Journalism and cycling

magicbastarder · 13-09-2017 11:01am

whoops, look at how late i was.

papu · 13-09-2017 5:58pm

Dangerous driver who deliberately hit cyclist jailed for 16 weeks

A Derbyshire man who repeatedly swerved into a group of cyclists and hit one of them has been jailed for 16 weeks after pleading guilty to dangerous driving. 50-year-old John Rafferty lost his temper while attempting to get past a dozen cyclists, two of whom were 12-year-old boys.

Rafferty was also handed a 112-week road ban.

I think drivers should be retested more frequently, definitely somebody who uses their car as a weapon like this, or is involved in reckless or dangerous behavior should have their license taken away and be forced to resit the DTT and driving exam ...

papu · 13-09-2017 6:03pm

Also very sad news..

A CYCLIST IN in her 60s has died following a collision with a tractor in Cork.

RIP.

average_runner · 13-09-2017 8:59pm

Recent CCTV footage from Kiltartan level crossing.

https://t.co/0nuCtBkKhq

Crazy van on the wrong side and the cyclist after it.

average_runner · 13-09-2017 9:06pm

papu wrote: »

Dangerous driver who deliberately hit cyclist jailed for 16 weeks

I think drivers should be retested more frequently, definitely somebody who uses their car as a weapon like this, or is involved in reckless or dangerous behavior should have their license taken away and be forced to resit the DTT and driving exam ...

Sorry but any idiot can pass the exam so having them re sit it is a waste of time.

Life time ban instead

Fighting Tao · 13-09-2017 9:36pm

average_runner wrote: »

Recent CCTV footage from Kiltartan level crossing.

https://t.co/0nuCtBkKhq

Crazy van on the wrong side and the cyclist after it.

Not sure why you are pointing this out as twitter video is not what could be considered journalism but was it obvious to the cyclist that the gates were closed? I don't know the road but they looked open to me when the cyclist appears.

magicbastarder · 13-09-2017 9:59pm

average_runner wrote: »

Sorry but any idiot can pass the exam so having them re sit it is a waste of time.

Life time ban instead

yeah, this is not a failure to follow the rules of the road; this is assault/GBH/call it what you will. it does not state in the ROTR 'you must not use your vehicle as a deadly weapon' so skill at driving does not enter the equation.

amcalester · 13-09-2017 10:08pm

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Not sure why you are pointing this out as twitter video is not what could be considered journalism but was it obvious to the cyclist that the gates were closed? I don't know the road but they looked open to me when the cyclist appears.

Yeah, bit harsh to call the cyclist crazy. He may not have been aware that a train was approaching, the gates were open or destroyed by the van.

I didn't notice any flashing lights either.

magicbastarder · 13-09-2017 10:14pm

amcalester wrote: »

I didn't notice any flashing lights either.

it was YOU! (pantomime gasp)

AndrewJRenko · 13-09-2017 11:01pm

papu wrote: »

I think drivers should be retested more frequently, definitely somebody who uses their car as a weapon like this, or is involved in reckless or dangerous behavior should have their license taken away and be forced to resit the DTT and driving exam ...

The whole idea of a once-in-a-lifetime test is pure nonsense. It has no impact on driving skills or levels 10 years later or 40 years later. We certainly need regular retesting.

13-09-2017 11:04pm

Looks like we need to see this one again :pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzWOwHVjr58

HivemindXX · 13-09-2017 11:42pm

average_runner wrote: »

Sorry but any idiot can pass the exam so having them re sit it is a waste of time.

Psychological testing. Some people just don't have the emotional stability to be allowed drive a car.

I'm interested to know what caused this rude gesture from the cyclist in the first place. In my experience that rarely happens unless the motorist did something to annoy or endanger the other party. Based on what happened next I have to suspect some incompetent or aggressive driving was what started this whole chain of events, not a cyclist randomly giving someone the finger for no reason.

average_runner · 14-09-2017 9:37am

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Not sure why you are pointing this out as twitter video is not what could be considered journalism but was it obvious to the cyclist that the gates were closed? I don't know the road but they looked open to me when the cyclist appears.

Twitter is a form of journalism, it is used to broadcast news!!!
And two gates were down when the cyclist when through, in bits though.
The cyclist would heard the ban as he/she came through 6 seconds later!!
Can't see the lights flashing due to the angle of the video clip.

average_runner · 14-09-2017 9:39am

HivemindXX wrote: »

Psychological testing. Some people just don't have the emotional stability to be allowed drive a car.

I'm interested to know what caused this rude gesture from the cyclist in the first place. In my experience that rarely happens unless the motorist did something to annoy or endanger the other party. Based on what happened next I have to suspect some incompetent or aggressive driving was what started this whole chain of events, not a cyclist randomly giving someone the finger for no reason.

I wouldn't be too worried what causes the gesture from the cyclist, it will never excuse what the driver did.

Pinch Flat · 14-09-2017 9:41am

average_runner wrote: »

I wouldn't be too worried what causes the gesture from the cyclist, it will never excuse what the driver did.

Reading between the lines, rags like the Indo would suggest that the cyclist deserved it. I mean, how dare he give the middle finger to one of our cosseted drivers?

what_traffic · 14-09-2017 10:18am

average_runner wrote: »

Twitter is a form of journalism, it is used to broadcast news!!!
And two gates were down when the cyclist when through, in bits though.
The cyclist would heard the ban as he/she came through 6 seconds later!!
Can't see the lights flashing due to the angle of the video clip.

Here is the Google Streetview of the crossing.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.1002807,-8.8133909,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMI4IMhCDZJ715SqZkeibNg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DMI4IMhCDZJ715SqZkeibNg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D181.4085%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Moflojo · 14-09-2017 10:54am

what_traffic wrote: »

Here is the Google Streetview of the crossing.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.1002807,-8.8133909,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMI4IMhCDZJ715SqZkeibNg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DMI4IMhCDZJ715SqZkeibNg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D181.4085%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I know that crossing well. There is a long, relatively straight road leading up to it in both directions. Based on the video, the only conclusion I can come to is that the driver was distracted by something (what could it be?) and didn't see the gate coming down until the last moment. It was quite fortunate that there wasn't another car, cyclist, or pedestrian waiting at the opposite side of the crossing or the van driver would have ploughed into them.

The cyclist shouldn't have crossed the tracks, granted, but it's wrong of Irish Rail to imply that the actions of the van driver and the cyclist are somehow equivalent.

https://twitter.com/dublincycling/status/908247226237046784

what_traffic · 14-09-2017 10:56am

https://twitter.com/dublincycling/status/908247226237046784[/QUOTE]
Agree 100% with this tweet.

Chips Lovell · 14-09-2017 11:01am

Sorry, but why is the cyclist somehow less culpable than the van driver?

RayCun · 14-09-2017 11:07am

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Sorry, but why is the cyclist somehow less culpable than the van driver?

The cyclist is an idiot, driving through a level crossing with flashing lights, and he's just seen why the barriers aren't down.

The van driver is a destructive idiot, driving through a level crossing with flashing lights, and breaking the barriers on the way.

what_traffic · 14-09-2017 11:08am

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Sorry, but why is the cyclist somehow less culpable than the van driver?

Well who has cost IR a couple of €€€€ in repairs, yet lad on the bike is the only one who's mental health is called into question by IR?

Moflojo · 14-09-2017 11:08am

RayCun wrote: »

The cyclist is an idiot, driving through a level crossing with flashing lights, and he's just seen why the barriers aren't down.

The van driver is a destructive idiot, driving through a level crossing with flashing lights, and breaking the barriers on the way.

And fleeing the scene.

Chips Lovell · 14-09-2017 11:14am

Both of them could have caused a serious accident. Emergency braking can lead to derailment.

Moflojo · 14-09-2017 11:22am

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Both of them could have caused a serious accident. Emergency braking can lead to derailment.

Chances are the driver of the train would already have received an automated warning as soon as there was an impact with the gates. It could be assumed that the cyclist made this assumption too and calculated the risk before crossing the tracks. It could also be assumed that cyclist would not have crossed the tracks had the barriers been down.

There are multiple mitigating factors surrounding the cyclist's actions, even though what the cyclist did is still ultimately wrong.

There are no mitigating factors for what the van driver did. Even if there was a genuine reason for the van driver striking the crossing, by choosing to drive away afterwards the driver has eliminated any possibility for mitigation.

Chips Lovell · 14-09-2017 11:24am

I think your reply speaks for itself. I'll leave it there.

RayCun · 14-09-2017 11:25am

Moflojo wrote: »

It could be assumed that the cyclist made this assumption too and calculated the risk before crossing the tracks. It could also be assumed that cyclist would not have crossed the tracks had the barriers been down.

:pac::pac::pac:
It could more credibly be assumed that the cyclist thought, "I don't see the train, so I'm grand"

buffalo · 14-09-2017 11:52am

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Both of them could have caused a serious accident. Emergency braking can lead to derailment.

Correct, but only one of them caused criminal damage to property by driving dangerously at speed through closing level crossing barriers and then fled the scene after causing the damage.

check_six · 14-09-2017 12:13pm

buffalo wrote: »

Correct, but only one of them caused criminal damage to property by driving dangerously at speed through closed level crossing barriers and then fled the scene after causing the damage.

Ah look, if the van man didn't see the flashing lights, and he didn't see the descending barriers, he can hardly be expected to notice the self-same barriers bouncing off the front of his van and scattering all over the road. Sheesh, give a working man a break! :eek:

The cyclist on the other hand, if my sources at Irish Rail are correct, is some kind of escaped lunatic who should be given a fair trial and then hanged. :rolleyes:

Moflojo · 14-09-2017 12:16pm

check_six wrote: »

The cyclist on the other hand, if my sources at Irish Rail are correct, is some kind of escaped lunatic who should be given a fair trial and then hanged. :rolleyes:

I believe your understanding of a witchhunt is flawed. The suspect is generally hanged, dunked, or burned alive first, with their guilt or innocence only definitively proven depending on the outcome.

average_runner · 14-09-2017 12:20pm

buffalo wrote: »

Correct, but only one of them caused criminal damage to property by driving dangerously at speed through closing level crossing barriers and then fled the scene after causing the damage.

True but either two of them could of cause a train driver life to be ruined.

Maybe think of some one else here.

Journalism and cycling

Comments