Angelfishsolo
A Velocipedian
- Location
- Cwmbach, South Wales
Pedestrians
- Thread starter benb
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Looks to me like, although going slowly you were poorly positioned and still going too fast for the conditions (the obstruction, pedestrians milling around and a fountain which introduces the possibility of slippery surfaces). You didnt expect a child to emerge from the obstruction like you should have, performed an emergency stop and fell off your bike.
Digital_Cowboy
New Member
- Location
- Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fl, USA
[QUOTE 1484588"]
That's not less. You're being ridiculous.
I'm a social worker, so don't bother making stuff up.
[/quote]
Have you worked any cases in the States? If not than you do not know what you are talking about.
A neighbor of a friend of mine had a pet raccoon, another neighbor reported them for child abuse and a full investigation was done. Even though the investigation showed that there was NO CHILDREN in any kind of danger they still have it on their record.
Also over here in the States plenty of men have had their careers destroyed because a female co-worker has accused them of sexual harassment. I saw a documentary years ago on the use of the polygraph and how inaccurate it can be. There was a man who answered three questions, and the machine said he was lying. He lost his job, he could no longer get any work in his chosen career field. The three questions that the machine said that he lied on were his name, marital status, and address.
So please unless you have actually investigated cases here in the States do not accuse me of making things up.
In the wake of the Casey Anthony case, there is a new bill being purposed for a new law to be called the Caylee Anthony law. It would make it a felony not to report a missing child within a "reasonable amount of time."
You would not believe the number of laws that we have on the books to protect children. There is the Amber Alert, which uses the illuminated signs along the roads to alert people to a missing child, there is the Code Adam for children who go missing in a store or mall. It seems like every time something happens to a child we end up with a new law aimed at protecting children.
Just the other month I was watching Nancy Grace's show "Swift Justice w/Nancy Grace," in which she heard the case of a man v. a woman who had had the man arrested alleging that he molested her son as well as talking him into stealing a car.
Nancy was able to determine from talking to the woman that her son was not the "sweet innocent, little angle" that she was making him out to be. It turns out that her "sweet innocent, little angle" had already spent time in juvenile detention for grand theft auto, and that he had been molested while in juvenile detention. Listening to her testify it sounded as if she was upset that her son wasn't the "sweet innocent, little angel" that she thought he was and because she couldn't go after those who were really responsible she went after the easiest target she could find. Or rather that she thought that she had found.
Even though Nancy didn't award him any money, IIRC she did find in his favor. The only mistake that he made was that he is a member of MySpace,and he as too much personal information posted to his page. And her son was able to gather enough information to make it look as if they really new each other when he (the kid) was just one of thousands of "friends" that he had on MySpace. That and he doesn't/didn't screen his friend requests. He'd approve of any and all friend requests that came in.
That's not less. You're being ridiculous.
I'm a social worker, so don't bother making stuff up.
[/quote]
Have you worked any cases in the States? If not than you do not know what you are talking about.
A neighbor of a friend of mine had a pet raccoon, another neighbor reported them for child abuse and a full investigation was done. Even though the investigation showed that there was NO CHILDREN in any kind of danger they still have it on their record.
Also over here in the States plenty of men have had their careers destroyed because a female co-worker has accused them of sexual harassment. I saw a documentary years ago on the use of the polygraph and how inaccurate it can be. There was a man who answered three questions, and the machine said he was lying. He lost his job, he could no longer get any work in his chosen career field. The three questions that the machine said that he lied on were his name, marital status, and address.
So please unless you have actually investigated cases here in the States do not accuse me of making things up.
In the wake of the Casey Anthony case, there is a new bill being purposed for a new law to be called the Caylee Anthony law. It would make it a felony not to report a missing child within a "reasonable amount of time."
You would not believe the number of laws that we have on the books to protect children. There is the Amber Alert, which uses the illuminated signs along the roads to alert people to a missing child, there is the Code Adam for children who go missing in a store or mall. It seems like every time something happens to a child we end up with a new law aimed at protecting children.
Just the other month I was watching Nancy Grace's show "Swift Justice w/Nancy Grace," in which she heard the case of a man v. a woman who had had the man arrested alleging that he molested her son as well as talking him into stealing a car.
Nancy was able to determine from talking to the woman that her son was not the "sweet innocent, little angle" that she was making him out to be. It turns out that her "sweet innocent, little angle" had already spent time in juvenile detention for grand theft auto, and that he had been molested while in juvenile detention. Listening to her testify it sounded as if she was upset that her son wasn't the "sweet innocent, little angel" that she thought he was and because she couldn't go after those who were really responsible she went after the easiest target she could find. Or rather that she thought that she had found.
Even though Nancy didn't award him any money, IIRC she did find in his favor. The only mistake that he made was that he is a member of MySpace,and he as too much personal information posted to his page. And her son was able to gather enough information to make it look as if they really new each other when he (the kid) was just one of thousands of "friends" that he had on MySpace. That and he doesn't/didn't screen his friend requests. He'd approve of any and all friend requests that came in.
Digital_Cowboy
New Member
- Location
- Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fl, USA
[QUOTE 1484589"]
Yes.
If you ride into someone, you're responsible.
[/quote]
Agreed, but if the reverse of that is true. If someone through their carelessness runs into a cyclist then they NOT the cyclist is responsible.
Why does that seem to be a difficult concept for you to grasp?
Yes.
If you ride into someone, you're responsible.
[/quote]
Agreed, but if the reverse of that is true. If someone through their carelessness runs into a cyclist then they NOT the cyclist is responsible.
Why does that seem to be a difficult concept for you to grasp?
Angelfishsolo
A Velocipedian
- Location
- Cwmbach, South Wales
By the same token you have no idea about British life and do not know what you are talking about.
Digital_Cowboy
New Member
- Location
- Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fl, USA
you re right I didn`t expect the child to run out like that but I was ready in case something did happen with hands on brakes but didn`t notice the wet surface
I was going slow enough & as most people were standing around I couldn`t wait for them to pass me I would probably have been there all night waiting for people to pass.
Poorly Positioned? don`t know where you get that from maybe you mean when I was on the floor
Looks like there was just as much room to the right of them as the left.
If you really couldn't have gone to their right you should have stopped until they had gone past you, No as they weren`t going anywhere just standing there ( the girl wasn`t on a reign or rein either) and then taken a wider line past the corner.
Digital_Cowboy
New Member
- Location
- Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fl, USA
[QUOTE 1484598"]
If the alternative is riding into someone then yes, you should. You saw her, you had time to stop, you should have stopped.
A crowd of people cannot suddenly appear from nowhere. If you're approaching a blind bend you must always assume there is a hazard around the corner until you're sure that there isn't, and alter your speed appropriately. If this means slowing to walking pace then that's what you must do.
[/quote]
I saw her, yes; I did NOT have time to stop. If I had she still would have hit my handlebars, plus as I'd said IIRC there were also people coming up from behind me and one or more of them would have walked into me.
Experience has taught me that while at these various concerts/events that yes there are some people milling about in the (closed) street. And that was pretty much true here. It was for want of a better word a fluke that I found myself in the situation that I did.
It wasn't a "blind bend" per say, as it was a normal run of road and as I said where the cop had his post setup was approximately a 1/4 of a mile or so away. At a three-way intersection, down the road from that cops post was another three-way intersection. And when I stopped at that second intersection and looked up and down the road that I was going to turn on there wasn't any large groups of people milling about. But apparently as I was riding down the road more and more people had started to leave the fenced in area where the concert was being held. So yes a crowd of people DID in fact "suddenly" appear from nowhere.
Also as I have said as more people appeared I was slowing my speed down. But that had I completely stopped the gal who hit my handlebars still would have hit them, as well as it is more than likely that the people who were walking behind me would have run into me. Would it have been better for me to stop and have I don't know how many people behind me run into me, or to continue and "allow" one person to hit my handlebars?
If the alternative is riding into someone then yes, you should. You saw her, you had time to stop, you should have stopped.
A crowd of people cannot suddenly appear from nowhere. If you're approaching a blind bend you must always assume there is a hazard around the corner until you're sure that there isn't, and alter your speed appropriately. If this means slowing to walking pace then that's what you must do.
[/quote]
I saw her, yes; I did NOT have time to stop. If I had she still would have hit my handlebars, plus as I'd said IIRC there were also people coming up from behind me and one or more of them would have walked into me.
Experience has taught me that while at these various concerts/events that yes there are some people milling about in the (closed) street. And that was pretty much true here. It was for want of a better word a fluke that I found myself in the situation that I did.
It wasn't a "blind bend" per say, as it was a normal run of road and as I said where the cop had his post setup was approximately a 1/4 of a mile or so away. At a three-way intersection, down the road from that cops post was another three-way intersection. And when I stopped at that second intersection and looked up and down the road that I was going to turn on there wasn't any large groups of people milling about. But apparently as I was riding down the road more and more people had started to leave the fenced in area where the concert was being held. So yes a crowd of people DID in fact "suddenly" appear from nowhere.
Also as I have said as more people appeared I was slowing my speed down. But that had I completely stopped the gal who hit my handlebars still would have hit them, as well as it is more than likely that the people who were walking behind me would have run into me. Would it have been better for me to stop and have I don't know how many people behind me run into me, or to continue and "allow" one person to hit my handlebars?
Digital_Cowboy
New Member
- Location
- Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fl, USA
[QUOTE 1484600"]
No, you're not qualified. According to your evidence there have only ever been three fatal cycle pedestrian collisions in the whole world. Ever.
You're making claims that you can't back up.
[/quote]
No, those are the one's that I remember reading about. Others at the other forum that I go to have talked about cyclists hitting and injuring and/or killing pedestrians.
No, you're not qualified. According to your evidence there have only ever been three fatal cycle pedestrian collisions in the whole world. Ever.
You're making claims that you can't back up.
[/quote]
No, those are the one's that I remember reading about. Others at the other forum that I go to have talked about cyclists hitting and injuring and/or killing pedestrians.
Angelfishsolo
A Velocipedian
- Location
- Cwmbach, South Wales
Can you not see that your actions were misguided?
Could not stop means going too fast. Fact.
Digital_Cowboy
New Member
- Location
- Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fl, USA
The same is true here as well, but if you ask the motorists on the road you get the same unsupported claim that you get over there, i.e. we cyclists do not pay our "fair share" and there for we do not have a right to be on their roads.
Angelfishsolo
A Velocipedian
- Location
- Cwmbach, South Wales
So does that mean we should bow down to the mighty car and take the same attitude towards pedestrians?
- Status