A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 12th 09, 08:03 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
mileburner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,365
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 19:55, "Brimstone" wrote:
mileburner wrote:


I was almost wiped out by a van a few weeks back. The driver pulled
out from a farmyard on the left. He was looking toward me but he did
not really see me; he was looking at the tractor behind me and
realised that he could pull out without needing to give way to the
tractor. The things which saved me were 1) I was passing wide
(centre of lane) and I saw him moving out and 2) there was nothing
coming ahead so I could pull across even further.
You can't trust drivers :-(


Nor anyone else with your own safety. Sadly, some people try to and
then cry about it when they come unstuck.

So we should go around daily in the expectation of being killed by
drivers in what purports to be a civilised country?

Question. Suppose I am walking along a pavement and a driver loses
control and mounts the pavement where I am. What action should I take
to avoid this and protect myself?


I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be prepared to get
out of it's way if it is coming at you and looking like it is not going to
stop. The roads are dangerous donchaknow?


Ads
  #22  
Old September 12th 09, 08:54 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Brimstone[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,237
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 19:55, "Brimstone" wrote:
mileburner wrote:
BrianW wrote:
On 11 Sep, 16:43, Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 09:36, BrianW wrote:


On 10 Sep, 16:23, Doug wrote:


On 10 Sep, 15:37, "mileburner"
wrote:


"Doug" wrote in message


...


That's what it says in this Times article;


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...e/article68281...


And it also says:


"...According to their research, cyclists are at significantly
more risk of being hit by cars on roads that include cycle
lanes.


Gee! No kidding. That's because cycle lanes encourage cyclists
to ride in the gutter and drivers to pass when it is not safe.


On


average, an overtaking car will pass 18cm closer to a bike in
a cycle lane than it would to a bike with which it was merely
sharing a road.


Sure! So long as the bike is in the cycle lane and the car is
in the main lane, everything is fine. No safety distance is
required. That's why cars may come as close as they like.


That is roughly the distance that your pedals stick out from
your cog. Do bear in mind that you also have elbows...


Keep the elbows within the cycle lane then!


...And yet, throughout our cities, provision for cyclists
remains perfunctory at best, and lunatic at worst..."


We know. Stay out of cycle lanes. They are dangerous places to
ride!


Hang on! Doesn't that place the onus on the cyclist instead of
on the source of danger? Shouldn't it be, "Drivers stay well
clear of cyclists because they are much more vulnerable than
you and don't become impatient while waiting to overtake
cyclists"?


Of course we should say that to drivers. ?Regrettably, though,
not all will do so. ?Given that the outcome of a collision
between a bike and a car is so much worse for the cyclist,
unfortunately cyclists do have to look after themselves as well.


So you admit it is worse for the vulnerable victim?


Of course. As I've told you several times, I myself was nearly
killed back in the summer whilst cycling. The prosecution of the
driver is ongoing.


I was almost wiped out by a van a few weeks back. The driver pulled
out from a farmyard on the left. He was looking toward me but he did
not really see me; he was looking at the tractor behind me and
realised that he could pull out without needing to give way to the
tractor. The things which saved me were 1) I was passing wide
(centre of lane) and I saw him moving out and 2) there was nothing
coming ahead so I could pull across even further.
You can't trust drivers :-(


Nor anyone else with your own safety. Sadly, some people try to and
then cry about it when they come unstuck.

So we should go around daily in the expectation of being killed by
drivers in what purports to be a civilised country?


Do you want to stay alive?

Question. Suppose I am walking along a pavement and a driver loses
control and mounts the pavement where I am. What action should I take
to avoid this and protect myself?


Run.




  #23  
Old September 12th 09, 09:01 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Brooke[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 671
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

On 12 Sep, 08:03, "mileburner" wrote:

I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be prepared to get
out of it's way if it is coming at you and looking like it is not going to
stop. The roads are dangerous donchaknow?


While I agree they are dangerous, the question is whether it is
tolerable in a civilised society to allow them to be this dangerous?
It seems to me that either the people who drive have got to get a lot
better at driving (I include myself), or slow down drastically, or be
prevented from driving. Current standards of driving skill in this
country are not acceptable.
  #24  
Old September 12th 09, 09:02 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Keitht
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,631
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

JNugent wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote:

Doug :


Surely if every time a driver set off on a journey they knew they
could be facing a long prison sentence for killing or seriously
injuring someone they would drive much more carefully and have more
respect for the safety of vulnerable cyclists and pedestrians?


I favour the spiked steering wheel boss myself, although for maximum
psychological impact the spike would ideally be mounted about 14"
lower.


Doug and Lee interacting and egging each other on.

A better example of the social reinforcement of bullying would be hard
to find.


The steering wheel spike is frequently quoted by police as being the
only real item that would stop people riving like idiots.

PL is only repeating what I've seen on telly several times.

--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.
  #25  
Old September 12th 09, 09:10 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Dragon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,715
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 19:55, "Brimstone" wrote:
mileburner wrote:
BrianW wrote:
On 11 Sep, 16:43, Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 09:36, BrianW wrote:
On 10 Sep, 16:23, Doug wrote:
On 10 Sep, 15:37, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
...
That's what it says in this Times article;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...e/article68281...
And it also says:
"...According to their research, cyclists are at significantly
more risk of being hit by cars on roads that include cycle
lanes.
Gee! No kidding. That's because cycle lanes encourage cyclists to
ride in the gutter and drivers to pass when it is not safe.
On
average, an overtaking car will pass 18cm closer to a bike in a
cycle lane than it would to a bike with which it was merely
sharing a road.
Sure! So long as the bike is in the cycle lane and the car is in
the main lane, everything is fine. No safety distance is
required. That's why cars may come as close as they like.
That is roughly the distance that your pedals stick out from
your cog. Do bear in mind that you also have elbows...
Keep the elbows within the cycle lane then!
...And yet, throughout our cities, provision for cyclists
remains perfunctory at best, and lunatic at worst..."
We know. Stay out of cycle lanes. They are dangerous places to
ride!
Hang on! Doesn't that place the onus on the cyclist instead of on
the source of danger? Shouldn't it be, "Drivers stay well clear of
cyclists because they are much more vulnerable than you and don't
become impatient while waiting to overtake cyclists"?
Of course we should say that to drivers. ?Regrettably, though, not
all will do so. ?Given that the outcome of a collision between a
bike and a car is so much worse for the cyclist, unfortunately
cyclists do have to look after themselves as well.
So you admit it is worse for the vulnerable victim?
Of course. As I've told you several times, I myself was nearly
killed back in the summer whilst cycling. The prosecution of the
driver is ongoing.
I was almost wiped out by a van a few weeks back. The driver pulled
out from a farmyard on the left. He was looking toward me but he did
not really see me; he was looking at the tractor behind me and
realised that he could pull out without needing to give way to the
tractor. The things which saved me were 1) I was passing wide (centre
of lane) and I saw him moving out and 2) there was nothing coming
ahead so I could pull across even further.
You can't trust drivers :-(

Nor anyone else with your own safety. Sadly, some people try to and then cry
about it when they come unstuck.

So we should go around daily in the expectation of being killed by
drivers in what purports to be a civilised country?


You maintain that a motorist should go around with the speculation of
killing someone, why should it be different for anybody else/

Question. Suppose I am walking along a pavement and a driver loses
control and mounts the pavement where I am. What action should I take
to avoid this and protect myself?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's democracy is another man's regime.



I expect you as I would expect me & everybody else to be aware of there
surroundings and take precautions about possible danger.
--

Tony Dragon
  #26  
Old September 12th 09, 09:12 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Dragon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,715
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 20:56, BrianW wrote:
On 11 Sep, 19:52, "mileburner" wrote:



BrianW wrote:
On 11 Sep, 16:43, Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 09:36, BrianW wrote:
On 10 Sep, 16:23, Doug wrote:
On 10 Sep, 15:37, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
...
That's what it says in this Times article;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...e/article68281...
And it also says:
"...According to their research, cyclists are at significantly
more risk of being hit by cars on roads that include cycle lanes.
Gee! No kidding. That's because cycle lanes encourage cyclists to
ride in the gutter and drivers to pass when it is not safe.
On
average, an overtaking car will pass 18cm closer to a bike in a
cycle lane than it would to a bike with which it was merely
sharing a road.
Sure! So long as the bike is in the cycle lane and the car is in
the main lane, everything is fine. No safety distance is
required. That's why cars may come as close as they like.
That is roughly the distance that your pedals stick out from
your cog. Do bear in mind that you also have elbows...
Keep the elbows within the cycle lane then!
...And yet, throughout our cities, provision for cyclists remains
perfunctory at best, and lunatic at worst..."
We know. Stay out of cycle lanes. They are dangerous places to
ride!
Hang on! Doesn't that place the onus on the cyclist instead of on
the source of danger? Shouldn't it be, "Drivers stay well clear of
cyclists because they are much more vulnerable than you and don't
become impatient while waiting to overtake cyclists"?
Of course we should say that to drivers. ?Regrettably, though, not
all will do so. ?Given that the outcome of a collision between a
bike and a car is so much worse for the cyclist, unfortunately
cyclists do have to look after themselves as well.
So you admit it is worse for the vulnerable victim?
Of course. As I've told you several times, I myself was nearly killed
back in the summer whilst cycling. The prosecution of the driver is
ongoing.
I was almost wiped out by a van a few weeks back. The driver pulled out from
a farmyard on the left. He was looking toward me but he did not really see
me; he was looking at the tractor behind me and realised that he could pull
out without needing to give way to the tractor. The things which saved me
were 1) I was passing wide (centre of lane) and I saw him moving out and 2)
there was nothing coming ahead so I could pull across even further.
You can't trust drivers

I got hit (or rather, I hit the car that pulled out in front of me).
Both lungs collapsed, jaw broken in three places, artery severed in my
neck. Not pretty.

So you hit the car not the car hit you? Also, being a cyclist you must
have been customarily to blame for putting yourself in danger. The
term 'boot is on the other foot' springs to mind.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.



Still spouting the usual rubbish.

--

Tony Dragon
  #27  
Old September 12th 09, 10:19 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
BrianW[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

On 12 Sep, 07:07, Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 20:56, BrianW wrote:



On 11 Sep, 19:52, "mileburner" wrote:


BrianW wrote:
On 11 Sep, 16:43, Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 09:36, BrianW wrote:


On 10 Sep, 16:23, Doug wrote:


On 10 Sep, 15:37, "mileburner" wrote:


"Doug" wrote in message


...


That's what it says in this Times article;


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...e/article68281...


And it also says:


"...According to their research, cyclists are at significantly
more risk of being hit by cars on roads that include cycle lanes.


Gee! No kidding. That's because cycle lanes encourage cyclists to
ride in the gutter and drivers to pass when it is not safe.


On


average, an overtaking car will pass 18cm closer to a bike in a
cycle lane than it would to a bike with which it was merely
sharing a road.


Sure! So long as the bike is in the cycle lane and the car is in
the main lane, everything is fine. No safety distance is
required. That's why cars may come as close as they like.


That is roughly the distance that your pedals stick out from
your cog. Do bear in mind that you also have elbows...


Keep the elbows within the cycle lane then!


...And yet, throughout our cities, provision for cyclists remains
perfunctory at best, and lunatic at worst..."


We know. Stay out of cycle lanes. They are dangerous places to
ride!


Hang on! Doesn't that place the onus on the cyclist instead of on
the source of danger? Shouldn't it be, "Drivers stay well clear of
cyclists because they are much more vulnerable than you and don't
become impatient while waiting to overtake cyclists"?


Of course we should say that to drivers. ?Regrettably, though, not
all will do so. ?Given that the outcome of a collision between a
bike and a car is so much worse for the cyclist, unfortunately
cyclists do have to look after themselves as well.


So you admit it is worse for the vulnerable victim?


Of course. As I've told you several times, I myself was nearly killed
back in the summer whilst cycling. The prosecution of the driver is
ongoing.


I was almost wiped out by a van a few weeks back. The driver pulled out from
a farmyard on the left. He was looking toward me but he did not really see
me; he was looking at the tractor behind me and realised that he could pull
out without needing to give way to the tractor. The things which saved me
were 1) I was passing wide (centre of lane) and I saw him moving out and 2)
there was nothing coming ahead so I could pull across even further.


You can't trust drivers


I got hit (or rather, I hit the car that pulled out in front of me).
Both lungs collapsed, jaw broken in three places, artery severed in my
neck. �Not pretty.


So you hit the car not the car hit you?


Yes, because I was already on the road. The driver pulled out in
front of me.

Also, being a cyclist you must
have been customarily to blame for putting yourself in danger. The
term 'boot is on the other foot' springs to mind.


Gollum, you hypocritical old ****, I was cycling (and reliant on
cycles as my main form of transport) when you were still bmbing around
in your 14 mpg Land Rover. Just because you are no longer allowed to
drive does not give you the moral high ground.
  #28  
Old September 12th 09, 10:36 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Brimstone[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,237
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Simon Brooke wrote:
On 12 Sep, 08:03, "mileburner" wrote:

I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be prepared
to get out of it's way if it is coming at you and looking like it is
not going to stop. The roads are dangerous donchaknow?


While I agree they are dangerous, the question is whether it is
tolerable in a civilised society to allow them to be this dangerous?
It seems to me that either the people who drive have got to get a lot
better at driving (I include myself), or slow down drastically, or be
prevented from driving. Current standards of driving skill in this
country are not acceptable.


How do you legislate for a driver suffering a heart attack whilst in motion?


  #29  
Old September 12th 09, 12:11 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,985
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Keitht wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote:

Doug :


Surely if every time a driver set off on a journey they knew they
could be facing a long prison sentence for killing or seriously
injuring someone they would drive much more carefully and have more
respect for the safety of vulnerable cyclists and pedestrians?


I favour the spiked steering wheel boss myself, although for maximum
psychological impact the spike would ideally be mounted about 14"
lower.


Doug and Lee interacting and egging each other on.

A better example of the social reinforcement of bullying would be hard
to find.


The steering wheel spike is frequently quoted by police as being the
only real item that would stop people riving like idiots.

PL is only repeating what I've seen on telly several times.


Doug, Lee and KeithT interacting and egging each other on.

A better example of the social reinforcement of bullying would be hard to
find. Unless another name can be added to the list.
  #30  
Old September 12th 09, 12:13 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,985
Default "Cycling is not dangerous. Cars are dangerous."

Brimstone wrote:

Simon Brooke wrote:
"mileburner" wrote:


I would suggest that you keep an eye on the traffic and be prepared
to get out of it's way if it is coming at you and looking like it is
not going to stop. The roads are dangerous donchaknow?


While I agree they are dangerous, the question is whether it is
tolerable in a civilised society to allow them to be this dangerous?
It seems to me that either the people who drive have got to get a lot
better at driving (I include myself), or slow down drastically, or be
prevented from driving. Current standards of driving skill in this
country are not acceptable.


How do you legislate for a driver suffering a heart attack whilst in motion?


Outlaw driving altogether?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chapman: "Speed Cameras are Dangerous, Kids" Nuxx Bar UK 0 May 1st 09 07:33 PM
Cycling not particularly dangerous Zebee Johnstone Recumbent Biking 1 June 13th 08 03:12 PM
Cycling not particularly dangerous Jens Müller[_2_] Social Issues 0 June 13th 08 12:42 PM
Most Dangerous: Cars, Dogs, Kids on Wheels, Other Bikers, Pedestrians? Ziactrice General 16 April 22nd 06 02:48 PM
"Dangerous" Cantilers? Robin Hubert Techniques 12 July 28th 05 06:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2021 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.