Carryfast that’s my point exactly, nobody gets penalised for what they get up to, if they did then they might think twice. I would have to disagree with relatively long prison sentences. Have you looked at what you can get? It’s laughable. I don’t care if you like cyclists or not a £35 fine for killing someone is less than anyone would accept as fair. There are plenty instances when drivers have got away with killing cyclists and have not recieved a jail sentence at all. Trust me it’s the best way to get away with murder in this country.
As for what happens in Germany, I don’t care, I dont live there, if you want that go move there. You will find their cyclists are better protected on the road and in the courts.
Of course the redesign will stop this;
From my personal collection of muppetry
Mate, twonks like that are normal over here !
Slackbladder:
Carryfast that’s my point exactly, nobody gets penalised for what they get up to, if they did then they might think twice. I would have to disagree with relatively long prison sentences. Have you looked at what you can get? It’s laughable. I don’t care if you like cyclists or not a £35 fine for killing someone is less than anyone would accept as fair. There are plenty instances when drivers have got away with killing cyclists and have not recieved a jail sentence at all. Trust me it’s the best way to get away with murder in this country.
As for what happens in Germany, I don’t care, I dont live there, if you want that go move there. You will find their cyclists are better protected on the road and in the courts.
Typical raving militant cyclist agenda in which they put themselves in danger in examples of the typical left turn type accident and then want drivers sentenced to violent criminal levels of penalties in the event of the inevitable accidents which result.
Since when was the penalty for the the charge of dangerous driving,let alone if it results in a fatality,just £35 
and as I said previously shown by this post having a low cab height and loads of glass,as in the case of a bus,makes no difference in the case of most cyclist v large vehicle accidents. 
usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/o … 56662772/1
cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sent … s_driving/
standard.co.uk/news/bus-driv … 09415.html
As I’ve said getting cyclists onto the pavements,and making them as responsible for avoiding accidents with pedestrians on the pavement,as they seem to want drivers to be in avoiding accidents with cyclists on the road,would save a lot more lives than allowing the present situation of cycling anarchy on the roads which expects drivers to go to jail whenever and every time that situation inevitably goes pear shaped.
While the total national figures of cycling fatalities seem to confirm that the problem is one of mixing cyclists with motorised traffic in general nothing to do with trucks in isolation.Together with confirming ( with some exceptions ironically not involving trucks ) the fact that cyclists by definition often don’t seem to be all that bright in looking after their own safety.On the basis that cycling on the road mixed with motorised traffic is an unnacceptable risk for all concerned and riding a cycle defencively is just as,if not more,essential as driving a motor vehicle defencively,if they choose to ride the things on the road.
Slackbladder:
There are plenty instances when drivers have got away with killing cyclists and have not recieved a jail sentence at all.
Because in those instances it was the idiot cyclist’s fault?
It’s like talking to little kids on here sometimes, I will type slowly so you understand. IMO the reason cyclists & drivers go on the way they do, because despite your one eyed view, some truckers do drive poorly, drivers v licence holders anyone, and we all make errors, is because there are no real penalties for breaking road rules. If there is no real punishment for committing a crime then people will break the law,cycling on the pavement for instance, it’s illegal but people do it all the time. It’s not illegal to ride up the side of a vehicle, stupid but not illegal.
It doesn’t matter how much glass a truck has, or how low it is, or how low the driver sits, if the driver doesn’t look he wouldn’t see anyone. I don’t have a blind spot with my mirrors so is the blind spot a myth, a bit like global warming?
The £35 fine for killing a cyclist is fact, sentence handed down by Solihull magistrates in jan to a taxi driver, hit the cyclist and killed him, carried him on the bonnet for 90 mtrs before hitting a tree. He gave up his taxi licence voluntarily but, as he was in his late 50s and he’d suffered enough a fine was thought to be sufficient. Justice my arse.
Just as a follow up to the courts giving out a £35 fine for killing a cyclist, later that week they fined a woman £110 for hitting a parked car and driving off. Now that’s real justice.
Slackbladder:
Just as a follow up to the courts giving out a £35 fine for killing a cyclist, later that week they fined a woman £110 for hitting a parked car and driving off. Now that’s real justice.
A dead person doesnt need money… But that poor car, £110 only just gets a decent valet. 
Kerbdog:
Leyland had the roadrunner with extra quarter panel for viewing the kerb !
Ford put an extra window in (so did Renault some years later) in which you were supposed to be able to see the cyclist.
The DAF LF/Renault range still have that option, there was one in the bodybuilders last time we were there.
One in three motorists who kill and maim do no jail time
Driving dangerously, drunk or under the influence of drugs does not guarantee a prison term
A third of drivers who kill or maim on the roads escape prison, with a large number just carrying out community punishments.
In a study of 405 drivers who were convicted of dangerous driving, driving under the influence of alchohol or drugs, or driving a stolen car, al of which resulted in death or serious injury for another person, only one in three did any jail time at all.
Out of the 255 motorists who went to prison, 21 were given less than six months and 104 were jailed for under two years. Just 37 - around one in seven - got sentences of over five years, according to the Telegraph.
Although the maximum sentence for dangerous driving was lengthened from 10 years to 14 years in 2004, no driver has ever been given the highest tariff.
According to the Telegraph:
For the most serious offences - driving with a “deliberate decision or flagrant disregard” for the rules of the road - the starting point for judges when choosing a sentence is eight years. It can be longer if more than one person was killed, if the driver had previous offences and if they were driving while disqualified or in a stolen vehicle.
However, if the driving was creating only a “significant” danger - the lowest level of seriousness, the starting point for sentencing judges is three years and the maximum term is five. The sentence is shortened if the driver was also injured, the victim was a friend or they were “unwittingly” on drink or drugs.
Under rules applied to all criminals, a driver who pleads guilty before trial will see their sentence automatically reduced by a third, and most will be released on licence after serving half their sentence — meaning their period in jail could be a matter of months.
Stephen Barclay, the Tory MP for North East Cambridgeshire, is campaigning for tougher sentences following the death of one of his constituents. He has set up a website, StopDangerousDriving.com.
Of course, the problem as identified by many cycle campaigners, is that very few drivers who hit cyclists are charged as dangerous drivers.
This is because it is easier to secure a conviction for careless driving, although the maximum jail term for that charge is only five years.
Tougher sentences tend to be imposed only where there are other aggravating factors, such as the motorist involved driving without insurance or while disqualified, or if the vehicle involved in the incident has been stolen.
According to British Cycling, the sentencing in cases where a cyclist has lost their life or been seriously injured “frequently undermine confidence in the justice system and send the wrong message about how we as a society value life and the right of people to travel safely,” although it points out that “the police, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the courts believe they are correctly following the priorities, guidelines and laws that are currently in place.”
British Cycling is now asking for a review of the entire system surrounding how such incidents are investigated and how their prosecution is handled.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: "Within the limits set by Parliament, it is for independent judges to decide on the appropriate sentence for an offender. In doing so they will take into account all details of the offence including any aggravating or mitigating circumstances and sentencing guidelines.
“Dangerous driving can destroy lives and have a devastating effect on victims and their family and friends. That is why we have introduced an additional offence of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, with a maximum penalty of 5 years."
Related stories
Woman charged with killing teenage cyclist while over drink drive limit
Three held after cyclist killed in east London
Court that handed down £35 fine for collision that killed cyclist decides on £110 fine for hitting parked
Cyclists should not be on the road, they are a dangerous nuisance.
Wobbling about two abreast is just asking to be wiped out.
A two inch flashing light strapped under their seat is hardly going to be seen amongst a sea of rear lights.
Cheggy:
Cyclists should not be on the road, they are a dangerous nuisance.
Wobbling about two abreast is just asking to be wiped out.
A two inch flashing light strapped under their seat is hardly going to be seen amongst a sea of rear lights.
youtube.com/watch?v=12fMTAQyXTI
tale of two different cyclist even after being warned the ■■■■■■ still does it the trucker would of been blamed though
discoman:
Cheggy:
Cyclists should not be on the road, they are a dangerous nuisance.
Wobbling about two abreast is just asking to be wiped out.
A two inch flashing light strapped under their seat is hardly going to be seen amongst a sea of rear lights.youtube.com/watch?v=12fMTAQyXTI
tale of two different cyclist even after being warned the ■■■■■■ still does it the trucker would of been blamed though
Good post, if every cyclist rode like the dude with the camera then there wouldn’t be a problem. Like i said before there are just chancers.
Slackbladder:
It’s like talking to little kids on here sometimes, I will type slowly so you understand. IMO the reason cyclists & drivers go on the way they do, because despite your one eyed view, some truckers do drive poorly, drivers v licence holders anyone, and we all make errors, is because there are no real penalties for breaking road rules. If there is no real punishment for committing a crime then people will break the law,cycling on the pavement for instance, it’s illegal but people do it all the time. It’s not illegal to ride up the side of a vehicle, stupid but not illegal.
It doesn’t matter how much glass a truck has, or how low it is, or how low the driver sits, if the driver doesn’t look he wouldn’t see anyone. I don’t have a blind spot with my mirrors so is the blind spot a myth, a bit like global warming?
The £35 fine for killing a cyclist is fact, sentence handed down by Solihull magistrates in jan to a taxi driver, hit the cyclist and killed him, carried him on the bonnet for 90 mtrs before hitting a tree. He gave up his taxi licence voluntarily but, as he was in his late 50s and he’d suffered enough a fine was thought to be sufficient. Justice my arse.
It seems to me that you’re just relying on one isolated incident,of which we don’t have the full facts,concerning a cab driver who maybe or maybe not should have been jailed depending on those circumstances ,to then make the case for taking draconian action against ‘all’ drivers,regardless of the circumstances,in the event of accidents involving cyclists and motor vehicles.While no surprise you seem to totally ignore the possibility that in too many cases it is cyclists who put themselves in danger while riding without due consideration for their own safety in addition to the unacceptable risk of cyclists being mixed with motor traffic in general anyway.In which case the cycling lobby seem to just be all about supporting that status quo while at the same time raving about jailing any and every driver who is unlucky enough to be involved in the inevitable results of that situation in addition to in many cases having more suicidal maniacs amongst their own lot than exist among motor vehicle drivers at least in the case of truck and bus drivers.
So as you seem to think that it’s ok to base the whole issue on your isolated example of the cab driver then I’ll just do the same in using my example concerning the bus and cycle collision in this example.No doubt under your bonkers draconian,jail all drivers in the event of collisions with cyclists ideas,the bus driver would have been sent to jail in this case had it resulted in injury or fatality to the cyclist involved.
youtube.com/watch?v=D3mb-JtQ5Vk
I suggest the cycling lot need to get their own house in order,including calling for cyclists to be allowed to use the pavements to get them off the roads,before calling for draconian penalties to be taken against motor vehicle drivers at least so long as there are examples like that one which show the true suicidal mental sate of too many cyclists when they take to the roads.Which maybe explains why judges are often ( rightly ) using a lot of discretion before deciding to wreck someone’s life by sending them to jail,for doing nothing more than using a motor vhicle on the road and being unlucky enough to get involved with a suicidal maniac riding a bicycle as shown in that video. 
FarnboroughBoy11:
discoman:
Cheggy:
Cyclists should not be on the road, they are a dangerous nuisance.
Wobbling about two abreast is just asking to be wiped out.
A two inch flashing light strapped under their seat is hardly going to be seen amongst a sea of rear lights.youtube.com/watch?v=12fMTAQyXTI
tale of two different cyclist even after being warned the ■■■■■■ still does it the trucker would of been blamed though
Good post, if every cyclist rode like the dude with the camera then there wouldn’t be a problem. Like i said before there are just chancers.
Id bet that the ■■■■■■ who went along the side of the wagon would be one of the same lot who’d whinge about vehicles not leaving enough room while overtaking them. The best bit concerning that video is that it actually shows the valuable contribution to road safety of cyclists using the pavements instead of the roads in this case which has actually been made available to them.Which even the idiot who stayed behind the truck seems to have ignored and preferrred to put himself at risk by staying on the road amongst the traffic.
Carryfast do you even read other posts? As I have put in other posts there are no draconian sentences, for anyone be they cyclists or drivers, as shown in my last effort. I’ve stated before that if it’s your fault then you should pay the consequences, how’s that ignoring the fact that cyclists put themselves in danger? I am fully aware that they do, I’ve seen them do it. On the other hand you seem to think that no driver is ever at fault in accidents with bikes. At least I can admit that some, not all by a long way, cyclists are complete tools on the road. It seems that as soon as you mention cyclist on this forum, all drivers become blameless road gods that should not have to mix with the riff raff bike users, whose sole intention is to throw themselves under the nearest truck so the driver goes to jail for years. Odd that the majority of other threads detail how bad some drivers are. Your own posts clearly show incidents where it’s the drivers fault, the bus driver for instance, or is it the cyclists fault that he ploughed into the back of her at 26 mph because he wasn’t looking? The taxi incident is an indication of how lenient courts are to drivers. It’s one incident, I don’t need to list them all as it would take too long.
Cyclists have as much right to be on the road as anyone else, read your HWC if your not sure. Get over yourself.
Carryfast:
Slackbladder:
youtube.com/watch?v=D3mb-JtQ5Vk
Very noticeable that after presumably damaging both the bus and the pick-up truck that the cyclist slopes off. Wouldn’t really make much difference to the vehicle owners any way because the cyclist is UNINSURED.
cav551:
Carryfast:
Slackbladder:
youtube.com/watch?v=D3mb-JtQ5VkVery noticeable that after presumably damaging both the bus and the pick-up truck that the cyclist slopes off. Wouldn’t really make much difference to the vehicle owners any way because the cyclist is UNINSURED.
Ayup,how do you know hes not insured? Lots of cyclists are and he looks like a courier so maybe some insurance through his job. 
Magistrates in Solihull have fined a taxi driver £35 and given him three penally points for an incident last year which he collided with a cyclist and then carried him for a further 90 metres on the bonnet of his car colliding with traffic signs and eventually hitting a tree. 20 year old animation student Tom Ridgway died of his injuries shortly afterwards.
At the conclusion of the case Mr Ridgway’s family called for tougher punishments for drivers who kill. The incident will be seen as further evidence of the need for change by those calling on the Government to undertake a review of the lenient sentences given to drivers who kill or injure cyclists and other vulnerable road users.
In this case 54-year-old taxi driver Ichhapal Bhamra was charged with the much lesser offence of driving without due care and attention rather than facing the more serious charge of causing death by dangerous driving - which usually carries a custodial sentence, or causing death by careless driving which results in a long ban, heavy fine and community service.
The Crown Prosecution Service opted for the lesser charge because it could not determine the cause of the initial collision nor whether Mr Ridgeway had been killed as a result of that impact or from being carried on the bonnet of the car until it collided with the tree.
In mitigation the court was told that Mr Bhamra has since voluntarily given up his taxi licence and that he suffers from post traumatic stress disorder and no longer felt able to drive.
Given that the CPS determined that Bhamra’s was driving without due care and attention some will undoubtedly question why they then did not pursue a charge of causing death by careless driving given that the CPS guidelines say it is merited for:
“A person who causes the death of another person by driving a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, is guilty of an offence”.
While the level of charge brought was a disappointment to Mr Ridgway’s family it is also worth noting that Solihull magistrates did not impose the maximum sentence available to them for the offence. According to the sentencing guidelines those found guilty of careless drive can be given 9 penalty points on their licence and a fine usually amounting to 150 per cent of the defendant’s weekly income.
The magistrates based their sentence on all the evidence presented to them - while our impressions of the case come from the report in The Solihull News, but even so both the charge and the sentence handed down will be seen as troubling by cycle safety campaigners and many in the wider cycling community…
Commenting on the charge, the sentence and the effect Tom’s death had had on his family his mother, Liz Ridgway told the Solihull New that:
“Neither the charge not the sentence reflect the enormous tragedy of a young man’s death when he was simply cycling along next to the pavement,” she said.
“It’s devastated our lives and there will be no going back.”
Mrs Ridgway went on to pay tribute to her son saying:
“Tom was a generous and exceptionally warm-hearted young man, making friends wherever he went and sharing his sunny, optimistic love of life with everyone he met.
“Everyone who knew him, misses his beautiful smile and genuine warmth. It is impossible to express how much Tom is loved by his family and friends and how special he was.”
Solihull MP Lorely Burt said she was “shocked and disgusted” by the sentence and pledged to look into the case. Last month representatives of CTC, British Cycling, and RoadPeace met with Justice Minister, Helen Grant to call for a review of sentencing guidelines, in cases where drivers kill or injure more vulnerable road users. At the meeting Department for Transport official agreed to back “a cross-stakeholder meeting with the different agencies involved to discuss a review of the system and how it might be improved.”
As yet no date has been announced for a follow up meeting,
Slopes off cav? He’s clearly visible on the pavement on the left. Why do you think he has no insurance? Another generalisation profligate on this forum. Oh and btw, you’ve made it look like I posted the video, I didn’t.
I’ve watched it a few times now and I’m struggling to see how it shows the safety of cycling on pavements. You cannot believe it would change their behaviour surely, that’s laughable.