cyclist deaths & the law

custardy

Mark_Mark wrote: »

While you keep putting forward biased media reports what do you expect?


You wont even tell us what you feel appropriate sentencing is, every time you are asked something about facts all you do is come back with what do you think.


You don't really give a toss about what I or anyone else thinks unless it agrees with your point of view.

You have yet to provide articles that dispute these so called biased articles.
Are they biased because I posted them? Which sources are on your approved list?

Mark_Mark

custardy wrote: »

You have yet to provide articles that dispute these so called biased articles.
Are they biased because I posted them? Which sources are on your approved list?

They are biased because they don't give the whole story, do you not understand that the press are in the business of making money and they are just after the story that sell.


They never give the whole of a judges summing up and often print the shock comment without reasoning. You do similar in your posts. The Kings Heath collision saying a lesser charge was used but you fail to mention they didn't have any evidence for death by dangerous.

custardy

Mark_Mark wrote: »

They are biased because they don't give the whole story, do you not understand that the press are in the business of making money and they are just after the story that sell.


They never give the whole of a judges summing up and often print the shock comment without reasoning. You do similar in your posts. The Kings Heath collision saying a lesser charge was used but you fail to mention they didn't have any evidence for death by dangerous.

I await you giving us the full transcript.
By your reckoning we can simply allow cases to go by since we havent got the full story.
no doubt the bus driver was forced to run over the cyclists as they went through a red light

Mark_Mark

custardy wrote: »

I await you giving us the full transcript. I don't have it, else as said earlier I pass comment on any decisions and sentencing.
By your reckoning we can simply allow cases to go by since we havent got the full story. You speak as if we were able to so something about it anyway.
no doubt the bus driver was forced to run over the cyclists as they went through a red light You're starting to lose it now.

..............................

custardy

Well there's a commendation for apathy if there ever was.

Mark_Mark

custardy wrote: »

Well there's a commendation for apathy if there ever was.

I'll leave you to your rant, its just a shame you aren't capable of putting forward a valid argument. :wave:

Johno100

Mark_Mark wrote: »

They never give the whole of a judges summing up and often print the shock comment without reasoning. You do similar in your posts. The Kings Heath collision saying a lesser charge was used but you fail to mention they didn't have any evidence for death by dangerous.

And even when some parts of the media report the evidence presented in court, other media sources disregard this to further their own agenda. For example in the case of Hope Fennell, the trial of the driver heard that Ms. Fennell did not dismount but rode her bike across the pedestrian crossing , contrary to Rule 79 of the HWC. But even yesterday this was published on the CTC website.

Hope was tragically killed on her way home from school in November 2011. She had followed her mother’s advice and dismounted from her bicycle to cross the pedestrian crossing just minutes from her home, but was run over by a 17-tonne fully loaded lorry as she did so.

http://www.ctc.org.uk/article/campaigns-guide/inquest-opens-teenage-cyclist%E2%80%99s-death

Cornucopia

Here's a quote from CTC which indicates the thinking behind this topic (in the context of a Government review into sentencing guidelines):

The revised guidelines should include sentences that discourage bad driving.

So, it's clear that there is a mistaken belief that cyclist collisions are caused by bad driving and that bad driving can be legislated away by heavier sentencing by the Courts.

Sadly, I don't think either of those things is true, and CTC and others may be wasting their time and the potential to reduce cyclist injuries by concentrating on it.

What's required is a proper examination (with the details made public) of the circumstances of every accident (certainly every fatality). That way, the public will be able to see whether the authorities involved are taking all necessary precautions and sentencing offenders appropriately.

In one class of accident, we are pretty much already able to see this - that is the "left-turn by large vehicle". In this type, one of the major factors is the presence of fixed safety barriers on the pavement edge which prevent the cyclist escaping and can result in them being trapped. Authorities ought to give due consideration into removing those barriers, or replacing them with something that has gaps in it, or is collapsible. (The counter argument is that they are there for pedestrian safety, and that in making things safer for cyclists, pedestrian injuries may increase).

At the same time, it's possible that cyclist speed is also a factor in those accidents. Perhaps a localised 20mph limit for cyclists (or for all vehicles) might focus attention on the dangers?

It's worth noting that cyclist stopping distance increases substantially between District Nurse speed (15mph) and City Courier speed (30mph).

custardy

Cornucopia wrote: »

Here's a quote from CTC which indicates the thinking behind this topic (in the context of a Government review into sentencing guidelines):

So, it's clear that there is a mistaken belief that cyclist collisions are caused by bad driving and that bad driving can be legislated away by heavier sentencing by the Courts.

Sadly, I don't think either of those things is true, and CTC and others may be wasting their time and the potential to reduce cyclist injuries by concentrating on it.

What's required is a proper examination (with the details made public) of the circumstances of every accident (certainly every fatality). That way, the public will be able to see whether the authorities involved are taking all necessary precautions and sentencing offenders appropriately.

In one class of accident, we are pretty much already able to see this - that is the "left-turn by large vehicle". In this type, one of the major factors is the presence of fixed safety barriers on the pavement edge which prevent the cyclist escaping and can result in them being trapped. Authorities ought to give due consideration into removing those barriers, or replacing them with something that has gaps in it, or is collapsible. (The counter argument is that they are there for pedestrian safety, and that in making things safer for cyclists, pedestrian injuries may increase).

At the same time, it's possible that cyclist speed is also a factor in those accidents. Perhaps a localised 20mph limit for cyclists (or for all vehicles) might focus attention on the dangers?

It's worth noting that cyclist stopping distance increases substantially between District Nurse speed (15mph) and City Courier speed (30mph).

It worth noting that biikes have varying stopping abilities.
So brake comparisons arent quite so clear.
Have you experienced many 20 mph zones? Plenty in Edinburgh
Usually I am overtaken or have someone ride on my tail. either in the car or bike.
How do you plan on enforcing the speed limits on bikes? Will speedos be fitted?
IMO barriers on corners are more of a herding device, than safety device for peds.
I have no problem with proper accident investigation. However all too often there are no witnesses to cyclists deaths.
No skid marks etc as in car vs car

Mark_Mark

custardy wrote: »

It worth noting that biikes have varying stopping abilities.
So brake comparisons arent quite so clear.
Have you experienced many 20 mph zones? Plenty in Edinburgh
Usually I am overtaken or have someone ride on my tail. either in the car or bike.
How do you plan on enforcing the speed limits on bikes? Will speedos be fitted?
IMO barriers on corners are more of a herding device, than safety device for peds.
I have no problem with proper accident investigation. However all too often there are no witnesses to cyclists deaths.
No skid marks etc as in car vs car

There aren't many skid marks in car vs car these days.