Another cyclist in disguise



D

David Hansen

Guest
David Hansen wrote:

> We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> never does so, according to them.

> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=491260&in_page_id=1770
> shows the reality behind these assertions.

The reality behind these assertions is that when it happens, the
driver is caught and punished. Is there something wrong with that? And
wouldn't it be nice if it happened to *everyone* who used the footway
as a racetrack?

Mind you, I'm not sure what the judge was on...

"Judge Sean Overend told Rowett: "You drove off on the pavement,
through pedestrians and went off"

But later:

"You did undertake a dangerous manouevre [sic] on the pavement but I
am quite satisfied that was not one which placed members of the public
in undue danger, you were merely driving round the shelter to get out.

What sort of danger is "due", as opposed to "undue"?

"The judge told him: "You were courageous in pleading guilty. You lost
your head that morning and behaved in a very foolish manner. It is
also apparent from the video footage taken from the front of the bus
that you remonstrated with the driver in an entirely inappropriate
manner. I know this will result in your losing your job and you will
have to find some other way of earning a living."

Rowett was fined £500 with £200 costs and banned from driving for a
year and ordered to take an extended test before he can get behind the
wheel again.

Sounds like a fair outcome to me - and the obvious dejection of the
miscreant speaks volumes (as does his guilty plea).







































[x-posted to ukt, where I am certain that others will support the
court's decision]
 
David Hansen wrote:
> We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> never does so, according to them.
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=491260&in_page_id=1770
> shows the reality behind these assertions.

That is of course the exception that proves the rule - it being so uncommon
as to warrant prosecution and make the news!

The pillock was prosecuted - as should be cyclists who endanger pedestrians
when cycling illegally on the pavement.

pk
 
On 02/11/2007 17:46, p.k. said,

> The pillock was prosecuted - as should be cyclists who endanger pedestrians
> when cycling illegally on the pavement.

Yes, you're right, but "You did undertake a dangerous manouevre on the
pavement but I am quite satisfied that was not one which placed members
of the public in undue danger, you were merely driving round the shelter
to get out."

What on earth was the judge on?? Not placing the public in any danger?
This was not some sort of accidental mishap - this was clearly a very
aggressive person who is incapable of controlling himself, and should be
banned for driving for a darn sight longer than a year.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> never does so, according to them.
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=491260&in_page_id=1770
> shows the reality behind these assertions.
>

You've missed the change in Government policy announced by Ruth Kelly
then:
http://newsbiscuit.com/article/motorists-extra-lane-is-the-pavement-225

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell
 
Paul Boyd wrote:
> On 02/11/2007 17:46, p.k. said,
>
>> The pillock was prosecuted - as should be cyclists who endanger
>> pedestrians when cycling illegally on the pavement.
>
> Yes, you're right, but "You did undertake a dangerous manouevre on the
> pavement but I am quite satisfied that was not one which placed members
> of the public in undue danger, you were merely driving round the shelter
> to get out."
>
> What on earth was the judge on?? Not placing the public in any danger?
> This was not some sort of accidental mishap - this was clearly a very
> aggressive person who is incapable of controlling himself, and should be
> banned for driving for a darn sight longer than a year.
>

"The judge told him: "You were courageous in pleading guilty”.”

I'm always amazed in these situations, where the evidence of guilt is
irrefutable, that pleading guilty is accepted by judges as a some sort
of mitigating act. Seems to me the defendant didn’t have a whole lot of
options.

Jon McD
 
Tony Raven wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>> We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
>> along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
>> never does so, according to them.
>>
>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=491260&in_page_id=1770
>> shows the reality behind these assertions.
>>
>
> You've missed the change in Government policy announced by Ruth Kelly
> then:
> http://newsbiscuit.com/article/motorists-extra-lane-is-the-pavement-225

Ye might just jape there, but the US has been gradually implementing
this for 60 years.

(Ray Bradbury).
http://www.unc.edu/~rlmart/dystopia/bradburypage.html

Which influenced him to write the pedestrian:
http://lifesucks.dk/425

From which he wrote Fahrenheit 451.

Martin.
 
On 2 Nov, 17:05, David Hansen <[email protected]> wrote:
> We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> never does so, according to them.
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_arti...
> shows the reality behind these assertions.
>
> --
> David Hansen, Edinburgh
> I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
> http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"Shoppers had to leap for their lives"

"But a judge let him off with a fine after telling him that he was
satisfied that no members of the public were placed in "undue
danger"."

Er - if the public were not in undue danger why did the shoppers have
to "leap for their lives"?
 
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:11:16 +0000 someone who may be Paul Boyd
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>What on earth was the judge on??

Probably alcohol, as drunk as a judge being an old saying. As you
and others have observed the judge's assertion is incorrect.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
In article <[email protected]>, David Hansen wrote:
>On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:11:16 +0000 someone who may be Paul Boyd
><[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
>>What on earth was the judge on??
>
>Probably alcohol, as drunk as a judge being an old saying. As you
>and others have observed the judge's assertion is incorrect.

"You mean as drunk as a lord - we say as sober as a judge."
"Yes, m'lord."
 
On 2 Nov, 17:28, JNugent <[email protected]>
wrote:
> David Hansen wrote:
> > We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> > along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> > never does so, according to them.
> >http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_arti...
> > shows the reality behind these assertions.
>
> The reality behind these assertions is that when it happens, the
> driver is caught and punished. Is there something wrong with that? And
> wouldn't it be nice if it happened to *everyone* who used the footway
> as a racetrack?
>
The reality is that when it happens the driver is not necessarily
caught. And what about drivers who leave their cars strewn illegally
over pavements and the council has to erect bollards or fences to
prevent it happening?
>
> Mind you, I'm not sure what the judge was on...
>
Probably car fumes, some of which could be mind altering..
>
> "Judge Sean Overend told Rowett: "You drove off on the pavement,
> through pedestrians and went off"
>
> But later:
>
> "You did undertake a dangerous manouevre [sic] on the pavement but I
> am quite satisfied that was not one which placed members of the public
> in undue danger, you were merely driving round the shelter to get out.
>
> What sort of danger is "due", as opposed to "undue"?
>
Good question.
>
> "The judge told him: "You were courageous in pleading guilty. You lost
> your head that morning and behaved in a very foolish manner. It is
> also apparent from the video footage taken from the front of the bus
> that you remonstrated with the driver in an entirely inappropriate
> manner. I know this will result in your losing your job and you will
> have to find some other way of earning a living."
>
> Rowett was fined £500 with £200 costs and banned from driving for a
> year and ordered to take an extended test before he can get behind the
> wheel again.
>
> Sounds like a fair outcome to me - and the obvious dejection of the
> miscreant speaks volumes (as does his guilty plea).
>
> [x-posted to ukt, where I am certain that others will support the
> court's decision]
>
Not a fair outcome. Such drivers should be banned for life from
driving. They obviously are a serious risk to the lives of others by
treating the law with contempt while in charge of a highly dangerous
machine in a public place. You can bet the judge is a motorist.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
"The car, more of a toilet than a convenience".
 
On 4 Nov, 09:03, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2 Nov, 17:28, JNugent <[email protected]>
> wrote:> David Hansen wrote:
> > > We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> > > along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> > > never does so, according to them.
> > >http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_arti...
> > > shows the reality behind these assertions.
>
> > The reality behind these assertions is that when it happens, the
> > driver is caught and punished. Is there something wrong with that? And
> > wouldn't it be nice if it happened to *everyone* who used the footway
> > as a racetrack?
>
> The reality is that when it happens the driver is not necessarily
> caught. And what about drivers who leave their cars strewn illegally
> over pavements and the council has to erect bollards or fences to
> prevent it happening?
>

Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
has...

Fod
 
On 04/11/2007 10:44, Fod wrote:
> Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
> has...

I remember them. Whatever happened to traffic wardens? I think the
last time I saw one was about 14 years ago. We could really do with a
few round here.

--
Danny Colyer <http://www.redpedals.co.uk>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"The plural of anecdote is not data" - Frank Kotsonis
 
On 04/11/2007 10:44, Fod said,

> Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
> has...

Everyone perhaps, except North Somerset. There was supposed to a
clamp-down on pavement parking a while ago. They don't seem to have
started yet. I expect that all the B&B owners complained that if their
customers couldn't park all over the pavements that it would be bad for
business.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
Danny Colyer wrote:
> On 04/11/2007 10:44, Fod wrote:
>> Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
>> has...
>
> I remember them. Whatever happened to traffic wardens? I think the
> last time I saw one was about 14 years ago. We could really do with a
> few round here.

They have been re-branded as "Parking Attendants". I have yet to ask one
for help when needing to park, so I couldn't tell you how good they are
for that part of their job. They seem pretty efficient at writing
tickets though.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"To communicate with Mars, converse with spirits, To report the
behaviour of the sea monster, Describe the horoscope,
haruspicate or scry, Observe disease in signatures." (T.S.Eliot)
 
Fod <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 4 Nov, 09:03, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:

> > The reality is that when it happens the driver is not necessarily
> > caught. And what about drivers who leave their cars strewn illegally
> > over pavements and the council has to erect bollards or fences to
> > prevent it happening?
> >
>
> Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
> has...

I have never seen a traffic warden down my street yet sometimes people
have parked their vehicles so far onto the pavement that it would be
impossible for anyone with a pushchair or wheelchair to pass.

Cheers,
Luke


--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>
 
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 16:06:54 +0000, Don Whybrow
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Danny Colyer wrote:
>> On 04/11/2007 10:44, Fod wrote:
>>> Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
>>> has...
>>
>> I remember them. Whatever happened to traffic wardens? I think the
>> last time I saw one was about 14 years ago. We could really do with a
>> few round here.
>
>They have been re-branded as "Parking Attendants". I have yet to ask one
>for help when needing to park, so I couldn't tell you how good they are
>for that part of their job. They seem pretty efficient at writing
>tickets though.

Do they still write tickets? The ones I see take photos, punch a few
things into their handheld machines and print something out.
 
On 4 Nov, 10:44, Fod <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 4 Nov, 09:03, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 2 Nov, 17:28, JNugent <[email protected]>
> > wrote:> David Hansen wrote:
> > > > We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> > > > along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> > > > never does so, according to them.
> > > >http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_arti...
> > > > shows the reality behind these assertions.
>
> > > The reality behind these assertions is that when it happens, the
> > > driver is caught and punished. Is there something wrong with that? And
> > > wouldn't it be nice if it happened to *everyone* who used the footway
> > > as a racetrack?
>
> > The reality is that when it happens the driver is not necessarily
> > caught. And what about drivers who leave their cars strewn illegally
> > over pavements and the council has to erect bollards or fences to
> > prevent it happening?
>
> Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
> has...
>
Yes and their coverage seems to be patchy to say the least. It took me
many months to get the council to put a stop to illegal parking close
to a Tesco car park, which severely obstructed access to people with
prams and bicycles.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
"The car, more of a toilet than a convenience".
 
On Nov 7, 8:40 am, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 4 Nov, 10:44, Fod <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 4 Nov, 09:03, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On 2 Nov, 17:28, JNugent <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:> David Hansen wrote:
> > > > > We are told by the usual suspects that it is only cyclists who drive
> > > > > along pavements. The poor hard done by salt of the earth motorist
> > > > > never does so, according to them.
> > > > >http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_arti...
> > > > > shows the reality behind these assertions.
>
> > > > The reality behind these assertions is that when it happens, the
> > > > driver is caught and punished. Is there something wrong with that? And
> > > > wouldn't it be nice if it happened to *everyone* who used the footway
> > > > as a racetrack?
>
> > > The reality is that when it happens the driver is not necessarily
> > > caught. And what about drivers who leave their cars strewn illegally
> > > over pavements and the council has to erect bollards or fences to
> > > prevent it happening?
>
> > Never heard of this thing called "Traffic Wardens". Everyone else
> > has...
>
> Yes and their coverage seems to be patchy to say the least. It took me
> many months to get the council to put a stop to illegal parking close
> to a Tesco car park, which severely obstructed access to people with
> prams and bicycles.

Thats more a problem with councils being useless. They often have the
power to do things but getting them to do it.

Fod
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Another cyclist attacked..
Replies
8
Views
474
UK and Europe
Pob
P
H
Another Wire Injures Cyclist
Replies
18
Views
901
UK and Europe
Zog The Undeniable
Z
S
Re: Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
Replies
1
Views
342
UK and Europe
Matt B
M
U
Yet another cyclist violently assaulted by motorist/s.
Replies
74
Views
2K
UK and Europe
Stevie D
S
P
Another young cyclist injured
Replies
30
Views
1K
UK and Europe
spindrift
S
Top Bottom Back