the law.

Then you complained about being insulted by other posters who took offence at this.

Now you are are saying the much more sensible and reasonable "Cyclists and motorists should have to account for their reckless and dangerous actions".. which I don't think there is a great deal of disagreement with tbh..

Perhaps I assumed too much by expecting others to see the point from the begining. My reaction to being insulted is due to these comments: you fucking bigot, cretins like you. Feel free to disagree with me, but tell me why, don't just resort to offensiveness. (Yes I know you didn't GG)

 

[Major Tom]

Yes - in a perfect world I'd like to see all cyclists cyling on pavements etc given fines etc. But there's finite resources.. and given the far greater danger of bad/reckless driving the police time/effort should primarily be put into penalising this driving. IMO far greater penalites should exist for dangerous driving.. which might eventually change the current culture.

Do you really mean ALL.

I use the A20 to Mottingham most days, and on the homeword journey its uphill, so i don;t get a lot of speed up, there are drains, bits of trees, dead animals and cats eyes in the side of the road I use. This road is also beloved of boy racers who get up to a whopping 60 or 70 mph, before slamming the anchors on at the speed camera, and then accelerating again. The combination of low speed, obstacles on the road, and complete wankers in vehicles makes this very dangerous for me. I've only been hit once on this road, but that was enough for me to make an important decision.

In the other direction where I get a good speed up I have no problem getting a good road position and keeping my space on the road. Most people pull into the other lane to overtake me; and its too early for boyracers in the morning; and traffic is usually much slower, I can end up being as fast or faster than the flow of traffic.

Considering that there is a nice wide pavement on either side of this road, never used as far as I can tell, by pedestrians, which the councils concerned refuse to reclassify to shared use cycle path (don;t know why) - then it seems obvious to me that I should cycle on the pavement on this route.

I hurt no-one. I stay alive.

 

[Hollis]

We don't live in that perfect would, unfortunately. If we did the many stupid and dangerous car drivers would also disappear.

<bangs head>

 

[Major Tom]

As I said, and as you ignored, I was stopped and told off a week or so ago.

I've been stopped a few times. Once when I was quite young for cycling through a ped crossing red light when noone was crossing. Once more recently - a traffic light, not at a junction, no crossing assciated with it, and no traffic on the road. I went through it and a policeman jumped out from nowhere and fined me 30 squid.

I've also been told off by police for moving ahead of the white line at a particularly dangerous junction (therby avoiding major cause of death and injury for cyclists) and for crossing the road on my bike at place where the cycle lane is so poorly designed that it just peters out. The policman accused me of going through a red light, and i said i didn;t. So he said don;t do it agin, and I said don't do what again, and the argument continued pointlessly until the policeman - after I said, if I've done somehting wrong then give me a ticket - said "I haven't got time for this" and drove off.

 

[Major Tom]

<bangs head>

Too much Led Zeppelin I reckon

 

[Major Tom]

I don't cycle in cities, I don't cycle on pavements, I give way to pedetrians. Most of my cycling is in the country

A leisure cyclist

 

[parallelepipete]

Of course the other thing is that car drivers are much more likely to be prosecuted in these circumstances. Cyclists, IME, routinely flout the law, running red lights, cycling the wrong way down one-way streets, riding on pavements. How often do we refer to the agression of cyclists on these boards? It is time that cyclists were reminded that they too must account for their actions

Oh FFS dessiato, there's already a thread about this, and I'm sure you know it.

And since you're on the subject, so do drivers (IME).

 

[Major Tom]

My point is 'A car and a bicycle are both vehicles and if they are operated in a way that could be criminal, then charges are filed equally in both situations' as said in the original post. Cyclists and motorists should have to account for their reckless and dangerous actions.

Truth is though that there isn;t enough police to do this and traffic law is a low priority as I know to my cost. even when I was a victim of a hit and run (I was a ped) motorist with a police witness - no charges were ever brought.

So people feel they can break the law. What's worrying for me though are the numbers of motrists and bus drivers who competely ignore red lights. I don;t particularly feel at risk from the odd (very rare) cyclist I see doing this.

 

[parallelepipete]

I don't cycle in cities,

Maybe you should have a go, and decide how dangerous cyclists are once you've tried it.

 

[dessiato]

Oh FFS dessiato, there's already a thread about this, and I'm sure you know it.

And since you're on the subject, so do drivers (IME).

If you read the thread you will see that I have also said that drivers do not have a defence either. My, consistent, argument is that cyclists must be prepared to defend their actions, and to take the consequences of their actions. I didn't know there was a thread about the original post. My attention was only drawn to it this a.m. Perhaps you could direct me to this other thread about this incident.

I've never cycled in a UK city, yes perhaps I should try it.

 

[parallelepipete]

If you read the thread you will see that I have also said that drivers do not have a defence either. My, consistent, argument is that cyclists must be prepared to defend their actions, and to take the consequences of their actions. I didn't know there was a thread about the original post. My attention was only drawn to it this a.m. Perhaps you could direct me to this other thread about this incident.

I've never cycled in a UK city, yes perhaps I should try it.

It's not a thread about this incident, I meant a thread about the harassment and danger caused by cyclists, which someone else has already linked to from this thread.