Often see the debate come up about how to protect yourself on the road. Ride defensively. Be aware of your surroundings, be visible etc etc.
Then I see this video and I genuine despair.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwykyd6egx9o
There's barely a mention of the victim in that article. She was seriously injured, had a 'life changing impact', but only awarded £175? I assume that there would be a separate claim for damages? It's nice that the articles refers to the BBC's Children In Need raising money for charity, though. 🙄
Then I see this video and I genuine despair.
Yeah, absolutely no excuse for that manoeuvre at all, clear line of sight etc etc the sooner cars are equipped with in car video to determine why drivers are distracted the better.
Someone phoned me 4 times before leaving a message this morning whilst I was driving to site, effing idiots everywhere.
I've had a couple of months off the bike due to illness - & while I've been off I've been completely reconsidering my wants and needs from cycling - and after almost a lifetime of road riding (and every other type of riding), I'm ditching it - everything from now on will be offroad (I'm lucky enought to be able to string lots of long routes together from the door) - I am absolutely sick of the attitudes to cyclists on the road, and the tripe I see spouted on social media just winds me up even more - grrrrrr
Statements like this piss me off:
”Terence Duddy's BMW knocked a woman off her bike…”
No it didn’t.
Terence Duddy drove his BMW in to the path of a cyclist.
“Terence Duddy's BMW knocked a woman off her bike…”
No it didn’t.
There’s even NUJ guidance, drafted with the assistance of Laura Laker, that tells them not to do this.
There’s even NUJ guidance, drafted with the assistance of Laura Laker, that tells them not to do this.
Unfortunately it seems to be a work in progress and only applied consistently to when a cyclist hits a pedestrian.
Watching that video is also depressing how effing large all the "cars" are.
There's barely a mention of the victim in that article. She was seriously injured, had a 'life changing impact', but only awarded £175? I assume that there would be a separate claim for damages? It's nice that the articles refers to the BBC's Children In Need raising money for charity, though. 🙄
The £175 victim surcharge doesn't go to the specific victim, it is essentially a tax on people convicted of crimes which pays for Victim Support etc. She will of course be able to pursue a claim against the driver (and his insurer). The fact the victim is barely mentioned is probably because the press were unaware of the case so didn't attend court and have scant information to go on. She may not want her personal details splashed across the media.
18 month suspended sentence (after pleading guilty), and an 18 month driving ban + 200 hrs community service. If he'd been just as careless but she landed differently/got lucky etc, and the injuries were only minor he'd likely still be driving; if she'd somehow swerved out his way he'd potentially have been offered a course!
The surprising thing is he didn't disclose it during the selection process.
If he'd been just as careless but she landed differently/got lucky etc, and the injuries were only minor he'd likely still be driving; if she'd somehow swerved out his way he'd potentially have been offered a course!
I had the misfortune to watch from around ten foot behind as Mrsstu suffered a very similar incident to that.
The sight of her sliding up the bonnet/windscreen then in to the air still gives me the chills.
The drivers punishment?
A training course and no fine...
If he'd been just as careless but she landed differently/got lucky etc, and the injuries were only minor he'd likely still be driving; if she'd somehow swerved out his way he'd potentially have been offered a course!
I had the misfortune to watch from around ten foot behind as Mrsstu suffered a very similar incident to that.
The sight of her sliding up the bonnet/windscreen then in to the air still gives me the chills.
The drivers punishment?
A training course and no fine...
this is what pisses me off. At fault collisions should be short ban, retest and black box. (I’m unconvinced by fines. Massive fine and extended ban for driving while banned.
Saw this posted on a news page on Instagram
A disproportionate number of comments blaming the cyclist for going too fast
We really can't win
Massive fine and extended ban for driving while banned.
Car seized at the incident and crushed, to be a strict liability offence and no get-out for it being someone else's car. The fine will be the cost of replacing a leased or loaned car the ban can be extended or restarted from the time of the offence. (Fines are, generally, only a punishment for the poor, the richer folks can normally afford them).
Daily Mail is conflicted - cyclists bad, but BBC Top Brass is worse, i think.
I don't understand why he waited until sentencing before resigning?
There’s even NUJ guidance, drafted with the assistance of Laura Laker, that tells them not to do this.
Unfortunately it seems to be a work in progress and only applied consistently to when a cyclist hits a pedestrian.
Watching that video is also depressing how effing large all the "cars" are.
Your right, its not helping.
mariam.issimdar@bbc.co.uk
I have, you should too, Just saying.
I don't understand why he waited until sentencing before resigning?
I'm not sure why we need to wonder about that. If he'd been exonerated then he would have carried on as before despite the fact that it was still obviously his fault. Maybe with the occasional twinge of guilt at giving someone a life changing experience.
If he'd been just as careless but she landed differently/got lucky etc, and the injuries were only minor he'd likely still be driving; if she'd somehow swerved out his way he'd potentially have been offered a course!
This is what a lot of drivers don't understand - the only reason that I didn't end up on the floor is because I took action or was lucky. It happens far too frequently.
If he'd been just as careless but she landed differently/got lucky etc, and the injuries were only minor he'd likely still be driving; if she'd somehow swerved out his way he'd potentially have been offered a course!
I had the misfortune to watch from around ten foot behind as Mrsstu suffered a very similar incident to that.
The sight of her sliding up the bonnet/windscreen then in to the air still gives me the chills.
The drivers punishment?
A training course and no fine...
I was lying on the sofa last night watching crap on TV after a pretty mental day and Police Interceptors was on. Oh good, some scally bashing by the rozzers. People caught dealing drugs, car theft, money laundering, failing to stop, ramming police cars with stolen pickups etc - the majority were "no charges were brought against the person" or minimal sentences/fines. The justice system as a whole in this country is fubar.
A disproportionate number of comments blaming the cyclist for going too fast
Yet they guy behind her, going at the same speed, displays the ability to easily pull to a halt in a safe stopping distance.
The same clowns would be complaining if she was dawdling along at 5 mph and they were being held up behind her
Watching that video is also depressing how effing large all the "cars" are.
Yep that struck me as well. I reckon anyone that loses their licence should be limited in the type of car they can drive when they get their licence back. Cars to be under 1.3 tons, and less that 100bhp. Preferably in pink..
I had the misfortune to watch from around ten foot behind as Mrsstu suffered a very similar incident to that.
The sight of her sliding up the bonnet/windscreen then in to the air still gives me the chills.
The drivers punishment?
A training course and no fine...
How on earth when something like that happens do you refrain from attacking the car & the driver?
"
Saw this posted on a news page on Instagram
A disproportionate number of comments blaming the cyclist for going too fast"
I saw this on facebook and the amount of people claiming the cyclist was on the wrong side of the road was crazy. In their eyes she rode into the front of a perfectly legally and safely driven car.
short ban, retest and black box
I agree, I don't understand why we cannot change the law to insist on short bans, book an extended driving test, and have a black box for a year.
How on earth when something like that happens do you refrain from attacking the car & the driver?
A Police van happened to be passing and stopped me...
In fairness he was pretty good about it and I calmed down once the driver was in the back of the van.
How can someone who does something so stupid get away without any real punishment.
Note the hole in the bonnet where the end of her bars hit.
on the sofa last night watching crap on TV after a pretty mental day and Police Interceptors was on. Oh good, some scally bashing by the rozzers. People caught dealing drugs, car theft, money laundering, failing to stop, ramming police cars with stolen pickups etc - the majority were "no charges were brought against the person" or minimal sentences/fines. The justice system as a whole in this country is fubar.
I've told this story before but - many years ago as a kid I was the victim of a pretty serious crime (involving my bike, and sharp stabby tools).
The Police were brilliant. Tireless. After many months it ended up in court (taking me away from exam prep time).
I distinctly remember the clerk rolling in the relevant paperwork for this pretty simple, cut and dry case, on a big sack trolley. Literal mountains of it.
I knew who did it. The Police knew who did it. The Judge knew who did it. The Jury knew who did it. The legal team on both sides knew who did it. The person who did it, knew we all knew he did it.
Months previously, I (and others) had correctly identified him in a line up. Not that it needed that, to know who he was.
Turns out, the Police officer running the line up, had used a make up on one of the other (innocent, volunteer) line-up bodies to cover up a bit of acne. This is normal procedure.
The person who had organise and run this line up was hauled over the coals by the defence team in court almost to the point of breakdown. Turns out, because of budgets, time, pressure,etc etc and generally doing a very hard job for not enough money - the makeup they had used was not the 'approved brand'.
Case thrown out. Not guilty. Off you pop, back to your sinkhole estate to commit more armed robberies.
The justice system as a whole in this country is fubar.
Yep.
A disproportionate number of comments blaming the cyclist for going too fast
We really can't win
It's an absolute certainty that no cyclist anywhere has ever behaved in a manner appropriate to everyone. There is absolutely no appropriate speed, every cyclist is either too fast or too slow (sometimes simultaneously). No cyclist has ever worn the correct amount of hi-vis, used the correct lights, ridden in the correct manner...
The local FB page for the area where my Mum lives has gradually accepted that a couple of the LTNs are there to stay so they've moved back to cyclist bashing.
The most recent one is how many cyclists were seen wearing all-black and with no lights. Right, so...you saw them then?! Saw them well enough to describe exactly what they were wearing right down to the brand of jeans, the type of bike and the speed they were going (invariably hurtling or dawdling, never "the right speed").
It's never-ending.
"they've moved back to cyclist bashing"
We (assuming those on STW are cyclists) might get a few minutes of peace while they froth about Tesco "cancelling Christmas". We can but hope.
Tesco cancelling Christmas?! What important news have I missed?
Tesco cancelling Christmas?! What important news have I missed?
It probably says 'Seasons Greetings' on the value tins of beans
Tesco cancelling Christmas?! What important news have I missed?
Is this about the very minor online kerfuffle because Tesco described their plastic Xmas trees as Evergreen Trees, etc. (Alongside another set of text on the box saying Merry Christmas.)