Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

guess who

Suprised this hasnt had a mention.

24 posts in this topic

is it because he's a cyclist? No. its because not all of us get the Bournemouth papers. Unequivocally and without reservation support the judges comments and the sentence.

 

Mr Benwell had also been charged with the offence of causing grievous bodily harm through wanton and furious cycling in relation to the incident, which took place near Branksome Chine beach on Friday 26 July. The Crown Prosecution Service dropped that charge after Benwell entered his guilty plea to the more serious offence of causing grievous bodily harm, which carries a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.

 

http://www.roadjustice.org.uk/case-study/bournemouth-cyclist-could-go-jail-after-pleading-guilty-gbh-260713

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Wanton and furious" - there's a pleasingly archaic term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Wanton and furious" - there's a pleasingly archaic term.

You'd think he was Lorna doone

Sentence too lenient

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Is "wanton and furious"  not a phrase?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is "wanton and furious" not a phrase?

Yes John, just a little archaic to those of us who didn't write on slate at school! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walking with the au pair?

 

Rich family were they, nice cars, nice school?  Why mention this?

 

Shouldn't make a differerance. Much as I support Cyclists, this is abominable.

 

Sounds like he was late for work, and ran the Child down. Cycists should be responsible under the law as every other road user.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Is "wanton and furious"  not a phrase?

You bloody well know what I meant

But we'll played all the same  :tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has already been posted, this news story is from a paper that very few people on this forum will have heard of, let alone read.

 

Also, I doubt any of the cyclists on here would jump quickly to defend the actions of the character found guilty in this case.

 

It's simply a fact of life that any cyclists stupid enough to run red lights or generally fail to obey the laws of our roads is unlikely to seriously hurt anyone but themselves.

 

This case is the exception to the norm.

 

If I'm not mistaken, the poster who started this thread is a driving instructor. Driving instructors should surely instill the values of courtesy and respect for all other road users to his pupils.

 

Having read his opinions on cyclists, I must say I wonder how this could be in his case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You bloody well know what I meant

But we'll played all the same  :tongue:

 

 

It's Chris........tmas! You can have that one for nothing! :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has already been posted, this news story is from a paper that very few people on this forum will have heard of, let alone read.

Also, I doubt any of the cyclists on here would jump quickly to defend the actions of the character found guilty in this case.

It's simply a fact of life that any cyclists stupid enough to run red lights or generally fail to obey the laws of our roads is unlikely to seriously hurt anyone but themselves.

This case is the exception to the norm.

If I'm not mistaken, the poster who started this thread is a driving instructor. Driving instructors should surely instill the values of courtesy and respect for all other road users to his pupils.

Having read his opinions on cyclists, I must say I wonder how this could be in his case.

Please tell me what my opinions on cyclists are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell me what my opinions on cyclists are.

I apologise. You're quite correct, the use of the word opinions was wrong.

 

But we've been here before, your posts on here do give a fairly hefty clue as to where you sit in the car drivers v cyclists debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologise. You're quite correct, the use of the word opinions was wrong.

 

But we've been here before, your posts on here do give a fairly hefty clue as to where you sit in the car drivers v cyclists debate.

 

There are bad car drivers just like there are bad cyclists.

 

Cyclists are more vunrable so should take more care and be much more aware of the danger they are in.

 

That is the stance i have always taken on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure I heard the verdict on national television, having not come across it before. That said, many local stories now reach a wider audience through the likes of the internet, facebook etc.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are bad car drivers just like there are bad cyclists.

 

Cyclists are more vunrable so should take more care and be much more aware of the danger they are in.

 

That is the stance i have always taken on here.

Your stance suggests that car drivers needn't care as much as cyclists as they're less vulnerable.

 

My argument with you is that all road users should surely take the same amount of care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your stance suggests that car drivers needn't care as much as cyclists as they're less vulnerable.

My argument with you is that all road users should surely take the same amount of care.

That's true. But ATEOTD if you are the one that will end up splattered all over the road, it's better for you if you assume everyone else is an idiot. Regardless of whether you should have to or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true. But ATEOTD if you are the one that will end up splattered all over the road, it's better for you if you assume everyone else is an idiot. Regardless of whether you should have to or not.

 

The difficulty with that is that it assumes that the vulnerable road user isn't taking the steps they should to be safe and/or are not following the rules of the road.  As I never tire of telling people: in the overwhelming majority of cases where blame can be assigned in collisions between cyclists and cars it is the car that is at fault.  To spell this out: the cyclist was doing everything they should to be safe, the driver was not.  This is why all the cycle training in the world will only make a fractional difference to cyclists (and indeed pedestrians) killed and injured on the roads - the greater number of accidents are caused by the people who are being repeatedly told that it's not their fault and that it's those odd people in lycra who are to blame for their own deaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am running along the pavement and I knock and old lady over, I am at fault as I am bigger and stronger and should have taken more care.  The responsibility does not belong to the frail old lady.  Cyclists should take care, so should motorists.  At the moment, only mildly devil-may-care people are likely to cycle anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true. But ATEOTD if you are the one that will end up splattered all over the road, it's better for you if you assume everyone else is an idiot. Regardless of whether you should have to or not.

Exactly my point.

Yet some people see it that i am blaming the bikerider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am running along the pavement and I knock and old lady over, I am at fault as I am bigger and stronger and should have taken more care. The responsibility does not belong to the frail old lady. Cyclists should take care, so should motorists. At the moment, only mildly devil-may-care people are likely to cycle anywhere.

You're quite correct. But if a particular stretch of pavement was notorious for big blokes jogging on it, the old lady might want to be on the lookout for said joggers. Of course in an ideal world she could walk wherever she wants but it isn't sadly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're quite correct. But if a particular stretch of pavement was notorious for big blokes jogging on it, the old lady might want to be on the lookout for said joggers. Of course in an ideal world she could walk wherever she wants but it isn't sadly.

Indeed! 

 

One of the issues in this is that the entire road network is "notorious for big blokes jogging on it" and only crazy old ladies are walking about.  Now, what do we do about this big blokes running about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the big blokes jogging will be quite reasonable though and also keep an eye out for the old ladies. There will always be one or two who don't give a monkeys though and no amount of legislation will change them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the big blokes jogging will be quite reasonable though and also keep an eye out for the old ladies. There will always be one or two who don't give a monkeys though and no amount of legislation will change them.

Fair enough, we will just tell frail old ladies to be more careful.  After all, no opint in charging the blokes knocking them over ;)

 

I am being a little factitious.  Most drivers do fine 95% of the time and we get away with it the rest thanks to others paying attention or nothing happening in that time.  However, things are heavily designed for people when driving rather than cycling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017