Well, it’s a fair question, but rabid cyclopaths might not like the answer…
A parent Kristie was with at the time of the incident spotted the brazen cyclist riding on the pavement again just three days later.
She approached the woman and asked for her details. As a result, the police later fined her £30.
“I don’t think it’s enough,” said Kristie. “She’s back to riding on the pavement after she hit a child. I wouldn’t even have been able to get back on that bike.”Ah, but she’s saving the environment, you know!
8 comments:
A hit-and-run cyclist knocked down a promising musician who dared to use a pedestrian crossing. She broke her shoulder and has had to give up playing the violin. If there is karma, cyclopaths should skid in chavdogshit then into the chavdog and owner. Save the environment.
start a civil action for damages.
But what is with;
Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (as amended by the Road Traffic Act 1991) it is an offence to ride recklessly on a road or in a dangerous, careless or inconsiderate manner. These offences are covered by sections 28 – 30 of the Act.
Dangerous cycling on a road is an offence under section 28 of the amended Road Traffic Act and is a more serious offence than careless and inconsiderate cycling. The amendment explains that the person is to be regarded as riding dangerously if, and only if, “(a) the way he rides falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful cyclist, and (b) it would be obvious to a competent and careful cyclist that riding in that way would be dangerous.” The section goes on to say that in considering what is to be expected of a competent and careful cyclist in (a), the circumstances which the cyclist was, or should have been, aware of must be considered. Also, in (b), the section states that ‘dangerous’ refers to “danger either of injury to any person or of serious damage to property.” The maximum penalty for dangerous cycling is £2,500.
Section 29 outlines the less serious offence of careless and inconsiderate cycling which states that a person is guilty of such an offence if a person cycles on a road without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration for other road users. This offence is appropriate when a cyclist does not act so recklessly as to satisfy the required criteria for dangerous cycling as outlined above. The maximum penalty for careless cycling is £1,000
"ROAD" could be a problem here, but the Pavement is also part of the public highway, so it would be worth considering.
"Safe For Whom..?"
Any pedestrian struck by a cyclist is very unlikely to be killed or seriously injured, whereas colliding with your gas guzzling 4X4 during attempts to cross your sacred tarmac, is more than twice as likely to prove fatal than being battered by a normal car, Julia.
More than a fifth of all High Street 'tractors' were sold in the Greater London area, and only a tiny fraction of them will ever be taken off-road.
Essex cyclists are not 'getting in the way' of rugged, tank-substitutes, more than driving wide armour boosts confidence in very poor drivers.
The 4X4 driver is far more likely to foster a subconscious tendency to intimidate vulnerable cyclists and pedestrians. Now that is a very real danger...especially when the mere sight of Lycra will give your main arteries that sudden, tight hug, dear.
Bunny
Ride on the road, obey the highway code and treat other road users with courtesy. If you have a problem with a motorist punch their lights out, take their keys and ride off dumping the keys, simples.
Cyclists fall into many groups, couriers with deadlines to meet are likely to be Devil may care in attitude but they probably cause more scares than scars, being professional. Children cycling on some roads really ought to use the pavement, carefully. Lycra clad Longriders (tee hee) pushing the pain barrier for another year of life are a f'in peril. Sorry LR, I know you are a responsible cyclist having ridden in France, probably with a cat in your onion basket.
"If there is karma, cyclopaths should skid in chavdogshit then into the chavdog and owner."
Seconded! Yelled at a lycralout who nearly mowed down an elderly lady in Southend high street just last week.
Bastard won't have heard me, he had earphones on... :/
"...start a civil action for damages..."
It'd Dagenham, FT, neither probably has anything worth taking!
"Any pedestrian struck by a cyclist is very unlikely to be killed or seriously injured..."
Oh, really?
Tell that to...well, all the people killed and seriously injured.
"Oh, really? Tell that to...well, all the people killed and seriously injured."
For all urban areas during the period 2008/2012, 1 (one) frail pedestrian died as a result of a cycle collision. However it appears that the victim was also predisposed to fatal injuries as a result of any minor fall.
Care to see the mortality statistics re 'urban tractors', JuliaM?
"Yelled at a lycralout who nearly mowed down an elderly lady in Southend high street just last week."
Oh...so no collision whatsover then?
I have a mental image of an 'Essex-chav-yelling-skull' snarling through the driver window, once its driver was confident that nothing impeded an escape route.
Post a Comment