Bl**dy pavement riding RLJ's...

[HJ]

To all those who say that RLJing and pavement cycling do no harm, read this!! The ba$tard got what he deserved, it is notable that he had already been banded from driving, but that won't stop the rest of us getting tarred with the same brush....

Now just waiting for someone to pop up and say that Mr Turner should have been wearing a helmet as it might have saved his life, after all it is always the victims fault

 

[Arch]

You're wasting your breath. I expect we'll now be treated to someone telling us how that doesn't count, because when they break the law it's alwys very carefully and only when there's no one around, and anyway it's safer for them....

Interesting point about him having already been banned from driving, just shows his default level of personal responsibility...

 

[addictfreak]

I am reading this as the driving ban being part of the same punishment for this offence. Or am I mis understanding it.

 

[Jake]

should have been longer!

 

[marinyork]

To all those who say that RLJing and pavement cycling do no harm, read this!! The ba$tard got what he deserved, it is notable that he had already been banded from driving, but that won't stop the rest of us getting tarred with the same brush....

Now just waiting for someone to pop up and say that Mr Turner should have been wearing a helmet as it might have saved his life, after all it is always the victims fault

I take your point about getting tarred, as in this case whenever he was driving he did something bad enough to get banned, so rather than a dangerous driver and cycling he metamorphosises into a dangerous cyclist. I don't like the article in general though as I think it is biased. It is not important in the context of his actions he was banned, the red light is also irrelevent and so is the bat out of hell and rabble rousing. I'm not sure he got what he deserved though as by coincidence what was effectively a drunk attempted murder in a car got a mere 3 years on the same day.

The only things that matter are pavement + hill (possibly steep) + sharp bend + speed (may or may not have been going at speed) + elderly and infirm.

 

[RRCC]

Interesting point about him having already been banned from driving, just shows his default level of personal responsibility...

I read it that he was banned from driving for this offence - which seems a little strange. (Edit) the police press release confirms this.

Otherwise the sentance was about what a driver would have got - not enough for this degree of recklessness.

 

[marinyork]

Otherwise the sentance was about what a driver would have got - not enough for this degree of recklessness.

Apples and oranges.

 

[beanzontoast]

Time for a more up-to-date piece of legislation with stiffer punishments reflecting modern roads, pedestrian areas etc methinks. Too many cyclists thinking it doesn't matter if they cycle on the pavement / everyone does it / I'm only on a bike / no-one's going to mind / who's going to stop me etc etc etc...

 

[marinyork]

Time for a more up-to-date piece of legislation with stiffer punishments enforcement reflecting modern roads, pedestrian areas etc methinks. Too many cyclists cars road users thinking it doesn't matter if they cycleride/drive on the pavement / everyone does it / I'm only on a bikevehicle / no-one's going to mind / who's going to stop me etc etc etc...

+1.

 

[beanzontoast]

+1.

Yeah - I guess you're right!

 

[thomas]

I read it that he was banned from driving for this offence - which seems a little strange. (Edit) the police press release confirms this.

I think that is a bit silly. If he didn't have a drivers licence would he have been banned? The drivers ban is a bit pointless too as it will only effect him for 5 months, not the full year.

No problem with the rest of it, fair enough if he should go to prison for cycling dangerously.

You're wasting your breath. I expect we'll now be treated to someone telling us how that doesn't count, because when they break the law it's alwys very carefully and only when there's no one around, and anyway it's safer for them....

Cycling on the pavement isn't dangerous. If he was cycling at a safe speed and could stop in the distance he could see it would have been fine. I'm quite happy for people to cycle on the pavement, if they are considerate. If they stop for peds and only tootle along (at about walking speed anyway). This chap was obviously being reckless. It was the excessive speed that caused the accident, rather than just because he was on the pavement.

 

[User482]

The guy should have got longer IMO. Just like all the motorists who mow down hundreds of pedestrians each year - I don't make a distinction.

 

[Dan B]

To all those who say that RLJing and pavement cycling do no harm, read this!!

I read it. It seems to me that the problem is not that Hall was illegally riding on the pavement but that he was riding like a dangerous and entirely selfish tosser. Even if he'd been legally on the pavement (e.g. it had been a shared use path), or if his victim had been in the road, he would still have been riding like a dangerous and entirely selfish tosser.

What thomas said.

 

[mr_cellophane]

I think that is a bit silly. If he didn't have a drivers licence would he have been banned?

yes, because they ban underage drivers who take cars and drive recklessly. For them the ban doesn't start until they apply for a licence.

 

[User482]

The driving ban might apply because he was charged with an offence that applies to all vehicles, rather than cyclists specifically.