What do you make of this?

[Paul Beazer]

If you live in the uk you'll have prob heard about this INCIDENT (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/7496757.stm)

Just interested what people think on here?

As usual it seems to bring out the usual "cyclists are a menace" etc etc in the tabloids, like we are some sort of maurauding gang of rapists.
Some rough figures for you:-
Number of cyclists killed each year on the UK's roads - 120
Number of pedestrians killed by cyclists each year - 1

So how come there is no outcry over the number of road related deaths in general? Are we now that desensitized that the thousands killed on UK roads each year dont affect us?

I dont doubt the cyclist was an @rse, but there is some suggestions that most of the witnesses (possibly the victim too) were intoxocated and she actually went into the cyclists path. Its not been proven if she was in the road or on the pavement either.

Terrible tradgedy for the victim and her family, but i think there was more going on than has been revealed..

[miller]

Sorry but what was he doing on the pavement in the first place?

By all means i agree on the disproportionate figures between cylcists and pedestrian deaths is bringing out the sensationalist headlines.

I watched the report on the news last night and its a terrible tragedy, looking at the other side you hear all about head injuries from all kinds of falls ie fights on the street. If this was a drunken fall would this case even be making the news? No and solely because of the figures mention above.

As for being densensitized i think that the amount of road deaths each day let alone each week has led to this. Not about people not caring but more about quantity of incidents.

Visit a smaller populated country for example and all you hear is road death figures, eg in Ireland its a massive talking point, it reached its highest last year around 400 mark i think. Each time i log on and read the Irish independent there is 9/10 chance the headline will include a picture of a wrecked car and notifying you of three more deaths in the country.


Just my tuppence!

Mike

[Paul Beazer]

Thats just it Mike, there is no proof the cyclist WAS actually on the pavement in the first place.
As an asside i just search for "cyclist+kills" on the BBC website and it comes up with apprx 41 pages of articles, most of them linking to some cyclist killed by cars, trucks etc.
This is much more of a scandal, but does it make the headlines? Does it Feck!

[richy rich]

I'm with you Paul, I gave up riding on roads years ago because of the PR1CKS in cars. I'm not saying all car drivers are Pr1cks just there are people out there that don't give a foock about there fellow man.

[Turbo_Steve]

I'm going to play devils advocate here: Some car drivers are pr1cks. As a percentage, I'd say just as many cyclists are idiots too.

The difference is that when a motorist makes a silly decision, it invariably results in the car hitting something, and if that's a person, or a cyclist, it results in death.

Cyclists are ususally travelling slower, so it results in and accident or injury.

As for the de-sensitization: I think the Speed Kills mantra has innured us to the whole road death issue.

[Pastor of Muppets]

isn't the reason this has caused so much of an outcry because he shouted "get of the way because i'm not"

[Kieran]

I think the crucial matter is that he's got off far too lightly. He caused death by recklessness - It doesn't matter what the mode of transport was.

I have to say - had he have been in a car, he'd be in prison, probably convicted of death by dangerous driving.

If he was on foot and pushed the girl over or out of the way, he'd probably be up for manslaughter charges.

Quite why death by dangerous cycling is in some way 'less bad' to merit a lesser sentence than death by dangerous driving, especially when the defendant admitted in court that he could have avoided the accident had he slowed down, is the question that should be asked - The end result (Death and ruined lives) is the same, so why not the punishment?

[Nick VR4]

Agree with Kieran here

He should be punished more his bike cost nearly £5000 /Grrr/Grrr

[elnevio]

Kieran is bang on the money there.

Another example of some pathetic sentencing.

[richy rich]

If he did what was reported (shout "get out of the way as I'm not stopping")then yes he should be punished. I don't think we have the full facts.

@ Turbo Steve yes there are total pr1cks in all walks of life, all I'm saying is I've stopped riding on the road because of said Pr1cks.

[bradc]

Obviously I do not know all the truths to the story, all I know is what is in that article.

It says the guy was on the pavement, and that he yelled out get out of the way etc.

If both of those are true then it is 100% his fault. Someone walking on the foot path shouldn't be expected to watch out for cars, bikes, whatever. The foot path is designed for people on foot :)

I personally despise cyclists. There is no licensing for them, no enforced rules, no tax on them at all, yet they seem to think they can do whatever they want on the roads and they know that if there is an incident, the car driver will be blamed. I think that they should either be made illegal from the good majority of roads and only legal in cities during the day in peak times when they are actually useful, and have a licensing scheme in place to stop them from thinking they can do whatever they want.

[richy rich]

Obviously I do not know all the truths to the story, all I know is what is in that article.

It says the guy was on the pavement, and that he yelled out get out of the way etc.

If both of those are true then it is 100% his fault. Someone walking on the foot path shouldn't be expected to watch out for cars, bikes, whatever. The foot path is designeI personally despise cyclists.d for people on foot :)
Brad there are a few versions of the event reported and English news papers are well known for sensationalising story's to sell papers so don't believe everything you read.



There is no licensing for them, no enforced rules, no tax on them at all, yet they seem to think they can do whatever they want on the roads and they know that if there is an incident, the car driver will be blamed. I think that they should either be made illegal from the good majority of roads and only legal in cities during the day in peak times when they are actually useful, and have a licensing scheme in place to stop them from thinking they can do whatever they want.

I don't care for your personal dispisement.

[bradc]

As I said, all I know is that article, not the story, although it sounds as if noone really does.

I still maintain that there should be licensing for all road users including bikes, just like there is for trucks, cars, buses, motorcycles.

[richy rich]

As I said, all I know is that article, not the story, although it sounds as if noone really does.

I still maintain that there should be licensing for all road users including bikes, just like there is for trucks, cars, buses, motorcycles.
Id love to see that policed you numb nuts.

[bradc]

If they can police car insurance, car tax and mot's then I can't see why not?

[Subaru ETA]

i do agree with brad apart from the taxing bit... i dont know what cyclist are like in the UK, but here they are a menace! esp when you are driving on a country road and you come flying around a corner and there they, 3 wide!! then they give the driver the fingers for passing!

this said, there are ALOT of ****ers in cars too.

as for the article, that clown should be in prison...if i was dring a car down the foot pathh drunk and hit someone thats where i would be! (i am assuming here that it is illegal to ride a bike on the footpath as it is here)

[Johny]

i just wish cyclists would follow the damned road rules far to many times i see cyclists riding through red lights or riding without helmets... its really no wonder so many of them die...

[Pastor of Muppets]

that's the real issue isnt it alot of cyclists seem un aware that the highway code classes them as a vehicle and thus they are bound by the same regulations as all other road users.

[danwins224]

put him in prison, doesnt matter how you kill someone the fact is you killed them. The law is laughable, the police cant do anything incase they're accused of something, the courts can't hand out the appropriate punishment because brussels say's it infringes they're human rights or whatever the latest buzz word is, damn the teachers cant even dicipline the school kids without the fear of being prosecuted!
A for cyclists i think that its the case of the few spoil it for the rest, its the so called serious riders that are dangerous, riding 3 or 4 wide when there's a group of them, or riding in the midle of the road. Brad is right, they should have to sit some type of road test to show they understand the highway code and should be taxed if they're they're using the roads!

[martin_y]

I'm with Richy here. I ride on the pavement (pavement= sidewalk=footpath). Having said that, I only ride at a just a tad over walking pace, and my little boy of 4 behind me in his seat, or on his own bike. I give pedestrians 100% right of way, and we often stop if people are walking towards us, to let them past.

If anyone can tell me how its safer for me (and my 4 year old) to ride my bike on the road, a few centimetres away from lorries doing 45, I am interested to hear their theory.

Have only had one incident, where a woman walking her dog made a snyde comment about me being on the footpath. Actually there was grass on the side of the footpath, and I was on that, while she was on the tarred piece, with her dog. (its not called a DOGPATH, is it?) ... :-)

All over Holland, the bikes and the pedestrians share the pavement, why not here?

I am not speaking up for the cyclist in the above article at all, he seems to be a w*nker, and deserves a stiffer sentence.

[Lillywotsername]

I personally despise cyclists. There is no licensing for them, no enforced rules, no tax on them at all, yet they seem to think they can do whatever they want on the roads and they know that if there is an incident, the car driver will be blamed. I think that they should either be made illegal from the good majority of roads and only legal in cities during the day in peak times when they are actually useful, and have a licensing scheme in place to stop them from thinking they can do whatever they want.
Careful Brad.... You are starting to sound like a woman /nag /nag /nag /nag /nag

I have to agree totally with K on this one as well.... Death by someone driving/riding recklessly should carry the same penalty across the board.


Some other startling stories to put this incident into perspective though.....
I am not belittling this story, rather the opposite I feel more punishment should be served, just trying to make a fair comparison.

How to get away with manslaughter
Under English law there is a charge of causing death by dangerous driving. This is the charge most commonly used whenever someone kills another person with a car though sometimes a lesser one is used. The charge seems to lead to sentences of between 6 months suspended and 2 years - one rarely hears of anything more severe.

If this charge didn't exist, a charge of manslaughter (unpremeditated murder) would have to be used, as is used for causing death in any other way. This is used in a few extreme driving cases (e.g. a fatal accident at the Silverstone race track on 9-Jul-1999, perhaps because it wasn't on the public highway). Manslaughter typically results in a custodial sentence of around 2 - 10 years.

Why is death caused by driving treated differently from death caused in any other circumstance? Why are motorists so privileged? (That's a rhetorical question - it can't be because they make the laws, can it?)

It would appear that a human life is worth at most a few thousand pounds, as judged by the fines in motoring cases before the criminal courts. This is oddly out-of-step with current 6-figure awards for damages in civil courts.
Some examples
I make no apology for highlighting cases of drivers who have gotten away with killing people without being charged with manslaughter (or murder in some cases).

Gary Hart
infamously caused the Selby rail crash and 10 deaths by losing control of his vehicle. As this case was so bad, he got 5 years for dangerous driving, rather more than many of these others...
Paul Thompson,
aged 36, a van driver, went into the back of a family car on the A1M near Stevenage, killing a 5-week-old girl and injuring her twin sister. He was fined £1000 for driving without due care and attention, plus £300 costs and banned for 6 months.
(Ceefax 27-Jan-1999)
Martin Rose,
aged 39, of Smeeth, Kent, was convicted of a drink-driving offence in which a couple and their son died. Their daughter had serious injuries. He failed to stop his van at a junction near Ashford and ploughed into their car. He also refused a breath test and to provide a blood specimen to the Police. He had 3 previous convictions for drunk-driving. He then tried to claim against the family's insurers for his injuries, asserting that the wife (the other driver) was negligent.
(Ceefax and Teletext 15-Jul-1999, CEN 16-Jul-1999)
An Austrian lorry driver
was charged with careless driving and failing to stop and report an accident, following an incident in which a 15-year-old paper girl was knocked off her bike and killed on the A299 near her home in Herne Bay, Kent.
(Cambridge Evening News 22-Jan-1996)
Stanley Casson,
aged 90, of Prestwich, Greater Manchester, was sentenced to 12 months jail, having admitted causing death by dangerous driving, and thereby became the oldest person to be sent to jail in England & Wales. He ran down and killed a woman and her granddaughter and then failed two eye tests administered by the Police. He was subsequently released on bail pending an appeal.
(Ceefax and Teletext 7-Aug-1999)
Karli Jones,
a learner-driver aged 22, was doing 100mph on the A4 in Reading in 1997, got a 5-year jail sentence for dangerous driving. He ran into another car, killing the driver and the 19-year-old passenger; two other passengers were seriously injured.
(Ceefax 31-Mar-1999)
James Talbot
caused the death of his two passengers, Mark Edge and Jason Hawkes, when he lost control on the A603, his car went into the air, landed on a parked car, bounced into a second one, which propelled that into a third. They had been out pubbing yet James' blood alcohol level was below the limit. Experts found no defect in his car. He admitted his bad driving caused the deaths and was given a sentence of 2 years with 5 years' disqualification. He then appealed, claiming that was too severe, which the Appeal Court rejected, saying the sentence was not excessive.
(CEN 31-Jan-1996)
Simon MacDonald,
then aged 17, drove his stepfather's Peugeot 106 at over 90mph out of Great Chishill, Cambs, and lost control, killing one of his four passengers - his 18-year-old best friend. He admitted causing death by dangerous driving and was sentenced to three and a half years youth custody and banned for five years.
(CEN 6-Aug-1999)
Gerald Sharratt,
a Metropolitan Police Constable, rammed into the back of a Cambridge nurse's car on 19-Jun-1995 and was tried and convicted on a charge of causing death by driving dangerously but was kept on in the Force. Judith Hood was stopped at temporary traffic lights on the A10. He was involved in a high-speed chase exercise.
(CEN 1-Feb-1996 onwards)
John Ward,
a lorry driver, fell asleep at the wheel, ploughed into the back of a council maintenance lorry and killed two workmen. The trial jury acquitted him of causing death by dangerous driving and found him guilty of careless driving. He was fined £350, banned from driving for 9 months and ordered to pay £50 prosecution costs.
(CEN 13-Jun-1996)
Russell Lyon,
aged 19, plus a 17-year-old accomplice, stole a car, drove it at up to 60mph erratically through London's theatreland, hit a man, carried him on the bonnet for 160 yards before the man fell under the wheels to his death. Lyon was charged with and admitted causing death by dangerous driving and aggravated vehicle-taking. As he was committing a crime at the time, the charge should have been murder.
(CEN, 3-May-1997)
John Were,
a 21-year old Trinity College undergraduate, killed two car passengers and seriously injuring three others whilst almost three times over the blood alcohol limit. He was sentenced to 18 months, suspended for 12 months, after admitting to two charges of causing death by dangerous driving.
(CEN, 13-Jan-1998)
Peter Kite,
the managing director of the Lyme Bay activity centre where four children died in a canoe accident, got a manslaughter sentence of 3 years reduced to 2 years by the Appeal Court on 8-Feb-1996. They rejected his appeal against his conviction.
Two years just for being responsible for the circumstances leading to death! If he'd knocked them down with his car he would have been charged with dangerous driving (or similar) and received a fine and suspension, it seems.
A youth
was charged with attempted murder for hitting a policeman in South Yorkshire.
Presumably if the youth had used a car the charge would have been dangerous driving or similar?
(Reported on 30-Mar-1996)

Links etc.
Campaign Against Drinking and Driving (CADD)
(Info as of 14-Sep-1998)

Supports and assists the families of victims who have suffered death or injury by drunken drivers on the road in the UK.

[Nick Mann]

Without being in full possession of the facts:

1. I agree the law is inadequate in this case, or that the system did not use the right law. A fine for killing someone is wrong. If it wasn't the cyclists fault then he should be in the clear. If it was his fault then he should be behind bars.
2. I can understand and to some extent agree with cyclists needing a license. There are cyclists that run red lights or ride aggressively in pedestrian areas. This should be addressed properly.
3. I am a cyclist and a driver. The driver ALWAYS gets the best deal. If you are a driver that feels the need to hate all cyclists, then you need to grow up. By all means hate the man on a bike who does something wrong, but why put one group containing millions of people in a category?

[SGHOM]

If you are a driver that feels the need to hate all cyclists, then you need to grow up.

I refuse to grow up then. :scholar: :pimp2: :iloveyou:

[MikeKey]

I used to drive just as much as I cycled, (rode to work, drove everywhere else), so was well aware of all the things cyclists hate about drivers and vice versa. As a result, I think I became a pretty considerate driver/cyclist. Equally, though, it made me all the more annoyed when I saw inconsiderate cyclists or drivers.

I've seen cyclists riding down the middle of the road, leaving no room to pass. I regularly see cyclists out riding 2 or 3 abreast, who couldn't care less about the line of irritated drivers queuing up behind them. My favourite is those guys I regularly see "racing" (at bike speeds, of course) in rush hour down a dual carriageway with a perfectly good tarmac cycle track running parallel to it...

I've also seen plenty of drivers cutting bikes up, intentionally blocking them in traffic, leaving no room when passing, etc.

The list goes on, but it's fair to say there are idiots both on bikes (of all kinds) and in cars, and nobody should hate cyclists/bikers/drivers based on the actions of the few who show no consideration for other road users.

And that's the point, isn't it, it's not about cyclists/bikers/drivers, it's about consideration for other people you're sharing the road with, whatever the mode of transport.

It's easy to get into an "us and them" mindset though. Despite the fact I'll come across far more inconsiderate drivers than cyclists while driving on any given day, it's somehow easier to ignore the mistakes made by "us", and concentrate on the mistakes made by "them"...

Just my $0.02!