Are cyclists that dim?

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:58:28 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:20:52 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:


Tom Crispin : Right class - I would like you to totally forget everything I
taught you yesterday.




--

Bertie Wooster's real name is Tom Crispin.
He uses the name Bertie Wooster so that people involved with
Young Lewisham and Greenwich Cyclists and John Ball primary school
can't see what a tosser he is.

On Aug 14, 7:51*pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 10:39, Squashme wrote:







On Aug 14, 12:46 am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 13/08/2012 21:58, Ian Smith wrote:

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:16:47 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:
* *On 13/08/2012 18:06, Squashme wrote:

In the real world, not your imaginary fairyland:-

Real Pedestrian Casualties 2001-09
Killed by cycles: 18
Killed by cars: 3,495

* *33,000,000 motorists compared to how many cyclists?
* *12,000 miles per annum compared to how many?

* *Do the math.

OK, if you insist.

DfT annual traffic statistics. *Billion vehicle miles, this is
table TRA0101 in the annual statistics.

2011 (latest data), cars and taxis: 240.7. *cycles: 3.1

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicle miles (assuming the 2011
mileages represent an average over the period concerned, but the
changes have been sufficiently regular that this is a reasonable
first approximation for comparative purposes):
cars: *1.6
cycles: 0.6

Of course, we should exclude motorways where there are no pedestrians,
since pedestrians cannot be killed where they aren't present. *About
20% of motor vehicle mileage is motorways (table TRA0102).

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicles miles where pedestrians
may be present:
cars: 2.0
cycles: 0.6

So cars are a bit over three times as likely to kill a pedestrian per
mile traveled than cycles are. *What did you think thsi 'math' would
prove?

So, can you provide accurate figures for how many active cyclists there
are and what their annual mileage is?

DfT annual traffic statistics no good for Dave huh? All part of the
conspiracy I guess.

No, didn't think so.

Because cyclists are an unregistered rabble.

So your figures don't hold water.

Unregistered rabble:
2 real pedestrians killed per year. (On average, some years being
zero. For cyclists, 1 or 2 makes a large difference to the stats,
unlike for motorists. Hide a corpse on a battlefield.)

Taxed, insured, trained, tested, eyesight-tested, IQ-tested, adult,
employer-controlled, state-of-the-art vehicle-driving, many-years-
experienced motorists:
388 real pedestrians killed per year.

In how many miles driven or ridden?

The Headline;

"Mole strangling increases by 100% since 2011!"

"Shocking figures released today show that mole strangling has doubled
in the last year. *Bertie McSquash, CEO of the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Mole Strangling (RSPMS) said "this outrage has to stop.
The Government must increase funding to prevent this epidemic.""

Now, if 1 mole was strangled in 2011 and 2 in 2012, the above would be
true, but not really a major problem.

However, if 20,000 moles were strangled in 2011 & 40,000 in 2012 - that
would be a problem.

Until we know exactly how many regular cyclists there are and their
annual mileage we cannot come to any conclusion whatsoever.

But since cyclists are an unregistered rabble - we don't know.


You do know. 2 pedestrians die in accidents with cyclists per year on
average. The rabble kills nobody some years. Obviously 0 dead per 2
billion miles is significantly different to 0 dead per 4 billion
miles, and quite worrying for someone like you.

-------------------------------------------------------
"The Department for Transport estimate that at least 1 million people
are driving illegally while random police checks suggest the figure
could be as high as 5 million. In 2002 there were 315,000 convictions
for driving without insurance, up 18% on the previous year. However,
the average fine was just £150, a snip considering the average
insurance premium is £350 and far more for the young men who are the
majority of offenders. Nineteen year old Lee Colligan, fined £75 in
September 2004, said "There's a choice between the off-chance of a £75
fine or paying more than £1000 to insure a car for a year. That's not
much of a choice for someone who is unemployed living in Liverpool."
Or anywhere else in the country for that matter."

On 14/08/2012 21:34, Squashme wrote:
On Aug 14, 7:51 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 10:39, Squashme wrote:







On Aug 14, 12:46 am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 13/08/2012 21:58, Ian Smith wrote:

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:16:47 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:
On 13/08/2012 18:06, Squashme wrote:

In the real world, not your imaginary fairyland:-

Real Pedestrian Casualties 2001-09
Killed by cycles: 18
Killed by cars: 3,495

33,000,000 motorists compared to how many cyclists?
12,000 miles per annum compared to how many?

Do the math.

OK, if you insist.

DfT annual traffic statistics. Billion vehicle miles, this is
table TRA0101 in the annual statistics.

2011 (latest data), cars and taxis: 240.7. cycles: 3.1

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicle miles (assuming the 2011
mileages represent an average over the period concerned, but the
changes have been sufficiently regular that this is a reasonable
first approximation for comparative purposes):
cars: 1.6
cycles: 0.6

Of course, we should exclude motorways where there are no pedestrians,
since pedestrians cannot be killed where they aren't present. About
20% of motor vehicle mileage is motorways (table TRA0102).

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicles miles where pedestrians
may be present:
cars: 2.0
cycles: 0.6

So cars are a bit over three times as likely to kill a pedestrian per
mile traveled than cycles are. What did you think thsi 'math' would
prove?

So, can you provide accurate figures for how many active cyclists there
are and what their annual mileage is?

DfT annual traffic statistics no good for Dave huh? All part of the
conspiracy I guess.

No, didn't think so.

Because cyclists are an unregistered rabble.

So your figures don't hold water.

Unregistered rabble:
2 real pedestrians killed per year. (On average, some years being
zero. For cyclists, 1 or 2 makes a large difference to the stats,
unlike for motorists. Hide a corpse on a battlefield.)

Taxed, insured, trained, tested, eyesight-tested, IQ-tested, adult,
employer-controlled, state-of-the-art vehicle-driving, many-years-
experienced motorists:
388 real pedestrians killed per year.

In how many miles driven or ridden?

The Headline;

"Mole strangling increases by 100% since 2011!"

"Shocking figures released today show that mole strangling has doubled
in the last year. Bertie McSquash, CEO of the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Mole Strangling (RSPMS) said "this outrage has to stop.
The Government must increase funding to prevent this epidemic.""

Now, if 1 mole was strangled in 2011 and 2 in 2012, the above would be
true, but not really a major problem.

However, if 20,000 moles were strangled in 2011 & 40,000 in 2012 - that
would be a problem.

Until we know exactly how many regular cyclists there are and their
annual mileage we cannot come to any conclusion whatsoever.

But since cyclists are an unregistered rabble - we don't know.


You do know. 2 pedestrians die in accidents with cyclists per year on
average.

By how many cyclists doing what annual mileage??????


-------------------------------------------------------
"The Department for Transport estimate that at least 1 million people
are driving illegally while random police checks suggest the figure
could be as high as 5 million. In 2002 there were 315,000 convictions
for driving without insurance, up 18% on the previous year. However,
the average fine was just £150, a snip considering the average
insurance premium is £350 and far more for the young men who are the
majority of offenders. Nineteen year old Lee Colligan, fined £75 in
September 2004, said "There's a choice between the off-chance of a £75
fine or paying more than £1000 to insure a car for a year. That's not
much of a choice for someone who is unemployed living in Liverpool."
Or anywhere else in the country for that matter."


That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.

How many regular cyclists are there in the UK and what is their annual
average mileage?

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On Aug 15, 8:28*am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 21:34, Squashme wrote:









On Aug 14, 7:51 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 10:39, Squashme wrote:

On Aug 14, 12:46 am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 13/08/2012 21:58, Ian Smith wrote:

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:16:47 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:
* * On 13/08/2012 18:06, Squashme wrote:

In the real world, not your imaginary fairyland:-

Real Pedestrian Casualties 2001-09
Killed by cycles: 18
Killed by cars: 3,495

* * 33,000,000 motorists compared to how many cyclists?
* * 12,000 miles per annum compared to how many?

* * Do the math.

OK, if you insist.

DfT annual traffic statistics. *Billion vehicle miles, this is
table TRA0101 in the annual statistics.

2011 (latest data), cars and taxis: 240.7. *cycles: 3.1

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicle miles (assuming the 2011
mileages represent an average over the period concerned, but the
changes have been sufficiently regular that this is a reasonable
first approximation for comparative purposes):
cars: *1.6
cycles: 0.6

Of course, we should exclude motorways where there are no pedestrians,
since pedestrians cannot be killed where they aren't present. *About
20% of motor vehicle mileage is motorways (table TRA0102).

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicles miles where pedestrians
may be present:
cars: 2.0
cycles: 0.6

So cars are a bit over three times as likely to kill a pedestrian per
mile traveled than cycles are. *What did you think thsi 'math' would
prove?

So, can you provide accurate figures for how many active cyclists there
are and what their annual mileage is?

DfT annual traffic statistics no good for Dave huh? All part of the
conspiracy I guess.

No, didn't think so.

Because cyclists are an unregistered rabble.

So your figures don't hold water.

Unregistered rabble:
2 real pedestrians killed per year. (On average, some years being
zero. For cyclists, 1 or 2 makes a large difference to the stats,
unlike for motorists. Hide a corpse on a battlefield.)

Taxed, insured, trained, tested, eyesight-tested, IQ-tested, adult,
employer-controlled, state-of-the-art vehicle-driving, many-years-
experienced motorists:
388 real pedestrians killed per year.

In how many miles driven or ridden?

The Headline;

"Mole strangling increases by 100% since 2011!"

"Shocking figures released today show that mole strangling has doubled
in the last year. *Bertie McSquash, CEO of the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Mole Strangling (RSPMS) said "this outrage has to stop.
The Government must increase funding to prevent this epidemic.""

Now, if 1 mole was strangled in 2011 and 2 in 2012, the above would be
true, but not really a major problem.

However, if 20,000 moles were strangled in 2011 & 40,000 in 2012 - that
would be a problem.

Until we know exactly how many regular cyclists there are and their
annual mileage we cannot come to any conclusion whatsoever.

But since cyclists are an unregistered rabble - we don't know.

You do know. 2 pedestrians die in accidents with cyclists per year on
average.

By how many cyclists doing what annual mileage??????

Obviously at least 2. Unless one cyclist is as unlucky as that poor
Portuguese lorry-driver.




-------------------------------------------------------
"The Department for Transport estimate that at least 1 million people
are driving illegally while random police checks suggest the figure
could be as high as 5 million. In 2002 there were 315,000 convictions
for driving without insurance, up 18% on the previous year. However,
the average fine was just �150, a snip considering the average
insurance premium is �350 and far more for the young men who are the
majority of offenders. Nineteen year old Lee Colligan, fined �75 in
September 2004, said "There's a choice between the off-chance of a �75
fine or paying more than �1000 to insure a car for a year. That's not
much of a choice for someone who is unemployed living in Liverpool."
Or anywhere else in the country for that matter."

That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.

How many regular cyclists are there in the UK and what is their annual
average mileage?

That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.
Why not concentrate on how many angels there are on a pinhead. That
should be quite easy for you to ascertain. All you need is some
angels.

"Bertie Wooster" wrote

Pedestrian deaths per bn vehicle km
Motor - 1.025
Cycle - 2.5

Unfortunate conclusion:
Per vehicle distance, pedestrians are almost 2.5 times more likely to
be killed by a cyclist than by a motorist.

Unless someone can show a mistake in my raw data, or my mathematical
calculations, there seem to be three possibilities:
separation of pedestrians and motor vehicle drivers is more effective
than separation of pedestrians and cyclists; or cyclists are more
reckless than motorists; or, as I suspect, a combination of the two.

Not difficult to realise the reason. The raw figures assume that cars,
bicycles and pedestrians are distributed evenly over the road network. In
reality pedestrian distribution is extremely lumpy and drivers of motor
vehicles can travel very long distances without being troubled by the
presence of pedestrians (even away from motorways) . Only look at areas
where the lumps coincide.

Squashme wrote:
On Aug 15, 8:28 am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 21:34, Squashme wrote:









On Aug 14, 7:51 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 10:39, Squashme wrote:

On Aug 14, 12:46 am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 13/08/2012 21:58, Ian Smith wrote:

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:16:47 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 13/08/2012 18:06, Squashme wrote:

In the real world, not your imaginary fairyland:-

Real Pedestrian Casualties 2001-09
Killed by cycles: 18
Killed by cars: 3,495

33,000,000 motorists compared to how many cyclists?
12,000 miles per annum compared to how many?

Do the math.

OK, if you insist.

DfT annual traffic statistics. Billion vehicle miles, this is
table TRA0101 in the annual statistics.

2011 (latest data), cars and taxis: 240.7. cycles: 3.1

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicle miles (assuming
the 2011
mileages represent an average over the period concerned, but the
changes have been sufficiently regular that this is a reasonable
first approximation for comparative purposes):
cars: 1.6
cycles: 0.6

Of course, we should exclude motorways where there are no
pedestrians,
since pedestrians cannot be killed where they aren't present.
About 20% of motor vehicle mileage is motorways (table TRA0102).

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicles miles where
pedestrians
may be present:
cars: 2.0
cycles: 0.6

So cars are a bit over three times as likely to kill a
pedestrian per
mile traveled than cycles are. What did you think thsi 'math'
would
prove?

So, can you provide accurate figures for how many active
cyclists there are and what their annual mileage is?

DfT annual traffic statistics no good for Dave huh? All part of
the conspiracy I guess.

No, didn't think so.

Because cyclists are an unregistered rabble.

So your figures don't hold water.

Unregistered rabble:
2 real pedestrians killed per year. (On average, some years being
zero. For cyclists, 1 or 2 makes a large difference to the stats,
unlike for motorists. Hide a corpse on a battlefield.)

Taxed, insured, trained, tested, eyesight-tested, IQ-tested,
adult, employer-controlled, state-of-the-art vehicle-driving,
many-years- experienced motorists:
388 real pedestrians killed per year.

In how many miles driven or ridden?

The Headline;

"Mole strangling increases by 100% since 2011!"

"Shocking figures released today show that mole strangling has
doubled in the last year. Bertie McSquash, CEO of the Royal
Society for the Prevention of Mole Strangling (RSPMS) said "this
outrage has to stop. The Government must increase funding to
prevent this epidemic.""

Now, if 1 mole was strangled in 2011 and 2 in 2012, the above
would be true, but not really a major problem.

However, if 20,000 moles were strangled in 2011 & 40,000 in 2012 -
that would be a problem.

Until we know exactly how many regular cyclists there are and their
annual mileage we cannot come to any conclusion whatsoever.

But since cyclists are an unregistered rabble - we don't know.

You do know. 2 pedestrians die in accidents with cyclists per year
on average.

By how many cyclists doing what annual mileage??????

Obviously at least 2. Unless one cyclist is as unlucky as that poor
Portuguese lorry-driver.




-------------------------------------------------------
"The Department for Transport estimate that at least 1 million
people are driving illegally while random police checks suggest the
figure could be as high as 5 million. In 2002 there were 315,000
convictions for driving without insurance, up 18% on the previous
year. However, the average fine was just �150, a snip considering
the average insurance premium is �350 and far more for the young
men who are the majority of offenders. Nineteen year old Lee
Colligan, fined �75 in September 2004, said "There's a choice
between the off-chance of a �75 fine or paying more than �1000
to insure a car for a year. That's not much of a choice for someone
who is unemployed living in Liverpool."
Or anywhere else in the country for that matter."

That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.

How many regular cyclists are there in the UK and what is their
annual average mileage?

That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.
Why not concentrate on how many angels there are on a pinhead. That
should be quite easy for you to ascertain. All you need is some
angels.

perhaps there are only ten cyclists travelling ten miles each per year, so
killing 2 people a year is horrifically bad.

On 15/08/2012 10:37, Squashme wrote:


That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.

How many regular cyclists are there in the UK and what is their annual
average mileage?

That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.

Its a question you can't answer isn't it?

And without knowing the answer, you cannot calculate anything.

And we don't know the answer because cyclists are an unregistered rabble.

Do you understand what "context" means?

See "Mole Strangling" for a clue.

Why not concentrate on how many angels there are on a pinhead. That
should be quite easy for you to ascertain. All you need is some
angels.


Another complete irrelevance, another cheap diversionary tactic.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On 15/08/2012 14:42, Mrcheerful wrote:
Squashme wrote:
On Aug 15, 8:28 am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 21:34, Squashme wrote:









On Aug 14, 7:51 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 14/08/2012 10:39, Squashme wrote:

On Aug 14, 12:46 am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 13/08/2012 21:58, Ian Smith wrote:

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:16:47 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 13/08/2012 18:06, Squashme wrote:

In the real world, not your imaginary fairyland:-

Real Pedestrian Casualties 2001-09
Killed by cycles: 18
Killed by cars: 3,495

33,000,000 motorists compared to how many cyclists?
12,000 miles per annum compared to how many?

Do the math.

OK, if you insist.

DfT annual traffic statistics. Billion vehicle miles, this is
table TRA0101 in the annual statistics.

2011 (latest data), cars and taxis: 240.7. cycles: 3.1

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicle miles (assuming
the 2011
mileages represent an average over the period concerned, but the
changes have been sufficiently regular that this is a reasonable
first approximation for comparative purposes):
cars: 1.6
cycles: 0.6

Of course, we should exclude motorways where there are no
pedestrians,
since pedestrians cannot be killed where they aren't present.
About 20% of motor vehicle mileage is motorways (table TRA0102).

So pedestrian fatalities per billion vehicles miles where
pedestrians
may be present:
cars: 2.0
cycles: 0.6

So cars are a bit over three times as likely to kill a
pedestrian per
mile traveled than cycles are. What did you think thsi 'math'
would
prove?

So, can you provide accurate figures for how many active
cyclists there are and what their annual mileage is?

DfT annual traffic statistics no good for Dave huh? All part of
the conspiracy I guess.

No, didn't think so.

Because cyclists are an unregistered rabble.

So your figures don't hold water.

Unregistered rabble:
2 real pedestrians killed per year. (On average, some years being
zero. For cyclists, 1 or 2 makes a large difference to the stats,
unlike for motorists. Hide a corpse on a battlefield.)

Taxed, insured, trained, tested, eyesight-tested, IQ-tested,
adult, employer-controlled, state-of-the-art vehicle-driving,
many-years- experienced motorists:
388 real pedestrians killed per year.

In how many miles driven or ridden?

The Headline;

"Mole strangling increases by 100% since 2011!"

"Shocking figures released today show that mole strangling has
doubled in the last year. Bertie McSquash, CEO of the Royal
Society for the Prevention of Mole Strangling (RSPMS) said "this
outrage has to stop. The Government must increase funding to
prevent this epidemic.""

Now, if 1 mole was strangled in 2011 and 2 in 2012, the above
would be true, but not really a major problem.

However, if 20,000 moles were strangled in 2011 & 40,000 in 2012 -
that would be a problem.

Until we know exactly how many regular cyclists there are and their
annual mileage we cannot come to any conclusion whatsoever.

But since cyclists are an unregistered rabble - we don't know.

You do know. 2 pedestrians die in accidents with cyclists per year
on average.

By how many cyclists doing what annual mileage??????

Obviously at least 2. Unless one cyclist is as unlucky as that poor
Portuguese lorry-driver.




-------------------------------------------------------
"The Department for Transport estimate that at least 1 million
people are driving illegally while random police checks suggest the
figure could be as high as 5 million. In 2002 there were 315,000
convictions for driving without insurance, up 18% on the previous
year. However, the average fine was just �150, a snip considering
the average insurance premium is �350 and far more for the young
men who are the majority of offenders. Nineteen year old Lee
Colligan, fined �75 in September 2004, said "There's a choice
between the off-chance of a �75 fine or paying more than �1000
to insure a car for a year. That's not much of a choice for someone
who is unemployed living in Liverpool."
Or anywhere else in the country for that matter."

That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.

How many regular cyclists are there in the UK and what is their
annual average mileage?

That is a complete irrelevance, a cheap diversionary tactic.
Why not concentrate on how many angels there are on a pinhead. That
should be quite easy for you to ascertain. All you need is some
angels.

perhaps there are only ten cyclists traveling ten miles each per year, so
killing 2 people a year is horrifically bad.


Perhaps that is the awful truth he is trying to hide?

But lets use your figures until someone proves otherwise.



--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Squashme wrote:
On Aug 12, 4:52 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 11/08/2012 18:59, Alan Holmes wrote:

"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in
message ...
Local haulage firm have fixed signs to the back of all their
vehicles warning cyclists not to overtake on the inside.

Are cyclists really that dim?

You seem to have changed your tune, I was under the impression
that you thought all cyclists were stupid!

I 'know' all cyclists are stupid

but they don't kill people.

I 'know' all motorists are stupid
and they do kill people.

what about the people that cyclists DO kill, don't they count? or
are they somehow invisible to you?

And how many people are killed by cyclists, and how many are killed by
vehicle drivers?

what does that have to do with the subject?

Try reading the articals!

On 17/08/2012 21:44, Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
Squashme wrote:
On Aug 12, 4:52 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 11/08/2012 18:59, Alan Holmes wrote:

"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in
message ...
Local haulage firm have fixed signs to the back of all their
vehicles warning cyclists not to overtake on the inside.

Are cyclists really that dim?

You seem to have changed your tune, I was under the impression
that you thought all cyclists were stupid!

I 'know' all cyclists are stupid

but they don't kill people.

I 'know' all motorists are stupid
and they do kill people.

what about the people that cyclists DO kill, don't they count? or
are they somehow invisible to you?

And how many people are killed by cyclists, and how many are killed by
vehicle drivers?

what does that have to do with the subject?

Try reading the articals!


Whats an "artical" idiot boy?




--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."