Safety in Numbers

David Hansen wrote:

"Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white line (which may be broken)
along the carriageway (see Rule 140). Keep within the lane when
practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that
it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road
users. Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your
experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer."

"can", of course, is not the same as "will or "do". The above wording
was the result of considerable pressure from cyclists to change it from
the previous version which was the work of numpties.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:30:25 +0100, Peter Clinch
said in
:

"can", of course, is not the same as "will or "do". The above wording
was the result of considerable pressure from cyclists to change it from
the previous version which was the work of numpties.

Actually as I recall it was the result of the numpties proposing
something even more clueless, the cyclists asking for something that
was evidence-based rather than faith-based, and the numpties giving
up and leaving it more or less as it was.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

william lawson wrote:

I quite agree - I also think that many of the "problems" are made
worse by cyclists riding through red traffic signals - switching from
car lane to car lane, riding on pavements and not using cycle lanes.

What is a car lane?

This does not give cyclists a good name at all - and may mean that
motorists have little respect for cyclists. It is interesting that if
you ask people what their view is of cyclists - it will most likely
not be positive.

Do you also have a problem with motorists jumping red lights, switching
from lane to lane, driving on pavements, not using the motorway when it
is available, and does this reduce the respect that you give to motorists?

I am not excusing the behaviour of cyclists that do jump lights or ride
on the footpath, but does this behaviour give motorist the right to
drive cyclists off the road as per previous threads on this group?


I now walk to college as although it takes longer - it is safer and
probably better for me fitness/health wise.

Walking is as safe cycling, as per previous threads on this subject.
It is good to see that you go to college and get a good education though.

Martin.

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:10:21 +0100, David Hansen
wrote:

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 10:08:55 +0100 someone who may be william lawson
wrote this:-

I quite agree - I also think that many of the "problems" are made
worse by cyclists [snip] and not using cycle lanes.

Which bit of, "use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend
on your experience and skills," do you have difficulty
understanding?


I am sorry to have upset you - I do not have difficulty understanding
things - I think that you may have misunderstood yourself - I did
not say that they were compulsory.

I said that problems are made worse by cyclists not using them.

william lawson wrote:

I said that problems are made worse by cyclists not using them.

And since they don't have to, and in many cases are worse off doing so,
ISTM that the real problem is ignorance of the people who assume
cyclists really ought to be using them. Not something that can really
be blamed fairly on cyclists.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Toom Tabard wrote:
On 8 Sep, 12:27, "wafflycat" wrote:
Without fail, the number one reason folk give to me as to why they won't
cycle on roads is that it is "unsafe". Of course, those of us who do cycle
know that in the great scheme of things it is no more dangerous than walking
and a zillion other activities deemed as safe to do- Hide quoted text -


I walk in town, a lot more than and a lot further than the average
person. I no longer cycle in town, because I find it is unsafe, and it
certainly many times more hazardous than walking. When walking, you
only mix with traffic when crossing, and can freely choose, monitor
and control how you do that. When you are cycling and permanently
interacting with traffic you have no such control. When cycling safely
and considerately I constantly had near-misses which could easily have
had serious consequences. That rarely if ever happens when walking.

I often walk to and from the city centre instead of cycling, but it is
because I like the walk, and don't have to keep finding places to lock
the bike up, take the lits off etc., every time I go into a shop.

I find I feel slightly safer cycling than I do walking, but the
convenience of walking short distances is good.

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:53:26 +0100, Peter Clinch
wrote:

william lawson wrote:

I quite agree - I also think that many of the "problems" are made
worse by cyclists riding through red traffic signals - switching from
car lane to car lane, riding on pavements and not using cycle lanes.

Cyclists riding through reds only have themselves to blame if they end
up flatter than they usually like. But switching lanes... bikes are
legally defined as vehicles, and those are *vehicle* lanes, not "car
lanes". Cycle lanes are not all created equal: some are good, many
impede cyclists and add to their danger, so it's pretty daft to use them
all.

I now walk to college as although it takes longer - it is safer

How do you know? Why don't the DfT's figures for relative safety show
that walking is typically safer?

Pete.

Perhaps I should have said it appears to me to be safer - do you know
where I can find these relative safety figures - are they on the DT
web site somewhere?

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:05:20 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote:

_ wrote:

Cycling is not more dangerous than walking.

Given certain measures over certain populations it isn't, but it's a
too-sweeping statement not to benefit from further qualification.

I would suspect there could well be particular locations where cycling
is more dangerous than walking, and certain individuals for whom cycling
is more dangerous than walking.

Pete.

Extremes do not represent the norm.

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:41:03 +0100, Martin
wrote:

william lawson wrote:

I quite agree - I also think that many of the "problems" are made
worse by cyclists riding through red traffic signals - switching from
car lane to car lane, riding on pavements and not using cycle lanes.

What is a car lane?

A lane which cars can travel in


This does not give cyclists a good name at all - and may mean that
motorists have little respect for cyclists. It is interesting that if
you ask people what their view is of cyclists - it will most likely
not be positive.

Do you also have a problem with motorists jumping red lights, switching
from lane to lane, driving on pavements, not using the motorway when it
is available, and does this reduce the respect that you give to motorists?

Yes - with red lights and changing lanes - no for driving on pavements
- if I could drive I would use motorways when I could.

I am not excusing the behaviour of cyclists that do jump lights or ride
on the footpath, but does this behaviour give motorist the right to
drive cyclists off the road as per previous threads on this group?

I did not know that motorists think they have a right drive cyclists
off the road - they don't as far as I can see.


I now walk to college as although it takes longer - it is safer and
probably better for me fitness/health wise.

Walking is as safe cycling, as per previous threads on this subject.
It is good to see that you go to college and get a good education though.

Martin.


I have never heard that 'walking is as safe as cycling' before - I
have of course heard that cycling is more dangerous than walking.

As Tom says - he has found walking is safer - and so have I.

(what has my education got to do with things?)

_ wrote:
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:05:20 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote:

_ wrote:

Cycling is not more dangerous than walking.
Given certain measures over certain populations it isn't, but it's a
too-sweeping statement not to benefit from further qualification.

I would suspect there could well be particular locations where cycling
is more dangerous than walking, and certain individuals for whom cycling
is more dangerous than walking.

Pete.

Extremes do not represent the norm.

never said they did, but where's your guarantee that any particular case
is "the norm"? "the norm" is an aggregate figure, not necessarily a
modal one.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/