VIDEO: CCTV footage of moment car crashed into young cyclist

CCTV footage of moment car crashed into young cyclist

CCTV footage of moment car crashed into young cyclist

First published in News
Last updated
by

This is the shocking moment when a driver crashed into a 12-year-old cyclist – after pulling out without looking.

The footage shows how a serious accident can be caused by a moment’s carelessness on the roads.

As the weather improves, Sussex Police is urging drivers and cyclists to look out for each other in a bid to reduce the annual bike death toll.

Last year four cyclists were killed in Sussex and a further 145 were seriously injured.

Across the country the number of cyclists killed increased from 107 to 118 between 2011 and 2012. More than 3,000 cyclists were seriously injured in each of those two years.

The CCTV footage was recorded on the A259 in Chichester in 2012.

The 41-year-old motorist was convicted of driving without due care and attention and was given three points on his licence, ordered to pay £85 costs, an £85 fine and a £20 victim surcharge.

Sergeant Carl Knapp said: “Fortunately in this case the cyclist escaped with bumps and bruises but it could have been a lot worse.

“Despite being just a few yards away, the car driver completely failed to look for the cyclist.”

He added: “My message to all road users is look once, look twice and then look a third time if you have to – whatever you need to do to make sure you keep yourself and other people safe.

“Seventy per cent of collisions where cyclists suffer serious harm or are killed happen at junctions.

“I would urge all road users to reflect on this and to take that opportunity to double check their view at junctions before passing through.”

The force has issued a number of tips for both cyclists and drivers.

Drivers are advised to look out for bikes and make eye contact with the cyclist where possible.

Also they should use indicators to signal their intentions so that cyclists can react, give them plenty of space and always check before opening their car door.

Cyclists are urged to ride positively, decisively and well clear of the kerb, and to look and signal to show drivers their intentions.

They should also avoid riding up the inside of large vehicles, always use lights, and wear light coloured or reflective clothing and a correctly fitted cycle helmet.

Comments (59)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:44am Thu 1 May 14

wexler53 says...

No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all. wexler53
  • Score: 4

6:52am Thu 1 May 14

DougM says...

wexler53 wrote:
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day.
But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving.
Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now.
[quote][p][bold]wexler53[/bold] wrote: No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.[/p][/quote]Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day. But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving. Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now. DougM
  • Score: 25

7:51am Thu 1 May 14

Spx says...

One less cyclist for you keyboard warriors to complain about! Nearly
One less cyclist for you keyboard warriors to complain about! Nearly Spx
  • Score: -25

7:56am Thu 1 May 14

Spx says...

What criminal sanctions will the driver suffer? What compensation will they be made to pay the cyclist? Will the police check the drivers computor history to see if they make menacing posts against cyclists on this site? Good Luck to the cyclist, I hope you recover soon.
What criminal sanctions will the driver suffer? What compensation will they be made to pay the cyclist? Will the police check the drivers computor history to see if they make menacing posts against cyclists on this site? Good Luck to the cyclist, I hope you recover soon. Spx
  • Score: -9

8:15am Thu 1 May 14

Baffled of Brighton says...

Pretty awful driving there. You can not make assumptions when driving... and the driver probably assumed that the cyclist was going to turn in the same big gap that the driver pulls out into... instead the cyclist doesn't go for the gap
Pretty awful driving there. You can not make assumptions when driving... and the driver probably assumed that the cyclist was going to turn in the same big gap that the driver pulls out into... instead the cyclist doesn't go for the gap Baffled of Brighton
  • Score: 7

9:07am Thu 1 May 14

monkeymoo says...

Typical car driver!
Typical car driver! monkeymoo
  • Score: -5

10:00am Thu 1 May 14

utternonsense says...

Most car drivers consider all types of transport . Unfortunately you do get the odd idiot . There is no excuse for this as they obviously did not look before pulling out . Not all us car drivers are the same .
Most car drivers consider all types of transport . Unfortunately you do get the odd idiot . There is no excuse for this as they obviously did not look before pulling out . Not all us car drivers are the same . utternonsense
  • Score: 25

11:07am Thu 1 May 14

Keith Peat says...

Right. Yes drivers are bumping into things all the time, trees,bus tops, other cars lamp posts etc. But then there's only damage at low speeds?

Why do exposed cyclists imagine that being right will stop their death and injury?

No blame of innocent cyclist or excuse for the driver. But why do cyclists go mad when I point out how risky road cycling is? And this video demonstrates that.
Right. Yes drivers are bumping into things all the time, trees,bus tops, other cars lamp posts etc. But then there's only damage at low speeds? Why do exposed cyclists imagine that being right will stop their death and injury? No blame of innocent cyclist or excuse for the driver. But why do cyclists go mad when I point out how risky road cycling is? And this video demonstrates that. Keith Peat
  • Score: -7

11:13am Thu 1 May 14

me007 says...

wexler53 wrote:
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
It's also possible, that the driver watching where they were going might have made a difference too! Your direction towards a hi-viz, shows a stunning lack of realisation about what actually happened here.

On a related thought... If all cyclists had to wear hi-viz vests, then surely, wouldn't all other road users? And if everyone ended up wearing them, they would become the norm, and as such, would no longer serve the purpose for which they were invented, that of making someone stand out.
[quote][p][bold]wexler53[/bold] wrote: No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.[/p][/quote]It's also possible, that the driver watching where they were going might have made a difference too! Your direction towards a hi-viz, shows a stunning lack of realisation about what actually happened here. On a related thought... If all cyclists had to wear hi-viz vests, then surely, wouldn't all other road users? And if everyone ended up wearing them, they would become the norm, and as such, would no longer serve the purpose for which they were invented, that of making someone stand out. me007
  • Score: 7

11:18am Thu 1 May 14

Old Ladys Gin says...

I go often to Holland where almost 90 percent of people own and use a bike.
You rarely see anyone wearing HiViz gear or a helmet and this extends to mopeds and small motorbikes; many of the bikes have no brakes.
To sit at a junction in a city such as Amsterdam and watch the interaction between the different classes of road users would be an education for any Brit who has not had the experience.
It's a matter of them all being used to it and they would not put up with some of the arrogant behaviour displayed by some motorists and some cyclists in this country.
Learn to live with each other.
I go often to Holland where almost 90 percent of people own and use a bike. You rarely see anyone wearing HiViz gear or a helmet and this extends to mopeds and small motorbikes; many of the bikes have no brakes. To sit at a junction in a city such as Amsterdam and watch the interaction between the different classes of road users would be an education for any Brit who has not had the experience. It's a matter of them all being used to it and they would not put up with some of the arrogant behaviour displayed by some motorists and some cyclists in this country. Learn to live with each other. Old Ladys Gin
  • Score: 21

11:22am Thu 1 May 14

me007 says...

Keith Peat wrote:
Right. Yes drivers are bumping into things all the time, trees,bus tops, other cars lamp posts etc. But then there's only damage at low speeds?

Why do exposed cyclists imagine that being right will stop their death and injury?

No blame of innocent cyclist or excuse for the driver. But why do cyclists go mad when I point out how risky road cycling is? And this video demonstrates that.
Do you need some sort of test or something? There's obviously an entire conversation going on in your head, that no one else is, at this stage in the comment section, party to. I'm less worried sometimes by dangerous drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians, than I am by the type of logic that you've displayed!
[quote][p][bold]Keith Peat[/bold] wrote: Right. Yes drivers are bumping into things all the time, trees,bus tops, other cars lamp posts etc. But then there's only damage at low speeds? Why do exposed cyclists imagine that being right will stop their death and injury? No blame of innocent cyclist or excuse for the driver. But why do cyclists go mad when I point out how risky road cycling is? And this video demonstrates that.[/p][/quote]Do you need some sort of test or something? There's obviously an entire conversation going on in your head, that no one else is, at this stage in the comment section, party to. I'm less worried sometimes by dangerous drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians, than I am by the type of logic that you've displayed! me007
  • Score: 6

11:50am Thu 1 May 14

getThisCoalitionOut says...

3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road.

And I'm not a cyclist.
3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist. getThisCoalitionOut
  • Score: 15

11:55am Thu 1 May 14

wippasnapper says...

Some drivers must be blind well at lest this driver is as clearly shone in this footage what could have the driver been looking at if not the traffic on the road yes by all means look left look right but also look what’s directly in front of you.
Some drivers must be blind well at lest this driver is as clearly shone in this footage what could have the driver been looking at if not the traffic on the road yes by all means look left look right but also look what’s directly in front of you. wippasnapper
  • Score: 8

12:31pm Thu 1 May 14

aat99 says...

Spx wrote:
One less cyclist for you keyboard warriors to complain about! Nearly
pathetic and sad
[quote][p][bold]Spx[/bold] wrote: One less cyclist for you keyboard warriors to complain about! Nearly[/p][/quote]pathetic and sad aat99
  • Score: 3

12:55pm Thu 1 May 14

Old Ladys Gin says...

wippasnapper wrote:
Some drivers must be blind well at lest this driver is as clearly shone in this footage what could have the driver been looking at if not the traffic on the road yes by all means look left look right but also look what’s directly in front of you.
In order to see everything you need to scan and the vast majority of drivers do not do it and are not taught to do it; they are taught to look.
[quote][p][bold]wippasnapper[/bold] wrote: Some drivers must be blind well at lest this driver is as clearly shone in this footage what could have the driver been looking at if not the traffic on the road yes by all means look left look right but also look what’s directly in front of you.[/p][/quote]In order to see everything you need to scan and the vast majority of drivers do not do it and are not taught to do it; they are taught to look. Old Ladys Gin
  • Score: 3

1:00pm Thu 1 May 14

Old Ladys Gin says...

getThisCoalitionOut wrote:
3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road.

And I'm not a cyclist.
Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be.
Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so.
Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe.
Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living.
Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk.
[quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be. Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so. Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe. Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living. Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk. Old Ladys Gin
  • Score: -6

1:06pm Thu 1 May 14

Old Ladys Gin says...

This is a country that knows how to cycle and also knows how road users can inhabit the same space.
It works - mostly - and that is about as good as it gets.

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=9OdPU_XfZ
YQ
This is a country that knows how to cycle and also knows how road users can inhabit the same space. It works - mostly - and that is about as good as it gets. http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=9OdPU_XfZ YQ Old Ladys Gin
  • Score: 1

1:08pm Thu 1 May 14

Old Ladys Gin says...

Or this one - can you imagine our queen cycling!

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=THfgwF-KQ
3U
Or this one - can you imagine our queen cycling! http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=THfgwF-KQ 3U Old Ladys Gin
  • Score: 0

1:14pm Thu 1 May 14

Mr Sworld says...

Keith Peat wrote:
Right. Yes drivers are bumping into things all the time, trees,bus tops, other cars lamp posts etc. But then there's only damage at low speeds? Why do exposed cyclists imagine that being right will stop their death and injury? No blame of innocent cyclist or excuse for the driver. But why do cyclists go mad when I point out how risky road cycling is? And this video demonstrates that.
Ah... Keith Peat. I'm guessing you are the 'Drivers Union' version?

Beware of this idiot, he's a retired, bitter, old busybody who endlessly trolls any cycling story and tries to make to shift any blame from motorist to the cyclists.

Well known around the on-line bike community.
[quote][p][bold]Keith Peat[/bold] wrote: Right. Yes drivers are bumping into things all the time, trees,bus tops, other cars lamp posts etc. But then there's only damage at low speeds? Why do exposed cyclists imagine that being right will stop their death and injury? No blame of innocent cyclist or excuse for the driver. But why do cyclists go mad when I point out how risky road cycling is? And this video demonstrates that.[/p][/quote]Ah... Keith Peat. I'm guessing you are the 'Drivers Union' version? Beware of this idiot, he's a retired, bitter, old busybody who endlessly trolls any cycling story and tries to make to shift any blame from motorist to the cyclists. Well known around the on-line bike community. Mr Sworld
  • Score: 2

1:15pm Thu 1 May 14

Plantpot says...

Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind.

A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.
Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind. A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties. Plantpot
  • Score: 0

1:25pm Thu 1 May 14

Old Ladys Gin says...

Plantpot wrote:
Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind.

A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.
I think you have to be careful to distinguish between small urban roads and larger ones.
In Barcelona on the city's many multi lane ring roads they imposed a blanket 80kph speed limit.
The stated reason was to reduce pollution and road casualties.
However after 18 months the experiment was stopped because pollution was hardly affected but casualties especially serious and fatal injuries increased by more than 40 percent.
All well and fine to increase speed limits where only motorised traffic is present but in inner city roads I doubt that would be successful.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind. A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.[/p][/quote]I think you have to be careful to distinguish between small urban roads and larger ones. In Barcelona on the city's many multi lane ring roads they imposed a blanket 80kph speed limit. The stated reason was to reduce pollution and road casualties. However after 18 months the experiment was stopped because pollution was hardly affected but casualties especially serious and fatal injuries increased by more than 40 percent. All well and fine to increase speed limits where only motorised traffic is present but in inner city roads I doubt that would be successful. Old Ladys Gin
  • Score: 5

1:45pm Thu 1 May 14

Quiterie says...

Plantpot wrote:
Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind.

A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.
Exactly what I've been arguing for..... let's get that traffic through as quickly as possible and off the roads. Especially around schools, where the speed limit should be doubled. As you say the evidence for this is compelling.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind. A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I've been arguing for..... let's get that traffic through as quickly as possible and off the roads. Especially around schools, where the speed limit should be doubled. As you say the evidence for this is compelling. Quiterie
  • Score: -9

1:57pm Thu 1 May 14

mhaiti says...

Old Ladys Gin wrote:
getThisCoalitionOut wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.
Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be. Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so. Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe. Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living. Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk.
Implying that the cyclist needs to be "more safe" is exactly the problem here. The cyclist has done nothing wrong, he's a 12 year old kid and the only lesson he may have learnt is to be petrified of cycling / cars.

That it takes hitting a child on a bike to ensure that the driver learns a lesson is wrong. Empathy on the roads should be there without having to go through something like this.

It's the fact that things like this happen to children (who probably would have otherwise followed decent road rules) that lead to them growing up into the militant cyclists that we see on the road today. You should see it in London, it is MUCH worse...such animosity between cyclists and motorists...
[quote][p][bold]Old Ladys Gin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be. Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so. Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe. Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living. Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk.[/p][/quote]Implying that the cyclist needs to be "more safe" is exactly the problem here. The cyclist has done nothing wrong, he's a 12 year old kid and the only lesson he may have learnt is to be petrified of cycling / cars. That it takes hitting a child on a bike to ensure that the driver learns a lesson is wrong. Empathy on the roads should be there without having to go through something like this. It's the fact that things like this happen to children (who probably would have otherwise followed decent road rules) that lead to them growing up into the militant cyclists that we see on the road today. You should see it in London, it is MUCH worse...such animosity between cyclists and motorists... mhaiti
  • Score: 12

2:13pm Thu 1 May 14

grabur says...

Fascinating video, the driver was most likely looking over to the left and right as he approached the junction, and forgot to look directly ahead. That was his blindspot. He just didn't spot the cyclist.

I dodged a similar encounter by luck recently. I had 4 lights on my bike as I was going into a three exit roundabout. Cars to the right of me clearly indicated, which was great. A car approached the roundabout on the left as I began making my way across to the last exit. I suddenly worried they wouldn't slow, and just go straight over. Then to my amazement, they took a right turn, because I was preempting the car rushing out, I slowed down, and the car just clipped my wheel. No signal or anything. Slight drizel. I left absolutely shocked. I was right there in his line of sight, so why wasn't I acknowledged? Even my flashing lights didn't help. Weird.
Fascinating video, the driver was most likely looking over to the left and right as he approached the junction, and forgot to look directly ahead. That was his blindspot. He just didn't spot the cyclist. I dodged a similar encounter by luck recently. I had 4 lights on my bike as I was going into a three exit roundabout. Cars to the right of me clearly indicated, which was great. A car approached the roundabout on the left as I began making my way across to the last exit. I suddenly worried they wouldn't slow, and just go straight over. Then to my amazement, they took a right turn, because I was preempting the car rushing out, I slowed down, and the car just clipped my wheel. No signal or anything. Slight drizel. I left absolutely shocked. I was right there in his line of sight, so why wasn't I acknowledged? Even my flashing lights didn't help. Weird. grabur
  • Score: 3

2:15pm Thu 1 May 14

grabur says...

I should say mini-roundabout.
I should say mini-roundabout. grabur
  • Score: 2

2:17pm Thu 1 May 14

Old Ladys Gin says...

mhaiti wrote:
Old Ladys Gin wrote:
getThisCoalitionOut wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.
Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be. Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so. Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe. Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living. Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk.
Implying that the cyclist needs to be "more safe" is exactly the problem here. The cyclist has done nothing wrong, he's a 12 year old kid and the only lesson he may have learnt is to be petrified of cycling / cars.

That it takes hitting a child on a bike to ensure that the driver learns a lesson is wrong. Empathy on the roads should be there without having to go through something like this.

It's the fact that things like this happen to children (who probably would have otherwise followed decent road rules) that lead to them growing up into the militant cyclists that we see on the road today. You should see it in London, it is MUCH worse...such animosity between cyclists and motorists...
My point is that nobody is perfect and people do and will make mistakes.
Nobody can say for sure what the effect will be on either of the road users involved but both have survived to tell the tale.
We will never have a situation when collisions do not occur but we have in the last 20 years in particular made massive strides in reducing road casualties.
I could not agree more that empathy on the roads should be the norm but that will only come by changing attitudes away from 'the car goes first' which is prevalent in the UK.
Many of our neighbouring countries changed this attitude a decade or more ago; you will see many towns and cities where all road users rub along quite nicely.
I attach the front page of the French highway code. It may need translating but gives a good picture of the current attitude:

http://www.securite-
routiere.gouv.fr/con
naitre-les-regles/la
-route-la-rue/le-cod
e-de-la-rue2
[quote][p][bold]mhaiti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Old Ladys Gin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be. Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so. Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe. Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living. Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk.[/p][/quote]Implying that the cyclist needs to be "more safe" is exactly the problem here. The cyclist has done nothing wrong, he's a 12 year old kid and the only lesson he may have learnt is to be petrified of cycling / cars. That it takes hitting a child on a bike to ensure that the driver learns a lesson is wrong. Empathy on the roads should be there without having to go through something like this. It's the fact that things like this happen to children (who probably would have otherwise followed decent road rules) that lead to them growing up into the militant cyclists that we see on the road today. You should see it in London, it is MUCH worse...such animosity between cyclists and motorists...[/p][/quote]My point is that nobody is perfect and people do and will make mistakes. Nobody can say for sure what the effect will be on either of the road users involved but both have survived to tell the tale. We will never have a situation when collisions do not occur but we have in the last 20 years in particular made massive strides in reducing road casualties. I could not agree more that empathy on the roads should be the norm but that will only come by changing attitudes away from 'the car goes first' which is prevalent in the UK. Many of our neighbouring countries changed this attitude a decade or more ago; you will see many towns and cities where all road users rub along quite nicely. I attach the front page of the French highway code. It may need translating but gives a good picture of the current attitude: http://www.securite- routiere.gouv.fr/con naitre-les-regles/la -route-la-rue/le-cod e-de-la-rue2 Old Ladys Gin
  • Score: -3

2:21pm Thu 1 May 14

rubberflipper says...

Some people just shouldn't be driving at all. In these cases, courts should order a re-test before people get their full licence back.
Some people just shouldn't be driving at all. In these cases, courts should order a re-test before people get their full licence back. rubberflipper
  • Score: 5

2:42pm Thu 1 May 14

sussexram40 says...

getThisCoalitionOut wrote:
3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road.

And I'm not a cyclist.
Pathetic. Same penalty as someone gets for accidentally straying over 30 in a 30 limit.
[quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Pathetic. Same penalty as someone gets for accidentally straying over 30 in a 30 limit. sussexram40
  • Score: 2

2:47pm Thu 1 May 14

Mr chock says...

getThisCoalitionOut wrote:
3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road.

And I'm not a cyclist.
i to was shocked it was just 3 points this also is a wonder The CCTV footage was recorded on the A259 in Chichester in 2012. ? image in footage has date 22/ 10 / 2012 this seems to have taken its time to be an article in the argus .. also please can we see the actual footage not the filming of the accident on a camera held to a screen "like them shelving in the clip LOL whats level the screen or the shelf
[quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.[/p][/quote]i to was shocked it was just 3 points this also is a wonder The CCTV footage was recorded on the A259 in Chichester in 2012. ? image in footage has date 22/ 10 / 2012 this seems to have taken its time to be an article in the argus .. also please can we see the actual footage not the filming of the accident on a camera held to a screen "like them shelving in the clip LOL whats level the screen or the shelf Mr chock
  • Score: -1

3:26pm Thu 1 May 14

Plantpot says...

Quiterie wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind.

A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.
Exactly what I've been arguing for..... let's get that traffic through as quickly as possible and off the roads. Especially around schools, where the speed limit should be doubled. As you say the evidence for this is compelling.
Clearly this doesn't apply to every road. Do you get watered twice a day?
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind. A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I've been arguing for..... let's get that traffic through as quickly as possible and off the roads. Especially around schools, where the speed limit should be doubled. As you say the evidence for this is compelling.[/p][/quote]Clearly this doesn't apply to every road. Do you get watered twice a day? Plantpot
  • Score: 1

3:28pm Thu 1 May 14

Plantpot says...

Old Ladys Gin wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind.

A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.
I think you have to be careful to distinguish between small urban roads and larger ones.
In Barcelona on the city's many multi lane ring roads they imposed a blanket 80kph speed limit.
The stated reason was to reduce pollution and road casualties.
However after 18 months the experiment was stopped because pollution was hardly affected but casualties especially serious and fatal injuries increased by more than 40 percent.
All well and fine to increase speed limits where only motorised traffic is present but in inner city roads I doubt that would be successful.
Whilst I agree with some of the views put forward, we shouldn't forget that given the sheer amount of miles driven, the UK is an incredibly safe place to drive, despite what some vocal minorities have to say.

Interestingly, there were some official figures out recently that said if cycles did as many miles in the UK as cars, casualty rates caused by both would only be marginally different.
[quote][p][bold]Old Ladys Gin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: Out of interest the last set of stats for road use I saw published by the EU has the UK second only to Malta in terms of road safety. Germany and Holland were quite some way behind. A long term Danish study has just concluded that increasing the speed limit on many roads reduces casualties.[/p][/quote]I think you have to be careful to distinguish between small urban roads and larger ones. In Barcelona on the city's many multi lane ring roads they imposed a blanket 80kph speed limit. The stated reason was to reduce pollution and road casualties. However after 18 months the experiment was stopped because pollution was hardly affected but casualties especially serious and fatal injuries increased by more than 40 percent. All well and fine to increase speed limits where only motorised traffic is present but in inner city roads I doubt that would be successful.[/p][/quote]Whilst I agree with some of the views put forward, we shouldn't forget that given the sheer amount of miles driven, the UK is an incredibly safe place to drive, despite what some vocal minorities have to say. Interestingly, there were some official figures out recently that said if cycles did as many miles in the UK as cars, casualty rates caused by both would only be marginally different. Plantpot
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Thu 1 May 14

Plantpot says...

me007 wrote:
wexler53 wrote:
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
It's also possible, that the driver watching where they were going might have made a difference too! Your direction towards a hi-viz, shows a stunning lack of realisation about what actually happened here.

On a related thought... If all cyclists had to wear hi-viz vests, then surely, wouldn't all other road users? And if everyone ended up wearing them, they would become the norm, and as such, would no longer serve the purpose for which they were invented, that of making someone stand out.
Using your rationale cars would be OK to not have lights?

We all have a duty of care on the roads - to each other and ourselves. Hi-viz assists in de-risking your journey. I am staggered at the numbers of cyclists that wear dark clothing and have no lights in less than perfect conditions. I am also staggered at the number of cars that use lights as a last resort in limited visibility.
[quote][p][bold]me007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wexler53[/bold] wrote: No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.[/p][/quote]It's also possible, that the driver watching where they were going might have made a difference too! Your direction towards a hi-viz, shows a stunning lack of realisation about what actually happened here. On a related thought... If all cyclists had to wear hi-viz vests, then surely, wouldn't all other road users? And if everyone ended up wearing them, they would become the norm, and as such, would no longer serve the purpose for which they were invented, that of making someone stand out.[/p][/quote]Using your rationale cars would be OK to not have lights? We all have a duty of care on the roads - to each other and ourselves. Hi-viz assists in de-risking your journey. I am staggered at the numbers of cyclists that wear dark clothing and have no lights in less than perfect conditions. I am also staggered at the number of cars that use lights as a last resort in limited visibility. Plantpot
  • Score: 3

3:34pm Thu 1 May 14

anon01273 says...

Everyone who's passed their driving test in the UK in recent years will (should) know the importance of LOOKING before changing speed or direction. Not just moving your eyes habitually, but actually RESPONDING to what you see!

This idiot driver clearly wasn't concentrating. It's a good thing he was going slowly. I don't want to imagine what would have happened if he had been speeding.
Everyone who's passed their driving test in the UK in recent years will (should) know the importance of LOOKING before changing speed or direction. Not just moving your eyes habitually, but actually RESPONDING to what you see! This idiot driver clearly wasn't concentrating. It's a good thing he was going slowly. I don't want to imagine what would have happened if he had been speeding. anon01273
  • Score: 4

3:39pm Thu 1 May 14

Plantpot says...

mhaiti wrote:
Old Ladys Gin wrote:
getThisCoalitionOut wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.
Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be. Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so. Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe. Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living. Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk.
Implying that the cyclist needs to be "more safe" is exactly the problem here. The cyclist has done nothing wrong, he's a 12 year old kid and the only lesson he may have learnt is to be petrified of cycling / cars.

That it takes hitting a child on a bike to ensure that the driver learns a lesson is wrong. Empathy on the roads should be there without having to go through something like this.

It's the fact that things like this happen to children (who probably would have otherwise followed decent road rules) that lead to them growing up into the militant cyclists that we see on the road today. You should see it in London, it is MUCH worse...such animosity between cyclists and motorists...
It's late October and it's 08.13am. This means it will be gloomy at least. If I were one of his parents, I'd be insisting on cycle lights and hi-viz. This is called common sense.

BTW, although there is a developing culture in the UK that someone is always to blame for everything, for most of history accidents have happened, and been accepted as such.
[quote][p][bold]mhaiti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Old Ladys Gin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: 3 points on his licence and that's it?! That's disgraceful. Thank goodness the poor child wasn't killed but this idiot should not be on the road and should be made to retake his test at least after a few years off the road. And I'm not a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Drivers and all other road users are not perfect nor required to be. Though distressing for the cyclist he survived and may well learn from the experience. I am certain the driver will have done so. Thus you have two road users that in future will be hopefully more safe. Collisions of this kind, where nobody is seriously injured, happen every day all over the world and could be seen as a risk you take in living. Of course you try to lessen the risk but there is and always will be some sort of risk.[/p][/quote]Implying that the cyclist needs to be "more safe" is exactly the problem here. The cyclist has done nothing wrong, he's a 12 year old kid and the only lesson he may have learnt is to be petrified of cycling / cars. That it takes hitting a child on a bike to ensure that the driver learns a lesson is wrong. Empathy on the roads should be there without having to go through something like this. It's the fact that things like this happen to children (who probably would have otherwise followed decent road rules) that lead to them growing up into the militant cyclists that we see on the road today. You should see it in London, it is MUCH worse...such animosity between cyclists and motorists...[/p][/quote]It's late October and it's 08.13am. This means it will be gloomy at least. If I were one of his parents, I'd be insisting on cycle lights and hi-viz. This is called common sense. BTW, although there is a developing culture in the UK that someone is always to blame for everything, for most of history accidents have happened, and been accepted as such. Plantpot
  • Score: 0

3:44pm Thu 1 May 14

anon01273 says...

What's worse is that the cyclist was stationary at the time. The driver can't blame the cyclist for suddenly having turned up from nowhere. If he had been looking in the right places, he would definitely had seen him, even with a dirty windscreen. No excuse.
What's worse is that the cyclist was stationary at the time. The driver can't blame the cyclist for suddenly having turned up from nowhere. If he had been looking in the right places, he would definitely had seen him, even with a dirty windscreen. No excuse. anon01273
  • Score: 6

6:12pm Thu 1 May 14

BenUk says...

that was clearly a accident, very easy to be done, the driver should of looked right before pulling out but that is hardly dangerous driving! and why do the victim only get £20 and the police/government/co
urts or who ever get £85 there just money making, penalize all drivers who make a mistake! i think the driver and the cyclists could of settled this without giving the money grabbers any money! i would rather give the cyclist £190 then only £20.
that was clearly a accident, very easy to be done, the driver should of looked right before pulling out but that is hardly dangerous driving! and why do the victim only get £20 and the police/government/co urts or who ever get £85 there just money making, penalize all drivers who make a mistake! i think the driver and the cyclists could of settled this without giving the money grabbers any money! i would rather give the cyclist £190 then only £20. BenUk
  • Score: 1

6:16pm Thu 1 May 14

ARMANA says...

If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!! ARMANA
  • Score: -11

8:16pm Thu 1 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

If you have ever travelled to Italy, the driving appears to be appalling- fast, erratic etc. However, I cycle all over Italy in cities and countryside and the courtesy shown to cyclists is fantastic. Perhaps it's also because the use of scooters is common in Italy and has been for generations so motorists are used to seeing vulnerable riders on the roads.
The reality with this case is that the driver clearly cannot cope with the multiple task of observation and manoeuvre. If he can't manage that safely, it's terrifying to imagine the risk he must be at speed on motorways.
If you have ever travelled to Italy, the driving appears to be appalling- fast, erratic etc. However, I cycle all over Italy in cities and countryside and the courtesy shown to cyclists is fantastic. Perhaps it's also because the use of scooters is common in Italy and has been for generations so motorists are used to seeing vulnerable riders on the roads. The reality with this case is that the driver clearly cannot cope with the multiple task of observation and manoeuvre. If he can't manage that safely, it's terrifying to imagine the risk he must be at speed on motorways. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 1

10:00pm Thu 1 May 14

gp.girl says...

ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
Seriously? The deaths/injury per a mile for pedestrians is about the same as cyclists so if someone you knew was hit or killed it would be their fault?

Walking to my local shops (no pavement) the behavior of motorists towards pedestrians is actually worse than cycling (I do this to) on same road they actually give less space to you. This was a surpise as pedestrian hating doesn't seem to be fashionable but risking the lives and health of other people is.
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]Seriously? The deaths/injury per a mile for pedestrians is about the same as cyclists so if someone you knew was hit or killed it would be their fault? Walking to my local shops (no pavement) the behavior of motorists towards pedestrians is actually worse than cycling (I do this to) on same road they actually give less space to you. This was a surpise as pedestrian hating doesn't seem to be fashionable but risking the lives and health of other people is. gp.girl
  • Score: 2

10:08pm Thu 1 May 14

Bill in Hanover says...

DougM wrote:
wexler53 wrote:
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day.
But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving.
Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now.
Being both a driver and a cyclist I've been on both ends of (thankfully) minor incidents and understand that, for some reason, drivers have difficulty in registering that a cyclist is there. In this instance the cyclist was totally innocent of anything but I agree that a Hi-Viz jacket or permanent lights on a bike would help save lives.
[quote][p][bold]DougM[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wexler53[/bold] wrote: No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.[/p][/quote]Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day. But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving. Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now.[/p][/quote]Being both a driver and a cyclist I've been on both ends of (thankfully) minor incidents and understand that, for some reason, drivers have difficulty in registering that a cyclist is there. In this instance the cyclist was totally innocent of anything but I agree that a Hi-Viz jacket or permanent lights on a bike would help save lives. Bill in Hanover
  • Score: 0

10:26pm Thu 1 May 14

DougM says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
DougM wrote:
wexler53 wrote:
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day.
But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving.
Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now.
Being both a driver and a cyclist I've been on both ends of (thankfully) minor incidents and understand that, for some reason, drivers have difficulty in registering that a cyclist is there. In this instance the cyclist was totally innocent of anything but I agree that a Hi-Viz jacket or permanent lights on a bike would help save lives.
As would pedestrians all wearing hi-viz, and cars all being painted fluorescent yellow. Neither is an outrageous suggestion, but I'm sure you think otherwise.
I drive and cycle everyday and I can see every single hazard in front of my eyes whether jet black or fluoro. If you can't then you shouldn't be on the road.
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DougM[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wexler53[/bold] wrote: No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.[/p][/quote]Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day. But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving. Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now.[/p][/quote]Being both a driver and a cyclist I've been on both ends of (thankfully) minor incidents and understand that, for some reason, drivers have difficulty in registering that a cyclist is there. In this instance the cyclist was totally innocent of anything but I agree that a Hi-Viz jacket or permanent lights on a bike would help save lives.[/p][/quote]As would pedestrians all wearing hi-viz, and cars all being painted fluorescent yellow. Neither is an outrageous suggestion, but I'm sure you think otherwise. I drive and cycle everyday and I can see every single hazard in front of my eyes whether jet black or fluoro. If you can't then you shouldn't be on the road. DougM
  • Score: 2

10:26pm Thu 1 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 3

6:45am Fri 2 May 14

Brightonlad86 says...

Whilst you cannot blame the cyclist in the slightest, I do think a hi vis vest would have prevented this accident all together. I certainly wouldn't let my child ride a bike in a road without one!
Whilst you cannot blame the cyclist in the slightest, I do think a hi vis vest would have prevented this accident all together. I certainly wouldn't let my child ride a bike in a road without one! Brightonlad86
  • Score: -3

7:00am Fri 2 May 14

Plantpot says...

DougM wrote:
Bill in Hanover wrote:
DougM wrote:
wexler53 wrote:
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day.
But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving.
Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now.
Being both a driver and a cyclist I've been on both ends of (thankfully) minor incidents and understand that, for some reason, drivers have difficulty in registering that a cyclist is there. In this instance the cyclist was totally innocent of anything but I agree that a Hi-Viz jacket or permanent lights on a bike would help save lives.
As would pedestrians all wearing hi-viz, and cars all being painted fluorescent yellow. Neither is an outrageous suggestion, but I'm sure you think otherwise.
I drive and cycle everyday and I can see every single hazard in front of my eyes whether jet black or fluoro. If you can't then you shouldn't be on the road.
Only a fool would think they are perfect.
[quote][p][bold]DougM[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DougM[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wexler53[/bold] wrote: No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.[/p][/quote]Well it's a daft thought that seeks to transfer blame onto someone who is 100% the victim here. If I can see the cyclist on a rubbish CCTV image the car driver can see him as clear as day. But as usual in these awful accidents people will always be apologists for the protagonist - the ONLY thing that caused this accident (and many like it) is the car driver's negligence and dangerous driving. Of course if this had been CCTV of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian there'd be over a hundred comments by now.[/p][/quote]Being both a driver and a cyclist I've been on both ends of (thankfully) minor incidents and understand that, for some reason, drivers have difficulty in registering that a cyclist is there. In this instance the cyclist was totally innocent of anything but I agree that a Hi-Viz jacket or permanent lights on a bike would help save lives.[/p][/quote]As would pedestrians all wearing hi-viz, and cars all being painted fluorescent yellow. Neither is an outrageous suggestion, but I'm sure you think otherwise. I drive and cycle everyday and I can see every single hazard in front of my eyes whether jet black or fluoro. If you can't then you shouldn't be on the road.[/p][/quote]Only a fool would think they are perfect. Plantpot
  • Score: 1

7:02am Fri 2 May 14

Plantpot says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport. Plantpot
  • Score: -5

8:22am Fri 2 May 14

High Wire says...

Plantpot wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.
ROSPA: "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions, around 280 people die a year in crashes in which someone was over the legal drink drive limit, a further 125 involve "aggressive driving", one third of fatal crashes involved 'loss of control' of a vehicle. More than 400 people are killed in crashes involving young car drivers".

It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances driving can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, driving represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.

On average, around five people die on Britain's roads every day - driver error remains the most common cause of road accidents
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.[/p][/quote]ROSPA: "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions, around 280 people die a year in crashes in which someone was over the legal drink drive limit, a further 125 involve "aggressive driving", one third of fatal crashes involved 'loss of control' of a vehicle. More than 400 people are killed in crashes involving young car drivers". It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances driving can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, driving represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport. On average, around five people die on Britain's roads every day - driver error remains the most common cause of road accidents High Wire
  • Score: 2

10:03am Fri 2 May 14

Plantpot says...

High Wire wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.
ROSPA: "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions, around 280 people die a year in crashes in which someone was over the legal drink drive limit, a further 125 involve "aggressive driving", one third of fatal crashes involved 'loss of control' of a vehicle. More than 400 people are killed in crashes involving young car drivers".

It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances driving can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, driving represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.

On average, around five people die on Britain's roads every day - driver error remains the most common cause of road accidents
Of course it does - the overwhelming number of people on the roads are in control of some form of motorised transport. What would you expect? By comparison the number of cyclists is tiny, so of course in real terms any numbers associated with them are relatively low. Interestingly, if you look at deaths and injuries per miles cycled, they are in fact going down.

In another report, if you were to extrapolate the number of deaths and injuries caused by cyclists to the equivalent numbers of miles driven by motorists, the numbers would be that much different.

Your quoting of the RoSPA report is somewhat selective, unsurprisingly. I would recommend that people give the whole report a read, it's quite balanced and shows that cyclists aren't as white as they would like to paint themselves.
[quote][p][bold]High Wire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.[/p][/quote]ROSPA: "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions, around 280 people die a year in crashes in which someone was over the legal drink drive limit, a further 125 involve "aggressive driving", one third of fatal crashes involved 'loss of control' of a vehicle. More than 400 people are killed in crashes involving young car drivers". It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances driving can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, driving represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport. On average, around five people die on Britain's roads every day - driver error remains the most common cause of road accidents[/p][/quote]Of course it does - the overwhelming number of people on the roads are in control of some form of motorised transport. What would you expect? By comparison the number of cyclists is tiny, so of course in real terms any numbers associated with them are relatively low. Interestingly, if you look at deaths and injuries per miles cycled, they are in fact going down. In another report, if you were to extrapolate the number of deaths and injuries caused by cyclists to the equivalent numbers of miles driven by motorists, the numbers would be that much different. Your quoting of the RoSPA report is somewhat selective, unsurprisingly. I would recommend that people give the whole report a read, it's quite balanced and shows that cyclists aren't as white as they would like to paint themselves. Plantpot
  • Score: 0

10:03am Fri 2 May 14

Plantpot says...

Above - numbers wouldn't be that much different
Above - numbers wouldn't be that much different Plantpot
  • Score: 0

3:57pm Fri 2 May 14

ARMANA says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth, ARMANA
  • Score: -1

4:05pm Fri 2 May 14

ARMANA says...

gp.girl wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
Seriously? The deaths/injury per a mile for pedestrians is about the same as cyclists so if someone you knew was hit or killed it would be their fault?

Walking to my local shops (no pavement) the behavior of motorists towards pedestrians is actually worse than cycling (I do this to) on same road they actually give less space to you. This was a surpise as pedestrian hating doesn't seem to be fashionable but risking the lives and health of other people is.
So what your saying, is you agree with me, sooner or later a cyclist or a pedestrian will get squashed being in road with motor vehicles , or putting it another way, walking along a railway line, sooner or later, you will get run over by a train, any takers on that ( b.ton brow nose )
[quote][p][bold]gp.girl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]Seriously? The deaths/injury per a mile for pedestrians is about the same as cyclists so if someone you knew was hit or killed it would be their fault? Walking to my local shops (no pavement) the behavior of motorists towards pedestrians is actually worse than cycling (I do this to) on same road they actually give less space to you. This was a surpise as pedestrian hating doesn't seem to be fashionable but risking the lives and health of other people is.[/p][/quote]So what your saying, is you agree with me, sooner or later a cyclist or a pedestrian will get squashed being in road with motor vehicles , or putting it another way, walking along a railway line, sooner or later, you will get run over by a train, any takers on that ( b.ton brow nose ) ARMANA
  • Score: 0

5:03pm Fri 2 May 14

High Wire says...

Plantpot wrote:
High Wire wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.
ROSPA: "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions, around 280 people die a year in crashes in which someone was over the legal drink drive limit, a further 125 involve "aggressive driving", one third of fatal crashes involved 'loss of control' of a vehicle. More than 400 people are killed in crashes involving young car drivers".

It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances driving can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, driving represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.

On average, around five people die on Britain's roads every day - driver error remains the most common cause of road accidents
Of course it does - the overwhelming number of people on the roads are in control of some form of motorised transport. What would you expect? By comparison the number of cyclists is tiny, so of course in real terms any numbers associated with them are relatively low. Interestingly, if you look at deaths and injuries per miles cycled, they are in fact going down.

In another report, if you were to extrapolate the number of deaths and injuries caused by cyclists to the equivalent numbers of miles driven by motorists, the numbers would be that much different.

Your quoting of the RoSPA report is somewhat selective, unsurprisingly. I would recommend that people give the whole report a read, it's quite balanced and shows that cyclists aren't as white as they would like to paint themselves.
You're kidding, right? You claim I'm being selective? Do you not see what I did to your one-sided, illogical comment?

If you ever showed balance you might be worth listening to.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]High Wire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]Something like 40% of all cycling injuries are caused by cyclists who lose control. It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances, even when traffic is absent, that cycling can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, cycling represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport.[/p][/quote]ROSPA: "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions, around 280 people die a year in crashes in which someone was over the legal drink drive limit, a further 125 involve "aggressive driving", one third of fatal crashes involved 'loss of control' of a vehicle. More than 400 people are killed in crashes involving young car drivers". It is blatantly obvious that under many circumstances driving can be a risky business. But I guess like many on here, driving represents some kind of political statement as opposed to a means of transport. On average, around five people die on Britain's roads every day - driver error remains the most common cause of road accidents[/p][/quote]Of course it does - the overwhelming number of people on the roads are in control of some form of motorised transport. What would you expect? By comparison the number of cyclists is tiny, so of course in real terms any numbers associated with them are relatively low. Interestingly, if you look at deaths and injuries per miles cycled, they are in fact going down. In another report, if you were to extrapolate the number of deaths and injuries caused by cyclists to the equivalent numbers of miles driven by motorists, the numbers would be that much different. Your quoting of the RoSPA report is somewhat selective, unsurprisingly. I would recommend that people give the whole report a read, it's quite balanced and shows that cyclists aren't as white as they would like to paint themselves.[/p][/quote]You're kidding, right? You claim I'm being selective? Do you not see what I did to your one-sided, illogical comment? If you ever showed balance you might be worth listening to. High Wire
  • Score: 1

7:19pm Fri 2 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,
You can have my mobile number anytime!
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,[/p][/quote]You can have my mobile number anytime! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 1

9:40am Sat 3 May 14

ARMANA says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,
You can have my mobile number anytime!
well put it on, then big mouth, !!
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,[/p][/quote]You can have my mobile number anytime![/p][/quote]well put it on, then big mouth, !! ARMANA
  • Score: 0

7:24pm Mon 5 May 14

ARMANA says...

Brighton brown nose gone quiet, !!!! THANK GOD, !!!
Brighton brown nose gone quiet, !!!! THANK GOD, !!! ARMANA
  • Score: -1

8:11pm Mon 5 May 14

gp.girl says...

ARMANA wrote:
gp.girl wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
Seriously? The deaths/injury per a mile for pedestrians is about the same as cyclists so if someone you knew was hit or killed it would be their fault?

Walking to my local shops (no pavement) the behavior of motorists towards pedestrians is actually worse than cycling (I do this to) on same road they actually give less space to you. This was a surpise as pedestrian hating doesn't seem to be fashionable but risking the lives and health of other people is.
So what your saying, is you agree with me, sooner or later a cyclist or a pedestrian will get squashed being in road with motor vehicles , or putting it another way, walking along a railway line, sooner or later, you will get run over by a train, any takers on that ( b.ton brow nose )
Missed the point, 'everyone' hates cyclists so risking their lives is fine it was a surprise to find that although they don't apperently hate pedestrians their 'its my road and I couldn't give a toss about you' behavior is actually worse. Which implys they actually hate pedestrians more but don't have the guts to admit to it. Its probably because they don't pay VED, have insurance, to a test, can walk up one way streets and get special pedestrian paths and light sequences. And there its a hope of the poor motorist getting this horrible situation fixed!
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gp.girl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]Seriously? The deaths/injury per a mile for pedestrians is about the same as cyclists so if someone you knew was hit or killed it would be their fault? Walking to my local shops (no pavement) the behavior of motorists towards pedestrians is actually worse than cycling (I do this to) on same road they actually give less space to you. This was a surpise as pedestrian hating doesn't seem to be fashionable but risking the lives and health of other people is.[/p][/quote]So what your saying, is you agree with me, sooner or later a cyclist or a pedestrian will get squashed being in road with motor vehicles , or putting it another way, walking along a railway line, sooner or later, you will get run over by a train, any takers on that ( b.ton brow nose )[/p][/quote]Missed the point, 'everyone' hates cyclists so risking their lives is fine it was a surprise to find that although they don't apperently hate pedestrians their 'its my road and I couldn't give a toss about you' behavior is actually worse. Which implys they actually hate pedestrians more but don't have the guts to admit to it. Its probably because they don't pay VED, have insurance, to a test, can walk up one way streets and get special pedestrian paths and light sequences. And there its a hope of the poor motorist getting this horrible situation fixed! gp.girl
  • Score: 1

8:31pm Mon 5 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,
You can have my mobile number anytime!
well put it on, then big mouth, !!
07968 357418
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,[/p][/quote]You can have my mobile number anytime![/p][/quote]well put it on, then big mouth, !![/p][/quote]07968 357418 brighton bluenose
  • Score: 3

9:30pm Mon 5 May 14

ARMANA says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,
You can have my mobile number anytime!
well put it on, then big mouth, !!
07968 357418
Thanks for that toilet mouth, il be ringing you ;)
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,[/p][/quote]You can have my mobile number anytime![/p][/quote]well put it on, then big mouth, !![/p][/quote]07968 357418[/p][/quote]Thanks for that toilet mouth, il be ringing you ;) ARMANA
  • Score: 1

3:23pm Mon 19 May 14

Barry Trotter says...

wexler53 wrote:
No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!!

It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.
Typical blame shifting driver.
Perhaps all cars also be painted hi-vis as well, then perhaps you could blame the driver for not bothering to look?
[quote][p][bold]wexler53[/bold] wrote: No excuse for that - the cyclist was right in front of him !!!! It's just possible some Hi-Viz might have made a difference as it appears to be dull weather... Just a thought, that's all.[/p][/quote]Typical blame shifting driver. Perhaps all cars also be painted hi-vis as well, then perhaps you could blame the driver for not bothering to look? Barry Trotter
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Mon 19 May 14

brighton bluenose says...

ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!!
You really are an absolute c***!!
your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,
You can have my mobile number anytime!
well put it on, then big mouth, !!
07968 357418
Thanks for that toilet mouth, il be ringing you ;)
Strange that that call never came through!
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: If it was capital punishment for knocking over cyclists, cyclist would still get squashed, they shouldnt be on the road with motor vehicles doing 20 30 40 mph+ this isnt rocket science, on a bike, on the road, sooner or later, your going to get knocked off, its just a case of how bad the cyclist is injured, hey ho, !!![/p][/quote]You really are an absolute c***!![/p][/quote]your a brave man ,sitting in front of your computer Toilet Mouth,[/p][/quote]You can have my mobile number anytime![/p][/quote]well put it on, then big mouth, !![/p][/quote]07968 357418[/p][/quote]Thanks for that toilet mouth, il be ringing you ;)[/p][/quote]Strange that that call never came through! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree