Over 500 cyclists injured on roads (From Daily Echo)

This is not surprising based on the way in which many of them ride without lights or ignore traffic signals. Before the avalanche of defensive comments from cyclists, I accept there will be motorists that are responsible for some of these incidents, however if we deal with the dangerous cyclists who put themselves and others at risk, this issue will continue to be a problem.

if they were fined as they should be hey would soon improve their behaviour

When are we to address the reality. Cycling on roads is about mixing,mingling competing with many large pieces of fast moving essential machinery, operated mostly by very average people? Road cycling may have been OK in 1913 but roads are much busier in 2013. As cycling increases all sorts of cycling accidents are increasing too. Our cycle clip politicians have much to answer for.

i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

cmth40 wrote:
i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

Erm when was the last time you saw the council grit and cycle path or footway?
Now which surface do you think will be more icey - road or cycle/footway?

I bet a lot of these incidents could have been avoided if everyone (cyclist and motorist) was a bit more patient and considerate.

Let's dispell a few myths here, cyclists are in the eyes of the law just as valid a road user as any car, lorry, or motorcyclist etc, and as such should be afforded as much road space as a car (section 163 Highway Code). I and a large number of commuting cyclists do indeed have minimum third party insurance through British Cycling Federation Membership, furthermore even if a 'tax disc' system for bikes were implemented it would be free for cyclists as the tax disc is currently based on emissions, it is the general taxation of working people (which includes commuting cyclists) which pays for the upkeep of the roads thereby cyclists are 'paying their way' just like any other road user. Another common misconception is that the provision of a cycle lane/path dictates a cyclist must use it, this is not the case, as already mentioned cycle lanes/paths are not routinely maintained and cleaned like the main highway and are often not the most safe or approriate route for a cyclist to utilise, most cycle paths do not even meet Department for Transport guidelines on sizing and marking! Like car drivers there will always be the odd cyclist who doesn't do so legally/appropriatel
y etc but lets not pretend they are anything other than the minority, the roads are there for everyone to use and share responsibly, safe driving/cycling from everyone is all that is required to minimise these casualty numbers.

Absolutely brilliant forry.

I think the subject is now closed.

SaintM wrote:
if they were fined as they should be hey would soon improve their behaviour

May I suggest you consider taking up cycling as all the fresh air and exercise may help you to carry out simple grammatical tasks such as starting a sentence with a capital letter, ending it with a full stop and checking your spelling.

sotondavid wrote:

SaintM wrote:
if they were fined as they should be hey would soon improve their behaviour

May I suggest you consider taking up cycling as all the fresh air and exercise may help you to carry out simple grammatical tasks such as starting a sentence with a capital letter, ending it with a full stop and checking your spelling.

The subject is now closed

J.P.M wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

SaintM wrote:
if they were fined as they should be hey would soon improve their behaviour

May I suggest you consider taking up cycling as all the fresh air and exercise may help you to carry out simple grammatical tasks such as starting a sentence with a capital letter, ending it with a full stop and checking your spelling.

The subject is now closed

Quite right. Sorry its closed!! But the potholes aren't, lol.

bazzeroz wrote:

J.P.M wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

SaintM wrote:
if they were fined as they should be hey would soon improve their behaviour

May I suggest you consider taking up cycling as all the fresh air and exercise may help you to carry out simple grammatical tasks such as starting a sentence with a capital letter, ending it with a full stop and checking your spelling.

The subject is now closed

Quite right. Sorry its closed!! But the potholes aren't, lol.

The subject is now closed

J.P.M wrote:

bazzeroz wrote:

J.P.M wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

SaintM wrote:
if they were fined as they should be hey would soon improve their behaviour

May I suggest you consider taking up cycling as all the fresh air and exercise may help you to carry out simple grammatical tasks such as starting a sentence with a capital letter, ending it with a full stop and checking your spelling.

The subject is now closed

Quite right. Sorry its closed!! But the potholes aren't, lol.

The subject is now closed

Looks open still.

Brusher Mills wrote:

J.P.M wrote:

bazzeroz wrote:

J.P.M wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

SaintM wrote:
if they were fined as they should be hey would soon improve their behaviour

May I suggest you consider taking up cycling as all the fresh air and exercise may help you to carry out simple grammatical tasks such as starting a sentence with a capital letter, ending it with a full stop and checking your spelling.

The subject is now closed

Quite right. Sorry its closed!! But the potholes aren't, lol.

The subject is now closed

Looks open still.

hampstead heath

it would be interesting to know through the statistics whose fault most of the accidents were, as a cyclist and driver i don't see anything wrong with cyclists going through some red lights particularly pelican crossings with red lights but no one using it (i've seen kids pressing the buttons just for fun walking with parents not using it) , some other traffic lights are plainly stupid holding up traffic on main roads when there is nothing at all waiting to join from a side road, about time we had smart traffic systems we pay enough in motoring taxes

cmth40 wrote:
i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

I suggest you read the comment of "Forest Resident" as an excellent example of the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation when writing about the issues of cycling injuries on the roads of Southampton and Hampshire.

sotondavid wrote:

cmth40 wrote:
i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

I suggest you read the comment of "Forest Resident" as an excellent example of the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation when writing about the issues of cycling injuries on the roads of Southampton and Hampshire.

I suggest you re-read the post and find the spelling mistake and omission of apostrophe therein.

Night Mare wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

cmth40 wrote:
i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

I suggest you read the comment of "Forest Resident" as an excellent example of the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation when writing about the issues of cycling injuries on the roads of Southampton and Hampshire.

I suggest you re-read the post and find the spelling mistake and omission of apostrophe therein.

I suggest that people accept the fact that cyclists are legitimate road users and get the hell over it, I mean as others have said, there's a MINORITY of bad eggs in each group of road users but don't let those few ruin things for the majority, also, another comment suggests it's illegal to go between stationary vehicles on a bicycle, this is false, it is perfectly legal for cyclists AND motorcyclists to do so and it is known as FILTERING, also, the same comment suggests that cyclists MUST use cycling infrastructure, this again is false, we do not have to use it and 9 times out of 10 we couldn't even if we wanted to because of people parking all over it, cycle lanes in "door zones" (the area a car door would be if it was open), people driving in cycle lanes and people jumping the red to sit at the Advanced Stop Line which is exclusively for cyclists UNLESS a driver has a very good reason for being there, such as already being there when the lights changed, then there's the "cycle lane mentality", meaning that some drivers seem to think a bit of paint will magically protect us no matter how close they pass while forgetting that as they pass that close, they put us into turbulent which if caused by a large vehicle like a van, could pull us out into the path of another vehicle, not to mention that wind can effect us big time as it could push us into the path of a car that is far too close causing them to hit us and it would be their fault, also, today I didn't see ANY cyclists breaking the law but I DID catch on camera, 2 cars jumping a red, a third driver jumping the red to sit at an ASL(Advanced Stop Line), 2 drivers using the phone while driving, an idiot overtaking me too close on top of a sharp left hand turn, 2 imbeciles passing too close at a traffic island where there was obviously no room to pass safely and 2 drivers going the WRONG way through guildhall square.

OVER 500 CYCLISTS INJURED ON ROADS - right, perhaps then cyclists should be on the roads. So so simple?

chunky_lover wrote:
OVER 500 CYCLISTS INJURED ON ROADS - right, perhaps then cyclists should be on the roads. So so simple?

We are legally obliged to be on the roads already. ;)

chunky_lover wrote:
OVER 500 CYCLISTS INJURED ON ROADS - right, perhaps then cyclists should be on the roads. So so simple?

If only it was so simple. Did you get the construction of your sentence wrong or did you intend to suggest that cyclists should be on the roads because 500 of them had been injured.

JPM is a Troll

Just stand at Woolston crossroads for a while and youl see cyclists going through red lights, cars doing the same and pedestrians also doing the same.
Add to this cars parked ON pedestrian crossings.
Just a question of time before a fatality occurs.
Overall (not just woolston) though i see cyclists breaking red lights more often than i see cars doing it.

This is an extremely in depth problem and a simple it's because cyclist are dangerous or car drivers are reckless although this may be the instance in some cases.
.
The infrastructure for cycling is just not there. We need to get bikes out and away of the traffic where we can, especially in places where the traffic is already heavy and especially where speed limits allow drivers to drive 50, 60mph.
.
Education of drivers and cyclists is also needed and also realisation from drivers that although cyclist can be annoying or inconvenience this does not justify dangerous behavior behind the wheel i.e. drive as closely as possible when you pass that cyclist to "prove" your point. You are driving a vehicle capable of causing serious injury and fatalities!

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Night Mare wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

cmth40 wrote: i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

I suggest you read the comment of "Forest Resident" as an excellent example of the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation when writing about the issues of cycling injuries on the roads of Southampton and Hampshire.

I suggest you re-read the post and find the spelling mistake and omission of apostrophe therein.

I suggest that people accept the fact that cyclists are legitimate road users and get the hell over it, I mean as others have said, there's a MINORITY of bad eggs in each group of road users but don't let those few ruin things for the majority, also, another comment suggests it's illegal to go between stationary vehicles on a bicycle, this is false, it is perfectly legal for cyclists AND motorcyclists to do so and it is known as FILTERING, also, the same comment suggests that cyclists MUST use cycling infrastructure, this again is false, we do not have to use it and 9 times out of 10 we couldn't even if we wanted to because of people parking all over it, cycle lanes in "door zones" (the area a car door would be if it was open), people driving in cycle lanes and people jumping the red to sit at the Advanced Stop Line which is exclusively for cyclists UNLESS a driver has a very good reason for being there, such as already being there when the lights changed, then there's the "cycle lane mentality", meaning that some drivers seem to think a bit of paint will magically protect us no matter how close they pass while forgetting that as they pass that close, they put us into turbulent which if caused by a large vehicle like a van, could pull us out into the path of another vehicle, not to mention that wind can effect us big time as it could push us into the path of a car that is far too close causing them to hit us and it would be their fault, also, today I didn't see ANY cyclists breaking the law but I DID catch on camera, 2 cars jumping a red, a third driver jumping the red to sit at an ASL(Advanced Stop Line), 2 drivers using the phone while driving, an idiot overtaking me too close on top of a sharp left hand turn, 2 imbeciles passing too close at a traffic island where there was obviously no room to pass safely and 2 drivers going the WRONG way through guildhall square.

Had to laugh when I saw cycle lanes in door zones.
.
I am very reluctant to use cycle paths now as of what you mentioned.
.
Cycling into Salisbury on the cycle path when a car drivers passenger (parked in the bus lane) opened their passenger door into the cycle path area knocking me clean of my bike and into the side of a cast iron bin.
.
And to rub further salt into the wound -I got a SMIDSY.

CharlieOxbridge wrote:
This is an extremely in depth problem and a simple it's because cyclist are dangerous or car drivers are reckless although this may be the instance in some cases.
.
The infrastructure for cycling is just not there. We need to get bikes out and away of the traffic where we can, especially in places where the traffic is already heavy and especially where speed limits allow drivers to drive 50, 60mph.
.
Education of drivers and cyclists is also needed and also realisation from drivers that although cyclist can be annoying or inconvenience this does not justify dangerous behavior behind the wheel i.e. drive as closely as possible when you pass that cyclist to "prove" your point. You are driving a vehicle capable of causing serious injury and fatalities!

Don't get on this website with these extreme common sense viewpoints.

Please repost with a more rediculous comment.

CharlieOxbridge wrote:
This is an extremely in depth problem and a simple it's because cyclist are dangerous or car drivers are reckless although this may be the instance in some cases.
.
The infrastructure for cycling is just not there. We need to get bikes out and away of the traffic where we can, especially in places where the traffic is already heavy and especially where speed limits allow drivers to drive 50, 60mph.
.
Education of drivers and cyclists is also needed and also realisation from drivers that although cyclist can be annoying or inconvenience this does not justify dangerous behavior behind the wheel i.e. drive as closely as possible when you pass that cyclist to "prove" your point. You are driving a vehicle capable of causing serious injury and fatalities!

I don’t think it is an in-depth problem. Its more an out-of-depth problem. Car drivers out of their depth. They just can't cope with a few cyclists milling around them. Solution – urban speed limit to 20 mph.

good-gosh wrote:

CharlieOxbridge wrote:
This is an extremely in depth problem and a simple it's because cyclist are dangerous or car drivers are reckless although this may be the instance in some cases.
.
The infrastructure for cycling is just not there. We need to get bikes out and away of the traffic where we can, especially in places where the traffic is already heavy and especially where speed limits allow drivers to drive 50, 60mph.
.
Education of drivers and cyclists is also needed and also realisation from drivers that although cyclist can be annoying or inconvenience this does not justify dangerous behavior behind the wheel i.e. drive as closely as possible when you pass that cyclist to "prove" your point. You are driving a vehicle capable of causing serious injury and fatalities!

I don’t think it is an in-depth problem. Its more an out-of-depth problem. Car drivers out of their depth. They just can't cope with a few cyclists milling around them. Solution – urban speed limit to 20 mph.

Cycling NIMBY who doesn't care about the countryside.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Night Mare wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

cmth40 wrote:
i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

I suggest you read the comment of "Forest Resident" as an excellent example of the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation when writing about the issues of cycling injuries on the roads of Southampton and Hampshire.

I suggest you re-read the post and find the spelling mistake and omission of apostrophe therein.

I suggest that people accept the fact that cyclists are legitimate road users and get the hell over it, I mean as others have said, there's a MINORITY of bad eggs in each group of road users but don't let those few ruin things for the majority, also, another comment suggests it's illegal to go between stationary vehicles on a bicycle, this is false, it is perfectly legal for cyclists AND motorcyclists to do so and it is known as FILTERING, also, the same comment suggests that cyclists MUST use cycling infrastructure, this again is false, we do not have to use it and 9 times out of 10 we couldn't even if we wanted to because of people parking all over it, cycle lanes in "door zones" (the area a car door would be if it was open), people driving in cycle lanes and people jumping the red to sit at the Advanced Stop Line which is exclusively for cyclists UNLESS a driver has a very good reason for being there, such as already being there when the lights changed, then there's the "cycle lane mentality", meaning that some drivers seem to think a bit of paint will magically protect us no matter how close they pass while forgetting that as they pass that close, they put us into turbulent which if caused by a large vehicle like a van, could pull us out into the path of another vehicle, not to mention that wind can effect us big time as it could push us into the path of a car that is far too close causing them to hit us and it would be their fault, also, today I didn't see ANY cyclists breaking the law but I DID catch on camera, 2 cars jumping a red, a third driver jumping the red to sit at an ASL(Advanced Stop Line), 2 drivers using the phone while driving, an idiot overtaking me too close on top of a sharp left hand turn, 2 imbeciles passing too close at a traffic island where there was obviously no room to pass safely and 2 drivers going the WRONG way through guildhall square.

Agreed there is a minority of bad cyclists out there.

Can you accept that there is only a minority of bad drivers?

Take note: not all drivers are bad!!!!!

P.s. read my opening line before you get all defensive.

CharlieOxbridge wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Night Mare wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

cmth40 wrote: i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

I suggest you read the comment of "Forest Resident" as an excellent example of the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation when writing about the issues of cycling injuries on the roads of Southampton and Hampshire.

I suggest you re-read the post and find the spelling mistake and omission of apostrophe therein.

I suggest that people accept the fact that cyclists are legitimate road users and get the hell over it, I mean as others have said, there's a MINORITY of bad eggs in each group of road users but don't let those few ruin things for the majority, also, another comment suggests it's illegal to go between stationary vehicles on a bicycle, this is false, it is perfectly legal for cyclists AND motorcyclists to do so and it is known as FILTERING, also, the same comment suggests that cyclists MUST use cycling infrastructure, this again is false, we do not have to use it and 9 times out of 10 we couldn't even if we wanted to because of people parking all over it, cycle lanes in "door zones" (the area a car door would be if it was open), people driving in cycle lanes and people jumping the red to sit at the Advanced Stop Line which is exclusively for cyclists UNLESS a driver has a very good reason for being there, such as already being there when the lights changed, then there's the "cycle lane mentality", meaning that some drivers seem to think a bit of paint will magically protect us no matter how close they pass while forgetting that as they pass that close, they put us into turbulent which if caused by a large vehicle like a van, could pull us out into the path of another vehicle, not to mention that wind can effect us big time as it could push us into the path of a car that is far too close causing them to hit us and it would be their fault, also, today I didn't see ANY cyclists breaking the law but I DID catch on camera, 2 cars jumping a red, a third driver jumping the red to sit at an ASL(Advanced Stop Line), 2 drivers using the phone while driving, an idiot overtaking me too close on top of a sharp left hand turn, 2 imbeciles passing too close at a traffic island where there was obviously no room to pass safely and 2 drivers going the WRONG way through guildhall square.

Had to laugh when I saw cycle lanes in door zones.
.
I am very reluctant to use cycle paths now as of what you mentioned.
.
Cycling into Salisbury on the cycle path when a car drivers passenger (parked in the bus lane) opened their passenger door into the cycle path area knocking me clean of my bike and into the side of a cast iron bin.
.
And to rub further salt into the wound -I got a SMIDSY.

It's very common to find a cycle lane that can't be used due to the door zone and it's more common that people don't look before swinging their doors open, or they see you but think you're going a lot slower, when I approach parked cars, I always take a more central position so that I'm away from the door zone, if there's cars either side of the road, I go right in the middle of them all but some drivers don't understand why we might do this and end up trying to force their way past, even if you've got priority, I also strongly suggest taking a more central position when going through pinch points too, most times there is not enough room to overtake through them safely and never stay in secondary at speeds over 10 to 15mph unless you're slowing down going uphill.

S!monOn wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Night Mare wrote:

sotondavid wrote:

cmth40 wrote:
i dont have a car and dont cycle but i,ve seen the way they abuse the roads,not looking,no lights,riding between cars ans not using the bike path,s that gthe councils so blindly reduced the road sizes to provide,we lost a lot of road to have a big cycle path put in be the amount that ever are on it is criminal,they,d rather hold up traffic,take chances on the icey road

I suggest you read the comment of "Forest Resident" as an excellent example of the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation when writing about the issues of cycling injuries on the roads of Southampton and Hampshire.

I suggest you re-read the post and find the spelling mistake and omission of apostrophe therein.

I suggest that people accept the fact that cyclists are legitimate road users and get the hell over it, I mean as others have said, there's a MINORITY of bad eggs in each group of road users but don't let those few ruin things for the majority, also, another comment suggests it's illegal to go between stationary vehicles on a bicycle, this is false, it is perfectly legal for cyclists AND motorcyclists to do so and it is known as FILTERING, also, the same comment suggests that cyclists MUST use cycling infrastructure, this again is false, we do not have to use it and 9 times out of 10 we couldn't even if we wanted to because of people parking all over it, cycle lanes in "door zones" (the area a car door would be if it was open), people driving in cycle lanes and people jumping the red to sit at the Advanced Stop Line which is exclusively for cyclists UNLESS a driver has a very good reason for being there, such as already being there when the lights changed, then there's the "cycle lane mentality", meaning that some drivers seem to think a bit of paint will magically protect us no matter how close they pass while forgetting that as they pass that close, they put us into turbulent which if caused by a large vehicle like a van, could pull us out into the path of another vehicle, not to mention that wind can effect us big time as it could push us into the path of a car that is far too close causing them to hit us and it would be their fault, also, today I didn't see ANY cyclists breaking the law but I DID catch on camera, 2 cars jumping a red, a third driver jumping the red to sit at an ASL(Advanced Stop Line), 2 drivers using the phone while driving, an idiot overtaking me too close on top of a sharp left hand turn, 2 imbeciles passing too close at a traffic island where there was obviously no room to pass safely and 2 drivers going the WRONG way through guildhall square.

Agreed there is a minority of bad cyclists out there.

Can you accept that there is only a minority of bad drivers?

Take note: not all drivers are bad!!!!!

P.s. read my opening line before you get all defensive.

I agree, not all drivers are bad, the majority are really good, like a few days ago, best driving I'd ever seen, followed me all the way from hamble motors to near what used to be bus stops by windhover roundabout, didn't tailgate, beep at me, gesticulate, flash their light or try to force their way past me, they just waited until they could make a safe pass by using the oncoming lane like drivers are supposed to but it's the minority that ruins it for the majority, if that minority suddenly ceased to exist and it was only good drivers who were left, you'd probably see insurance prices tumble.

Between 1951 and 2006 a total of 309,144 people were killed and 17.6 million were injured in accidents on British roads. These are just numbers, they do not take into account the impact on peoples lives that this carnage has had.

http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Reported_Ro
ad_Casualties_Great_
Britain

If there had been this level of destruction in the air transport or rail system then they would have shut down years ago.

A minority of bad drivers is still too many. Unless the level of competency of drivers increases through the introduction of ongoing training and testing then we will continue to kill each other at these unacceptable levels.

Take a look at the following report:

https://www.gov.uk/g
overnment/uploads/sy
stem/uploads/attachm
ent_data/file/9280/r
rcgb2011-complete.pd
f

Bad cyclists jumping red lights, cycling on pavements and weaving through traffic is just not relevant to the problem.

sotondavid wrote:
Between 1951 and 2006 a total of 309,144 people were killed and 17.6 million were injured in accidents on British roads. These are just numbers, they do not take into account the impact on peoples lives that this carnage has had.

http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/Reported_Ro

ad_Casualties_Great_

Britain

If there had been this level of destruction in the air transport or rail system then they would have shut down years ago.

A minority of bad drivers is still too many. Unless the level of competency of drivers increases through the introduction of ongoing training and testing then we will continue to kill each other at these unacceptable levels.

Take a look at the following report:

https://www.gov.uk/g

overnment/uploads/sy

stem/uploads/attachm

ent_data/file/9280/r

rcgb2011-complete.pd

f

Bad cyclists jumping red lights, cycling on pavements and weaving through traffic is just not relevant to the problem.

I noticed an alarming trend in that report, it's 10 times safer to be out when it's wet than when it's dry.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

sotondavid wrote:
Between 1951 and 2006 a total of 309,144 people were killed and 17.6 million were injured in accidents on British roads. These are just numbers, they do not take into account the impact on peoples lives that this carnage has had.

http://en.wikipedia.


org/wiki/Reported_Ro


ad_Casualties_Great_


Britain

If there had been this level of destruction in the air transport or rail system then they would have shut down years ago.

A minority of bad drivers is still too many. Unless the level of competency of drivers increases through the introduction of ongoing training and testing then we will continue to kill each other at these unacceptable levels.

Take a look at the following report:

https://www.gov.uk/g


overnment/uploads/sy


stem/uploads/attachm


ent_data/file/9280/r


rcgb2011-complete.pd


f

Bad cyclists jumping red lights, cycling on pavements and weaving through traffic is just not relevant to the problem.

I noticed an alarming trend in that report, it's 10 times safer to be out when it's wet than when it's dry.

It also shows that mobility scooters are just as dangerous as cyclists.

Ginger_cyclist is like a Duracell. It goes on and on and on and on...........

Lockssmart wrote:
Ginger_cyclist is like a Duracell. It goes on and on and on and on...........

Ok then bud, let's hear what you've got to say, though I doubt it would be much as your mind is like a cheap battery, it dies after 2 seconds of use.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Lockssmart wrote:
Ginger_cyclist is like a Duracell. It goes on and on and on and on...........

Ok then bud, let's hear what you've got to say, though I doubt it would be much as your mind is like a cheap battery, it dies after 2 seconds of use.

Unlike you, I'm not biting.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

sotondavid wrote:
Between 1951 and 2006 a total of 309,144 people were killed and 17.6 million were injured in accidents on British roads. These are just numbers, they do not take into account the impact on peoples lives that this carnage has had.

http://en.wikipedia.


org/wiki/Reported_Ro


ad_Casualties_Great_


Britain

If there had been this level of destruction in the air transport or rail system then they would have shut down years ago.

A minority of bad drivers is still too many. Unless the level of competency of drivers increases through the introduction of ongoing training and testing then we will continue to kill each other at these unacceptable levels.

Take a look at the following report:

https://www.gov.uk/g


overnment/uploads/sy


stem/uploads/attachm


ent_data/file/9280/r


rcgb2011-complete.pd


f

Bad cyclists jumping red lights, cycling on pavements and weaving through traffic is just not relevant to the problem.

I noticed an alarming trend in that report, it's 10 times safer to be out when it's wet than when it's dry.

That's not a trend. It isn't even a fact. It's a tiny bite of rhetoric that doesn't really tell us much at all.

Lockssmart wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Lockssmart wrote:
Ginger_cyclist is like a Duracell. It goes on and on and on and on...........

Ok then bud, let's hear what you've got to say, though I doubt it would be much as your mind is like a cheap battery, it dies after 2 seconds of use.

Unlike you, I'm not biting.

No, you just swallow whole.

You just go on and on and on.

Georgem wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

sotondavid wrote:
Between 1951 and 2006 a total of 309,144 people were killed and 17.6 million were injured in accidents on British roads. These are just numbers, they do not take into account the impact on peoples lives that this carnage has had.

http://en.wikipedia.



org/wiki/Reported_Ro



ad_Casualties_Great_



Britain

If there had been this level of destruction in the air transport or rail system then they would have shut down years ago.

A minority of bad drivers is still too many. Unless the level of competency of drivers increases through the introduction of ongoing training and testing then we will continue to kill each other at these unacceptable levels.

Take a look at the following report:

https://www.gov.uk/g



overnment/uploads/sy



stem/uploads/attachm



ent_data/file/9280/r



rcgb2011-complete.pd



f

Bad cyclists jumping red lights, cycling on pavements and weaving through traffic is just not relevant to the problem.

I noticed an alarming trend in that report, it's 10 times safer to be out when it's wet than when it's dry.

That's not a trend. It isn't even a fact. It's a tiny bite of rhetoric that doesn't really tell us much at all.

Actually follow the link and you'll find it's an official report that shows quite alarming trends and statistics, such as the fact that between 2005 and 2009, an average of 485 cyclists that were killed or seriously injured on the roads, were CHILDREN, of course if that was just those that were killed, the number would be significantly lower but it still makes up a shocking percentage of all serious collisions that cyclists are involved in.

Lockssmart wrote:
You just go on and on and on.

Someone has to, otherwise every bugger else won't listen.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Lockssmart wrote:
You just go on and on and on.

Someone has to, otherwise every bugger else won't listen.

That's the most sensible thing you've said so far. Lol

Lockssmart wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Lockssmart wrote:
You just go on and on and on.

Someone has to, otherwise every bugger else won't listen.

That's the most sensible thing you've said so far. Lol

Well it's true, if you don't keep on about something, no one will listen.

Just wish I could drive a bike!!

Have a read of this article: "What an RAF pilot can teach us about being safe on the road". It helps explain why SMIDSY occurs.

http://www.londoncyc
list.co.uk/raf-pilot
-teach-cyclists/

Read it and learn. You may save your own or somebody else's life.

sotondavid wrote:
Have a read of this article: "What an RAF pilot can teach us about being safe on the road". It helps explain why SMIDSY occurs.

http://www.londoncyc

list.co.uk/raf-pilot

-teach-cyclists/

Read it and learn. You may save your own or somebody else's life.

Read it before, I already follow the tips they mention by being further away from the curb(no matter how annoyed drivers get about it) and I have an arsenal of lights that are either just flashing in day light or a combo of flashing and steady at night and in poor visibility.

daveetwo wrote:
Just stand at Woolston crossroads for a while and youl see cyclists going through red lights, cars doing the same and pedestrians also doing the same.
Add to this cars parked ON pedestrian crossings.
Just a question of time before a fatality occurs.
Overall (not just woolston) though i see cyclists breaking red lights more often than i see cars doing it.

Which Woolston crossroads? The one on Portsmouth high street by the river had been highlighted several times as a problem area.

However when people like myself surveyed it (I used a camera to record activities) we didnt see anyone run the red on bike. I was there for a good hour back in November and saw several cyclists using the lights in a proper and legal manner.

However there were many amber-gamblers and drivers speeding up to whizz through the light that had just changed to red. This to me is more dangerous as pedestrians are just stepping out on the crossing expecting traffic to stop.

Put every policeman in the city on traffic duty for one day every month and fine every driver for every petty infringement. That would sharpen up driving standards of most lazy brains overnight.

downfader wrote:

daveetwo wrote:
Just stand at Woolston crossroads for a while and youl see cyclists going through red lights, cars doing the same and pedestrians also doing the same.
Add to this cars parked ON pedestrian crossings.
Just a question of time before a fatality occurs.
Overall (not just woolston) though i see cyclists breaking red lights more often than i see cars doing it.

Which Woolston crossroads? The one on Portsmouth high street by the river had been highlighted several times as a problem area.

However when people like myself surveyed it (I used a camera to record activities) we didnt see anyone run the red on bike. I was there for a good hour back in November and saw several cyclists using the lights in a proper and legal manner.

However there were many amber-gamblers and drivers speeding up to whizz through the light that had just changed to red. This to me is more dangerous as pedestrians are just stepping out on the crossing expecting traffic to stop.

Bah I mean Portsmouth Road by the Woolston high street...