Elderly drivers, a worrying example.

On 16 July, 10:47, Andy Leighton wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:51:42 +0100, Mr Benn %%%@%.%% wrote:

Off-road. *Or maybe provisional licences can be granted (don't laugh!)
allowing cycling only on minor roads. *Cycling on busy shared roads these
days can be very dangerous and it's not something to be taken lightly.

What happens if you live on an A road? *How are the children going to
cycle then? *If off-road they might need to be taken in a car, or they
may have to walk their bikes until they find a minor road. *It isn't
very likely is it? *In fact as a scheme it seems likely to reduce the
number of people (both adults and children) who cycle severely over the
long-term.

As that is precisely Mr Benn's objective, he' scarcely likely to see
it as a disadvantage.

Mr Benn wrote:
"Keitht" KeithT wrote in message
...
Mr Benn wrote:
"spindrift" wrote in message
...
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...est.4960582.jp

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.
More fuel for my idea of compulsory driver re-testing evey x years. And
when I get to be PM, I'll also make cycling tuition and testing
mandatory.
Okey Dokeley -- what age do you suggest cyclists are to be tested?
Where do they cycle until then?

Off-road. Or maybe provisional licences can be granted (don't laugh!)
allowing cycling only on minor roads. Cycling on busy shared roads these
days can be very dangerous and it's not something to be taken lightly.



Where 'off road' ?
Pavements are all that's left in most places.
What age?
How would 'provisional' work? -- only cycling on 'B' roads?
Only allowed to go to the shops and not commute?

Cue Al Murray "He really hasn't thought this through"


If it was very dangerous then peope wouldn't be out there as a casual
exercise. It would be classified as a dangerous sport.
It isn't -- do you have a bike? if so, do you ride it on the roads?


--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

mileburner wrote:
Keitht wrote:
Mr Benn wrote:
"spindrift" wrote in message
...
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...est.4960582.jp

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist
and drove down the road with him trapped under the car.
More fuel for my idea of compulsory driver re-testing evey x years. And
when I get to be PM, I'll also make cycling tuition and testing
mandatory.
Okey Dokeley -- what age do you suggest cyclists are to be tested?

8 years old, anything much before that and they seem to have difficulty
understanding rights of way and terms such as primary/secondary position.


Hmm, not sure if at 8 yrs old they can be held to a legal document such
as a license (or even a social contract). Though at 8 a lot of them
show more sense than their supposed 'elders and betters'

And they are all still in the primary position - secondary arrives at
about 11.

--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

"Keitht" KeithT wrote in message
...

Hmm, not sure if at 8 yrs old they can be held to a legal document such as
a license (or even a social contract). Though at 8 a lot of them show
more sense than their supposed 'elders and betters'

I was thinking more of compulsory training at that age, with perhaps a
certificate. The "Cycling Proficiency" is held in year 6 (the final year of
primary education) at age 10 to 11. However it seems to me to be left rather
late when the guvverment are trying to promote cycling and walking to school
over being ferried to school by car. Unfortunately my 2nd eldest DD missed
out on cycle training because there was no trainer available in that
particular year. It seems that while they appear to want to promote cycling
and sustainable transport, they are only really paying lip service otherwise
they would make cycling part of the curriculum.

"Simon Brooke" wrote in message
...
On 16 July, 10:47, Andy Leighton wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:51:42 +0100, Mr Benn %%%@%.%% wrote:

Off-road. Or maybe provisional licences can be granted (don't laugh!)
allowing cycling only on minor roads. Cycling on busy shared roads these
days can be very dangerous and it's not something to be taken lightly.

What happens if you live on an A road? How are the children going to
cycle then? If off-road they might need to be taken in a car, or they
may have to walk their bikes until they find a minor road. It isn't
very likely is it? In fact as a scheme it seems likely to reduce the
number of people (both adults and children) who cycle severely over the
long-term.

As that is precisely Mr Benn's objective, he' scarcely likely to see
it as a disadvantage.

That is false. My objective would be to reduce casualties.

"Keitht" KeithT wrote in message
...
Mr Benn wrote:
"Keitht" KeithT wrote in message
...
Mr Benn wrote:
"spindrift" wrote in message
...
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...est.4960582.jp

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.
More fuel for my idea of compulsory driver re-testing evey x years.
And when I get to be PM, I'll also make cycling tuition and testing
mandatory.
Okey Dokeley -- what age do you suggest cyclists are to be tested?
Where do they cycle until then?

Off-road. Or maybe provisional licences can be granted (don't laugh!)
allowing cycling only on minor roads. Cycling on busy shared roads these
days can be very dangerous and it's not something to be taken lightly.

Where 'off road' ?
Pavements are all that's left in most places.
What age?
How would 'provisional' work? -- only cycling on 'B' roads?
Only allowed to go to the shops and not commute?

Cue Al Murray "He really hasn't thought this through"


If it was very dangerous then peope wouldn't be out there as a casual
exercise. It would be classified as a dangerous sport.
It isn't -- do you have a bike? if so, do you ride it on the roads?

You don't have to worry. I will never be PM!

Mr Benn wrote:
"Simon Brooke" wrote in message
...
On 16 July, 10:47, Andy Leighton wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:51:42 +0100, Mr Benn %%%@%.%% wrote:

Off-road. Or maybe provisional licences can be granted (don't
laugh!) allowing cycling only on minor roads. Cycling on busy
shared roads these days can be very dangerous and it's not
something to be taken lightly.

What happens if you live on an A road? How are the children going to
cycle then? If off-road they might need to be taken in a car, or they
may have to walk their bikes until they find a minor road. It isn't
very likely is it? In fact as a scheme it seems likely to reduce the
number of people (both adults and children) who cycle severely over
the long-term.

As that is precisely Mr Benn's objective, he' scarcely likely to see
it as a disadvantage.

That is false. My objective would be to reduce casualties.

Then why not deal with the root cause of the problem rather than make life
more difficult for those who are trying to improve themsleves?

mileburner wrote:
"Keitht" KeithT wrote in message
...

Hmm, not sure if at 8 yrs old they can be held to a legal document such as
a license (or even a social contract). Though at 8 a lot of them show
more sense than their supposed 'elders and betters'

I was thinking more of compulsory training at that age, with perhaps a
certificate. The "Cycling Proficiency" is held in year 6 (the final year of
primary education) at age 10 to 11. However it seems to me to be left rather
late when the guvverment are trying to promote cycling and walking to school
over being ferried to school by car. Unfortunately my 2nd eldest DD missed
out on cycle training because there was no trainer available in that
particular year. It seems that while they appear to want to promote cycling
and sustainable transport, they are only really paying lip service otherwise
they would make cycling part of the curriculum.



I liked the proficiency test so much I did it twice and the 'advanced'
or whateveritwascalled that got me a badge I could fit to my bike.
Did one test on my mum's bike (Raleigh Palm Beach?) - fortunately she's
not that tall and it meant I could just about get one foot to the ground.

The training tends to be done locally while the gob****es are installed
here in the epicentre of the known and unknown universe - London.
Politicians are always around for a soundbite but not for useful money.




--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

On 16 July, 13:16, "Mr Benn" %%%@%.%% wrote:
"Simon Brooke" wrote in message

What happens if you live on an A road? How are the children going to
cycle then? If off-road they might need to be taken in a car, or they
may have to walk their bikes until they find a minor road. It isn't
very likely is it? In fact as a scheme it seems likely to reduce the
number of people (both adults and children) who cycle severely over the
long-term.
As that is precisely Mr Benn's objective, he' scarcely likely to see
it as a disadvantage.

That is false. *My objective would be to reduce casualties.

It isn't the cyclists who cause the casualties.

On Jul 16, 1:16*pm, "Mr Benn" %%%@%.%% wrote:
"Simon Brooke" wrote in message

...
On 16 July, 10:47, Andy Leighton wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:51:42 +0100, Mr Benn %%%@%.%% wrote:

Off-road. Or maybe provisional licences can be granted (don't laugh!)
allowing cycling only on minor roads. Cycling on busy shared roads these
days can be very dangerous and it's not something to be taken lightly..

What happens if you live on an A road? How are the children going to
cycle then? If off-road they might need to be taken in a car, or they
may have to walk their bikes until they find a minor road. It isn't
very likely is it? In fact as a scheme it seems likely to reduce the
number of people (both adults and children) who cycle severely over the
long-term.
As that is precisely Mr Benn's objective, he' scarcely likely to see
it as a disadvantage.

That is false. *My objective would be to reduce casualties.

Encouraging cycling reduces casualties.

Cyclists exert a civilising influence on the roads, studies have shown
that the more cyclists there are the safer the roads become.

Motorists get used to them, many motorists would also cycle themselves
so attitudes change.

Any taxation, registration or compulsory licencing of cyclists would
be a regressive step (and is never gonna happen anyway).