Cyclists on the telly

I am not advocating any rule. I am advocating freedom of choice. I have not said anything in relation to motorcycle protective gear (there are no rules other than to wear a helmet), seat belts or switching off safety features. All I am saying is that cycling helmets provide minimal protection and their non use should not be the basis of criticism from others.

You are right though, most people that fall over don't get head injuries, a bit like cyclists really, but some do and their lives are ruined as a consequence; I have seen Emergency Bikers on the telly ! A head falling from close to 2m high, such as when you step off a pavement, can generate skull breaking forces. Maybe we should only allow stepping off pavements whilst wearing head protection, walking on pavements without would be OK, as long as you don't run. We would of course have to carry a helmet for those times when we want to cross the road. Unless it is a pedestrian crossing with those dimples by the side of the road to tell blind people (can I use the term blind people, maybe I should have used hard of seeing people) where they can cross without stepping off a curb, which would be OK because the fall would be from less than 2m.

 

I haven't been held up directly, I know how to get round a cyclist, but many other drivers aren't so confident around cyclists, that's what holds me up. Particularly at junctions where there are cyclists all over the road getting in the way of everyone. Let me take you for a drive into London during rush hour, where you can see from a different perspective. I'd only get as far as Vauxhall bridge before you started agreeing with me...

 

ok, fresh from a reasonably quick ride back from London...

With this thread in mind, I didn't do anything I wouldn't do, but I was conscious of doing lifesavers before pulling out, sticking my hand out before moving right, thanking drivers in side roads for not killing me and thanking drivers for giving me plenty of room when passing.

Generally, all very good. The most notable knob was the cyclist wearing dark clothing, no lights and big headphones on. Just pulled out to overtake a parked car without looking. A statistic in the making.

 

Fig I regularly drive in London up to 5 times a month. I have bothered my arse to take and teach advanced training, both as part of my job and in my spare time, that including observation, hazard perception awareness, high speed driving, including vip protection, Emergency response, and human tissue delivery. It is all this that has shaped my attitude, performance and riding style on public roads not simply the "I have been driving X amount of years arguement".

So yes training IS important to get an overall perspective, not be restricted to ones little personal bubble day in day out.

No I cant show you an advanced cycling certificate, im afraid you got me there!

 

I like #66

 

Today on the way home saw numerous cyclists on the road in the dark NO lights!!!
Then as one went round a roundabout they got wiped out by a family car.

 

Darwinism. :biggrin:

About the same level of intelligence as the GSX-R rider I saw tonight with no gloves on??! Blue hands, like a zombie...

 

Dumbwinism ????

 

But yeah but no but if you fitted lights to pedestrians then you would have no problem seeing them even in daylight so when they step off of kerbs they would'nt drop scalding water over their protective headgear meaning their mums aunty's best friend got wanked off by a donkey in a hi-viz gimp mask singing hey diddle diddle the cat and the fiddle got jizzed on by a blind person.



So.

Would you take the risk?

 

But it isn't a legal requirement (59). Unlike some of the other rules, such as stopping at a red light (79).

I don't need nanny telling me what I 'should' or 'shouldn't' do.

 

Oh, you have got me thinking now. Maybe I shouldn't get out of bed tomorrow. Nasty things might happen.

 

On a more serious note I finally watched the program 'Battle on Britain's Roads' that prompted this thread and all I can say is I shall stick to my own rule about traveling south of Kendal only in life or death situations. It is obviously far too dangerous down there for a simple country boy.

 

and that about sums up many cyclists attitute to safety and no doubt the cyclists will blame the car for the accident

there is some totally stupid move to try and bring in a law which makes car drivers automatically in the wrong if a cyclist is injurred, this would only make cases like this more common as cyclists would then be completely above the law and blameless regardless of the facts

I feel sorry for the car driver who has been involved in an avoidable accident becuase of a cyclists ignorant & selfish attitude towards other road users

 

So do I.

I also feel sorry for the cyclist who's been involved in an avoidable accident because of a motorist's ignorant and selfish attitude towards other road users.

An ignorant and selfish person remains an ignorant and selfish person regardless of their means of transport.

 

Above all else it's attitude that causes problems - on all sides. I really couldn't care less if someone wants to ride in dark clothes and no lights, it's their lookout, and all road users make mistakes, we see it every day, that's just human nature. But people with a bad attitude are a problem for everyone, and I see more cyclists with attitude problems than any other road user.

 

i think what hacks me of about cyclist is when they are in a group and riding 2 or 3 abreast , this seems to happen quite regular down here, like on saturday on the main road with loads of queing traffic behind, or they are in single file and they just whip out and overtake each other without looking when a cars overtaking them, seen a few nearly knocked off bye cars like this, going to end in tears soon

 

Copenhagenize.com - Bicycle Culture by Design

Cycle Chic®

Worth a look :smile: