Road Casualties 2009
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Mentalguy2k8 on 21 Jul 2010 03:37 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:8anjtbF23uU2(a)mid.individual.net... > JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk > gurgled happily, sounding much like they > were saying: > >>>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. > >> There are many here who promote the idea of 5 and 6 year olds cycling to >> school unaccompanied - because it is quite safe. > > I'm sure it is. > > If those children understand and obey the rules of the road. > But who is teaching them? There's no compulsory training or testing for riding bikes on the road, and if these kids are learning from (most of) the adults I've seen cycling, God help them. With any form of transport where the operators and equipment is almost completely unregulated, you're always going to get injuries and deaths. I can't think of many other wheeled vehicles where the vehicle isn't subject to examination at regular intervals, or the rider/driver not tested and passed to a decent standard before being allowed to operate his vehicle on public roads.
From: nmm1 on 21 Jul 2010 03:39 In article <ntx1o.299334$m87.121602(a)hurricane>, Mentalguy2k8 <Mentalguy2k8(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >"Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >news:8anjtbF23uU2(a)mid.individual.net... >> >> If those children understand and obey the rules of the road. > >But who is teaching them? Darwinian evolution. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
From: Derek C on 21 Jul 2010 04:18 On Jul 21, 8:08 am, Tony Raven <tra...(a)gotadsl.co.uk> wrote: > Derek C wrote: > > On Jul 20, 7:52 pm, Tony Raven <tra...(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. > > >> Tony > > > Possibly because a greater percentage of cyclists now wear cycle > > helmets. > > So how do you explain the rise in cyclist deaths over 2003-6. Was > helmet wearing dropping over that period? > > -- > Tony > Possibly just random statistical variations, or an increase in risky cycling behaviours such as deliberate red light jumping, which seems to tie up with my personal observations of cyclists in the London area. Before risk compensation is brought into the argument, it's mainly the unhelmeted cyclists (pscholists!) who seem to to do this. Derek
From: Tony Raven on 21 Jul 2010 05:38 Derek C wrote: > On Jul 21, 8:08 am, Tony Raven <tra...(a)gotadsl.co.uk> wrote: >> Derek C wrote: >>> On Jul 20, 7:52 pm, Tony Raven <tra...(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. >>>> Tony >>> Possibly because a greater percentage of cyclists now wear cycle >>> helmets. >> So how do you explain the rise in cyclist deaths over 2003-6. Was >> helmet wearing dropping over that period? >> >> -- >> Tony >> > Possibly just random statistical variations, or an increase in risky > cycling behaviours such as deliberate red light jumping, which seems > to tie up with my personal observations of cyclists in the London > area. Before risk compensation is brought into the argument, it's > mainly the unhelmeted cyclists (pscholists!) who seem to to do this. > > Derek So you're suggesting that when deaths decrease its an effect of helmets and when they increase its a random statistical fluctuation? In London more cyclists are killed on green by drivers running a red light than the other way round. But even then they make up a tiny proportion of the cyclist deaths most of which are caused by lorries turning across cyclists and either crushing them under the back wheels or crushing them against the railings. None of those would be helped one iota by a helmet. -- Tony " I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." Bertrand Russell
From: Adrian on 21 Jul 2010 05:41
Tony Raven <traven(a)gotadsl.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > In London more cyclists are killed on green by drivers running a red > light than the other way round. But even then they make up a tiny > proportion of the cyclist deaths most of which are caused by lorries > turning across cyclists and either crushing them under the back wheels > or crushing them against the railings. None of those would be helped > one iota by a helmet. Very true. They would, however, be helped massively by those same cyclists pausing to think - even briefly - about what the hell they're doing going down the left of an HGV at lights. |