# Taken out by another cyclist.



## BlackPanther (24 Apr 2012)

Riding home tonight, I was doing about 25mph, when an 11 year old kid does this!




View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBzNTQ08MNg



Anyway, after picking up the pieces, and checking that both me and the kid are physically o.k. I carry his bike home, which was about 1/2 mile away (whilst pushing mine.) On the way I checked my bike and apart from a slight scratch, no visible damage. Amazingly, my front wheel/forks showed no sign of damage, I think his rear spokes absorbed most of the shock, plus I just managed to grab the brakes just before the collision, so I probably hit him at about 20mph.

The truly shocking thing (far more of a shock than the actual accident to me) was his Mums attitude. I've cut the vid down, but essentially I'd told her that my bike appeared undamaged, but could I have some contact details, just in case. Listen to the audio and let me know what you think. I personally would take complete responsibility for my Sons actions. Apparently though, this 'Mum' has the attitude that kids will have accidents, and to hell with anyone who's injured/suffers financially as a result of this.


----------



## sabian92 (24 Apr 2012)

I think to be honest you did pretty well not to murder that bloody woman. The fact she didn't seem to think she was responsible is shocking.

What a moronic attitude to take. Hope you and your bike is OK.


----------



## baldycyclist (24 Apr 2012)

I have looked at the first bit where you hit him
If you were a car would he have stopped?
The problem is the way the brain works
If you were a car his brain would have pulled his brakes (possibly but he was looking like he was going to cross any way!!!!)
But because you were something his brain did not recognise then his brain did not pull the brakes

I might show the footage to mum and she what she thinks


She is thick and needs to understand a little more

Kid looks pretty shaken up - and has had his wake up call


Hope you are all ok and the bike is still cool - I think you handled the immediate situation extremely well


----------



## gaz (24 Apr 2012)

DAMN!!! what silly cycling by the kid and what an awful attitude from the parent.


----------



## Headgardener (24 Apr 2012)

Did she even ask if you and the bike were OK as it didn't seem like it.


----------



## fossyant (24 Apr 2012)

TBH, I would have gone ape about the kids cycling, and said about the cars behind. Then when she realised her son was very nearly mush..

You know where they live, if there is damage, then get your legal bods to sort it (CTC BC)

You can't argue with a mom and dad over their kid in a situation, don't work. Sort it later.

Thank goodness the kid didn't get splattered by a car.


----------



## Brahan (24 Apr 2012)

That nice pristine white car door would look great with a size 10 boot mark on it. Just to punctuate proceedings. 

Maybe stick one in her face too.


----------



## gambatte (24 Apr 2012)

I'm guessing there'll be some on here that'd say you were approaching a crossing it was up to you to anticipate that a kid on a bike might just ride out?
Playing devils advocate BTW


----------



## fossyant (24 Apr 2012)

I know from even telling a kid to stop bullying my son, or the head will be told. Some weeks later said mom comes raging into the cub unit I helped out with. We ended up in a disagreement - me being calm, she lost it, and I thought, fek it - I packed in working with kids.

This mum never dropped the kid at cubs/ or even did dad, it was 'friends' that did it. But in the fragile situation any volunteer is in, I packed it in. I wasn't busting my ass to research things for kids to do that was great and get abused as a volunteer. Sad as it is.

No-one will take responsibility.


----------



## fossyant (24 Apr 2012)

Brahan said:


> That nice pristine white car door would look great with a size 10 boot mark on it. Just to punctuate proceedings.
> 
> Maybe stick one in her face too.


 
It's a new Nissan Juke, they aren't cheap. Taste, well its a FUGLY car - my 11 year old son shouts out every time he sees one of these things.."my eyes" !!!!


----------



## Boris Bajic (24 Apr 2012)

I thought this was a thread about a romantic rendezvous.

Frankly, I feel slightly let down that it's just a crash.

Glad you're OK though.

I thought you were very restrained and diplomatic - with the kid and the mother.


----------



## HovR (24 Apr 2012)

Blimey, that's pretty insane. He just crossed the road without as much as taking a glance to see if anything was coming. He was lucky he didn't take a pedal/chainring to the face!

Am I right in thinking the pedals/frame hit the top of the boys wheel before your wheel did? Pretty amazing that there was no real damage to your bike. Not sure you had to worry about him riding off though - That pringle he has in the rear dropouts was never going to roll through the rear triangle!


----------



## BlackPanther (24 Apr 2012)

gambatte said:


> I'm guessing there'll be some on here that'd say you were approaching a crossing it was up to you to anticipate that a kid on a bike might just ride out?
> Playing devils advocate BTW


 

D'y know, I've anticipated several numpty peds/cars/cyclists and took avoiding action, but this kid didn't register as he was cycling too fast to NOT go straight on and he actually does a last second swerve on to the road. I asked him if he'd changed his mind at the last second and he admitted it.

I doubt many would have anticipated this one......but maybe I should start giving any peds/bicycles on the pavement a quick blast of Airzound? Mind you that would provoke quite a few folk.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (24 Apr 2012)

I think you showed remarkable restraint, and I admire you greatly for that. Personally as a parent I would appreciate the effort you obviously made to ensure my child was safe and taken home, I would pay for any damage on princple. I pity the child with a role model like that. Dreadfull parent is supposed to set an example on doing the right thing.


----------



## HovR (24 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> but maybe I should start giving any peds/bicycles on the pavement a quick blast of Airzound? Mind you that would provoke quite a few folk.


 
A bell for pedestrians, and the AirZound for cars? There are multiple blind bends on a cycle path on my commute, and the cycle commuters who take that route ring their bell a few times whilst approaching to inform peds and other cyclists that they are coming.


----------



## BlackPanther (24 Apr 2012)

HovR said:


> Blimey, that's pretty insane. He just crossed the road without as much as taking a glance to see if anything was coming. He was lucky he didn't take a pedal/chainring to the face!
> 
> Am I right in thinking the pedals/frame hit the top of the boys wheel before your wheel did? Pretty amazing that there was no real damage to your bike. Not sure you had to worry about him riding off though - That pringle he has in the rear dropouts was never going to roll through the rear triangle!


 

It all happened so fast, but looking at his bent derailler and wheel, I think I hit the derailler first, then his spokes absorbed the impact, and he just went up and over my front wheel. The chainring is the most 'forward' part on the bike, so there was no contact with the frame. Yes he was fortunate that he didn't get a leg full of chainring.......a collision with a recumbent could easily open ones leg right open!

Apart from a cut on my knee, some light scratches on the rear quick release/gear change mech, a bent bottle holder, bent neck rest.....oh and my left shoe lace is worn, not a bad outcome for me and my machine. All the bent stuff bent back, gears/brakes working fine, front wheel not buckled, and the carbon forks are thankfully scratch/crack free.....oh and I lost an aaa battery.


----------



## stowie (24 Apr 2012)

I think that the Mum's attitude wasn't great at all, and I felt very sorry for the kid, who obviously was really shaken up. But, I think that people are naturally very wary when discussing money with a stranger, especially when that stranger is believing (however correctly) that they are at fault and liable. I am sure you are a reasonable person, who wouldn't try to use the incident to gain extra money, but there are people that would. If I was the mum, I would exchange details, but admit absolutely no liability as per a car accident.

This is the reason I have insurance for my cycle. I think her attitude may have been different if you gave her your insurance details (if you have insurance) and say that you will claim off the insurers for any repairs. It is then up to your insurance to pursue reimbursement or not.

I feel sorry for the kid, but he didn't seem to look at all. He was lucky it wasn't a car. If I was you I would just chalk it up to the rich tapestry of life - after all if you present a bill and they don't pay, then what next? Small claims court? It is sh!t, but many people have a real talent for not taking responsibility.

PS : That car does look like a Nissan Juke which is truly the most ugly car ever created. I wonder if they are bought as some kind of bet.


----------



## hennbell (24 Apr 2012)

The change I would make to this exchange is not to have a discussion about compensation with her. At that time just introduce your self ask her name first then ask for a contact number after getting her name. If you have her name and address with the use of the internet you could find the rest of her details. But a horrible reaction by a shocked mother


----------



## MrJamie (24 Apr 2012)

Glad you're both okay. 

I've watched the impact a few times, amazing how quickly it goes from bike on the path to bike in your path. Also amazing that he didnt look, with car noise right behind you and oncoming too.

I figure the mum was just caught off-guard with the situation and took a defensive stance to the compensation discussion. Presumably there was some conversation had before the video arrives at her house talking about moneys.


----------



## gambatte (25 Apr 2012)

BP, glad you and the bike are OK(ish)
Sometimes the best thing to do is chalk it up and move on. I'm trying to take that advice myself after tonight. Seeing as we're sort of local to each other you may know the road I'm on about J1 of the M18 into Hellaby? This evenings return commute. Approaching the industrial estate RAB, its a 2 lane dual carriageway. 3 vehicles stood traffic, in the left hand lane, which I'm approaching fast. I'm going straight on. Seeing as I'll be in standing traffic at the approach to a RAB, I'm in primary.
I'm suddenly aware of a red van on my RH, trying to overtake, close, with not enough room to complete the manouvre. Rather than move right into the clear lane, he just drifts left.....
I get in front and regain my position
Traffic moves.
I enter the RAB in primary. Ride the LH lane in primary.
Half way to the second exit i do a lifesaver and find RVM is trying to overtake, close, on the RAB I'm instantly thinking 'punishment pass'. as we exit the RAB he then decides to use his vehicle as a weapon as throws it left, closing the gap right down, before flooring it and heading off at speed into the distance. With his hazard lights flashing, I assume as a 'cheer'?
I got his Reg. I've been thinking 'let it go', there's no evidence, your word against his..... But I could report it? Say I know the situation, but although I know theres no evidence I believe it ought to be reported, in case it helps show a pattern with a known driver....
I didn't.
Thought I'd got it out of my head.
Not sure if it was the memory bugging me or because I made the mistake of having 2 cups of 'Rocket Fuel' espresso coffee, with guarana in the hour before bed.... but i couldn't sleep
So I've come down and figured I'd report it, but before that I'd just do a vehicle reg check.
Looks like my memorys not that good in the heat of the moment 'Not found'
Looks like I'll have to take my own advice and chalk it up...
End of the day, i can still get on a bike tomorrow


----------



## BSRU (25 Apr 2012)

The parents attitude stinks, she is responsible for her kid whether she likes it or not. She obviously does not comprehend what could have happened if you had been driving a car.

I have had a couple similar near misses with school children on bikes, they just ride across the road with no concern to check whether it is safe or not. These days if I see a similar situation I ease off and cover the brakes.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Apr 2012)

What's with that carlitox idiot? Can't believe he wants to blame panther for the crash. I suppose he's like Lee - has perfect hindsight thanks to the camera. I don't think that one was avoidable, myself. The child was just too quick and too committed with his swerve to cross the road.

Must admit it's a good example of why crashing on recumbents is much better than doing same on an upright.


----------



## jugglingphil (25 Apr 2012)

I really feel for the kid (probably as I have sons about the same age).
I can not believe that none of the car drivers pulled up and got out to check kid (and OP) OK.
I thought OP was very restrained and did the right thing by ensuring the kid got home OK. In hindsight I'd suggest agreeing to differ earlier and resuming the conversation re liability at a later time if necessary, but it's a lot easier to think of the right reaction when watching on film.


----------



## gambatte (25 Apr 2012)

This and my own recent events have really got me considering a cam.....


----------



## Arjimlad (25 Apr 2012)

Awful attitude from Mum. The poor lad looks very shaken up - at least his sister noticed and went to give him a hug.

I think he learned a valuable lesson. I hope she thanked you for bringing him home at some point before the camera started rolling.


----------



## GrasB (25 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1822134, member: 9609"]It does raise the question of - should cyclists carry third party insurance?[/quote]
Where does it end though? There are dog owners not keeping their dogs properly under control & I've had some expensive damage caused by a dog (lead), both on & off a bike. I also know people who have had pedestrians damage things which have been expensive to replace/fix through simply not giving 2 hoots about other people & their property. So do we have a 3rd party insurance for anyone who moves about outside their house?


----------



## growingvegetables (25 Apr 2012)

jugglingphil said:


> In hindsight I'd suggest agreeing to differ earlier and resuming the conversation re liability at a later time if necessary, but it's a lot easier to think of the right reaction when watching on film.


 
+1


Wonder if asking for name, address and phone number so that you could report the incident to the police might have worked? [That's a thought that just occurred – have you reported the incident? Might be worth doing – better to be told that you don't need to, than to find out later that you should have. Highway Code is ... "vaguer" than the law.]

Just a thought. Avoids the rider "looking callous", and mother "looking defensive"? There's a "third party" then, making an independent judgement on how the kid's negligence contributed to the incident? Don't know.


----------



## Recycler (25 Apr 2012)

It strikes me as odd that this woman thinks that OP should have insurance, but she obviously doesn't have it for her son.

Personally, I would just post the video on You Tube. With any luck it would get picked up and she would be embarrassed by the whole affair.


----------



## hydridmatt (25 Apr 2012)

I really feel for you - you did well to limit the impact, then made sure he was okay and made sure the lad got home. You are pretty much blameless in the whole affair. However...

However, on the video (and I accept that this may just be the edit) you turned up with a visibly upset child and then immediately started discussing your wheel – she may have seen that as callous, and made her less inclined to be reasonable. She should pay for it, but you might have wanted to approach the whole conversation in a more gentle way (“just wanted to make sure he got home okay and by the way…”), given that she was clearly slightly shell-shocked. Your immediate “my wheel costs a hundred quid” meant that she saw you, not as the guy who did his utmost to avoid hitting her son and had made sure he got home okay, but as a guy who hit her child and then demanded she pay for it. Your blood was probably up, and your stridency maybe made her wary.

I speak as someone who uses a camera, and had an incident with a driver. When I was watching the incident back with my wife, she was shocked at how aggressive I sounded when, in my head, I was being perfectly reasonable.


----------



## xpc316e (25 Apr 2012)

I do not feel sorry for the child; they say the apple does not fall far from the tree, and it is easy to see why and how this child is so stupidly careless. I feel sorry for you; you took a nasty tumble, and I am glad you and the bike are OK. 

The mother's attitude stinks and one only hopes that her actions come back to haunt her one day soon.


----------



## Paul J (25 Apr 2012)

Expect the unexpected is what I was told by a Police Officer when I hit a dog that came out of no where. It was my fault and that I was lucky not to be prosecuted for undue care and attention.

Womans attitude sucks but we can all be a bit defensive of our little ones. You expected her to offer paying to repair your bike (if damaged). But I didn't hear you mention to repair the childs that clearly had damage.

What would you have done if you had hit him and killed him? Would you be blaming the child?


----------



## CopperCyclist (25 Apr 2012)

In some ways it's almost a shame that you won't be claiming against her, as she could quite do with the demonstration that if there was damage you your bike then she WOULD have to pay. As you say in the video, small claims courts is where it would go, where the burden of proof is markedly less than the criminal court. You would only need to demonstrate the child was at fault 'on the balance of probabilities' which the video clearly does.

In regards to the above poster, without knowing the case I think the advice may have been a bit OTT. 'Expect the unexpected' is all very well, but threading to prosecute a driver for hitting a dog that came out of nowhere is a bit excessive!

Glad you're ok Panther - as Mikey said, you can probably thank being on a recumbent for that - a crash at that speed on an upright might not have been so agreeable.


----------



## jonny jeez (25 Apr 2012)

BP, glad you were okay and the bike is not damaged.

Videos are a wonderful thing arent they, they allow us to examine the minutia of every element and make comment without the advantage of either being present nor having any of the "feelings" and emotions that you must have had at the time.

That said...here I go...(ducks)

A few things struck me by the vid.

The first was (and i'm sorry if this offends you...please take into account all of the above!) but there was a small child who, regardless of fault was crying and apologising off camera. Yet you seemed more concerned about your bike and lights than ensuring that he was ok. That seemed counter-intuitive to me. I would hope, in that situation that my first reaction would be to ensure he was ok...but then who knows.

My second was that you were very kind to walk the child and his bike home, as a parent I would have been truly grateful for this. I was shocked that very little gratitude was not expressed by the mother (I think there was a reason for this).

My third was regards her attitude. She seemed concerned, articulate and calm, wasn't an idiot nor an offensive person (from what I could see) infact she seemed considerate and understanding on every element except the issue of fault and responsibility.

Perhaps Stowie is right, perhaps she felt pressured and responded inappropriately.

But ask yourself, could you expect anything else. How does she know you are telling the truth, how does she know you aren't some red light jumping manic who swiped her son off of a crossing..she doesn't so she leapt to the defensive. She also felt threatened and showed this to you by asking the kids to go inside and shutting them in. In response, your manner was at odds, you spoke faster and were becoming more and more frustrated ( thus more and more of a threat to her) and so the conversation was doomed.

I agree with others that, perhaps just returning her kid with a gentle "glad we were all ok, can I perhaps send you a copy of the vid to help your son learn"" would have resulted in a better conclusion.

In reality, I would have most likely done exactly the same as you (even down to the collection of my lights and speed of my voice!) but as you posted here you clearly wish for some opinion...that was mine.


----------



## Leodis (25 Apr 2012)

Not sure what is more funny, the womens attitude or a Doncaster accent in Lycra!!


----------



## addictfreak (25 Apr 2012)

I agree with all the comments made. The young chap was indeed lucky it was another cyclist and not a car.

The one point I noticed from the video, was that not one car driver got out out of their vehicle to offer assistance.


----------



## Hip Priest (25 Apr 2012)

If that were one of my kids I'd be very grateful that you'd brought him home, and I'd have offered you a lift home and told you to ring me if you find anything wrong with the bike. Above all I'd be grateful that my child were still alive.


----------



## Hip Priest (25 Apr 2012)

addictfreak said:


> The one point I noticed from the video, was that not one car driver got out out of their vehicle to offer assistance.


 
My other half arrived at the scene of a big accident at the weekend. Young lad had written his car off. She said everyone else was just picking their way throught the wreckage and driving off, so she got out and rang an ambulance for him, checked he was ok...etc

It sometimes feels like we live in a hostile, every-man-for-himself world.


----------



## BlackPanther (25 Apr 2012)

stowie said:


> I am sure you are a reasonable person, who wouldn't try to use the incident to gain extra money, but there are people that would.


 

This is my point though, I'm NOT like that. I WASN'T after any recompense. I'd told her that I thought there was no damage (as she didn't have the decency to ask about my injuries/damage) but when I asked her for contact details her attitude was just abysmal.

I once had a lad scratch MY car with his bike. The parent apologised, and asked me to get it fixed and send him the bill, which he would then take out of his kids pocket money. THAT'S good parenting. I pointed out that the scratch, although it looked quite bad didn't seem to go down to the base coat, and that I'd try an polish it out. 10 mins with some Auto Glymn resin polish, no more scratch. THAT'S being a decent human being.

I almost wish that the bike had been totalled, just so I could send her a £1800 bill........I don't really of course, but she just wound me up so much! Anyway, I'm fine, the bike's fine, the kid (hopefully) learned a valuable lesson, and the Mum, well she's a bitch.


----------



## BlackPanther (25 Apr 2012)

MrJamie said:


> Glad you're both okay.
> 
> I've watched the impact a few times, amazing how quickly it goes from bike on the path to bike in your path. Also amazing that he didnt look, with car noise right behind you and oncoming too.
> 
> I figure the mum was just caught off-guard with the situation and took a defensive stance to the compensation discussion. Presumably there was some conversation had before the video arrives at her house talking about moneys.


 
As I carried the kids bike home, he was very upset that his Mum would see the it. Apparently, he's already damaged one bike by ridding into a car, and another by riding into a wall! Yet his Mum allows him to ride on/across busy roads, helmetless. The reason that some video is missing is that initially, I'd left my helmet camera on the bike, so I didn't think the audio would be audible, so I went to get the helmet camera, and held it to film her because I just wanted proof of her attitude.


----------



## BlackPanther (25 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> What's with that carlitox idiot? Can't believe he wants to blame panther for the crash. I suppose he's like Lee - has perfect hindsight thanks to the camera. I don't think that one was avoidable, myself. The child was just too quick and too committed with his swerve to cross the road.
> 
> Must admit it's a good example of why crashing on recumbents is much better than doing same on an upright.


 

Yes indeed. If I'd been on the road bike....well imagine running at Hussain Bolts top speed, leaping 3 feet in the air, and bouncing down the road. As it is, I have slight cut on knee, and my right arm aches, but I'm pretty sure that's from carrying the bike home for the kid!

RECUMBENTS RULE, there's no safer way to be knocked off your bike!


----------



## Mr Celine (25 Apr 2012)

Why did you need contact details? You know where they live (that number 20 behind her head is a bit of a giveaway) and you could have asked the lad his name while walking home.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Apr 2012)

jonny jeez said:


> The first was (and i'm sorry if this offends you...please take into account all of the above!) but there was a small child who, regardless of fault was crying and apologising off camera. Yet you seemed more concerned about your bike and lights than ensuring that he was ok. That seemed counter-intuitive to me. I would hope, in that situation that my first reaction would be to ensure he was ok...but then who knows.


 
It's the quiet ones you have to worry most about. Noisy hopping ones are not likely to be in any immediate danger.


----------



## BlackPanther (25 Apr 2012)

Mr Celine said:


> Why did you need contact details? You know where they live (that number 20 behind her head is a bit of a giveaway) and you could have asked the lad his name while walking home.


 

I did ask the kid his name. I assume that the Mums surname is the same, I also made an audio note of the address on the video, but tbh, I know Rossington pretty well as I work a mile away. So yes I do have full details.

I initially asked for a contact number really just so I could give her a ring to confirm that there was no serious damage (I had given the bike as serious a check as I could at the roadside, and aside from a couple of scratches----no damage.) I would have called her to confirm that no further action would be taken by myself, and to alleviate any worries she' may have had.

This was, of course before she turned out to be such a senseless, evil witch.

I will be sending her a link to the youtube video. Apparently she's not much liked judging by most comments, either by her attitude to me, or her parenting 'skills'. Hopefully, for the kids sake, she'll see the (potentially lethal) seriousness, and educate her Son to prevent future 'accidents'. Maybe she'll also adjust her attitude in future, but I seriously doubt it!


----------



## gambatte (25 Apr 2012)

Rozzo! Kept watching the vid thinking "I know that road?.."


----------



## stowie (25 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> This is my point though, I'm NOT like that. I WASN'T after any recompense. I'd told her that I thought there was no damage (as she didn't have the decency to ask about my injuries/damage) but when I asked her for contact details her attitude was just abysmal.
> 
> I once had a lad scratch MY car with his bike. The parent apologised, and asked me to get it fixed and send him the bill, which he would then take out of his kids pocket money. THAT'S good parenting. I pointed out that the scratch, although it looked quite bad didn't seem to go down to the base coat, and that I'd try an polish it out. 10 mins with some Auto Glymn resin polish, no more scratch. THAT'S being a decent human being.
> 
> I almost wish that the bike had been totalled, just so I could send her a £1800 bill........I don't really of course, but she just wound me up so much! Anyway, I'm fine, the bike's fine, the kid (hopefully) learned a valuable lesson, and the Mum, well she's a bitch.


 
I understand this, it is just hard to gauge whether someone is going to try something on or whether they are genuine. The mother appears not to have the social skills to provide the information (which you already know since you know where they live) without opening herself up to committing to paying a hefty bill that isn't related to the actual damage.

For example, I once had a woman run into the back of me (in my car) whilst I was stationary waiting for a lollipop lady to let children cross. I had been stationary a while and could see she wasn't looking but fiddling around with something - I had enough time to pull up on my handbrake hard to make sure the shunt didn't knock me into crossing children. Sure enough she bumped into the back of me at low speed. She was hysterical, crying and saying sorry. I calmed her down by saying that it was OK and the car looked OK. We ended up swapping insurance details and I said I was taking it to a garage check out the car. When the garage looked they found damage to the bumper struts which had been badly knocked out of shape. I rang and sent her the cost of repair and said I was amenable to going through insurance or settling outside. She went mad saying that I had said there was no damage and that I had stopped too quickly. She accused me of trying to rip her off. Needless to say I went through the insurers and got the lollipop lady as a witness. I hope it cost her in no claims way above what the actual cost was (which wasn't much).

This rambling story is an illustration of the fact that some people are gits and you cannot really tell who is a git until the chips are down. Hence many people are wary.

I think you acted perfectly reasonably, but the reaction wouldn't have surprised me unfortunately.


----------



## mr_cellophane (25 Apr 2012)

Unmarried mums Eh ?


----------



## hydridmatt (25 Apr 2012)

"Senseless evil witch" "Bitch"

You don't know her apart from a ten minute meeting in which she was caught totally off-guard, but you are happy to call her all this on the internet, as well as putting her name online. She is a mother whose kid has just been in an RTA - remember your worst behaviour when stressed and consider whether you might be over-reacting. But hey, judging by the comments on a *cyclists* website, she is not much liked...


----------



## jonny jeez (26 Apr 2012)

hydridmatt said:


> "Senseless evil witch" "Bitch"


 
I felt the same.

insensitive, shocked, ignorant possibly

but "evil", "witch" and a "bitch" most definatley not.

If this is the type of "evil witch" you encounter up your way..then never...ever travel down south to london where you would most likely have been butted, then stabbed and then victimised by her boyfriend and his mates for ever more.

My view on her was that she seemed like a pleasant women who cared for her children but who was ill educated on cycle and road law (most probably used to the local kids all banging into one another and taking it knock for knock). She is also most likely unaware of the cost of your bent nor the danger her son put himself in.

Personally I would remove the public link (however interesting it was for us to view) and send her a private link or else this could easily develop into a hate campaign and start to ruin peoples lives, if you have published her name and address on the internet then you may well have already started this process.

it was a nasty indecent, of which you survived unscathed but she is not a nasty person...and neither are you.

let it go


----------



## Paul J (26 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> I did ask the kid his name. I assume that the Mums surname is the same, . I also made an audio note of the address on the video, but tbh, I know Rossington pretty well as I work a mile away. So yes I do have full details.
> 
> I initially asked for a contact number really just so I could give her a ring to confirm that there was no serious damage (I had given the bike as serious a check as I could at the roadside, and aside from a couple of scratches----no damage.) I would have called her to confirm that no further action would be taken by myself, and to alleviate any worries she' may have had.
> 
> ...


 
Wow so big of you to send a video link. Maybe before you start slinging this sort of thing about you'd better watch out she doesen't go to the police herself and report you. Maybe forward her this forum so she can actually see how you are running at the mouth. Easy to have a go when she or her husband cannot voice an opinion. If I was the boys parents I would be seeking legal advice to take you to court for defamation of character and anything else my son could take action against you for. After all the child is a minor so will get legal aid.

He rode off the path without looking. You hit him, your lucky that he didn't (?) substain anymore injuries other than a damaged ego and a broken bike, he is a child or are you forgetting this?

It's people like you with the "I am better than every other road user attitude" that gets up drivers and other cyclists noses.


----------



## Hebe (26 Apr 2012)

If that were my child, they wouldn't be allowed back on a bike until they'd help repay the cost of repairs to both bikes, and completed Bikeability.

Equally, if that were my child, I'd be pretty upset about footage of them and enough information to identify his address being posted on public internet forums without my consent.


----------



## Melonfish (26 Apr 2012)

I thought about this last night and it appears that what i want to say has almost already been said by the last few posts.
but please don't take this the wrong way when i say quite honestly from an outside point of view your video makes you look like a complete tool.

now take a minute to get over those words and think about it. you have posted on the internet a video of yourself hitting a child on a bike, then the video shows you concerned with cleaning up YOUR bike and your fallen kit, there is a cursery "are you ok?" to the kid
then the video shows you confronting the childs mother and having an arguement.
like i say, from an outside point of view you could not have posted a worse video.

Your biggest mistake however was posting it on an open google searchable internet forum, listing the mothers possible last name and more importantly posting the childs face accross the internet.
i can tell you now if you'd posted my childs face on the internet without my permission regardless of whether or not he was to blame for an accident i'd have the police feel your collar in minutes and i can't describe the beating i'd give you as a parent. i pray she does not go to the police over this.
i'm actually going to request a mod removes this thread because honestly it puts Cyclechat in a rather sticky legal situation because of your actions. I want to say a lot more but i don't think i need to at this point i'd just be ranting.
thanks
pete


----------



## Paul J (26 Apr 2012)

Totally agree. I have downloaded a copy of this page as evidence if needed for the *CHILD & PARENT*


----------



## betty swollocks (26 Apr 2012)

You could not have avoided hitting that child: it was entirely the child's fault.
What you did right was ensuring the child's safety after and escorting him home. This was the decent and honorable thing to do and you did it.
What you did wrong was a) to get into and argument with the child's mother at this stage in the proceedings and b) be abusive about her on a public forum and c) post the video on youtube.
What you need to do is a) calm down, b) withdraw the video from youtube, c) burn a copy of the video and give this to the parents together with a covering letter - the letter should contain no threats, no apology from you (it wasn't your fault) a bill for any damage to your bike and wishes from you that i) the boy is ok and ii) that he and the parents learn from this.
And take it from there.


----------



## jugglingphil (26 Apr 2012)

Hip Priest said:


> My other half arrived at the scene of a big accident at the weekend. Young lad had written his car off. She said everyone else was just picking their way throught the wreckage and driving off, so she got out and rang an ambulance for him, checked he was ok...etc
> 
> It sometimes feels like we live in a hostile, every-man-for-himself world.


 
One of the joys of cycling is that it enables you to interact with the surroundings, driving a car is very different.


----------



## Paul J (26 Apr 2012)

I agree take it to them with a copy of this forum thread as well as your name and address so they can send around the police and don't forget to keep the thread upto date so we can see how it pans out for the greater good.


----------



## davefb (26 Apr 2012)

Melonfish said:


> I thought about this last night and it appears that what i want to say has almost already been said by the last few posts.
> but please don't take this the wrong way when i say quite honestly from an outside point of view your video makes you look like a complete tool.
> 
> now take a minute to get over those words and think about it. you have posted on the internet a video of yourself hitting a child on a bike, then the video shows you concerned with cleaning up YOUR bike and your fallen kit, there is a cursery "are you ok?" to the kid
> ...


what are you talking about, what police issue is posting a video of someone online?

public place...


----------



## ianrauk (26 Apr 2012)

davefb said:


> what are you talking about, what police issue is posting a video of someone online?
> 
> public place...


 

However he does make a good point about posting the mothers name. Of which has now been removed


----------



## Melonfish (26 Apr 2012)

Someone as in a general member of the public no. a child? are you seriously telling me you'd have no problem with someone posting images of your child on the internet?


----------



## gambatte (26 Apr 2012)

davefb said:


> public place...


 
<Devils Advocate mode on>
The 'confrontation' with the parent took place not in a public place, but on private land. A private driveway.
<Devils Advocate mode off>


----------



## davefb (26 Apr 2012)

gambatte said:


> <Devils Advocate mode on>
> The 'confrontation' with the parent took place not in a public place, but on private land. A private driveway.
> <Devils Advocate mode off>


hehe yeah thats "true"

though it's still just a civil matter..


----------



## davefb (26 Apr 2012)

Melonfish said:


> Someone as in a general member of the public no. a child? are you seriously telling me you'd have no problem with someone posting images of your child on the internet?


 
what are you talking about? this isn't "posting some images" this is recording something in a public place, then sticking it on youtube..
they can ask youtube to take it down or ask the poster... it's all about "expectation of privacy"...


----------



## Shaun (26 Apr 2012)

I read the thread first before watching the video and I cannot believe some of the comments made towards this woman - both by yourself and by others on this thread.

She was obviously grateful for the kind return of her son and bike and I can't see anywhere where she acted like a "bitch" or "witch". I was expecting a fag-smoking mother-of-five with a can of Tennants in one hand and a lead attached to a pitbull in the other!!

Now don't get me wrong, her son could have been killed by his carelessness and I can't see any time (on your approach) that he turns to look up the road before crossing it. Which, as a parent myself, I find quite shocking!! He has been a _very_ lucky lad indeed to have only had his wheel damaged and a few bumps or bruises, and he needs to be educated as to how to cross safely when he's out and about and maybe even advised to walk his bike across busy/fast roads.

I also feel for you because most of us also know how frightening it can be to hit things or be knocked off -it can be bloody scary stuff - brown-pants moments are not uncommon when you are a proficient and fast cyclist, but they do tend to leave you on edge a little afterwards, so I'm taking a guess that you were still a bit wound-up from the incident when you arrived at his house?

You did a very _good_ thing walking him home and ensuring he was safely back in the arms of mum 'n' dad - especially when none of it was really your fault - however, from the video you appear to have turned up at this woman's house, with the full knowledge of what has happened, and started ranting about compensation and arguing with her. She has understandably become defensive; I expect I would be. She doesn't know you from Adam and you're making out like you might want something from her (seriously, listen to how insistent you are being with her). She hasn't seen the accident and you're throwing in a figure of £1500 quid. I can see why she's been unreceptive. She also possibly wants to make sure her son is okay and get his side of the story too (and maybe even give him a bollocking for being so careless?).

It might be best to remove the video from YouTube and make a more measured approach to the lady. Call round and calmly ask if you can come in and _show_ her the video, so she can _see_ what has happened for herself (she might well be quite shocked by it - I know as a parent I would be!) - and then explain that you were just wanting to have a general agreement from her to pay for any minor repairs that you might have found later.

I understand how you feel but I think the approach to resolving it could have been better.

Anyway, I really don't want to see any more name-calling of this lady on CC please.

Thanks,
Shaun


----------



## BenM (26 Apr 2012)

> are you seriously telling me you'd have no problem with someone posting images of your child on the internet?


Won't anyone think of the children????!!!111!!!!1111!!!!!

And, actually, no I wouldn't. It is IMHO completely ridiculous to take that view that posting images of children on the internet is in and of itself a problem. FWIW there are quite a few pics of my children on the internet.

There is, potentially, a child safety issue - if the video is shown to provide enough information to identify the child AND that child is subject to a protection order then his mother could be seen to have not taken steps to prevent his identification. (substitute mother for school and you get the reason why schools don't want you taking pictures of productions....)

B.


----------



## davefb (26 Apr 2012)

wot admin said.. 

Also recall my brother being taken home by a sheepish couple after he went over their cars bonnet ( him and bike "perfectly" okay).... my mum wanted rid of them very quickly though, mainly because he was in for 'a right bollocking' due to breaking the "dont be out after dusk" (no lights) and "dont ride fast on the pavement" (some blind driveway entrances)rules..


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2012)

To be frank, the sort of behaviour by Paul on here is far worse. It makes this place an unpleasant place to be around.

I'm a bit surprised at you lot panning black panther so badly. I thought he did a great job and was very responsible about sorting out the kid too. Tell you what, I'd much rather Black Panther was around if my kid was in a crash rather than Paul, or even you, Shaun. (


----------



## Sara_H (26 Apr 2012)

betty swollocks said:


> You could not have avoided hitting that child: it was entirely the child's fault.
> What you did right was ensuring the child's safety after and escorting him home. This was the decent and honorable thing to do and you did it.
> What you did wrong was a) to get into and argument with the child's mother at this stage in the proceedings and b) be abusive about her on a public forum and c) post the video on youtube.
> What you need to do is a) calm down, b) withdraw the video from youtube, c) burn a copy of the video and give this to the parents together with a covering letter - the letter should contain no threats, no apology from you (it wasn't your fault) a bill for any damage to your bike and wishes from you that i) the boy is ok and ii) that he and the parents learn from this.
> And take it from there.


 
I agree wholeheartedly with this.

Although the woman was ignorant of the facts regarding her respnsibilities for damage caused by her son, she was just being defensive - the discussion was never going to get anywhere.
Some of the comments here are totally uncalled for.

To the OP - hope you're ok, my heart was in my mouth watching the video - must have been a terrible shock for you.


----------



## gambatte (26 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> To be frank, the sort of behaviour... on here is far worse. It makes this place an unpleasant place to be around.
> 
> I'm a bit surprised at you lot panning black panther so badly.. (


 
+1
I was surprised. Seemed like a bit of a feeding frenzy, both at the original post and when the tide turned against the original poster.
Before Mikeys post I was thinking I wouldn't be surprised if we lost a member....


----------



## Mushroomgodmat (26 Apr 2012)

speaking only for myself...If that was my son Id be horrified and thankful beyond words to you for making sure he made it home okay. And without question I would pay for any damages caused (once I had seen the footage of course)

its a strange world where a mother (of I think are well brought up kids) seems unwilling to take responsibility, not exactly a good message to send. Had I been in your situation, I probably would have resorted to saying something like this should probably be a police matter now as an accident on the roads has happened and two vehicle have been damaged.

The only thing I (suspect) you did incorrectly is to record the conversation on her property...not sure what the legal grounds are for that.


----------



## Shaun (26 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> To be frank, the sort of behaviour by Paul on here is far worse. It makes this place an unpleasant place to be around.
> 
> I'm a bit surprised at you lot panning black panther so badly. I thought he did a great job and was very responsible about sorting out the kid too. Tell you what, I'd much rather Black Panther was around if my kid was in a crash rather than Paul, or even you, Shaun. (


 
I would hope I would have done just the same and walked the lad home - and I commend BlackPanther for his actions - but the painting of the mother as a "bitch" because she won't immediately engage with a stranger about possible "compensation" when he's just turned up at her house with her damaged son+bike it a little bit harsh IMHO.

Doesn't she deserve the opportunity to see if her kid is okay? Get his side of the story? Deal with his damaged bike too?

The kid did something wrong and caused and accident and I agree his parents should take some responsibility for that, but you've got to give the mum a bit of time to adjust to the idea - she's likely been quite shocked at what's happened too!

I'm sure the mum appreciates BlackPanther's kindness and would expect her, once she's had time to talk to her son, to be somewhat sympathetic and be willing to talk more about repairs, etc. but maybe later on in the day when things have calmed down and everyone's over the shock.


----------



## musa (26 Apr 2012)

I would do this I would do that

Be realistic for goodness sake.


----------



## gavintc (26 Apr 2012)

Wow, there are some sanctimonious people on here. A young child drifts into the road and an accident ensues. He clearly did not do it deliberately and he is only a child. How about some degree of understanding for what the child went through. The mum was not present at the accident and has great difficulty assessing the situation based upon the information she has been given. 

There are some really unpleasant people who post on here. 'witch' 'bitch' - completely unacceptable.


----------



## dawesome (26 Apr 2012)

It simply would not occur to me to mention compensation after that event.


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2012)

dawesome said:


> It simply would not occur to me to mention compensation after that event.


 
Yeah, but that's because you haven't just been knocked off, injured, and had damage to your bike. I'd be 'kin livid about it, and I'd want a couple of minutes to calm down and deal with the situation too.

There was a collision - refusal to exchange details just in case is the behaviour of scum. Nobody asked for admission of liability or actual payment. At least Black Panther didn't need to insist, since he has her name and address, and her image and son's image on video.


----------



## dawesome (26 Apr 2012)

I said "If". I don't think a child that age is liable for anything, and it simply would not enter my mind to mention it.


----------



## tongskie01 (26 Apr 2012)

if there's a blame, there's a claim. remember that blackpanther is the victim here....he should be compensated for any damage done to him which was not his fault. this woman is just defensive and not admit liability for her childs actions especially when it comes to money matters. she's not shown a good example to her child at all...


----------



## dawesome (26 Apr 2012)

Maybe later, if there was damage, I'd mention it but I'm not sure about liability when children cause accidents.


----------



## gambatte (26 Apr 2012)

dawesome said:


> Maybe later, if there was damage, I'd mention it but I'm not sure about liability when children cause accidents.


 
If you're of an age when you are held liable for criminal prosecution, I reckon you can be held liable for damages from what we've seen?
If there were damages it's likely her household insurance would cover it.....
We're talking here when there are no damages. What if BP had several £100s of pounds damage, would we be saying 'suck it up'?


----------



## dawesome (26 Apr 2012)

The kid needs to be warned about riding straight into the road, the consequences could have been much worse. The mum went into protective mum-mode, which is entirely understandable. I don't think I would mention compo at all, much less at that moment.


----------



## tongskie01 (26 Apr 2012)

as parents, we should take responsibility for our children actions. we should be in contol over them all the time. if we let them loose and they make mistakes, thats the risk that we have to answer for...


----------



## Shaun (26 Apr 2012)

I think it's more a matter of timing. Expecting the mum to take it all in and agree to compensation within minutes of learning about it is a bit harsh IMHO. The name calling because of this isn't really nice either. We don't know the woman.

I think as cyclists we can all sympathise with and be supportive of BP, but I just think the compensation discussion would have been better taking place later on - maybe on the ride home from work after a proper assessment of the bike and a better idea of how much we're talking about.


----------



## stowie (26 Apr 2012)

tongskie01 said:


> as parents, we should take responsibility for our children actions. we should be in contol over them all the time. if we let them loose and they make mistakes, thats the risk that we have to answer for...


 
You can't be serious? I wonder how you control children at all times without putting them on some kind of leash or locking them in a room. The child was at an age when children go out and play. He should have looked before wondering into the road. He got a very nasty shock. He was lucky it wasn't a car. He probably won't do it again.

The more I look at the video, the more I think this is a case of bad timing and the fact that she didn't really handle the situation really well. On the other hand, if a stranger started talking about compensation I wouldn't probably agree to it, but be more circumspect. I would give my details and take theirs, as well as noting down the state of the cycles (maybe camera phone pictures). I would keep this very friendly and thank the OP profusely for his help with my child. I am uncomfortable with the terminology being used on this forum for her - I just think she was a bit bemused by the situation, probably worried about her son, and concerned about talk of repair bills with a stranger with whom she was trying to understand the events. And this came out as defensive denials.


----------



## Black Sheep (26 Apr 2012)

I watched without audio and couldn't help wondering if mum was mainly concerned about how her lad is - I could see him almost going into shock as he realises how close he came just before his sister gives him a hug and takes him inside - mum was probably wanting to patch him up, give him a shouting at etc before thinking about anything else.



Mushroomgodmat said:


> speaking only for myself...If that was my son Id be horrified and thankful beyond words to you for making sure he made it home okay. And without question I would pay for any damages caused (once I had seen the footage of course)
> .


 
I'd need a moment or two to take in the fact my kid had nearly been flattened by anything before I was able to discuss much else


----------



## Black Sheep (26 Apr 2012)

Hip Priest said:


> My other half arrived at the scene of a big accident at the weekend. Young lad had written his car off. She said everyone else was just picking their way throught the wreckage and driving off, so she got out and rang an ambulance for him, checked he was ok...etc
> 
> It sometimes feels like we live in a hostile, every-man-for-himself world.


 
given that my wife has current nurse training, legally we have to stop incase she can do something
although she's only paediatric trained and so not certain on assisting adults.


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2012)

Admin said:


> Expecting the mum to take it all in and agree to compensation within minutes of learning about it is a bit harsh IMHO.


 
NO ONE ASKED FOR COMPENSATION. Just for a phone number.


----------



## Mike8782 (26 Apr 2012)

Black Sheep said:


> I watched without audio and couldn't help wondering if mum was mainly concerned about how her lad is - I could see him almost going into shock as he realises how close he came just before his sister gives him a hug and takes him inside - mum was probably wanting to patch him up, give him a shouting at etc before thinking about anything else.


 
That's kind of how I read it. The boy looks quite upset and that's going to be the Mum's priority. I can imagine my Mum being in this situation had it been a young me, and I could see how she would be more worried about me than discussing money. I tend to think timing was more the issue then the woman's attitude itself.


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2012)

*BULLSHIT* All she was worried about was avoiding any further contact with the VICTIM, Black Panther. She refused to exchange phone numbers, and that makes her contemptible.


----------



## CopperCyclist (26 Apr 2012)

Interestingly, I saw the 'confrontation' (can't think of a better description ATM) quite differently. I was surprised to see two reasonable people completely butting heads - however it was clear both were reasonable people. I rarely get the privilege of dealing with these. She's wrong that it wouldn't be her responsibilty to pay. Panther is probably wrong to take the stance he did of insisting for details hat he probably didn't need - he had the lads name and his address after all.

Both these wrongs aren't big, aren't huge, and both have been blown out of all proportion by the various sides on here - which is natural, it's a forum, it provokes debate. However, at the end of the day I think any level headed person would agree that the woman doesn't deserve to be called an 'evil bitch', just as Panther doesn't deserve the panning he has had.

From the brief view I have of each, and the opinion I've inferred from their behaviour, I think that if both Panther and the woman sat, watched the clip, then read this post, they'd both apologise to each other.


----------



## Black Sheep (26 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> *BULLSHIT* All she was worried about was avoiding any further contact with the VICTIM, Black Panther. She refused to exchange phone numbers, and that makes her contemptible.


 
I think, before classing her as contemptible she should be given a second chance to discuss etc at a time when she's not thinking 'Brian could have been flattened by a truck'

you're told when driving and in an incident to exchange contact info etc and you hold the information in the back of your mind, no one has ever told you what to do when someone arrives with your son in a shaken state, his damaged bike and tells you 'your son rode in front of me, i knocked him off and have helped him home'

it's a few things to take in at one time


----------



## Mike8782 (26 Apr 2012)

Although the boy was at fault, Black Panther clearly wasn't the only victim here


----------



## gavintc (26 Apr 2012)

I presume that few of you have passed your driving test as this scenario is tested in the Hazard Perception Test. This is a predictable hazard demanding some care and prediction. To me the cyclist's behaviour comes across as "Get out of my way, I am a cyclist". Consider, had this been a 5 year old on a bike rolling down a drive and into the road. Simply because the child is about 11/12 does not change the scenario. As road users, we are required to take care and to watch out for hazards - good road sense is vital. 

Personally, I think the woman's mother could ask the cyclist for compensation. He was certainly not cycling with due care and attention for the prevailing conditions.


----------



## Shaun (26 Apr 2012)

Let's not do that - I don't think BP can be blamed for the accident - the lad didn't look and just turned into the road without warning. I don't think for one minute BP expected him to do that (the hindsight of video footage is great for making something seem "obvious" that wasn't in that _split-second_ of time beforehand) and I think he did a good and right thing walking the lad home. I would hope that if my daughter was silly enough to do that and get knocked off her bike, someone would be caring enough to see her home safely.

The only thing I really have an issue with is the name-calling of the mother and I've covered that in my previous replies.


----------



## Hawk (26 Apr 2012)

gavintc said:


> I presume that few of you have passed your driving test as this scenario is tested in the Hazard Perception Test. This is a predictable hazard demanding some care and prediction. To me the cyclist's behaviour comes across as "Get out of my way, I am a cyclist". Consider, had this been a 5 year old on a bike rolling down a drive and into the road. Simply because the child is about 11/12 does not change the scenario. As road users, we are required to take care and to watch out for hazards - good road sense is vital.
> 
> Personally, I think the woman's mother could ask the cyclist for compensation. He was certainly not cycling with due care and attention for the prevailing conditions.


 
The difference is that a child going down a driveway is heading in to your path whereas here the child suddenly changes direction in to the road, in a way that is unexpected.

If a car driver is proceeding over a give way line and hasn't seen you and you continue on when you could've clearly stopped, maybe you are partly liable. If a car doing a quarter of your speed changes lane in front of you without signalling....

As for BP being 'more concerned' for his lights than the kid - the kid was in a safe place (traffic island) and appeared to be well enough... collecting the lights off the road would have let traffic get moving and this would be the obvious thing to do in the situation.

In the moment, I don't think I could've done better than BP. I'm sure criticising him is an easy way to say "I'd have done this so I wouldn't have had this accident", shame we're not all as perfect as the critics must be


----------



## gambatte (26 Apr 2012)

gavintc said:


> I presume that few of you have passed your driving test as this scenario is tested in the Hazard Perception Test. This is a predictable hazard demanding some care and prediction. To me the cyclist's behaviour comes across as "Get out of my way, I am a cyclist". Consider, had this been a 5 year old on a bike rolling down a drive and into the road. Simply because the child is about 11/12 does not change the scenario. As road users, we are required to take care and to watch out for hazards - good road sense is vital.
> Personally, I think the woman's mother could ask the cyclist for compensation. He was certainly not cycling with due care and attention for the prevailing conditions.





gambatte said:


> I'm guessing there'll be some on here that'd say you were approaching a crossing it was up to you to anticipate that a kid on a bike might just ride out?
> Playing devils advocate BTW


 
Took 2 days, sad to be proven right....


----------



## musa (26 Apr 2012)

Wait till its on your shoe thats all that can be said


----------



## Gary E (26 Apr 2012)

Hawk said:


> As for BP being 'more concerned' for his lights than the kid - the kid was in a safe place (traffic island) and appeared to be well enough... collecting the lights off the road would have let traffic get moving and this would be the obvious thing to do in the situation.


Sorry, I really wasn't going to let myself get caught up in this, but are you serious????

The poor kid was standing there wimpering and cradling his arm. How the hell can he not be the first and only priority??

Frankly I have a real hang up about that kind of language being used in front of kids too (although I realise that might just be my hang up).

The kid, throughout the whole video is clearly, obviously, seriously traumatised and by the look of it hurt too.

EVERYTHING ELSE IS SECONDARY (again this may just be me)

To be honest, if you did post the address (another step too far) I'd be happy to send the kid some money to fix his bike up.

Feel free to have a go at me but come on people get your priorities sorted!


----------



## Hawk (26 Apr 2012)

Gary E said:


> Sorry, I really wasn't going to let myself get caught up in this, but are you serious????
> 
> The poor kid was standing there wimpering and cradling his arm. How the hell can he not be the first and only priority??
> 
> ...


 

I see your point and I wasn't clear above. What I meant was that in the moment I would _instinctively_ want to clear the road first as this would naturally seem to be the biggest hazard at that point in time.


----------



## Gary E (26 Apr 2012)

I'd want to make sure I hadn't just broken the kids arm (regardless of who's fault it was)

If I was in the car I'd have gotten out to help whether the road was cleared in front of me or not.


----------



## BlackPanther (26 Apr 2012)

I'd just been taken out, has that ever happened to you? Maybe you'd be Mr calm.....but I doubt it. As a motorcyclist whenever I've seen someone come off their bike, THE 1st thing they want to do is pick it up. In fact I once had to shout to a mate to leave his bike and get to safety off the busy road!

Rightly or wrongly, I did the same. I'm afraid that I'm not a rich man......a bike gets me to work and back, every day of the year, and I ain't gonna leave it, and the other bits in the middle of the road to get run over by the long line of cars queueing up! It took 20 seconds to retrieve my bike. I'm not a medic, but I do have 2 kids and if they're standing up saying Owwww, then then they're not seriously injured.

I got him to the side of the road, he seemed to my untrained eye to be fine, so I carried his bike 1/2 mile home for him to make sure he got home safely (MANY WOULDN'T). If you want to have a go at me, how about having a go at all the car drivers who just sat in their cars. I'm always the first (and often only) person to get out of my car/lorry when I witness an accident, offer help/phone emergency services/offer to be a witness, and I've pushed many a broken down car or motorbike when they've conked out at a busy junction. And yet here I'm the bad guy? I wonder how you'd cope in a similar situation. I don't want to fall out with any one on here, but people with 20/20 hindsight wind me up. I ain't perfect, but overall, I do more for others than most!


----------



## hennbell (26 Apr 2012)

Paul J said:


> Wow so big of you to send a video link. Maybe before you start slinging this sort of thing about you'd better watch out she doesen't go to the police herself and report you. Maybe forward her this forum so she can actually see how you are running at the mouth. Easy to have a go when she or her husband cannot voice an opinion. If I was the boys parents I would be seeking legal advice to take you to court for defamation of character and anything else my son could take action against you for. After all the child is a minor so will get legal aid.
> 
> He rode off the path without looking. You hit him, your lucky that he didn't (?) substain anymore injuries other than a damaged ego and a broken bike, he is a child or are you forgetting this?
> 
> It's people like you with the "I am better than every other road user attitude" that gets up drivers and other cyclists noses.


 

Seriously are you suggesting, after watching that video that the OP is responsible for the accident?

And " It's people like you with the "I am better than every other road user attitude" that gets up drivers and other cyclists noses" - do you not see the irony in that statement?


----------



## Gary E (26 Apr 2012)

As I said I don't want to argue either and yes oddly enough it has happened to me (only in my case it was an old lady).

I sympathise entirely with your dilemma, I really do, I just think that the best interests of the minor are paramount here.

I'm not trying to take the moral high ground nor am I trying to vilify you. I hope you and your bike are OK but I think that this is a situation that needs careful private resolution not public ordeal by video.


----------



## MrGrumpy (26 Apr 2012)

hennbell said:


> Seriously are you suggesting, after watching that video that the OP is responsible for the accident?
> 
> And " It's people like you with the "I am better than every other road user attitude" that gets up drivers and other cyclists noses" - do you not see the irony in that statement?


 


BlackPanther said:


> I'd just been taken out, has that ever happened to you? Maybe you'd be Mr calm.....but I doubt it. As a motorcyclist whenever I've seen someone come off their bike, THE 1st thing they want to do is pick it up. In fact I once had to shout to a mate to leave his bike and get to safety off the busy road!
> 
> Rightly or wrongly, I did the same. I'm afraid that I'm not a rich man......a bike gets me to work and back, every day of the year, and I ain't gonna leave it, and the other bits in the middle of the road to get run over by the long line of cars queueing up! It took 20 seconds to retrieve my bike. I'm not a medic, but I do have 2 kids and if they're standing up saying Owwww, then then they're not seriously injured.
> 
> I got him to the side of the road, he seemed to my untrained eye to be fine, so I carried his bike 1/2 mile home for him to make sure he got home safely (MANY WOULDN'T). If you want to have a go at me, how about having a go at all the car drivers who just sat in their cars. I'm always the first (and often only) person to get out of my car/lorry when I witness an accident, offer help/phone emergency services/offer to be a witness, and I've pushed many a broken down car or motorbike when they've conked out at a busy junction. And yet here I'm the bad guy? I wonder how you'd cope in a similar situation. I don't want to fall out with any one on here, but people with 20/20 hindsight wind me up. I ain't perfect, but overall, I do more for others than most!


 
Not wanting to get into a slagging match about who is right and who is wrong here but maybe this is why as cyclists we should have insurance, if you were a car driver this would of been a hell of alot worse  however a car driver would have insurance and this would of been dealt with via that surely.


----------



## Recycler (26 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> I'd just been taken out, has that ever happened to you? Maybe you'd be Mr calm.....but I doubt it. As a motorcyclist whenever I've seen someone come off their bike, THE 1st thing they want to do is pick it up. In fact I once had to shout to a mate to leave his bike and get to safety off the busy road!
> 
> Rightly or wrongly, I did the same. I'm afraid that I'm not a rich man......a bike gets me to work and back, every day of the year, and I ain't gonna leave it, and the other bits in the middle of the road to get run over by the long line of cars queueing up! It took 20 seconds to retrieve my bike. I'm not a medic, but I do have 2 kids and if they're standing up saying Owwww, then then they're not seriously injured.
> 
> I got him to the side of the road, he seemed to my untrained eye to be fine, so I carried his bike 1/2 mile home for him to make sure he got home safely (MANY WOULDN'T). If you want to have a go at me, how about having a go at all the car drivers who just sat in their cars. I'm always the first (and often only) person to get out of my car/lorry when I witness an accident, offer help/phone emergency services/offer to be a witness, and I've pushed many a broken down car or motorbike when they've conked out at a busy junction. And yet here I'm the bad guy? I wonder how you'd cope in a similar situation. I don't want to fall out with any one on here, but people with 20/20 hindsight wind me up. I ain't perfect, but overall, I do more for others than most!


 
Well said.
Just ignore those who are so quick to criticise.


----------



## Gary E (26 Apr 2012)

The trouble with these forums is that everyone seems to think they have to choose a side.

I'm not doing that.

If I was there I'd have helped the kid and helped you with your bike. After all, as you said, you'd done nothing wrong.

You're obviously an experienced cyclist and (hopefully) the damage to your bike is just cosmetic. So why not go round and ask if the kids OK, take him (and his cute little sister) a bag of sweets and offer your help and experience with his bike and his road sense.

Life really is too short


----------



## gambatte (26 Apr 2012)

MrGrumpy said:


> Not wanting to get into a slagging match about who is right and who is wrong here but maybe this is why as cyclists we should have insurance, if you were a car driver this would of been a hell of alot worse  however a car driver would have insurance and this would of been dealt with via that surely.


A car driver would only have to have had TP F&T
He wouldn't have any recourse through his insurance for fixing his vehicle or personal injury.


----------



## Maylian (26 Apr 2012)

I think its quite disgusting the way some posters are treating BP, yes after watching the video with 2020 hindsight you could potentially say that he might assume that the kid would cross at that point. However despite my own ability, and I do believe I am very observant on the roads, I wouldn't have guessed the kid would do that it happens so quickly. And then BP mentions that the kid has done this many times before.

Had it been me, the kid is making noise (aka fine for the immediate future), I would get everything out of the road and make sure the kid was safe and what injuries he has. Would I have sworn.........100% yes, coming off my bike, being hit by a van I have sworn. Either at the person who's knocked me off or my own stupidity. It is instinct and I would be surprised if the kid hasn't heard that from his own parents and friends.

The conversation with the parent, again distancing yourself you could assume that the mother would be worried about her child, might be intimidated / worried about money etc...you can't really guess what's going on in her head. Again I would try and justify myself just as you did if I was in front of her. 

Gary E I like your suggestion of sweets and experience etc but I really think for me that would be over stepping the mark. Since this has happened before the mother / father if they are responsible should stop him cycling until they put him on a cycling profiency course god forbid next time it is a car. Finally the reprehensible part is that NO motorists got out of their car and offered any assistance or even checked on you both!


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2012)

Yep, I'm with Black Panther. Getting everything out of the way was important - did you not hear the moton already getting on the horn with impatience? Oh, and as far as I can see the kid's arm was fine, it was his leg that was sore.

BP, I would suggest that you have nothing further to do with the family. I just feel that they are very likely to misbehave towards you in the future in some way.


----------



## Black Sheep (26 Apr 2012)

I think, if we're not careful we're going to start going round in an unproductive spiral of trying to lay blame. 

this was an accident, Black Panther assessed the situation and made a decision, the boy on the bike made a split second decision and hopefully has learnt from it, either way, no one set out for this incident to happen.


----------



## BlackPanther (26 Apr 2012)

MrGrumpy said:


> Not wanting to get into a slagging match about who is right and who is wrong here but maybe this is why as cyclists we should have insurance, if you were a car driver this would of been a hell of alot worse  however a car driver would have insurance and this would of been dealt with via that surely.


 
I agree about how much worse it would've been if I was in the car. For a start I wouldn't have caught the collision on camera, and I/or the car that hit him would probably now be under investigation if injury occurred.

The fact is that the kid wasn't 100% to blame. Mechanical failures aside, when 2 vehicles collide, even if one jumps a red light, you should be ready for such occurrences. Indeed, I've avoided such scenarios before and 'saved' someone from causing an accident. I drive/cycle/motorcycle in excess of 40,000 miles a year (I'm an HGV driver) and without blowing my own trumpet, there have been quite a few times over the years when I've taken avoiding action to prevent a collision. Even in a 28 ton lorry, you still get the 'SMIDSY' drivers.

Maybe if I'd been more focused on the cyclist on the pavement, I could've avoided him? But tbh, I was holding primary, watching for any cars behind to do a dodgy overtake, plus there's a junction coming up on my right where cars regularly pull out on me (and other cyclists). Other than get off and push the bike every time there's a ped/cyclist in my vicinity I'm at a bit of a loss. Someone suggested ringing the bell, which tbh wouldn't have made the blindest bit of difference.....the kid changed his mind at the last second, and a 'ping ping' wouldn't have stopped him. Maybe I could've used the airzound, but then you risk winding up car drivers. I'd like to leave y'all with this thought.

No-one's ever too old or experienced to learn. I've learned something from this experience, but when you've got so much going on in front, behind and at the side of you, it's difficult (20/20 hindsight aside) to always notice everything which is happening around you, all of the time. If this vid makes just one cyclist/car driver that bit more aware or the unpredictability of kids, then it's served its purpose. AMEN.


----------



## Gary E (26 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> I agree about how much worse it would've been if I was in the car. For a start I wouldn't have caught the collision on camera, and I/or the car that hit him would probably now be under investigation if injury occurred.
> 
> The fact is that the kid wasn't 100% to blame. Mechanical failures aside, when 2 vehicles collide, even if one jumps a red light, you should be ready for such occurrences. Indeed, I've avoided such scenarios before and 'saved' someone from causing an accident. I drive/cycle/motorcycle in excess of 40,000 miles a year (I'm an HGV driver) and without blowing my own trumpet, there have been quite a few times over the years when I've taken avoiding action to prevent a collision. Even in a 28 ton lorry, you still get the 'SMIDSY' drivers.
> 
> ...


Top man! and a brave thing to say after all the flack. It's a shame more threads can't meet somewhere in the middle like this.


----------



## Paul J (26 Apr 2012)

hennbell said:


> Seriously are you suggesting, after watching that video that the OP is responsible for the accident?
> 
> And " It's people like you with the "I am better than every other road user attitude" that gets up drivers and other cyclists noses" - do you not see the irony in that statement?


 
No but no doubt you will explain


----------



## BentMikey (26 Apr 2012)

Ring the bell made me laugh out loud!!


----------



## Recycler (26 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1824409, member: 9609"]Reactions amongst children are not very predictable, stuff like this will go round his school like wildfire, hopefully it will make him a bit of a hero, but then again it could insight bullying. And what an enormous concept for a young child to contemplate, a video of his accident being viewed worldwide, let alone all the nasty uncalled for comments about his mother.[/quote]

Gosh...... It might even end up with the kid learning that it's not wise to go onto the road without looking. After all, the poor kid doesn't seem to have learnt that simple lesson from his mother.


----------



## tongskie01 (26 Apr 2012)

stowie said:


> You can't be serious? I wonder how you control children at all times without putting them on some kind of leash or locking them in a room. The child was at an age when children go out and play. He should have looked before wondering into the road. He got a very nasty shock. He was lucky it wasn't a car. He probably won't do it again.
> 
> excuse me but we're in the 21st century. even grown up people would think twice to cross that road more so on a bicycle. i wouldn't let my kids wander unsupervised. the boy was lucky it wasn't a car that hit him.


----------



## Hip Priest (26 Apr 2012)

I don't think it is particularly irresponible or unusual to allow an 11 year old out on his bike like that. Kids will always have accidents and get into scrapes. I certainly did. It's part of growing up.


----------



## gambatte (27 Apr 2012)

Strange how we all fall into habittual terminology. We've regularly stated on other collisions how they are 'incidents', but introduce kids and 'accidents' occur...


----------



## gambatte (27 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1824409, member: 9609"]Reactions amongst children are not very predictable, stuff like this will go round his school like wildfire, hopefully it will make him a bit of a hero, but then again it could insight bullying. And what an enormous concept for a young child to contemplate, a video of his accident being viewed worldwide, let alone all the nasty uncalled for comments about his mother.[/quote]
I can't help but agree with you to a degree, especially to the points about his mother.
However to echo Recyclers point. IME The 'educational' one off talks at school about road safety etc can seem reasonable, but disjointed from your own reality. They have no personal connection, they're actors.
If just one of his mates views it and think "That could have been me.... and what if!!"
Could be a positive move?


----------



## johnnyh (27 Apr 2012)

I would like to think the lad got a right good ticking off once inside the house, and that the parents reaction was that of a parent who will always stand up for their child...

I guess we will never know.


----------



## tongskie01 (27 Apr 2012)

she sounds like she's standing up for her money.


----------



## steve52 (27 Apr 2012)

gambatte said:


> I'm guessing there'll be some on here that'd say you were approaching a crossing it was up to you to anticipate that a kid on a bike might just ride out?
> Playing devils advocate BTW


 this was my first thought, if you were on a motor bike or in a car? kids adults and me do stupid things sometimes and its great when someone more alert saves us.


----------



## ultraviolet (27 Apr 2012)

just watched the video;

would you still be going around the parents place hoping for compensation like you did if the child was lieing face down lifeless on the tarmac bleeding?

i thought you where going round to the parents house to make sure the child was ok and see him get home safely

parents are responsible for there children. if there child had maliciously riden into you and coursed damage, then i think that would be ok to pop round like you did

accidents are accidents, look back at the video and at the child, he'll forget the moment. i'm sure he'll be more careful in the years to come.

i had the same thing happen to me a few years and the main thing that sticks in my mind is the kids face as he was stairing down at me while i was in utter pain with a popped out shoulder


----------



## gambatte (27 Apr 2012)

ultraviolet said:


> just watched the video;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Parents are responsible yes. I reckon this is a good case for going back to our old mantra of 'there are no accidents, only incidents. With incidents theres generally liability and in this case I wou7ldn't necessarily put it on the lad or BP. I'd put a good portion on the mum, considering the lads admitted history of cycling incidents.
My 2 lads have just got bikes. I also got 'em highway code books and make sure they read them. I take them out, ride with them and get them used to hazard awareness, lifesavers.
She's the adult, she's the legal GUARDIAN, she should have an idea what he's like on a bike. Same way that sitting next to a provisional driver makes me responsible for the car.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Apr 2012)

ultraviolet said:


> would you still be going around the parents place hoping for compensation like you did if the child was lieing face down lifeless on the tarmac bleeding?


 
Would you like to rephrase that just slightly more accurately and give your post a little bit of honesty? All he did was ask for a phone number in case there was damage, and he was careful to say he didn't think there was any damage.


----------



## Boris Bajic (27 Apr 2012)

I think this thread may have run out of puff a little.

I try to be Mr Calm at all times in traffic, but have said some extraordinary and blunt things in the immediate aftermath of a scare or a collision.

With or without 20-20 hindsight, the OP kept his calm after the impact, got the kid home safely and didn't go all "Claim the Max" about the collision.

The kid was wrong, but so was I in almost every action I took at 11. I cycled to school in SE1 and EC4 at that age and ought really to have died before 1975 if my road skills had played a part in my survival.

The mother came across less than fabulously, but didn't earn the vitriol heaped on her by some posters.

We are all human and the people in the video are displaying fairly typical human behaviour.

Hindsight Warriors can be as saintly, wise or clever as they want - but there's nothing like shock or adrenalin to slightly crunch the gears in your brain.


----------



## theclaud (27 Apr 2012)

Hindsight Warrior Alert, then!

I've been following this thread but only just had the chance to watch the video with the sound on. Now that I have, I'm surprised the thread wasn't locked long ago - after all the opprobrium heaped upon her, I was expecting to see her swearing her head off and hurling a litany of abuse and prejudice at the OP. In fact all she has done is to be politely wary of someone who has collided with her son and is talking about money and blame rather too much. I'm sure everyone acknowledges that the kid's manoeuvre happened rather quickly, and that it would have taken exceptional reactions to have avoided a collision altogether at that speed. Which was, it has to be said, pretty nippy. A lot nippier, for example, than the speed at which one would pass a child on a bike that closely if one were not separated from him by the meanings that arise from the idea of pavement vs. road - or at least not without watching him like a hawk and covering the brakes. I'm afraid I'm inclined to be the devil for whom Gambatte was advocating early in the thread.


----------



## BlackPanther (27 Apr 2012)

O.K. then. I've heard lots of comments on my original video. The more I think about it, even though the Mother (IMHO) was out of line (and wrong form a legal standpoint) the more I think that the best thing to do would be to edit the video. I'm not going to bother messing around pixelating (I can't even spell it ne' mind do it!) So I've just cut it, but not removed it because I reckon there are 2 important things that can be gained from viewing the video.



View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oBzNTQ08MNg



1/ It points out just how quick things can happen and catch you off guard. Even if you think you're riding as safely as possible. It's hard to hold primary, watch out for cars pulling out from the junction coming up on the right, and watch out for the kid on the pavement. I don't think in all honesty that many would've been able to avoid this collision.....but, hopefully I won't get caught out again!


2/ For gawds sake, everyone please show their kids just what can happen if they don't look before crossing the road!

And on that note, thankyou, and good night.


----------



## gambatte (27 Apr 2012)

gambatte said:


> This and my own recent events have really got me considering a cam.....


Too much ££ for now....
Reckon the airzounds back on


----------



## theclaud (27 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> O.K. then. I've heard lots of comments on my original video. The more I think about it, even though the Mother (IMHO) was out of line (and wrong form a legal standpoint) the more I think that the best thing to do would be to edit the video. I'm not going to bother messing around pixelating (I can't even spell it ne' mind do it!) So I've just cut it, but not removed it because I reckon there are 2 important things that can be gained from viewing the video.
> 
> 1/ It points out just how quick things can happen and catch you off guard. Even if you think you're riding as safely as possible. It's hard to hold primary, watch out for cars pulling out from the junction coming up on the right, and watch out for the kid on the pavement. I don't think in all honesty that many would've been able to avoid this collision.....but, hopefully I won't get caught out again!
> 
> ...


 
At the risk of prolonging a disagreement, I think a more positive message would be one that doesn't place all the responsibility on the shoulders of road users even more vulnerable than ourselves. How about: Remember that kids do things without looking - slow down, watch them, and give them loads of space? The title of your video doesn't help, if you don't mind my saying so.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Apr 2012)

No, I think there's a limit to how much care you can take over vulnerable road users, and I think this case exceeds it.

I'd like to think my horse and pedestrian videos should show how much care I take around peds. I don't think I could have avoided this one myself.


----------



## BlackPanther (27 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> The title of your video doesn't help, if you don't mind my saying so.


 
Erm, I was T-Boned.....off my bike.....by another cyclist. I was going to call it *'Ramases Niblick the third...Kerplunk, Kerplunk, Whoops! Wheres my thribble?' *But than realised that if someone was looking at you tube and wanted to find videos of a cyclist getting T-Boned, then the former title would be far more effective than the latter.




theclaud said:


> How about: Remember that kids do things without looking - slow down, watch them, and give them loads of space?


 
Good point Mr Hindsight. Maybe you should give lessons on how to ride (or go through life for that matter) without ever ever ever missing one of the billions of (however unlikely) possible scenarios that could happen daily.

I heard that a guy in China was killed by a falling meteorite. What a Wally, fancy walking around without constantly scouring the skies for falling meteorites, talk about asking for it!


----------



## theclaud (27 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> *No, I think there's a limit to how much care you can take over vulnerable road users*, and I think this case exceeds it.
> 
> I'd like to think my horse and pedestrian videos should show how much care I take around peds. I don't think I could have avoided this one myself.


 
You think? He's a child. He did the sort of thing children do. Let's aim to create the sort of public spaces where children don't pay for making a silly manoeuvre by being broadsided at 25mph. If BP had been in a car going at 30, would people seriously be arguing that the driver had no duty of care towards a child on the adjacent pavement? The bottom line, I'm afraid, is that BP _needn't_ have been going at 25mph, and/or _might_ have predicted that the kid might not go straight on. I'm not saying I wouldn't have been going too fast in the same situation, or would have seen it coming much sooner, but there it is...


----------



## theclaud (27 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> Erm, I was T-Boned.....off my bike.....by another cyclist. I was going to call it *'Ramases Niblick the third...Kerplunk, Kerplunk, Whoops! Wheres my thribble?' *But than realised that if someone was looking at you tube and wanted to find videos of a cyclist getting T-Boned, then the former title would be far more effective than the latter.
> 
> Good point Mr Hindsight. Maybe you should give lessons on how to ride (or go through life for that matter) without ever ever ever missing one of the dozens of (however unlikely) possible scenarios that could happen daily.
> 
> I heard that a guy in China who was killed by a falling meteorite. What a Wally, fancy walking around without constantly scouring the skies for falling meteorites, talk about asking for it!


 
What happened to "thank you and goodnight?" It might be technically correct, but it is nevertheless odd, to refer in the context of a traffic incident to a-kid-on-a-bike-on-the-pavement as "another cyclist". It suggests an equivalence between you, when in fact you're the grown-up, and you're faster and heavier. And you T-boned him, not the other way round.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Apr 2012)

Tut tut, some nasty victim blaming going on there mate.


----------



## BlackPanther (27 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> The bottom line, I'm afraid, is that BP _needn't_ have been going at 25mph,


 
.....Unless you're on a busy road, in which case it's sometimes far safer (especially near pinch points) to be near to the speed of the other traffic to prevent overtakes. CAN I JUST POINT OUT THAT HAD I BEEN GOING SLOWER, I WOULD'VE BEEN OVERTAKEN BY THE MANY CARS BEHIND, AND THEN THE KID WOULD'VE BEEN HIT BY ON OF THOSE.



theclaud said:


> What happened to "thank you and goodnight?" It might be technically correct, but it is nevertheless odd, to refer in the context of a traffic incident to a-kid-on-a-bike-on-the-pavement as "another cyclist". It suggests an equivalence between you, when in fact you're the grown-up, and you're faster and heavier. And you T-boned him, not the other way round.


 
I bow down before you, for you are indeed a God. Please please spread the word. Teach us all. We yearn for your awesome power of never ever making a mistake. Oh, and the video title is 'T-Boned by another cyclist', and if you're going to be so pedantic, then maybe I meant the title to represent the other cyclist.....he was 'T-Boned by another cyclist'....me! See, I can be pedantic too.


----------



## Crackle (27 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> Erm, I was T-Boned.....off my bike.....by another cyclist.


 


BlackPanther said:


> Oh, and the video title is 'T-Boned by another cyclist', and if you're going to be so pedantic, then maybe I meant the title to represent the other cyclist.....he was 'T-Boned by another cyclist'....me! See, I can be pedantic too.


 
You can only be pedantic if you remember what you already posted. [insert winky smiley]


----------



## BlackPanther (27 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> Tut tut, some nasty victim blaming going on there mate.


 

There's always one.


----------



## BlackPanther (27 Apr 2012)

Crackle said:


> You can only be pedantic if you remember what you already posted. [insert winky smiley]


 

I was feigning the pedanticism.....if that's a word.


----------



## Boris Bajic (27 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> I was feigning the pedanticism.....if that's a word.


 
It's pedantry..... shoot!!!! 

I mean "My mate told me it's pedantry. I've never heard the term myself".

Phew.... I nearly looked sad or stupid or both just now....


----------



## BentMikey (28 Apr 2012)

Except he wasn't at the crossing, he was riding along the pavement at a reasonable speed. I think it's a step too far to expect a sudden swerve across the road like that, at least not with that much speed and that suddenly.


----------



## theclaud (28 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> .....Unless you're on a busy road, in which case it's sometimes far safer (especially near pinch points) to be near to the speed of the other traffic to prevent overtakes. CAN I JUST POINT OUT THAT HAD I BEEN GOING SLOWER, I WOULD'VE BEEN OVERTAKEN BY THE MANY CARS BEHIND, AND THEN THE KID WOULD'VE BEEN HIT BY ON OF THOSE.



There's no need to shout. I acknowledge that following traffic is easier to manage when you're travelling at speed, but unfortunately it's a trade-off - it makes you, from the point of view of someone crossing the road, part of the problem. The shouty bit doesn't follow, although no one is disputing that it's worse to be hit by a car than by a bike. I don't think you were doing anything particularly reckless or made a mistake that any one of us might not make - I'm just pointing out that, as fast-moving traffic claiming a priority, you become part of what makes it difficult for the kid on the bike to get from A to B.


----------



## theclaud (28 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> Tut tut, some nasty victim blaming going on there mate.



If we are starting to think of ourselves as the "victims" of 11-year old children trying to cross the road, then we probably need to get a grip.


----------



## GetAGrip (28 Apr 2012)

You raaaang Ma Lady


----------



## Hawk (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1826227, member: 45"]He was at a crossing point. Or did you miss that? .;-)[/quote]

I would've missed it as well, could've just been a traffic calming feature as the path the kid was on appears to go off to the left.

The point is YES, the cyclist missed it (this doesn't the incident his fault in my opinion but this is irrelevant fortunately).

So thankyou, BP for posting this clip and contributing to the following discussion.

I consider myself an inexperienced cyclist and it is great to be able to see in real time how quickly a situation that looks fairly normal can turn in to a dangerous one, particularly when children are involved.

I now don't need to go out and make the same mistake before I pick up the experience required to avoid such a situation :-)


----------



## BentMikey (28 Apr 2012)

Here's another child who'd also done something like this before:



Paul, you're doing a Lee here. If you really think you could have avoided that, then I'm laughing at your arrogance.


----------



## gambatte (28 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> If we are starting to think of ourselves as the "victims" of 11-year old children trying to cross the road, then we probably need to get a grip.


No, more likely thinking of ourselves as victims of a mother who's let her child out without adequate supervision and with insufficient cycle skills, who has a history of writing off bikes.
And personally speaking as a parent of 10 and an 8 year old lads who both have bikes.


----------



## Boris Bajic (28 Apr 2012)

I have to be careful here, as I always say before being the opposite of careful.

As a parent who encouraged cycling, I went to great lengths to drum roadsense into the young minds of my offspring. There will be dreamers on this forum who will claim that either they or their children had perfect roadsense before they could walk.

All my children ate from the cat's dish as toddlers. All of them have offed themselves from bikes at speed through their own inattention or the desire to turn round and chat on a fast descent. I was pretty Draconian as a cycle-teaching parent and they didn't ride alone on the roads until they were in year 6. But there are no guarantees.

Nonetheless... for all the kamikaze lack of reck in allowing unguided missiles onto the public highway, at least the lad was on a bike and using it.

Little old ladies, AIM members, Senna-wannabes and stressed sales reps have all pulled out on cyclists without looking. 

Yes, the little chappie was a prize turnip. We all have been at one time or another on the highway.

I don't think BP was a victim of the mother of the chappie he hit. I have schooled mine in road riding to an almost absurd degree, but there is no guarantee that they won't get T-Boned by a passing artic through their own inattention. I'd still much rather they were cycling among 10-wheelers than glued to an X-Box screen.

BP was not at fault for the incident, but he'll be watching like a hawk for kids riding on the pavement from now on. The turnip kid caused the collision and he'll be a little more careful stepping or riding off the pavement next time.


----------



## BlackPanther (28 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> There's no need to shout.


 

Just wanting to really bang home the point. If I had been riding slower, and hadn't been in primary, then I'm 99% sure that one of those cars lined up behind my bike (as seen in the video immediately after the collision) would've hit the lad instead of me, as they'd have overtaken me. They would've been travelling 20% faster, and whereas I travelled only a metre or so before I came to a rather inelegant stop on the road, a car would've travelled.....23 metres (that's thinking and braking distance). Maybe the kid would've been flung over the bonnet, maybe he'd have been thrown to the side, maybe he'd have gone under the car, who knows. All I know is that it's lucky I didn't set off from work 30 seconds later.

Hindsight has been mentioned (or implied) dozens of times in this thread, but I think the majority of posters have been honest to admit that this would have been very difficult (but I'm not saying impossible) to avoid. Maybe, just maybe on a different day, I wouldn't have had a line of cars behind me to watch, or a side road coming up on the right (where cars regularly pull out in front of me) and maybe I would've pre-empted the lad swerving out into the road at the last second, but I doubt it. My human brain is designed primarily to keep it's host safe, and therefore focuses on the most imminent danger. Drivers brains are the same, and that's why they're more likely to pull out on a cyclist.....we're just not a threat!

I'm not saying that the way the brain works is ideal in this day and age, but it's difficult to override millions of years of evolution. Of course, now that I've had this new experience knocked (almost literally) into my human brain, next time maybe I'll be focused on the very slight possibility of a rider suddenly swerving across me without any indication.......I just hope that me being focused on that doesn't mean that I miss the car pulling out of the side road......it's all a balancing act.


----------



## BentMikey (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1826369, member: 45"]Nor am I suggesting that I would have avoided the collision. [/quote]

Good, that's all we need to know. You clearly do agree with my point.


----------



## theclaud (28 Apr 2012)

gambatte said:


> No, more likely thinking of ourselves as victims of a mother who's let her child out without adequate supervision and with insufficient cycle skills, who has a history of writing off bikes.



Excellent! Another social problem to lay at the door of mothers! Just what we need, instead of making streets safer for children. Has anyone yet suggested that the road might be better with a 20mph limit? Or have we all been too busy slagging Mum off? But not Dad, of course...


----------



## ultraviolet (28 Apr 2012)

where theres blame, theres a claim :-)


----------



## Hip Priest (28 Apr 2012)

Well done on highlighting the sexism theclaud - some very unfair comments have been made about the lady in the video. Personally I can't see what the parents have done wrong with regards to safety. Human beings make mistakes, and that's all the young lad on the bike did. Are his parents meant to have him strapped into a papoose until he reaches the age where he'll never make a mistake? No such age exists.


----------



## Recycler (28 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> Excellent! Another social problem to lay at the door of mothers! Just what we need, instead of making streets safer for children. Has anyone yet suggested that the road might be better with a 20mph limit? Or have we all been too busy slagging Mum off? But not Dad, of course...


 
So, the parents aren't expected to teach their kids a bit of basic roadsense?

The kid wasn't looking, wasn't making signals, had a record of smashing bikes, and FWIW wasn't wearing a helmet...

Yes, it looks like it's down to us.


----------



## Recycler (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1826444, member: 9609"]And what has a helmet got to do with the price of fish, he hurt his arm!.[/quote]

The parents let the kid out on the road without a helmet, knowing that he had smashed bikes up before.
Hardly responsible parenting.

The fact that he did not appear to hurt his head on this occasion is completely irrelevant.


----------



## Hip Priest (28 Apr 2012)

When I was that lads age I used to go out on my bike all hours without a helmet. In fact, when I was a kid, my mum used to chuck me out the house all day so I wasn't under her feet.

These days I'd get taken to Spongey-plastic-fun-zone in a massive 4x4, where I'd be 'safe'.


----------



## gambatte (28 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> Excellent! Another social problem to lay at the door of mothers! Just what we need, instead of making streets safer for children. Has anyone yet suggested that the road might be better with a 20mph limit? Or have we all been too busy slagging Mum off? But not Dad, of course...


Presumptive of you. Do we know dads about? All we've seen is mother and mention of a partner. So yeah, she's the only GUARDIAN we know about.


----------



## BentMikey (28 Apr 2012)

The helmet or lack of it is nothing to do with the issue. It doesn't make her a bad parent.


----------



## gambatte (28 Apr 2012)

Hip Priest said:


> When I was that lads age I used to go out on my bike all hours without a helmet. In fact, when I was a kid, my mum used to chuck me out the house all day so I wasn't under her feet.
> 
> These days I'd get taken to Spongey-plastic-fun-zone in a massive 4x4, where I'd be 'safe'.


 
Mine won't, just make sure they've got road sense before they go out. Go out with them to start with. Keep it up occasionally once they're 'competent'

We know the roads are busier than 'X' number of years ago. It's the first excuse plod gives for not enforcing pavement parking etc.

So as well as there being more cars on the road, more cars parked on the road, theres also an increasing number of cars that don't make any discernable engine noise. Make sure they know to be aware of their environment.

You can do commentary driving, get 'em doing a bit of commentary riding


----------



## Recycler (28 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> The helmet or lack of it is nothing to do with the issue. It doesn't make her a bad parent.


 
It certainly doesn't make her a good parent. It's one of those things that can only help the safety of her child.

For all we know she doesn't care a hoot about the kids safety. All we can see in the video is that she is concerned about paying to repair his bike and avoiding paying for the damage to the other bike. The OP can tell us what she said, but AFAIK there's no evidence that she even thanked him for bringing the kid and his bike home. Not a very good example to set for the kid.


----------



## stowie (28 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> Excellent! Another social problem to lay at the door of mothers! Just what we need, instead of making streets safer for children. Has anyone yet suggested that the road might be better with a 20mph limit? Or have we all been too busy slagging Mum off? But not Dad, of course...


 
Of course, the 20 mph limit wouldn't have helped in this case. I also think that the mother is being slagged off because she is in the film, not Dad. If it had just been Dad, I expect that Dad would have been slagged off instead. But the tone of some of the comments about the mother is unnecessary.


----------



## theclaud (28 Apr 2012)

Recycler said:


> So, the parents aren't expected to teach their kids a bit of basic roadsense?
> 
> The kid wasn't looking, wasn't making signals, had a record of smashing bikes, and FWIW wasn't wearing a helmet...



Brilliant! This thread isn't anywhere near tendentious enough. Let's throw in an irrelevant helmet debate.


----------



## theclaud (28 Apr 2012)

gambatte said:


> Presumptive of you. Do we know dads about? All we've seen is mother and mention of a partner. So yeah, she's the only GUARDIAN we know about.



It's neither here nor there. For me there's no bad parenting to address- I think it's a good thing for kids to be out on their own. But if there were a parenting issue, one might reasonably expect the other parent, absent or not, to share the responsibility for it. I'm merely struck by the fact that mothers take a disproportionate share of the blame for, well, just about everything, and I'm dismayed by the entirely unwarranted abuse directed at the mother in this thread.


----------



## BentMikey (28 Apr 2012)

Recycler said:


> It certainly doesn't make her a good parent. It's one of those things that can only help harm the safety of her child.


 
FTFY


----------



## gambatte (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1826593, member: 45"]If you'd ridden down there before then you'd know it was a crossing point. Two bollards on a pedestrian island indicate a crossing point but you're right, it's not easy to see from the clip. I'm not sure what's on the pole on the island.[/quote]
If memory serves its just a lamp


----------



## Recycler (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1826537, member: 9609"]I think you are being so unfair about this family, the young lad was polite, his sister seemed caring towards him, the mother was also relatively polite but stood her ground, (didn't hand over a blank cheque), and I'm sure she did thank BP for bringing the lad home, and then there was that lovely little dog called buster. Nothing in that video to suggest anything remotely wrong with them.[/quote]

Yes, I'm sure that she is the next Mother Theresa and a shining light for all to follow.
The whole incident was down to the reckless riding of the OP who even had the audacity to selfishly take the kid and his bike back home to his mother. Almost criminal behaviour.
The darling child should be encouraged to cross the road without looking.

And Buster. What a gem. Lassie has nothing on him.

I reckon that the mother should sue the OP for every penny he's got.


----------



## ultraviolet (28 Apr 2012)

Hip Priest said:


> Well done on highlighting the sexism theclaud - some very unfair comments have been made about the lady in the video. Personally I can't see what the parents have done wrong with regards to safety. Human beings make mistakes, and that's all the young lad on the bike did. Are his parents meant to have him strapped into a papoose until he reaches the age where he'll never make a mistake? No such age exists.


 
perfectly put.

i think i'll stop subscribing to this thread now :-)


----------



## Recycler (28 Apr 2012)

Hip Priest said:


> Are his parents meant to have him strapped into a papoose until he reaches the age where he'll never make a mistake? No such age exists.


 
No, of course they aren't. However, they should be expected to take responsibility for the lads actions.


----------



## theclaud (28 Apr 2012)

BlackPanther said:


> Just wanting to really bang home the point. If I had been riding slower, and hadn't been in primary, then I'm 99% sure that one of those cars lined up behind my bike (as seen in the video immediately after the collision) would've hit the lad instead of me, as they'd have overtaken me. They would've been travelling 20% faster, and whereas I travelled only a metre or so before I came to a rather inelegant stop on the road, a car would've travelled.....23 metres (that's thinking and braking distance). Maybe the kid would've been flung over the bonnet, maybe he'd have been thrown to the side, maybe he'd have gone under the car, who knows. All I know is that it's lucky I didn't set off from work 30 seconds later.
> 
> Hindsight has been mentioned (or implied) dozens of times in this thread, but I think the majority of posters have been honest to admit that this would have been very difficult (but I'm not saying impossible) to avoid. Maybe, just maybe on a different day, I wouldn't have had a line of cars behind me to watch, or a side road coming up on the right (where cars regularly pull out in front of me) and maybe I would've pre-empted the lad swerving out into the road at the last second, but I doubt it. My human brain is designed primarily to keep it's host safe, and therefore focuses on the most imminent danger. Drivers brains are the same, and that's why they're more likely to pull out on a cyclist.....we're just not a threat!
> 
> I'm not saying that the way the brain works is ideal in this day and age, but it's difficult to override millions of years of evolution. Of course, now that I've had this new experience knocked (almost literally) into my human brain, next time maybe I'll be focused on the very slight possibility of a rider suddenly swerving across me without any indication.......I just hope that me being focused on that doesn't mean that I miss the car pulling out of the side road......it's all a balancing act.



You might be right about how it might have happened had you been riding more slowly... but then you might be wrong. It's butterfly-flapping-its-wings-in-South-America stuff. Stowie thinks a 20mph limit wouldn't have made a difference, but I disagree. Not because I imagine that you're obliged to abide by it, but because lower traffic speeds overall would change the entire character of the road, including the speed you feel pressured to maintain whilst keeping would-be overtakers at bay.


----------



## stowie (28 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> You might be right about how it might have happened had you been riding more slowly... but then you might be wrong. It's butterfly-flapping-its-wings-in-South-America stuff. Stowie thinks a 20mph limit wouldn't have made a difference, but I disagree. Not because I imagine that you're obliged to abide by it, but because lower traffic speeds overall would change the entire character of the road, including the speed you feel pressured to maintain whilst keeping would-be overtakers at bay.


 
I don't think 20mph would have made a difference in this instance because the cycle may have been travelling at less than 20mph and wouldn't need to obey the limit in any case. But don't get me wrong, I am very much for 20mph limits on pretty much all urban or suburban roads.


----------



## theclaud (28 Apr 2012)

stowie said:


> I don't think 20mph would have made a difference in this instance because the cycle may have been travelling at less than 20mph and wouldn't need to obey the limit in any case. But don't get me wrong, I am very much for 20mph limits on pretty much all urban or suburban roads.



He was doing about 25, by his own reckoning- it certainly looks it in the video. If the max for cars were 20, a cyclist moving at 15-20 would be going fast enough to manage the following traffic without giving occasion for impatience- which was the idea, as BP has it, of approaching the pinch point at 25 in a 30 zone as in the video.


----------



## Boris Bajic (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1826942, member: 9609"]Sorry for going completely off topic, but did want to stick my oar in here - You probably are correct mothers do get more of the blame when things go wrong, but there is the added benefit for mothers that when families break up, fathers do not have a hope in hell, the law seems to back the woman 99.999%[/quote]

Way off topic, but that's the nature of the beast.

1. The Claud is right that some comments about the mother were unwarrantedly abusive. There was a teensy mysogynistic streak in one or two of them.

2. In cases of family break-up the courts are very often right to look to the mother for childcare and similar. I was raised by a (widowed) single father. He was heroic in his approach to the task, but massively ill-equipped for it. I had no idea what the added magic of a maternal presence was until I saw my wife with our children. I have to say I was a bit envious. Unless the mother is an axe-murderer, I would always be in favour of custody decisions favouring her. I dare say the figure of 99.999% is given inaccurately to make a point, but I'd be surprised if the true figure was lower than 90% - nor should it be.

Sorry, you can go back on-topic now that I've made a calm and non-contentious reply.


----------



## Hip Priest (28 Apr 2012)

Boris Bajic said:


> 2. In cases of family break-up the courts are very often right to look to the mother for childcare and similar. I was raised by a (widowed) single father. He was heroic in his approach to the task, but massively ill-equipped for it. I had no idea what the added magic of a maternal presence was until I saw my wife with our children. I have to say I was a bit envious. Unless the mother is an axe-murderer, I would always be in favour of custody decisions favouring her. I dare say the figure of 99.999% is given inaccurately to make a point, but I'd be surprised if the true figure was lower than 90% - nor should it be.


 
I agree. But it does feel a little unfair that a woman could tire of her husband and not only ditch him, but deprive him of the experience of living with his kids. But then who said life was fair?


----------



## Maylian (28 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> Excellent! Another social problem to lay at the door of mothers! Just what we need, instead of making streets safer for children. Has anyone yet suggested that the road might be better with a 20mph limit? Or have we all been too busy slagging Mum off? But not Dad, of course...


 
Maybe re read some posts....I clearly state in mine that it is the responsibility of both parents to educate the child. On my more aggressive side why do mothers get to use that as a defense for so many things they are not versed in? It is one of my pet hates that women think the line "as a mother" in anyway allows their opinion to be more valid unless of course someone asked on experiences of being a mother....


----------



## gambatte (28 Apr 2012)

There have been comments about helmets etc. But the amount of kids I see out on bikes without a single brake component actually present on the machine makes me wonder as to the thought some parents give to the safety of their kids.....


----------



## Maylian (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1827023, member: 9609"]Not such a thing on cycleChat, someone will have a problem with it

I would suggest the sky is blue, but no doubt there would be 50 replies telling me it wasn't[/quote]

I'm colour blind and resemble this remark


----------



## gambatte (28 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1827023, member: 9609"]Not such a thing on cycleChat, someone will have a problem with it

I would suggest the sky is blue, but no doubt there would be 50 replies telling me it wasn't[/quote]

Its black right now


----------



## ultraviolet (28 Apr 2012)

Recycler said:


> No, of course they aren't. However, they should be expected to take responsibility for the lads actions.


 
prosicely; like saying sorry on the childs behalf, who was clearly shaken by the events. thats all that was needed.


----------



## theclaud (29 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1826942, member: 9609"]Sorry for going completely off topic, but did want to stick my oar in here - You probably are correct mothers do get more of the blame when things go wrong, but there is the added benefit for mothers that when families break up, fathers do not have a hope in hell, the law seems to back the woman 99.999%[/quote]

It is OT, and it's also untrue. Courts are not biased in favour of women- they are, very sensibly, inclined to find in favour of the de facto primary carer. That this is usually the mother is a reflection of broader inequalities in employment and the division of domestic labour. So it is unfair, but in exactly the opposite of the way you imagine. But hey, this thread can take it all: misogyny; victim-blaming; faux victim-blaming; helmets; and now Fathers for Justice. I'm currently cooking up an anecdote that involves immigration, hi-vis, rape and RLJ, just to make sure we don't miss anything.


----------



## Crackle (29 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> It is OT, and it's also untrue. Courts are not biased in favour of women- they are, very sensibly, inclined to find in favour of the de facto primary carer. That this is usually the mother is a reflection of broader inequalities in employment and the division of domestic labour. So it is unfair, but in exactly the opposite of the way you imagine. But hey, this thread can take it all: misogyny; victim-blaming; faux victim-blaming; helmets; and now Fathers for Justice. I'm currently cooking up an anecdote that involves immigration, hi-vis, rape and RLJ, just to make sure we don't miss anything.


 
Motorbikes, you should probably involve motorbikes as well.

Not too many facts though, facts are a bit inconvenient where prejudiced uninformed judgemental opinion is concerned.


----------



## theclaud (29 Apr 2012)

Crackle said:


> Motorbikes, you should probably involve motorbikes as well.
> 
> Not too many facts though, facts are a bit inconvenient where prejudiced uninformed judgemental opinion is concerned.



Motorbikes, of course! Silly of me to leave them out. And speed cameras.


----------



## Alien8 (29 Apr 2012)

Maylian said:


> I'm colour blind and resemble this remark


 
I didn't realise I was colour blind until the doctor told me - it was a bit of a bolt out of the yellow...


----------



## Mushroomgodmat (29 Apr 2012)

Alien8 said:


> I didn't realise I was colour blind until the doctor told me - it was a bit of a bolt out of the yellow...



http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...7pW4BA&usg=AFQjCNHLvR9R5VXx4oIGaa4CA8ePbG1y9w


----------



## theclaud (29 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1827585, member: 9609"]You can't have it both ways, when it comes to custody the woman is presumed to be the primary carer, so therefore can we not assume that if the child has not been brought up correctly then we can also point the finger at the woman. Seems only fair to me.

As for the OT stuff, it was you that went off topic on this badly done to woman's tangent. And as you know, throughout this thread I have very much been on the side of the mother who has received some very uncalled for comments.[/quote]

I acknowledge your last point, and indeed your contributions helped salvage what was becoming a rather nasty thread.

I didn't say women are presumed to be the primary carers, I said they usually _were_ the primary carers. The courts are not acting on a presumption; they are recognising a fact. Any for all the flack they get, I'd say that they have an understanding of motherhood that is both less sentimental and less judgemental than the population at large, the media and the political classes. And I'm not trying to have anything both ways- the argument is perfectly coherent. It's reasonable to expect the two people who produce a child to share the responsibility for that child's care and well-being. So why assume that when a child is behaving in a particular way, that it is a result of what the mother is or isn't doing, rather than because of what the father is or isn't doing? My thumbs are too tired for more italics, or I'd emphasize the final "or isn't". 

Anyway, we can still agree that we're OT, because there is no particular parenting issue arising from the video.


----------



## Recycler (29 Apr 2012)

[QUOTE 1827591, member: 9609"]I think you can judge a family by the dog. Happy dog = good family; Unhappy dog = Bad family
And Buster looked a happy wee soul![/quote]

OMG.
The mother was doing everything to avoid her obligations, but that's OK because of a very brief shot of a dog.
I would prefer to look at the evidence


----------



## Boris Bajic (29 Apr 2012)

theclaud said:


> I acknowledge your last point, and indeed your contributions helped salvage what was becoming a rather nasty thread.
> 
> I didn't say women are presumed to be the primary carers, I said they usually _were_ the primary carers. The courts are not acting on a presumption; they are recognising a fact. Any for all the flack they get, I'd say that they have an understanding of motherhood that is both less sentimental and less judgemental than the population at large, the media and the political classes. And I'm not trying to have anything both ways- the argument is perfectly coherent. It's reasonable to expect the two people who produce a child to share the responsibility for that child's care and well-being. So why assume that when a child is behaving in a particular way, that it is a result of what the mother is or isn't doing, rather than because of what the father is or isn't doing? My thumbs are too tired for more italics, or I'd emphasize the final "or isn't".
> 
> Anyway, we can still agree that we're OT, because there is no particular parenting issue arising from the video.


 
This is a nice post. Some of the comments about the mother in the video were quite unpleasant and needed to be stemmed.

I think there was a degree of misogyny creeping in there, but I believe the main reason the mother took the (pointless) flak was that she was present.

I may be wrong, but I'm not sure anyone was pointing the finger of blame at mothers (or women) in general. I certainly hope they weren't. 

As to women (generally) being the primary carers, this fits almost every childhood of which I have some knowledge. To be more specific, it is not women who tend to be the primary carers, but _mothers_. I make the distinction because I know many women who do not have (or profess to have) the "understanding of motherhood that is both less sentimental and less judgemental than the population at large" to which you refer. That attitude tends (although not exclusively) to be the domain of the mother.

There were women around the house occasionally after my mother's early and unfortunate death and that was fine. But they were not mothers. To a child, there is a big difference. During my childhood I 'adopted' a few spare mothers from close friends. I am close to this day to all who are still alive, even where I have lost touch with the childhood friend.


----------



## Browser (4 May 2012)

HovR said:


> A bell for pedestrians, and the AirZound for cars?


 
Just seen this, nasty and could have been a lot worse for both of you. I agree totally with you HovR, but being as we are in England, 99.9% of the time all you'd get is a mouthful of abuse for daring to let anyone know there was a bicycle approaching at speed.


----------

