Jump to content

Death By Dangerous Cycling - New Laws


Featured Posts

10 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

I'd be interested to see the dataset that Patrick Scott has access to ……...

 

 

Supposedly the Department of Transport.

 

Over the past seven years there have been 25 pedestrians killed in accidents with bikes and another 700 seriously injured – meaning roughly two people every week are being killed or badly hurt in crashes with bikes.

The Department of Transport data, which does not state who is at fault in the accidents, shows three pedestrians were killed in crashes with bikes last year and another 112 were seriously injured.

The Department of Transport figures show there were a total of 115 serious or fatal injuries to pedestrians last year, an increase of 16 per cent on the figure four years earlier.

Separate NHS statistics revealed there is around one emergency admission to hospital every day for a pedestrian who has been in collision with a cyclist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Supposedly the Department of Transport.

 

Over the past seven years there have been 25 pedestrians killed in accidents with bikes and another 700 seriously injured – meaning roughly two people every week are being killed or badly hurt in crashes with bikes.

The Department of Transport data, which does not state who is at fault in the accidents, shows three pedestrians were killed in crashes with bikes last year and another 112 were seriously injured.

The Department of Transport figures show there were a total of 115 serious or fatal injuries to pedestrians last year, an increase of 16 per cent on the figure four years earlier.

Separate NHS statistics revealed there is around one emergency admission to hospital every day for a pedestrian who has been in collision with a cyclist.

Well that seems to suggest a figure of just over 3 killed and 100 injured per annum, which is substantially better (in terms of injuries) that the figure of 233 in 2006. Where did this idea that they've doubled come from?

 

I have to say whether talking about car or cycling accidents I have never liked this X have been killed or injured since it is meaningless without breakdown, does it mean 1 has been killed and 114 injured? or 30 killed and 85 injured? Sadly after nearly a decade of reducing accident levels they are all going back up again (interesting, except motorcycles), whatever the reason is a separate debate.

Edited by Wanderer Vagabond
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Supposedly the Department of Transport.

 

Over the past seven years there have been 25 pedestrians killed in accidents with bikes and another 700 seriously injured – meaning roughly two people every week are being killed or badly hurt in crashes with bikes.

The Department of Transport data, which does not state who is at fault in the accidents, shows three pedestrians were killed in crashes with bikes last year and another 112 were seriously injured.

The Department of Transport figures show there were a total of 115 serious or fatal injuries to pedestrians last year, an increase of 16 per cent on the figure four years earlier.

Separate NHS statistics revealed there is around one emergency admission to hospital every day for a pedestrian who has been in collision with a cyclist.

 

It is probably  safer to travel by boat rather than walking. I imagine  there are not many accidents between boats and pedestrians and not many accidents between boats and cyclists .

 

Looking for figures for roads indicates for year 2016 there were 1700 road deaths of which  448 were  pedestrians . This makes 3 pedestrians  killed by cyclists, as quoted above,  a small number.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opinion on this issue, and cyclists in general, is out of all proportion to reality, and intensity of that opinion even moreso. The anger and outrage directed at cyclists is clearly evidence of something driven by deeper urges and emotions. Obviously there are well established patterns of distorted risk perception etc but that doesn't account for the depth of anger that one sees in almost any internet forum where non-cyclists/drivers seek to control and limit cycling or cyclist behaviour.

It is an instructive and fascinating evidence of primitive tribal psychology at work in relation to 'out-group' demonisation.

 

 

 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tigerr said:

Opinion on this issue, and cyclists in general, is out of all proportion to reality, and intensity of that opinion even moreso. The anger and outrage directed at cyclists is clearly evidence of something driven by deeper urges and emotions. Obviously there are well established patterns of distorted risk perception etc but that doesn't account for the depth of anger that one sees in almost any internet forum where non-cyclists/drivers seek to control and limit cycling or cyclist behaviour.

It is an instructive and fascinating evidence of primitive tribal psychology at work in relation to 'out-group' demonisation.

 

 

 

Sounds right.  The arguments always play out the same way too. 

 

1st person says "they should pay road tax!",

 

2nd person says "there's no such thing as road tax!  It's called VED",

 

1st person says "they should be liable for VED then!",

 

2nd person points out that the VED charge for zero emmisions vehicles is £0! 

 

1st person then starts ranting about lycra.

 

It's all quite amusing really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tigerr said:

Opinion on this issue, and cyclists in general, is out of all proportion to reality, and intensity of that opinion even moreso. The anger and outrage directed at cyclists is clearly evidence of something driven by deeper urges and emotions. Obviously there are well established patterns of distorted risk perception etc but that doesn't account for the depth of anger that one sees in almost any internet forum where non-cyclists/drivers seek to control and limit cycling or cyclist behaviour.

It is an instructive and fascinating evidence of primitive tribal psychology at work in relation to 'out-group' demonisation.

 

 

 

There is much in what you say and I have little argument with it. However, the extra issue for us as towpath users is that we share the space with the cyclists. Being overtaken by a cyclist from behind is a scary experience if you didn’t hear them coming and leads to anger being generalised against the whole group. It’s like trying to walk along a country road and having to push into the hedge to escape the SUV coming round the corner.

 

The other thing about cyclists is what we see here at Mercia, a whole pack of MAMILs turning up and occupying a big chunk of cafe space. No reason why they shouldn’t, of course, but it all contributes to the perception of them as a separate and irritating out-group.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Sounds right.  The arguments always play out the same way too. 

1st person says "they should pay road tax!",

2nd person says "there's no such thing as road tax!  It's called VED",

1st person says "they should be liable for VED then!",

2nd person points out that the VED charge for zero emmisions vehicles is £0! 

1st person then starts ranting about lycra.

It's all quite amusing really.

Even so, whether called Road Tax or VED , the bike will at least be registered and have a number-plate (and traceable), with a charge based on how much CO2 cyclists exhale.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Horace42 said:

Even so, whether called Road Tax or VED , the bike will at least be registered and have a number-plate (and traceable), with a charge based on how much CO2 cyclists exhale.

 

OMG the LOLs I get at this site. You lot are such a bizarre bunch. You're suggesting a tax on breathing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Horace42 said:

Even so, whether called Road Tax or VED , the bike will at least be registered and have a number-plate (and traceable), with a charge based on how much CO2 cyclists exhale.

 

Next thing we'll expect people to pay to go jogging based on their CO2 emissions .... and it's a short step from that to paying for a walk :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tigerr said:

Opinion on this issue, and cyclists in general, is out of all proportion to reality, and intensity of that opinion even moreso. The anger and outrage directed at cyclists is clearly evidence of something driven by deeper urges and emotions. Obviously there are well established patterns of distorted risk perception etc but that doesn't account for the depth of anger that one sees in almost any internet forum where non-cyclists/drivers seek to control and limit cycling or cyclist behaviour.

It is an instructive and fascinating evidence of primitive tribal psychology at work in relation to 'out-group' demonisation.

 

 

 

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/08/2018 at 11:39, Wanderer Vagabond said:

If you were to join the 816 car drivers/passengers who died in car accidents in 2016 (latest figures) the likelihood is that the main cause of death is going to be a head injury 

I’m not sure that’s true. A major cause of death to car occupants following an RTC is extreme internal haemorrhaging. Although head injuries are also common, which is the more prevalent appears difficult to ascertain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheBiscuits said:

There's no need to be nasty :D

 

Godwin are/were a respected Manufacturer of Boat Water Pumps ,so the only Godwins Law that I am aware of is that the Non-Return Valve on a Godwin Pump will need a sharp clout with a Blunt Instrument in the Spring ,after it has stood all Winter..

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jds_1981 said:

OMG the LOLs I get at this site. You lot are such a bizarre bunch. You're suggesting a tax on breathing?

Not breathing - only when exhaling

Although I'm sure HMRC would love to tax breathing - if only they could get away with.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KevMc said:

Next thing we'll expect people to pay to go jogging based on their CO2 emissions .... and it's a short step from that to paying for a walk :cheers:

Exactly, or any other physical activity that increases the breathing rate - of which a couple come to mind - and if that could be taxed as well, where does it stop.

I have a feeling, cyclists need not worry too much.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.