Bournemouth EchoCyclist attacked in 'road rage' incident in Bournemouth (From Bournemouth Echo)

When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.

Cyclist 'repeatedly hit' by driver in Holdenhurst Road

Bournemouth Echo: Cyclist attacked in 'road rage' incident in Bournemouth Cyclist attacked in 'road rage' incident in Bournemouth

A CYCLIST was punched in the face during a shocking road rage attack on Monday morning.

The young man, believed to be in his late teens, was repeatedly hit by a driver in Holdenhurst Road, Bournemouth at around 11am.

Shocked eyewitnesses said the “absolutely awful” incident had left them shaken.

Julian Mandeley, who runs barbers Uppercutz, said the cyclist was nearly knocked off his bike by the enraged driver.

“The motorist pulled in front of the cyclist so he couldn't get away and then hit him two or three times in the face,” he said.

“He literally cut this young man off at the corner of the road and blocked him off. He nearly took him off his bike doing that. Then he came flying out of the car and started laying into him [the cyclist].”

Tracey Dyer and Steph Rustom, of the Dorset Pantry, said the incident “came out of nowhere”.

“All of a sudden, the driver was just laying into him,” said Tracey.

“He was going really quite mad. The young guy kept very calm though - we could hear him saying, 'Just leave it'.”

Owner Steph said the attack was an “exaggerated response”, and believed the cyclist had attempted to overtake the driver moments before the altercation.

“We were worried because the driver was going mental and trying to push the cyclist into the road,” she said.

“They nearly ended up going into the hedge.”

Tracey said: “It was absolutely awful.”

A spokesperson from Dorset Police said: “Officers were called to a report of road rage in Holdenhurst Road close to Lowther Gardens at 11.05am.

“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.”

She said the car was a Mercedes C20 registered to a man from Gateshead, Tyne and Wear.

Comments (79)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:14pm Mon 2 Jun 14

speedy231278 says...

“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.”

Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story..... speedy231278
  • Score: 50

3:21pm Mon 2 Jun 14

ruggerlad says...

once again another incident where road users refuse to be tolerant to each other !
once again another incident where road users refuse to be tolerant to each other ! ruggerlad
  • Score: 30

3:22pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Townee says...

I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work.
I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work. Townee
  • Score: 26

3:24pm Mon 2 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-) bobthedestroyer
  • Score: 14

3:26pm Mon 2 Jun 14

speedy231278 says...

bobthedestroyer wrote:
All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?
[quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)[/p][/quote]Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes? speedy231278
  • Score: -13

3:29pm Mon 2 Jun 14

ruggerlad says...

speedy231278 wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?
what's new ?
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)[/p][/quote]Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?[/p][/quote]what's new ? ruggerlad
  • Score: 25

3:42pm Mon 2 Jun 14

smhinto says...

Townee wrote:
I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work.
I am surprised that the police turned up in the first place. Short of armed
robbery or murder one has no chance of seeing a copper for miles.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work.[/p][/quote]I am surprised that the police turned up in the first place. Short of armed robbery or murder one has no chance of seeing a copper for miles. smhinto
  • Score: -11

3:49pm Mon 2 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

speedy231278 wrote:
“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures!
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....[/p][/quote]Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures! suzigirl
  • Score: 16

3:50pm Mon 2 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

ruggerlad wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?
what's new ?
Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them!
[quote][p][bold]ruggerlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)[/p][/quote]Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?[/p][/quote]what's new ?[/p][/quote]Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them! suzigirl
  • Score: -3

4:20pm Mon 2 Jun 14

arthur1948 says...

why use cycle lanes...they use the pavements now...

why cant they walk on pavements like pedestrians do?
why use cycle lanes...they use the pavements now... why cant they walk on pavements like pedestrians do? arthur1948
  • Score: 6

4:26pm Mon 2 Jun 14

scrumpyjack says...

speedy231278 wrote:
“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.”

Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
Not at all - some people would rather not go through the crud of going to court and making statements etc only to see the attacker get nothing more than a token slap on the wrist.

This is a teenager and just maybe he was frightened, shocked and intimidated and just wanted to get home ASAP.

But of course the nasty minded on here will also pat each other on the back about how they know the real truth and that as ALL cyclists are r'holes then it musty be the case here as well.

Pathetic.
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....[/p][/quote]Not at all - some people would rather not go through the crud of going to court and making statements etc only to see the attacker get nothing more than a token slap on the wrist. This is a teenager and just maybe he was frightened, shocked and intimidated and just wanted to get home ASAP. But of course the nasty minded on here will also pat each other on the back about how they know the real truth and that as ALL cyclists are r'holes then it musty be the case here as well. Pathetic. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 85

4:29pm Mon 2 Jun 14

BIGTONE says...

Did he have a helmet on?
Did he have a helmet on? BIGTONE
  • Score: -23

4:46pm Mon 2 Jun 14

scrumpyjack says...

suzigirl wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures!
And you know this how exactly?

Your biased, poisonous rants really do show the sort of person you are.

And it 'ain't pretty.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....[/p][/quote]Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures![/p][/quote]And you know this how exactly? Your biased, poisonous rants really do show the sort of person you are. And it 'ain't pretty. scrumpyjack
  • Score: -13

4:58pm Mon 2 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures!
And you know this how exactly? Your biased, poisonous rants really do show the sort of person you are. And it 'ain't pretty.
Are you having a laugh mate! All I said is that there are two sides to every story and there are bad cyclists and bad motorists. Why would a motorist react is such a way without provocation? I am not condoning what the motorist did but we don't know the full story. As to your reaction that White Lightning is not good for you!
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....[/p][/quote]Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures![/p][/quote]And you know this how exactly? Your biased, poisonous rants really do show the sort of person you are. And it 'ain't pretty.[/p][/quote]Are you having a laugh mate! All I said is that there are two sides to every story and there are bad cyclists and bad motorists. Why would a motorist react is such a way without provocation? I am not condoning what the motorist did but we don't know the full story. As to your reaction that White Lightning is not good for you! suzigirl
  • Score: 14

5:05pm Mon 2 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
Not at all - some people would rather not go through the crud of going to court and making statements etc only to see the attacker get nothing more than a token slap on the wrist. This is a teenager and just maybe he was frightened, shocked and intimidated and just wanted to get home ASAP. But of course the nasty minded on here will also pat each other on the back about how they know the real truth and that as ALL cyclists are r'holes then it musty be the case here as well. Pathetic.
Wake up and smell the coffee mate! Some cyclists are r'holes and some motorists are r'holes - simple and indeed some motorcyclists are r'holes! If my husband had got hold of the car driver who threw a lit cigarette out of her car window when he was behind on his motorbike and the car driver that cut him up whilst on his mobile..............
..all in the space of 20 minutes!
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....[/p][/quote]Not at all - some people would rather not go through the crud of going to court and making statements etc only to see the attacker get nothing more than a token slap on the wrist. This is a teenager and just maybe he was frightened, shocked and intimidated and just wanted to get home ASAP. But of course the nasty minded on here will also pat each other on the back about how they know the real truth and that as ALL cyclists are r'holes then it musty be the case here as well. Pathetic.[/p][/quote]Wake up and smell the coffee mate! Some cyclists are r'holes and some motorists are r'holes - simple and indeed some motorcyclists are r'holes! If my husband had got hold of the car driver who threw a lit cigarette out of her car window when he was behind on his motorbike and the car driver that cut him up whilst on his mobile.............. ..all in the space of 20 minutes! suzigirl
  • Score: -2

5:24pm Mon 2 Jun 14

HiGene says...

There's NO excuse for physical violence. It sounds like a nasty attack.

Snide comments on cycle lanes and pavement cycling are misplaced here.
There's NO excuse for physical violence. It sounds like a nasty attack. Snide comments on cycle lanes and pavement cycling are misplaced here. HiGene
  • Score: 60

5:33pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

smhinto wrote:
Townee wrote:
I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work.
I am surprised that the police turned up in the first place. Short of armed
robbery or murder one has no chance of seeing a copper for miles.
Unless there's a motorist with no seat belt and a fine can be had.
[quote][p][bold]smhinto[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work.[/p][/quote]I am surprised that the police turned up in the first place. Short of armed robbery or murder one has no chance of seeing a copper for miles.[/p][/quote]Unless there's a motorist with no seat belt and a fine can be had. Minty Fresh
  • Score: -4

5:43pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Understated says...

it is strange that he wouldnt want to pursue this further, but they seem to know the man who attacked him, its still an offense to lay into someone, even if he doesnt want to press charges. maybe he did something other than attempt to overtake, maybe a comment as he did so which made the driver take it out on him, still inexcusable behaviour.

im sure its a lesson learned
it is strange that he wouldnt want to pursue this further, but they seem to know the man who attacked him, its still an offense to lay into someone, even if he doesnt want to press charges. maybe he did something other than attempt to overtake, maybe a comment as he did so which made the driver take it out on him, still inexcusable behaviour. im sure its a lesson learned Understated
  • Score: -8

5:43pm Mon 2 Jun 14

SeafaringMan says...

Watch out, there's a Geordie about!
Watch out, there's a Geordie about! SeafaringMan
  • Score: -3

5:57pm Mon 2 Jun 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

HiGene wrote:
There's NO excuse for physical violence. It sounds like a nasty attack.

Snide comments on cycle lanes and pavement cycling are misplaced here.
There are lots of excuses for physical violence. Defending yourself, family and property for starters.
[quote][p][bold]HiGene[/bold] wrote: There's NO excuse for physical violence. It sounds like a nasty attack. Snide comments on cycle lanes and pavement cycling are misplaced here.[/p][/quote]There are lots of excuses for physical violence. Defending yourself, family and property for starters. HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: -21

6:10pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Speak up Brown says...

Townee wrote:
I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work.
Any chance of this in English?
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I others reported it then the police had enough information to charge the driver with assault, even thought the cyclist didn't want to press charges. Know the police they wouldn't want to get involved with all the paper work.[/p][/quote]Any chance of this in English? Speak up Brown
  • Score: 14

6:18pm Mon 2 Jun 14

JemBmth says...

Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt. JemBmth
  • Score: -1

6:21pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Controversial But True says...

I'm afraid that the name 'Uppercuts' raised an ironic grin!!
I'm afraid that the name 'Uppercuts' raised an ironic grin!! Controversial But True
  • Score: 1

6:42pm Mon 2 Jun 14

BackOfTheNet says...

Perhaps he didn't want to take it further so the thug won't get his name and address?

He's already assaulted him once, what would stop him finding him and doing it again?
Perhaps he didn't want to take it further so the thug won't get his name and address? He's already assaulted him once, what would stop him finding him and doing it again? BackOfTheNet
  • Score: 21

6:48pm Mon 2 Jun 14

AnastasiaB says...

There are bad motorists and bad cyclists but cars that go through a red light are charged with dangerous driving whereas it seems perfectly ok for a cyclist to go through without stopping. Last witnessed a few hours ago.
There are bad motorists and bad cyclists but cars that go through a red light are charged with dangerous driving whereas it seems perfectly ok for a cyclist to go through without stopping. Last witnessed a few hours ago. AnastasiaB
  • Score: -2

6:57pm Mon 2 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

suzigirl wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures!
Sad but true. Still doesn't warrant a beating though as I'm sure you agree
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....[/p][/quote]Exactly! It is always half a story where a cyclist and a motorist are concerned - bad cyclists/bad motorists in equal measures![/p][/quote]Sad but true. Still doesn't warrant a beating though as I'm sure you agree bobthedestroyer
  • Score: 8

7:01pm Mon 2 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
[quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here bobthedestroyer
  • Score: -6

7:03pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Arthur Maureen says...

suzigirl wrote:
ruggerlad wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?
what's new ?
Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them!
Back out on day release I see
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ruggerlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)[/p][/quote]Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?[/p][/quote]what's new ?[/p][/quote]Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them![/p][/quote]Back out on day release I see Arthur Maureen
  • Score: 9

7:05pm Mon 2 Jun 14

new2it says...

I find it quite sad that out of everybody who witnessed the attack apparently nobody was prepared to try and defuse the situation. A good job the cyclist wasn't seriously injured, whatever the reason for the assault.
I find it quite sad that out of everybody who witnessed the attack apparently nobody was prepared to try and defuse the situation. A good job the cyclist wasn't seriously injured, whatever the reason for the assault. new2it
  • Score: 20

7:33pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Fingersonthem says...

BackOfTheNet wrote:
Perhaps he didn't want to take it further so the thug won't get his name and address?

He's already assaulted him once, what would stop him finding him and doing it again?
Did the police get the cyclist name, was he on a mission since last weeks drug bust at a nearby property. You don't have to be in the Observer Corp to see what goes on in this area
[quote][p][bold]BackOfTheNet[/bold] wrote: Perhaps he didn't want to take it further so the thug won't get his name and address? He's already assaulted him once, what would stop him finding him and doing it again?[/p][/quote]Did the police get the cyclist name, was he on a mission since last weeks drug bust at a nearby property. You don't have to be in the Observer Corp to see what goes on in this area Fingersonthem
  • Score: -20

7:39pm Mon 2 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

speedy231278 wrote:
“The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.”

Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....
It could be that the cyclist was so frightened by the experience that he doesn't want a repeat of the incident should he take it further. Normally I would be able to state specifically why the cyclist did not want to take action but unfortunately my crystal ball is broken again so I've taken it to be repaired. This means that just for once I've had to resort to idle speculation.
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: “The cyclist involved in the incident did not want to take this any further.” Why would you not want to do so, unless there was something to come out you would rather not? Seems very odd, unless as usual we are only getting half the story.....[/p][/quote]It could be that the cyclist was so frightened by the experience that he doesn't want a repeat of the incident should he take it further. Normally I would be able to state specifically why the cyclist did not want to take action but unfortunately my crystal ball is broken again so I've taken it to be repaired. This means that just for once I've had to resort to idle speculation. breamoreboy
  • Score: 18

7:43pm Mon 2 Jun 14

boardsandphotos says...

AnastasiaB wrote:
There are bad motorists and bad cyclists but cars that go through a red light are charged with dangerous driving whereas it seems perfectly ok for a cyclist to go through without stopping. Last witnessed a few hours ago.
No it's not perfectly ok for cyclists to go through red lights and the majority of cyclists on here will condemn such behaviour.
[quote][p][bold]AnastasiaB[/bold] wrote: There are bad motorists and bad cyclists but cars that go through a red light are charged with dangerous driving whereas it seems perfectly ok for a cyclist to go through without stopping. Last witnessed a few hours ago.[/p][/quote]No it's not perfectly ok for cyclists to go through red lights and the majority of cyclists on here will condemn such behaviour. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 21

7:51pm Mon 2 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
I could have sworn blind this morning that the motorist in the centre lane at the Somerford roundabout was going straight across, but no, they turned left. Indicators, not a chance. Good job I had my eyes open or anpther cyclist would have ended up under the wheels of one ton of very lethal weapon. And as relevant to this report as your comment above.
[quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]I could have sworn blind this morning that the motorist in the centre lane at the Somerford roundabout was going straight across, but no, they turned left. Indicators, not a chance. Good job I had my eyes open or anpther cyclist would have ended up under the wheels of one ton of very lethal weapon. And as relevant to this report as your comment above. breamoreboy
  • Score: 25

7:54pm Mon 2 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
[quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly. breamoreboy
  • Score: 9

7:59pm Mon 2 Jun 14

boardsandphotos says...

breamoreboy wrote:
JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
I could have sworn blind this morning that the motorist in the centre lane at the Somerford roundabout was going straight across, but no, they turned left. Indicators, not a chance. Good job I had my eyes open or anpther cyclist would have ended up under the wheels of one ton of very lethal weapon. And as relevant to this report as your comment above.
Yep I was very nearly clipped by the wing mirror of a vw transit (or whatever the vw equivalent is called) this morning, due to the poor decision by the van driver to overtake as i was passing a parked car, the room he left me was both inconsiderate and dangerous.
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]I could have sworn blind this morning that the motorist in the centre lane at the Somerford roundabout was going straight across, but no, they turned left. Indicators, not a chance. Good job I had my eyes open or anpther cyclist would have ended up under the wheels of one ton of very lethal weapon. And as relevant to this report as your comment above.[/p][/quote]Yep I was very nearly clipped by the wing mirror of a vw transit (or whatever the vw equivalent is called) this morning, due to the poor decision by the van driver to overtake as i was passing a parked car, the room he left me was both inconsiderate and dangerous. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 23

8:33pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Judd3rman says...

By the looks of this we will never see the whole story. Just a reminder... Under the road traffic act every vehicle and conveyance are equal on the roads they are allowed on. A cyclist has as much right to use a road as a biker, car driver, van driver etc. The difference is that it is virtually impossible to prosecute a cyclist for running a red light unless it it witnessed by a police officer.
By the looks of this we will never see the whole story. Just a reminder... Under the road traffic act every vehicle and conveyance are equal on the roads they are allowed on. A cyclist has as much right to use a road as a biker, car driver, van driver etc. The difference is that it is virtually impossible to prosecute a cyclist for running a red light unless it it witnessed by a police officer. Judd3rman
  • Score: 2

9:02pm Mon 2 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

Judd3rman wrote:
By the looks of this we will never see the whole story. Just a reminder... Under the road traffic act every vehicle and conveyance are equal on the roads they are allowed on. A cyclist has as much right to use a road as a biker, car driver, van driver etc. The difference is that it is virtually impossible to prosecute a cyclist for running a red light unless it it witnessed by a police officer.
Unfortunately not everyone understands that very principle. It doesn't matter what mode of transport you use there those that show consideration and those that don't. And it doesn't just apply to road users sadly.

End of the day the driver should not have physically attacked the cyclist (unless he was being attacked himself, just CYAing ;-))
[quote][p][bold]Judd3rman[/bold] wrote: By the looks of this we will never see the whole story. Just a reminder... Under the road traffic act every vehicle and conveyance are equal on the roads they are allowed on. A cyclist has as much right to use a road as a biker, car driver, van driver etc. The difference is that it is virtually impossible to prosecute a cyclist for running a red light unless it it witnessed by a police officer.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately not everyone understands that very principle. It doesn't matter what mode of transport you use there those that show consideration and those that don't. And it doesn't just apply to road users sadly. End of the day the driver should not have physically attacked the cyclist (unless he was being attacked himself, just CYAing ;-)) bobthedestroyer
  • Score: 7

10:05pm Mon 2 Jun 14

seaviews says...

Ever thought this has nothing to do with road rage?
Ever thought this has nothing to do with road rage? seaviews
  • Score: 1

10:30pm Mon 2 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

seaviews wrote:
Ever thought this has nothing to do with road rage?
A very good point.

Of course when I was younger it was known as "losing your temper".
[quote][p][bold]seaviews[/bold] wrote: Ever thought this has nothing to do with road rage?[/p][/quote]A very good point. Of course when I was younger it was known as "losing your temper". breamoreboy
  • Score: 4

11:07pm Mon 2 Jun 14

sprintervanman says...

Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?
Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK? sprintervanman
  • Score: 9

11:10pm Mon 2 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist. bobthedestroyer
  • Score: -3

11:12pm Mon 2 Jun 14

JemBmth says...

bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes I can. He knew he'd done wrong because he cycled away like the clappers, mountee the pavement at 'high speed', making pedestrians jump out of the way and turned into a one-way street (the wrong way) so I couldn't catch him. That is when I called the police,
[quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes I can. He knew he'd done wrong because he cycled away like the clappers, mountee the pavement at 'high speed', making pedestrians jump out of the way and turned into a one-way street (the wrong way) so I couldn't catch him. That is when I called the police, JemBmth
  • Score: -4

11:15pm Mon 2 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

sprintervanman wrote:
Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?
**** it, missed that opportunity. I think why it has crossed over is the general assumption that the cyclist did something to p*ss the driver off, hence the light jumping and pavement cycling comments. I for one only have an issue with cycling on the pavement when they are trying to break the land speed record. I wish our pavements were wider so pedestrians and cyclists were kept apart from the four wheeled tin cans. I know not all cyclists use cycle lanes but they probably would if they didn't have to do some bits on the road then pavement then road again.
[quote][p][bold]sprintervanman[/bold] wrote: Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?[/p][/quote]**** it, missed that opportunity. I think why it has crossed over is the general assumption that the cyclist did something to p*ss the driver off, hence the light jumping and pavement cycling comments. I for one only have an issue with cycling on the pavement when they are trying to break the land speed record. I wish our pavements were wider so pedestrians and cyclists were kept apart from the four wheeled tin cans. I know not all cyclists use cycle lanes but they probably would if they didn't have to do some bits on the road then pavement then road again. bobthedestroyer
  • Score: 14

11:21pm Mon 2 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

bobthedestroyer wrote:
sprintervanman wrote:
Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?
**** it, missed that opportunity. I think why it has crossed over is the general assumption that the cyclist did something to p*ss the driver off, hence the light jumping and pavement cycling comments. I for one only have an issue with cycling on the pavement when they are trying to break the land speed record. I wish our pavements were wider so pedestrians and cyclists were kept apart from the four wheeled tin cans. I know not all cyclists use cycle lanes but they probably would if they didn't have to do some bits on the road then pavement then road again.
Blimey Echo autocensored D A M N
[quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sprintervanman[/bold] wrote: Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?[/p][/quote]**** it, missed that opportunity. I think why it has crossed over is the general assumption that the cyclist did something to p*ss the driver off, hence the light jumping and pavement cycling comments. I for one only have an issue with cycling on the pavement when they are trying to break the land speed record. I wish our pavements were wider so pedestrians and cyclists were kept apart from the four wheeled tin cans. I know not all cyclists use cycle lanes but they probably would if they didn't have to do some bits on the road then pavement then road again.[/p][/quote]Blimey Echo autocensored D A M N bobthedestroyer
  • Score: 2

11:26pm Mon 2 Jun 14

ruggerlad says...

sprintervanman wrote:
Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?
Road tax was abolished in the 30's ! It's vehicle excise duty of which lots of cars are now exempt ! Nothing to do with the article above , would you also say tax exempt vehicles should not be allowed ? This is a whole other debate that should take place somewhere else !
[quote][p][bold]sprintervanman[/bold] wrote: Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?[/p][/quote]Road tax was abolished in the 30's ! It's vehicle excise duty of which lots of cars are now exempt ! Nothing to do with the article above , would you also say tax exempt vehicles should not be allowed ? This is a whole other debate that should take place somewhere else ! ruggerlad
  • Score: -5

11:35pm Mon 2 Jun 14

sprintervanman says...

bobthedestroyer wrote:
sprintervanman wrote:
Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?
**** it, missed that opportunity. I think why it has crossed over is the general assumption that the cyclist did something to p*ss the driver off, hence the light jumping and pavement cycling comments. I for one only have an issue with cycling on the pavement when they are trying to break the land speed record. I wish our pavements were wider so pedestrians and cyclists were kept apart from the four wheeled tin cans. I know not all cyclists use cycle lanes but they probably would if they didn't have to do some bits on the road then pavement then road again.
Correct word used there 'assumption'. I could say i would imagine the Bloke in the Merc was a bit peeved that a cyclist could pass him in slow moving traffic and was not happy that he had all that motor power and felt a little weak in the trouser department.An assumption of cause.My main comparison between bad motorist and bad cyclist is simply this.....Uninsured, unlicensed drivers are not motorist they are out to do what they want and screw any one else. Red light jumping, pavement cycling persons are not Cyclist they are also in the screw every one else degree.A motorist is a person who is legal and above board and a true cyclist are law abiding and often belong to organisations such as the CTC which means they carry Third Party insurance.Yes UK cycle lanes need a major re think to make them work.
[quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sprintervanman[/bold] wrote: Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?[/p][/quote]**** it, missed that opportunity. I think why it has crossed over is the general assumption that the cyclist did something to p*ss the driver off, hence the light jumping and pavement cycling comments. I for one only have an issue with cycling on the pavement when they are trying to break the land speed record. I wish our pavements were wider so pedestrians and cyclists were kept apart from the four wheeled tin cans. I know not all cyclists use cycle lanes but they probably would if they didn't have to do some bits on the road then pavement then road again.[/p][/quote]Correct word used there 'assumption'. I could say i would imagine the Bloke in the Merc was a bit peeved that a cyclist could pass him in slow moving traffic and was not happy that he had all that motor power and felt a little weak in the trouser department.An assumption of cause.My main comparison between bad motorist and bad cyclist is simply this.....Uninsured, unlicensed drivers are not motorist they are out to do what they want and screw any one else. Red light jumping, pavement cycling persons are not Cyclist they are also in the screw every one else degree.A motorist is a person who is legal and above board and a true cyclist are law abiding and often belong to organisations such as the CTC which means they carry Third Party insurance.Yes UK cycle lanes need a major re think to make them work. sprintervanman
  • Score: 8

11:43pm Mon 2 Jun 14

sprintervanman says...

ruggerlad wrote:
sprintervanman wrote:
Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?
Road tax was abolished in the 30's ! It's vehicle excise duty of which lots of cars are now exempt ! Nothing to do with the article above , would you also say tax exempt vehicles should not be allowed ? This is a whole other debate that should take place somewhere else !
with respect i said the non existent road tax which sort of implies i know it does not exist and know that that it was abolished in 1937 for the up keep of the roads to be paid by local taxation.
[quote][p][bold]ruggerlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sprintervanman[/bold] wrote: Why are comments crossing over to cycling on the pavement and red light jumpers when it has nothing to do with this article as reported.At least no one has mentioned the non existent 'road tax' regarding cycle users.Is that a slow progress for the UK?[/p][/quote]Road tax was abolished in the 30's ! It's vehicle excise duty of which lots of cars are now exempt ! Nothing to do with the article above , would you also say tax exempt vehicles should not be allowed ? This is a whole other debate that should take place somewhere else ![/p][/quote]with respect i said the non existent road tax which sort of implies i know it does not exist and know that that it was abolished in 1937 for the up keep of the roads to be paid by local taxation. sprintervanman
  • Score: 6

1:05am Tue 3 Jun 14

Bournemouthfan2 says...

Never mind, I haven't seen this happen locally....well not yet.

www.youtube.com/watc
h?v=EFYW_RsyS8o
Never mind, I haven't seen this happen locally....well not yet. www.youtube.com/watc h?v=EFYW_RsyS8o Bournemouthfan2
  • Score: 2

8:45am Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Arthur Maureen wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
ruggerlad wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?
what's new ?
Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them!
Back out on day release I see
At least they let me out!
[quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ruggerlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)[/p][/quote]Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?[/p][/quote]what's new ?[/p][/quote]Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them![/p][/quote]Back out on day release I see[/p][/quote]At least they let me out! suzigirl
  • Score: -9

8:53am Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
[quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers! suzigirl
  • Score: -14

9:45am Tue 3 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
[quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website. breamoreboy
  • Score: 0

9:50am Tue 3 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Arthur Maureen wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
ruggerlad wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?
what's new ?
Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them!
Back out on day release I see
Some poor guy has taken a pounding so what do we get, pathetic name calling. Just great :-(
[quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ruggerlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)[/p][/quote]Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?[/p][/quote]what's new ?[/p][/quote]Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them![/p][/quote]Back out on day release I see[/p][/quote]Some poor guy has taken a pounding so what do we get, pathetic name calling. Just great :-( breamoreboy
  • Score: 2

9:59am Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

breamoreboy wrote:
Arthur Maureen wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
ruggerlad wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)
Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?
what's new ?
Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them!
Back out on day release I see
Some poor guy has taken a pounding so what do we get, pathetic name calling. Just great :-(
You are quite right he is pathetic and I should be the bigger person and ignore him!
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ruggerlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: All these stories will disappear when the three towns travel plan is finished....as the whole conurbation will be gridlocked :-)[/p][/quote]Perhaps we'll have to drive in all those cycle lanes?[/p][/quote]what's new ?[/p][/quote]Do you mean the cycle lanes that the cyclists will not use because there might be the odd leaf on them![/p][/quote]Back out on day release I see[/p][/quote]Some poor guy has taken a pounding so what do we get, pathetic name calling. Just great :-([/p][/quote]You are quite right he is pathetic and I should be the bigger person and ignore him! suzigirl
  • Score: -8

10:58am Tue 3 Jun 14

Repo says...

suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so? Repo
  • Score: 2

11:04am Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
[quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you! suzigirl
  • Score: -3

11:20am Tue 3 Jun 14

JemBmth says...

No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face.
No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face. JemBmth
  • Score: -11

11:27am Tue 3 Jun 14

Repo says...

suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub!

I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you![/p][/quote]Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so? Repo
  • Score: 5

12:08pm Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
[quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you![/p][/quote]Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so? suzigirl
  • Score: -4

12:11pm Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law!
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.[/p][/quote]So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law! suzigirl
  • Score: -7

12:36pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Repo says...

suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
I'll answer your question, even though you haven't answered mine:
If there is absolutely NO DANGER I don't see why ANY vehicle should not cross a red light. BUT, as a car does not have full vision (even underneath its own wheels - like a bike does), and it weighs over 1 ton, and it has over 100Hp on tap: There is rarely an occasion when it is not dangerous for a car to cross a red light.
However, I can see a situation where a cycle wants to turn left at a set of lights, there is no oncoming or cross traffic, there are no pedestrians, there is a full field of view, and speed is reduced to walking pace. Would you not agree that this is a common sense situation when a cycle could cross a red light?
I rest my case M'lord.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you![/p][/quote]Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]I'll answer your question, even though you haven't answered mine: If there is absolutely NO DANGER I don't see why ANY vehicle should not cross a red light. BUT, as a car does not have full vision (even underneath its own wheels - like a bike does), and it weighs over 1 ton, and it has over 100Hp on tap: There is rarely an occasion when it is not dangerous for a car to cross a red light. However, I can see a situation where a cycle wants to turn left at a set of lights, there is no oncoming or cross traffic, there are no pedestrians, there is a full field of view, and speed is reduced to walking pace. Would you not agree that this is a common sense situation when a cycle could cross a red light? I rest my case M'lord. Repo
  • Score: 10

12:39pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Dorset Logic says...

HRH of Boscombe wrote:
HiGene wrote:
There's NO excuse for physical violence. It sounds like a nasty attack.

Snide comments on cycle lanes and pavement cycling are misplaced here.
There are lots of excuses for physical violence. Defending yourself, family and property for starters.
From Boscombe......
[quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HiGene[/bold] wrote: There's NO excuse for physical violence. It sounds like a nasty attack. Snide comments on cycle lanes and pavement cycling are misplaced here.[/p][/quote]There are lots of excuses for physical violence. Defending yourself, family and property for starters.[/p][/quote]From Boscombe...... Dorset Logic
  • Score: -1

12:41pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Dorset Logic says...

JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Yes all cyclists are the same. QED
[quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Yes all cyclists are the same. QED Dorset Logic
  • Score: 3

12:44pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Dorset Logic says...

Ivan Pavlov, did a great experiment where he noticed how dogs started to froth at the mouth when a bell rang.

The echo did a similar experiment in the first couple of decades of the 2000's where they noted that people would froth at the mouth at the word "cyclist".
Ivan Pavlov, did a great experiment where he noticed how dogs started to froth at the mouth when a bell rang. The echo did a similar experiment in the first couple of decades of the 2000's where they noted that people would froth at the mouth at the word "cyclist". Dorset Logic
  • Score: 15

12:45pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Dorset Logic says...

JemBmth wrote:
No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face.
Your theory is incorrect
[quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face.[/p][/quote]Your theory is incorrect Dorset Logic
  • Score: 9

2:04pm Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
I'll answer your question, even though you haven't answered mine: If there is absolutely NO DANGER I don't see why ANY vehicle should not cross a red light. BUT, as a car does not have full vision (even underneath its own wheels - like a bike does), and it weighs over 1 ton, and it has over 100Hp on tap: There is rarely an occasion when it is not dangerous for a car to cross a red light. However, I can see a situation where a cycle wants to turn left at a set of lights, there is no oncoming or cross traffic, there are no pedestrians, there is a full field of view, and speed is reduced to walking pace. Would you not agree that this is a common sense situation when a cycle could cross a red light? I rest my case M'lord.
Then why is the light red then?
[quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you![/p][/quote]Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]I'll answer your question, even though you haven't answered mine: If there is absolutely NO DANGER I don't see why ANY vehicle should not cross a red light. BUT, as a car does not have full vision (even underneath its own wheels - like a bike does), and it weighs over 1 ton, and it has over 100Hp on tap: There is rarely an occasion when it is not dangerous for a car to cross a red light. However, I can see a situation where a cycle wants to turn left at a set of lights, there is no oncoming or cross traffic, there are no pedestrians, there is a full field of view, and speed is reduced to walking pace. Would you not agree that this is a common sense situation when a cycle could cross a red light? I rest my case M'lord.[/p][/quote]Then why is the light red then? suzigirl
  • Score: -11

2:17pm Tue 3 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

JemBmth wrote:
No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face.
You are probably being marked down because your comments have nothing at all to do with this report, which is actually about one person bashing nine balls of hell out of another person. Since when did their chosen modes of transport come into it? For all we know, dad has finally caught up with son and given him the trouncing he should have been given years ago. Put another way, we simply don't know the facts, but that doesn't seem to matter too much to some posters here.
[quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face.[/p][/quote]You are probably being marked down because your comments have nothing at all to do with this report, which is actually about one person bashing nine balls of hell out of another person. Since when did their chosen modes of transport come into it? For all we know, dad has finally caught up with son and given him the trouncing he should have been given years ago. Put another way, we simply don't know the facts, but that doesn't seem to matter too much to some posters here. breamoreboy
  • Score: 10

2:24pm Tue 3 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law!
Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.[/p][/quote]So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law![/p][/quote]Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver. breamoreboy
  • Score: 9

3:15pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Repo says...

suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
I'll answer your question, even though you haven't answered mine: If there is absolutely NO DANGER I don't see why ANY vehicle should not cross a red light. BUT, as a car does not have full vision (even underneath its own wheels - like a bike does), and it weighs over 1 ton, and it has over 100Hp on tap: There is rarely an occasion when it is not dangerous for a car to cross a red light. However, I can see a situation where a cycle wants to turn left at a set of lights, there is no oncoming or cross traffic, there are no pedestrians, there is a full field of view, and speed is reduced to walking pace. Would you not agree that this is a common sense situation when a cycle could cross a red light? I rest my case M'lord.
Then why is the light red then?
Because its on a timed loop.
Or, because cars are turning right, from the road the cyclist is turning in to (in which case the cyclist would only be in danger if he was traveling straight on, not turning left). If the road had a filtered left hand lane this side would be on green anyway, its only because the single lane lights cannot distinguish between cars going straight on and cars turning left that the light has to be on red.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you![/p][/quote]Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]What is wrong with a motorist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]I'll answer your question, even though you haven't answered mine: If there is absolutely NO DANGER I don't see why ANY vehicle should not cross a red light. BUT, as a car does not have full vision (even underneath its own wheels - like a bike does), and it weighs over 1 ton, and it has over 100Hp on tap: There is rarely an occasion when it is not dangerous for a car to cross a red light. However, I can see a situation where a cycle wants to turn left at a set of lights, there is no oncoming or cross traffic, there are no pedestrians, there is a full field of view, and speed is reduced to walking pace. Would you not agree that this is a common sense situation when a cycle could cross a red light? I rest my case M'lord.[/p][/quote]Then why is the light red then?[/p][/quote]Because its on a timed loop. Or, because cars are turning right, from the road the cyclist is turning in to (in which case the cyclist would only be in danger if he was traveling straight on, not turning left). If the road had a filtered left hand lane this side would be on green anyway, its only because the single lane lights cannot distinguish between cars going straight on and cars turning left that the light has to be on red. Repo
  • Score: 9

3:50pm Tue 3 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law!
Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.
Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.[/p][/quote]So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law![/p][/quote]Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.[/p][/quote]Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense? suzigirl
  • Score: -12

8:31pm Tue 3 Jun 14

scrumpyjack says...

Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote:
Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Exactly.

For example at a Pelican when the person has crossed, at a junction where you are on a main road and the quiet side road with priority has no other cars in sight, at a road where you can carry straight on alongside the pavement and not actually 'exposed' to any open road/turning.
[quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Exactly. For example at a Pelican when the person has crossed, at a junction where you are on a main road and the quiet side road with priority has no other cars in sight, at a road where you can carry straight on alongside the pavement and not actually 'exposed' to any open road/turning. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 3

8:32pm Tue 3 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law!
Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.
Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?
I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous.

The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed.

What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.[/p][/quote]So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law![/p][/quote]Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.[/p][/quote]Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?[/p][/quote]I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous. The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed. What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both? breamoreboy
  • Score: 5

9:09am Wed 4 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law!
Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.
Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?
I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous. The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed. What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both?
I knew I was right - emotionally damaged!
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.[/p][/quote]So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law![/p][/quote]Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.[/p][/quote]Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?[/p][/quote]I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous. The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed. What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both?[/p][/quote]I knew I was right - emotionally damaged! suzigirl
  • Score: -7

12:45pm Wed 4 Jun 14

FNS-man says...

Judd3rman wrote:
By the looks of this we will never see the whole story. Just a reminder... Under the road traffic act every vehicle and conveyance are equal on the roads they are allowed on. A cyclist has as much right to use a road as a biker, car driver, van driver etc. The difference is that it is virtually impossible to prosecute a cyclist for running a red light unless it it witnessed by a police officer.
No different vehicles are not the same under the eyes of the law. Hence there are different laws for different vehicles. You will notice that there are different sections in the Highway Code, for example.

More dangerous vehicles have more restrictions than less dangerous vehicles. Hence lorries have lots more regulation than cars, which have lots more regulation than bikes, which have lots more regulations than pedestrians.

The more dangerous vehicle you are in, the more responsibility you have.
[quote][p][bold]Judd3rman[/bold] wrote: By the looks of this we will never see the whole story. Just a reminder... Under the road traffic act every vehicle and conveyance are equal on the roads they are allowed on. A cyclist has as much right to use a road as a biker, car driver, van driver etc. The difference is that it is virtually impossible to prosecute a cyclist for running a red light unless it it witnessed by a police officer.[/p][/quote]No different vehicles are not the same under the eyes of the law. Hence there are different laws for different vehicles. You will notice that there are different sections in the Highway Code, for example. More dangerous vehicles have more restrictions than less dangerous vehicles. Hence lorries have lots more regulation than cars, which have lots more regulation than bikes, which have lots more regulations than pedestrians. The more dangerous vehicle you are in, the more responsibility you have. FNS-man
  • Score: 5

2:55pm Wed 4 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law!
Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.
Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?
I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous. The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed. What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both?
I knew I was right - emotionally damaged!
Asperger Syndrome actually.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.[/p][/quote]So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law![/p][/quote]Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.[/p][/quote]Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?[/p][/quote]I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous. The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed. What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both?[/p][/quote]I knew I was right - emotionally damaged![/p][/quote]Asperger Syndrome actually. breamoreboy
  • Score: 1

3:57pm Wed 4 Jun 14

kangaroo_joey says...

Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Ok whats the danger in a car jumping a red light if its safe to do so? probably because you will get charge with dangerous driving so the same rule should apply for cyclists that jump red lights if they want to ride on the road
[quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you![/p][/quote]Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Ok whats the danger in a car jumping a red light if its safe to do so? probably because you will get charge with dangerous driving so the same rule should apply for cyclists that jump red lights if they want to ride on the road kangaroo_joey
  • Score: -3

3:57pm Wed 4 Jun 14

kangaroo_joey says...

Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Repo wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers!
Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you!
Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?
Ok whats the danger in a car jumping a red light if its safe to do so? probably because you will get charge with dangerous driving so the same rule should apply for cyclists that jump red lights if they want to ride on the road
[quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Repo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]But of course trying to find the cyclist to press charges will be impossible as they are not identifiable like cars and motorbikes. That is why some cyclists behave like this because there is no come back! There should be a new law that all cyclists have to be licensed to go on the road and be easily identified - that will cut down the number of red light jumpers![/p][/quote]Why can't a cyclist jump a red light if there is absolutely no danger to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Because it is against the law for one - unbelievable! Cyclists have been killed jumping red lights is that dangerous enough for you![/p][/quote]Its also the law, According to the Licensing Act 1872 that you are not allowed to be drunk in a pub! I'll give you another chance to answer the question again because I don't think you read it the first time: What is wrong with a cyclist jumping a red light IF there is absolutely NO DANGER to themselves or anyone else in doing so?[/p][/quote]Ok whats the danger in a car jumping a red light if its safe to do so? probably because you will get charge with dangerous driving so the same rule should apply for cyclists that jump red lights if they want to ride on the road kangaroo_joey
  • Score: 0

8:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

Dorset Logic wrote:
Ivan Pavlov, did a great experiment where he noticed how dogs started to froth at the mouth when a bell rang.

The echo did a similar experiment in the first couple of decades of the 2000's where they noted that people would froth at the mouth at the word "cyclist".
Brilliant :-D
[quote][p][bold]Dorset Logic[/bold] wrote: Ivan Pavlov, did a great experiment where he noticed how dogs started to froth at the mouth when a bell rang. The echo did a similar experiment in the first couple of decades of the 2000's where they noted that people would froth at the mouth at the word "cyclist".[/p][/quote]Brilliant :-D bobthedestroyer
  • Score: 3

10:12am Thu 5 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
bobthedestroyer wrote:
JemBmth wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.
Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here
Yes you can when they behave stupidly.
Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.
I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.
So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law!
Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.
Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?
I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous. The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed. What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both?
I knew I was right - emotionally damaged!
Asperger Syndrome actually.
That explains a lot - thanks!
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthedestroyer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are not always so innocent. They constantly break the law. I hooted at one who pulled out in front of me without lights. He caught up with me because I actually stopped at traffic lights and he smashed my wing mirror on purpose and cycled off. I reported him and have a crime number. So much for being concerned about his safety after he entered a roundabout without looking and caused another motorist to screech to a halt.[/p][/quote]Steady you can't criticise cyclists on here[/p][/quote]Yes you can when they behave stupidly.[/p][/quote]Judging by the thumbs down tally, I was right with my statement about criticising cyclists. I can only assume they are the cycling elite and not the considerate average cyclist.[/p][/quote]I've up-voted this. I'm in the latter category. I do break the law, but only after applying some common sense, e.g. is it safe for everybody around me and for myself to do so? Not that this has anything to do with someone getting their lights punched out, but hey ho, this is the Bournemouth Echo website.[/p][/quote]So why don't you use some common sense and not break the law![/p][/quote]Maybe because if I'm on the pavement where there are no pedestrians I'm far safer than being on the road. Okay I'm fully aware that no motorist ever pits their one ton of lethal weapon against me when they're drunk, using the mobile or whatever, but just to be on the safe side I try to play fail safe. This tactic could save a phone call to my family, and save the police from spending a lot of your money hunting for the hit and run driver.[/p][/quote]Are you sure you have not suffered a head injury when going through a red traffic light and colliding with one of those nasty cars as you don't seem to be making any sense?[/p][/quote]I don't go through red lights, it's far too dangerous. The only time I've ever been hit was when I was knocked off at the Purewell Cross roundabout. Fortunately it was just a glancing blow that left me with severe bruising but not much else. Having a very dry sense of humour I recall chuckling to myself at the scene. This was because the driver of the 1a bus was waiting patiently for somebody to pick my bike up from the middle of the roundabout. He'd seen the flashing front and rear lights that the car driver had missed. What doesn't make sense? What do I have to explain, the facetious side to my comment, the sarcastic side, or both?[/p][/quote]I knew I was right - emotionally damaged![/p][/quote]Asperger Syndrome actually.[/p][/quote]That explains a lot - thanks! suzigirl
  • Score: -3

4:42pm Fri 6 Jun 14

tim m says...

JemBmth wrote:
No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face.
Suppose he didn't scowl in the line-up?
[quote][p][bold]JemBmth[/bold] wrote: No doubt cyclists are marking me down because they think they are above the law. I was asked by police if I would recognize the cyclist in a 'line-up' and I could as I can remember his scowling face.[/p][/quote]Suppose he didn't scowl in the line-up? tim m
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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