It makes my blood boil!

[Angelfishsolo]

Digital Cowboy, I take all your points on board (though I disagree with most) but I cannot take seriously your opinion about the assailant's family and any suffering they may or may not feel from any legal procedings. That is surely a matter for the concience of the assailant himself, and nobody else. Sometimes people just have to accept some responsibilty for themselves. Un-PC I know but life is hard. (Lefties take note)

Agreed. If that was a consideration no one would ever be punished!

 

[The Jogger]

If the car had of been caught on camera speeding, do you think the excuse ' I don't know who was driving it' would have been accepted or do you think a fine would be issued to the owner but as it's just a cyclist, it's a case of the old bill not doing their job right again.

 

[downfader]

I think a big problem online is anonymous comments that gives a voice to cowards. I see similar styles of bigotted comments on a variety of issues such as: students, unemployed, public sector workers, travellers - not just cyclists.

The problem is that lower life newspapers love creating an argument so they can generate page hits and more revenue. The higher end newspapers are not clean on this either but you do see a lot of removed comments and they are more likely to have threaded comments so you can foster good discussion.

The newspapers are responsible for content published on their sites so if they can be shown to be irresponsible, an external body might be able to punish them. The recent hacking story might be the catalyst for reigning in these papers.

Students, public sector workers etc all blend in with the crowd. Get on a bike and you're pretty exposed. It does make me wonder - will some poor sod encounter one of these cowards whilst out and about?

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

I agree that we should never give in to bullies. But this is different, this is now institutionalised bigotry.

It never used to be this way, I've seen it change over the past few years, slowly creeping in, perhaps unhindered by us as we stood by and ignored much of the comment that was made. Its not just a viewpoint.... its a "recieved wisdom" in the same way racist Fathers and Mothers "teach" their kids to hate.

With the newspaper comments, it appears to me that the admin teams don't mind that any story is taken over as a spring board to slag anyone off. I agree with Marin, teens do still get it in the neck, and I wonder how these people would feel if someone went on a news story about a teen being stabbed after a robbery and left a load of sh*t about "kids do this, kids do that, its their own fault!"

I feel like printing up a shirt that says: "I am not a law breaker!"

I too agree that we should stand up to bullies. And it pisses me off when I read comments that advocate for violence against cyclists. Sadly cyclists are the only "minority" group that it is not only fashionable but acceptable to advocate violence against.

Also sadly, all of those cyclists who break the law while riding i.e. riding against traffic (salmon riding), riding without lights (ninja riding), etc. are not helping the cause any. And I have to laugh at those people who think that the actions of one person doesn't reflect on others. Sadly, it does.

Education and punishment are really toe only way that we're going to change things.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Digital Cowboy, I take all your points on board (though I disagree with most) but I cannot take seriously your opinion about the assailant's family and any suffering they may or may not feel from any legal procedings. That is surely a matter for the concience of the assailant himself, and nobody else. Sometimes people just have to accept some responsibilty for themselves. Un-PC I know but life is hard. (Lefties take note)

TBB,

I appreciate your honesty. I was just trying to point out that it is likely that there is the possibility of other innocent victims. And that in seeking justice that we should be careful not to inflict any kind of damage on them.

And I fully agree with you that people need to learn to accept responsibility for their actions, and I don't think that that is being "un-PC." And actually, I find being "PC" to be "un-PC." When people are afraid to speak their mind because it might "offend" someone how have we benefited from that?

As an example, I'm sure most of us are aware of the crash that accorded during the Tour and a French media vehicle over the weekend. A reporter with ESPN (a cable sports network here in the states) had tweeted that he thought that that crash was humorous. Which has sparked a furor of "PC" backlash. Calling for the reporters resignation or his firing. At least one saying that if the reporter had made a sexist remark about women that there would be all kinds of backlash over that. And that there'd be no question as to whether or not he should be fired.

The way that I think that this should be handled is that he should be suspended for several weeks, and/or fined, as well as having a written letter of reprimand placed in his personal file. If he screws up again with the next year or so use that incident along with this one as grounds for dismissing him. And when it comes time to renegotiate his contract use that letter as grounds to either not rehire him or to demote him.

Now if he was openly calling for violence against cyclists or any other group yes, that would be a different situation and dismissal would not be uncalled for. But calling for his dismissal simply for speaking his mind (even though some thoughts are better left unsaid/tweeted/shared, is going too far.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

TBB,

I appreciate your honesty. I was just trying to point out that it is likely that there is the possibility of other innocent victims. And that in seeking justice that we should be careful not to inflict any kind of damage on them.

And I fully agree with you that people need to learn to accept responsibility for their actions, and I don't think that that is being "un-PC." And actually, I find being "PC" to be "un-PC." When people are afraid to speak their mind because it might "offend" someone how have we benefited from that?

As an example, I'm sure most of us are aware of the crash that accorded during the Tour and a French media vehicle over the weekend. A reporter with ESPN (a cable sports network here in the states) had tweeted that he thought that that crash was humorous. Which has sparked a furor of "PC" backlash. Calling for the reporters resignation or his firing. At least one saying that if the reporter had made a sexist remark about women that there would be all kinds of backlash over that. And that there'd be no question as to whether or not he should be fired.

The way that I think that this should be handled is that he should be suspended for several weeks, and/or fined, as well as having a written letter of reprimand placed in his personal file. If he screws up again with the next year or so use that incident along with this one as grounds for dismissing him. And when it comes time to renegotiate his contract use that letter as grounds to either not rehire him or to demote him.

Now if he was openly calling for violence against cyclists or any other group yes, that would be a different situation and dismissal would not be uncalled for. But calling for his dismissal simply for speaking his mind (even though some thoughts are better left unsaid/tweeted/shared, is going too far.

Your well reasoned argument here says nothing about the impact a punishment would have on family members. Did you lose track in the thread or is this a backtrack?

 

[abo]

A government job (or a job in the healthcare field or relies heavily on public trust) I can see, one's off duty/clock activities effecting their job. But if it's just an "average run of the mill type job," then what they do when not on the clock shouldn't effect their job. Such as someone who "flips burgers" or wash dishes at the fast food joint/local pub shouldn't loose their job because of something that they'd done while off of the clock.

The guy is a farrier, someone has already posted on the Youtube clip that they will be taking their business elsewhere. Can be quite a close-knit passtime horseriding too, if word gets round then he might lose more...

 

[pshore]

Students, public sector workers etc all blend in with the crowd. Get on a bike and you're pretty exposed. It does make me wonder - will some poor sod encounter one of these cowards whilst out and about?

These anonymous postings do enable us to see what some people are thinking but most are cowards hiding behind anonymity. Very few of them will threaten violence against someone over this when face to face because they know they are wrong.

I do meet drivers on my commute who have buzzed me on purpose. I make a point of tapping on their window and talking to them in a very polite and civilised way. (actually most of them are expecting violence as I turn up and so extreme politeness puts them on the back foot). I can say that every driver I have managed to have a conversation with has been converted when I tell them I am just trying to make it home to my children. All petty arguments vanish as they realise what they have done. So, there is hope.

You might be right about losing this battle but we have not lost the war. This story has attracted more thugs than normal. On other stories we have made a difference together. For example, on my local paper, the bigotry is always countered by reasoned and sensible arguments and I can tell you that incidents of "you don't pay road tax" is now close to zero. This is real progress.

So don't be disheartened, your dedication to the cause is inspiring and is having a real and positive effect.

Phil.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

If he is a good farrier they won't. In any case it would be tough justice for him to lose his livelihood because of his moment of madness. May be 6 months of his income would be fair, and a years suspended sentence to stay with him forever. But he shouldn't be crucified.

I did say some

 

[abo]

If he is a good farrier they won't. In any case it would be tough justice for him to lose his livelihood because of his moment of madness. May be 6 months of his income would be fair, and a years suspended sentence to stay with him forever. But he shouldn't be crucified.

**** him, he shouldn't have done what he did. And I'm not saying that because I ride a bike and the guy he 'punched' was a cyclist. There is too much unpunished thuggery in this country so if he loses his business then tough. Hopefully in the near future this guy will be looking for a job and the person doing the interviewing will remember his unintentionally public neanderthalims and pass him over for someone more deserving.

 

[Ste T.]

hmmm .... actually I think your'e probably right.

reiver,reiver,reiver......What are you thinking of. You won't last long rethinking something and then admitting you may have been wrong. Don't you know, you're supposed to paint yourself into a corner and argue till bedtime

 

[downfader]

My Mother has just said this has been mentioned on the Jeremy Vine R2 show today

 

[Angelfishsolo]

My Mother has just said this has been mentioned on the Jeremy Vine R2 show today

This?

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Agreed. If that was a consideration no one would ever be punished!

I'm not saying that he shouldn't be punished. I'm just saying that he shouldn't be punished to the extent that if he has children that he can't provide for them. That isn't asking too much is it?

I mean if he has children and he is punished to such an extent that he can't provide for his children what do you think is going to end up happening?

As I said, yes let's punish him, but not to the extent that he cannot afford to take care of his other obligations. Isn't that reasonable?

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

If the car had of been caught on camera speeding, do you think the excuse ' I don't know who was driving it' would have been accepted or do you think a fine would be issued to the owner but as it's just a cyclist, it's a case of the old bill not doing their job right again.

Very good point, or if it had been involved in a hit and run. If the owner wasn't willing to identify who was driving they'd be the one charged with the hit and run.