Cyclists are always right - apparently

In an article about cycling fatalities
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4764846.stm

<quote>
He said: "In Scandinavian countries cyclists' deaths on the road are
practically unknown - in other words HGVs in Scandinavian countries do
not run over cyclists."
</quote>

He seems to miss the alternative interpretation of this statistic when
blaming poorly trained lorry drivers.

 

There was a news article last night on London news on the TV about this
shyte.
A "Cyclo-Courier" was interviewed that stated he had lost many colleagues to
accidents involving lorry collisions with them while they rode.
There is also a bunch of self righteous do - gooders trying to restrict HGV
driving times for London so the cyclists stand a better chance on the roads!
**** em and the bike they rode in on.
How many times have you watched the twats ride through red lights, use the
pavement, ignore on way street signs and generally stick a finger up at most
of the road laws ?

Better idea would be to tax push bikes for the outright inconvenience they
cause by having a 5th of the road width to themselves and not allowing
motorbikes use that marked section.

 

You, of course, don't break any traffic laws?

 

R obbo wrote:
snip

I find that red push bike section quite handy for gently slipping to the
front of the queue at traffic lights. Haven't checked with the
authorities if it's frowned upon to use it like that. I guess it's
probably up to the local council exactly what the regulations are ?

 

It's not allowed - it's for push bikes.

But then WTF is going to stop you doing it?

Just don't be hypocritical about it

 

[stage-whisper]

You do of course realise that we (ie. "scandinavians") drive on the
*right* side of the road..?! :-D

[/s-w]


/Claus

 

He (Bill Chidley) also has his facts wrong, as one of the most effective
cyclist-killers in Denmark is in fact lorries; the right-turning kind
(which I guess would 'translate' to left-turning ones in the UK..?)

The large number of 'deaths-by-lorry' has resulted in legislation that
requires two additional side-mirrors (looking down beside the cab of the
lorry - "between" the lorry and the sidewalk) - but this has not yet
resulted in a reduction of cyclists killed by turning lorries.

/claus

 

Intet Navn () gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

But that's about the easiest for a cyclist to avoid being caught by.

Simply - _Don't bloody get into that position._

- If you're at a set of traffic lights, and a wagon pulls up next to you -
move forward into his windscreen view.

- Don't ride up the kerb side of a stationary wagon at lights.

- If a truck starts to overtake you just before a junction, ease back and
prepare to stop.

Yes, the truck driver might be in the wrong - But you can't exactly argue
that from under the wheels, can you?

 

Because cyclists are essentially stupic dunts.
--
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a
I demand nothing of you except that you amuse me.

Folding@Home Team UKRM
http://vspx27.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teampage&teamnum=47957

 

Me, on the pushbike in front of him.

 

Being an everyday cyclist myself, I'm sorry to say that I'm somewhat in
agreement with you...

My guess is that the sense of 'immortality' a cyclist may pick up when
driving on the bicycle-paths (of which there are a lot in the larger
cities, reducing the number of cyclists being run down from behind by
cars!) reduces the will/ability to drive defensively when cars and bicyles
suddenly have to 'mix' (fx. at crossroads). All issues of right and wrong
aside, defensive driving still seems a pretty good survival-strategy in a
"car vs. bicycle" scenario..!

Does all the suspicion with regards to cars and lousy drivers make
motorcyclists/bikers better cyclists..?! :-o

/claus

 

Quite. It's not as if they display VED's anyway so WGAF