Road Casualties 2009
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: The Peeler on 20 Jul 2010 15:45 On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:52:37 +0100, Tony Raven <traven(a)gotadsl.co.uk> wrote: >Mrcheerful wrote: >> JMS wrote: >>> Road Casualties Great Britain Main Results: 2009 are out at the DfT >>> webpages. >>> >>> Main Highlights are : >>> >>> Total road casualties down 4% >>> Seriously injured down 6% >>> Child casualties down 6% >>> All pedestrian casualties down 6% >>> Motor cycle casualties down 4% >>> >>> All good news - oh - there are a couple more: >>> >>> Number of seriously injured cyclists up 6% >>> Total casualties among cyclists up 5% >> >> that is probably because of an increase in their numbers coupled witha lack >> of training/regulation >> >> > >Somehow the minor fact that cyclist fatalities fell by 10% seems to have >been overlooked. I can't think why on earth that would be. That only encourages the bastards.
From: Tom Crispin on 20 Jul 2010 15:51 On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:52:37 +0100, Tony Raven <traven(a)gotadsl.co.uk> wrote: >Mrcheerful wrote: >> JMS wrote: >>> Road Casualties Great Britain Main Results: 2009 are out at the DfT >>> webpages. >>> >>> Main Highlights are : >>> >>> Total road casualties down 4% >>> Seriously injured down 6% >>> Child casualties down 6% >>> All pedestrian casualties down 6% >>> Motor cycle casualties down 4% >>> >>> All good news - oh - there are a couple more: >>> >>> Number of seriously injured cyclists up 6% >>> Total casualties among cyclists up 5% >> >> that is probably because of an increase in their numbers coupled witha lack >> of training/regulation >> >> > >Somehow the minor fact that cyclist fatalities fell by 10% seems to have >been overlooked. I can't think why on earth that would be. Not according to the Guardian's headline: "Sharp rise in number of cyclists killed on roads" http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/nov/05/cycling-deaths-department-of-transport
From: nmm1 on 20 Jul 2010 16:06 In article <oavb46tdkbonfdonmrj32b0h5uv5r5bunh(a)4ax.com>, Tom Crispin <kije.remove(a)this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote: >On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:52:37 +0100, Tony Raven <traven(a)gotadsl.co.uk> >wrote: > >>Somehow the minor fact that cyclist fatalities fell by 10% seems to have >>been overlooked. I can't think why on earth that would be. > >Not according to the Guardian's headline: >"Sharp rise in number of cyclists killed on roads" >http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/nov/05/cycling-deaths-department-of-transport You are looking at different data. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
From: Tom Crispin on 20 Jul 2010 16:21 On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:11:44 +0100, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk > wrote: >Road Casualties Great Britain Main Results: 2009 are out at the DfT >webpages. > >Main Highlights are : > >Total road casualties down 4% >Seriously injured down 6% >Child casualties down 6% >All pedestrian casualties down 6% >Motor cycle casualties down 4% > >All good news - oh - there are a couple more: > >Number of seriously injured cyclists up 6% >Total casualties among cyclists up 5% The figures in London are different. Pedal cyclist casualties in Greater London by severity and year: Year Fatal Serious Slight All 2000 14 408 3,084 3,506 2001 21 444 2,857 3,322 2002 20 394 2,648 3,062 2003 19 421 2,616 3,056 2004 8 332 2,620 2,960 2005 21 351 2,523 2,895 2006 19 373 2,566 2,958 2007 15 446 2,509 2,970 2008 15 430 2,757 3,202 2009 13 420 3,236 3,669 The second lowest number of fatalities in a decade, a decade average number of serious injuries and the largest number of recorded hospital admissions of cyclists with a grazed knee or similar ailments. Source: http://londonroadsafety.tfl.gov.uk/www/downloads/casualty-collision-data/pedal_casualties.pdf http://londonroadsafety.tfl.gov.uk/www/downloads/publications/casualties-in-greater-london-during-2009.pdf Sadly, in 2009, there was the first child cyclist fatality in London since 2004. A young lad was killed by a policeman driving a fast moving police car, with lights but no siren, as the child was cycling across a pedestrian crossing.
From: Adrian on 20 Jul 2010 16:31
Tom Crispin <kije.remove(a)this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Sadly, in 2009, there was the first child cyclist fatality in London > since 2004. A young lad was killed by a policeman driving a fast moving > police car, with lights but no siren, as the child was cycling across a > pedestrian crossing. It would probably be inappropriate to ask why somebody was cycling across a pedestrian crossing, wouldn't it? I'm not sure it's relevant, either. The only relevant fact is that somebody using a pedestrian crossing was not observing traffic properly. On it's own, that should not result in a fatality. The police driver was clearly not prepared for the crossing to be in use. As usual, contributory fuckwittery on the part of both those involved. Nor do I see the fact it was a child as being particularly relevant - if the child wasn't old enough to properly understand the rules of the road, then it's a failure of the parents to properly supervise their child. |