uk.rec.cycling Google Group

Re: Yet another pedestrian hurt

2009-11-21T15:59:03Z

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:37:07 +0000, Tony Dragon
I'm not altogether sure. Certainly in a car accident one is legally
required to stop and provide details, but I'm not sure about a
cycle-ped accident. Certainly common courtesy would require it, but
I'm not sure about the legal position. Someone on here probably knows.

Re: Yet another pedestrian hurt

2009-11-21T15:37:07Z

If indeed it was a 'hit & run' then he would be a fugitive.

Re: OT, Cyclists, please go away.

2009-11-21T15:27:54Z

If you wanted a discussion you wouldn't be uttering tedious propaganda.

Re: OT, Cyclists, please go away.

2009-11-21T14:36:57Z

Beg pardon: I was under the impression that you wanted a discussion, not
just to score a point.
-dan

Re: OT, Cyclists, please go away.

2009-11-21T13:59:30Z

It should take less than that. A cyclist should be able to make the
decision in a split-second that cycling alongside a vehicle turning left
is a really stupid thing to do.

Re: Beware of the elephant that can crush you

2009-11-21T14:00:20Z

If there's a place for Jesus to come and suffer, he would ride a bike.
"Crucifiction" only lasted a few days, and then he came back from the
dead...
No such hope for modern cyclists.

Re: God doesn't give a shit about cyclists

2009-11-21T13:56:34Z

Since most cars seem to be ACCELERATING when they pass you, it means
that God doesn't give a shit about cyclists.

Re: Yet another pedestrian hurt

2009-11-21T13:39:17Z

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:04:51 -0800 (PST), webreader
"Caught" is an interesting choice of word. Are you suggesting the
cyclist is some sort of fugitive?

Re: I Hate Motorists

2009-11-21T13:26:46Z

Sure, I've done it myself. But given that one almost never sees a
terraced street where the carriageway is encroached on by bicycles
parked both sides, it's not a particularly interesting example. So, in
what circumstances _would_ you overtake a cyclist with only 12 inches to
spare?
-dan

Re: OT, Cyclists, please go away.

2009-11-21T13:16:50Z

Five minutes thought on the matter should be sufficient to come up with
the obvious explanation. When cycling down the side of a stationary
vehicle there is no chance until it starts moving of having it move into
your path and injure you. But when the other vehicle is passing the
cyclist, there is no such guarantee that it will not move sideways if

Yet another pedestrian hurt

2009-11-21T13:04:51Z

He just rode off, and what are the chances of him being caught.
[link]
WSR

Re: OT, Cyclists, please go away.

2009-11-21T11:54:23Z

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:42:21 +0000, Judith M Smith
(twaddle snipped)
I'm sure you've posted all that twaddle before, no new arguments?

Re: OT, Cyclists, please go away.

2009-11-21T11:50:15Z

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:28:32 +0000, Tony Dragon
Sounds like a recipe for getting hurt. The numpty Mr Cheerful was
talking about cyclists going "straight over the red light", which is a
bigger recipe for getting hurt, which is why I queried "regardless".

Re: Wheel sizes

2009-11-21T11:47:29Z

If you want to be really rigorous, you could repeat this a hundred times,
fit a distribution to the data and then you can obtain the standard error
for the recorded speed.

Re: "Footage of car collision released "

2009-11-21T11:42:08Z

Doug wrote:
I don't think that everyone here has said that.
You're making it up (or imagining it).