I can't believe it.

Although I have some sympathy, I don't feel that much for the bus driver, as he obviously wasn't in a position to do this

hc_rule_163_give_vulnerable_road_users_at_least_as_much_space_as_you_would_a_car.jpg


I always approach leaving enough space for a cyclist to fall off in front of me, and while I'm passing
 
daugs":2i7stcuq said:
just don't understand how can be legal to tint windows to that extent and why the police do nothing about all the cars driving around with it done, the fact the driver cant see properly means everyone else cyclists and drivers alike are at greater, unnecessary risk.




It isnt legal to have anything but the factory tint (which is usually around 17%) fitted to the front windows of any vehicle, the police do stop cars and make them remove the tints when they see them, but they cannot see every car, everywhere, as there simply arent enough officers!


That is properly tragic, i hate people who just fling their doors open, obviously im a rider myself, and i also drive and have as much love for my cars as i do my bikes, drivers like him give all drivers a bad name!

But they will do it with complete disregard for anyone/anything, you wouldve thought he would at least check so as not to have anyone smash into his door ffs!




*edit*



I disagree with the above comment about the bus driver, if the rider was doing a decent pace (ill generalise with my usual 19-20mph pace) then that is enough speed to carry the rider a few feet and into/under the path of the bus, whether he be leaving a decent gap or not!

To speculate that the bus driver may or may not have been too close isnt the issue here, its the fact that had the car driver looked/seen the rider, this would never have happened!
 
In any other circumstances, if someone causes a death due to their own negligence then it is manslaughter. How he got any with this is beyond belief and very sad.
 
andyz":2rxkue78 said:
In any other circumstances, if someone causes a death due to their own negligence then it is manslaughter. How he got any with this is beyond belief and very sad.



Looking again it says in the article that the reason he got away with it is because he was stationary at the time, there was no traffic offence committed due to him not actually driving!

That is a horrific failure on the part of the law, one man is dead, and another who has caused it, has walked away scott free, sickening!
 
I misread the original details of the case, and now my view is less clear.

The car driver set in motion a chain of events, true.

The bus driver had perhaps not taken account of the possibility of the cyclist falling into his path, perhaps was too close.

The jury would have to weigh up what the consequences would have been had the bus not been there. We cannot assume the results would have been the same.

It was never being prosecuted as a driving offence.

The bus driver, were they to face charges, would of course be guilty of a driving related offence.

I had originally thought the cyclist was in a separate cycling lane, and had then been flung across into the path of the bus.

I blame too little sleep, been up talking about the Connecticut situation with my folks across the pond.
 
Back
Top