Cyclist hurt in collision in Romsey

Daily Echo: Cyclist hurt in collision Cyclist hurt in collision

A CYCLIST was taken to hospital after a collision between a car and a bike.

The incident involving a blue Skoda and the male cyclist happened on Southampton Road, Romsey, close to the Plaza Theatre, and the cyclist sustained a possible leg injury and superficial cuts to the face, but the injuries were not thought to be serious.

He was taken to Southampton General Hospital and the scene was cleared within half an hour of the incident, just after 8.45am this morning.

Comments (56)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:36am Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.
One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:37am Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.
Also I hope the cyclist wasn't injured too badly and that he recovers soon.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.[/p][/quote]Also I hope the cyclist wasn't injured too badly and that he recovers soon. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:55am Wed 17 Oct 12

S!monOn says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.
One of them wasn't paying due car and attention... so naturally you assume its the car driver? A natural born Sherlock are you?
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.[/p][/quote]One of them wasn't paying due car and attention... so naturally you assume its the car driver? A natural born Sherlock are you? S!monOn
  • Score: 0

12:10pm Wed 17 Oct 12

keepontriking says...

No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians.

I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?
No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians. I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill? keepontriking
  • Score: 0

12:25pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_fox says...

Regardless of who caused the accident, why doesn't the county redesign this junction to keep cyclists and motorists apart?

There's plenty of space for a proper dutch-style layout, which would cost very little and reduce road danger to virtually nil.

Isn't that worth saving life and limb for?
Regardless of who caused the accident, why doesn't the county redesign this junction to keep cyclists and motorists apart? There's plenty of space for a proper dutch-style layout, which would cost very little and reduce road danger to virtually nil. Isn't that worth saving life and limb for? Ginger_fox
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

S!monOn wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.
One of them wasn't paying due car and attention... so naturally you assume its the car driver? A natural born Sherlock are you?
I never said who I thought it was, I was making a statement about what the car driver should have been doing anyway, sitting in a car makes you less aware of your surroundings so you have to actively look and check your mirrors before moving, changing lane, changing position or changing direction, it's quite possible even that the car was pulling out from a driveway and the view of the cyclist was blocked by a tree or something and they pulled out anyway, personally if I was riding past driveways where a drivers view might be blocked, I'd move further away from the curb to make it more likely that I'll be seen but in that situation the fault would still with the driver due to lack of care and attention by not trying to get a better view.
[quote][p][bold]S!monOn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.[/p][/quote]One of them wasn't paying due car and attention... so naturally you assume its the car driver? A natural born Sherlock are you?[/p][/quote]I never said who I thought it was, I was making a statement about what the car driver should have been doing anyway, sitting in a car makes you less aware of your surroundings so you have to actively look and check your mirrors before moving, changing lane, changing position or changing direction, it's quite possible even that the car was pulling out from a driveway and the view of the cyclist was blocked by a tree or something and they pulled out anyway, personally if I was riding past driveways where a drivers view might be blocked, I'd move further away from the curb to make it more likely that I'll be seen but in that situation the fault would still with the driver due to lack of care and attention by not trying to get a better view. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

12:28pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Dave of Dibden says...

keepontriking wrote:
No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians.

I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?
Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care
[quote][p][bold]keepontriking[/bold] wrote: No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians. I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?[/p][/quote]Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care Dave of Dibden
  • Score: 0

12:32pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Dave of Dibden wrote:
keepontriking wrote:
No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians.

I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?
Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care
Or pedestrians stepping out in front of cars and cyclists because they're too busy on their phone or something instead of looking where they're walking?
[quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]keepontriking[/bold] wrote: No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians. I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?[/p][/quote]Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care[/p][/quote]Or pedestrians stepping out in front of cars and cyclists because they're too busy on their phone or something instead of looking where they're walking? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

12:33pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Ginger_fox wrote:
Regardless of who caused the accident, why doesn't the county redesign this junction to keep cyclists and motorists apart?

There's plenty of space for a proper dutch-style layout, which would cost very little and reduce road danger to virtually nil.

Isn't that worth saving life and limb for?
Education is the answer, not segregation.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_fox[/bold] wrote: Regardless of who caused the accident, why doesn't the county redesign this junction to keep cyclists and motorists apart? There's plenty of space for a proper dutch-style layout, which would cost very little and reduce road danger to virtually nil. Isn't that worth saving life and limb for?[/p][/quote]Education is the answer, not segregation. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

12:34pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

keepontriking wrote:
No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians.

I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?
I believe that number would be zero.
[quote][p][bold]keepontriking[/bold] wrote: No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians. I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?[/p][/quote]I believe that number would be zero. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

12:34pm Wed 17 Oct 12

wizard says...

Dave of Dibden wrote:
keepontriking wrote:
No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians.

I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?
Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care
Why not tell us the answer? or even give us some sort of ratio, bike to cyclist accidents, then the cyclist to pedestrian stats? assuming you have them??? or are you just gobbing off?
[quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]keepontriking[/bold] wrote: No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians. I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?[/p][/quote]Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care[/p][/quote]Why not tell us the answer? or even give us some sort of ratio, bike to cyclist accidents, then the cyclist to pedestrian stats? assuming you have them??? or are you just gobbing off? wizard
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

wizard wrote:
Dave of Dibden wrote:
keepontriking wrote:
No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians.

I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?
Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care
Why not tell us the answer? or even give us some sort of ratio, bike to cyclist accidents, then the cyclist to pedestrian stats? assuming you have them??? or are you just gobbing off?
10 people in a whole year get minor injuries from cyclists, though compared to the thousands who get killed or seriously injured by cars, 10 minor injuries is nothing, most of the injuries caused by cyclists are also mostly children riding on the pavement because their parents don't want them on the road, it's also the reason people grow up thinking it's ok to ride on the pavement.
[quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]keepontriking[/bold] wrote: No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians. I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?[/p][/quote]Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care[/p][/quote]Why not tell us the answer? or even give us some sort of ratio, bike to cyclist accidents, then the cyclist to pedestrian stats? assuming you have them??? or are you just gobbing off?[/p][/quote]10 people in a whole year get minor injuries from cyclists, though compared to the thousands who get killed or seriously injured by cars, 10 minor injuries is nothing, most of the injuries caused by cyclists are also mostly children riding on the pavement because their parents don't want them on the road, it's also the reason people grow up thinking it's ok to ride on the pavement. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Wed 17 Oct 12

keepontriking says...

Hmm. In 2010 in GB 43 pedestrians were killed on footways or verges and 367 seriously injured.

DfT says almost all of these were caused by motor vehicles!
Not cyclists, not mobility scooters, not tiles falling from roofs, but motor vehicles!
Makes you realise where the real dangers are.
Hmm. In 2010 in GB 43 pedestrians were killed on footways or verges and 367 seriously injured. DfT says almost all of these were caused by motor vehicles! Not cyclists, not mobility scooters, not tiles falling from roofs, but motor vehicles! Makes you realise where the real dangers are. keepontriking
  • Score: 0

1:47pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

keepontriking wrote:
Hmm. In 2010 in GB 43 pedestrians were killed on footways or verges and 367 seriously injured.

DfT says almost all of these were caused by motor vehicles!
Not cyclists, not mobility scooters, not tiles falling from roofs, but motor vehicles!
Makes you realise where the real dangers are.
It does indeed.
[quote][p][bold]keepontriking[/bold] wrote: Hmm. In 2010 in GB 43 pedestrians were killed on footways or verges and 367 seriously injured. DfT says almost all of these were caused by motor vehicles! Not cyclists, not mobility scooters, not tiles falling from roofs, but motor vehicles! Makes you realise where the real dangers are.[/p][/quote]It does indeed. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

1:50pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Dave of Dibden says...

wizard wrote:
Dave of Dibden wrote:
keepontriking wrote:
No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians.

I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?
Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care
Why not tell us the answer? or even give us some sort of ratio, bike to cyclist accidents, then the cyclist to pedestrian stats? assuming you have them??? or are you just gobbing off?
Probably copying your example
[quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]keepontriking[/bold] wrote: No, he did not assume the car driver wasn't paying attention. He made the comment that they so often don't, which is why they kill and injure so many more vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians. I wonder how many car drivers cyclists kill?[/p][/quote]Or how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists who don't look or care[/p][/quote]Why not tell us the answer? or even give us some sort of ratio, bike to cyclist accidents, then the cyclist to pedestrian stats? assuming you have them??? or are you just gobbing off?[/p][/quote]Probably copying your example Dave of Dibden
  • Score: 0

1:52pm Wed 17 Oct 12

burgerboy says...

I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o). burgerboy
  • Score: 0

1:55pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
[quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

2:03pm Wed 17 Oct 12

S!monOn says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I like to view it this way:

Car drivers are idiots.

Cyclists are idiots.

Whose to blame? The idiots.

The End :)
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I like to view it this way: Car drivers are idiots. Cyclists are idiots. Whose to blame? The idiots. The End :) S!monOn
  • Score: 0

2:07pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Dave of Dibden says...

Pedestrians killed by cyclists

------+-------------
-----------------+--
----
| 2006 | 233 |
|------+------------
--------------------
----|
| 2007 || 267 |
|------+------------
------------------+-
-----
| 2008 | | 247 |
|------+------------
--------------------
------| 2009 | | 141 |
|------+------------
--------------------
-----|
| 2010 || 123 |
+-------------------
--------------------
--------------------
-------------+
Pedestrians killed by cyclists ------+------------- -----------------+-- ---- | 2006 | 233 | |------+------------ -------------------- ----| | 2007 || 267 | |------+------------ ------------------+- ----- | 2008 | | 247 | |------+------------ -------------------- ------| 2009 | | 141 | |------+------------ -------------------- -----| | 2010 || 123 | +------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------+ Dave of Dibden
  • Score: 0

2:15pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Torchie1 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Wed 17 Oct 12

keepontriking says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Doesn't seem to have worked for many drivers does it who continue to inflict killing and serious injury on the most viulnerable, as well as being a scourge on communities through their speeding, pollution, noise, congestion, and other anti-social behaviour :-(
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Doesn't seem to have worked for many drivers does it who continue to inflict killing and serious injury on the most viulnerable, as well as being a scourge on communities through their speeding, pollution, noise, congestion, and other anti-social behaviour :-( keepontriking
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Fat lot of good it did for people in cages eh? Face it, this stuff you want cyclists to have, it just won't happen.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Fat lot of good it did for people in cages eh? Face it, this stuff you want cyclists to have, it just won't happen. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

2:23pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Dave of Dibden wrote:
Pedestrians killed by cyclists

------+-------------

-----------------+--

----
| 2006 | 233 |
|------+------------

--------------------

----|
| 2007 || 267 |
|------+------------

------------------+-

-----
| 2008 | | 247 |
|------+------------

--------------------

------| 2009 | | 141 |
|------+------------

--------------------

-----|
| 2010 || 123 |
+-------------------

--------------------

--------------------

-------------+
Well that's a load of bull, those are the figures for pedestrians killed by motor vehicles, not cyclists.
[quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: Pedestrians killed by cyclists ------+------------- -----------------+-- ---- | 2006 | 233 | |------+------------ -------------------- ----| | 2007 || 267 | |------+------------ ------------------+- ----- | 2008 | | 247 | |------+------------ -------------------- ------| 2009 | | 141 | |------+------------ -------------------- -----| | 2010 || 123 | +------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------+[/p][/quote]Well that's a load of bull, those are the figures for pedestrians killed by motor vehicles, not cyclists. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

2:27pm Wed 17 Oct 12

downfader says...

Dave of Dibden wrote:
Pedestrians killed by cyclists

------+-------------

-----------------+--

----
| 2006 | 233 |
|------+------------

--------------------

----|
| 2007 || 267 |
|------+------------

------------------+-

-----
| 2008 | | 247 |
|------+------------

--------------------

------| 2009 | | 141 |
|------+------------

--------------------

-----|
| 2010 || 123 |
+-------------------

--------------------

--------------------

-------------+
Do you have to misrepresent the data!

List source, please. As I suspect those are the figures for injuries, not deaths.

Oh look http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-15975564 - 208,000 recorded casualties via the Police in 2010. And according to the Stats19 data most didn't involve bicycles - 99% involved motor vehicles.

I think you should retract your comment.
[quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: Pedestrians killed by cyclists ------+------------- -----------------+-- ---- | 2006 | 233 | |------+------------ -------------------- ----| | 2007 || 267 | |------+------------ ------------------+- ----- | 2008 | | 247 | |------+------------ -------------------- ------| 2009 | | 141 | |------+------------ -------------------- -----| | 2010 || 123 | +------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------+[/p][/quote]Do you have to misrepresent the data! List source, please. As I suspect those are the figures for injuries, not deaths. Oh look http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-15975564 - 208,000 recorded casualties via the Police in 2010. And according to the Stats19 data most didn't involve bicycles - 99% involved motor vehicles. I think you should retract your comment. downfader
  • Score: 0

2:32pm Wed 17 Oct 12

downfader says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Regulation aint going to happen. You can be as vociferous as you like but its never been brought in before, and is very unlikely to happen now.

Look at motoring - how has licensing and insurance and co stopped any of the deaths or serious injuries? How has it stopped motorway speeding (I was on the m27 last week - 70mph on the far left, the middle 2 lanes were full of drivers tailgating and doing WELL over our 70)? How has it stopped the rampant pavement parking (which causes the elderly and disabled many issues)?

Regulation wont save lives - people like yourself changing your limited attitude might.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Regulation aint going to happen. You can be as vociferous as you like but its never been brought in before, and is very unlikely to happen now. Look at motoring - how has licensing and insurance and co stopped any of the deaths or serious injuries? How has it stopped motorway speeding (I was on the m27 last week - 70mph on the far left, the middle 2 lanes were full of drivers tailgating and doing WELL over our 70)? How has it stopped the rampant pavement parking (which causes the elderly and disabled many issues)? Regulation wont save lives - people like yourself changing your limited attitude might. downfader
  • Score: 0

2:45pm Wed 17 Oct 12

burgerboy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Torchie 1 You have hit the nail fair and square on the head.A few years ago whilst i was stationary i had a cyclist ride into the wing of my car doing £200 worth of damage. No cycle insurance so i could not make a claim on him and as the cyclist was not injured the police did not want to know.If i had claimed on my insurance i would have lost my no claim bonus and my excess was £150 anyway.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Torchie 1 You have hit the nail fair and square on the head.A few years ago whilst i was stationary i had a cyclist ride into the wing of my car doing £200 worth of damage. No cycle insurance so i could not make a claim on him and as the cyclist was not injured the police did not want to know.If i had claimed on my insurance i would have lost my no claim bonus and my excess was £150 anyway. burgerboy
  • Score: 0

2:54pm Wed 17 Oct 12

keepontriking says...

burgerboy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Torchie 1 You have hit the nail fair and square on the head.A few years ago whilst i was stationary i had a cyclist ride into the wing of my car doing £200 worth of damage. No cycle insurance so i could not make a claim on him and as the cyclist was not injured the police did not want to know.If i had claimed on my insurance i would have lost my no claim bonus and my excess was £150 anyway.
Many cyclists are covered for 3rd party, often through household insurances. Did you pursue that avenue?
BTW do you support compulsory insurance for pedestrians too?

But there are around 2million uninsured drivers out there killing, maiming, carrying out hit and run with near impunity - I hope you would agree any efforts should be aimed at halting that travesty first.
Do you?
[quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Torchie 1 You have hit the nail fair and square on the head.A few years ago whilst i was stationary i had a cyclist ride into the wing of my car doing £200 worth of damage. No cycle insurance so i could not make a claim on him and as the cyclist was not injured the police did not want to know.If i had claimed on my insurance i would have lost my no claim bonus and my excess was £150 anyway.[/p][/quote]Many cyclists are covered for 3rd party, often through household insurances. Did you pursue that avenue? BTW do you support compulsory insurance for pedestrians too? But there are around 2million uninsured drivers out there killing, maiming, carrying out hit and run with near impunity - I hope you would agree any efforts should be aimed at halting that travesty first. Do you? keepontriking
  • Score: 0

2:56pm Wed 17 Oct 12

S!monOn says...

downfader wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Regulation aint going to happen. You can be as vociferous as you like but its never been brought in before, and is very unlikely to happen now. Look at motoring - how has licensing and insurance and co stopped any of the deaths or serious injuries? How has it stopped motorway speeding (I was on the m27 last week - 70mph on the far left, the middle 2 lanes were full of drivers tailgating and doing WELL over our 70)? How has it stopped the rampant pavement parking (which causes the elderly and disabled many issues)? Regulation wont save lives - people like yourself changing your limited attitude might.
Has anyone pointed out to you that you exaggerate alot?
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Regulation aint going to happen. You can be as vociferous as you like but its never been brought in before, and is very unlikely to happen now. Look at motoring - how has licensing and insurance and co stopped any of the deaths or serious injuries? How has it stopped motorway speeding (I was on the m27 last week - 70mph on the far left, the middle 2 lanes were full of drivers tailgating and doing WELL over our 70)? How has it stopped the rampant pavement parking (which causes the elderly and disabled many issues)? Regulation wont save lives - people like yourself changing your limited attitude might.[/p][/quote]Has anyone pointed out to you that you exaggerate alot? S!monOn
  • Score: 0

3:09pm Wed 17 Oct 12

flowergirly says...

More to the point guys...was the bike ok in the collision????
More to the point guys...was the bike ok in the collision???? flowergirly
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Wed 17 Oct 12

S!monOn says...

flowergirly wrote:
More to the point guys...was the bike ok in the collision????
Or the car?
[quote][p][bold]flowergirly[/bold] wrote: More to the point guys...was the bike ok in the collision????[/p][/quote]Or the car? S!monOn
  • Score: 0

3:17pm Wed 17 Oct 12

keepontriking says...

S!monOn wrote:
flowergirly wrote:
More to the point guys...was the bike ok in the collision????
Or the car?
And was the driver insured, taxed and wearing a ...... ?
[quote][p][bold]S!monOn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]flowergirly[/bold] wrote: More to the point guys...was the bike ok in the collision????[/p][/quote]Or the car?[/p][/quote]And was the driver insured, taxed and wearing a ...... ? keepontriking
  • Score: 0

3:29pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Dave of Dibden says...

downfader wrote:
Dave of Dibden wrote:
Pedestrians killed by cyclists

------+-------------


-----------------+--


----
| 2006 | 233 |
|------+------------


--------------------


----|
| 2007 || 267 |
|------+------------


------------------+-


-----
| 2008 | | 247 |
|------+------------


--------------------


------| 2009 | | 141 |
|------+------------


--------------------


-----|
| 2010 || 123 |
+-------------------


--------------------


--------------------


-------------+
Do you have to misrepresent the data!

List source, please. As I suspect those are the figures for injuries, not deaths.

Oh look http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-15975564 - 208,000 recorded casualties via the Police in 2010. And according to the Stats19 data most didn't involve bicycles - 99% involved motor vehicles.

I think you should retract your comment.
Government published data
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: Pedestrians killed by cyclists ------+------------- -----------------+-- ---- | 2006 | 233 | |------+------------ -------------------- ----| | 2007 || 267 | |------+------------ ------------------+- ----- | 2008 | | 247 | |------+------------ -------------------- ------| 2009 | | 141 | |------+------------ -------------------- -----| | 2010 || 123 | +------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------+[/p][/quote]Do you have to misrepresent the data! List source, please. As I suspect those are the figures for injuries, not deaths. Oh look http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-15975564 - 208,000 recorded casualties via the Police in 2010. And according to the Stats19 data most didn't involve bicycles - 99% involved motor vehicles. I think you should retract your comment.[/p][/quote]Government published data Dave of Dibden
  • Score: 0

3:45pm Wed 17 Oct 12

downfader says...

Dave of Dibden wrote:
downfader wrote:
Dave of Dibden wrote:
Pedestrians killed by cyclists

------+-------------



-----------------+--



----
| 2006 | 233 |
|------+------------



--------------------



----|
| 2007 || 267 |
|------+------------



------------------+-



-----
| 2008 | | 247 |
|------+------------



--------------------



------| 2009 | | 141 |
|------+------------



--------------------



-----|
| 2010 || 123 |
+-------------------



--------------------



--------------------



-------------+
Do you have to misrepresent the data!

List source, please. As I suspect those are the figures for injuries, not deaths.

Oh look http://www.bbc.co.uk


/news/uk-15975564 - 208,000 recorded casualties via the Police in 2010. And according to the Stats19 data most didn't involve bicycles - 99% involved motor vehicles.

I think you should retract your comment.
Government published data
Where..? Post the link.
[quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dave of Dibden[/bold] wrote: Pedestrians killed by cyclists ------+------------- -----------------+-- ---- | 2006 | 233 | |------+------------ -------------------- ----| | 2007 || 267 | |------+------------ ------------------+- ----- | 2008 | | 247 | |------+------------ -------------------- ------| 2009 | | 141 | |------+------------ -------------------- -----| | 2010 || 123 | +------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------+[/p][/quote]Do you have to misrepresent the data! List source, please. As I suspect those are the figures for injuries, not deaths. Oh look http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-15975564 - 208,000 recorded casualties via the Police in 2010. And according to the Stats19 data most didn't involve bicycles - 99% involved motor vehicles. I think you should retract your comment.[/p][/quote]Government published data[/p][/quote]Where..? Post the link. downfader
  • Score: 0

3:47pm Wed 17 Oct 12

downfader says...

S!monOn wrote:
downfader wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Regulation aint going to happen. You can be as vociferous as you like but its never been brought in before, and is very unlikely to happen now. Look at motoring - how has licensing and insurance and co stopped any of the deaths or serious injuries? How has it stopped motorway speeding (I was on the m27 last week - 70mph on the far left, the middle 2 lanes were full of drivers tailgating and doing WELL over our 70)? How has it stopped the rampant pavement parking (which causes the elderly and disabled many issues)? Regulation wont save lives - people like yourself changing your limited attitude might.
Has anyone pointed out to you that you exaggerate alot?
How exactly have I exaggerated? You've already been wrong early on within the discussions here, making presumptions.
[quote][p][bold]S!monOn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Regulation aint going to happen. You can be as vociferous as you like but its never been brought in before, and is very unlikely to happen now. Look at motoring - how has licensing and insurance and co stopped any of the deaths or serious injuries? How has it stopped motorway speeding (I was on the m27 last week - 70mph on the far left, the middle 2 lanes were full of drivers tailgating and doing WELL over our 70)? How has it stopped the rampant pavement parking (which causes the elderly and disabled many issues)? Regulation wont save lives - people like yourself changing your limited attitude might.[/p][/quote]Has anyone pointed out to you that you exaggerate alot?[/p][/quote]How exactly have I exaggerated? You've already been wrong early on within the discussions here, making presumptions. downfader
  • Score: 0

4:37pm Wed 17 Oct 12

bigal007 says...

S!monOn wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.
One of them wasn't paying due car and attention... so naturally you assume its the car driver? A natural born Sherlock are you?
lol!!
[quote][p][bold]S!monOn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: One of them wasn't paying due care and attention. though the road layout could have also played a part as the lanes seem quite wide but the car driver should have been looking out for vulnerable road users anyway, especially if they notice they're in the wrong place for where they're going, the number of drivers who don't look or misjudge a cyclists speed is madness, some even just pull out anyway because they're simply uncaring arseholes.[/p][/quote]One of them wasn't paying due car and attention... so naturally you assume its the car driver? A natural born Sherlock are you?[/p][/quote]lol!! bigal007
  • Score: 0

4:45pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Markyjl says...

Ok, to end this stupid debate lets look at the facts for road deaths in 2011;

Vehicles involved in pedestrian fatalities:
Bicycle: 2
Minibus: 3
Motorbike: 18
Bus: 34
HGV/LGV: 61
Car/Taxi: 256
Other: 11

As summarized by the Guardian: http://www.guardian.
co.uk/news/datablog/
2012/sep/28/road-dea
ths-great-britain-da
ta

Or if you want the full details you can get them here from the Department of Transport:

http://www.dft.gov.u
k/statistics/release
s/reported-road-casu
alties-great-britain
-annual-report-2011/
Ok, to end this stupid debate lets look at the facts for road deaths in 2011; Vehicles involved in pedestrian fatalities: Bicycle: 2 Minibus: 3 Motorbike: 18 Bus: 34 HGV/LGV: 61 Car/Taxi: 256 Other: 11 As summarized by the Guardian: http://www.guardian. co.uk/news/datablog/ 2012/sep/28/road-dea ths-great-britain-da ta Or if you want the full details you can get them here from the Department of Transport: http://www.dft.gov.u k/statistics/release s/reported-road-casu alties-great-britain -annual-report-2011/ Markyjl
  • Score: 0

5:03pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Markyjl says...

For years back to 2006 here are the statistics (released as part of a freedom for information request): http://www.whatdothe
yknow.com/request/uk
_accident_statistics
_for_pedes) for Pedestrians killed in collisions with cyclists:

2006: 3
2007: 6
2008: 3
2009: 0
2010: 2

The statistics do not record if the collision occurred on the road, on a crossing or the pavement.
For years back to 2006 here are the statistics (released as part of a freedom for information request): http://www.whatdothe yknow.com/request/uk _accident_statistics _for_pedes) for Pedestrians killed in collisions with cyclists: 2006: 3 2007: 6 2008: 3 2009: 0 2010: 2 The statistics do not record if the collision occurred on the road, on a crossing or the pavement. Markyjl
  • Score: 0

5:31pm Wed 17 Oct 12

sotonbev says...

Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam.
Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam. sotonbev
  • Score: 0

5:34pm Wed 17 Oct 12

keepontriking says...

sotonbev wrote:
Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam.
Troll. Ignore.
[quote][p][bold]sotonbev[/bold] wrote: Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam.[/p][/quote]Troll. Ignore. keepontriking
  • Score: 0

5:35pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Torchie1 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Fat lot of good it did for people in cages eh? Face it, this stuff you want cyclists to have, it just won't happen.
I think you now may understand why a car driver can be involved in a collision with a cyclist and only have sleepless nights over the cost to the drivers insurance. You want to come out and play Deathrace 2000 on a bicycle, just don't think you'll win in any collision.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Fat lot of good it did for people in cages eh? Face it, this stuff you want cyclists to have, it just won't happen.[/p][/quote]I think you now may understand why a car driver can be involved in a collision with a cyclist and only have sleepless nights over the cost to the drivers insurance. You want to come out and play Deathrace 2000 on a bicycle, just don't think you'll win in any collision. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

5:38pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Markyjl says...

sotonbev wrote:
Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam.
I call cycle bs BINGO, thanks sotonbev!
[quote][p][bold]sotonbev[/bold] wrote: Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam.[/p][/quote]I call cycle bs BINGO, thanks sotonbev! Markyjl
  • Score: 0

6:05pm Wed 17 Oct 12

downfader says...

Markyjl wrote:
sotonbev wrote:
Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam.
I call cycle bs BINGO, thanks sotonbev!
Beat me to it!!
[quote][p][bold]Markyjl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonbev[/bold] wrote: Cyclists, do seem to think they own the road, they dont look to see if its safe to do whatever there wanting to do, they hold traffic up by riding in the middle of the road, they go thru red lights, they hop on the pavement when they feel like it and they squeeze by in the inside lane when theres a traffic jam.[/p][/quote]I call cycle bs BINGO, thanks sotonbev![/p][/quote]Beat me to it!! downfader
  • Score: 0

6:18pm Wed 17 Oct 12

100%HANTSBOY says...

burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Don't forget the other Golden rule,if you don't get the cyclist with your bonnet,make sure your passenger gets them with the door ;)
[quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Don't forget the other Golden rule,if you don't get the cyclist with your bonnet,make sure your passenger gets them with the door ;) 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

7:30pm Wed 17 Oct 12

good-gosh says...

I rather like the idea that anyone advocating road anarchy is banned from driving for life (excluding silly schoolboys desperate for attention)
I rather like the idea that anyone advocating road anarchy is banned from driving for life (excluding silly schoolboys desperate for attention) good-gosh
  • Score: 0

7:38pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
burgerboy wrote:
I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).
Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?
I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.
Fat lot of good it did for people in cages eh? Face it, this stuff you want cyclists to have, it just won't happen.
I think you now may understand why a car driver can be involved in a collision with a cyclist and only have sleepless nights over the cost to the drivers insurance. You want to come out and play Deathrace 2000 on a bicycle, just don't think you'll win in any collision.
Actually, I'd be quite worried if a driver didn't have sleepless nights over the possibility that they may have killed someone.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: I like the old idea that if you can get a pedestrian with your car it is worth ten points.A mobility scooter is worth fifteen points and a cyclist is worth twenty points with a bonus of ten if that cyclist happens to be ginger.(;o).[/p][/quote]Is this comment being made because I'm right or is it just because I'm a cyclist?[/p][/quote]I think it was made because you're an unemployed sanctimonious bicycle rider who can see no errors committed on two wheels but actively hunts down any possibility of one committed on four. As for your remark about education I think that could negatively impact bicyclists who launch themselves without licence or preparation on to busy roads with the hope and expectation that the qualified vehicle drivers will be able to interpret their manoeuvrings and keep them safe. It's high time a formal licence and the appropriate insurances along with an independent annual examination was introduced to help save the lives of the pedal pushing fraternity. At least they'd have lights once a year.[/p][/quote]Fat lot of good it did for people in cages eh? Face it, this stuff you want cyclists to have, it just won't happen.[/p][/quote]I think you now may understand why a car driver can be involved in a collision with a cyclist and only have sleepless nights over the cost to the drivers insurance. You want to come out and play Deathrace 2000 on a bicycle, just don't think you'll win in any collision.[/p][/quote]Actually, I'd be quite worried if a driver didn't have sleepless nights over the possibility that they may have killed someone. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

7:54pm Wed 17 Oct 12

good-gosh says...

I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.
I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells. good-gosh
  • Score: 0

8:00pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

good-gosh wrote:
I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.
Now this I agree with.
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.[/p][/quote]Now this I agree with. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

8:02pm Wed 17 Oct 12

100%HANTSBOY says...

good-gosh wrote:
I rather like the idea that anyone advocating road anarchy is banned from driving for life (excluding silly schoolboys desperate for attention)
worked tho,dinnit!!
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I rather like the idea that anyone advocating road anarchy is banned from driving for life (excluding silly schoolboys desperate for attention)[/p][/quote]worked tho,dinnit!! 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

8:15pm Wed 17 Oct 12

100%HANTSBOY says...

good-gosh wrote:
I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.
And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!!
Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!!
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.[/p][/quote]And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!! Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!! 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

8:38pm Wed 17 Oct 12

good-gosh says...

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.
And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!!
Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!!
OK, understood, no problems.
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.[/p][/quote]And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!! Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!![/p][/quote]OK, understood, no problems. good-gosh
  • Score: 0

9:59pm Wed 17 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.
And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!!
Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!!
Cycling is only slow when going uphill, any other time I could easily match the speed of a car or legally exceed the speed limit.
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.[/p][/quote]And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!! Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!![/p][/quote]Cycling is only slow when going uphill, any other time I could easily match the speed of a car or legally exceed the speed limit. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

8:47am Thu 18 Oct 12

100%HANTSBOY says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.
And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!!
Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!!
Cycling is only slow when going uphill, any other time I could easily match the speed of a car or legally exceed the speed limit.
Oh go on then,I'll take the bait,how do you legally exceed the speed limit?...I.ve got a feeling this is going to be good!!
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.[/p][/quote]And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!! Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!![/p][/quote]Cycling is only slow when going uphill, any other time I could easily match the speed of a car or legally exceed the speed limit.[/p][/quote]Oh go on then,I'll take the bait,how do you legally exceed the speed limit?...I.ve got a feeling this is going to be good!! 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

11:15am Thu 18 Oct 12

downfader says...

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.
And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!!
Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!!
Cycling is only slow when going uphill, any other time I could easily match the speed of a car or legally exceed the speed limit.
Oh go on then,I'll take the bait,how do you legally exceed the speed limit?...I.ve got a feeling this is going to be good!!
On a bicycle the speed limit law does not apply unless it is a specific bylaw (eg various offroad routes - though none in Southampton).

The law states "motorised vehicle" rather than "mechanically propelled". Its buried in the 1984 road traffic act I think, but annoyingly I cant find it right now on OPSI
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I also like the idea that any motorist who caused a cyclist to fall is banned for life. That would most certainly sharpen up the attention brain cells.[/p][/quote]And so they should, if it was intentional (in fact I think it would be attempted murder),I think my original post went whoosh right over your head,I was actually ridiculling burgerboy,but perhaps I should realise that the cyclist/motorist debate is not one for any sort of humour!! Apologies if,like your mode of transport,you're a bit slow!![/p][/quote]Cycling is only slow when going uphill, any other time I could easily match the speed of a car or legally exceed the speed limit.[/p][/quote]Oh go on then,I'll take the bait,how do you legally exceed the speed limit?...I.ve got a feeling this is going to be good!![/p][/quote]On a bicycle the speed limit law does not apply unless it is a specific bylaw (eg various offroad routes - though none in Southampton). The law states "motorised vehicle" rather than "mechanically propelled". Its buried in the 1984 road traffic act I think, but annoyingly I cant find it right now on OPSI downfader
  • Score: 0

11:38am Thu 18 Oct 12

camerajuan says...

After 18 months of cycling from town to Nursling & back up to 6 times a week, being constantly aware of my surroundings, abiding by traffic laws yet continuously braking/swerving to avoid careless drivers/pedestrians, I was finally in an accident last week.

Coming down Shirley Road, the car level with me stuck his indicators on literally 6 feet before the turn off he intended to enter. He then turned without looking and even with me slamming on my brakes-which are brand new and sound-I put a nice human shaped dent in his passenger door.

He had initially claimed innocence and blamed me but several witnesses explained his mistake. I was level with his boot as he turned and he didn't check his inside before turning. He still wanted my details for an insurance claim so he wouldn't incur any costs.

Moral of the story - You can have reactions like a mongoose on speed but when drivers don't look, its their fault.

Also, to whoever whines about cyclists being in their way, we're not. You just didn't look properly.
After 18 months of cycling from town to Nursling & back up to 6 times a week, being constantly aware of my surroundings, abiding by traffic laws yet continuously braking/swerving to avoid careless drivers/pedestrians, I was finally in an accident last week. Coming down Shirley Road, the car level with me stuck his indicators on literally 6 feet before the turn off he intended to enter. He then turned without looking and even with me slamming on my brakes-which are brand new and sound-I put a nice human shaped dent in his passenger door. He had initially claimed innocence and blamed me but several witnesses explained his mistake. I was level with his boot as he turned and he didn't check his inside before turning. He still wanted my details for an insurance claim so he wouldn't incur any costs. Moral of the story - You can have reactions like a mongoose on speed but when drivers don't look, its their fault. Also, to whoever whines about cyclists being in their way, we're not. You just didn't look properly. camerajuan
  • Score: 1

12:08pm Thu 18 Oct 12

downfader says...

camerajuan wrote:
After 18 months of cycling from town to Nursling & back up to 6 times a week, being constantly aware of my surroundings, abiding by traffic laws yet continuously braking/swerving to avoid careless drivers/pedestrians, I was finally in an accident last week.

Coming down Shirley Road, the car level with me stuck his indicators on literally 6 feet before the turn off he intended to enter. He then turned without looking and even with me slamming on my brakes-which are brand new and sound-I put a nice human shaped dent in his passenger door.

He had initially claimed innocence and blamed me but several witnesses explained his mistake. I was level with his boot as he turned and he didn't check his inside before turning. He still wanted my details for an insurance claim so he wouldn't incur any costs.

Moral of the story - You can have reactions like a mongoose on speed but when drivers don't look, its their fault.

Also, to whoever whines about cyclists being in their way, we're not. You just didn't look properly.
From your description you've been lefthooked.

Some advice from years of experience:
- join CTC or British Cycling - under £40 a year but gives you legal and insurance, as well as other cycling advice/rides

- If involved in a collision as a cyclist, phone the Police (esp if injured or bike damaged). If you havent already then get down to the Station and report it.

- Invest in a helmet camera (doesn't have to be a Contour or GoPro, there are cheaper options) and if anything bad like this does happen you have evidence that the Police and insurance can use. Haulage firms are investing in cameras, too, for this very reason.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: After 18 months of cycling from town to Nursling & back up to 6 times a week, being constantly aware of my surroundings, abiding by traffic laws yet continuously braking/swerving to avoid careless drivers/pedestrians, I was finally in an accident last week. Coming down Shirley Road, the car level with me stuck his indicators on literally 6 feet before the turn off he intended to enter. He then turned without looking and even with me slamming on my brakes-which are brand new and sound-I put a nice human shaped dent in his passenger door. He had initially claimed innocence and blamed me but several witnesses explained his mistake. I was level with his boot as he turned and he didn't check his inside before turning. He still wanted my details for an insurance claim so he wouldn't incur any costs. Moral of the story - You can have reactions like a mongoose on speed but when drivers don't look, its their fault. Also, to whoever whines about cyclists being in their way, we're not. You just didn't look properly.[/p][/quote]From your description you've been lefthooked. Some advice from years of experience: - join CTC or British Cycling - under £40 a year but gives you legal and insurance, as well as other cycling advice/rides - If involved in a collision as a cyclist, phone the Police (esp if injured or bike damaged). If you havent already then get down to the Station and report it. - Invest in a helmet camera (doesn't have to be a Contour or GoPro, there are cheaper options) and if anything bad like this does happen you have evidence that the Police and insurance can use. Haulage firms are investing in cameras, too, for this very reason. downfader
  • Score: 0

2:13pm Thu 18 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

downfader wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
After 18 months of cycling from town to Nursling & back up to 6 times a week, being constantly aware of my surroundings, abiding by traffic laws yet continuously braking/swerving to avoid careless drivers/pedestrians, I was finally in an accident last week.

Coming down Shirley Road, the car level with me stuck his indicators on literally 6 feet before the turn off he intended to enter. He then turned without looking and even with me slamming on my brakes-which are brand new and sound-I put a nice human shaped dent in his passenger door.

He had initially claimed innocence and blamed me but several witnesses explained his mistake. I was level with his boot as he turned and he didn't check his inside before turning. He still wanted my details for an insurance claim so he wouldn't incur any costs.

Moral of the story - You can have reactions like a mongoose on speed but when drivers don't look, its their fault.

Also, to whoever whines about cyclists being in their way, we're not. You just didn't look properly.
From your description you've been lefthooked.

Some advice from years of experience:
- join CTC or British Cycling - under £40 a year but gives you legal and insurance, as well as other cycling advice/rides

- If involved in a collision as a cyclist, phone the Police (esp if injured or bike damaged). If you havent already then get down to the Station and report it.

- Invest in a helmet camera (doesn't have to be a Contour or GoPro, there are cheaper options) and if anything bad like this does happen you have evidence that the Police and insurance can use. Haulage firms are investing in cameras, too, for this very reason.
£24 for the BC ride membership, means £2 a month which is a dream bargain considering the amount of legal support and insurance you get, also for a little extra you can get cycle breakdown cover and insure it for fire and theft and I can provide a link to the camera I have that is commonly listed on ebay, bought it for £50, records in 720P with a wide angle lens so it has a slight fish-eye effect but £50 for a HD bullet style cam is a steal, on ebay, search for "act20 camera" and it should come up though there is a better version now called the act30 that records in full HD but is similarly priced.
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: After 18 months of cycling from town to Nursling & back up to 6 times a week, being constantly aware of my surroundings, abiding by traffic laws yet continuously braking/swerving to avoid careless drivers/pedestrians, I was finally in an accident last week. Coming down Shirley Road, the car level with me stuck his indicators on literally 6 feet before the turn off he intended to enter. He then turned without looking and even with me slamming on my brakes-which are brand new and sound-I put a nice human shaped dent in his passenger door. He had initially claimed innocence and blamed me but several witnesses explained his mistake. I was level with his boot as he turned and he didn't check his inside before turning. He still wanted my details for an insurance claim so he wouldn't incur any costs. Moral of the story - You can have reactions like a mongoose on speed but when drivers don't look, its their fault. Also, to whoever whines about cyclists being in their way, we're not. You just didn't look properly.[/p][/quote]From your description you've been lefthooked. Some advice from years of experience: - join CTC or British Cycling - under £40 a year but gives you legal and insurance, as well as other cycling advice/rides - If involved in a collision as a cyclist, phone the Police (esp if injured or bike damaged). If you havent already then get down to the Station and report it. - Invest in a helmet camera (doesn't have to be a Contour or GoPro, there are cheaper options) and if anything bad like this does happen you have evidence that the Police and insurance can use. Haulage firms are investing in cameras, too, for this very reason.[/p][/quote]£24 for the BC ride membership, means £2 a month which is a dream bargain considering the amount of legal support and insurance you get, also for a little extra you can get cycle breakdown cover and insure it for fire and theft and I can provide a link to the camera I have that is commonly listed on ebay, bought it for £50, records in 720P with a wide angle lens so it has a slight fish-eye effect but £50 for a HD bullet style cam is a steal, on ebay, search for "act20 camera" and it should come up though there is a better version now called the act30 that records in full HD but is similarly priced. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree