|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:06:14 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote: On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 12:49:47 +0000, Tony Dragon said in : So you agree with cyclist's breaking the law, glad we have established that. Nope. I agree with removing the prime incentive for them to do so, which also as it turns out is the major source of risk to pedestrians (on or off the footway) and cyclists alike. You probably didn't notice but I did point out that in many places cycling on the footway is now perfectly legal, due to the application of Magic White Paint (TM). Note that in many places there are no footways, pedestrians are forced to use the carriageway. I doubt "many places" - but they do have every right to be in the carriageway. It is long past time that people stopped making excuses for motor danger. Guy Any chance of an answer yet: Do you think that as a pedestrian you are more likely to be hit by a bike being intentionally ridden along the path than you are by a car being intentionally driven along the path? |
Ads |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:22:04 +0000, Tony Dragon said in : I have no idea if the hospital added the incident into the stats, do you? I think you'll find that hospitals add *all* admission incidents to the stats. To the hospital stats, possibly. But not to the Police STATS19 database, which is what is, for the time being at least, used to compile the government's official road casualty statistics and their RCGB report. -- Matt B |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:09:55 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote: On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:39:16 -0000, "pk" said in : Which does not actually change the documented fact that pedestrians are far more likely to be injured on the footway by motorists than cyclists. I think the fact that is documented it the number of reported injuries not the number of injuries per se, there is after all a legal duty to report motor accident causing injury there will be close to 100% reporting of car related injuries but a far lower proportion of the minor cycle/pedestrian collisions will be reported. Reporting of injuries does indeed vary according to severity and cause. Nearly all fatalities, and most serious injuries, are recorded. Trivial injuries are mostly unreported, we can only infer things form the relative prevalence of those injuries which are reported. For example, we know that half of all injury admissions to hospital are due to simple trips and falls, and many of these are on footways. My council says that the major cause of footway trips is damage to the footways by motor vehicle encroachment. probably better, though, to stick with the figures we do have rather than suppositions. And also probably better to look to the causes and how they might be fixed, rather than advocating draconian responses to the symptoms. Especially since the symptom is, in many cases, entirely legal now. Guy Any chance Guy - you're not avoiding it are you? Do you think that as a pedestrian you are more likely to be hit by a bike being intentionally ridden along the path than you are by a car being intentionally driven along the path? |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
Tony Dragon wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 12:49:47 +0000, Tony Dragon said in : So you agree with cyclist's breaking the law, glad we have established that. Nope. As I said you agree with cyclist's breaking the law, glad we have established that. I agree with removing the prime incentive for them to do so, which also as it turns out is the major source of risk to pedestrians (on or off the footway) and cyclists alike. You probably didn't notice but I did point out that in many places cycling on the footway is now perfectly legal, due to the application of Magic White Paint (TM). They are now classed a duel use, not footways as yiu well know. You also know that we are talking about pedestrian footways. Note that in many places there are no footways, pedestrians are forced to use the carriageway. So It is long past time that people stopped making excuses for motor danger. Guy Who has done that You're (unfortunately) wasting your time, because you're arguing a point with someone who not only doesn't agree with your view but refuses to accept that it even exists. Guy is fervently, passionately, anti *any* legislation on cycling, and uses the Bollenlogic (TM) of saying "its nowhere near as bad as what someone else does". Using that logic its okay for us all to drive everywhere at 150mph, because someone else has already been caught at 172 so we're not as bad as him. The key difference between Chapman and the motorist groups he so despises is that the motorists are quick to condemn lawbreaking by their peers while Chapman insists that lawbreaking cyclists should be excused because "they're only breaking the law to hide from those dangerous motorists!". What I think is the funny bit is that despite that somewhat blinkered perspective Chapman keeps calling other sociopathic! |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
|
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:39:16 -0000, "pk" said in : Which does not actually change the documented fact that pedestrians are far more likely to be injured on the footway by motorists than cyclists. I think the fact that is documented it the number of reported injuries not the number of injuries per se, there is after all a legal duty to report motor accident causing injury there will be close to 100% reporting of car related injuries but a far lower proportion of the minor cycle/pedestrian collisions will be reported. Reporting of injuries does indeed vary according to severity and cause. Nearly all fatalities, and most serious injuries, are recorded. Trivial injuries are mostly unreported, we can only infer things form the relative prevalence of those injuries which are reported. For example, we know that half of all injury admissions to hospital are due to simple trips and falls, and many of these are on footways. My council says that the major cause of footway trips is damage to the footways by motor vehicle encroachment. probably better, though, to stick with the figures we do have rather than suppositions. And also probably better to look to the causes and how they might be fixed, rather than advocating draconian responses to the symptoms. Especially since the symptom is, in many cases, entirely legal now. BWAHAHAHAHAHAA! Ah ****, sorry, I normally try and not rise to Chapmans idiocy but this time I couldn't resist. Now he wants to blame cars for incidents on the pavement even when they're not *there*!!! |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
Clive George wrote:
"Tony Dragon" wrote in message ... In my experience, they aren't. But I would imagine that most motorist caused injuries are reported, probably not the same for cycle collisions. (My daughters injuries were not reported) Why not? If you want the authorities to do something about this, you need them to have the evidence that it is a problem. Complaining on here isn't going to do anything - go to the police and get the injury recorded. What did you do about the person who caused the injury? How can he do anything - the psycholist used his Get Out Of Jail Free card by exploiting his lack of visible identification. Fit the ******* with number plates and there will be an amazing reduction in lawbreaking cycling. |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
Phil W Lee wrote:
"Just zis Guy, you know?" considered Sun, 25 Jan 2009 08:33:16 +0000 the perfect time to write: On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:02:05 +0000, JNugent said in : Why not just "start" by arresting footway cyclists, fining them (heavily) and crushing their bikes? For the same reason that you don't treat a runny nose by nasal amputation. It's a symptom, and not even a serious one as far as the available evidence goes. I think you're feeding the trolls No, I think he *is* one. |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:09:32 +0000
_ wrote: Fit the ******* with number plates and there will be an amazing reduction in lawbreaking cycling. It works so well with motorists, after all ... |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclist hits granny in pavement crash in Brighton
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 12:05:02 +0000, David Hansen said in : However, councils are adding white paint and blue signs to pavements. By magic that turns the pavement into a "cycle facility", which cyclists are supposed to be grateful for and want to use. And woe betide them if they fail to show the proper gratitude. It is of course Perfectly Reasonable to drive a 38T artic at them in order to educate them as to the folly of failing to use a narrow grit-strewn footpath instead of a road when Magic White Paint (TM) is in place. Unfortunately I dont have a 38T artic available. Can I use a 2 1/2T Landy instead? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pavement cyclist killed | Tony Raven | UK | 1 | November 4th 06 08:07 PM |
Pavement cyclist | Colin Blackburn | UK | 39 | September 12th 05 03:43 PM |
Tyler hits the pavement one last time | [email protected] | Racing | 0 | April 19th 05 12:02 AM |
"Pavement cyclist is first to be fined" | Pete Bentley | UK | 19 | January 24th 05 02:59 AM |
Pavement cyclist falls off. | Peter B | UK | 3 | November 24th 03 06:10 PM |