Road Casualties 2009
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: nmm1 on 21 Jul 2010 07:25 In article <4ZWdnStgP6COStvRnZ2dnUVZ8qQAAAAA(a)bt.com>, Tony Raven <junk(a)raven-family.invalid> wrote: >> >> Nine times out of ten, if that happens, it's because they have stopped >> in the gutter rather than in the primary position. That's stupid and >> dangerous - cyclists should almost always maintain a distance of 1-2 >> metres from the kerb, for many reasons. > >In front of the cab is a dangerous place to be too. More than a few >cyclists have been run over by a driver who pulled up behind a cyclist >who then became out of sight, out of mind for the driver. Visibility >directly in front of the cab is not good unless you stand out of the >seat and lean forward. Then get a more visible bicycle! I don't have that problem. I will accept that children and small riders don't have that option, but I am not totally convinced by the assertion that this is a common problem, though it certainly happens. However, it is STILL vastly safer than cowering on the left of HGVs, buses etc. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
From: Andy Leighton on 21 Jul 2010 08:48 On 21 Jul 2010 10:31:12 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Tony Raven <traven(a)gotadsl.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they > were saying: > >>> 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. > >> In a few cases that is the problem, often encouraged by the provision of >> a cycle lane into an ASL on the left of the road. But it's more often >> the lorry pulling up alongside the cyclist. > > Did I say "who was there first"? I did not. Implied by "going down the left of an HGV". If it ain't there you can't go down the left of it. > If you're sat on your bike at a stop light, and a wagon pulls up next to > you, it would seem to me to be a rather wise move to move forward and > across a bit so that he can't squish you. All very true and should be covered by adequate training (or learning as you go). Also avoidable by stopping in the primary position. -- Andy Leighton => andyl(a)azaal.plus.com "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials" - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
From: The Peeler on 21 Jul 2010 08:57 On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 07:48:04 -0500, Andy Leighton <andyl(a)azaal.plus.com> wrote: >On 21 Jul 2010 10:31:12 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Tony Raven <traven(a)gotadsl.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they >> were saying: >> >>>> 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. >> >>> In a few cases that is the problem, often encouraged by the provision of >>> a cycle lane into an ASL on the left of the road. But it's more often >>> the lorry pulling up alongside the cyclist. >> >> Did I say "who was there first"? I did not. > >Implied by "going down the left of an HGV". If it ain't there you can't >go down the left of it. Once more, Adrian trips over his own pedantry/pomposity! LOL
From: Just zis Guy, you know? on 21 Jul 2010 10:02 On 21 Jul 2010 10:37:52 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: >"Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> 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. > >>>> Probably cycling along a feeder lane to an ASL box that some cretin in >>>> the council failed to realise would be a death trap. > >>>Possibly. But that doesn't make it anything but thoroughly stupid and >>>suicidal to use it, does it? > >> You're preaching to the choir here. > >Am I? It doesn't seem like it. Quite the opposite, in fact, with the >usual strong hints of "They're a cyclist, and came off far worse, >therefore they must be the innocent party". I think you will find very few cyclists in any of the groups to which this is posted who advocate passing on the left of large vehicles in traffic. Guy -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/ The usenet price promise: all opinions offered in newsgroups are guaranteed to be worth the price paid.
From: Brimstone on 21 Jul 2010 10:40
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote in message news:ea1e46hhg8f9rdfv4vctbr89cmr796egat(a)4ax.com... > The Metropolitan Police and TfL seem to think the blame goes both > ways, they are targeting both communities with education campaigns. > Since when has educating both parties to a problem been called "blame"? (BTW - I'm not suggesting that both groups can't learn.) |