Bicyclist Charged With Manslaughter After Hitting, Killing Pedestrian

[GarfieldLeChat]

Ah.. so its okay to be target, err. be prejudicial ( ) towards this group.. ?



<good statistics btw.. this is why I stopped cycling in London. Not just paranoia >

no road craft is as important a skill for a tractor as it is for a invaild carrage car cyclist lorry truck van motor bike etc

to assume that one group should have the skill and not the other is simply madness all road users should have greater road craft, and this collectivly would reduce the number of accidents caused by road users... why are you attempting to translate this simple point into a stick to beat car users with... car users are road users and should have better road craft... because the statement applies to all road users... you see the hint is in the use of the word all shall i find a dictionary definition of all for you would that help

 

[gaijingirl]

sorry did i ask for death figures ...

i asked for a relaibe source of figures to back up the editors claim of routinely flouting of the law...

if you are intending to change the topic of discussion to ground you feel you can argue then that's fine but don't expect that it will result in responses you'll like...

I'm not specifically resonding to your request. If you want "a relaibe source of figures to back up the editors claim of routinely flouting of the law" you can find them yourself. If you don't want to look at the figures I have posted then don't. No need to be so abusive.

 

[parallelepipete]

i was with you up till here. I find seperate cycle lanes unusable, they get covered in glass, never get cleaned, cars park on them, people walk along them, wait for buses on them, etc. They also get built to a lower standard then roads, meaning potholes, bumps etc. slowing cyclists down, when we should be allowing them to go as fast as possible.

they are like that in the UK, certainly. The Netherlands does a rather better job.

I rarely use cycle lanes because they are generally awful, but I do appreciate it when I find properly constructed lanes with segregation on busy main routes, because it also makes sure cyclists are assured some of the road space.

The one thing I always object to is cycle lanes on the pavement (unnecessary conflict with peds, forces you to give way to traffic turning left even when you're going straight on).

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

I'm not specifically resonding to your request. If you want "a relaibe source of figures to back up the editors claim of routinely flouting of the law" you can find them yourself. If you don't want to look at the figures I have posted then don't. No need to be so abusive.

not bieng abusvie love just merely sayign that thes figures don't correspond to the debated point and that other reading this thread should be aware that the point beign debated around them are a derail from the point being made...

 

[Major Tom]

they are like that in the UK, certainly. The Netherlands does a rather better job.

I rarely use cycle lanes because they are generally awful, but I do appreciate it when I find properly constructed lanes with segregation on busy main routes, because it also makes sure cyclists are assured some of the road space.

The one thing I always object to is cycle lanes on the pavement (unnecessary conflict with peds, forces you to give way to traffic turning left even when you're going straight on).

another thing in London is that some lanes are ridiculously narrow and do not allow a two way flow of cyclists even though they are marked for this.

Some also sharply veer round objects such as trees or phone boxes, forcing cyclists to slow down or stop.

Tree roots provide a nice bumpy obstacle too.

 

[gaijingirl]

not bieng abusvie love just merely sayign that thes figures don't correspond to the debated point and that other reading this thread should be aware that the point beign debated around them are a derail from the point being made...

You may be saying that now but before you were actually assuming that I had posted up those figures in relation to your request "for a relaibe source of figures to back up the editors claim of routinely flouting of the law". Which was quite vain really - it's not all about you.

But I am quite aware of your "debating" style and I'm not about to try and enter into any kind of logical discussion with you. Why don't you source those figures yourself and add something to the discussion about which you feel so passionately instead of berating others who do - it may be more constructive.

I am also quite confident from the content of the other posts on this thread that the other posters don't need you to advise them on what the point being debated actually is.

 

[Hollis]

no road craft is as important a skill for a tractor as it is for a invaild carrage car cyclist lorry truck van motor bike etc

to assume that one group should have the skill and not the other is simply madness all road users should have greater road craft, and this collectivly would reduce the number of accidents caused by road users... why are you attempting to translate this simple point into a stick to beat car users with... car users are road users and should have better road craft... because the statement applies to all road users... you see the hint is in the use of the word all shall i find a dictionary definition of all for you would that help

I'm not 'beating' car users. I'm saying they're the ones that need to be targetted in terms of 'flouting the law', aggressive & intimidatory driving etc. because they're in charge of a far more dangerous piece of equipment. Disproportionately target driver behaviour and I'd suggest you'd see a far better improvement in those fatality statistics.

Thats one of the things that became obvious to me when I cycled. No matter how carefully I cycled I was exposing myself, imho, to an unacceptable level of risk beyond my control each day.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

You may be saying that now but before you were actually assuming that I had posted up those figures in relation to your request "for a relaibe source of figures to back up the editors claim of routinely flouting of the law". Which was quite vain really - it's not all about you.

But I am quite aware of your "debating" style and I'm not about to try and enter into any kind of logical discussion with you. Why don't you source those figures yourself and add something to the discussion about which you feel so passionately instead of berating others who do - it may be more constructive.

I am also quite confident from the content of the other posts on this thread that the other posters don't need you to advise them on what the point being debated actually is.

sorry to use your logic analogy the debate had gone on tagent to which i had responded derailed by the editor and chums, i responded with several poitns which were being addressed by posters such as major tom all engauging and debating haply and not getting their own perosnal arse ache on about things all responding in a very civilised manner i respond to your figures at the tail end of this logcially assuming that you might indeed be involving yourself in the current topic of debate and you then throw your toys out of the pram...

as for vainity i think you best look in the mirror love, you are the one who has decided to perosnalise this when there was no call for it with in the flow of the debate and thus turned the topic in to a discussion about you rather than the subejct matter...

as for sorucing figures for the editors claim i see no reason to do his research for him he made the claim it has been challenged thus far he hasn't decided to back it up that's his issue, why you feel compelled to respond or indeed to comment, stamp your foot be indignant is your own look out... but again has nothign ot do with the topic matter care to add to that in some meanigful way...

What are your opinions about the link you posted, why inferences do you draw from them, do you consider this would be a better fuel to the learn to drive better lobby or the ban them all lobby what are your opinons personally in relation to the link you posted, do you have related experince which would allow you to confirm or deny their findings etc...

it's called debate not self promotion try doing some of it and get of the egotisitcal tip you are clearly on...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

another thing in London is that some lanes are ridiculously narrow and do not allow a two way flow of cyclists even though they are marked for this.

Some also sharply veer round objects such as trees or phone boxes, forcing cyclists to slow down or stop.

Tree roots provide a nice bumpy obstacle too.

hence my point about better cycle lanes which are more compresehnsive... they are clearly cases where the thought process is clearly we've be told we have to have these get the green paint out.... there that'll do..

 

[gaijingirl]

sorry to use your logic analogy the debate had gone on tagent to which i had responded derailed by the editor and chums, i responded with several poitns which were being addressed by posters such as major tom all engauging and debating haply and not getting their own perosnal arse ache on about things all responding in a very civilised manner i respond to your figures at the tail end of this logcially assuming that you might indeed be involving yourself in the current topic of debate and you then throw your toys out of the pram...

as for vainity i think you best look in the mirror love, you are the one who has decided to perosnalise this when there was no call for it with in the flow of the debate and thus turned the topic in to a discussion about you rather than the subejct matter...

as for sorucing figures for the editors claim i see no reason to do his research for him he made the claim it has been challenged thus far he hasn't decided to back it up that's his issue, why you feel compelled to respond or indeed to comment, stamp your foot be indignant is your own look out... but again has nothign ot do with the topic matter care to add to that in some meanigful way...

What are your opinions about the link you posted, why inferences do you draw from them, do you consider this would be a better fuel to the learn to drive better lobby or the ban them all lobby what are your opinons personally in relation to the link you posted, do you have related experince which would allow you to confirm or deny their findings etc...

it's called debate not self promotion try doing some of it and get of the egotisitcal tip you are clearly on...

Sorry, I'm not prepared to get in a fight with you - you're targeting the wrong person for that.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

I'm not 'beating' car users. I'm saying they're the ones that need to be targetted in terms of 'flouting the law', aggressive & intimidatory driving etc. because they're in charge of a far more dangerous piece of equipment. Disproportionately target driver behaviour and I'd suggest you'd see a far better improvement in those fatality statistics.

Thats one of the things that became obvious to me when I cycled. No matter how carefully I cycled I was exposing myself, imho, to an unacceptable level of risk beyond my control each day.

but this is the point about road craft hollis it's not really to do with how careful you are it's about being more aware of your surronding's beign able to anticipate the actions and reactions of people around you and having consideration for all road users... therefore targetting all users with better road craft at all levels allows all road users to improve thus meaning that regardless of transportation method be it bycycle to bus car to arctic all road users are going to be more considereate...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Sorry, I'm not prepared to get in a fight with you - you're targeting the wrong person for that.

it's not about you jesus ... will you contribute to the thread or are you just intrestede in posting up more 'look at me' usless boost your post count comments...

 

[Major Tom]

but this is the point about road craft hollis it's not really to do with how careful you are it's about being more aware of your surronding's beign able to anticipate the actions and reactions of people around you and having consideration for all road users... therefore targetting all users with better road craft at all levels allows all road users to improve thus meaning that regardless of transportation method be it bycycle to bus car to arctic all road users are going to be more considereate...

It's a nice dream, but I'm not sure what this has to do with the real world.

I am able to anticipate when a cylcist needs to pull out around a parked car, and always leave space, but that's not difficult. Most poeple just choose not to. They can't be arsed.

As a cyclist I'm able to anticipate a bus cutting me up and do just enough to stop me from being knocked off my bike. But why do I need to?

this sort of road craft will inevitably ned up with cyclists losing their rights of way I'm afraid.

Motorists need to be trained to a higher standard - and to show they can respect other road users' rights before they're given a license. And have it taken away if they don't.

But, again, not sure how to achieve this.

 

[gaijingirl]

I rarely use cycle lanes because they are generally awful, but I do appreciate it when I find properly constructed lanes with segregation on busy main routes, because it also makes sure cyclists are assured some of the road space.

The one thing I always object to is cycle lanes on the pavement (unnecessary conflict with peds, forces you to give way to traffic turning left even when you're going straight on).

TBH.. I don't really like the segregated ones either... I find that pedestrians get confused and often walk in them...

..but quite agree that the ones painted on the pavement are terrible... I'm thinking especially of the ones around Vauxhall Cross... they're so dangerous... for all road users... pedestrians wandering into them, car drivers turning left onto roads which dissect them... just a nightmare!

 

[Major Tom]

..but quite agree that the ones painted on the pavement are terrible... I'm thinking especially of the ones around Vauxhall Cross... they're so dangerous... for all road users... pedestrians wandering into them, car drivers turning left onto roads which dissect them... just a nightmare!

Vauxhall Cross was a stitch up as far as cyclists are concerned. the scheme we got wasn;t the one that cycle groups approved.

I prefer to join in with the fray on that road, carve out space in one of the lanes, signal furiously, fully expecting to get beeped at and sworn at, though for what reason I never know. I also fully expect to be informed that I don;t pay road tax, contrary to the facts, of course.

 

[editor]

Vauxhall Cross is a disgrace. Dangerous as fuck. I wouldn't blame any cyclist (carefully and respectfully) taking to the pavement while trying to navigate their way through the perilous traffic flow.

 

[Hollis]

but this is the point about road craft hollis it's not really to do with how careful you are it's about being more aware of your surronding's beign able to anticipate the actions and reactions of people around you and having consideration for all road users... therefore targetting all users with better road craft at all levels allows all road users to improve thus meaning that regardless of transportation method be it bycycle to bus car to arctic all road users are going to be more considereate...

I think I was quite aware as a cyclist of what was going on. Too aware of the risks some drivers were taking with me, safe in the knowledge that the worst which could happen to them was a few scratches to the paintwork..etc.

 

[Major Tom]

I think I was quite aware as a cyclist of what was going on. Too aware of the risks some drivers were taking with me, safe in the knowledge that the worst which could happen to them was a few scratches to the paintwork..etc.

a slap on the wrist or a small fine if they were really unlucky

 

[Cloud]

mm I think I might try cycling like I'm driving a car, I'm sure the rush hour traffic will love me as I create a fucking 5 mile traffic jam trying to negotiate a three lane roundabout at 5 mph.

 

[Major Tom]

mm I think I might try cycling like I'm driving a car, I'm sure the rush hour traffic will love me as I create a fucking 5 mile traffic jam trying to negotiate a three lane roundabout at 5 mph.

why 5 mph? It's safer if you can mnage the same speed as cars are.

I only get problems when cars get annoyed with me in front of them, despite the fact that I am going the same speed as them. Something must go wrong in their reality circuits. 'A bike going the same speed as me? And in front of me?' So they try to overtake, except they can't get the speed to do it, so i end up getting cut up. But I've never been knocked off cos of this.

the main problem I have on roundabouts are incoming traffic ignoring my right of way.

 

[MikeMcc]

I easily see as many car drivers driving whilst talking on their mobile phone as cyclists breaking red lights... they may not be as visible unless you take the time to look at them... I have to because I'm the one they're gonna mow down in their absent mindedness...

I agree with that, I'm not trying to defend pig-ignorance by drivers. at least they can be identified and prosecuted for being knobs though.

 

[Cloud]

why 5 mph? It's safer if you can mnage the same speed as cars are.

Because I'm incredibly unfit as 'proper' cyclists go, my bike weighs 34lb and It has 26 x 2.3 tyres on it. I was exadurating a little on the speed though, even I can manage a tad faster than 5 mph unless it's a hill and I'm feeling lazy or warming up.

The traffic likes to do about 50 mph on some of the major roundabouts round these parts and I doubt Lance Armstrong on one of Eddy Merckx's cappuccino's could keep up with that

 

[Major Tom]

Because I'm incredibly unfit as 'proper' cyclists go, my bike weighs 34lb and It has 26 x 2.3 tyres on it. I was exadurating a little on the speed though, even I can manage a tad faster than 5 mph unless it's a hill and I'm feeling lazy or warming up.

The traffic likes to do about 50 mph on some of the major roundabouts round these parts and I doubt Lance Armstrong on one of Eddy Merckx's cappuccino's could keep up with that

true enough

The worst I have to cope with is the big one on the A20 at Mottingham - traffic can go 50 there, but its ususally too congested for speed.

I did for a while cycle round the outside, until I realised that crossing the roads feeding the roundabout was actually more dangerous than just cycling on it.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Results 1 - 10 of about 14,000 for cyclist kills pedestrian

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=cyclist+kills+pedestrian&btnG=Search&meta=

Results 1 - 10 of about 143,000 for car driver kills pedestrian

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=car+driver+kills+pedestrian&meta=

Search results from Google – pretty rough and ready way of demonstrating anything but the fact that the latter is greater than the former by a factor of 10, and the fact that many of the stories in the former are actually about drivers killing cyclists, would seem to me to indicate that the people who need to get their act together on the roads are primarily car drivers.

Yes, it’s sad that the man in this incident was killed due to the actions of a cyclist but lets not get carried away here – as GG stated earlier on, deaths caused by car drivers simply aren’t newsworthy events most of the time, because it is accepted as a common place occurrence. I do agree that all road users, peds, cyclists and drivers need to be encouraged to raise their own awareness of other road users, but to somehow equivalise the potential dangers of all road users is, imo, clearly nonsense.

"Driver error is found to be a contributory cause in over 90% of accidents, and driving too fast is a driver error in judging what is safe." DETR, Road Safety Division, Speed Policy Review Discussion Paper, August 1999.
85% of drivers admit to breaking the law by exceeding the speed limit.
In 1998, 10,481 pedestrians and 3,312 cyclists were killed or seriously injured by motorists.

The blunt reality of the status quo is that people must risk their lives if they wish to walk or cycle.

From Speed Kills leaflet (pdf)

 

[Major Tom]

I agree with that, I'm not trying to defend pig-ignorance by drivers. at least they can be identified and prosecuted for being knobs though.

they can be (in theory) but they hardly ever are, as evidenced by the sheer numbers who are currently breaking laws.

as far as talking on a mobile phone is concerned isn't the fine a really piddly amount?

 

[gaijingirl]

as far as talking on a mobile phone is concerned isn't the fine a really piddly amount?

I believe it's £30 which is the same, I think as you get for cycling on the pavement. I just don't think those two offences are comparable in terms of the damage that can be caused by them. Like I said earlier.. the woman turning left (this morning on my morning commute) whilst looking to the right and talking on her phone could easily have taken out myself and the other 5 or so cyclists if we hadn't noticed and pulled over accordingly. In many cases I think that riding on the pavement is not a good idea, but it's unlikely to result in 5 serious injuries/deaths.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

It's a nice dream, but I'm not sure what this has to do with the real world.

nope tougher tests are coming slowly, as is the concept of limting engine size or progressive taxtion based on egine size... a few years ago this would have been considered pie in the sky... time will come when retesting is manditory for all drivers not just ones who have lost their licence. As vechiles get more and more sophisiticated and have greater internal safety systems people will need more and more skill to drive them at current this is not the case because we are still basically updating a 50 year old lay out based on old touring saloons (modern saloons are really just refined saloons) but newer more context speific vechile will be developed prolly more along smart car type lines as the engine size limtiations etc kick in... things like parking sensors which have beena round on cars for about 20 years are now being fitted to cars as standard these sensors can pick up a cat walking behind the car or a small child and sooner or later they will be used to provide a preiferal warning system for them. this type of technological advance does in some way cusion the driver from their actions though as does sound proofing internally and also externally (it's harder to judge the approaching speed of a vechile if it's quiter becuase we don't have the auditory clues which combine with the sight informaiton to gather info on speed)

but ultimatly it means that odler drivers (who in an aging population represetn the majority) will slowly have to give up driving

I am able to anticipate when a cylcist needs to pull out around a parked car, and always leave space, but that's not difficult. Most poeple just choose not to. They can't be arsed.

no that's your impression of some drivers i do it i see many other drivers who do do it some drivers do not... I do it indicdently i was following a cyclist down the narrow bit of the murder mile with about 10 meters or so between him and me and he was pulling away from me (i was doing 30ish) so the 5 mph on a bike is very slow...

As a cyclist I'm able to anticipate a bus cutting me up and do just enough to stop me from being knocked off my bike. But why do I need to?

it's called defensive driving ... bus drivers are some of the most irresponsible people on the roads the fact that they earn minimum wage unless they 'do overtime' means they are never going to attact the most skilled drivers and what with the right's of way they do have it makes alot of them think they own the road... some bus drivers in contrast are some of the best drivers on the road... unfortunatly few of them appear around my neak of the woods....

this sort of road craft will inevitably ned up with cyclists losing their rights of way I'm afraid.

hasn't so far ... but then it appears you haven't acutally taken any advanced driving courses to find out how much you don't know ... as is witnessed here you are speaking from astand point of prejudice not informed knowledge... i can't really debate against your airy fairy monsters ... they aren't real...

Motorists need to be trained to a higher standard - and to show they can respect other road users' rights before they're given a license. And have it taken away if they don't.[/QUOTE]

yup this is what i'm saying too so why are you disagreeing you seem a mass of contradictions which shows in this post...

what exactly are you objecting to by all road users learnign road craft, should people not have the appropreate skills to utilise in the appropreate circumstances??

I don't get it....

But, again, not sure how to achieve this.

as is highlighted it's beign done now more can be done but don't write it off as a pipe dream...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

I believe it's £30 which is the same, I think as you get for cycling on the pavement. I just don't think those two offences are comparable in terms of the damage that can be caused by them. Like I said earlier.. the woman turning left (this morning on my morning commute) whilst looking to the right and talking on her phone could easily have taken out myself and the other 5 or so cyclists if we hadn't noticed and pulled over accordingly. In many cases I think that riding on the pavement is not a good idea, but it's unlikely to result in 5 serious injuries/deaths.

we can all do this type of comparison the bloke who rode of th pavement right into the wing of my stationary car a few days ago wasn't paying particular attention nor was the guy who got clipped by the bus he rode out infront of on stokie high street then instead of stopping whent he bus beebed stood ont he peedals to trya nd swerve round it ...

The pedestrain who walked into my drivers door and started mouthing of even though i had seen him crossing into the road without looking as i was half way through the tunr and decided to come to a stop expecting him to walk round the bonnent...

there are alot of idiots out there who don't mind their own safety we can all trade stories about these idiots, the problem i see here time and time again is that these idiots are used as classic examples of 'what's wrong with the world today' and the cnept is extrapolatied to encompass every single user of that mode of transport ... this is plain and simple sterotyping and prejudice and plain wrong...

 

[gaijingirl]

there are alot of idiots out there who don't mind their own safety we can all trade stories about these idiots, the problem i see here time and time again is that these idiots are used as classic examples of 'what's wrong with the world today' and the cnept is extrapolatied to encompass every single user of that mode of transport ... this is plain and simple sterotyping and prejudice and plain wrong...

Yes I agree entirely, which is why I disagree with statements such as "all cyclists, routinely flout the law" (which is one of the topics we were originally discussing)

 

[Major Tom]

I don't get it....



as is highlighted it's beign done now more can be done but don't write it off as a pipe dream...

that's my point - it is a pipe dream.

your point about what may or may not be admissable in court proves you're not dealing with reality here.