why do horse owners think they own the road ?

voiceofreason

Mr Lahey's no stranger to "mass debating", that's for sure.....

Mr_Lahey

Katie-Kat-Kins wrote: »

Hmmmm seems like a slight change of tack.....

maybe someone realises that they have been sounding like a c**k

Mr Lahey it was you who admitted to endangering lives by driving fast and close, yet now you seem to deny it.

And as a lawyer I can tell you that it is you who wouldn't have a leg to stand on if you were involved in an accident with a horse. Most of the time the driver is held liable, especially if he was in contravention of the highway code. By passing a horse at 70mph you are almost certainly guilty of dangerous driving, and if the rider you hit died (or a passenger in your car - who is likely to be injured when a ton of horse goes through the windscreen) then it would be a charge of death by dangerous driving - which is homicide.

Think on Mr Lahey, and take a long hard look in the mirror and ask yourself if you could live with the death of a human on your conscious.

Law students these days Surely a lawyer would know that the highway code is not law? I admit, it contains points of law, but it isn't law. All parts that are law are written in bold.

Read back and you will see that i said if a horse rider knowingly brought a timid horse out who then was spooked by a driver (lets assume the driver was passing slow - but then how slow is slow? Is it measurable?) No, of course it isn't, how is the driver to know the horse is timid? Assuming of course he has never seen the horse and there is no way of him knowing.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that the driver would still be liable? Each case would be judged on it's own merits, but i can tell you with absolute certainty that the fault would lie with the rider of the horse im most cases - Unless the driver was actually driving fast.

A quick search on Lexis Nexus brings up nothing to back up your claim. So if indeed you are a lawyer then i suggest you stick to the land registration/paralegal work you are probably currently doing.

Have a look -

Laws HA 1835 sect 72, R(S)A 1984, sect 129(5) - Horses must not ride on pavements or paths.
S.214 Highway code - Says drivers should pass slow and wide, as you will see this is not law.
S.52 Highway code - Says all riders should be able to control their horse.

Mr_Lahey

mr.savage wrote: »

Oh you really know what you're talking about, don't you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate

Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument.

I can not believe you quoted Wikipedia.

Mr_Lahey

mr.savage wrote: »

mmm...A lawyer who admits breaking the law on an open forum, :rotfl:

See the post about the highway code.






I amaze myself sometimes - But it is easy when i'm dealing with ill educated probably unemployed Sun readers.

kerry13238

i love horses but dont see why they can poop on the road and the owners dont have to pick it up like dog owners do? they should also pay a fee like cars do to maintain the road they do as much damage as cars

Mr_Lahey

voiceofreason wrote: »

No, no, no - what I resent is d*ckheads like you being on the road, with your bald tyres and "don't give a f*ck" attitude.

You're more dangerous than any skittish horse......

More insults.

Come at me with a reasoned and educated argument to illustrate your side of the argument - Oh, you cant

Katie-Kat-Kins

Mr_Lahey wrote: »

Law students these days Surely a lawyer would know that the highway code is not law? I admit, it contains points of law, but it isn't law. All parts that are law are written in bold.

Read back and you will see that i said if a horse rider knowingly brought a timid horse out who then was spooked by a driver (lets assume the driver was passing slow - but then how slow is slow? Is it measurable?) No, of course it isn't, how is the driver to know the horse is timid? Assuming of course he has never seen the horse and there is no way of him knowing.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that the driver would still be liable? Each case would be judged on it's own merits, but i can tell you with absolute certainty that the fault would lie with the rider of the horse im most cases - Unless the driver was actually driving fast.

A quick search on Lexis Nexus brings up nothing to back up your claim. So if indeed you are a lawyer then i suggest you stick to the land registration/paralegal work you are probably currently doing.

Have a look -

Laws HA 1835 sect 72, R(S)A 1984, sect 129(5) - Horses must not ride on pavements or paths.
S.214 Highway code - Says drivers should pass slow and wide, as you will see this is not law.
S.52 Highway code - Says all riders should be able to control their horse.

The highway code is persuasive to the courts.

I'm not going to justify the rest with a response I don't have to justify my professional qualifications to you, but I am fully familiar with the Road Traffic Act, and whilst passing wide and slow may not be enacted law you do have a duty of care to other road users in negligence. You could also be found guilty of danagerous driving for driving in the manner in which you have described.

I have to say I'm surprised that a qualified lawyer would be so unprofessional as to rant I'll sue you on a forum, or to admit to and be proud of reckless and dangerous driving on an open forum!

JudgeAdvocate

Pack it in telling all the horseriders to go and ride in fields. These fields have been bought and paid for and are there for a purpose. How would you like it if I took to riding round your garden? Also how do people expect farmers to get their tractors around to do field work -fly?

voiceofreason

Mr_Lahey wrote: »

I amaze myself sometimes - But it is easy when i'm dealing with ill educated probably unemployed Sun readers.

Oh come on, now - a bit of banter's one thing, but serious insults like this?

For shame.

mr.savage

Mr_Lahey wrote: »

See the post about the highway code.




I amaze myself sometimes - But it is easy when i'm dealing with ill educated probably unemployed Sun readers.

Dangerous driving is a matter of law, not the Highway Code.:rotfl:

But as you purport to be a lawyer, you should know that. [FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]