Member24 September 2009 at 7:39 pm
MAD………….. 😈 😈 😈 😈
Or not…. ❓
We were touching on this on Tuesday evenings ride, what’s your slant 😕 😕
Member24 September 2009 at 7:49 pm
I drive HGVs for a living I commute on a Motorcycle and I drive a Car at weekends, aswell as cycling for pleasure.
Everyone has a duty of care to other road users whatever mode of transport. This sounds like a crazy idea, which in the long run would create even more hard feelings between all the different road users.
And then theres the pedestrians, and we know they always look where their going 🙄 ……go on then let the bunfight comence 😈
Member24 September 2009 at 8:49 pm
The debate has been over complicated and the plans of the Government to automatically asign blame unworkable.
This country has always believed in innocent until proven guilty and to a large extent I agree with this belief.
However, To appease everyone the government simply has to lower the burden of proof on the prosecution (Make each case a search for the truth) and when found guilty impose more serious penalties.
Other than that all road users need to respect all other road users !!
And motorists need to remember that when overtaking a bike they should view the manouver in the same way they would overtake a motor vehicle.
Nothing wrong with healthy debate !!
Member25 September 2009 at 9:36 am
Firstly I’d like to say that I haven’t once voted labour so you can’t blame me for this twaddle 😆
I am going to have to agree with John Rocket Fuel and say we need to preserve the precedent of “innocent until proven guilty” to ensure a fair and balanced view of every “collision.
As a car driver I take reasonable precautions to avoid hitting cyclists i.e. I drive within the speed limits and fully lit at night, I give them a wide berth when passing them, and I assume a position on the road that allows cyclists to pass me in stationary traffic. However if some unlit cyclist dressed in black shot out in front of me and I knocked them off then I’d expect a bit of support from the law, this proposed change will rob me of that deserved support.
Similarly if I’m on my bike I ensure that I’m fully lit, have my helmet on and I treating every road user as if they haven’t seen me and if, despite my best efforts, someone does hit me (it’s happened before 👿 ) then I expect the fact that I’ve done everything within my power to avoid being hit to be taken into consideration rather than being arbitrarily assumed to be innocent.
The only way we are seriously going to show the likes of Madley, Martin and Clarkson that we’re not all irresponsible d*cks is that when a collision occurs liability is assigned via an impartial examination of all facts, naturally assuming the cyclist is innocent will . . .
a) give these idiots more to moan about in the right wing rags
b) not encourage anyone to get on the bike because they’ve been bad mouthed in the press before they’ve even got on a bike and although it boils my p*ss to say it Clarkson has that kind of influence on the masses.
The world seems to be going to hell in a hand cart and all the government want to do is to introduce pointless, unfair, unenforcible laws that only serve to p*ss people off. I’d like to say that the next government would shelve such hair brained plans but I’ve got no faith in them either!
Jesus christ where’s the tylenol 😆