Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

Bus Driver jailed for knocking down cyclist !!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 05:56 PM
  #91  
tony de wonderful's Avatar
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by azz250478
Just so we're clear, are you saying that anything the cyclist did that day didn't contribute to what happened?
You mean like getting on his bike that day?

I don't want to get into some sort of metaphysical cause and effect debate, but legally the Driver is either responsible for his actions in a court of law or has diminished responsibility on the grounds of say madness for example.

There is a 3rd possibility that the bus Driver was being compelled. Maybe the cyclist had a friend who was holding a gun to the head of the bus Drivers child, and was threatening to kill the child unless the Driver attempted to kill the cyclist with his bus? What do you reckon?
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 07:57 PM
  #92  
TonyBurns's Avatar
TonyBurns
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 2
From: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Angry

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Come off it that is trite rubbish.

What could the cyclist have done to deserve a de facto attempt on his life?

Please think before you write.
There is a saying, if you dont throw ****, you dont get covered in it when someone throws it back.

Simple, you are sticking up for the cyclist saying he is totally innocent, I do not condone what the driver did, but if the cyclist didnt provoke him then he wouldnt be in the situation he is now.

If you now want to get off your high and mighty horse and actually see that, you may see more of a 2 sided story rather than just blaming one party and thinking the other totally innocent.

Tony
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 08:38 PM
  #93  
davyboy's Avatar
davyboy
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,488
Likes: 0
From: Some country and western
Default

It's rather like saying that the wife deserved to get hit as she did not make dinner in time. Or I gave my son a good beating as he was late home. Or I knee capped him as he didn't pay his debts.

There are things you don't do. One of them is aiming your vehicle at vunerable road users. If a 40 ton arctic didn't bother braking because a car driver didn't let him pull out would you be defending the lorry driver?
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 08:53 PM
  #94  
An0n0m0us's Avatar
An0n0m0us
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,600
Likes: 29
From: UK
Default

Originally Posted by davyboy
There are things you don't do.
And another one is don't act like an utter fcukwit on a bicycle by winding up other road users as you will come off worse in any coming together.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 08:57 PM
  #95  
mrmadcap's Avatar
mrmadcap
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,790
Likes: 0
From: manchester
Default

The bus driver should have drove onto the footpath and finished him off
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 09:04 PM
  #96  
scoobiepaul's Avatar
scoobiepaul
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 672
Likes: 2
Default

Originally Posted by Luan Pra bang
I just watched the video again and it looks like the cyclist swerves to block the bus from overtaking, all things considered I am starting to think the cyclist deserved it.

Before people get too uppity I cycle as well but I would say 99% of drivers I come across are very good so I don't share the militant 'car drivers are always wrong' mentality.
+1 Watch it the cyclist is not quite as innocent as you think, that said if you drive for a living you have to stay professional and calm. ( I am training to be a bus driver and 99% of cyclists are very responsible)
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 09:19 PM
  #97  
TonyBurns's Avatar
TonyBurns
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 2
From: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Default

Originally Posted by davyboy
It's rather like saying that the wife deserved to get hit as she did not make dinner in time. Or I gave my son a good beating as he was late home. Or I knee capped him as he didn't pay his debts.

There are things you don't do. One of them is aiming your vehicle at vunerable road users. If a 40 ton arctic didn't bother braking because a car driver didn't let him pull out would you be defending the lorry driver?
Totally wrong, you see it as if one party is innocent, as above, I dont condone what the bus driver did but if you provoke (especially on a cycle) then really you are pretty stupid to swerve out to try to block a bus ffs.
To me, neither party is innocent even if the cyclist didnt deserve that, he ended up being an idiot and learnt a hard lesson.

Tony
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 09:38 PM
  #98  
jonc's Avatar
jonc
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,647
Likes: 22
Default

Originally Posted by davyboy
There are things you don't do. One of them is aiming your vehicle at vunerable road users. If a 40 ton arctic didn't bother braking because a car driver didn't let him pull out would you be defending the lorry driver?
At the same time if you drive around like a **** like you owned the road and deliberately try to cut up and imped the progress of a 40 ton arctic would you be defending the car driver.

Both parties were in the wrong, the difference being the bus driver will feel the full force of the law and the rider the felt the force of the bus. Hopefully both will have learnt from this incident.

Perhaps cyclists should be required to have a licence much like other motorised vehicles and be award points for reckless or dangerous riding, hopefully it will reduce these kinds of incidents. At the moment there is no requirement for cyclists to have any form of experience to use the roads.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 09:45 PM
  #99  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Originally Posted by mrmadcap
The bus driver should have drove onto the footpath and finished him off
Probably would have,but i think its illegal for a bus driver to reverse a bus whilst carrying passengers.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 09:47 PM
  #100  
JonMc's Avatar
JonMc
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (51)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 20,491
Likes: 2
From: Wherever I park my car, that's my home
Default

Originally Posted by jonc
Perhaps cyclists should be required to have a licence much like other motorised vehicles and be award points for reckless or dangerous riding, hopefully it will reduce these kinds of incidents. At the moment there is no requirement for cyclists to have any form of experience to use the roads.
I'd be up for that, advanced cycling proficiency, add to it the requirement for cyclists to have insurance
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:03 PM
  #101  
tony de wonderful's Avatar
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by TonyBurns
There is a saying, if you dont throw ****, you dont get covered in it when someone throws it back.

Simple, you are sticking up for the cyclist saying he is totally innocent, I do not condone what the driver did, but if the cyclist didnt provoke him then he wouldnt be in the situation he is now.

If you now want to get off your high and mighty horse and actually see that, you may see more of a 2 sided story rather than just blaming one party and thinking the other totally innocent.

Tony
I did not say the cyclist was totally innocent but he was never on trial for a crime, besides when was cyclist badly the moral equivalent of attempted murder?

It is a bit like blaming the beaten wife after her husbands smacks her about because she burned his dinner. She 'provoked' him of course? Two sides to every story?
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:04 PM
  #102  
tony de wonderful's Avatar
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by jonc
At the moment there is no requirement for cyclists to have any form of experience to use the roads.
Nor pedestrians.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:13 PM
  #103  
jonc's Avatar
jonc
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,647
Likes: 22
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Nor pedestrians.
Idiot!
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:16 PM
  #104  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Nor pedestrians.
I don't think pedestrians normally walk in the road,unless crossing.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:24 PM
  #105  
Kieran_Burns's Avatar
Kieran_Burns
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
From: There on the stair
Default

Originally Posted by jonc
Idiot!
Unfortunately by that comment you've only proven that you don't understand the facts of using the road.

(I was kind of wondering how long, hence my very first post, it would take for the usual uninformed comments to come out. Insurance does not mitigate liability - whether someone is insured or not does not negate their liability when at fault; it simply helps pay for the costs. A cyclist nor a pedestrian does not need a licence to use the road, as they have a right to. Motorists have to have a licence for the privilege, which can be removed remember)

and so it descends into the usual negative stereotypes.....
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:26 PM
  #106  
Kieran_Burns's Avatar
Kieran_Burns
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
From: There on the stair
Default

Originally Posted by DYK
Probably would have,but i think its illegal for a bus driver to reverse a bus whilst carrying passengers.
Given the sticky at the top of this page, the pair of you should be utterly ashamed of yourselves.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:33 PM
  #107  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Originally Posted by Kieran_Burns
Unfortunately by that comment you've only proven that you don't understand the facts of using the road.

(I was kind of wondering how long, hence my very first post, it would take for the usual uninformed comments to come out. Insurance does not mitigate liability - whether someone is insured or not does not negate their liability when at fault; it simply helps pay for the costs. A cyclist nor a pedestrian does not need a licence to use the road, as they have a right to. Motorists have to have a licence for the privilege, which can be removed remember)

and so it descends into the usual negative stereotypes.....
Can you explain to me then why a cyclist can be stopped by police for drunk driving,or riding at night without lights,but don't need a licence for riding a vehicle on the road.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:35 PM
  #108  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Originally Posted by Kieran_Burns
Given the sticky at the top of this page, the pair of you should be utterly ashamed of yourselves.
Nothing to be ashamed about kieran,i think it is actually illegal for a bus driver to reverse whilst carrying passengers.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:39 PM
  #109  
Kieran_Burns's Avatar
Kieran_Burns
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
From: There on the stair
Default

Originally Posted by DYK
Can you explain to me then why a cyclist can be stopped by police for drunk driving,or riding at night without lights,but don't need a licence for riding a vehicle on the road.
Specifically in the first example: they can't. Different laws for different offences, it's not driving while under the influence and there are specific laws for cycling without lights (or reflectors etc) after dark.... but even whether they have committed the offence, there is no licence to endorse.

Quick Google:
Section 30 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, as amended by the Road Traffic Act 1991, provides the offence of cycling on a road or public place whilst under the influence of drink or drugs. It states:
30(1) A person who, when riding a cycle on a road or other public place, is unfit to ride through drink or drugs (that is to say, is under the influence of drink or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the cycle) is guilty of an offence.

NOTES

(i) The evidence of the extent to which a person is affected must be measured by means other than the provision of a specimen of breath, blood or urine, as there is no power to require such a specimen in these circumstances. However, if such a specimen was offered, it is probable that the evidence obtained by analysis of the specimen would be admissible.
(ii) In Scotland a constable may arrest without warrant a person committing an offence.
(iii) In England and Wales a constable may only arrest without warrant in accordance with the powers of arrest set out in section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. In such an instance, that power might be exercised where a satisfactory address has not been furnished, or the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that arrest is necessary to prevent such a person causing physical injury to himself or any other person (see also other conditions in s24 of PACE).
(iv) The absence of a specific power of arrest in England and Wales affects the ability of the police to present any form of medical evidence of the accused's condition.
(v) There is no offence of 'being in charge' of a cycle under the Road Traffic Acts, but such conduct may well be an offence of drunk in charge of a carriage under section 12 of the Licensing Act 1872. A bicycle or tricycle is a carriage for the purpose of that section.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:39 PM
  #110  
Clarebabes's Avatar
Clarebabes
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 21,366
Likes: 0
From: A big town with sh1t shops: Northampton
Default

Originally Posted by DYK
Nothing to be ashamed about kieran,i think it is actually illegal for a bus driver to reverse whilst carrying passengers.
Gosh, our local bus driver must be running the gauntlet with the police every day at our local bus station if that's the case...
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:47 PM
  #111  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Originally Posted by Clarebabes
Gosh, our local bus driver must be running the gauntlet with the police every day at our local bus station if that's the case...
That's what i know hun,from a bus driver from many moons ago.Its the reason why they always mainly leave the back end sticking out of a bus stop and don't actually pull all the way in,because if they did,they may have to reverse to get out again.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 10:55 PM
  #112  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Yes Kieran i know a licence is not needed to ride a cycle on the road,but you can actually be stopped for riding a cycle if you have been suspected of drinking booze,or taking drugs.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 11:24 PM
  #113  
tony de wonderful's Avatar
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by DYK
I don't think pedestrians normally walk in the road,unless crossing.
Have you ever walked anywhere like where there are country lanes?
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 11:35 PM
  #114  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Have you ever walked anywhere like where there are country lanes?
Tony that's a bit of a weak excuse,i suppose its the reason why they won't make pass+compulsory.because country drivers have to drive too far to the nearest motorway.come on get real.
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2012 | 11:47 PM
  #115  
tony de wonderful's Avatar
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by DYK
Tony that's a bit of a weak excuse,i suppose its the reason why they won't make pass+compulsory.because country drivers have to drive too far to the nearest motorway.come on get real.
Well the point is pedestrians are road users to, just like cyclists, you don't need wheels to have a right to be on a road unless it has restrictions like motorways and dual carriageways.
Reply
Old Feb 19, 2012 | 12:04 AM
  #116  
DYK's Avatar
DYK
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,824
Likes: 1
From: Scooby Planet
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Well the point is pedestrians are road users to, just like cyclists, you don't need wheels to have a right to be on a road unless it has restrictions like motorways and dual carriageways.
No pedestrians are pedestrians and road users are road users,pedestrians don't generally use the road as they are on foot,hence the foot path,car drivers motorcyclists,coach,bus,truck drivers use the road,and cyclist use road,footpath,or canal.licence free,insurance free,tax free.i'm a cyclist mate,but ride my bike off road.


Just the other morning at 6am i was driving came to a roundabout slowed to check my right,here we go a cyclist came charging from the right,now i could of sped in front of this guy and turned left,but no i let him past he put up his hand to say hey thanks,i knew i would have to overtake him moments later as he was heading along the same road as me,fair enough.moments later i overtake the guy,but he was a ok cyclist,not a hey i got a cam on my helmet i'm filming you.
Reply
Old Feb 19, 2012 | 12:47 AM
  #117  
Galifrey's Avatar
Galifrey
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,356
Likes: 0
From: Corsham
Default

Originally Posted by Ant
10 points and a bonus 5 for getting him to the path
Wasn't only me thinking that then
Reply
Old Feb 19, 2012 | 01:33 AM
  #118  
jonc's Avatar
jonc
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,647
Likes: 22
Default

Originally Posted by Kieran_Burns
Unfortunately by that comment you've only proven that you don't understand the facts of using the road.

(I was kind of wondering how long, hence my very first post, it would take for the usual uninformed comments to come out. Insurance does not mitigate liability - whether someone is insured or not does not negate their liability when at fault; it simply helps pay for the costs. A cyclist nor a pedestrian does not need a licence to use the road, as they have a right to. Motorists have to have a licence for the privilege, which can be removed remember)

and so it descends into the usual negative stereotypes.....
To you that may be so. But would you not agree that some form of training or formal test be beneficial so that it demonstrates that the rider is competent to use the Queen's highway. I've lost count the amount of times I've witnessed cyclists in London charging up the inside of a lorry or bus that is making a left turn, or cutting across lanes without looking for traffic behind, or running through red lights. Unfortunately I've also seen the aftermarth of quite a number of accidents involving cyclists including one fatality in London, granted not all of them may not be the fault of the cyclist.

I'm not against cyclists, but I would rather my children for example be subject to an age limit and formal test in order to use the road. At the moment there is nothing to stop them from riding on the roads now. They're far too young at the moment and simply won't allow it at this stage. I did my cycling proficiency test years and years ago when I was in primary school with courses laid out in a controlled environment. Sadly the take up for this training for this sort of minimum recommended standard for cycling on roads is very low.

With the advent of the Boris bikes in London absolutely anyone can regardless of skill or experience can cycle in London without full comprehension or awareness of how to ride in city traffic. As a result there have been many accidents involving these bikes alone. I can only imagine that they place a lot of faith on other road users to be aware and make allowances for their presence on the road.

If there was a licence for cyclists and a points system, whilst it may not negate the cyclists liability and responsibility, it would allow frequent and persistent offenders to be penalised and banned from riding their bikes on the road.
Reply
Old Feb 19, 2012 | 09:32 AM
  #119  
Aaron1978's Avatar
Aaron1978
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,034
Likes: 0
From: Moved to the Darkside
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
You mean like getting on his bike that day?

I don't want to get into some sort of metaphysical cause and effect debate, but legally the Driver is either responsible for his actions in a court of law or has diminished responsibility on the grounds of say madness for example.

There is a 3rd possibility that the bus Driver was being compelled. Maybe the cyclist had a friend who was holding a gun to the head of the bus Drivers child, and was threatening to kill the child unless the Driver attempted to kill the cyclist with his bus? What do you reckon?
Did the cyclist swerve needlessly in front of the bus or not? And do you think he was attempting to wind him up?

What the bus driver did was inexcusable, but you never know how people react these days and thinking bad things will never happen to you is naive.

Rightly or wrongly the cyclist has learnt a very hard lesson.
Reply
Old Feb 19, 2012 | 10:14 AM
  #120  
BIG FUD's Avatar
BIG FUD
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (84)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,917
Likes: 0
From: In my own world..
Default agree

Originally Posted by DCI Gene Hunt
All IMHO - the cyclist was riding along like a ****, clearly he could have been closer to the pavement, staying safe, and still allowing the bus to pass (as wes ll as the stream of cars behind the bus). The cyclist appears to be behaving like a pillock but what the bus driver then does is clearly insane as he could very easily have killed the cyclist. There is no excuse on this planet for the way the bus driver behaved, the fact the cyclist was being a *** just means he was being a ***... but if we ran over every *** we came across in real life SNet NSR would be deserted .... it's funny to watch the pro bikers support the cyclist and pro drivers the bus driver... wherein reality both were *****, albeit the driver decided to escalate it to attempted murder.
To me this is bang on the buck
Reply



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:26 AM.