Man, 77, left needing surgery after argument over cycling on the pavement in Christchurch Road, Boscombe

SCENE: The junction between Parkwood Road and Christchurch Road, Boscombe.

SCENE: The junction between Parkwood Road and Christchurch Road, Boscombe.

First published in News by

A “THUGGISH” cyclist who left a pensioner with a broken hip after a pavement confrontation in Boscombe is being hunted by police.

The 77-year-old Bournemouth man was walking past the George Fry electrical store at the corner of Christchurch Road and Parkwood Road at just after 9am on Saturday when a group of cyclists came by.

One of them, when told by the victim to stop riding on the pavement, knocked him to the ground causing serious injuries, before riding off towards Boscombe town centre.

As the Daily Echo went to press last night the offender was still at large.

Detective Sergeant Andy Bell, of Bournemouth CID, said the pensioner was being treated at Poole Hospital.

“The elderly victim requires surgery to treat his injuries and is facing a lengthy recovery,” he said.

“I am appealing for anyone who witnessed this incident, and anyone with any information about the man responsible, to contact me urgently.

“This area will have been busy at this time of the morning and I am keen to speak with anyone who can help me with this investigation.”

Ward councillor Phil Stanley Watts condemned the attacker. “This is terrible news, I hope the victim will make a full recovery,” he said.

“My colleagues and I have visited sheltered housing all around the area and time and time again the residents bring up their fear of cyclists on the pavement and in the precinct.

“The council is doing a lot to promote cycling at the moment, but that has to go hand in hand with encouraging better awareness of cycle safety in schools and youth centres.

“Also I would like to see a zero tolerance approach to riding on pavements from the police.”

Bournemouth cycling campaigner Mike Chalkley said it was “thuggish” behaviour.

“The majority of cyclists would never dream of doing something like this,” he said.

“Unfortunately some people come to see this as representing cyclists, but for someone with no respect for others it makes no difference whether they are on a bike, in a car or walking.”

The offender was described as white, wearing a grey hooded top with the hood up, riding a dark coloured bicycle.

Witnesses and anyone with information should call Dorset Police in confidence on 101, quoting incident number 19:119. Alternatively, call the Crimestoppers line on 0800 555 111.

Comments (55)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:57am Mon 21 Apr 14

anotherfatslob says...

Make the roads safe for everyone and this wouldn't happen.
Make the roads safe for everyone and this wouldn't happen. anotherfatslob
  • Score: -32

7:01am Mon 21 Apr 14

Huey says...

cycle of violence
cycle of violence Huey
  • Score: -27

7:02am Mon 21 Apr 14

bosco1 says...

Hope the gentleman recovers from this terrible ordeal, it is an ongoing thing all around bournemouth with cyclists on pavements. another area of concern is by Asda/Staples and wellington road, always cyclists on the pavements along with the scroungers. Lets hope they find the culprit very soon and make an example of him in public. Good wishes to the poor gentleman.
Hope the gentleman recovers from this terrible ordeal, it is an ongoing thing all around bournemouth with cyclists on pavements. another area of concern is by Asda/Staples and wellington road, always cyclists on the pavements along with the scroungers. Lets hope they find the culprit very soon and make an example of him in public. Good wishes to the poor gentleman. bosco1
  • Score: 32

7:28am Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade

THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike

Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point?

Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot

I suspect not.
Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point? Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot I suspect not. DanWeston
  • Score: -26

7:42am Mon 21 Apr 14

alasdair1967 says...

DanWeston wrote:
Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade

THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike

Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point?

Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot

I suspect not.
I think SCUM is more appropriate than thuggish
[quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point? Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot I suspect not.[/p][/quote]I think SCUM is more appropriate than thuggish alasdair1967
  • Score: 48

7:47am Mon 21 Apr 14

BIGTONE says...

DanWeston wrote:
Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade

THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike

Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point?

Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot

I suspect not.
Whatever you want to call him makes no difference.
Once a snake always a snake.
A nice bit of jail time for ABH will be on the menu if they catch him.
[quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point? Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot I suspect not.[/p][/quote]Whatever you want to call him makes no difference. Once a snake always a snake. A nice bit of jail time for ABH will be on the menu if they catch him. BIGTONE
  • Score: 43

7:49am Mon 21 Apr 14

newforestbloke says...

anotherfatslob wrote:
Make the roads safe for everyone and this wouldn't happen.
with incidents like this and comments like this, I'm beginning to have some sympathy for individual(s) who disrupted the latest New Forest cycle event by spreading tacks on the road

So when a cyclist feels at risk is it OK to assault a member of the public?
[quote][p][bold]anotherfatslob[/bold] wrote: Make the roads safe for everyone and this wouldn't happen.[/p][/quote]with incidents like this and comments like this, I'm beginning to have some sympathy for individual(s) who disrupted the latest New Forest cycle event by spreading tacks on the road So when a cyclist feels at risk is it OK to assault a member of the public? newforestbloke
  • Score: -14

7:56am Mon 21 Apr 14

anotherfatslob says...

When a cyclist feels at risk it's ok to ride on the pavement,according to government guidelines.
When a cyclist feels at risk it's ok to ride on the pavement,according to government guidelines. anotherfatslob
  • Score: -1

7:56am Mon 21 Apr 14

nickynoodah says...

Its Easter for goodness sake
we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time
stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know
grow a pear pete for once in your life.
Its Easter for goodness sake we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know grow a pear pete for once in your life. nickynoodah
  • Score: -23

8:01am Mon 21 Apr 14

poolebabe says...

As has been mentioned before, the man is a thug. They give cyclists a bad name. No different from a bad driver or motorcyclist or careless pedestrian. There is bad within all road user groups. The punishments need to be more severe. Cyclists breaking the law should be subject to the same punishments as drivers at the very least. Maybe Dorset "road safe" could get involved.
As has been mentioned before, the man is a thug. They give cyclists a bad name. No different from a bad driver or motorcyclist or careless pedestrian. There is bad within all road user groups. The punishments need to be more severe. Cyclists breaking the law should be subject to the same punishments as drivers at the very least. Maybe Dorset "road safe" could get involved. poolebabe
  • Score: 31

8:03am Mon 21 Apr 14

retry69 says...

nickynoodah wrote:
Its Easter for goodness sake
we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time
stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know
grow a pear pete for once in your life.
Nickynoodah leaving at 9 heading out your way to see relatives might call in and see you for a coffee and my Easter Egg :)
[quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: Its Easter for goodness sake we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know grow a pear pete for once in your life.[/p][/quote]Nickynoodah leaving at 9 heading out your way to see relatives might call in and see you for a coffee and my Easter Egg :) retry69
  • Score: 4

8:13am Mon 21 Apr 14

High Treason says...

Why bother. The police will use large amounts of time and money to trace the offender. The CPS may decide to prosecute, more time and money, the courts will dish out a naughty boy sentence. The victim will suffer for ages and never get any sense of justice. Time for cycling on pavements to have an instant £100 fine and cyclist to hold public liability insurance.
Why bother. The police will use large amounts of time and money to trace the offender. The CPS may decide to prosecute, more time and money, the courts will dish out a naughty boy sentence. The victim will suffer for ages and never get any sense of justice. Time for cycling on pavements to have an instant £100 fine and cyclist to hold public liability insurance. High Treason
  • Score: 35

8:23am Mon 21 Apr 14

nickynoodah says...

Brilliant I will meet you at your mothers gypsy caravan , what number is it I have lost it
don't be late don't get lost pete I got a bottle for you
ask your carer to drive slowly .

ps....don't forget to take a shower
like you did last time x.
Brilliant I will meet you at your mothers gypsy caravan , what number is it I have lost it don't be late don't get lost pete I got a bottle for you ask your carer to drive slowly . ps....don't forget to take a shower like you did last time x. nickynoodah
  • Score: -21

8:34am Mon 21 Apr 14

retry69 says...

Come on theres is not that many in Bere, its the green spotted one with the 3 4x4s outside and I showered on my birthday so im fine tx
Come on theres is not that many in Bere, its the green spotted one with the 3 4x4s outside and I showered on my birthday so im fine tx retry69
  • Score: -8

8:42am Mon 21 Apr 14

Huey says...

BIGTONE wrote:
DanWeston wrote:
Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade

THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike

Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point?

Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot

I suspect not.
Whatever you want to call him makes no difference.
Once a snake always a snake.
A nice bit of jail time for ABH will be on the menu if they catch him.
Unless wiggsy is the judge
[quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point? Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot I suspect not.[/p][/quote]Whatever you want to call him makes no difference. Once a snake always a snake. A nice bit of jail time for ABH will be on the menu if they catch him.[/p][/quote]Unless wiggsy is the judge Huey
  • Score: 16

8:48am Mon 21 Apr 14

Tripod says...

I notice Mr Underhill has been conspicuous by His silence in the Pavement Cyclist rows...
I notice Mr Underhill has been conspicuous by His silence in the Pavement Cyclist rows... Tripod
  • Score: 18

9:15am Mon 21 Apr 14

Roginthesouth says...

The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes.
But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.
The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes. But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes. Roginthesouth
  • Score: 24

9:37am Mon 21 Apr 14

Tripod says...

Roginthesouth wrote:
The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes.
But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.
Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way.
[quote][p][bold]Roginthesouth[/bold] wrote: The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes. But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.[/p][/quote]Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way. Tripod
  • Score: 20

9:59am Mon 21 Apr 14

nickynoodah says...

knobdirt broke his leg in two places

outside a brothel
and inside the unemployable office
you know
knobdirt broke his leg in two places outside a brothel and inside the unemployable office you know nickynoodah
  • Score: -19

11:04am Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

Tripod wrote:
Roginthesouth wrote:
The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes.
But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.
Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way.
So if registration is the answer how come it hasn't stopped the endemic pavement parking?
[quote][p][bold]Tripod[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Roginthesouth[/bold] wrote: The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes. But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.[/p][/quote]Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way.[/p][/quote]So if registration is the answer how come it hasn't stopped the endemic pavement parking? DanWeston
  • Score: 9

11:39am Mon 21 Apr 14

Tripod says...

DanWeston wrote:
Tripod wrote:
Roginthesouth wrote:
The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes.
But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.
Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way.
So if registration is the answer how come it hasn't stopped the endemic pavement parking?
Pavement parking is something that appears to have fallen down the back of the sofa when parking enforcement was transferred from Police to Local Authority control, the Police don't see it as their problem, local authorities only see it as an offence if the vehicle is also on double yellow's (and they can make a buck).
[quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tripod[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Roginthesouth[/bold] wrote: The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes. But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.[/p][/quote]Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way.[/p][/quote]So if registration is the answer how come it hasn't stopped the endemic pavement parking?[/p][/quote]Pavement parking is something that appears to have fallen down the back of the sofa when parking enforcement was transferred from Police to Local Authority control, the Police don't see it as their problem, local authorities only see it as an offence if the vehicle is also on double yellow's (and they can make a buck). Tripod
  • Score: 7

12:13pm Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

Tripod wrote:
DanWeston wrote:
Tripod wrote:
Roginthesouth wrote:
The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes.
But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.
Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way.
So if registration is the answer how come it hasn't stopped the endemic pavement parking?
Pavement parking is something that appears to have fallen down the back of the sofa when parking enforcement was transferred from Police to Local Authority control, the Police don't see it as their problem, local authorities only see it as an offence if the vehicle is also on double yellow's (and they can make a buck).
Which is why we need to raise the profile and do something about it.

It would be so simple to cave zero tolerance clampdowns in areas and then fine ALL those abusing the pavement,......Cycli
st AND motorist
[quote][p][bold]Tripod[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tripod[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Roginthesouth[/bold] wrote: The reality is that current roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists, which presents a difficulty when cycling is being promoted in the UK as a favourable option of transport. I suspect that is the reason why the police have accepted cyclists riding on the pavements as a safer alternative, and councils are constructing more cycle lanes. But it’s time for the police to put a stop to riding on the pavement, both for the safety of pedestrians and to stop cyclists being given a bad reputation by thugs who ride bikes.[/p][/quote]Even when there are wide roads and cycle lanes, or quiet back-roads they still cycle on the pavements. The Police turn a Blind-Eye because Push Bikes don't have registration numbers, Cyclists don't need a Licence or any other form of ID so they can easily give false names & addresses, if a Police Officer arrests a Cyclise S/He has to do something with the Bike... so it's far easier to just look the other way.[/p][/quote]So if registration is the answer how come it hasn't stopped the endemic pavement parking?[/p][/quote]Pavement parking is something that appears to have fallen down the back of the sofa when parking enforcement was transferred from Police to Local Authority control, the Police don't see it as their problem, local authorities only see it as an offence if the vehicle is also on double yellow's (and they can make a buck).[/p][/quote]Which is why we need to raise the profile and do something about it. It would be so simple to cave zero tolerance clampdowns in areas and then fine ALL those abusing the pavement,......Cycli st AND motorist DanWeston
  • Score: 8

12:16pm Mon 21 Apr 14

twynham says...

So was the driver of a silver Vauxhall Zafira who seriously injured a pedestrian at Blackwater this morning "THUGGISH"?
So was the driver of a silver Vauxhall Zafira who seriously injured a pedestrian at Blackwater this morning "THUGGISH"? twynham
  • Score: 7

12:18pm Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

anotherfatslob wrote:
When a cyclist feels at risk it's ok to ride on the pavement,according to government guidelines.
... similar to a motorist parking on a pavement because they are too lazy to walk and extra three feet from the road?


You are also misrepresenting the "guidelines", either through ignorance of their content or deliberately.

There were a number of conditions in the Boateng letter:

"The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users"

Far from the outright .blanket authorisation you have tried to portray
[quote][p][bold]anotherfatslob[/bold] wrote: When a cyclist feels at risk it's ok to ride on the pavement,according to government guidelines.[/p][/quote]... similar to a motorist parking on a pavement because they are too lazy to walk and extra three feet from the road? You are also misrepresenting the "guidelines", either through ignorance of their content or deliberately. There were a number of conditions in the Boateng letter: "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users" Far from the outright .blanket authorisation you have tried to portray DanWeston
  • Score: 1

12:22pm Mon 21 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

Anyone who seriously assaults a pensioner should be charged with attempted murder as death is a likely outcome.

If the gentleman survives, it is almost certainly a life changing event. Any costs associated should be paid by the thug. If that bankrupts him well, ain't life a *itch.
Anyone who seriously assaults a pensioner should be charged with attempted murder as death is a likely outcome. If the gentleman survives, it is almost certainly a life changing event. Any costs associated should be paid by the thug. If that bankrupts him well, ain't life a *itch. JackJohnson
  • Score: 16

12:30pm Mon 21 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

DanWeston wrote:
Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade

THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike

Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point?

Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot

I suspect not.
Why the bizarre "THUGGISH" cyclist?

a) There can be no doubt that he was a cyclist. The OED defines 'cyclist' as "a person who rides a bicycle".

b) There can be little doubt he is a thug.

So, just an accurate description of him. No ulterior motive.
[quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point? Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot I suspect not.[/p][/quote]Why the bizarre "THUGGISH" cyclist? a) There can be no doubt that he was a cyclist. The OED defines 'cyclist' as "a person who rides a bicycle". b) There can be little doubt he is a thug. So, just an accurate description of him. No ulterior motive. JackJohnson
  • Score: 8

12:39pm Mon 21 Apr 14

rdemeath says...

Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law. rdemeath
  • Score: 11

12:57pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

Another old bloke got knocked over yesterday in the same spot
True. I read it here yesterday
Another old bloke got knocked over yesterday in the same spot True. I read it here yesterday Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: 9

1:24pm Mon 21 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
Persuading the police we've already got to stop ignoring bad cyclists, bad motorists, bad motor cyclists and even bad pedestrians (yes, there are some) would be a good start.
[quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]Persuading the police we've already got to stop ignoring bad cyclists, bad motorists, bad motor cyclists and even bad pedestrians (yes, there are some) would be a good start. JackJohnson
  • Score: 11

1:58pm Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
AGAin whether through ignorance of malice, a total distortion of the 1835 HA


The actual phrase you have selectively quoted to fit your agenda SHOULD read:

If any person shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers; or shall wilfully lead or drive any horse, ****, sheep, mule, swine, or cattle or carriage of any description, or any truck or sledge, upon any such footpath or causeway; or shall tether any horse, ****, mule, swine, or cattle, on any highway, so as to suffer or permit the tethered animal to be thereon."

The 1903 amendment included cars under the "carriage of any description"

So although you choose only to apply it to cyclists... it covers motor vehicles equally

But back to the point... if we are going to remove cycles from their owners for misuse of the pavement... will you be supporting the removal of a vehicle from anyone who parks on the pavement.

Or is this yet again a hypocritical demand clamp down on cyclists and ignore motorists committing the same, but far more dangerous offence...?

If you are unhappy with motor vehicle seizure, please explain why?
[quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]AGAin whether through ignorance of malice, a total distortion of the 1835 HA The actual phrase you have selectively quoted to fit your agenda SHOULD read: If any person shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers; or shall wilfully lead or drive any horse, ****, sheep, mule, swine, or cattle or carriage of any description, or any truck or sledge, upon any such footpath or causeway; or shall tether any horse, ****, mule, swine, or cattle, on any highway, so as to suffer or permit the tethered animal to be thereon." The 1903 amendment included cars under the "carriage of any description" So although you choose only to apply it to cyclists... it covers motor vehicles equally But back to the point... if we are going to remove cycles from their owners for misuse of the pavement... will you be supporting the removal of a vehicle from anyone who parks on the pavement. Or is this yet again a hypocritical demand clamp down on cyclists and ignore motorists committing the same, but far more dangerous offence...? If you are unhappy with motor vehicle seizure, please explain why? DanWeston
  • Score: 4

2:02pm Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

PS the asterisks are not an edit, but because the net nanny does not like the three letter description of a donkey used in the original act!
PS the asterisks are not an edit, but because the net nanny does not like the three letter description of a donkey used in the original act! DanWeston
  • Score: 4

2:53pm Mon 21 Apr 14

poolebabe says...

rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.
[quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name. poolebabe
  • Score: -5

3:20pm Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

poolebabe wrote:
rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.
Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists
[quote][p][bold]poolebabe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.[/p][/quote]Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists DanWeston
  • Score: 7

5:23pm Mon 21 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

DanWeston wrote:
poolebabe wrote:
rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.
Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists
So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly.

The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them.

Two wrongs do not make a right.
[quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]poolebabe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.[/p][/quote]Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists[/p][/quote]So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly. The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them. Two wrongs do not make a right. JackJohnson
  • Score: -3

5:40pm Mon 21 Apr 14

QPUtd says...

This story has no relevance to the debate about illegal cycling.. it is a story about a 77 year old who was attacked by a bunch of yobs. The fact that they were cycling on the pavement is irrelevant. It could just as well be a story about yobs who attacked a 77 year old who told them off for throwing litter, or for playing loud music
This story has no relevance to the debate about illegal cycling.. it is a story about a 77 year old who was attacked by a bunch of yobs. The fact that they were cycling on the pavement is irrelevant. It could just as well be a story about yobs who attacked a 77 year old who told them off for throwing litter, or for playing loud music QPUtd
  • Score: 16

6:33pm Mon 21 Apr 14

DanWeston says...

JackJohnson wrote:
DanWeston wrote:
poolebabe wrote:
rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.
Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists
So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly.

The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them.

Two wrongs do not make a right.
Exactly, but what we need to do as urgently is to sort out the hypocrisy that surrounds vehicles on pavements

I always find it rather pathetic when we get the demands to fine cyclists, confiscate and crush their bicycles, yet as soon as you suggest the same treatment for motorists on the pavement we get utter silence.

What should be done is for a blitz on BOTH, led by this paper...

Name and shame cyclists AND motorists causing problems, injury and inconvenience for the elderly, partially sighted and infirm

Demand draconian fines for both and see if we can resolve the issue
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]poolebabe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.[/p][/quote]Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists[/p][/quote]So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly. The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them. Two wrongs do not make a right.[/p][/quote]Exactly, but what we need to do as urgently is to sort out the hypocrisy that surrounds vehicles on pavements I always find it rather pathetic when we get the demands to fine cyclists, confiscate and crush their bicycles, yet as soon as you suggest the same treatment for motorists on the pavement we get utter silence. What should be done is for a blitz on BOTH, led by this paper... Name and shame cyclists AND motorists causing problems, injury and inconvenience for the elderly, partially sighted and infirm Demand draconian fines for both and see if we can resolve the issue DanWeston
  • Score: 2

7:45pm Mon 21 Apr 14

kinsonjim says...

NICKYNOODA IT IS 1661 BUT IT HAS GOT NO WHEELS, THEY USED THEM FOR THEIR NUISANCE SCUM BUGGIE
NICKYNOODA IT IS 1661 BUT IT HAS GOT NO WHEELS, THEY USED THEM FOR THEIR NUISANCE SCUM BUGGIE kinsonjim
  • Score: -5

8:41pm Mon 21 Apr 14

fireflier says...

Come on you human beings!

Someone out there knows the SCUMBAG who caused this broken leg!

Do you know him or have you heard any low-life bragging about how it was 'well wicked' that he whacked this old guy ????

This cretin isn't a friend.....he's a bit of garbage that needs to be cleaned off our streets! There's a piece of sh1t on this bike ...and it's not on the tyre!!!

Come on....do the right thing ...and give a name to the police.
Come on you human beings! Someone out there knows the SCUMBAG who caused this broken leg! Do you know him or have you heard any low-life bragging about how it was 'well wicked' that he whacked this old guy ???? This cretin isn't a friend.....he's a bit of garbage that needs to be cleaned off our streets! There's a piece of sh1t on this bike ...and it's not on the tyre!!! Come on....do the right thing ...and give a name to the police. fireflier
  • Score: 5

8:48pm Mon 21 Apr 14

SelenaOverton says...

Another Daily Echo witch hunt - reminds us of drivers leaving the scene of an accident. Based on hearsay, without all the facts let's gang up and find the evildoer - I have been reading this paper for years and slowly but surely the paper is losing its role as reporters.
Next the Daily Echo will be leading the witch hunt for 'benefits scroungers', then illegal i,,igrants....
I'm afraid as a paper more people should complain - but then the Daily Echo redaction ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING that does not CONFORM.
Another Daily Echo witch hunt - reminds us of drivers leaving the scene of an accident. Based on hearsay, without all the facts let's gang up and find the evildoer - I have been reading this paper for years and slowly but surely the paper is losing its role as reporters. Next the Daily Echo will be leading the witch hunt for 'benefits scroungers', then illegal i,,igrants.... I'm afraid as a paper more people should complain - but then the Daily Echo redaction ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING that does not CONFORM. SelenaOverton
  • Score: 6

8:50pm Mon 21 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

fireflier wrote:
Come on you human beings!

Someone out there knows the SCUMBAG who caused this broken leg!

Do you know him or have you heard any low-life bragging about how it was 'well wicked' that he whacked this old guy ????

This cretin isn't a friend.....he's a bit of garbage that needs to be cleaned off our streets! There's a piece of sh1t on this bike ...and it's not on the tyre!!!

Come on....do the right thing ...and give a name to the police.
This isn't a broken leg, it's a broken hip which is far more serious.

The thug was in a group of cyclists. Whether they were known to each other or they had just got bunched up is anyone's guess, but there's a fair chance of it's the former. With a little luck someone who knows him wil do the decent thing and give him up.
[quote][p][bold]fireflier[/bold] wrote: Come on you human beings! Someone out there knows the SCUMBAG who caused this broken leg! Do you know him or have you heard any low-life bragging about how it was 'well wicked' that he whacked this old guy ???? This cretin isn't a friend.....he's a bit of garbage that needs to be cleaned off our streets! There's a piece of sh1t on this bike ...and it's not on the tyre!!! Come on....do the right thing ...and give a name to the police.[/p][/quote]This isn't a broken leg, it's a broken hip which is far more serious. The thug was in a group of cyclists. Whether they were known to each other or they had just got bunched up is anyone's guess, but there's a fair chance of it's the former. With a little luck someone who knows him wil do the decent thing and give him up. JackJohnson
  • Score: -2

8:50pm Mon 21 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

fireflier wrote:
Come on you human beings!

Someone out there knows the SCUMBAG who caused this broken leg!

Do you know him or have you heard any low-life bragging about how it was 'well wicked' that he whacked this old guy ????

This cretin isn't a friend.....he's a bit of garbage that needs to be cleaned off our streets! There's a piece of sh1t on this bike ...and it's not on the tyre!!!

Come on....do the right thing ...and give a name to the police.
This isn't a broken leg, it's a broken hip which is far more serious.

The thug was in a group of cyclists. Whether they were known to each other or they had just got bunched up is anyone's guess, but there's a fair chance of it's the former. With a little luck someone who knows him wil do the decent thing and give him up.
[quote][p][bold]fireflier[/bold] wrote: Come on you human beings! Someone out there knows the SCUMBAG who caused this broken leg! Do you know him or have you heard any low-life bragging about how it was 'well wicked' that he whacked this old guy ???? This cretin isn't a friend.....he's a bit of garbage that needs to be cleaned off our streets! There's a piece of sh1t on this bike ...and it's not on the tyre!!! Come on....do the right thing ...and give a name to the police.[/p][/quote]This isn't a broken leg, it's a broken hip which is far more serious. The thug was in a group of cyclists. Whether they were known to each other or they had just got bunched up is anyone's guess, but there's a fair chance of it's the former. With a little luck someone who knows him wil do the decent thing and give him up. JackJohnson
  • Score: -2

8:56pm Mon 21 Apr 14

rdemeath says...

I wrote in support of the elderly gentleman, 7 years older than me - and the fact that I mentioned the cyclist was merely down to the fact the assailant was riding a bicycle.
I fully agree that selfish parking of motor cars are also cause of public nuisance. However, the elderly gentleman was not knocked down by a motor car, which is why I referred to the relevant act. In a court of Law, the prosecution is unlikely to refer to the entire Act when addressing the case put before the court.
Richard de Meath,
Norwich Avenue,
bournemouth
I wrote in support of the elderly gentleman, 7 years older than me - and the fact that I mentioned the cyclist was merely down to the fact the assailant was riding a bicycle. I fully agree that selfish parking of motor cars are also cause of public nuisance. However, the elderly gentleman was not knocked down by a motor car, which is why I referred to the relevant act. In a court of Law, the prosecution is unlikely to refer to the entire Act when addressing the case put before the court. Richard de Meath, Norwich Avenue, bournemouth rdemeath
  • Score: 6

9:06pm Mon 21 Apr 14

nickynoodah says...

The only way to stop George from posting his nonsense on here
is shooting by hanging.
The only way to stop George from posting his nonsense on here is shooting by hanging. nickynoodah
  • Score: -3

9:30pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Understated says...

nickynoodah wrote:
The only way to stop George from posting his nonsense on here
is shooting by hanging.
what a great idea,
he will hang you, while we shoot you.. deal? .
.
.
.
no?
shame.
[quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: The only way to stop George from posting his nonsense on here is shooting by hanging.[/p][/quote]what a great idea, he will hang you, while we shoot you.. deal? . . . . no? shame. Understated
  • Score: -3

12:16am Tue 22 Apr 14

s-pb2 says...

Being a Boscombe resident and knowing the types that ride up and down the precinct in Boscombe and around the area, generally on the pavement, they are more than likely to be involved in drug distribution. You see them regularly and are familiar to locals. I wouldnt be at all surprised if this is one of them, to which the police wont have a chance of identifying
Being a Boscombe resident and knowing the types that ride up and down the precinct in Boscombe and around the area, generally on the pavement, they are more than likely to be involved in drug distribution. You see them regularly and are familiar to locals. I wouldnt be at all surprised if this is one of them, to which the police wont have a chance of identifying s-pb2
  • Score: 5

2:59am Tue 22 Apr 14

Adrian XX says...

I blame the badgers.
I blame the badgers. Adrian XX
  • Score: 2

10:38am Tue 22 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

SelenaOverton wrote:
Another Daily Echo witch hunt - reminds us of drivers leaving the scene of an accident. Based on hearsay, without all the facts let's gang up and find the evildoer - I have been reading this paper for years and slowly but surely the paper is losing its role as reporters.
Next the Daily Echo will be leading the witch hunt for 'benefits scroungers', then illegal i,,igrants....
I'm afraid as a paper more people should complain - but then the Daily Echo redaction ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING that does not CONFORM.
So, are you suggesting that the Echo has no role to play in informing people that this serious assault took place and assisting in either encouraging him to turn himself in, or encouraging anyone else who knows who he is to give him up?

Would you prefer that the Echo had not reported the assault, possibly allowing the thug to evade justice (however meagre it turns out to be)?

IMHO they have a fundamental role in seeing that this thug come to justice. The more people who know what happened, the more likely it will be that he is caught.

What, exactly, is wrong with identifying people who claim benefits they are not entitled to? What is wrong with identifying people who are in the UK illegally? I may be old-fashioned in the standards I expect of myself, and from others, but surely as citizens of the UK we have a duty to do that?

What, exactly, are you urging more people to complain about?

Must go and sharpen the prongs on my pitch-fork (and make sure the tar-barrel is full and ready to light).
[quote][p][bold]SelenaOverton[/bold] wrote: Another Daily Echo witch hunt - reminds us of drivers leaving the scene of an accident. Based on hearsay, without all the facts let's gang up and find the evildoer - I have been reading this paper for years and slowly but surely the paper is losing its role as reporters. Next the Daily Echo will be leading the witch hunt for 'benefits scroungers', then illegal i,,igrants.... I'm afraid as a paper more people should complain - but then the Daily Echo redaction ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING that does not CONFORM.[/p][/quote]So, are you suggesting that the Echo has no role to play in informing people that this serious assault took place and assisting in either encouraging him to turn himself in, or encouraging anyone else who knows who he is to give him up? Would you prefer that the Echo had not reported the assault, possibly allowing the thug to evade justice (however meagre it turns out to be)? IMHO they have a fundamental role in seeing that this thug come to justice. The more people who know what happened, the more likely it will be that he is caught. What, exactly, is wrong with identifying people who claim benefits they are not entitled to? What is wrong with identifying people who are in the UK illegally? I may be old-fashioned in the standards I expect of myself, and from others, but surely as citizens of the UK we have a duty to do that? What, exactly, are you urging more people to complain about? Must go and sharpen the prongs on my pitch-fork (and make sure the tar-barrel is full and ready to light). JackJohnson
  • Score: 1

7:24pm Tue 22 Apr 14

breamoreboy says...

DanWeston wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
DanWeston wrote:
poolebabe wrote:
rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.
Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists
So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly.

The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them.

Two wrongs do not make a right.
Exactly, but what we need to do as urgently is to sort out the hypocrisy that surrounds vehicles on pavements

I always find it rather pathetic when we get the demands to fine cyclists, confiscate and crush their bicycles, yet as soon as you suggest the same treatment for motorists on the pavement we get utter silence.

What should be done is for a blitz on BOTH, led by this paper...

Name and shame cyclists AND motorists causing problems, injury and inconvenience for the elderly, partially sighted and infirm

Demand draconian fines for both and see if we can resolve the issue
Clamping down on illegal cycling and parking strikes me as an excellent idea, especially in Boscombe where life would be made much more difficult for the drug dealers by depriving them of their transport..
[quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]poolebabe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.[/p][/quote]Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists[/p][/quote]So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly. The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them. Two wrongs do not make a right.[/p][/quote]Exactly, but what we need to do as urgently is to sort out the hypocrisy that surrounds vehicles on pavements I always find it rather pathetic when we get the demands to fine cyclists, confiscate and crush their bicycles, yet as soon as you suggest the same treatment for motorists on the pavement we get utter silence. What should be done is for a blitz on BOTH, led by this paper... Name and shame cyclists AND motorists causing problems, injury and inconvenience for the elderly, partially sighted and infirm Demand draconian fines for both and see if we can resolve the issue[/p][/quote]Clamping down on illegal cycling and parking strikes me as an excellent idea, especially in Boscombe where life would be made much more difficult for the drug dealers by depriving them of their transport.. breamoreboy
  • Score: 2

5:04am Wed 23 Apr 14

guisselle says...

retry69 wrote:
nickynoodah wrote:
Its Easter for goodness sake
we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time
stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know
grow a pear pete for once in your life.
Nickynoodah leaving at 9 heading out your way to see relatives might call in and see you for a coffee and my Easter Egg :)
Ask Nicky has he sniffed any saddles lately, ooh naughty!
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: Its Easter for goodness sake we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know grow a pear pete for once in your life.[/p][/quote]Nickynoodah leaving at 9 heading out your way to see relatives might call in and see you for a coffee and my Easter Egg :)[/p][/quote]Ask Nicky has he sniffed any saddles lately, ooh naughty! guisselle
  • Score: -1

5:05am Wed 23 Apr 14

guisselle says...

nickynoodah wrote:
Its Easter for goodness sake
we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time
stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know
grow a pear pete for once in your life.
A partridge in a pear tree or a pair of golf balls.
[quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: Its Easter for goodness sake we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know grow a pear pete for once in your life.[/p][/quote]A partridge in a pear tree or a pair of golf balls. guisselle
  • Score: -1

5:17am Wed 23 Apr 14

guisselle says...

retry69 wrote:
nickynoodah wrote:
Its Easter for goodness sake
we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time
stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know
grow a pear pete for once in your life.
Nickynoodah leaving at 9 heading out your way to see relatives might call in and see you for a coffee and my Easter Egg :)
Ask Nicky has he sniffed any saddles lately, ooh naughty!
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: Its Easter for goodness sake we don't want to listen to your mental comments all the time stop changing your user name every two minutes and ask your carer to put you back in bed see a doctor or a psychiatrist you know grow a pear pete for once in your life.[/p][/quote]Nickynoodah leaving at 9 heading out your way to see relatives might call in and see you for a coffee and my Easter Egg :)[/p][/quote]Ask Nicky has he sniffed any saddles lately, ooh naughty! guisselle
  • Score: -1

9:07pm Thu 24 Apr 14

pete woodley says...

Dont waste time trying to get through on 101,its wasting your money.
Dont waste time trying to get through on 101,its wasting your money. pete woodley
  • Score: 1

7:57am Sat 26 Apr 14

Phixer says...

anotherfatslob wrote:
When a cyclist feels at risk it's ok to ride on the pavement,according to government guidelines.
And where does the government spend a lot of my money to make cycling safer - on the pavements to share with pedestrians!
[quote][p][bold]anotherfatslob[/bold] wrote: When a cyclist feels at risk it's ok to ride on the pavement,according to government guidelines.[/p][/quote]And where does the government spend a lot of my money to make cycling safer - on the pavements to share with pedestrians! Phixer
  • Score: 0

8:03am Sat 26 Apr 14

Phixer says...

breamoreboy wrote:
DanWeston wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
DanWeston wrote:
poolebabe wrote:
rdemeath wrote:
Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before.
Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week.
Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!'
When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour?
The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply).
I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.
So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.
Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists
So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly.

The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them.

Two wrongs do not make a right.
Exactly, but what we need to do as urgently is to sort out the hypocrisy that surrounds vehicles on pavements

I always find it rather pathetic when we get the demands to fine cyclists, confiscate and crush their bicycles, yet as soon as you suggest the same treatment for motorists on the pavement we get utter silence.

What should be done is for a blitz on BOTH, led by this paper...

Name and shame cyclists AND motorists causing problems, injury and inconvenience for the elderly, partially sighted and infirm

Demand draconian fines for both and see if we can resolve the issue
Clamping down on illegal cycling and parking strikes me as an excellent idea, especially in Boscombe where life would be made much more difficult for the drug dealers by depriving them of their transport..
Yes, it is an excellent idea but it won't happen. Our public serpents won't get out of bed/the office if it means working for my/our/your money/salary or having to use common sense. They're much too busy thinking of job retentions schemes and how much more money they can waste on useless white lines and signs.

Cynical? Moi? Stop giving me reasons to be so cynical.
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]poolebabe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rdemeath[/bold] wrote: Thuggish behaviour in many sectors has become an everyday occurrence in modern society. When taken to court, the miscreant is virtually assured of a tiny slap on the wrist, is treated with greater care then the victim, and simply continues on as before. Part of this criminal behaviour are the drivers who insist on using their phones whilst driving is an everyday sight. Selfish and thoughtless drivers regularly park on corners, even where there are double yellow lines, a situation that occurs on Norwich Avenue every day of the week. Side-stepping pavement cyclists gives us oldies plenty of exercise as they speed by, contemptuous of the law, feeling they can do so with impunity. The occasional injury to the elderly is laughingly shrugged off as 'just one of those things that happen!' When was the last time a cyclist taken to court and fined for this anti-social behaviour? The Highways Act 1835 prohibits cycling on a footpath which is "by the side of any road" and "set apart for" use by pedestrians only. If you're caught by a police officer or a community support officer riding on a pedestrian pavement by a road, you can be given a fixed penalty of £30, or prosecuted and fined up to £500 (unless someone is hurt, in which case other offences might apply). I suggest doubling the number of Community Police Officers would be an excellent start, as would removing the bicycle of those found to breach the law.[/p][/quote]So.....for example, on Ringwood road near Seaview/Newtown, there are cycle lanes on the pavement. So how exactly does the law work? In this case, the law was broken because the cyclist was riding in a pedestrianised area with signs that say "no cycling" totally different. I don't suppose a day goes by without someone breaking the law cycling there. It's infuriating because it's such a small area, but a few idiots give the rest a bad name.[/p][/quote]Lets take a snapshot shall we...... look at the Google Maps tTreet View of this area and the fact that there are lorries, cars vehicles parked illegally on the cycle track, at one point you are expected to navigate THROUGH a bus stop ... as you say the law is broken every day by these inconsiderate motorists[/p][/quote]So the attitudes of the police and the council's enforcement officers needs to be changed. The rules/laws need to be applied to all - equally and fairly. The fact that there are other road users parking illegally does not give cyclists a right to ignore the laws that apply to them. Two wrongs do not make a right.[/p][/quote]Exactly, but what we need to do as urgently is to sort out the hypocrisy that surrounds vehicles on pavements I always find it rather pathetic when we get the demands to fine cyclists, confiscate and crush their bicycles, yet as soon as you suggest the same treatment for motorists on the pavement we get utter silence. What should be done is for a blitz on BOTH, led by this paper... Name and shame cyclists AND motorists causing problems, injury and inconvenience for the elderly, partially sighted and infirm Demand draconian fines for both and see if we can resolve the issue[/p][/quote]Clamping down on illegal cycling and parking strikes me as an excellent idea, especially in Boscombe where life would be made much more difficult for the drug dealers by depriving them of their transport..[/p][/quote]Yes, it is an excellent idea but it won't happen. Our public serpents won't get out of bed/the office if it means working for my/our/your money/salary or having to use common sense. They're much too busy thinking of job retentions schemes and how much more money they can waste on useless white lines and signs. Cynical? Moi? Stop giving me reasons to be so cynical. Phixer
  • Score: 0

8:31pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Dr Martin says...

Huey wrote:
BIGTONE wrote:
DanWeston wrote:
Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade

THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike

Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point?

Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot

I suspect not.
Whatever you want to call him makes no difference.
Once a snake always a snake.
A nice bit of jail time for ABH will be on the menu if they catch him.
Unless wiggsy is the judge
Ahh what a place
[quote][p][bold]Huey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DanWeston[/bold] wrote: Again why the bizarrre "THUGGISH" cyclist... except to stir up the road tax brigade THis was a thug who happened to b on a bike Would you have reported it as a "THUGGISH motorist" if he had driven a car to this point? Would it have been reported as a "THUGGISH pedestrian" if he had been on foot I suspect not.[/p][/quote]Whatever you want to call him makes no difference. Once a snake always a snake. A nice bit of jail time for ABH will be on the menu if they catch him.[/p][/quote]Unless wiggsy is the judge[/p][/quote]Ahh what a place Dr Martin
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

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

I agree