KonaCommuter wrote: speed camera’s are the source of open hostility
This really REALLY irks me, people constantly moaning on about speed cameras just being 'revenue raising'. Hello, don't speed, PROBLEM SOLVED! .
But if I spent more time looking at the road than worry about 3kmh, I'd be a safer driver. Driving/riding safety is way bigger than a fraction over the already low limit.
But meh, I'll continue to swerve erratically under the limit because "I'm safe under the speed limit"
Yes catching and fining people for speeding is like shooting fish in a barrell. Speeding is just one contributing factor to crashes, not the only one as authorities might have us believe. Careless driving like the silver Commodore in the video clip is far more dangerous. The Commodore quite likely wasn't even speeding (presuming that bit of the road wasn't actually part of the roadworks) yet he still managed to nearly kill the bike rider. There needs to be more marked Police cars and uniformed officers out on the roads. And better road user training - this includes cyclists.
ACT Police confirmed to ninemsn they have made contact with the motorist and are considering whether to press charges. c'mon fellas - slap him with a neg driving charge!!!!!
Colour me surprised - if it was centennial park you would be wondering when the cyclist would be charged.
I was going to buy a fast, stylish bike, but I looked in the mirror & thought "you're not fooling anyone, you know"
Looks like someone from Jims has gone into damage control. Much different attitude to what was displayed on their facebook page:
Andrew Kelly21 minutes ago Good afternoon, It is with some disappointment to find this one-sided story. The headline, Cyclist Catches Hit & Run, suggests that the driver of the vehicle, a Jim’s Mowing franchisee, was aware that he made contact with the cyclist and failed to stop. This is in fact, not the case. Jim's Group has gone to great lengths to make contact with the cyclist. Unfortunately, the franchisee was totally unaware that he made any contact. Jim’s Group first became aware of the accident when it was posted on YouTube. Obviously, when made aware of the accident, Jim’s Group acted immediately. We located and spoke with the franchisee, who was unaware that the accident even occurred. We also made immediate contact with police and reported the accident to them. We believe we were the first to do so. Finally, we e-mailed the cyclist, offering our sincerist apologies and offered in writing to pay for any damage that the accident may have caused to the bicycle. We are yet to hear back from the cyclist, despite three separate e-mails being sent to him. We are hoping to obtain the footage of the accident to show to new franchisees in training, highlighting the challenges of towing a trailer and to ensure that this kind of accident does not occur again. We also want to utilise it internally to educate more of our 3000 Jim’s franchisees. As a group, we are deeply upset that the accident took place and we care for the wellbing of the cyclist. Fortunately, he appears to have escaped any injury. Kind regards, Jim Penman, Jim's Group Founder
Can't confirm is its legitimate, as its just in the comments section of the news
ACT Police confirmed to ninemsn they have made contact with the motorist and are considering whether to press charges. c'mon fellas - slap him with a neg driving charge!!!!!
Colour me surprised - if it was centennial park you would be wondering when the cyclist would be charged.
I cannot believe they have to consider it. But then again refer to my cynical previous post.
jules21 wrote:
Ross wrote:There needs to be more marked Police cars and uniformed officers out on the roads.
who's going to pay for that?
society eventually. with luck greater presence brings about less road trauma. less road trauma leads to less economic impact as a whole. not easy to measure which is why its never done, no direct causal link, just supposition.
Life is not about waiting for the rain to pass.....it's about learning to dance (or ride) in the rain. - anonymous
othy wrote:Looks like someone from Jims has gone into damage control. Much different attitude to what was displayed on their facebook page:
Andrew Kelly21 minutes ago Good afternoon, It is with some disappointment to find this one-sided story. The headline, Cyclist Catches Hit & Run, suggests that the driver of the vehicle, a Jim’s Mowing franchisee, was aware that he made contact with the cyclist and failed to stop. This is in fact, not the case. Jim's Group has gone to great lengths to make contact with the cyclist. Unfortunately, the franchisee was totally unaware that he made any contact. Jim’s Group first became aware of the accident when it was posted on YouTube. Obviously, when made aware of the accident, Jim’s Group acted immediately. We located and spoke with the franchisee, who was unaware that the accident even occurred. We also made immediate contact with police and reported the accident to them. We believe we were the first to do so. Finally, we e-mailed the cyclist, offering our sincerist apologies and offered in writing to pay for any damage that the accident may have caused to the bicycle. We are yet to hear back from the cyclist, despite three separate e-mails being sent to him. We are hoping to obtain the footage of the accident to show to new franchisees in training, highlighting the challenges of towing a trailer and to ensure that this kind of accident does not occur again. We also want to utilise it internally to educate more of our 3000 Jim’s franchisees. As a group, we are deeply upset that the accident took place and we care for the wellbing of the cyclist. Fortunately, he appears to have escaped any injury. Kind regards, Jim Penman, Jim's Group Founder
Can't confirm is its legitimate, as its just in the comments section of the news
othy wrote:Looks like someone from Jims has gone into damage control. Much different attitude to what was displayed on their facebook page:
Unfortunately, the franchisee was totally unaware that he made any contact.
i actually believe that. if you look at the video, i'd say the franchisee probably assumes the cyclist will hug the gutter, leaving him free to turn left across the strange green paint, the purpose of which he doesn't understand but doesn't have time to worry about either.
othy wrote:Looks like someone from Jims has gone into damage control. Much different attitude to what was displayed on their facebook page:
Unfortunately, the franchisee was totally unaware that he made any contact.
i actually believe that. if you look at the video, i'd say the franchisee probably assumes the cyclist will hug the gutter, leaving him free to turn left across the strange green paint, the purpose of which he doesn't understand but doesn't have time to worry about either.
i think it's just gross negligence.
Do not agree myself. He knew (or ought to have known) that the cyclist wasn't hugging the gutter when the vehicle passed the cyclist.
Here is how I see it. This driver, let's call him Jim, is in roadworks, behind two cyclists. Wants to turn left just after where the roadworks end. Gap between cyclists is too small to squeeze through there. So Jim being an impatient numpty,and you know, these cyclists, they only do about 10 km/h, and [insert usual ignorant rant here] accelerates to try and squeeze through the gap. It is apparent he realises quite late it's a bit tight, because his speed is *increasing* as he commences his turn. The driver clearly knew it was tight. He's gunning the engine, you can see the acceleration and hear the engine rumbling.
Having decided to proceed with the LH turn, knowing it's a tight squeeze, he clips the cyclist, and gets on with his day regardless. Possibilities are:
1. He did know; or 2. He did not know.
If he did know and is just lying, the position is obvious.
If he did not know, the question is - why not? Having driven that car in that manner in those circumstances, and obviously knowing he was cutting it tight, to not check to see he got through, to not feel the bump or hear the cries, suggests a level of wiflul blindness. You cannot claim to be truly "not aware" of an accident where you have, by your own actions, and clearly to your own knowledge, created a dangerous situation. Refraining from checking the wing mirror and ignoring the sounds of the incident, are simply not an answer here. Proving beyond reasonable doubt that he did know, is not a simple matter.
But IMO it is highly likely that he either knew, or was wilfully blind to the probable outcome of his actions, which is of course no answer at all.
Frankly, had the damage to Eugene McGee's car been less, I am quite certain Mr McGee would have denied knowledge of any accident at all. In the end it's a character question. Some people behave appropriately when they cause an incident, and some people do not. Jim is of poor character. Persons of poor character, the ones who will not stop, will generally also be willing to lie, prevaricate, delay and avoid, and otherwise only ever own up to the most inconceivable but theoretically possible version of events that provides the best outcome for themselves.
othy wrote:Looks like someone from Jims has gone into damage control. Much different attitude to what was displayed on their facebook page:
Andrew Kelly21 minutes ago Good afternoon, It is with some disappointment to find this one-sided story. The headline, Cyclist Catches Hit & Run, suggests that the driver of the vehicle, a Jim’s Mowing franchisee, was aware that he made contact with the cyclist and failed to stop. This is in fact, not the case. Jim's Group has gone to great lengths to make contact with the cyclist. Unfortunately, the franchisee was totally unaware that he made any contact. Jim’s Group first became aware of the accident when it was posted on YouTube. Obviously, when made aware of the accident, Jim’s Group acted immediately. We located and spoke with the franchisee, who was unaware that the accident even occurred. We also made immediate contact with police and reported the accident to them. We believe we were the first to do so. Finally, we e-mailed the cyclist, offering our sincerist apologies and offered in writing to pay for any damage that the accident may have caused to the bicycle. We are yet to hear back from the cyclist, despite three separate e-mails being sent to him. We are hoping to obtain the footage of the accident to show to new franchisees in training, highlighting the challenges of towing a trailer and to ensure that this kind of accident does not occur again. We also want to utilise it internally to educate more of our 3000 Jim’s franchisees. As a group, we are deeply upset that the accident took place and we care for the wellbing of the cyclist. Fortunately, he appears to have escaped any injury. Kind regards, Jim Penman, Jim's Group Founder
Can't confirm is its legitimate, as its just in the comments section of the news
I now dub Australia the ignorant country. reading some of those comments leaves me in no doubt that we are not so lucky anymore.
I am annoyed with myself - I know better than to listen to talk back radio or read comments on news articles.
I am not sure which is a greater demonstration of stupidity - the comments themselves or the fact that they appear to use their real names.
It would seem some people don't realise just how common it is for people to google their name - prospective employers, insurance co investigators, lawyers who are going to cross examine you etc etc
I was going to buy a fast, stylish bike, but I looked in the mirror & thought "you're not fooling anyone, you know"
I am annoyed with myself - I know better than to listen to talk back radio or read comments on news articles.
I am not sure which is a greater demonstration of stupidity - the comments themselves or the fact that they appear to use their real names.
It would seem some people don't realise just how common it is for people to google their name - prospective employers, insurance co investigators, lawyers who are going to cross examine you etc etc
yes I took myself out the back and gave myself an uppercut for reading them. you should do the same, self flagellation can be good for you occasionally.
and yes, I know we are not all completely anonymous but you should self vet your own rantings if you don't want to be caught out. a member of another forum once said he was immune to the internet exposure because he used an alias on the forums and never associated with any other members. well he was shocked when some members started digging into his internet presence, knew where he lived, worked, rode his bike and all sorts of other information. so much for anonymity and aliases. the first thing I do when presented with even a glimmer of information nowadays is do an internet search, its absolutely amazing what you can find out with judicious use of search engines and search criteria.
Life is not about waiting for the rain to pass.....it's about learning to dance (or ride) in the rain. - anonymous
Arrrg. Reading some of those comments.. It makes my faith in humanity die a little bit.
It's the cyclists fault he got hit and run by a careless and dangerous driver because...
a. he isn't paying rego and doesn't deserve to be on the road unless he does. b. cyclists shouldn't be on the road, ever (even if they paid rego, that's just a fee to be allowed to exist). c. simply because he's a person riding a bicycle instead of driving a car like all the other rednecks.
That's it. I quit.
Check out my practical cycling and cycle touring website:VELOPHILE AUSTRALIA
You forgot the "might is right" argument posed quite often. I'm gonna get me one of these and carve up everything smaller than a b double, that'll show 'em Is there any truth in the argument that the size of ones vehicle is inversely proportional to ones dangly bits? This bloke'd need black pepper to go with the tweezers and magnifying glass
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic. London Boy 29/12/2011
That's hilarious. You need a forklift .... just to see into the back tray
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
rogan wrote: Jim is of poor character. Persons of poor character, the ones who will not stop, will generally also be willing to lie, prevaricate, delay and avoid, and otherwise only ever own up to the most inconceivable but theoretically possible version of events that provides the best outcome for themselves.
Dealing with young people who often have done something that contravenes the rules, I am absolutely stunned and amazed how they will argue black is white and deny any responsibility, lying bare-faced, even when the evidence against them is blatantly clear..... even when I have seen the misdemeanour.
Lying to save your arse has become an Australian cultural value I'm afraid
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
ldrcycles wrote:But if I spent more time looking at the road than worry about 3kmh, I'd be a safer driver. Driving/riding safety is way bigger than a fraction over the already low limit.
But meh, I'll continue to swerve erratically under the limit because "I'm safe under the speed limit"
I would think that if you lack the situational awareness to know when you are exceeding the speed limit then you are probably missing a number of other things as well. If you are having trouble keeping below the speed limit and keeping a good lookout then you should slow down. Simple really.
ACT Police confirmed to ninemsn they have made contact with the motorist and are considering whether to press charges. c'mon fellas - slap him with a neg driving charge!!!!!
That is good news. WRT the debate over who was in the right I would think that would be clear from the video.
Last edited by exadios on Sun Jul 01, 2012 12:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ACT Police confirmed to ninemsn they have made contact with the motorist and are considering whether to press charges. c'mon fellas - slap him with a neg driving charge!!!!!
That is good news. WRT the debate over was in the right I would think that would be clear from the video.
Oops... started reading the comments. I must be a masochist.
Honestly though, all this constant chatter about rego/road tax, rights to be on the road etc makes you think that people have NFI what they are talking about? How can these people be allowed to finish school without understanding such basic laws and principles? We need to have a massive and ongoing public awareness campaign to drive the point home to these people.
Check out my practical cycling and cycle touring website:VELOPHILE AUSTRALIA
elStado wrote: How can these people be allowed to finish school without understanding such basic laws and principles?
Who said "they" actually finished school at all ?
Myself personally finished year 12, BUT played sport every chance I could, didn't take any interest in what was being taught & was thrust into the construction industry at age 17. The first thing you're taught from fellow construction workers is to drink until you vomit, buy a really fast ute & HATE cyclists. Oh & don't forget to smoke heaps & women belong in the kitchen.
ACT Police confirmed to ninemsn they have made contact with the motorist and are considering whether to press charges. c'mon fellas - slap him with a neg driving charge!!!!!
That is good news. WRT the debate over was in the right I would think that would be clear from the video.
Oops... started reading the comments. I must be a masochist.
Honestly though, all this constant chatter about rego/road tax, rights to be on the road etc makes you think that people have NFI what they are talking about? How can these people be allowed to finish school without understanding such basic laws and principles? We need to have a massive and ongoing public awareness campaign to drive the point home to these people.
othy wrote:Looks like someone from Jims has gone into damage control. Much different attitude to what was displayed on their facebook page:
Andrew Kelly21 minutes ago Good afternoon, It is with some disappointment to find this one-sided story. The headline, Cyclist Catches Hit & Run, suggests that the driver of the vehicle, a Jim’s Mowing franchisee, was aware that he made contact with the cyclist and failed to stop. This is in fact, not the case. Jim's Group has gone to great lengths to make contact with the cyclist. Unfortunately, the franchisee was totally unaware that he made any contact. Jim’s Group first became aware of the accident when it was posted on YouTube. Obviously, when made aware of the accident, Jim’s Group acted immediately. We located and spoke with the franchisee, who was unaware that the accident even occurred. We also made immediate contact with police and reported the accident to them. We believe we were the first to do so. Finally, we e-mailed the cyclist, offering our sincerist apologies and offered in writing to pay for any damage that the accident may have caused to the bicycle. We are yet to hear back from the cyclist, despite three separate e-mails being sent to him. We are hoping to obtain the footage of the accident to show to new franchisees in training, highlighting the challenges of towing a trailer and to ensure that this kind of accident does not occur again. We also want to utilise it internally to educate more of our 3000 Jim’s franchisees. As a group, we are deeply upset that the accident took place and we care for the wellbing of the cyclist. Fortunately, he appears to have escaped any injury. Kind regards, Jim Penman, Jim's Group Founder
Can't confirm is its legitimate, as its just in the comments section of the news
stanevelyn wrote:VERY INTERESTING: That the driver did not know that he hit the cyclist.. It begs the question... Was the driver aware that he was towing a trailer?
Whilst the driver says that he did not know that he hit the cyclist, one alternative explanation is that he did not CARE if he hit the cyclist, nor indeed whether the cyclist lived or died.
I was going to buy a fast, stylish bike, but I looked in the mirror & thought "you're not fooling anyone, you know"
find_bruce wrote:Whilst the driver says that he did not know that he hit the cyclist, one alternative explanation is that he did not CARE if he hit the cyclist, nor indeed whether the cyclist lived or died.
another is that he realised that he had hit the cyclist, then quickly determined that his "best" option was to drive off and deny knowledge of hitting him if he got found out. this is pretty obviously at least a possibility, and Jim Penman's purported defense of his franchisee, asserting that he didn't know he'd hit the cyclist, if really posted by him, is self serving.
Saw a HumVee today. Flying several flags... arabic and english writing all over it Black. Syrian Revolution painted on it. No pedestal mounted 50 cal.. but.
THe Aussie army will be selling off several Bushmasters in the next year or so I am told. Hmmmmmmmmmm
exadios wrote:You will note that I did not say that corporations can sue for defamation. I said they can sue for a "type of defamation" - under different legislation.
I mean the only other explanation is that you have no recollection or comprehension of what you said less than 12 hours before.
.
c'mon fellas - slap him with a neg driving charge!!!!!
