Convicted of Dangerous Cycling...

[DOD]Asprilla · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:43

Jonny ///M said:
Just saw the screenshot and that looks like a downhill bike,will confirm soon.

I think that's what it said in the Telegraph. It was custom built and wasn't road legal due to lack of reflectors.

badbob · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:46

[DOD]Asprilla;12062364 said:
wasn't road legal due to lack of reflectors.

lol. It's pretty rare I see front and rear reflectors on a bike.

[DOD]Asprilla · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:47

badbob said:
lol. It's pretty rare I see front and rear reflectors on a bike.

Yeah, a bit pot / kettle considering my rear one is missing!

Jonny ///M · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:50

Didn't think it was the law they had to be fitted,i know we have to fit reflectors and a bell when selling but the customer can remove if they want. Also,what a ***** having obviously amazing brakes and not using them! (i have all my reflectors fitted,honestly,i do!)

badbob · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:51

Also the goverment wanted to clamp down hard on bikes, then how come third party pedals don't have orange reflectors? Neither of my SPD pedals have them.

Demon · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:55

[DOD]Asprilla;12062299 said:
The BBC story has been updated to show a CCTV image of him on the bike. The court was told that conditions would have allowed him to move into the road to avoid her.

So he was Riding in the road, and the 'move into the road' statement means he could have gone towards the opposite side of the road to avoid the 'group' of people??? I'm still not clear on exactly what happened..

I would say I think the girl and her friends have played some part in all this, they shouldn't have been in the road ( if it's as I interpret it ), and if there was a 'gap' for the cyclist, it's not like he 100% intended to hit the girl. It takes two to tango..

Jonny ///M · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:55

badbob said:
Also the goverment wanted to clamp down hard on bikes, then how come third party pedals don't have orange reflectors? Neither of my SPD pedals have them.

http://www.eastriding.gov.uk/corp-docs/tradingstandards/tsd337.pdf

Reading the last paragrapgh of this it seems that a pre built bike must have all those but one build by yourself....doesn't.

kieranv · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:56

look like fox 40's on the front to me.

Jonny ///M · 10 Jul 2008 at 13:57

kieranv said:
look like fox 40's on the front to me.

Could be me with silver boxxers.....although my hoodies blue

kieranv · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:01

my boxxers are primered grey now...could have been me

, although i dont own a fetching pair of what looks like blue waterproof trousers.

anyhoo, yes, the guy should be done on manslaughter or something similar, pretty shocking to just ride straight into a pedestrian, even after you've told them to move.

Demon · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:01

kieranv said:
look like fox 40's on the front to me.

How the how the hell can you tell?

Do you have the image 'processing' software used in CSI?

Ezyryder · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:02

Rilot said:
Totally agree.
I just wish cyclists would make up their minds whether they are a vehicle (and concequently obey the rules of the road such as traffic lights) or whether they are a pedestrian (in which case they should stay off the road).
It's this halfway house they seem to occupy whereby they are a pedestrian when the lights on the road are red and a vehicle when the road is clear that winds me up.

As a cyclist (that does more than 20mph on average) I agree that bikes should be considered vehicles, as that's what they are. What it doesn't make it easy is that a lot of pavement sections are not marked as cycling paths where both people and bikes can be on. If the pavement where this guy was cycling was a share path for bikes and people I think the girl should be at fault. I find all kinds of people walking their dogs out of their leads and children running around and to be honest, it ****** me off inmensly.

Burnsy2023 · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:03

Rilot said:
Totally agree.
I just wish cyclists would make up their minds whether they are a vehicle (and concequently obey the rules of the road such as traffic lights) or whether they are a pedestrian (in which case they should stay off the road).
It's this halfway house they seem to occupy whereby they are a pedestrian when the lights on the road are red and a vehicle when the road is clear that winds me up.

I totally agree.

As for the guy in question, as both a motorist and a cyclist, he should have the book thrown at him. You are required by the highway code to stop for pedeestrians already crossing the road. He didn't and he killed someone in the process.

As for the stopping distances, he should have always made sure he was going an appropriate speed to stop for hazards, just like you would in a car.

People like him give people like me a bad name.

Burnsy

Jonny ///M · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:03

Demon said:
How the how the hell can you tell?

Do you have the image 'processing' software used in CSI?

Comes quite easy when you spend loads of time looking...it's the stantion colour!

Ah **** it,he's a grade A plank riding a big ass bike into a girl. He has to live with it for the rest of his life unless hes a heartless *****.

Got a train to catch.

Burnsy2023 · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:05

Ezyryder said:
If the pavement where this guy was cycling was a share path for bikes and people I think the girl should be at fault.

I disagree. I find it annoying to have to slow for pedestrians on a shared lane, but it's necessity and he should have gone a speed that wouldn't have killed the poor girl if he hit her.

Burnsy

al123 · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:07

I don’t see how people can be defending him. Surely if he has been convicted then there was sufficient evidence to prove that he was at fault?

If he was a car driver he would probably be in prison.

[DOD]Asprilla · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:07

Demon said:
So he was Riding in the road, and the 'move into the road' statement means he could have gone towards the opposite side of the road to avoid the 'group' of people???

That would be my assumption. There is no reason why a cyclist can't move towards the centre of the road to avoid a hazard, providing it doesn't put the more at risk.

Demon said:
I would say I think the girl and her friends have played some part in all this, they shouldn't have been in the road ( if it's as I interpret it ), and if there was a 'gap' for the cyclist, it's not like he 100% intended to hit the girl. It takes two to tango..

I don't doubt that mistakes were made by both parties. However, to cycle through a group of people without slowing down is just blatantly reckless,

Ezyryder · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:25

Burnsy2023 said:
I disagree. I find it annoying to have to slow for pedestrians on a shared lane, but it's necessity and he should have gone a speed that wouldn't have killed the poor girl if he hit her.

Burnsy

I disagree back!

If you can’t follow the rules of that particular road or you don’t know them don’t use them. At the end of the day cycle paths (not segregated ones) are like small roads, and when I am doing on average 20mph you can’t expect me to brake to 0mph instantly!

For what I have been reading though this guy was riding on the road and the group of girls/boys where probably drunk and walking into the road slightly. He is at fault, as anyone can see an accident could happen, so either slow down and shout at them as you go past or allow plenty of space just in case.

[DOD]Asprilla · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:32

Ezyryder said:
At the end of the day cycle paths (not segregated ones) are like small roads, and when I am doing on average 20mph you can’t expect me to brake to 0mph instantly!

You're not expected to break instantly, you are expected to assess the risks ahead of you and travel at an appropriate speed. That may be lower than you want to, but that can't be helped.

Ezyryder · 10 Jul 2008 at 14:46

[DOD]Asprilla;12062778 said:
You're not expected to break instantly, you are expected to assess the risks ahead of you and travel at an appropriate speed. That may be lower than you want to, but that can't be helped.

Assess. That’s a good word. First off, dogs should not be off their leads, people should be walking on their side of the road and not swerving like ‘I don’t give a pile of crap of who else is using the path’ With that aside I agree with you partially. I can have wrong assessments, no one teaches me how to assess, how should I know I should go at that speed on this corner or what other shenanigans, at the end of the day I didn’t receive any training on how to ride a bike.