A cyclist has obtained CCTV footage of the terrifying moment a driver on the wrong side of the road knocked him off his bike at the foot of one of North London’s most popular climbs.
Medical student Josh Dey shared footage of the shocking incident with local newspaper The Ham & High, which has uploaded the video to its website.
The hit-and-run collision left him with injuries including a bleed on the brain, knee ligament damage, and his nose “broken into multiple bits.”
Police, who are investigating the incident, asked him to try and obtain the footage.
He said: “What shocked me the most was when I looked up the CCTV was the way he was driving – he was on the wrong side of the road.
“I could even see the guy’s face – it looks like he’s smiling like it’s just a normal day. He hit a cyclist and ran.
“I have seen drivers being reckless but never did I imagine I would ever myself have been hit by a car.”
“I don’t think it’ll deter me in the long-term [from cycling],” he continued, “but I can’t see being back on a bike this year.
“I don’t want to get back on a bike because I don’t want to think about getting hit by a car.”
Anyone with information is requested to call police police on 101 quoting reference number CAD 5769 of April 21.
Swain’s Lane, which is flanked in part by the eastern and western sides of Highgate Cemetery, is the site of the annual Urban Hill Climb and is popular throughout the year with cyclists from North London wanting to do hill repetitions.
64 thoughts on “Horrific hit and run on Swain’s Lane – North London’s favourite road for hill reps (+ link to video)”
Shocking. Looked as though
Shocking. Looked as though the driver of the BMW was going a bit too quick as well as being on the wrong side of the road. Roof down not a care in the world, driving like a complete arse..
I hope that Thonmoy Josh Dey makes a full recovery and can feel able to ride his bicycle again soon.
Don’t click on the first vid
Don’t click on the first vid link, it seems to be fake. Scroll down to the second which actually works.
Not for the faint hearted, seeing a cyclist tossed up into the air and the driver not even stopping. From the position of the car, I suspect that the driver was used to driving on the right. Given the vids, and the seriousness of this driving, I would hope that the police treat this as a priority and find this bastard soon.
burtthebike wrote:
I think the fact that he had to get his own CCTV footage tells you everything about the priorities here
burtthebike wrote:
If it was accidental driving on the right, they would have took out the black car two seconds earlier. I suspect the car was either too powerful for them when they first pulled off OR they were swinging to avoid something (someone) else off camera. Still either way to just drive off after that would hopefully bring stronger charges then Careless driving but on past experience I honestly doubt it.
What’s the story behind the
What’s the story behind the police asking him to get hold of CCTV coverage?
Are they too busy or something?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-48066573
Butty wrote:
Should we call the police and report the number plate on the CCTV to them as well? As it seems they needed him to get his own footage and now wants extra details when it is very clear the car and the description.
Although of course having number plates don’t mean much unless they happen to be on a cyclist.
Butty wrote:
Don’t know – but this is the second time in a week that I have heard that the victim of a accident had to go find the CCTV footage themselves because the police couldn’t be arsed to do their job…. a bit like the 4kers I see parked up eating mcdonalds and donuts in the countryside on my work commute – apparantly its always lunchtime in the policeforce nowadays.
leqin wrote:
Happened to me some years back here in Hertfordshire. Hit and run, nobody apparantly who stopped got the reg. I suggested to police that he could only have gone down x or y road which has lots of buisnesses and CCTV cameras plus feeding back onto the main industrial road which has even more.
All they were bothered about was asking if I had a different coloured jack despite the reflective strips, my lights and the fact the roundabout was extremely well lit. They couldn’t even get my address correct despite me telling the officer who turned up, I had to ring back twice to remind the officer to sort their shit out and actually investigate. ATEOTD absolutely nothing. Pathetic.
Luckily for me I only had a minor scrpae and a pringled rear wheel but culd so easily have been worse, it’s hardly any surprise the confidence and respect in police is at an all time low!
leqin wrote:
What was ‘accidental’ about that driving? Dangerous definitely, reckless maybe, murderous perhaps, but there’s nothing accidental about driving on the wrong side of the road at high speed in two tonnes of steel and glass.
jh27 wrote:
The answer is that we suppose that the driver did not deliberately set out with intent to mow down the cyclist. However outraged we might be by what did happen, we must reserve some further margin for the case where the action is deliberate. If that does prove to be the case then the crime is all the more serious and deserving even greater sentence.
Sriracha wrote:
What was ‘accidental’ about that driving? Dangerous definitely, reckless maybe, murderous perhaps, but there’s nothing accidental about driving on the wrong side of the road at high speed in two tonnes of steel and glass.
— leqin The answer is that we suppose that the driver did not deliberately set out with intent to mow down the cyclist. However outraged we might be by what did happen, we must reserve some further margin for the case where the action is deliberate. If that does prove to be the case then the crime is all the more serious and deserving even greater sentence.— Butty
Arguably, the driver did deliberately set out to cause injury to someone by driving with reckless abandon. They may not have been targetting a specific person, but I would consider it a deliberate attack.
You could draw a parallel with terrorists using a vehicle to drive into a crowd of people – no specific target intended, but still a deliberate attack.
Sriracha wrote:
What was ‘accidental’ about that driving? Dangerous definitely, reckless maybe, murderous perhaps, but there’s nothing accidental about driving on the wrong side of the road at high speed in two tonnes of steel and glass.
— leqin The answer is that we suppose that the driver did not deliberately set out with intent to mow down the cyclist. However outraged we might be by what did happen, we must reserve some further margin for the case where the action is deliberate. If that does prove to be the case then the crime is all the more serious and deserving even greater sentence.— Butty
As I said on the other thread – that ‘margin’ is a very small one, small-to- non-existent. Putting too much emphasis on it just enables the socially-and-politically powerful to get away with things the less powerful can’t. Because the former can commit serious harm without having to put the same level of mental effort into it that the latter have to.
In the end I don’t know I care that much about the details of what thoughts someone has in their heads at the time when they commit a harmful act.
Butty wrote:
The Met can’t be arsed acting for (broadly) similar reasons that they couldn’t be arsed investigating the murder of Stephen Lawrence.
They were (and are) institutionally racist and they are institutionally anti-cycling.
If it’s on fake plates
If it’s on fake plates (likely if the Police can’t find out who it was) then hopefully whoever repaired it for the damage remembers it and reports the driver/owner. The marks left by that type of incident are quite distinctive.
StuInNorway wrote:
Using the DVLA website, the car shows up as taxed and MOTd. It is registered as the same black BMW convertible model as in the video. That said, it could have been a cloned car. But with the police knowing the reg no, it should take them seconds to locate the registered vehicle. A quick examination of it would reveal any damage, or any recent repairs too. The driver would be fairly easy to identify using the video.
I know the police are pushed to the limit due to cuts, but this is not a complex case to follow up. Quite the reverse in fact.
Starting to wonder if the
Starting to wonder if the police are operating under sharia law or something. Maybe they need 7 righteous male witnesses or something before they can be bothered to do anything.
All I can say is I’m
All I can say is I’m impressed with the speed that 3 people went to his aid.
The rest of the story makes no sense – asked to find CCTV???
Met gonna Met. A bigger waste
Met gonna Met. A bigger waste of money and oxygen you couldn’t imagine. I’m embarrassed to say I wanted to be a copper when I was a nipper. Useless prats they are.
Still, at least they know how to throw some shapes at the Notting Hill carnival. What a way to earn your keep.
I saw this earlier today and
I saw this earlier today and honestly had to take a moment to process what I’d just seen. I just cannot compute what kind of human would find it acceptable to mow somebody down & then drive off.
I know this site is full of this kind of shit but this is one of the worst ones in my humble opinion!
Possibly off their heads on
Possibly off their heads on coke/crack whatever. Hard to tell but possibly deliberate. Didn’t look like they were at all bovered.
squidgy wrote:
How do you accidentally drive so much over the speed limit and on the wrong side of the road? In what way could it possibly not be ‘deliberate’?
Plod are useless cunts.
Plod are useless cunts.
Well, Halliwell, I hope one
Well, Halliwell, I hope one day you have need of the police and they tell you to fuck off because you called them useless cunts. Every professions has its wankers, skivers and dodgers. Even the one you’re in. I’ve met surgeons who are absolute arseholes, pilots who are complete philandering wankers, digger drivers who are so bereft of humanity they shouldn’t draw oxygen on the same planet as my children. However, most surgeons, pilots, police and digger drivers are really good people, just like you probably are. However, in your job you probably don’t, every friday, saturday and sunday night, take time away from your family to drag back to theirs, mewling puking abusive sons-of-bitches who threaten you and your family, spit on you,bite, kick and scratch you and call you the most foul abuse available.
In spite of BTBS experiences (his wheel was buckled and handlebar tape was torn, but he expects plod to drop all they are doing and seek out whatever reprobate so inconvenienced him; ignoring the plight of the assaulted, raped, murdered, terminally and mentally ill, and the lonely, lost and lovelorn, so they can chase down someone who he admits didn’treally do much damage) most police (my friends, family members and members of my community) who have turned out and assisted when I have been assaulted, reported an abducted child, reported car crashes or other problems, have largely been helpful, empathetic, decent and done the best they can with the resources they have available. I can speak of experience of UK and NZ police.
Really, I hope one day your child is abducted, your daughter raped, your elderly mother’s home burgled or you are simply mugged in a back alley. And then you have the basic human decency, when you inevitably call them, to thank the decent, kind human beings who come to assist you and apologise sincerely to their face for calling them useless cunts. Because to do any less would mean you’re a useless, two faced, bigotted prick, who quite frankly isn’t worth their time.
Drivers, cyclists, police, politicians. They’re all human beings who, by and large are as decent as you and I, and who have chosen and engage in their activity with the best of intent, but find themselves, on occasion, hamstrung by rules, regulations, and priorities that may not conveniently coincide with yours.
madcarew wrote:
…to hope that someone gets raped because their father is of the opinion that the police are largely useless?
srchar wrote:
I gave him a range of opportunities to require the help of the police, all of which I have first or second hand experience of. And every time the police have responded they have been awesome. Not one of them was a useless cunt. So, you can single that example out, or take the (rather coarsely and clumsily put) point that there is a whole range of roles the police fill, anyone of which he might require at any time and which he might hope would take precedence over a pretzeled wheel, or an ‘altercation’ one friday night.
To be utterly clear, I don’t wish rape on anyone (nor child abduction or any other violence).
srchar wrote:
Oops.
madcarew wrote:
Not all policemen and policewomen are evil, twisted c**ts.
Just most of them.
The good ones are a minority, and that minority is prevented from doing any good through political decisions.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/02/police-officer-london-lost-control-streets-knife-crime-cuts
The rot in the police – just as in almost every single other sphere of British society – started in 1979, when the language of ‘the market’ started to be applied to a service the role of which was to protect lives and property.
madcarew wrote:
I’ve never been tempted to report someone to the administrators before, but your persistent and unjustified use of inappropriate language and frankly disgusting hopes are making me think seriously about it. You might use language and scenarios like that in your job, but there is no excuse for them here.
Madcarew… you Sir, are an
Madcarew… you Sir, are an idiot.
They are useless cunts, and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded. Just because they pick up drunks etc as you so put it from the town centre of an evening does not make them heroes.
You just have to look at recent history, with the mis-handling of evidence in court cases/poor methods of evidence gathering/low conviction rates/lack of local knowledge to see my point.
I have come to need them once before after being involved in an altercation. With my hand and face injured, 3 people pointing out the cretin who run me over, clear number plate on video and security cam footage from 2 shops, they still couldn’t convict.
I imagine you are probably a copper, judging by your diatribe?
Hopeless.
I stand by my point.
Halliwell wrote:
And I offered the probability that you are a decent human being. Perhaps in assessing my idiocy we have common ground on my character judgement?
I am a builder, not a policeman.
You tar them all with the same brush having come to need them once. Well done.
You are of course aware that it is not the job of the police to convict? Clearly you are, otherwise you would be deluded. And probably an idiot.
Your point is based on evidence as robust as that of any flat earther. Really, it needs sharpening.
As I pointed out in my ‘diatribe’ all professions have their idiots (even yours, and apparently mine) however, we’d not all like to be judged on the actions of those few members of our profession who aren’t the sharpest tack, would we.
Let me be perfectly clear, I don’t wish rape or violence on any member of your family or anyone else. I do hope that one day you get another personal occasion to re-assess the capabilities of the police.
Halliwell wrote:
Is this from first hand experience with every force in the UK?
Does it include the truly magnificent West Midlands roads team, whose work has positively influenced the attitude towards vulnerable road users in virtually every force in the country (and just about everyone they’ve come into contact with)?
madcarew has a very valid argument. It applies to every single occupation and group, whether police officers, Muslims, cyclists, BMW drivers…
Tarring all of a group with the same brush because of the (in)action of a tiny minority on one occasion is the kind of knuckle-dragging, lazy, ignorant, shit-stirring bollocks that does not belong in a vaguely intelligent conversation between adults. Contributions like the ones you’ve posted so far on this topic are tantamount to abuse, they derail any debate and are poison for internet discourse in general.
Perhaps you should try doing work experience scraping up the remains road crash victims and informing their relatives, dealing with violent drug dealers or some other easy-peasy part of their overpaid, glamorous lifestyle.
@madcarew – I don’t think you
@madcarew – I don’t think your reaction is at all proportionate. The facts are that the police in this case are being useless and failing to do their job as we (the public) sees it and so maybe some verbal abuse is justified if it’ll get them off their arses.
hawkinspeter wrote:
How has calling an entire tribe “useless cunts” ever helped to mend the behaviour of the few?
Ever? It’s as ineffectual as it is bigotted, stupid, and base. Really, we want the police on our side. How does that kind of response advance (our) cause one iota? It’s destructive, not constructive. It’s unhelpful. It’s peurile.
My response was to say that most police, like most cyclists, are good decent people, with a few pithy examples.
I agree that it seems weird that the police have asked the man to get his own CCTVcoverage.
However, one has to ask the basic question how has this private citizen got their hands on CCTV footage? Has he told the police the source, is that source available to the police? The police can’t just demand CCTV coverage off someone. They need a search warrant or court order, which may involve a backlog of days or weeks. It may just be far simpler and quicker for the man to provide it himself. Back to that resources thing. Before those basic questions are resolved, it’s barely fair to blame the police. And before resolving those questions “we, the public, as we see it” are in no position to pass judgement on their efficacy. How much help can we expect from them in the future by jumping to judgement and hurling invective before seeing it from the other side.
People like legs-eleven, BTBS and here Halliwell cast invective at an entire group based on nothing stronger than their own meagre (both BTBS and Halliwell have stated their opinion is largely based on one disappointing interaction for both of them) experience, most of that group who spend most of their time protecting and helping the weakest and most disadvantaged of us (Dont’ believe me? go out on a few evenings with the cops and see their work on the street).
It is no better, or different, than saying “all cyclists are blind useless arrogant cunts” because some of the ones you see run red lights. Ye who is without sin and all that. I would direct the same ire and invective at anyone who would say the same of cyclists. It’s inappropriate, and ultimately, foolish.
Being realistic, it’s not
Being realistic, it’s not unreasonable for the Met to ask if there is any CCTV – without it, there is no case unless there was a witness with accurate details. It is no secret that they are immensely stretched. A lot of problems with justice are not of the police’s making, but every time a decent case comes to nothing or next to nothing it does make my blood boil – as it does the police’s.
I was taken out in a hit and run last year – the police were outstanding and diligent in tracing the culprit . He turned out to be a villain, known to the police, with an alias and all recorded on the system. Driving licence etc in his proper name, car used in a different name (long story) which was the one he habitually used. Essentially summoned under proper name, listed in court under usual name, didn’t turn up. Magistrate’s Clerk bleated about are we sure it’s the right person and made it clear that he, the Clerk, would insist on proof, which is something that the police had not expected given his previous record with the courts and it all fell apart. Police were furious, and said that if it were any consolation, they’d have him again soon for something, and that they would provide all the help they could in getting the insurance sorted. All I had was a witness statement from another driver who saw it and noted the number. All I could say was that it was a silver Vovo XC90. Without anything more than the latter, there would have been nothing the poilice could have done.
nniff wrote:
No, it should be the job of the police to check if there are any CCTV cameras covering the area. I wouldn’t want CCTV footage to just be handed out to anyone who asks (though it is covering a public area) which is why it should be the police requesting the footage for the purpose of law enforcement.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Have a read of the Guardian article that I linked to. I agree that it should be the police’s job, but if the picture painted in the article is true (and it is truly shocking) then it is easily understandable why they can’t.
Where does the fault lie – the overstreteched copper or the politicians who aren’t funding more of them (and the public who elected them)?
hawkinspeter wrote:
And the police have asked for the cctv evidence to be made available to them, by the most propitious avenue available. To demand it otherwise (as pointed out elsewhere) requires a court order or search warrant.
madcarew wrote:
That doesn’t match up with my experiences – maybe for the police to “demand” footage they may require a court order, but they are certainly within their rights to make enquiries and request access to footage.
Just to clarify – my own interactions with police have generally been positive and I don’t subscribe to tarring them all with the same brush. Anecdotally, it does appear that the MET are letting themselves down (maybe they do stirling work in other areas – I don’t know).
Always shocking to see
Always shocking to see something like this, even more so when it’s local and a road I regularly ride. I hope they get the driver.
For those having a go at the police, I’m sure not every copper in the country is perfect, but articles like this https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/02/police-officer-london-lost-control-streets-knife-crime-cuts help provide some context. They have a hard and often thankless job and it’s too simplistic simply write off front line police as uncaring when the picture is far more nuanced.
All the Policemen* and women
All the Policemen* and women that I have had contact with; in a work capacity, as a first responder volunteer, as a victim of crime and on the wrong end of a ticking off for motorcycling just a bit too enthusiastically have been professional, fair and reasonable.
*Except the one who gave me a speeding ticket for 34 in a 30 when I was 19 – Obviously he was a total bastard.
@madcarew – you’re right
@madcarew – you’re right about “useless cunts” not being constructive. In my mind, it’s an appropriate response to a dereliction of duty. Your response to that was particularly nasty and uncalled for.
I don’t know about getting the police “on our side” – as far as I understand it, they are paid to do a job and I don’t care if they like or hate me as long as they do their job impartially.
I’d agree that the police being under-resourced is a major problem, but the people best placed to deal with that are the senior police who need to make their case for funding to the politicians or maybe have a series of high profile resignations if they are not being allowed to do their job. It’s not fair, but necessary.
I know of no reason why police cannot ask for CCTV footage – where I work we’ve occasionally been asked for footage where our CCTV also covers a footpath and road. We’re perfectly happy to co-operate and no warrant is required.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Clearly there is an institutional issue within policing where police are neither ‘on our side’, nor impartial. We, as a group, would like to change that. Calling them all useless cunts (even the ones on another article on this site today who speedily facilitated the return of a stolen bike) is worse than not helpful, it’s damaging.
Winning hearts and minds has been a far more effective approach than ‘because you’re paid to’ since roughly forever, and ‘because you’re paid to’ isn’t working that well for us right now, is it?
As for my response, Halliwell called an entire group of people useless cunts (about as strong an invective as available) and I suggested a number of reasons and opportunities for him to change his mind. I didn’t direct any epithet at him, and even suggested he’s probably a decent human being. I don’ think that’s disproportionate or harsh even. To be fair, suggesting that his mother be burgled or daughter be raped was a clumsy and coarse way of making a point that we all may need the help of the services some day, and may well be glad of the non-useless cuntery that may be on display at the time.
Police can ask for CCTV footage, they can not demand it without a search warrant or court order. I can imagine there are a number of reasons why someone might not be keen to hand over their CCTV footage, and I know some institutions will not pass it to authorities without a court order . One might want to ask the basic question how the rider had seen the CCTV footage, but not passed it directly to the police, or given them the contact, or is it in fact poor reporting, and it was someone’s dashcam that the police don’t have access to. It’s all pretty flimsy grounds for calling them useless cunts.
I think I’ve made my point :-/
madcarew wrote:
However you did direct the following at Halliwell which I would consider to be a lot more vindictive than simply calling them a name:
Yep sure, la la la, it must
Yep sure, la la la, it must be awesome forever being right!
There’s some more info on the
There’s some more info on the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-48146526/highgate-hit-and-run-cctv-shows-cyclist-thrown-into-air
Also: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48146525
It’s worth noting that the
It’s worth noting that the police in Kentish Town are seriously under the cosh right now due to a series of stabbings around Queens Crescent. It doesn’t make it right that the victim was asked to go looking for CCTV footage but there is a reason for it.
Bill H wrote:
It’s also worth noting that the police are only ‘under the cosh’ because there are no coppers, and the reason there are no coppers, is because there is no money to hire them. And this is as a result of the changes in public policy in 1979, which (contrary to what most people think) were continued in 1997, and which are still in place today. That is: the language and ideals of free market capitalism applied to formerly public services, like the NHS, transport, education, utilities (gas, water, electricity), mail, and of course to the police. It is an obscenity which should provoke mass demonstrations, that the police are told they have a ‘budget’ and that if the money runs out then tough shit – you can’t investigate any more crime. You can’t police the roads. You can’t hire more officers. Just as it is an obscenity that the NHS are held to budgets. The NHS and the police should not be treated like companies. They need more money as there is more crime, then they get more money. Doctors need more money to buy kidney dialysis machines, or MRI scanners, then they get more money. A politician who refuses them that money, should be dragged by the hair into a public place and destroyed by repeated blows to the head, neck and upper torso from the sharp end of a claw hammer, and then left in public as a reminder of what happens to people who put profit before people.
As a slight tangent, one should also note that what money there is, the police get to spend more or less however they wish, and vanity projects like changing their logo or their ‘slogan’ (and having to spend a couple of million on changing the paint on all of their vehicles as well as buying new stationery etc), or ‘feel good’ tactics like devoting millions of pounds to a ‘positive arrest’ policy where ‘hate crime’ is concerned (which in the overwhelming majority of cases, really just means ‘someone can’t control his or her emotions and demands that the state punish someone who’s offended them’) are probably not the most efficient use of resources.
But globally, the mantra that ‘fewer coppers means more crime’ is only partially true. Most crime is economically motivated, and the official neoliberal mantra of ‘austerity’ to punish those who are already on the lower socio-economic strata for the crimes of the financial sector, and to pay for a bail-out amounting to roughly half a trillion pounds to the UK banks, has caused immeasurable hardship across the entire country with the possible exception of the south east of England. A reduction in policing is only the tip of that particular clusterfuck.
Bill H wrote:
So being maimed/life changing injuries/killed by a person using one type of weapon (a motorvehicle for instance) – which happens very frequently in the UK is less of a concern than someone/people being stabbed, why?
How many stab deaths compared to motoring caused deaths, we know for a fact that KSIs are around 24-25,000 annually plus over 160,000 minor injuries. Stabbings/knife attacks are becoming a problem in some areas of the country but deaths and injuries to people by motovehicle have been a massive problem for decades and continue to be so. I’m not seeing why we should excuse police for not doing their duty because there are other matters at hand of an equally serious nature that has a huge effect on society, more so than stabbings in the vast majority of the country.
I don’t go about worrying about being stabbed but I do worry about been killed or maimed whilst on my bike, not such that I would ever stop cycling but it’s always there in the background virtually every single day.
This is an act of extreme
This is an act of extreme violence, extreme illegal violence. As we are using knife crime as some sort of benchmark, I would suggest that there have been more violent road deaths in London so far this year than there has been knife deaths, 29 as of yesterday, I believe.
The outcry if the victim of a stabbing had been asked to obtain their own CCTV evidence would be deafining, let alone the suspect being SENT A LETTER. Or that this process would have to be started within 2 weeks, (the ridiculous Notice of Impending Prosocution). You would think the seriousness of the Failure to Stop, may remove the NIP time limit, (but you know, war on motorist and all that) and could justify perhaps a knock on the door.
I may not wish to use Halliwell’s language, and would perhaps not want to generalise quite as much but I do understand his anger.
Oh, and wishing and hoping mean pretty much the same thing.
ktache wrote:
As well as the delay for a NIP (it’s ‘Intended’ rather than ‘imminent’, FYI), check outThe Deregulation Act 2015 and its requirement that except for some very narrowly defined circumstances, parking can no longer be enforced via CCTV.
No CCTV means more ‘parking enforcement officers’ need to be hired, and of course, ‘austerity’ means that there isn’t much money to hire them.
Fewer parking penalties equals greater impunity for the selfish, sociopathic c**ts who are drivers, to abandon their cars wherever the fuck they want … equals kerching, hear those votes for the Tories comin’ in!
Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:
As well as the delay for a NIP (it’s ‘Intended’ rather than ‘imminent’, FYI), check outThe Deregulation Act 2015 and its requirement that except for some very narrowly defined circumstances, parking can no longer be enforced via CCTV.
No CCTV means more ‘parking enforcement officers’ need to be hired, and of course, ‘austerity’ means that there isn’t much money to hire them.
Fewer parking penalties equals greater impunity for the selfish, sociopathic c**ts who are drivers, to abandon their cars wherever the fuck they want … equals kerching, hear those votes for the Tories comin’ in!— ktache
I thought that parking enforcement now falls into the hands of local councils except for when the parking is blocking access.
hawkinspeter wrote:
It does, yes. Hence my mention of ‘parking enforcement officers’.
Sorry. I could have been clearer.
Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:
Just FYI, it Is ‘Civil Enforcement Officer’ – because they are civillian council employees who enforce civil offences, unlike traffic wardens who are/were employed by police forces (virtually all (if not all) councils have elected for parking offences de-criminalised in their areas – meaning that the police are no longer repsonsible for enforcing, and also the council gets to keep any fines).
Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:
Yes because most of societies ills stem from the Tories. I doubt a Labour supporter has ever assaulted, robbed, raped or murdered anyone. Only Tories and maybe those Green weirdos.
I voted Tory once and committed a home invasion AND blocked someone’s drive in the same weekend. Never again!
Rick_Rude wrote:
Fewer parking penalties equals greater impunity for the selfish, sociopathic c**ts who are drivers, to abandon their cars wherever the fuck they want … equals kerching, hear those votes for the Tories comin’ in!
— Rick_Rude Yes because most of societies ills stem from the Tories. I doubt a Labour supporter has ever assaulted, robbed, raped or murdered anyone. Only Tories and maybe those Green weirdos. I voted Tory once and committed a home invasion AND blocked someone’s drive in the same weekend. Never again!— Legs_Eleven_Worcester
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html
Hope this helps.
Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:
One of my favourite stats to quote to the “pay some bloody road tax!” mob is that over 80% of people who ride bikes also happen to own cars. You’d do well to remember that.
Also, if you stop seeing absolutely everything in the world through the lens of national politics, your arguments might get taken more seriously.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – surely those of us who frequent this site have learned that labels solve nothing?!
srchar wrote:
I’m always amused by people who say or write things like, ‘I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again’. I mean, we’re hanging on your every word, so we sort of know what you’ve already said.
Anyway, my last question before bed: what in my words or my online ‘demeanour’ gives you the impression that I give a flying shit whether you or anyone else ‘takes my arguments seriously’? Are you so up yourself that you think I seek ‘approval’ from you or from ‘my peers’?
Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:
It always amuses me that people who post their opinion on the web, accompanied by many swears, claim not to care what anyone thinks of it. Especially people who start a thread to tell a forum that they are moving to a different country. It’s rather bizarre behaviour, and a complete waste of time, if you might as well be shouting into a void.
Not sure how that makes me “up” myself. Do you talk to people in real life in the same way you write here? Genuinely interested.
srchar wrote:
Yeah, but some of those who ride bikes and own cars put one of those ahead of the other in deterining their worldview. Some see the world primarily through a car windscreen, even if they might cycle for sport or recreation or a minority of journeys. It’s not about being selfish or being Tories, so much as just your self-interest and experience determines how you see things. “Being determines conciousness”, as someone (definitely not a Tory) once said.
I don’t think it maps that well onto UK party politics in general. There are plenty of petrol heads and motor-industry lobbyists in all parties. But I thought Mr Legs was making a specific point about a specific bit of legislation. In that case it does seem that it was Tories looking for motorist votes.
Just as with Erik Pickles idiotic ruling that councils had to give a longer ‘grace’ period for parking bays (an idea that seemed the very definition of empty pandering, as the length of the base period for parking is surely set by councils in the first place, plus if one motorist parks for longer the next will have more trouble finding a space)
The motorist may not have
The motorist may not have deliberately driven into the cyclist. But the speed at which they were travelling, the side of the road on which they chose to drive and the failing to stop all were deliberate acts, all of which they decided to do.
ktache wrote:
I really hope that I’m not sharing the road with the sort of person who can do this deliberately, but sadly, I can’t actually think of a good reason to be travelling at 30mph on the wrong side of the road outside that parade of shops. There’s a roundabout just out of shot to the left too, which you’d have to approach on the correct side of the road.
The driver must be bricking it about getting his stern letter.
The idiot Pickles also
The idiot Pickles also proposed allowing some parking on double yellows, completely ignoring the effect that that would have had on congestion and safety. It’s also the Tories that proposed Burt’s favorite, the review on road safety, and then pandered to the anticyclist rhetoric and rapidly proposed new laws against Alliston. Because of the obvious this has seemingly found itself in the long grass, but I wager that this grass is shorter than the ones that surround the laws that will make us all safer. The recent Tories have been less War Mongerers than New Labour, to give them their due.
Is there anyway we can close
Is there anyway we can close the comments on this thread. Now that an arrest has been made and all that.
ktache wrote:
And deny Halliwell and a few others the chance to apologies for some of the things they have said about the Police?