Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is sometimes
correct.
At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
fast.
A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken by
the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road
further down.
I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he calmed
down.
He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
that so used my mobile to call one.
Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
cause no more problems.
The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just round
the corner.
The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
them later.
Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the wrong &
did not stop.

Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would say.


Francis

francis wrote:
> Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is sometimes
> correct.
> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
> major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
> appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
> fast.
> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
> front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken by
> the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
> Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
> island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road
> further down.
> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
> was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
> When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he calmed
> down.
> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
> that so used my mobile to call one.
> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
> cause no more problems.
> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just round
> the corner.
> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
> them later.
> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
> could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the wrong &
> did not stop.
>
> Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would say.
>
The driver who cut across is an arsehole. what a pity she couldn't be 
stopped.

Well done to those who stopped to help the cyclist.

"francis"  wrote in message 
news:5ab3c5cd-8db6-4cbe-9b86-7f81f76a1dcc@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

Just to sumarise:

> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn

> They did no collide

> no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.

Why would he, no collision there.

> the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centreisland & lost control,
> he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road

Cyclist crashed.

> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was.

Being a considerate motorist you stoped to help.

> When I reached him he wanted to rearrange my face.

Cyclist was thretening.

> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
> that so used my mobile to call one.

Sounds like he had somthing to hide.

> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
> cause no more problems.

More helpfull and considerate motorists helping the free loader.

> The cyclist did not want the police informed

Probably riding without tax, insurance or a licence.

Post made using Doug logic (TM)

Brimstone wrote:
> francis wrote:
>> Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is sometimes
>> correct.
>> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
>> major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
>> appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
>> fast.
>> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
>> front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken by
>> the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
>> Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
>> island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road
>> further down.
>> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
>> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
>> was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
>> When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he calmed
>> down.
>> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
>> that so used my mobile to call one.
>> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
>> cause no more problems.
>> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just round
>> the corner.
>> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
>> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
>> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
>> them later.
>> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
>> could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the wrong &
>> did not stop.
>>
>> Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would say.
>>
> The driver who cut across is an arsehole. what a pity she couldn't be 
> stopped.
> 
> Well done to those who stopped to help the cyclist. 
> 
> 

I completely agree with you, but I have one question for you, where does 
it say the driver was a she?

-- 
Tony the Dragon

Tony Dragon wrote:
> Brimstone wrote:
>> francis wrote:
>>> Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is
>>> sometimes correct.
>>> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
>>> major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
>>> appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
>>> fast.
>>> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
>>> front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken
>>> by the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
>>> Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
>>> island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the
>>> road further down.
>>> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
>>> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
>>> was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
>>> When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he
>>> calmed down.
>>> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
>>> that so used my mobile to call one.
>>> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
>>> cause no more problems.
>>> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just
>>> round the corner.
>>> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
>>> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
>>> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
>>> them later.
>>> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
>>> could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the wrong
>>> & did not stop.
>>>
>>> Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would say.
>>>
>> The driver who cut across is an arsehole. what a pity she couldn't be
>> stopped.
>>
>> Well done to those who stopped to help the cyclist.
>>
>>
>
> I completely agree with you, but I have one question for you, where
> does it say the driver was a she?

It doesn't.

Depresion wrote:
> "francis"  wrote in message 
> news:5ab3c5cd-8db6-4cbe-9b86-7f81f76a1dcc@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> 
> Just to sumarise:
> 
>> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn
> 
>> They did no collide
> 
>> no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
> 
> Why would he, no collision there.
> 
>> the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centreisland & lost control,
>> he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road
> 
> Cyclist crashed.
> 
>> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
>> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was.
> 
> Being a considerate motorist you stoped to help.
> 
>> When I reached him he wanted to rearrange my face.
> 
> Cyclist was thretening.
> 
>> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
>> that so used my mobile to call one.
> 
> Sounds like he had somthing to hide.
> 
>> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
>> cause no more problems.
> 
> More helpfull and considerate motorists helping the free loader.
> 
>> The cyclist did not want the police informed
> 
> Probably riding without tax, insurance or a licence.
> 
> Post made using Doug logic (TM) 
> 
> 

I was about to have a pop at you until I saw the last line.


-- 
Tony the Dragon

Brimstone wrote:
> Tony Dragon wrote:
>> Brimstone wrote:
>>> francis wrote:
>>>> Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is
>>>> sometimes correct.
>>>> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
>>>> major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
>>>> appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
>>>> fast.
>>>> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
>>>> front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken
>>>> by the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
>>>> Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
>>>> island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the
>>>> road further down.
>>>> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
>>>> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
>>>> was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
>>>> When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he
>>>> calmed down.
>>>> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
>>>> that so used my mobile to call one.
>>>> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
>>>> cause no more problems.
>>>> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just
>>>> round the corner.
>>>> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
>>>> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
>>>> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
>>>> them later.
>>>> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
>>>> could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the wrong
>>>> & did not stop.
>>>>
>>>> Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would say.
>>>>
>>> The driver who cut across is an arsehole. what a pity she couldn't be
>>> stopped.
>>>
>>> Well done to those who stopped to help the cyclist.
>>>
>>>
>> I completely agree with you, but I have one question for you, where
>> does it say the driver was a she?
> 
> It doesn't. 
> 
> 
Years of driving brings you to that conclusion?
Mind you since I have been married I have never sold a car with all it's 
original body parts (yes dear I'll make you a cup of tea)

-- 
Tony the Dragon

francis wrote:

> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
> that so used my mobile to call one

> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.

Nice waste of resources...

-- 
Abo

francis  wrote:

> Just to prove the Doug 'cyclist OK motorist wrong' claim is sometimes
> correct.

The key word here is "sometimes". I think everyone posting here with one
exception agrees that in any incident involving a cyclist and a car that
sometimes the cyclist is at fault and sometimes the car driver is at
fault.

The exception is the one person who believes that the car driver is
always at fault.

Does that help you with your prejudiced and bullshit take on the
attitude of motorists who use this newsgroup?

"Brimstone"  wrote in message 
news:jOadndfdp-QiZMLVnZ2dnUVZ8sbinZ2d@bt.com...
> francis wrote:
>> Just to prove the Doug 'cyclist OK motorist wrong' claim is sometimes
>> correct.
>> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
>> major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
>> appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
>> fast.
>> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
>> front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken by
>> the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
>> Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
>> island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road
>> further down.
>> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
>> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
>> was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
>> When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he calmed
>> down.
>> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
>> that so used my mobile to call one.
>> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
>> cause no more problems.
>> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just round
>> the corner.
>> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
>> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
>> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
>> them later.
>> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
>> could not be bothered to wait I don't know. But he was in the wrong &
>> did not stop.
>>
>> Just thought I'd post this to see what the usual suspect would say.
>>
> The driver who cut across is an arsehole. what a pity she couldn't be 
> stopped.
>
> Well done to those who stopped to help the cyclist.

Brim !!   That is not the reply Doug will want to read. Now you're going to 
force him to fit the wheels back on the goalposts.
;o)

On 23 Jun, 23:21, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> francis  wrote:
> > Just to prove the Doug 'cyclist OK motorist wrong' claim is sometimes
> > correct.
>
> The key word here is "sometimes". I think everyone posting here with one
> exception agrees that in any incident involving a cyclist and a car that
> sometimes the cyclist is at fault and sometimes the car driver is at
> fault.
>
> The exception is the one person who believes that the car driver is
> always at fault.
>
> Does that help you with your prejudiced and bullshit take on the
> attitude of motorists who use this newsgroup?
>
Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
cyclists? The point you and others are always avoiding is that
motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
cyclists on bicycles and for that reason motorists should take extra
care but they don't. Instead they try to shift blame away from their
careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
victims.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

On 24 Jun, 07:07, Doug  wrote:

>
> Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
> cyclists? The point you and others are always avoiding is that
> motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
> cyclists on bicycles and for that reason motorists should take extra
> care but they don't. Instead they try to shift blame away from their
> careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
> victims.

Could it be that many cyclists have never taken any test, have never
consulted the highway code, have learnt their cycling and roadcraft
skills on their own without any form of guidance or tuition. In view
of these facts how can you take the view that in accidents they can
always be held blameless.

If a car driver operated with the same criteria then you would be
baying for his/her arrest.
NM

Tony Dragon wrote:
> Brimstone wrote:
>> Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>> francis wrote:
>>>>> Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is
>>>>> sometimes correct.
>>>>> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive
>>>>> across a major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the
>>>>> correct gear appeared, going down the major road right to left
>>>>> travelling quite fast.
>>>>> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn
>>>>> in front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action
>>>>> taken by the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did
>>>>> not stop. Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately
>>>>> clipped the centre island & lost control, he ended up in a heap
>>>>> in the middle of the road further down.
>>>>> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
>>>>> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him
>>>>> he was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my
>>>>> face. When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car
>>>>> he calmed down.
>>>>> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy
>>>>> with that so used my mobile to call one.
>>>>> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as
>>>>> to cause no more problems.
>>>>> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just
>>>>> round the corner.
>>>>> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
>>>>> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
>>>>> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he
>>>>> needed them later.
>>>>> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him
>>>>> and could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the
>>>>> wrong & did not stop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would
>>>>> say.
>>>> The driver who cut across is an arsehole. what a pity she couldn't
>>>> be stopped.
>>>>
>>>> Well done to those who stopped to help the cyclist.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I completely agree with you, but I have one question for you, where
>>> does it say the driver was a she?
>>
>> It doesn't.
>>
>>
> Years of driving brings you to that conclusion?

What conclusion?

> Mind you since I have been married I have never sold a car with all
> it's original body parts (yes dear I'll make you a cup of tea)

"Tony Dragon"  wrote in message 
news:yvmdnZHjW451jf3VRVnyhwA@bt.com...
> Brimstone wrote:
>> francis wrote:
>>> Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is sometimes
>>> correct.
>>> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
>>> major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
>>> appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
>>> fast.
>>> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
>>> front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken by
>>> the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
>>> Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
>>> island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road
>>> further down.
>>> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
>>> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
>>> was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
>>> When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he calmed
>>> down.
>>> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
>>> that so used my mobile to call one.
>>> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
>>> cause no more problems.
>>> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just round
>>> the corner.
>>> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
>>> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
>>> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
>>> them later.
>>> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
>>> could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the wrong &
>>> did not stop.
>>>
>>> Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would say.
>>>
>> The driver who cut across is an arsehole. what a pity she couldn't be 
>> stopped.
>>
>> Well done to those who stopped to help the cyclist.
>
> I completely agree with you, but I have one question for you, where does 
> it say the driver was a she?
>

Driving like a woman?

(ducks.....)

Doug wrote:
> On 23 Jun, 23:21, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
>> francis  wrote:
>>> Just to prove the Doug 'cyclist OK motorist wrong' claim is
>>> sometimes correct.
>>
>> The key word here is "sometimes". I think everyone posting here with
>> one exception agrees that in any incident involving a cyclist and a
>> car that sometimes the cyclist is at fault and sometimes the car
>> driver is at fault.
>>
>> The exception is the one person who believes that the car driver is
>> always at fault.
>>
>> Does that help you with your prejudiced and bullshit take on the
>> attitude of motorists who use this newsgroup?
>>
> Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
> cyclists? The point you and others are always avoiding is that
> motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
> cyclists on bicycles and for that reason motorists should take extra
> care but they don't. Instead they try to shift blame away from their
> careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
> victims.

Exactly the Dougspiel(tm) that we've come to expect.

On Jun 24, 7:07 am, Doug  wrote:
> On 23 Jun, 23:21, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:> francis  wrote:
> > > Just to prove the Doug 'cyclist OK motorist wrong' claim is sometimes
> > > correct.
>
> > The key word here is "sometimes". I think everyone posting here with one
> > exception agrees that in any incident involving a cyclist and a car that
> > sometimes the cyclist is at fault and sometimes the car driver is at
> > fault.
>
> > The exception is the one person who believes that the car driver is
> > always at fault.
>
> > Does that help you with your prejudiced and bullshit take on the
> > attitude of motorists who use this newsgroup?
>
> Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
> cyclists?

Still not interested in facts and happier with emotive mug slinging?
Fair enough.

> The point you and others are always avoiding is that
> motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
> cyclists on bicycles

No one disputes what you have just said.

> and for that reason motorists should take extra
> care but they don't.

Are you now trying to claim that no motorists at all take extra care
around cyclists?
Allow me to disprove that, since passing my test many years ago i
always give cyclists extra care and only overtake if there is enough
room to pass them safetly.  Even if this means having to drive behind
them for a long period to time before overtaking.



> Instead they try to shift blame away from their
> careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
> victims.

Translation - everyone here looks at the evidence and that doesn't
always support my anti car ranting which is why I refuse to do so
unless it supports my anti car ranting.

Fod

On Jun 24, 8:08 am, NM  wrote:
> On 24 Jun, 07:07, Doug  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
> > cyclists? The point you and others are always avoiding is that
> > motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
> > cyclists on bicycles and for that reason motorists should take extra
> > care but they don't. Instead they try to shift blame away from their
> > careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
> > victims.
>
> Could it be that many cyclists have never taken any test, have never
> consulted the highway code, have learnt their cycling and roadcraft
> skills on their own without any form of guidance or tuition. In view
> of these facts how can you take the view that in accidents they can
> always be held blameless.
>
> If a car driver operated with the same criteria then you would be
> baying for his/her arrest.

Doug thinks that illegal unlicensed joyriders are the same as law
abiding motorists...

Fod

Doug  wrote:

> On 23 Jun, 23:21, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> > francis  wrote:
> > > Just to prove the Doug 'cyclist OK motorist wrong' claim is sometimes
> > > correct.
> >
> > The key word here is "sometimes". I think everyone posting here with one
> > exception agrees that in any incident involving a cyclist and a car that
> > sometimes the cyclist is at fault and sometimes the car driver is at
> > fault.
> >
> > The exception is the one person who believes that the car driver is
> > always at fault.
> >
> > Does that help you with your prejudiced and bullshit take on the
> > attitude of motorists who use this newsgroup?
> >
> Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
> cyclists?


Still beating your sexual partner?

> The point you and others are always avoiding is that
> motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
> cyclists on bicycles and for that reason motorists should take extra
> care but they don't. Instead they try to shift blame away from their
> careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
> victims.

The point you are always avoiding is that the above is undiluted runny
bullshit.

Tony Dragon wrote:


> I completely agree with you, but I have one question for you, where does 
> it say the driver was a she?
> 

Dangerous, these sexist assumptions. After all you might think that 
someone who uses a butterfly as their alias was female too....
Roger Thorpe

In message 
, Doug 
 writes
>Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
>cyclists? The point you and others are always avoiding is that
>motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
>cyclists on bicycles and for that reason motorists should take extra
>care but they don't. Instead they try to shift blame away from their
>careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
>victims.
Interesting little piece that.
I've just spent a week in the great metrolops (London) and was amused to 
see cyclists blaming car drivers for forcing them off of the road 
through aggressive driving, then they themselves doing the same thing to 
pedestrians on the pavements.   Hypocritical lot aren't they, cyclists. 
Oh I think I've read of another on this very group who fills the bill 
nicely.
-- 
Clive

In message <1ij1ak7.1vlaq9y1b96c7tN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, Steve Firth 
<%steve%@malloc.co.uk> writes
>Doug  wrote:
>
>> On 23 Jun, 23:21, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
>> > francis  wrote:
>> > > Just to prove the Doug 'cyclist OK motorist wrong' claim is sometimes
>> > > correct.
>> >
>> > The key word here is "sometimes". I think everyone posting here with one
>> > exception agrees that in any incident involving a cyclist and a car that
>> > sometimes the cyclist is at fault and sometimes the car driver is at
>> > fault.
>> >
>> > The exception is the one person who believes that the car driver is
>> > always at fault.
>> >
>> > Does that help you with your prejudiced and bullshit take on the
>> > attitude of motorists who use this newsgroup?
>> >
>> Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
>> cyclists?
>
>
>Still beating your sexual partner?

If only he had one. It might give him something better to do than his 
daily ritual of cutting and pasting of Daily Mail articles and his 
obsessive quest to rid uk.transport of motorists.

I was going to describe his quest as Quixotic in its sheer folly and 
pointlessness, except that does Quixote a great disservice. Duhg seems 
to share all the negative characteristics (impractical, impulsive, 
living in a dreamworld) and absolutely none of the charm or romance.

-- 
Ed Banger

On 2008-06-24, Clive  wrote:
> In message 
>, Doug 
> writes
>>Still trying to exonerate motorists who cause injury or death to
>>cyclists? The point you and others are always avoiding is that
>>motorists in cars are much, much more dangerous than vulnerable
>>cyclists on bicycles and for that reason motorists should take extra
>>care but they don't. Instead they try to shift blame away from their
>>careless use of lethal machines in public places to their vulnerable
>>victims.
> Interesting little piece that.
> I've just spent a week in the great metrolops (London) and was amused to 
> see cyclists blaming car drivers for forcing them off of the road 
> through aggressive driving, then they themselves doing the same thing to 
> pedestrians on the pavements. 

That always amuses me, too.

-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On 23 Jun, 20:16, francis  wrote:
> Just to prove the Doug ‘cyclist OK motorist wrong’ claim is sometimes
> correct.
> At about 10.30 today near Wallington I was waiting to drive across a
> major road, from my right a cyclist, wearing all the correct gear
> appeared, going down the major road right to left travelling quite
> fast.
> A white estate car was coming from the left and made a right turn in
> front of said cyclist. They did no collide due to the action taken by
> the cyclist, no deviation was taken by the car who did not stop.
> Whilst avoiding the car the cyclist unfortunately clipped the centre
> island & lost control, he ended up in a heap in the middle of the road
> further down.
> I pulled my van into the carriageway to block traffic, turned the
> hazards on & went to see how the cyclist was. When I reached him he
> was walking about (not very steady) & wanted to rearrange my face.
> When he realised that I was not the driver of the white car he calmed
> down.
> He said that he did not want an ambulance, but I was not happy with
> that so used my mobile to call one.
> Other drivers were sorting his bike out & directing traffic so as to
> cause no more problems.
> The ambulance turned up so fast I think they must have been just round
> the corner.
> The cyclist did not want the police informed or to go to hospital,
> after the paramedics checked him out he went on his way.
> I and another driver (truck) gave him our details in case he needed
> them later.
> Who knows if the car driver just did not see him, or did see him and
> could not be bothered to wait I don’t know. But he was in the wrong &
> did not stop.
>
> Just thought I’d post this to see what the usual suspect would say.
>

Apologies for lateness, but thanks for taking charge. That kind of
crossing your T and not seeing you has happened to me (once by another
cyclist rljing).