Minister hit car

irishrover99 · 02-01-2017 3:54pm #1

http://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0102/842220-denis-naughten/

And it makes the main headlines on RTÉ

***minister***

Hanwellian · 02-01-2017 3:55pm

There will be a raft of legislation aimed at cyclists soon!

eeguy · 02-01-2017 3:56pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0102/842220-denis-naughten/

And it makes the main headlines on RTÉ

Whats a minsister?
Also, the report says he was hit BY a car, not that he hit a car.
Also, why wouldn't it make headlines?

irishrover99 · 02-01-2017 4:00pm

Hanwellian wrote: »

There will be a raft of legislation aimed at cyclists soon!

Good to see you got my point of posting the link unlike someone else.

irishrover99 · 02-01-2017 4:03pm

eeguy wrote: »

Whats a minsister?
Also, the report says he was hit BY a car, not that he hit a car.
Also, why wouldn't it make headlines?

if I was hit by a car today and it wasn't fatal, would it have made the news?. And my apologies for the spelling mistake. I promise not to do it again

ArmaniJeanss · 02-01-2017 4:07pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

if I was hit by a car today and it wasn't fatal, would it have made the news?. And my apologies for the spelling mistake. I promise not to do it again

Its hardly unreasonable in a democracy that when the people we elect are involved in an incident that it gets reported. Its 'of interest' whereas if it was just you then it would be of no interest (no offence meant).

beauf · 02-01-2017 4:08pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

...And it makes the main headlines on RTÉ..

I would have thought that a minister in any country getting injured would be newsworthy. Not entirely sure why you think it wouldn't.

I dunno which way you meant this, that there will be anti cycling or pro cycling activity as a result. I assume the former if this was meant to be cynical. Somehow I doubt any action will be taken. Everyone seems to want to drive and be stuck in traffic everywhere.

inforfun · 02-01-2017 4:09pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

if I was hit by a car today and it wasn't fatal, would it have made the news?. And my apologies for the spelling mistake. I promise not to do it again

Are you a Minister?

c montgomery · 02-01-2017 4:10pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

if I was hit by a car today and it wasn't fatal, would it have made the news?. And my apologies for the spelling mistake. I promise not to do it again

Well no, your a nobody

Chuchote · 02-01-2017 4:35pm

What's interesting (apart from the fact that another cyclist was struck by a car, poor man, and I hope he's ok) is that it's plainly reported as his being hit by the car from behind. No "but was he wearing a helmet", no "was in collision with", no "damn cyclist probably deserved it".

Ted111 · 02-01-2017 4:45pm

minister hit by car

I hope he hit the car back.

jaykay74 · 02-01-2017 4:52pm

irishrover99 wrote:

if I was hit by a car today and it wasn't fatal, would it have made the news?

Are you trying to pass this as a logical argument? Seriously?

eeguy · 02-01-2017 4:53pm

c montgomery wrote: »

Well no, your a nobody

Maybe he's a Minsister?

irishrover99 · 02-01-2017 5:09pm

jaykay74 wrote: »

Are you trying to pass this as a logical argument? Seriously?

Yes definitely. Should this guys life be taken more seriously than anyone else's. Should he get special attention from the Gardai after an accident than me, maybe he should since I'm a nobody. I can be pretty sure some measure will be taken because of this that possibly would not have if it was me or a nobody.

eeguy · 02-01-2017 5:19pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

Yes definitely. Should this guys life be taken more seriously than anyone else's. Should he get special attention from the Gardai after an accident than me, maybe he should since I'm a nobody. I can be pretty sure some measure will be taken because of this that possibly would not have if it was me or a nobody.

Should it? No.

Will it? Yes.

magicbastarder · 02-01-2017 5:40pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

Yes definitely. Should this guys life be taken more seriously than anyone else's.

he's a public figure and politician. of course it's newsworthy in a way that you being injured is not. i'm surprised that's even worth commenting on.

beauf · 02-01-2017 5:53pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

Yes definitely. Should this guys life be taken more seriously than anyone else's. Should he get special attention from the Gardai after an accident than me, maybe he should since I'm a nobody. I can be pretty sure some measure will be taken because of this that possibly would not have if it was me or a nobody.

How did you not notice this is how the world and human nature works before now.

feargale · 02-01-2017 6:14pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

if I was hit by a car today and it wasn't fatal, would it have made the news?.

If you were found in a pub after hours and convicted accordingly would it make headlines? Two guesses as to how the minister would fare in the same circumstances.

Two guesses as to whether your passing will match Zsa Zsa Gabor's for headlines. Oh my, what an unfair world we live in. I'd say your only remedy is to start a revolution.

If you want immortality you should cycle up Mount Everest, because you won't get it in boards.ie. Otherwise get over yourself.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 02-01-2017 7:13pm

irishrover99 wrote: »

if I was hit by a car today and it wasn't fatal, would it have made the news?.

Oh stop feeling so precious about yourself.

He's a political & public figure so of course his accident is going to make the news before you or I, that's how it goes.

Looking at the RTE Six One News is appears as though he was very lucky not to have sustained more serious injuries.

I hope he makes a speedy recovery.

Beasty · 02-01-2017 7:46pm

In an attempt to take any heat out of this thread...

D'ya reckon if Min's sister married Irish Rover their first girl would be called Mini Driver?

Oh, and I'll change the thread title now

Moflojo · 02-01-2017 7:47pm

Chuchote wrote: »

What's interesting (apart from the fact that another cyclist was struck by a car, poor man, and I hope he's ok) is that it's plainly reported as his being hit by the car from behind. No "but was he wearing a helmet", no "was in collision with", no "damn cyclist probably deserved it".

The reporting could go one step further and remove the passive language of being hit "by a car". The reality is that he was hit with a car that was under the control of a driver.

I firmly believe that any collision between a vehicle and a pedestrian/cyclist should be treated as a criminal act by default and investigated as such. The driver should be arrested or cautioned and taken for breathalyser and blood tests immediately. If the driver is found to be under the influence of drugs or if any aspect of the driver's paperwork is out of order (license, tax, insurance, NCT) then the collision should be treated as GBH, manslaughter or the appropriate level of corresponding violent crime.

Bigus · 02-01-2017 7:50pm

Beasty wrote: »

In an attempt to take any heat out of this thread...

D'ya reckon if Min's sister married Irish Rover their first girl would be called Mini Driver?

Oh, and I'll change the thread title now

Minor injuries so I can joke inoffensively.

And the driver that hit him was a cyclopath

But I'm sure the community will Raleigh round.

magicbastarder · 02-01-2017 8:07pm

i'm talking your post with a giant pinch of salt.

magicbastarder · 02-01-2017 8:12pm

Moflojo wrote: »

I firmly believe that any collision between a vehicle and a pedestrian/cyclist should be treated as a criminal act by default

i can't see how this would work - you've an immediate presumption that the cause of the collision is on one side, where it could just as easily be on the other. IANAL, but i suspect this would fall on a basic premise of natural justice.
what if the accident was found to have been caused by the pedestrian?
and you're proposing using irrelevant details (tax, NCT, etc.) as a means of imposing a harsher sentence. again, i can't see thie logic or justice in this.

Odelay · 02-01-2017 8:19pm

Moflojo wrote: »

The reporting could go one step further and remove the passive language of being hit "by a car". The reality is that he was hit with a car that was under the control of a driver.

I firmly believe that any collision between a vehicle and a pedestrian/cyclist should be treated as a criminal act by default and investigated as such. The driver should be arrested or cautioned and taken for breathalyser and blood tests immediately. If the driver is found to be under the influence of drugs or if any aspect of the driver's paperwork is out of order (license, tax, insurance, NCT) then the collision should be treated as GBH, manslaughter or the appropriate level of corresponding violent crime.

Tax?? Tax out of date and the driver should be charged with GBH or manslaughter?? What world do you live in?

eeguy · 02-01-2017 8:53pm

Odelay wrote: »

Tax?? Tax out of date and the driver should be charged with GBH or manslaughter?? What world do you live in?

That's way OTT. Out of date tax or insurance doesn't make you a violent driver. Stupid maybe, but not worthy of GBH or manslaughter.

Unfortunately accidents happen. No one goes out with the express intention of hurting another, and few are that negligent that someone gets hurt as a return of their action or lack of.

I do agree that the onus is on the motorist to drive safely. They're in the more powerful vehicle and they are the one (usually) attempting to manoeuvre around the cyclist.

Moflojo · 02-01-2017 9:04pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

and you're proposing using irrelevant details (tax, NCT, etc.) as a means of imposing a harsher sentence. again, i can't see thie logic or justice in this.

I think they're relevant because they dictate whether the vehicle (and potentially the driver) should have been on the road in the first place. At the very least it suggests a basic lack of due care or responsibility by the driver. If a child accidentally shot himself with an unregistered or unlicensed firearm do you think the penalty for the firearm owner would be more harsh than if the firearm was properly licensed?

realdanbreen · 02-01-2017 9:11pm

Chuchote wrote: »

What's interesting (apart from the fact that another cyclist was struck by a car, poor man, and I hope he's ok) is that it's plainly reported as his being hit by the car from behind. No "but was he wearing a helmet", no "was in collision with", no "damn cyclist probably deserved it".

Like a lot of cyclists he probably thought the fact that he had colourful lycra and a helmet on made him somehow safe. Cycling into a low bright sun or cycling in poor conditions on public roads is asking for trouble. Common sense should prevail.

amcalester · 02-01-2017 9:20pm

realdanbreen wrote: »

Like a lot of cyclists he probably thought the fact that he had colourful lycra and a helmet on made him somehow safe. Cycling into a low bright sun or cycling in poor conditions on public roads is asking for trouble. Common sense should prevail.

So it's the minister's own fault that he was hit because he may have been wearing a helmet and Lycra while cycling with the sun at his back?

Have you a source for this?

07Lapierre · 02-01-2017 9:22pm

realdanbreen wrote: »

Like a lot of cyclists he probably thought the fact that he had colourful lycra and a helmet on made him somehow safe. Cycling into a low bright sun or cycling in poor conditions on public roads is asking for trouble. Common sense should prevail.

Victim blaming is alive and well eh?

Moflojo · 02-01-2017 9:23pm

realdanbreen wrote: »

Like a lot of cyclists he probably thought the fact that he had colourful lycra and a helmet on made him somehow safe. Cycling into a low bright sun or cycling in poor conditions on public roads is asking for trouble. Common sense should prevail.

Shtahp.

If the conditions are poor or there's a low bright sun it's up to all road users, including drivers, to adjust their behaviour according to the conditions. If a driver is blinded by the sun they are obliged to stop, slow to a safe speed, or wear appropriate eyewear.

Minister hit car

Comments