So much safer for cyclists to be allowed to go through red!

Altarf

Norman_Castle wrote: »

It certainly didn't blame the child or suggest that behaviour from a cyclist is acceptable.

Try re-reading it without the cyclist blinkers on, and you will see that it certainly does place blame on the child for being hit by a cyclist ploughing through a red light.

Unfortunately far too many anti-social cyclists have the same selfish attitude, and treat the law as something that they can ignore.

brat

Altarf wrote: »

Try re-reading it without the cyclist blinkers on, and you will see that it certainly does place blame on the child for being hit by a cyclist ploughing through a red light.

Unfortunately far too many anti-social cyclists have the same selfish attitude, and treat the law as something that they can ignore.

:wall:

I know what I mean,
Norman has it spot on.
Your misrepresentation, if not wilful, displays an incredible inability to understand.

All I'm saying, and have said so throughout, is that every individual should take responsibility for theirs and others' safety on the road, irrespective of liability or blame.

If my comments mean anything otherwise to you, and quite frankly I don't see how they can, then please understand that if a cyclist ploughs through a red light and hits a child or anyone else on the road, the cyclist will be held entirely liable for the incident.

But we as individuals can mitigate the risk to ourselves by doing what is required when lights are green for us, which is to proceed with care.

esuhl

Tilt wrote: »

i'm amazed (but not surprised) how it's escalated from a simple straight forward debate about a potential change in rules regarding red lights and cyclists here to (what seems to be) the inevitable slanging match between the holier than thou bunch of cyclists which make up the majority of this area of the forum and a few unfortunate motorists who dare venture into this neck of the woods.

GASP! You DARE to venture into this neck of the woods?! What a big boy! How terribly brave of you!

Fancy having to face the overwhelming onslaught of... a web forum! How did you cope with the challenge of looking at text on a computer screen without a big cage of metal to threaten others and hide inside when you get scared? I hope the big words didn't frighten you.

No wonder you and your fellow motorists enjoy such recklessly bullying behaviour on the roads. It's probably the only chance you ever get to feel like you have power over other people.

The funny thing is... you're not bright enough to recognise your behaviour and see what a laughing stock you and your fellow lunatics have become when you genuinely rely on ignorance, stupidity, prejudice and bigotry to defend your tragically misplaced sense of superiority.

Hold up a mirror, reflect back your ignorant belligerence, and you're even stupid enough to be shocked. Hilarious!

Still, it's good to see that your thoughts are slowly progressing towards the sophistication of a middle-school pupil. You've clearly learnt something here:

Tilt wrote: »

The fact that there are both irresponsible cyclists AND drivers out there...

Norman_Castle

Altarf wrote: »

Try re-reading it without the cyclist blinkers on, and you will see that it certainly does place blame on the child for being hit by a cyclist ploughing through a red light.

Unfortunately far too many anti-social cyclists have the same selfish attitude, and treat the law as something that they can ignore.

Try reading it without prejudice. Try reading your post history and you will see that you place the blame for everything on cyclists. 30 of your last 31 posts are focussed on condemning cyclists. You don't seem to have any interest in anything else. Your obsessive conviction that cyclists are generally anti-social is unlikely to give an unbiased view.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/search.php?do=finduser&u=5559

Retrogamer

Altarf wrote: »

Unfortunately far too many anti-social cyclists have the same selfish attitude, and treat the law as something that they can ignore.

That's a very high horse you're on there. Careful you don't fall off now.
Do you show the same level of vigilance to motorists who park on double yellow lines, floor it through amber lights or exceed the speed limit? I think there is a higher risk from them and a lot more of them after all.

As a cyclist if i went through a red light (which i don't do) and hit someone, i'd be accepting blame.
They should check it's clear, but if it's not they still have right of way.

Altarf

esuhl wrote: »

No wonder you and your fellow motorists enjoy such recklessly bullying behaviour on the roads.

Duh, I speak as a pedestrian who is irritated by thoughtless cyclists, not as a motorist.

brat wrote: »

But we as individuals can mitigate the risk to ourselves by doing what is required when lights are green for us, which is to proceed with care.

Because pedestrians have to watch out for the anti-social colour blind cyclists, who are quite happy to plough on through red lights and are indifferent to whether they harm anyone due to their illegal behaviour.

Kim_kim

Retrogamer wrote: »

I think there is a higher risk from them and a lot more of them after all.

My daughter as little more than a toddler got mown down by a cyclist speeding downhill on a pavement past the park we were leaving.

My daughter was one step ahead of me. As we stepped out she crashed into my daughter.

This was 25 years ago - I should have called the police though, I was so shocked at the time.

She (the cyclist) was in a crumpled heap, thankfully my daughter wasn't badly injured.

I HATE cyclists on the pavements - pavements are for people!!!

brat

Altarf wrote: »

Because pedestrians have to watch out for the anti-social colour blind cyclists, who are quite happy to plough on through red lights and are indifferent to whether they harm anyone due to their illegal behaviour.

That's entirely correct, pedestrians need to take care because there may be other road users who break the law or make a mistake. That's why the law is written in such a way to require all road users to take care when proceeding through a junction on a green light.

Interestingly, the only people in this forum context who wilfully claim to have broken any road traffic laws are yourself and Tilt. I wonder if the law abiding behaviour of the cyclists in this community will eventually influence yourself and tilt, the community's criminal fraternity, to modify your law breaking proclivities.

brat

Kim_kim wrote: »

I HATE cyclists on the pavements - pavements are for people!!!

I hate cyclists on the pavement who ride like that. I've seen many cyclists on quiet pavements not bothering a soul who are there because it's much safer for them.

For me cars on the pavement are a much greater annoyance. They get in my road every day.

Retrogamer

Kim_kim wrote: »

My daughter as little more than a toddler got mown down by a cyclist speeding downhill on a pavement past the park we were leaving.

My daughter was one step ahead of me. As we stepped out she crashed into my daughter.

This was 25 years ago - I should have called the police though, I was so shocked at the time.

She (the cyclist) was in a crumpled heap, thankfully my daughter wasn't badly injured.

I HATE cyclists on the pavements - pavements are for people!!!

It seems you have quoted me and told your story to try and point out i'm wrong.

I'm sorry for what happened to your daughter, but my point stands.

There are significantly more people seriously injured or killed from negligence from motorists than there are cyclists.