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.

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.

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

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

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?

On May 23, 6:01*pm, JNugent wrote:
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?

When you say 'majority' I take it you mean a car user mob who seem to
have no regard for the safety of others.

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

On May 24, 6:02*am, Doug wrote:
On May 23, 6:01*pm, JNugent wrote:



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?

When you say 'majority' I take it you mean a car user mob who seem to
have no regard for the safety of others.

Strangely, no. I think you'll find that the "car user mob who seem to
have no regard for the safety of others" are not in the majority,
whereas drivers who are generally well-intentioned and don't go around
ploughing into bus queues, houses, cyclists etc. are the overwhealming
majority.

On May 24, 8:54*am, FrengaX wrote:
On May 24, 6:02*am, Doug wrote:









On May 23, 6:01*pm, JNugent wrote:

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?

When you say 'majority' I take it you mean a car user mob who seem to
have no regard for the safety of others.

Strangely, no. I think you'll find that the "car user mob who seem to
have no regard for the safety of others" are not in the majority,
whereas drivers who are generally well-intentioned and don't go around
ploughing into bus queues, houses, cyclists etc. are the overwhealming
majority.

Well we know from past surveys that a majority of motorists knowingly
exceed speed limits, aka break the law with no regard for the safety
of others, so what other dangerous activities does your 'majority' get
up to?

Anyone driving a car is a potential threat to vulnerable road users,
whether intentionally or not, so don't try to wriggle out of it.

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

On May 25, 7:17*am, Doug wrote:
On May 24, 8:54*am, FrengaX wrote:







On May 24, 6:02*am, Doug wrote:

On May 23, 6:01*pm, JNugent wrote:

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?

When you say 'majority' I take it you mean a car user mob who seem to
have no regard for the safety of others.

Strangely, no. I think you'll find that the "car user mob who seem to
have no regard for the safety of others" are not in the majority,
whereas drivers who are generally well-intentioned and don't go around
ploughing into bus queues, houses, cyclists etc. are the overwhealming
majority.

Well we know from past surveys that a majority of motorists knowingly
exceed speed limits, aka break the law with no regard for the safety
of others, so what other dangerous activities does your 'majority' get
up to?

Anyone driving a car is a potential threat to vulnerable road users,
whether intentionally or not, so don't try to wriggle out of it.

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
*http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.


Well we know from past surveys that a majority of cyclists knowingly
break the law with no regard for the safety of others, so what other
dangerous activities does your 'majority' get
up to?

Anyone riding a bike is a potential threat to vulnerable road users,
whether intentionally or not, so don't try to wriggle out of it.

On 25/05/2011 07:17, Doug wrote:
....
Well we know from past surveys that a majority of motorists knowingly
exceed speed limits,...

When the Road Research Laboratory did an extensive study of speed
limits, their conclusion was that the purpose of speed limits should not
be seen as being to keep traffic at or below the set limit. Rather, they
should be seen as a way to avoid large differentials in traffic speed
and as a way to reduce significantly the number of vehicles that grossly
exceed the set limit. Their suggestions of what constituted 'grossly
exceeding' the limit quite closely match the ACPO recommendations on the
point at which prosecution would be appropriate.

Colin Bignell