Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
The Daily Mail branded cyclists who break the law as ‘two-wheeled tartars’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2168939/Jumping-red-lights-Putting-pedestrians-peril-Why-tartars-wheels-think-law.html?ito=feeds-newsxmlthis week, after a cyclist http://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/court-crime/cyclist_who_jumped_red_light_and_left_lawyer_brain_damaged_is_fined_just_850_1_1432529who jumped a red light leaving a pedestrian brain injured was fined £850. Are they right? Let us know what you think.
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Daily Mail in shock headline shockazzzzzzzzz................. 
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Daily Fail in usual anti-cycling mode, just for a change
What manner of creature's this, being but half a fish and half a monster
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
If this 'person on a bike' had been driving a car and caused the same injury he would have faced a stiffer penalty, that doesn't seem fair. People like this make me sick, especially those who want to justify law breaking. They taint us all, marking us out as wierdos in many peoples eyes. Very sad... Every time I travel to our local town they are there jumping lights and riding on pavements. It's not being tackled vigourously enough IMO
Al
Al
Reuse, recycle, to save the planet.... Auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Boots. Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can...... Every little helps!
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
I see opinion counts for more than research in that paper.
According to what is available to us the cyclist was convicted for careless cycling, not for jumping a redlight.
He denied the RLJ bit and I cant see that he was convicted for it. So it appears that bit wasnt proven.
Next he compares theoretical maximum penalties for motorists to the actual penalty handed out to the cyclist, giving the misleading impression that is what this cyclist would have got for doing this in his car instead. Which we all know isnt the case.
Experience tells us that in the real world if he had hid the pedestrian at just 26mph in his car in this way he probably wouldnt have made court.
As for the civil compensation, for once I hope a lawyer does get a great load of money.
Let us hope that cyclist has third party insurance to pay it.
Where as I would like to see more criminal liability for bad driving/cycling this sentence doesnt look any more lenient than motorists receive. In fact quite the contrary.
Here is a handy resource to back up my opinion.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=50829&hilit=lenient+penalties
According to what is available to us the cyclist was convicted for careless cycling, not for jumping a redlight.
He denied the RLJ bit and I cant see that he was convicted for it. So it appears that bit wasnt proven.
Next he compares theoretical maximum penalties for motorists to the actual penalty handed out to the cyclist, giving the misleading impression that is what this cyclist would have got for doing this in his car instead. Which we all know isnt the case.
Experience tells us that in the real world if he had hid the pedestrian at just 26mph in his car in this way he probably wouldnt have made court.
As for the civil compensation, for once I hope a lawyer does get a great load of money.
Let us hope that cyclist has third party insurance to pay it.
Where as I would like to see more criminal liability for bad driving/cycling this sentence doesnt look any more lenient than motorists receive. In fact quite the contrary.
Here is a handy resource to back up my opinion.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=50829&hilit=lenient+penalties
Yma o Hyd
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
A story of two halves.
What said cyclist did was clearly wrong (assuming the reported facts are correct) and he was at fault for injuring the victim. We should do nothing to try to justify his actions because they were plain wrong.
However, the reaction to this (not just by the Daily-"Racist in public so that you don't have to be"-Mail) is obviously a pedalling its own agenda. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was an anti-cyclist agenda, rather it is just a revenue raising one, based upon the simple premise of targeting a minority group who are easily identifiable and attempting to raise the rabble agin them. If said cyclist had, for instance, been an African asylum seeker I'd bet the cycling part of the story would have played second seat.
You can understand, if not agree with, the victim's wife saying that people should stop caring about cyclists who get killed by lorries. Once upon a time you'd have expected better from the press (or would you - is it a question of volume with any idiot with a journalist's badge now allowed to force their ill-informed opinion on others via the plethora of blogs and tweets attached to any newspaper?).
Perspective is the first casualty here. How many pedestrians killed or injured by cyclists vs how many cyclists killed or injured by drivers? We should strive to reduce both to zero, but _intentionally_ picking exclusively on the lesser of the two evils in an attempt to demonise the innocent might be a crime more despicable than that committed by the tartar cyclist in the first place - at least it was not his intention to cause harm.
What said cyclist did was clearly wrong (assuming the reported facts are correct) and he was at fault for injuring the victim. We should do nothing to try to justify his actions because they were plain wrong.
However, the reaction to this (not just by the Daily-"Racist in public so that you don't have to be"-Mail) is obviously a pedalling its own agenda. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was an anti-cyclist agenda, rather it is just a revenue raising one, based upon the simple premise of targeting a minority group who are easily identifiable and attempting to raise the rabble agin them. If said cyclist had, for instance, been an African asylum seeker I'd bet the cycling part of the story would have played second seat.
You can understand, if not agree with, the victim's wife saying that people should stop caring about cyclists who get killed by lorries. Once upon a time you'd have expected better from the press (or would you - is it a question of volume with any idiot with a journalist's badge now allowed to force their ill-informed opinion on others via the plethora of blogs and tweets attached to any newspaper?).
Perspective is the first casualty here. How many pedestrians killed or injured by cyclists vs how many cyclists killed or injured by drivers? We should strive to reduce both to zero, but _intentionally_ picking exclusively on the lesser of the two evils in an attempt to demonise the innocent might be a crime more despicable than that committed by the tartar cyclist in the first place - at least it was not his intention to cause harm.
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36740
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Somebody who breaks the law is an offender.
Beyond that, most of it's rhetoric, starting with "Otherwise law-abiding..." going right up to things like allusions to Hannibal Lecter, depending on POV.
Legal trivia: Gannif (which I believe is Yiddish for "thief") is a shibboleth for an offender among Leeds City Police officers.
Incidentally, my dictionary says:-
tartar - a formidable, rough, unmaneageable person; one who unexpectedly turns the tables on his opponent. (This isn't the same as a Tatar, who may have ridden a horse, rather than a bike, for Genghis Khan.)
Beyond that, most of it's rhetoric, starting with "Otherwise law-abiding..." going right up to things like allusions to Hannibal Lecter, depending on POV.
Legal trivia: Gannif (which I believe is Yiddish for "thief") is a shibboleth for an offender among Leeds City Police officers.
Incidentally, my dictionary says:-
tartar - a formidable, rough, unmaneageable person; one who unexpectedly turns the tables on his opponent. (This isn't the same as a Tatar, who may have ridden a horse, rather than a bike, for Genghis Khan.)
Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
thirdcrank wrote:Somebody who breaks the law is an offender.
Beyond that, most of it's rhetoric, starting with "Otherwise law-abiding..." going right up to things like allusions to Hannibal Lecter, depending on POV.
Legal trivia: Gannif (which I believe is Yiddish for "thief") is a shibboleth for an offender among Leeds City Police officers.
Incidentally, my dictionary says:-
tartar - a formidable, rough, unmaneageable person; one who unexpectedly turns the tables on his opponent. (This isn't the same as a Tatar, who may have ridden a horse, rather than a bike, for Genghis Khan.)
Is a cheeky one Tartar Sauce?
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Tartars were/are an ethnic tribe in Asia.
We had a Tribal Class frigate called HMS Tartar. Sounds like a good definition of TCs.
We had a Tribal Class frigate called HMS Tartar. Sounds like a good definition of TCs.
Mick F. Cornwall
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
As Daily Fail rants go, this one seemed quite mild. I look forward to a similar rant about law-breaking drivers (which is most of them), but I'm not holding my breath.
Should legal penalties for careless cycling match the penalties for careless driving? I'm not convinced. Compared to careless drivers, careless cyclists create a bigger risk to themselves but a lesser risks to other road users.
Anyhow, I don't know how much difference fines make. I doubt any cyclists would change their behaviour if the possible fine increased to £2500.
Should legal penalties for careless cycling match the penalties for careless driving? I'm not convinced. Compared to careless drivers, careless cyclists create a bigger risk to themselves but a lesser risks to other road users.
Anyhow, I don't know how much difference fines make. I doubt any cyclists would change their behaviour if the possible fine increased to £2500.
Last edited by snibgo on 7 Jul 2012, 12:05am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
I believe whatever our mode of transport, we have a duty to be aware of and not to endanger those more vulnerable than us...
If in a car/van look out for motorcyclists, cyclists, pedestrians, pushchairs etc...
Cyclists, look out for pedestrians, pushchairs etc... and make it easy for those who could easily do you damage to know where you are and what you are doing.
We can all just get along.
At various times in my life I have walked, cycled, driven a car, van, tractor and even a 3.5 ton van, that did not make me a "van driver", merely a person who happened to be driving a van at the time. People in cars and people on bikes do not acknowledge restrictions placed on people in other situations, such as turning circles, visibility, speed, braking time.
As a person on a cycle, acknowledge that your speed (or lack of it) can frustrate a car driver, acknowledge that if you collide with a pedestrian they will likely come off worst. Ride responsibly, follow the rules for your own safety, weaving in and our of traffic may save you 2 minutes, but have you given people in cars adequate time to react to where you are, can they predict where you are going.
As a person in a car, acknowledge following a cyclist too closely can make them nervous, acknowledge that if you collide with a cyclist or pedestrian they will likely come off worst, acknowledge that driving in the cycle lane to stop the cyclist getting ahead of you and delaying you at the roundabout is probably not a nice or sensible or safe thing to do.
WE ALL NEED TO STOP BEING SELFISH and help each other so we can all stay safe, whether walking, cycling or driving.
If in a car/van look out for motorcyclists, cyclists, pedestrians, pushchairs etc...
Cyclists, look out for pedestrians, pushchairs etc... and make it easy for those who could easily do you damage to know where you are and what you are doing.
We can all just get along.
At various times in my life I have walked, cycled, driven a car, van, tractor and even a 3.5 ton van, that did not make me a "van driver", merely a person who happened to be driving a van at the time. People in cars and people on bikes do not acknowledge restrictions placed on people in other situations, such as turning circles, visibility, speed, braking time.
As a person on a cycle, acknowledge that your speed (or lack of it) can frustrate a car driver, acknowledge that if you collide with a pedestrian they will likely come off worst. Ride responsibly, follow the rules for your own safety, weaving in and our of traffic may save you 2 minutes, but have you given people in cars adequate time to react to where you are, can they predict where you are going.
As a person in a car, acknowledge following a cyclist too closely can make them nervous, acknowledge that if you collide with a cyclist or pedestrian they will likely come off worst, acknowledge that driving in the cycle lane to stop the cyclist getting ahead of you and delaying you at the roundabout is probably not a nice or sensible or safe thing to do.
WE ALL NEED TO STOP BEING SELFISH and help each other so we can all stay safe, whether walking, cycling or driving.
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Cyclists are not.
My father is left mentaly ill by being run over by a lorry that drove straight across a main road my father was cycling down ramming him into a crash barrier. The driver only recieved £500 fine 9 points on his licence, 5 years later my father still has not seen his compensation and cannot look after himself.
I feel for the victim left mentaly ill and hope they are adequately compensated, the reality is your held under lock and key under the mental health act!
My father is left mentaly ill by being run over by a lorry that drove straight across a main road my father was cycling down ramming him into a crash barrier. The driver only recieved £500 fine 9 points on his licence, 5 years later my father still has not seen his compensation and cannot look after himself.
I feel for the victim left mentaly ill and hope they are adequately compensated, the reality is your held under lock and key under the mental health act!
-
ivantheterriblish
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 6 Jul 2012, 5:23pm
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Apparently they are in London where jumping red lights seems to be the norm.
A cycling/motorist friend of mine is having to fight a claim for cycle damage and personal injury plus loss of no claims bonus from a cyclist who rode across a red light in front of him, then claimed it was my friend who had crossed after the lights had changed. Because of the disappearnce of all witnesses (they are very public spirited in London!) it is just the word of one against the other.
I feel fortunate to do my cycling in a small country town and its surroundings where most cyclists obey the law and most motor vehicles give cyclists plenty of room.
A cycling/motorist friend of mine is having to fight a claim for cycle damage and personal injury plus loss of no claims bonus from a cyclist who rode across a red light in front of him, then claimed it was my friend who had crossed after the lights had changed. Because of the disappearnce of all witnesses (they are very public spirited in London!) it is just the word of one against the other.
I feel fortunate to do my cycling in a small country town and its surroundings where most cyclists obey the law and most motor vehicles give cyclists plenty of room.
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Who bought the paper? Shame on you!
I won't defend any action others take and I'm not going to discuss this case, but I would like to comment all the same.
I'm also not someone who thinks they are a faultless person, my driving is ok, my cycling pretty good, following the rules doing either, no comment
I try my best though
however, I'm yet to meet a car driver who doesn't break the speed limit. Every day drivers risk my life by speeding. They need to focus on that for everyone's sake, speed kills.
Flip side for me is that pedestrians seem to leap out into the road without looking, I'm surprised more don't get hit. Cyclists in general must be good at avoiding them that's all I can say!
I won't defend any action others take and I'm not going to discuss this case, but I would like to comment all the same.
I'm also not someone who thinks they are a faultless person, my driving is ok, my cycling pretty good, following the rules doing either, no comment
I try my best thoughhowever, I'm yet to meet a car driver who doesn't break the speed limit. Every day drivers risk my life by speeding. They need to focus on that for everyone's sake, speed kills.
Flip side for me is that pedestrians seem to leap out into the road without looking, I'm surprised more don't get hit. Cyclists in general must be good at avoiding them that's all I can say!
Re: Are cyclists who break the law 'two wheeled tartars'?
Note also I didn't say I was a good driver, there are very few of them, but ask anyone and they think they are a good driver. If only they were more careful and less cocky.