On 12 Sep, 07:07, Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 20:56, BrianW wrote:



On 11 Sep, 19:52, "mileburner" wrote:

BrianW wrote:
On 11 Sep, 16:43, Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 09:36, BrianW wrote:

On 10 Sep, 16:23, Doug wrote:

On 10 Sep, 15:37, "mileburner" wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message

...

That's what it says in this Times article;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...e/article68281...

And it also says:

"...According to their research, cyclists are at significantly
more risk of being hit by cars on roads that include cycle lanes.

Gee! No kidding. That's because cycle lanes encourage cyclists to
ride in the gutter and drivers to pass when it is not safe.

On

average, an overtaking car will pass 18cm closer to a bike in a
cycle lane than it would to a bike with which it was merely
sharing a road.

Sure! So long as the bike is in the cycle lane and the car is in
the main lane, everything is fine. No safety distance is
required. That's why cars may come as close as they like.

That is roughly the distance that your pedals stick out from
your cog. Do bear in mind that you also have elbows...

Keep the elbows within the cycle lane then!

...And yet, throughout our cities, provision for cyclists remains
perfunctory at best, and lunatic at worst..."

We know. Stay out of cycle lanes. They are dangerous places to
ride!

Hang on! Doesn't that place the onus on the cyclist instead of on
the source of danger? Shouldn't it be, "Drivers stay well clear of
cyclists because they are much more vulnerable than you and don't
become impatient while waiting to overtake cyclists"?

Of course we should say that to drivers. ?Regrettably, though, not
all will do so. ?Given that the outcome of a collision between a
bike and a car is so much worse for the cyclist, unfortunately
cyclists do have to look after themselves as well.

So you admit it is worse for the vulnerable victim?

Of course. As I've told you several times, I myself was nearly killed
back in the summer whilst cycling. The prosecution of the driver is
ongoing.

I was almost wiped out by a van a few weeks back. The driver pulled out from
a farmyard on the left. He was looking toward me but he did not really see
me; he was looking at the tractor behind me and realised that he could pull
out without needing to give way to the tractor. The things which saved me
were 1) I was passing wide (centre of lane) and I saw him moving out and 2)
there was nothing coming ahead so I could pull across even further.

You can't trust drivers

I got hit (or rather, I hit the car that pulled out in front of me).
Both lungs collapsed, jaw broken in three places, artery severed in my
neck. �Not pretty.

So you hit the car not the car hit you?

Yes, because I was already on the road. The driver pulled out in
front of me.

Also, being a cyclist you must
have been customarily to blame for putting yourself in danger. The
term 'boot is on the other foot' springs to mind.

Gollum, you hypocritical old ****, I was cycling (and reliant on
cycles as my main form of transport) when you were still bmbing around
in your 14 mpg Land Rover. Just because you are no longer allowed to
drive does not give you the moral high ground.