Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Cyclist Safety
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
Level one advanced Pursuit driver, anti-hijack driving instructor, Assessor and Instructor IAM, Skid pan instructor....
They need to get rid of the jargon though - 1 is chasing someone, 2 is getting away from them
It's largely luck because as has been pointed out, when you are texting you are not fully aware of what is going on on the road, so if something happens outside of your control you wont be able to react.
Ask FF - who is allowed to use a push to talk device whilst driving.
FF - Are the IAM drivers actually any better than normal drivers? Or afre they just lucky as seems to be being indicated above.
Can you arrest Darkness on the evidence given above - he admitted to speeding.
Anyone else just had visions of Flat foot running around shouting chase me from that?
As more than 14 days has passed since my last offence I think I am safe meface, but thanks for thinking of me anyhow!
Just as well I gave up my motorbikes for my push cycles!
I can touch type but I would never text and drive.
IAM better?, No, its nearly all men, late 40's, but it makes them more aware of hazards and hazard perception and limits of their and the cars ability
One of the biggest problems I find is peoples over reliance on technology, by that I mean ABS, traction control, parking sensors, width sensors on wing mirrors etc.
ABS doesn't mean you won't skid, but people don't know what to do if they do, all the things we used to do (remove cause, steer into it, pump breaks etc) are now wrong and doing that will make it worse but nobody has told the masses this.
Knowing you limits is really important too. All that tech in the car makes people think they are better drivers then they are, starts snowing and you always see people either driving too fast or crawling on the inside, it just takes common sense to drive to the limit of your abilities.
Sat Navs, how many people see the car in front driving erratically, moving lanes, slowing down and when you over take its clear they are being confused by a sat nav on unfamiliar roads....bet its a lot.
No, just you
FF you are spot on with the sat nav drivers, it is now a game to be played in the car, spot the sat nav driver by the bad driving, the correct guess rate is 90%.
Isn't that what he was doing at Outlaw whilst wearing a jock strap?
Time to stir this up a bit
Speeding isn't dangerous.
Speed limits are arbitrary and bear no relation to road safety ( I cite driving past a school at 3:30pm vs 3:30am as an example) and can find you several examples of roads within 5 miles of my house where the limit has been arbitrarily tinkered with**.
Speeding may be illegal, but it's 'not paying attention' and 'not being able to stop in the distance that you can see' which are the killers (and this is borne out by government statistics) To prevent either of these probably involves drivers slowing down, but the speed to which they should slow down bears no relation to the speed limit; 30mph past a school at tipping out time? Too fast, but legal; 40mph at 0330 when there's no one about to kill; illegal but pretty safe.
Personally, when on a bike, I'll prefer to share the road with a person driving a little over the speed limit but watching where they're going rather than someone doing 29mph who's off in a world of their own.
*tin hat time*
** both up and down. It really is arbitrary. Makes no sense that I drove those roads illegally one day (UNSAFE) but completely legally the next day (PERFECTLY SAFE) while doing exactly the same speed.
I like the phrase "its a limit not a target" people race to get to the limit for that road and as others have said don't take into account the road/weather conditions.
One problem with the argument that over 30 or whatever is safe is that it over looks that there are other users on the road. If the traffic is going past at thirty you can probably find a safe gap to cross the road on foot, if the traffic is going through at 50 it's a whole lot harder, especially if you have children with you.
I'd see you, TimpR
Cyclist should pass a test, be registered, taxed and insured before they allowed on the road. There vehicles should be identifiable (Number plated). Then they would have to take responsibility for their behaviour.
In 40 years of cycling, on and off, I have hit the tarmac on 3 occasions. 1 was my stupidity, 2 was a mechanical failure (lack of maintainance/ignorance on my part). 3 being knocked off by someone not looking when they opened their car door... Canute a big bruise, car a bent door that would not shut.
Having said that I would not ride a bike, drive a car or walk down the road in London or anywhere within 100 miles unless I really had to.
PS wear a helmet.
When they were invented lots of stupid people argued against them. Not wearing a helmet should invalidate your insurance.
Taxed? Wtf for?
Tested, registered, taxed and insured ..... and who is going to regulate that little lot then ??
As for all other road users. Be responsible.
Can't agree with this. What about national speed limits on your commute? Aso much more more likely to be street lighting in a 30 limit.
Limits are there because the police need something objective to enforce whereas "inappropriate speed" is subjective. As has been said above you can be going too fast of the conditions but within the speed limit and vice versa is also true.
Cyclists are more akin to pedestrians than they are motorists. There are c25,000 people killed or seriously injured on the UKs roads.3,000 cyclists are killed or seriously injured each year. (All figures per ROSPA). Cyclists cannot be compared to cars.
http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/cycling/facts-figures.aspx
I assumed that Canute was trolling. If he/she's really that daft it's pointless trying to reason with them.
Ian: Canute is a bit of a troll but he usually posts so late at night that few people reads his comments. I'm not quite sure why he bothers really. If you want to generate controversy you need to be posting around Thursday lunchtime
Cyclists should atleast have third party liability insurance. Home owning cyclists may be covered on their house insurance. But I guess many are not. These days with CCTV in urban areas and also in vehicle. Then cyclisets can an will be held responsible for their behaviour on the road and the consequences of that behaviour. Provided that they can be identified. If cyclists were identifiable, cyclists behaviours would be safer. If cyclists were taxed, this would pay for road maintainence development of safe cycle routes, policing and other generally desirable outcomes. why shouldn't cyclist be taxed for use of the roads.
Talking nonsense Canute.
Cyclists cant be "Taxed" as drivers are. Road tax was abolished in 1930's, it's now called VED which is emissions based. Cyclists would be exempt at £0 like many fuel efficient cars.
Road Tax is paid for by the British Tax Payer, We all pay Road Tax