Accident outside Primark 28/03/15

[Eater Sundae]

You may well be right but with no requirement to pass a proficiency test before embarking on the public highway very few pedal cyclists undertake any professional training in the first place.

 

And with no need for insurance or indeed much need for accountablity with them being fairly anonymous, having no registration number, many feel they do not need to bother with instruction or training that could save both their lives and those of other people as it not compulsory.

.

.

.

 

Which other people? How many are there?

[Cyclone]

You may well be right but with no requirement to pass a proficiency test before embarking on the public highway very few pedal cyclists undertake any professional training in the first place.

You have some proof of the numbers I assume?

 

And with no need for insurance or indeed much need for accountablity with them being fairly anonymous, having no registration number, many feel they do not need to bother with instruction or training that could save both their lives and those of other people as it not compulsory.

Again, you can prove what "many" cyclists feel can you? And of course you can also show that cyclists at fault incidents are a common cause of cyclist and others deaths?

 

Somehow I doubt that you have any evidence for either of these assertions.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 08:46 ----------

 

Pedestrians are not on the road like bikers are so dont be daft / they use the cause way. :hihi:

 

Except when there is no pavement, or when they cross the road.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 08:48 ----------

 

Originally Posted by Cyclone

 

You'd rather kill someone than pay for a little bit more training

 

If the activities indulged in by others require me in order to improve their safety by taking more, (in my view unnecessray) training the the very least they can do is pay for that training and compensate me well for my time.

 

If a bungee jumper, a hang glider or other extreme activities does get hurt do the rest of us lose any sleep over it? If they die we can empathise with the families of these people but do we really care about the person who died.. of course not. These are recognised dangerous activities that some people (arguably sometimes selfishly) indulge in. What is unfair is when their activities put other people at risk. The same can be said for riding a pedal cycle on the road.

 

There are in some cases for some dangerous activities legislation in place the purpose of which is primarily to protect the public and minimise costs to the state. The same should be true of pedal cycling.

.

.

 

If you run into a hang glider who unexpectedly swoops in front of you, then I don't think many people would blame you for it.

The fact is that most cyclists who are killed or injured are not in the wrong though and that's why you, and other motorists, need more training. You don't drive safely, you are dangerous around cyclists and YOU put them at risk, they don't put themselves at risk.

[Timeh]

If you run into a hang glider who unexpectedly swoops in front of you, then I don't think many people would blame you for it.

The fact is that most cyclists who are killed or injured are not in the wrong though and that's why you, and other motorists, need more training. You don't drive safely, you are dangerous around cyclists and YOU put them at risk, they don't put themselves at risk.

 

Can you link to this please?

[Cyclone]

Certainly;

 

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

 

A tiny proportion of accidents involving cyclists are caused by riders jumping red lights or stop signs, or failing to wear high-visibility clothing and use lights, a government-commissioned study has discovered.

 

The findings appear to contradict a spate of recent reports speculating that risky behaviour by riders, such as listening to music players while cycling, could be behind a near 20% rise in cyclist deaths and serious injuries in the second quarter of this year.

 

The study, carried out for the Department for Transport, found that in 2% of cases where cyclists were seriously injured in collisions with other road users police said that the rider disobeying a stop sign or traffic light was a likely contributing factor. Wearing dark clothing at night was seen as a potential cause in about 2.5% of cases, and failure to use lights was mentioned 2% of the time.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 09:20 ----------

 

The data, which was analysed by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), showed that more than a quarter of all cycling deaths in 2005-07 happened when a vehicle ran into the rear of a bike. This rose to more than one-third in rural areas and to 40% in collisions that took place away from junctions.

 

With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.

 

I think this supports the idea that drivers need more training, not cyclists. Who are of course acutely aware of their own vulnerability and unlikely (in the majority of cases) to put themselves into danger deliberately.

[dutch]

Someone told me about a cyclist killed by a drunk driver last year.

 

Do cyclists need a license or do we need to ban alcohol to solve that problem?

[Timeh]

Certainly;

 

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

 

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 09:20 ----------

 

 

I think this supports the idea that drivers need more training, not cyclists. Who are of course acutely aware of their own vulnerability and unlikely (in the majority of cases) to put themselves into danger deliberately.

No, you cheery picked that report and even in the link you provided it states its contradictory to other reports.

[Halibut]

No, you cheery picked that report and even in the link you provided it states its contradictory to other reports.

 

Cherry.

 

It says it it contradicts reports which were speculating - i.e. not based on evidence.

[Timeh]

Cherry.

 

It says it it contradicts reports which were speculating - i.e. not based on evidence.

 

Well i am Cheery but yes, i meant Cherry lol

[Cyclone]

No, you cheery picked that report and even in the link you provided it states its contradictory to other reports.

 

It's the first link that came up when I googled it. And as Halibut points out, it contradicts speculation with evidence.

 

Feel free to actually provide some counter evidence though. You asked if I could provide some proof of what I said, I've done it, time to change your opinion I'd say.

 

So I'll repeat;

 

"I think this supports the idea that drivers need more training, not cyclists. Who are of course acutely aware of their own vulnerability and unlikely (in the majority of cases) to put themselves into danger deliberately."

[Tommo68]

..... You don't drive safely, you are dangerous around cyclists and YOU put them at risk, they don't put themselves at risk.

 

Is that an accusation?

 

I have never had a conviction for any motoring offence not even parking.

 

So who said you are qualified to judge my driving without actually knowing who I am or having knowingly observed my driving.

 

BTW Accusing me of anything does not distract anyone from knowing that most pedal cyclists have not passed any test of their competence or even undergone any form of formal training before taking to the road. Nor are they easily accountable for their actions (no number plate) they have no proof their pedal cycles are road worthy and nor are they compelled to have 3rd party insurance. Some even ride on both pavements and pedestrian precincts. They can be seen daily ignoring red lights, crossing zebra crossings whilst pedestrians are on them.

 

If pedal cyclists want the same conderation as other road users then perhaps they should both read the highway code and consider behaving like road users.

 

If they do want cycle lanes everywhere then perhaps they should make the same financial contributions to the state as say a motorcyclist.

.

.