Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

OP has said a lot about that. They've been a bit less forthcoming in describing their own behaviour in how they "raised the issue"! Perhaps that might explain the laughing onlookers. Perhaps not.

Why did you feel the need to post that?

Have you actually read the rest of the thread?

7 hours ago, HeadNun said:

This thread is about the father's ungenerous and snide reaction towards a pedestrian, into which his four-year-old collided. Not about whether said child should have been cycling on the pavement. 

It's a thread about parenting so stop hijacking it, just so you can showcase, yet again, your vast and superior knowledge about roads, bikes, cars, driving, the law, pavements, ebikes, LTNs. PCNs, lanes, lines, speed limits, helmets, lights, dayglow, lycra etc etc etc. 

Just seen this.  Your post was a bit unnecessary.  I was simply responding to the previous post that children should be cycling on the pavement.

But as you say I know shed loads about transport.  Not to the depths that some go down to the minutia.  Some call me the space cowboy.  Some call me the gangster of love.  I think of myself as the people's poet.  You have to laugh at yourself.

Echoing what DKH said, we weren't there, you don't know the parent was making a snide remark,

My favourite Dulwich parent story was a few years ago were friends when we were in the Herne garden a few years ago, who let their children run riot.  Bless.  One decided to turn the hose on spraying some poor drinkers.  Now most of us would be mortified, but the friends welcomed their child's creativity.   

7 hours ago, malumbu said:

Echoing what DKH said, we weren't there, you don't know the parent was making a snide remark,

If we accept what the OP has written, and it does seem credible, the father did not respond to the incident appropriately. His child was out of his line of sight when the OP was hit from behind by the child on a bike. Many of us, having been startled like this, might express some displeasure. Rather than a sincere and concerned apology, it sounds as though the father instead attempted to paint the OP as the problem, even laughing at them. I don't know what kind of message that would send to his child but doubt it is a good one. 

Yes - the fact they go long on how awful the other adult was but seem a bit reluctant to talk about their own behaviour!

If you actually read the OP, their argument with the man wasn't about the kid hitting him, but about OP being told that their "reaction was over the top". Well, OK, then, OP - what was that reaction?

OP then says "As I walked away, I heard him and two other adults talking and laughing about my reaction – yes, laughing." That's an interesting detail. Many possibilities here. Is the world is so chock full of sadists that even casual onlookers cackle at the sight of someone being smacked into by a 4 year old on a bike? Did OP make a bit of a tit of themselves with their reaction? Or something else entirely? We'll never really know because we don't have both sides of the story - in fact, not even a complete one-sided story...

I know this isn’t the same but I’m using it to illustrate how some people can laugh at very inappropriate things they should not be laughing at.  I was once knocked down by an out of control Rottweiler who barrelled into me from the back when I was walking in a park with my dog. I landed on my back and his owners laughed at me instead of coming to see if I was ok. This dog later went on to bite the hand of the owner of a tiny dog who picked him up to keep him away from the Rottweiler. The owner of the small dog never appeared in the park again as they were worried about being bitten (or the dog) again. 

We (me and other dog walkers but not the owner who was bitten - we encouraged her to report it but she was too petrified) ended up reporting the owner to the police by following him to see where he lived.  This parent sounds like a dickhead.  

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • They said you didn’t have a meter even though you did? Utterly bizarre.   I also thought that the water company wasn’t allowed to fit a meter unless you asked for one.  
    • I know this isn’t the same but I’m using it to illustrate how some people can laugh at very inappropriate things they should not be laughing at.  I was once knocked down by an out of control Rottweiler who barrelled into me from the back when I was walking in a park with my dog. I landed on my back and his owners laughed at me instead of coming to see if I was ok. This dog later went on to bite the hand of the owner of a tiny dog who picked him up to keep him away from the Rottweiler. The owner of the small dog never appeared in the park again as they were worried about being bitten (or the dog) again.  We (me and other dog walkers but not the owner who was bitten - we encouraged her to report it but she was too petrified) ended up reporting the owner to the police by following him to see where he lived.  This parent sounds like a dickhead.  
    • I use the phone shop up by the cemetery on Forest Hill Road. Excellent service.  An alternative is a charging mat which doesn’t use the port. 
    • What about the place on the corner of Melbourne Grove right near the station.  There are also a few places on Rye Lane that I’ve heard are good but I’ve don’t know which ones they are.  Maybe someone else would.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...