Ramming cyclist at only 10mph is OK

[james01]

http://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mai ... 0/TextView (see left-hand article)
Just a fine and penalty points for using car as offensive weapon! (And no MOT!).

[irc]

Your actions were deliberate, but it was not a case of running a person down because you were only travelling at 10mph and he sustained no injuries.”

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/st ... 45932.html

Should have been dangerous driving if not assault if deliberate. Given there have been cases where people have died from head injuries from falling from a standing position any deliberate knocking a cyclist off his bike should have been dealt with more harshly.

[danhopgood]

The missing bit from the reports is of course why the cyclist felt they needed to kick the car in the first place.

My take on this is this is it's an example of why retaliation by cyclists at poor driving - whilst understandable (I've done it myself) - is a bad idea. It just ups the anti, with the motorist in the driving seat - literally.

[Vantage]

And folk wonder why some cyclists are on the verge of taking the law into their own hands. Disgusting.

[pwa]

I'm not sure how I feel about this, really. It sounds like a severe loss of cool on both sides. Damaging a car door may be tempting, but it's a bit naughty. And nudging someone off their bike with your car is inexcusable. Not the same as driving into them at speed but, yes, it could cause harm. It sounds like two people having a moment they would rather forget.

[Vantage]

Hitting someone with a car at 10mph (according to the judge) is a bit more than a nudge. Cars are particularly heavy pieces of equipment and if she'd misjudged her reflexes or the cars braking system, broken bones or death (extreme case I know) might have resulted. The judge acknowledged she did it deliberately in an effort to stop the cyclist.
If someone had scratched my bike and I then threw my 5.5lb lock at them to stop them, I'd be up for GHB and I doubt a judge would be so sympathetic to my reasoning. It's not far off shooting someone in the leg with a gun to stop them. Cars and guns are both deadly weapons.
£300 worth of damage to a car is easier to repair than the potential loss of life. This should have been a much more severe punishment.

[danhopgood]

And folk wonder why some cyclists are on the verge of taking the law into their own hands. Disgusting.

Verge? £300 worth of damage says at least one cyclist did take the law into their own hands!

[kwackers]

Verge? £300 worth of damage says at least one cyclist did take the law into their own hands!

What's the alternative? Report it to the police? Because that's been proven to work (you can't expect justice even if the end result leaves you dead)...
£300 sounds like a decent alternative to a 'fine' to me.

[danhopgood]

What's the alternative? Report it to the police? Because that's been proven to work (you can't expect justice even if the end result leaves you dead)...
£300 sounds like a decent alternative to a 'fine' to me.

If there's been a traffic offence - yes it should be reported to the Police. Police resources are such that only the serious problems are likely to get looked at though and getting enough evidence is difficult. Head cams are symptomatic of a way of doing this.

Lack of enforcement is a problem. People taking the law into their own hands is not the solution to that problem - it'll make things worse - in my view.

[kwackers]

If there's been a traffic offence - yes it should be reported to the Police. Police resources are such that only the serious problems are likely to get looked at though and getting enough evidence is difficult. Head cams are symptomatic of a way of doing this.

Headcam evidence is routinely ignored by the police. Reporting stuff simply provides you with a crime number. They may as well simply issue them online with a single click then at least the level of expectation wouldn't be unrealistic.

Lack of enforcement is a problem. People taking the law into their own hands is not the solution to that problem - it'll make things worse - in my view.

That may well be true, but in the real world not only is nothing happening but it's actually getting worse. When folk are getting off scott free after killing others then something has to give.
The uncomfortable reality is that if every cyclist who had their safety compromised left a dent in the offenders vehicle then most folk would give us a wide berth and not only that but in an attempt to 'fix' the problem the authorities would be forced to take our concerns on board.

The idea that taking the law into your own hands doesn't provide a solution isn't in itself proven and if nobody else is prepared to do it for you then why shouldn't you do it yourself???

(P.S. I'm playing devils advocate here but there's a serious point to be made.)

[Elizabethsdad]

What I don't understand is why half the article is blathering on about the driver being fashion designer and her career - what has that got to do with the price of onions in this case?

[blackbike]

I think that once someone has shown they are prepared to deliberately use a car as a weapon they should be banned from driving for life.

That fat criminal obviously needs more exercise so a driving ban would do her good.

[blackbike]

What I don't understand is why half the article is blathering on about the driver being fashion designer and her career - what has that got to do with the price of onions in this case?

I think they mention it because she is wearing such a poor choice of clothes herself. They show off her fat figure to maximum effect.

[Vantage]

I'm not saying I will or I won't, but my 5.5lb chainlock is now kept at the top of my Pendle for easy reach.

[Bicycler]

That fat criminal obviously needs more exercise so a driving ban would do her good.

I think they mention it because she is wearing such a poor choice of clothes herself. They show off her fat figure to maximum effect.

Less of the fat stuff please. It just stigmatises innocent people. Her body shape is utterly irrelevant to her horrible actions.