WeX Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 These have been posted on here before. You may have to register for some of these to download them. I guess these are the reports that have made up most of the recent press coverage (certainly since 2009) This first one, remember you need to look at the stats for adult cyclists. These are based on police reported stats. They are slightly skewed when one party isn't available for interview to give there own version of events. This is usually because they are dead. Collisions involving pedal cyclists on Britain's roads: establishing the causes http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/reports_publications/trl_reports/cat_road_user_safety/report_collisions_involving_pedal_cyclists_on_britain_s_roads_establishing_the_causes_.htm Pedal cyclist collisions and casualties in Greater London http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/pedal-cyclist-collisions-and-casualities-in-greater-london-sep-2011.pdf this is the the one that Boris get so badly wrong when he said blame for 62% of KSIs was on the cyclists disobeying the law. He later said I asked Transport for London to look into a statistic that I was told about during my election campaign. Its own statistics and research suggest this is not the case in London and I am pleased to be able to set the record straight on this. Accident stats in general https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-main-results-2011 not on this thread they haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Yes, yes they are. Have you never seen a child on a bike on a road? Or a scooter. Or even a pedestrian on the road? Do you get to redefine what "road user" means so that it conveniently includes only the groups you wish? they are not road users, they cross the road but do not use the road to traverse the country. seriously are you really that stupid or are you just playing at being thick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Like pedestrians. We must rivet number plates to pedestrians to allow road safety to be enforced improved. you said pedestrians not me and you are pretending to be stupid (I hope) to try and make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 There were statistics about who was at fault in most accidents involving bikes... We've previously looked at statistics about injuries caused by bikes... when did we sit down and do this cyclone? I'm sure I would remember it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 when did we sit down and do this cyclone? I'm sure I would remember it. The first was in this thread, a few pages ago. And has been linked again just recently. The 2nd was in an older thread, Tony contributed to it, the numbers are ridiculously low, 1.5 fatalities a year caused by bikes hitting people, and 20 injuries or something in those realms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 they are not road users, they cross the road but do not use the road to traverse the country. I run on the road where there is no pavement. I am a road using pedestrian. seriously are you really that stupid or are you just playing at being thick? Neither, you are deliberately trying to narrow the group of 'road users' so that you can then argue for your 'level' playing field of making them all licensed and registered. There is no logical basis for either the narrowing of the group, or the subsequent registration and licensing. Cars are dangerous, to people other than the driver, bikes are not. Hence there is no requirement for insurance or for licensing or for registration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 you said pedestrians not me and you are pretending to be stupid (I hope) to try and make a point. I am trying to make a point yes, but there is no stupidity involved. The idea that pedestrians be licensed and registered is stupid though, I'll give you that, just like your idea that bikes be licensed and registered is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 The first was in this thread, a few pages ago. And has been linked again just recently. The 2nd was in an older thread, Tony contributed to it, the numbers are ridiculously low, 1.5 fatalities a year caused by bikes hitting people, and 20 injuries or something in those realms. ok, cylcone in your world every law is due to safety and none are anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I am trying to make a point yes, but there is no stupidity involved. The idea that pedestrians be licensed and registered is stupid though, I'll give you that, just like your idea that bikes be licensed and registered is stupid. why is it stupid to be identifiable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molly44 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 i think that registering bikes would be of great use, both for the ever increasing theft of bikes and then those that do ride irresponsibly. it would make a better road using experience for everyone, Umm but then i suppose people would argue that pedestrians should have a reg number tattooed on their foreheads so they could be identified as well if they jaywalked, (which is an offence i think) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.