Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
"The highest number of road deaths in London last year happened in
Barnet, Transport for London figures show. In 2010, nine people died and 1,520 injured on the borough's road network, a rise of 8% on the previous year..." Hmm! So casualties are up and our roads are not getting safer after all, contrary to popular opinion from motorists on these newsgroups. "...Overall, outer London saw a 4% increase in casualties, up to 16,507 for the 12 months, and inner London, a 2% increase. Cyclist casualties showed a 9% increase in both inner and outer London." Mo http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13499789 But get this! "...During his time as a councillor in the London Borough of Barnet, Coleman has built up a reputation as an outspoken supporter of car driving, leading Richard Littlejohn to label him a "hero" for introducing a policy of removing road humps when the roads of Barnet are resurfaced.[27] Coleman quotes the Metropolitan Police and the London Ambulance Service as being supporters of this policy while road safety critics argue that the policy is reckless and driven by populism and self promotion..." Mo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_C...Pro-car_policy -- . UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated). http://www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
Doug wrote: "Cyclist casualties showed a 9% increase in both inner and outer London." I rather thought from postings made earlier this year mentioning some cycling guru quoting a brochure published by his pro-cycling organisation that individual cyclists were now safer on the road due to the increasing number of them. Have cyclist numbers in London fallen, and thus the risk to individual cyclists increased? If so, why? "Cycling gets safer the more cyclists there are. That's the message of CTC's Safety in Numbers campaign (see brochure, 5MB pdf) which explains that the more people cycle, the safer it is for each individual cyclist." http://www.ctc.org.uk/desktopdefault.aspx?tabid=5225 "London has seen a 91% increase in cycling since 2000 and a 33% fall in cycle casualties since 1994-98. This means that cycling in the city is 2.9 times safer than it was previously" "In fact cycling isn’t as risky as commonly thought, with just one death every 32 million kilometres – that’s over 800 times around the world." http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/Camp...in_Numbers.pdf HTH -- from Kim Bolton |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
On 23/05/2011 12:16, Doug wrote:
"The highest number of road deaths in London last year happened in Barnet, Transport for London figures show. In 2010, nine people died and 1,520 injured on the borough's road network, a rise of 8% on the previous year..." Hmm! So casualties are up and our roads are not getting safer after all, contrary to popular opinion from motorists on these newsgroups. "...Overall, outer London saw a 4% increase in casualties, up to 16,507 for the 12 months, and inner London, a 2% increase. Cyclist casualties showed a 9% increase in both inner and outer London." You missed a bit Doug: 'Overall however, road fatalities decreased by 28% in inner London to 51 and by 34% in outer London.' Of course, none of these figures mean anything without relating them to road use. We need to know whether cycle use has risen by more or less than 9% to know whether a 9% increase in casualties is a worsening or an improvement in the situation. Colin Bignell |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
On Mon, 23 May 2011 04:16:09 -0700 (PDT), Doug
wrote: "The highest number of road deaths in London last year happened in Barnet, Transport for London figures show. In 2010, nine people died and 1,520 injured on the borough's road network, a rise of 8% on the previous year..." Hmm! So casualties are up and our roads are not getting safer after all, contrary to popular opinion from motorists on these newsgroups. "...Overall, outer London saw a 4% increase in casualties, up to 16,507 for the 12 months, and inner London, a 2% increase. Cyclist casualties showed a 9% increase in both inner and outer London." Not nearly enough. |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
On 23/05/2011 12:16, Doug wrote:
"The highest number of road deaths in London last year happened in Barnet, Transport for London figures show. In 2010, nine people died and 1,520 injured on the borough's road network, a rise of 8% on the previous year..." Hmm! So casualties are up and our roads are not getting safer after all, contrary to popular opinion from motorists on these newsgroups. "...Overall, outer London saw a 4% increase in casualties, up to 16,507 for the 12 months, and inner London, a 2% increase. Cyclist casualties showed a 9% increase in both inner and outer London." Mo http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13499789 But get this! "...During his time as a councillor in the London Borough of Barnet, Coleman has built up a reputation as an outspoken supporter of car driving, leading Richard Littlejohn to label him a "hero" for introducing a policy of removing road humps when the roads of Barnet are resurfaced.[27] Coleman quotes the Metropolitan Police and the London Ambulance Service as being supporters of this policy while road safety critics argue that the policy is reckless and driven by populism and self promotion..." Mo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_C...Pro-car_policy Fancy a local politician having the bare-faced effrontery to do what the majority want. Where *will* it end? |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
On 23/05/2011 12:16, Doug wrote:
"The highest number of road deaths in London last year happened in Barnet, Transport for London figures show. In 2010, nine people died and 1,520 injured on the borough's road network, a rise of 8% on the previous year..." Hmm! So casualties are up and our roads are not getting safer after all, contrary to popular opinion from motorists on these newsgroups. "...Overall, outer London saw a 4% increase in casualties, up to 16,507 for the 12 months, and inner London, a 2% increase. Cyclist casualties showed a 9% increase in both inner and outer London." Just goes to prove that a push bike isn't a suitable form of transport on modern roads. But get this! "...During his time as a councillor in the London Borough of Barnet, Coleman has built up a reputation as an outspoken supporter of car driving, leading Richard Littlejohn to label him a "hero" for introducing a policy of removing road humps when the roads of Barnet are resurfaced.[27] Coleman quotes the Metropolitan Police and the London Ambulance Service as being supporters of this policy while road safety critics argue that the policy is reckless and driven by populism and self promotion..." LAS have considerable problems with road humps slowing them down when attending to Cat A calls and transporting seriously ill patients to hospitals. -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
More reasons to ban them from the roads.
|
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
"Theodore" wrote in message ... More reasons to ban them from the roads. And move them onto pavements, or ban them completely? It would however be odd to one of the most effective forms of transport in central London (to be replaced with what, cars? That would be one of the most impossible ways of getting around, even if you had a car that could magically fold up and be put away at the end of the journey). Anyway the figures don't say by how much the amount of cycling has itself increased (or decreased), so they could mean nothing. -- Bartc |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
wrote in message
... On 23/05/2011 12:16, Doug wrote: "The highest number of road deaths in London last year happened in Barnet, Transport for London figures show. In 2010, nine people died and 1,520 injured on the borough's road network, a rise of 8% on the previous year..." Hmm! So casualties are up and our roads are not getting safer after all, contrary to popular opinion from motorists on these newsgroups. "...Overall, outer London saw a 4% increase in casualties, up to 16,507 for the 12 months, and inner London, a 2% increase. Cyclist casualties showed a 9% increase in both inner and outer London." Just goes to prove that a push bike isn't a suitable form of transport on modern roads. According to the article, casualties across *all* forms of transport increased by 8% in Barnet. Which presumably goes to show that modern transport isn't a suitable form of transport on modern roads, at least in Barnet! That is, following your own logic. -- Bartc |
Cyclist casualties up 9% in London.
On 23/05/2011 22:13, BartC wrote:
Just goes to prove that a push bike isn't a suitable form of transport on modern roads. According to the article, casualties across *all* forms of transport increased by 8% in Barnet. Which presumably goes to show that modern transport isn't a suitable form of transport on modern roads, at least in Barnet! That is, following your own logic. Oh look! You missed this "Overall however, road fatalities decreased by 28% in inner London to 51 and by 34% in outer London". But since figures for accidents by all forms of transport are down - except cycling - which is increasing. -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:29 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com