Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

It's obvious that the car driver was also at fault for being on the phone, but not to the degree of "dangerous driving" and definately not prison.

What must the cyclist have been thinking? "It's OK, they'll see me" ? Well that's sure to end well isn't it :rolleyes:

I quoted you because I agree, he chose to jump the red, and paid the price for it.

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

I see. I miss read what you wrote.

As to the woman driver. Driving at 45mph through a junction one handed whilst having a conversation on her mobile. I'm not so sure you would see it quite so forgivingly had the cyclist been a member of your family. They were both at fault. The cyclist showed with his life the possible consequences of running a red light. The driver is I think being made an example of to others what the consequences could be for them should they wish to drive one handed through traffic lights and 45 mph whilst having a conversation on their mobile.

She killed someone. Had she not been speeding, she would not have hit the cyclist. Had she not been on her phone, she may have had more control and seen what was going to happen and avoided it.

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

If she had been speeding to a greater degree she wouldn't have hit him either :rolleyes:
Other than that, +1.


However...

If for example the woman had swerved, and killed some other poor bugger, then what penalty would there be to the cyclist? Probably nothing. Which annoys me somewhat.

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

Your right but I think we are sliding away from the original topic of the thread. My point with the topic in mind, is that she is being made an example of, there is no need and no point making the argument look equal in the media as the result of the cyclists actions speaks for it's self and would serve no purpose to further highlight the fact he ran a red light. Rather make a big issue of the fact the woman was speeding with mobile in hand. Seems reasonable to me. I'm not taking into account the punishment issued just the way it has been portrayed in the media.

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

Yeah +1.

Can you get points for using a phone in the car?

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

Points in death race 2000?

Only three, and they go on your licence. ;)

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

I believe it is at the moment 3 points and 'they' are looking to up that to 6 points.

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

Prosecutions have dropped?

Well that could be for a few reasons, like less people using mobile's which would be nice. Or it could be because there are less coppers and more cameras about.

Re: Impartial media coverage?
 

Well for me the sooner they raise it from 3 points to 6 the better. Caught twice and they would be banned. I'm sure the majority of drivers who call and drive at the moment would massively reduce then. Especially if the police were more strict on enforcing the law. Let's hope it's not just Bolton that are getting tougher.