Wednesday, 1 February 2012

Looks Like Even The Police Are Fed Up With Cyclopaths…

It’s not just bloggers, clearly:
Mr Moore told Waltham Forest magistrates: "I do remember quite clearly cycling along past the junction. Suddenly, without any warning I could see, the lorry turned on me.
"I remember screaming 'Stop, stop', I think, and I think I'm going to die. Then I can remember being under the lorry and in considerable pain.
You can remember all that, but you couldn’t remember not to try to take on something many, many times your size?
Crash investigator Pc Clive Austin told the court that tanker driver Nigel Gummer, 54, of Hadleigh, Essex, would have been able to see Mr Moore approaching for at least 12 seconds in a rear-view mirror as he waited at the junction.
And, of course, Mr Moore would have been able to see the tanker. No-one ever considers that, though, do they?

Well, actually, they do, when pressed:
Mr Moore had been riding in a cycle lane and drew level with the tanker's front axle virtually as it began pulling away. He tried to cycle straight on but was hit by the lorry, which had stopped in the advance cyclist's "box", and had been indicating a left turn.

Pc Austin said Mr Moore had the right of way under the Highway Code but admitted it would have been "a pertinent move" for the cyclist to show "some level of caution".
Yes. Yes, Indeed it would. But Mr Moore had the right of way, damn it, and we know how cyclists get when they think they are in the right...
Mr Moore, associate business editor of The Independent, is pursuing a civil claim for compensation against the tanker company's insurers.

He said he was disappointed the prosecution failed to call two witnesses, including the man who helped him as he lay trapped under the tanker. "I think the whole legal process is weighted against the victim," he said.

Mr Moore called for lorries to be fitted with sensors to detect cyclists, saying: "If it saves lives, and saves people being put in the same position as me, it's a damn good thing."
You know what else would save people being ‘put in the same position as you’? Taking a bit more care yourself. Rather than expecting everyone else to look out for you…

And speaking of which:
Cyclists were caught in a double police operation on the same day, flouting pedestrian restrictions in the city and then riding without lights later that night.
*waits for cyclopaths to start screaming and shouting and wailing ‘Unfair!!!!’*
Fifty-one cyclists were given fines for riding in the pedestrianised zones in Cornmarket and Queen Street over three hours – although police officers were too busy to stop them all.
Yup, in other words, they saw their fellows being stopped and just went sailing on by…

Now imagine motorists seeing a cop car or a speed trap. How many wouldn't reflexively check their speed and, if over the limit, bring it down? Not cyclists, oh no. Confident in the knowledge they have no identifying registrations, and no licenses to lose, they go sailing blithely by, breaking the law with impunity.
And later on Wednesday night officers were also catching cyclists without lights at The Plain, leaving police frustrated that safety laws were still being ignored.
And yet if a lorry had not seen them, lo! The wailing and gnashing of teeth would be a cry like unto the heavens…

Naturally, it isn't the cyclists in the wrong. Oh, no. They need to change the law for them.
But James Styring, of cycling campaign group Cyclox, said: “People shouldn’t cycle down Cornmarket and Queen Street but they need to change the regulations.

“I don’t think it’s a big deal when you think about people who drive while on their mobile phones.

“On Cornmarket there are probably too many pedestrians for any sensible person to want to cycle."
Aha! Yes, ‘any sensible person’. And there’s the rub, eh?

Because it seems, for too many people, getting a bike involves the removal of a good few brain cells and any element of personal responsibility they may have left...

20 comments:

  1. "Naturally, it isn't the cyclists in the wrong. Oh, no. They need to change the law for them" ...

    Well, now that the precedent has been set by the law being changed to suit St Doreen of Lawrence .. we can anticipate that every chancer will expect the same treatment ..

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I don’t think it’s a big deal when you think about people who drive while on their mobile phones."

    Ah yes, tu quoque, otherwise known as "the cyclist's fallacy".

    ReplyDelete
  3. Have to admit, I see plenty of people using mobile phones whilst driving where I live ..

    I'm a driver & I'd like to see more of them prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law ..

    But I'd also like to see legislation requiring cyclists to have some form of registration document, an identifying mark, insurance & the equivalent of an MoT .. they claim after all, to be road users & expect other road users to regard them as such ..

    Just because they provide their own motive power, why should they "leech" whilst the rest of us pay through the nose ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. At the start of this I must point out that when I work in the UK and when it is possible I cycle into work, and I wear lycra as part of this ritual. (On any distance more than 7 miles for comforts sake).

    This is more than just cyclists bleating on about rights, when I cycle back from work, I expect to treat other users with courtesy and have that courtesy responded to. So if I break the law I should be punished, as should a motorist on a mobile phone. This whole subject is about a lack of responsibility for the individuals actions, whether it be cycling without lights, jumping a red light or driving with a mobile phone. It is the same as yesterday's 'loveable rogue situation, people are not taking responsibility for their actions. The idiot who got ran over by the lorry, for God's did you not see it signalling?

    I personally see this as part of bigger problem, which is the lack of thought for others and the lack of personal responsibility.

    Keep up the good work Julia.

    Regards,

    Bunny

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree totally Bunny ..

    When I learned to drive (many years ago) my Instructor was fond of saying "Always allow a cyclist their wobble" ..

    Which I still do, in the same way that I hang back, or pull wide, wherever possible, for horses (I value my car's bodywork) ..

    But we seem to have reached a situation where the cyclist is always seen as the "victim" & the driver as the "aggressor" ..

    This imbalance needs to be officially redressed ..

    One thing which does need to be urgently addressed is the selfish attitude of the Sunday "head-down, arse-up" lycra-clad, cycling groups who think its perfectly acceptable to ride in a bunch, whilst chatting ..

    ReplyDelete
  6. Apart from knocking down the occassional little old lady, cyclists who act in a foolish manner are a self-solving problem.

    What I don't like is bluebottles throwing their weight about over trivial matters while serious criminals are laughing in the cop's useless faces.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I can't honestly say that I have any sympathy with this nincompoop; everyone knows that HGVs have a number of blindspots close in to them, and if you see one indicating left, you stay the hell back away from it and let the driver do what he wants.

    Similarly with lights: if you're out at night, you need lights. LOTS of lights, and much more behind than in front; you can see motorists coming from the front but you want to really make the buggers pay attention if they're behind you. Lots of nice bright yellow reflective material is a really good idea too, as are Scotchlite ankle bands (keeps you trousers out of the chain too).

    Put simply, the more obvious you are on a bike, the further off the motorists see you, and the more time they have to get the notion of "Oh look, a cyclist, better avoid him" into their minds.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 'Just because they provide their own motive power, why should they "leech" whilst the rest of us pay through the nose ?'

    crabs in a bucket, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  9. XX "I think the whole legal process is weighted against the victim," XX

    No. A bloody big tanker is weighted against the "victim". It may pay to remember that next time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Good God, a cyclist on the road. How unusual. Round where I live most cyclists much prefer the safety of the pavement, though I admit the odd one or two who will use the road like to pull on to the pavement at traffic lights so they can use the pedestrian crossing.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Cyclopath", Julia? What this bloke did was as sensible as a dinghy cutting in front of a ferry - the dinghy might be in the right but that won't help anyone in it if it ends up on the bottom. I think a better term for this is "suicyclist".

    Oh look, here's another one - http://youtu.be/YDAYkdlKEGI

    ReplyDelete
  12. Angry Exile... Here's a little poem from one of the instructors on an offshore sailing course that I took many years ago:

    "Here lies the body of Harold Day,
    who insisted on his Right of Way.

    He was right, dead right
    as he sailed along,
    but he's just as dead
    as if he'd been wrong!"

    ReplyDelete
  13. "I think the whole legal process is weighted against the victim,"

    and not just in this case. Being as he works for The Independent he might want to look around the office to see who's partly to blame for that happening.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Considering the vitriol and vituperation from the cyclopaths at Anna Racoon's place I'm surprised you stuck your head above the parapet on this one.
    Good post though and yes, right of way does not mean you might survive the the experience of being right.

    ReplyDelete
  15. On the accident victim, sounds like he might have been technically in the right but nevertheless was a prize prat doing what he did.

    If I am in a cycle lane and have the SLIGHTEST suspicion a vehicle may possibly be about to turn left I act as if it is definately doing so. This is basic road/common sense; it's very likely the driver can't or otherwise has not seen me.

    Also, what Dan said about lights. Anyone stupid enough to ride at night without lights is too stupid to live...

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think the excellent Captain Haddock has this right. I am an old git who cycles (as well as walks and drives) and everything is fine as long as the vehicle driver gives me a bit of room. Most do (boy racers tend to be best oddly).

    However, there is a significant minority that has to pass without hindrance and will get as close as they can, just to squeeze by without losing a microsecond. I then often catch up to them at the next red light and fantasize about putting a brick through their window or slashing their tyres. I do not pull up unseen on a vehicle's nearside as I realise this is a recipe for suicide, which I have no interest in at the moment. I must say though, that often enough some idiot in a motor pulls up alonside me at lights and then wishes to turn left at the junction and assumes that a ton or two of metal pulling across a 70kg flesh sack wins.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Ah yes, tu quoque, otherwise known as "the cyclist's fallacy"."

    He doesn't seem to realise other drivers loathe dangerous drivers every bit as much as cyclists, does he?

    "The idiot who got ran over by the lorry, for God's did you not see it signalling? "

    Ah, but he had the right of way, you see! Once again, people know all their rights, but none of their responsibilities...

    "One thing which does need to be urgently addressed is the selfish attitude of the Sunday "head-down, arse-up" lycra-clad, cycling groups who think its perfectly acceptable to ride in a bunch, whilst chatting .."

    Yup, that really, really annoys me.

    "What I don't like is bluebottles throwing their weight about over trivial matters while serious criminals are laughing in the cop's useless faces."

    I doubt it's trivial, I suspect pedestrians have complained vociferously to get a police presence there.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "... everyone knows that HGVs have a number of blindspots close in to them..."

    Indeed. I don't even ride a bike, and I know that!

    "crabs in a bucket, eh?"

    No, it's more a question of courtesy to other road users.

    "Good God, a cyclist on the road. How unusual. Round where I live most cyclists much prefer the safety of the pavement.."

    Since they made Southend's Victoria Circus a paving stone wasteland, they've been a damned menace.

    " I think a better term for this is "suicyclist". "

    Oh, marvellous! You should trademark that one :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Here's a little poem from one of the instructors on an offshore sailing course that I took many years ago..."

    That should be printed on card and handed out to every cyclist in the country!

    "Being as he works for The Independent he might want to look around the office to see who's partly to blame for that happening."

    He no doubt believes himself to be a solution, not a problem.

    "Considering the vitriol and vituperation from the cyclopaths at Anna Racoon's place I'm surprised you stuck your head above the parapet on this one."

    Heh! Indeed...

    "...and everything is fine as long as the vehicle driver gives me a bit of room. Most do (boy racers tend to be best oddly)."

    Well, they spent hours polishing that thing and fitting ridiculous extra bits to it - they don't want to scratch it!

    ReplyDelete
  20. You should trademark that one :)

    Nope. I'm hoping more people will use it. Besides, if I'm honest I heard it somewhere else anyway.

    ReplyDelete