Police hunt for saboteurs who threw nails on the road during Wiggle cycling event in the New Forest

Bournemouth Echo: Police hunt for saboteurs who threw nails on the road during Wiggle event Police hunt for saboteurs who threw nails on the road during Wiggle event

POLICE are carrying out door-to-door inquiries in the hunt for saboteurs who targeted a mass cycling event in the New Forest.

Nails were thrown along Braggers Lane, Bransgore, during the Wiggle New Forest Spring Sportive, which attracted more than 2,000 entrants at the weekend.

A total of 15 cyclists suffered punctures but police say no-one was injured. Now officers are carrying out house-to-house inquiries in a bid to trace the culprits.

Bransgore Parish Council chairman Cllr Richard Frampton hit out at attempts to sabotage the ride and endanger the safety of riders.

He said: “I know there’s been sensitivity over these events, partly because of the numbers, but there’s no excuse for anyone to take the law into their own hands.

“If there are genuine concerns they should go through the proper channels and be looked at in the correct way.”

It follows a similar incident last year in which opponents placed drawing pins in the road.

Comments (63)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:28am Tue 15 Apr 14

richardcompton3 says...

And burglaries go unresponded To!
And burglaries go unresponded To! richardcompton3
  • Score: -16

9:24am Tue 15 Apr 14

EdBmth says...

Perhaps The Echo could get Ann Sevier's view on this matter. After all she supported the posters going up around the area. After all she did say

"The cyclists are the people that have antagonised the residents. We are a democratic society and we have every right to voice our concerns and put up posters.

"The people who come to visit at weekends should not be confronted by - in many cases - ill-mannered and ill-behaved middle-aged men who should know better."

So what does she consider throwing pin tacks on the road, which could also end up in the hooves of horses etc ?
Perhaps The Echo could get Ann Sevier's view on this matter. After all she supported the posters going up around the area. After all she did say "The cyclists are the people that have antagonised the residents. We are a democratic society and we have every right to voice our concerns and put up posters. "The people who come to visit at weekends should not be confronted by - in many cases - ill-mannered and ill-behaved middle-aged men who should know better." So what does she consider throwing pin tacks on the road, which could also end up in the hooves of horses etc ? EdBmth
  • Score: 33

9:34am Tue 15 Apr 14

Hessenford says...

Cllr Richard Frampton said, “I know there’s been sensitivity over these events, partly because of the numbers, but there’s no excuse for anyone to take the law into their own hands.
.

The reason that people take the law into their own hands is because they don't believe that anyone is listening to them although having said that there is no excuse to put other people lives in danger as well as the potential to injure animals.
Cllr Richard Frampton said, “I know there’s been sensitivity over these events, partly because of the numbers, but there’s no excuse for anyone to take the law into their own hands. . The reason that people take the law into their own hands is because they don't believe that anyone is listening to them although having said that there is no excuse to put other people lives in danger as well as the potential to injure animals. Hessenford
  • Score: -17

9:51am Tue 15 Apr 14

BarrHumbug says...

Good luck with that, I think you'll find the locals rather tight lipped on the matter? For the Greater Good and all that, you need to have see Hot Fuzz to get that one ;)
Good luck with that, I think you'll find the locals rather tight lipped on the matter? For the Greater Good and all that, you need to have see Hot Fuzz to get that one ;) BarrHumbug
  • Score: 19

10:46am Tue 15 Apr 14

twynham says...

Cycle artist Mark Fairhurst produced this poster a while back.
How apposite!
pic.twitter.com/od7H
RZC6Fl
Cycle artist Mark Fairhurst produced this poster a while back. How apposite! pic.twitter.com/od7H RZC6Fl twynham
  • Score: 7

11:29am Tue 15 Apr 14

speedy231278 says...

It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries. speedy231278
  • Score: -18

11:48am Tue 15 Apr 14

Mind the gap says...

Great event, looking forward to next year.
Great event, looking forward to next year. Mind the gap
  • Score: 20

11:49am Tue 15 Apr 14

Mind the gap says...

Great event. Really looking forward to next year. Well done to all who made this such a fantastic day.
Great event. Really looking forward to next year. Well done to all who made this such a fantastic day. Mind the gap
  • Score: 17

11:55am Tue 15 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

speedy231278 wrote:
It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured!
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured! suzigirl
  • Score: -20

12:10pm Tue 15 Apr 14

boardsandphotos says...

speedy231278 wrote:
It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property.

Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate.

You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 34

12:29pm Tue 15 Apr 14

lewis100 says...

You just know those above passively condoning this behaviour, would be demanding the full force of the law if someone had slashed their car tyre.

The Police and courts don't take kindly to wannabe vigilante's, especially those who are on the wrong side of the law in the first place.
You just know those above passively condoning this behaviour, would be demanding the full force of the law if someone had slashed their car tyre. The Police and courts don't take kindly to wannabe vigilante's, especially those who are on the wrong side of the law in the first place. lewis100
  • Score: 19

12:31pm Tue 15 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law! suzigirl
  • Score: -27

12:37pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Bawsack says...

Looking forward to doing this event next year, and I would assume thanks for the press from the Echo and a national news paper its going to get even more popular! Might bring my bike over at the weekend :)
Looking forward to doing this event next year, and I would assume thanks for the press from the Echo and a national news paper its going to get even more popular! Might bring my bike over at the weekend :) Bawsack
  • Score: 32

12:56pm Tue 15 Apr 14

boardsandphotos says...

suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
You've answered your own question....

What happens if a cyclist goes through a red light and collides with a car?

Well, as you've said, the cyclist is likely to come out worse off, the car is likely to be damaged and the driver would have to live with the fact he'd just killed a cyclist.

The cyclist will be dead, which the worst punishment you can pretty much get for jumping a red light and there's not a lot the Police can do about that particular case.

If he's injured then he should, as I have said, be punished in whatever way is deemed fit by the judiciary system and should also have to pay damages to the driver, physical and mental, as well as repairs to the car, additionally if he's injured so severely that getting on a bike again will be an unfortunate consequence of actions, if he does get back on his bike I would like to think the lesson will have been learned.

I say again, the act of deliberately jumping a red light is wrong and illegal however no cyclist does this with the intention of causing injury, odds will be weighed up, a judgement is made and the expectation is that the manoeuvre is completed without causing damage, death or injury.

I am NOT justifying or encouraging the act of jumping a red light, I am pointing out that the act of putting nails, tacks etc down on the route of an organised cycle event is an act of deliberate vandalism.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]You've answered your own question.... What happens if a cyclist goes through a red light and collides with a car? Well, as you've said, the cyclist is likely to come out worse off, the car is likely to be damaged and the driver would have to live with the fact he'd just killed a cyclist. The cyclist will be dead, which the worst punishment you can pretty much get for jumping a red light and there's not a lot the Police can do about that particular case. If he's injured then he should, as I have said, be punished in whatever way is deemed fit by the judiciary system and should also have to pay damages to the driver, physical and mental, as well as repairs to the car, additionally if he's injured so severely that getting on a bike again will be an unfortunate consequence of actions, if he does get back on his bike I would like to think the lesson will have been learned. I say again, the act of deliberately jumping a red light is wrong and illegal however no cyclist does this with the intention of causing injury, odds will be weighed up, a judgement is made and the expectation is that the manoeuvre is completed without causing damage, death or injury. I am NOT justifying or encouraging the act of jumping a red light, I am pointing out that the act of putting nails, tacks etc down on the route of an organised cycle event is an act of deliberate vandalism. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 17

12:57pm Tue 15 Apr 14

boardsandphotos says...

*additionally if he's injured so severely that NOT getting on a bike again
*additionally if he's injured so severely that NOT getting on a bike again boardsandphotos
  • Score: 6

12:58pm Tue 15 Apr 14

kingstonpaul says...

What lousy publicity for the New Forest and its efforts to attract tourism. Do these pathetic and petty minded bigots represent a broader hostility to visitors across the park?
What lousy publicity for the New Forest and its efforts to attract tourism. Do these pathetic and petty minded bigots represent a broader hostility to visitors across the park? kingstonpaul
  • Score: 27

1:04pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Arthur Maureen says...

suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy.

There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy. There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise. Arthur Maureen
  • Score: 23

1:08pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Arthur Maureen says...

suzigirl wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured!
Wait for the knock felon! 'bad boys (in your case old women) bad boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they come for you'

By the way I do hope horses using these roads are not affected by the moronic scattering of nails, tacks, whatever on the road..
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured![/p][/quote]Wait for the knock felon! 'bad boys (in your case old women) bad boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they come for you' By the way I do hope horses using these roads are not affected by the moronic scattering of nails, tacks, whatever on the road.. Arthur Maureen
  • Score: 16

1:09pm Tue 15 Apr 14

scrumpyjack says...

Arthur Maureen wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy.

There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise.
I have to agreed.

Watch her react if anyone slags off bikers

You know the idiots who roar along side you forcing you over because something is coming the other way, the ones that queue jump and then cut in front of you at lights, the ones who overtake on bends and you're coming the other way and have to fight panic and veer off into the hedge, or the ones overtaking you doing over 100 mph (even on A roads), or the ride outs who drive as a mass group blocking the road to anything that wants to overtake them, or the ones weaving between lanes on the motorways, or the.....
[quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy. There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise.[/p][/quote]I have to agreed. Watch her react if anyone slags off bikers You know the idiots who roar along side you forcing you over because something is coming the other way, the ones that queue jump and then cut in front of you at lights, the ones who overtake on bends and you're coming the other way and have to fight panic and veer off into the hedge, or the ones overtaking you doing over 100 mph (even on A roads), or the ride outs who drive as a mass group blocking the road to anything that wants to overtake them, or the ones weaving between lanes on the motorways, or the..... scrumpyjack
  • Score: 12

1:23pm Tue 15 Apr 14

scrumpyjack says...

suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 8

1:40pm Tue 15 Apr 14

EdBmth says...

suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Or of course there could be the cyclist who waited until the light went green, rode off and was unfortunate enough to be hit by one of the 1,876 drivers who got caught jumping a red light on Castle Lane in just 5 months !
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Or of course there could be the cyclist who waited until the light went green, rode off and was unfortunate enough to be hit by one of the 1,876 drivers who got caught jumping a red light on Castle Lane in just 5 months ! EdBmth
  • Score: 33

1:44pm Tue 15 Apr 14

forest-dweller says...

kingstonpaul wrote:
What lousy publicity for the New Forest and its efforts to attract tourism. Do these pathetic and petty minded bigots represent a broader hostility to visitors across the park?
Bigots - what on earth are you on about?? It's hysteria like this that doesn't make the situation any better.
[quote][p][bold]kingstonpaul[/bold] wrote: What lousy publicity for the New Forest and its efforts to attract tourism. Do these pathetic and petty minded bigots represent a broader hostility to visitors across the park?[/p][/quote]Bigots - what on earth are you on about?? It's hysteria like this that doesn't make the situation any better. forest-dweller
  • Score: -22

2:14pm Tue 15 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
Arthur Maureen wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy. There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise.
I have to agreed. Watch her react if anyone slags off bikers You know the idiots who roar along side you forcing you over because something is coming the other way, the ones that queue jump and then cut in front of you at lights, the ones who overtake on bends and you're coming the other way and have to fight panic and veer off into the hedge, or the ones overtaking you doing over 100 mph (even on A roads), or the ride outs who drive as a mass group blocking the road to anything that wants to overtake them, or the ones weaving between lanes on the motorways, or the.....
Oh Arthur you are a one........... are your veins sticking out of your neck yet..... what it must be like to be perfect..........but you probably don't get many problems with your zimmer frame..... or may be you do......
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy. There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise.[/p][/quote]I have to agreed. Watch her react if anyone slags off bikers You know the idiots who roar along side you forcing you over because something is coming the other way, the ones that queue jump and then cut in front of you at lights, the ones who overtake on bends and you're coming the other way and have to fight panic and veer off into the hedge, or the ones overtaking you doing over 100 mph (even on A roads), or the ride outs who drive as a mass group blocking the road to anything that wants to overtake them, or the ones weaving between lanes on the motorways, or the.....[/p][/quote]Oh Arthur you are a one........... are your veins sticking out of your neck yet..... what it must be like to be perfect..........but you probably don't get many problems with your zimmer frame..... or may be you do...... suzigirl
  • Score: -26

2:22pm Tue 15 Apr 14

speedy231278 says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property.

Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate.

You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
It's still a deliberate act, and the consequences are resulting from a deliberate act. Neither ignoring the Highway Code nor spreading tacks on roads are accidental, and both should carry a punishment.
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]It's still a deliberate act, and the consequences are resulting from a deliberate act. Neither ignoring the Highway Code nor spreading tacks on roads are accidental, and both should carry a punishment. speedy231278
  • Score: 3

2:24pm Tue 15 Apr 14

speedy231278 says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
Arthur Maureen wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy.

There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise.
I have to agreed.

Watch her react if anyone slags off bikers

You know the idiots who roar along side you forcing you over because something is coming the other way, the ones that queue jump and then cut in front of you at lights, the ones who overtake on bends and you're coming the other way and have to fight panic and veer off into the hedge, or the ones overtaking you doing over 100 mph (even on A roads), or the ride outs who drive as a mass group blocking the road to anything that wants to overtake them, or the ones weaving between lanes on the motorways, or the.....
Ah, someone has woken numpty-tw@ up, I see...
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Ahh the clichéd cyclist running through the red light etc, blah, blah, blah.. think you'll find most of the cyclists riding at the weekend do not ride without lights, do not wear dark clothing at night, do not jump red lights.. there is a clear distinction between people who ride bikes (they being the ones who do the above) and cyclists who tend not to do the above, spend money / time / effort on making sure they / the bike is safe and roadworthy. There are of course the few who do not adhere to the above, as there are with the few motorists who every day of the week jump red lights.. but then you do not wish to hear this as you have a blinkered view of the topic and prefer to spend your existence spouting rubbish on here in a (very) futile attempt to antagonise.[/p][/quote]I have to agreed. Watch her react if anyone slags off bikers You know the idiots who roar along side you forcing you over because something is coming the other way, the ones that queue jump and then cut in front of you at lights, the ones who overtake on bends and you're coming the other way and have to fight panic and veer off into the hedge, or the ones overtaking you doing over 100 mph (even on A roads), or the ride outs who drive as a mass group blocking the road to anything that wants to overtake them, or the ones weaving between lanes on the motorways, or the.....[/p][/quote]Ah, someone has woken numpty-tw@ up, I see... speedy231278
  • Score: -5

2:36pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Scarecrow52 says...

What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden?
Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free!
No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary.
What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem.
You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth!
What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden? Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free! No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary. What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem. You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth! Scarecrow52
  • Score: -13

2:43pm Tue 15 Apr 14

boardsandphotos says...

speedy231278 wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property.

Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate.

You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
It's still a deliberate act, and the consequences are resulting from a deliberate act. Neither ignoring the Highway Code nor spreading tacks on roads are accidental, and both should carry a punishment.
The act of jumping a red light might be deliberate but the intention and motive is NOT to cause harm or damage.

The act of deliberately setting down nails, tacks etc IS a deliberate act and the motive and intention IS to cause harm or damage.

The act of deliberate criminal damage is the bigger offence.
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]It's still a deliberate act, and the consequences are resulting from a deliberate act. Neither ignoring the Highway Code nor spreading tacks on roads are accidental, and both should carry a punishment.[/p][/quote]The act of jumping a red light might be deliberate but the intention and motive is NOT to cause harm or damage. The act of deliberately setting down nails, tacks etc IS a deliberate act and the motive and intention IS to cause harm or damage. The act of deliberate criminal damage is the bigger offence. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 15

3:02pm Tue 15 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

Perhaps, in the mind of the at-tack-er, the intention was to cause disruption. The damage was collateral.

Whatever the intention it was stupid, criminal and foolish.
Perhaps, in the mind of the at-tack-er, the intention was to cause disruption. The damage was collateral. Whatever the intention it was stupid, criminal and foolish. JackJohnson
  • Score: 7

3:14pm Tue 15 Apr 14

lewis100 says...

Scarecrow52 wrote:
What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden?
Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free!
No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary.
What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem.
You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth!
Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there.

That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.
[quote][p][bold]Scarecrow52[/bold] wrote: What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden? Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free! No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary. What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem. You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth![/p][/quote]Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there. That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit. lewis100
  • Score: 26

3:24pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Ash_69 says...

suzigirl wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured!
Oh, perhaps throwing some nails around Poole Quay on motorbike night would be okay then as long as no one is injured. Hopefully that would slow those blasted things down
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured![/p][/quote]Oh, perhaps throwing some nails around Poole Quay on motorbike night would be okay then as long as no one is injured. Hopefully that would slow those blasted things down Ash_69
  • Score: 19

3:45pm Tue 15 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

Ash_69 wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured!
Oh, perhaps throwing some nails around Poole Quay on motorbike night would be okay then as long as no one is injured. Hopefully that would slow those blasted things down
I would like to see you try it LOL!
[quote][p][bold]Ash_69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured![/p][/quote]Oh, perhaps throwing some nails around Poole Quay on motorbike night would be okay then as long as no one is injured. Hopefully that would slow those blasted things down[/p][/quote]I would like to see you try it LOL! suzigirl
  • Score: -24

3:55pm Tue 15 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

EdBmth wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Or of course there could be the cyclist who waited until the light went green, rode off and was unfortunate enough to be hit by one of the 1,876 drivers who got caught jumping a red light on Castle Lane in just 5 months !
So are you saying that 1876 car drivers were stationary/approachi
ng a red traffic light and then proceeded to go through them. I don't think so. How many cyclists were caught jumping red lights then - no data on that because of course cyclists are not identifiable - I bet you it would be double that!
[quote][p][bold]EdBmth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Or of course there could be the cyclist who waited until the light went green, rode off and was unfortunate enough to be hit by one of the 1,876 drivers who got caught jumping a red light on Castle Lane in just 5 months ![/p][/quote]So are you saying that 1876 car drivers were stationary/approachi ng a red traffic light and then proceeded to go through them. I don't think so. How many cyclists were caught jumping red lights then - no data on that because of course cyclists are not identifiable - I bet you it would be double that! suzigirl
  • Score: -26

3:59pm Tue 15 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

lewis100 wrote:
Scarecrow52 wrote:
What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden?
Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free!
No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary.
What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem.
You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth!
Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there.

That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.
The problem is with those who organise mass events with no regard for other visitors or the people that live and work there.

I have frequently been stopped by the police on my way into the Lake District and have been told to turn around because it's already full.
[quote][p][bold]lewis100[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scarecrow52[/bold] wrote: What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden? Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free! No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary. What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem. You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth![/p][/quote]Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there. That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.[/p][/quote]The problem is with those who organise mass events with no regard for other visitors or the people that live and work there. I have frequently been stopped by the police on my way into the Lake District and have been told to turn around because it's already full. JackJohnson
  • Score: -8

4:02pm Tue 15 Apr 14

EdBmth says...

suzigirl wrote:
EdBmth wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Or of course there could be the cyclist who waited until the light went green, rode off and was unfortunate enough to be hit by one of the 1,876 drivers who got caught jumping a red light on Castle Lane in just 5 months !
So are you saying that 1876 car drivers were stationary/approachi

ng a red traffic light and then proceeded to go through them. I don't think so. How many cyclists were caught jumping red lights then - no data on that because of course cyclists are not identifiable - I bet you it would be double that!
Yes 1876 motorists jumped one set of red lights in 5 months. This was reported in the Echo. So I am only stating the facts, not supposition

http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/news/10313461
.1_876_drivers_jump_
Castle_Lane_red_ligh
ts_in_just_five_mont
hs/?ref=rc
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EdBmth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Or of course there could be the cyclist who waited until the light went green, rode off and was unfortunate enough to be hit by one of the 1,876 drivers who got caught jumping a red light on Castle Lane in just 5 months ![/p][/quote]So are you saying that 1876 car drivers were stationary/approachi ng a red traffic light and then proceeded to go through them. I don't think so. How many cyclists were caught jumping red lights then - no data on that because of course cyclists are not identifiable - I bet you it would be double that![/p][/quote]Yes 1876 motorists jumped one set of red lights in 5 months. This was reported in the Echo. So I am only stating the facts, not supposition http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10313461 .1_876_drivers_jump_ Castle_Lane_red_ligh ts_in_just_five_mont hs/?ref=rc EdBmth
  • Score: 15

4:02pm Tue 15 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

Arthur Maureen wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured!
Wait for the knock felon! 'bad boys (in your case old women) bad boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they come for you' By the way I do hope horses using these roads are not affected by the moronic scattering of nails, tacks, whatever on the road..
Have you been on the white lightning again......
[quote][p][bold]Arthur Maureen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]Totally agree with you. Door to Door enquiries - what a total waste of Police time - and what would happen in the event that anybody was caught - nobody was injured![/p][/quote]Wait for the knock felon! 'bad boys (in your case old women) bad boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they come for you' By the way I do hope horses using these roads are not affected by the moronic scattering of nails, tacks, whatever on the road..[/p][/quote]Have you been on the white lightning again...... suzigirl
  • Score: -17

4:08pm Tue 15 Apr 14

scrumpyjack says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to? scrumpyjack
  • Score: 9

4:30pm Tue 15 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London.
The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck" suzigirl
  • Score: -7

4:54pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Jo__Go says...

Test
[b]Test[/b] Jo__Go
  • Score: -2

6:13pm Tue 15 Apr 14

lewis100 says...

JackJohnson wrote:
lewis100 wrote:
Scarecrow52 wrote:
What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden?
Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free!
No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary.
What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem.
You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth!
Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there.

That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.
The problem is with those who organise mass events with no regard for other visitors or the people that live and work there.

I have frequently been stopped by the police on my way into the Lake District and have been told to turn around because it's already full.
Is that what you are claiming? That the organisers have given no regard?

They appear to have given an enormous amount of regard to numbers attending, routes and all kinds of other matters with the relevant local authorities. The people objecting simply don't want them there, at all, and that is both ridiculous and transparent.
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lewis100[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scarecrow52[/bold] wrote: What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden? Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free! No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary. What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem. You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth![/p][/quote]Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there. That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.[/p][/quote]The problem is with those who organise mass events with no regard for other visitors or the people that live and work there. I have frequently been stopped by the police on my way into the Lake District and have been told to turn around because it's already full.[/p][/quote]Is that what you are claiming? That the organisers have given no regard? They appear to have given an enormous amount of regard to numbers attending, routes and all kinds of other matters with the relevant local authorities. The people objecting simply don't want them there, at all, and that is both ridiculous and transparent. lewis100
  • Score: 10

6:30pm Tue 15 Apr 14

boardsandphotos says...

JackJohnson wrote:
lewis100 wrote:
Scarecrow52 wrote:
What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden?
Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free!
No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary.
What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem.
You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth!
Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there.

That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.
The problem is with those who organise mass events with no regard for other visitors or the people that live and work there.

I have frequently been stopped by the police on my way into the Lake District and have been told to turn around because it's already full.
Yeah right....

The Lake District is 6 times the size of The New Forest and entertains only about 1 million more visitors per year than The New Forest does.

Sorry but I think you are making that up.
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lewis100[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scarecrow52[/bold] wrote: What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden? Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free! No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary. What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem. You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth![/p][/quote]Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there. That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.[/p][/quote]The problem is with those who organise mass events with no regard for other visitors or the people that live and work there. I have frequently been stopped by the police on my way into the Lake District and have been told to turn around because it's already full.[/p][/quote]Yeah right.... The Lake District is 6 times the size of The New Forest and entertains only about 1 million more visitors per year than The New Forest does. Sorry but I think you are making that up. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 10

6:55pm Tue 15 Apr 14

scrumpyjack says...

suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London.
The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
Ok good start. First one.

In London which is THE most dangerous place in the UK.

And the other 2?
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]Ok good start. First one. In London which is THE most dangerous place in the UK. And the other 2? scrumpyjack
  • Score: 11

6:59pm Tue 15 Apr 14

scrumpyjack says...

suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London.
The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us.

Can it?.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 9

8:01pm Tue 15 Apr 14

BIGTONE says...

POLICE are carrying out door-to-door inquiries in the hunt for saboteurs who targeted a mass cycling event in the New Forest.


Good day, Sir/Madam, do you know who these nails belong to?
POLICE are carrying out door-to-door inquiries in the hunt for saboteurs who targeted a mass cycling event in the New Forest. Good day, Sir/Madam, do you know who these nails belong to? BIGTONE
  • Score: 2

8:34pm Tue 15 Apr 14

PUZZLED ONE says...

Couldn't they check 'em for finger-prints then go from house to house in the New Forest taking finger prints?
Couldn't they check 'em for finger-prints then go from house to house in the New Forest taking finger prints? PUZZLED ONE
  • Score: -2

10:56pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Lord Spring says...

BIGTONE wrote:
POLICE are carrying out door-to-door inquiries in the hunt for saboteurs who targeted a mass cycling event in the New Forest.


Good day, Sir/Madam, do you know who these nails belong to?
Or some body has nicked our stinger.
[quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: POLICE are carrying out door-to-door inquiries in the hunt for saboteurs who targeted a mass cycling event in the New Forest. Good day, Sir/Madam, do you know who these nails belong to?[/p][/quote]Or some body has nicked our stinger. Lord Spring
  • Score: 2

12:17am Wed 16 Apr 14

sprintervanman says...

48 hours Driving in France i seemed to have missed all the action dam and blast.Feel really bad now knowing i have given a friendly toot and a wave to cyclists and the old and young on their mopeds having to wait a second or two to pass them......then back to Blighty...!!
48 hours Driving in France i seemed to have missed all the action dam and blast.Feel really bad now knowing i have given a friendly toot and a wave to cyclists and the old and young on their mopeds having to wait a second or two to pass them......then back to Blighty...!! sprintervanman
  • Score: 4

7:39am Wed 16 Apr 14

Rick White says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London.
The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us.

Can it?.
A very quick search found this info:
It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import!

July 5th 2012
A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light.
City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct

Cycle magazine report;
Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership.

Mail report;
More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey.
The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic.
Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed.


Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not. Rick White
  • Score: -2

8:20am Wed 16 Apr 14

newforestbloke says...

lewis100 wrote:
Scarecrow52 wrote:
What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden?
Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free!
No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary.
What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem.
You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth!
Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there.

That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.
or rather the problem is the latest cycle event whre paticipants think they have the right to stop both residents and other visitors enjoying the area as they (residents and othe visitors) see fit.

I wish to make it quite clear that my opinion that tiis person is being very very stupid in spreading tacks on the road. All this is acheiving is to raise tensions in an already inflamed situaution
[quote][p][bold]lewis100[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scarecrow52[/bold] wrote: What on earth possessed 2,000 + cyclist, who don't have to pay central government any form of fee to ride on the public roads, to then stump up £30 to Mr Barden? Would it not be a lot cheaper and easier, as well as cause far less animosity from locals, to phone a couple of friends and do exactly the same thing, for free! No matter; it would appear that the cyclists feel safer in huge numbers as those that live and work in the area that they used must be real scary. What the organiser forgets is that this is a working landscape and not just a playground for those that do not live and work here, and that my friends is the whole crux of the problem. You see that no matter what is written in response to comments here, there are 3 sides to every story; Yours, Mine and the Truth![/p][/quote]Actually, what some seem to have forgotten, or are just ignoring, is that it is a "playground" for those that do not live there. That's the whole point of the national parks, they belong to the nation, everyone can visit and use them with very few restrictions. The problem seems to be with those that have moved there, and now think they have a right to stop visitors enjoying the area as they see fit.[/p][/quote]or rather the problem is the latest cycle event whre paticipants think they have the right to stop both residents and other visitors enjoying the area as they (residents and othe visitors) see fit. I wish to make it quite clear that my opinion that tiis person is being very very stupid in spreading tacks on the road. All this is acheiving is to raise tensions in an already inflamed situaution newforestbloke
  • Score: -2

8:55am Wed 16 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

Rick White wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.
A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........
[quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)........... suzigirl
  • Score: -8

9:15am Wed 16 Apr 14

Arthur Maureen says...

PUZZLED ONE wrote:
Couldn't they check 'em for finger-prints then go from house to house in the New Forest taking finger prints?
Would be more like web prints considering some of the creatures living there..
[quote][p][bold]PUZZLED ONE[/bold] wrote: Couldn't they check 'em for finger-prints then go from house to house in the New Forest taking finger prints?[/p][/quote]Would be more like web prints considering some of the creatures living there.. Arthur Maureen
  • Score: 2

9:37am Wed 16 Apr 14

scrumpyjack says...

Rick White wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London.
The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us.

Can it?.
A very quick search found this info:
It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import!

July 5th 2012
A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light.
City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct

Cycle magazine report;
Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership.

Mail report;
More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey.
The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic.
Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed.


Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
No I'm sorry the first is about a cyclist (in lets be honest a freak accident) hitting someone.

The rest are just articles about cyclists jumping red lights.

You still have not found 3 examples of a cyclist being hit and seriously injured/ killed when doing so.

But you assure us this is dangerous and selfish on us poor drivers.

The fact you can't should (it won't) that just maybe it is not as dangerous as you and others keep bleating on about and not such a dram after all.

But facts seem not to bother most on here - you can list hundreds, if not thousands of cases where they have 'jumped' red lights but can't actually show this having any negative effects.

Think about it.
[quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.[/p][/quote]No I'm sorry the first is about a cyclist (in lets be honest a freak accident) hitting someone. The rest are just articles about cyclists jumping red lights. You still have not found 3 examples of a cyclist being hit and seriously injured/ killed when doing so. But you assure us this is dangerous and selfish on us poor drivers. The fact you can't should (it won't) that just maybe it is not as dangerous as you and others keep bleating on about and not such a dram after all. But facts seem not to bother most on here - you can list hundreds, if not thousands of cases where they have 'jumped' red lights but can't actually show this having any negative effects. Think about it. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 5

9:40am Wed 16 Apr 14

scrumpyjack says...

suzigirl wrote:
Rick White wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.
A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........
No the driver was on the phone and was sent down..

Try again.

So "just what I am saying" seems not so right after all........
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........[/p][/quote]No the driver was on the phone and was sent down.. Try again. So "just what I am saying" seems not so right after all........ scrumpyjack
  • Score: 3

9:51am Wed 16 Apr 14

Franks Tank says...

suzigirl wrote:
Rick White wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.
A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........
It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........[/p][/quote]It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles. Franks Tank
  • Score: 8

11:23am Wed 16 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Rick White wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.
A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........
It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles.
I take it you are referring to my dead son - you are one horrible person and should be banned from commenting. This is one of the main reasons why I comment on cyclists who potentially endanger their own lives!
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........[/p][/quote]It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles.[/p][/quote]I take it you are referring to my dead son - you are one horrible person and should be banned from commenting. This is one of the main reasons why I comment on cyclists who potentially endanger their own lives! suzigirl
  • Score: -7

11:47am Wed 16 Apr 14

Franks Tank says...

suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Rick White wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.
A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........
It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles.
I take it you are referring to my dead son - you are one horrible person and should be banned from commenting. This is one of the main reasons why I comment on cyclists who potentially endanger their own lives!
Really? I never knew that, why have you never mentioned this before?
I just thought that as a mother of a local tri-athlete you have a more balanced view about people taking to the roads on bicycles.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........[/p][/quote]It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles.[/p][/quote]I take it you are referring to my dead son - you are one horrible person and should be banned from commenting. This is one of the main reasons why I comment on cyclists who potentially endanger their own lives![/p][/quote]Really? I never knew that, why have you never mentioned this before? I just thought that as a mother of a local tri-athlete you have a more balanced view about people taking to the roads on bicycles. Franks Tank
  • Score: 6

1:03pm Wed 16 Apr 14

kingstonpaul says...

Children, we're well accustomed to the tiresome tribalism of cyclists vs. non-cyclists on this site. Alas, the arguments never get further than gratuitous mud-slinging and finger-pointing. Now just go away because you're boring the pants off everyone else that really can't be bothered to read any more of your ripostes.
Children, we're well accustomed to the tiresome tribalism of cyclists vs. non-cyclists on this site. Alas, the arguments never get further than gratuitous mud-slinging and finger-pointing. Now just go away because you're boring the pants off everyone else that really can't be bothered to read any more of your ripostes. kingstonpaul
  • Score: 5

3:05pm Wed 16 Apr 14

Rick White says...

Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote: Rick White wrote: scrumpyjack wrote: suzigirl wrote: scrumpyjack wrote: scrumpyjack wrote: suzigirl wrote: boardsandphotos wrote: speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the sameIt has got to a point where this is 'reductio ad absurdum'
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the sameIt has got to a point where this is 'reductio ad absurdum' Rick White
  • Score: 0

3:51pm Wed 16 Apr 14

suzigirl says...

Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Rick White wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
speedy231278 wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.
The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.
So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law!
Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.
Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?
November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"
I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.
A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.
Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........
It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles.
I take it you are referring to my dead son - you are one horrible person and should be banned from commenting. This is one of the main reasons why I comment on cyclists who potentially endanger their own lives!
Really? I never knew that, why have you never mentioned this before? I just thought that as a mother of a local tri-athlete you have a more balanced view about people taking to the roads on bicycles.
I am the mother of a world champion actually! As I have said before I give respect to cyclists on the road giving them enough room etc. etc. It is the cyclists that endanger themselves unecessarily that makes me angry. I would not wish another mother to go through what I had to go through when my son made a mistake on a bicycle and died. I hope you understand now - now just leave me alone and don't make any more comments - thank you.
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rick White[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: It's a pity the authorities don't show such a passion for persuing those cycling in pedestrian areas, on pavements or through red lights. After all, going on the fashion for 'that could have' stories that the Ohec likes to favour (my kid could have been blinded, for example), such behaviour 'could' also cause nasty injuries.[/p][/quote]The difference being that cyclists don't set out with the intention of deliberately injuring people or to cause damage to property. Going through Red lights is both dangerous and illegal and should be condemed and cyclists caught doing it should be fined or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate. You can question peoples actions but the motives of the saboteurs was clearly to cause damage, that's not the case with a cyclist jumping a light, dangerous as it is the expectation is to complete the action unscathed.[/p][/quote]So what happens if a cyclist deliberately goes through a red traffic light and collides with a car - I dare say he would come off worse but what about the car driver who would have to live with the fact that he has injured/killed a cyclist breaking the law![/p][/quote]Give three examples of where that has happened, ever.[/p][/quote]Hey Suzi you found those 3 examples yet - you can look at the whole of the UK for as far back as you need to?[/p][/quote]November 13th 2013 cyclist killed going through red traffic light in London. The coroner said "Many cyclists went through red traffic lights but did not suffer the same "devastating consequences" by "virtue of luck"[/p][/quote]I mean how hard can it be to find 3? - after all you keep telling us how dangerous it is and how unfair it is on all of us (me included) drivers who are driving and knocking over on a regular basis the swathes of red light hoping cyclists and the trauma is causing us. Can it?.[/p][/quote]A very quick search found this info: It is the paragraphs 2 and 3 which are of more import! July 5th 2012 A cyclist has been convicted of running down and severely injuring a pedestrian after jumping a red light. City of London Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV footage of the incident on July 5 last year, in which Schipka hit Mr Hyer in Holborn Viaduct Cycle magazine report; Cyclr, an online cycling magazine surveyed its readers earlier this year and found that 51 per cent admitted frequently jumping red lights. Cyclr’s editor-in- chief Gerry Newton largely echoes the views of his readership. Mail report; More than half of cyclists have jumped a red light, according to a survey. The offenders – some 57 per cent of bike riders – said their main reason for the risky manoeuvre was that it was safer to get ahead of other traffic. Around 14 per cent said they go through red lights regularly or sometimes, the poll by the Institute of Advanced Motorists revealed. Whilst you are right that very few cyclists are brought to book for jumping red lights compared to car drivers, it might just be that vehicles of all kinds have identifiers, number plates, which are traceable, whereas, bikes do not.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I am saying and I think I might have passed the test now! I also remember the death of a cyclist in Southampton I think going through a red light. Unfortunately the driver was using a mobile (another one of my pet hates!)...........[/p][/quote]It's particularly sad that you (suzigirl in particular) are gaining some sort or warped pleasure looking up news stories about cyclists killed in collisions with vehicles.[/p][/quote]I take it you are referring to my dead son - you are one horrible person and should be banned from commenting. This is one of the main reasons why I comment on cyclists who potentially endanger their own lives![/p][/quote]Really? I never knew that, why have you never mentioned this before? I just thought that as a mother of a local tri-athlete you have a more balanced view about people taking to the roads on bicycles.[/p][/quote]I am the mother of a world champion actually! As I have said before I give respect to cyclists on the road giving them enough room etc. etc. It is the cyclists that endanger themselves unecessarily that makes me angry. I would not wish another mother to go through what I had to go through when my son made a mistake on a bicycle and died. I hope you understand now - now just leave me alone and don't make any more comments - thank you. suzigirl
  • Score: -3

3:56pm Wed 16 Apr 14

nosuchluck54 says...

What a sad,arrogant individual I almost feel some pity,
What a sad,arrogant individual I almost feel some pity, nosuchluck54
  • Score: 3

5:47pm Wed 16 Apr 14

Lord Parkstone says...

What a waste of police time and resources not to mention money investigating this.
What a waste of police time and resources not to mention money investigating this. Lord Parkstone
  • Score: -1

6:11pm Wed 16 Apr 14

JackJohnson says...

BIGTONE wrote:
POLICE are carrying out door-to-door inquiries in the hunt for saboteurs who targeted a mass cycling event in the New Forest.


Good day, Sir/Madam, do you know who these nails belong to?
I found a tack in my shoe this morning.

I demand a police investigation!
[quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: POLICE are carrying out door-to-door inquiries in the hunt for saboteurs who targeted a mass cycling event in the New Forest. Good day, Sir/Madam, do you know who these nails belong to?[/p][/quote]I found a tack in my shoe this morning. I demand a police investigation! JackJohnson
  • Score: -2

8:06pm Fri 18 Apr 14

cromwell9 says...

What a Happy bunch we all are .
The horse riders .Hate the Walkers.
The Walkers hate the Horse riders,
The Walkers hate the Dog Walkers,
The horse riders hate the dog walkers.
Every one hates the CYCLE riders .etc,e
The bird watchers hate everybody,
What a hatefull world we live in ,
What a Happy bunch we all are . The horse riders .Hate the Walkers. The Walkers hate the Horse riders, The Walkers hate the Dog Walkers, The horse riders hate the dog walkers. Every one hates the CYCLE riders .etc,e The bird watchers hate everybody, What a hatefull world we live in , cromwell9
  • Score: 2

8:24am Sat 19 Apr 14

Dorset Logic says...

I've got a good argument on how to stop people riding through the New Forest. Keep saying over and over again that cyclist's often run through red lights. I don't think people will notice the negatives of that argument. Most cyclists don't do it as they like being alive, and there are not a hell of a lot of traffic lights in the area.
I've also noticed that some of the cyclist's are smokers and that's a filthy habit, it stinks you know. They are so stupid smoking, it should be banned. There is every chance that a cigarette discarded by one of those cyclist's on the event could burn down the entire New Forest.
I'm also not sure why its called the New Forest either as it seems to be mostly heath and bog.
I've got a good argument on how to stop people riding through the New Forest. Keep saying over and over again that cyclist's often run through red lights. I don't think people will notice the negatives of that argument. Most cyclists don't do it as they like being alive, and there are not a hell of a lot of traffic lights in the area. I've also noticed that some of the cyclist's are smokers and that's a filthy habit, it stinks you know. They are so stupid smoking, it should be banned. There is every chance that a cigarette discarded by one of those cyclist's on the event could burn down the entire New Forest. I'm also not sure why its called the New Forest either as it seems to be mostly heath and bog. Dorset Logic
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

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

I agree