If you don't accept the big difference between grey clothing and something bright set against a grey road you're in cuckoo land.
New Highway Code Changes Come Into Effect Saturday 29th January
- Thread starter Fat_Dragon
- Start date
r00fie1
Well-known member
High - Vis clothing is not the answer to irresponsible negligent drivers.
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
If you look into this issue it's not as 'grey and white' as you suggest. For example at this time of the year when the sun is low hi vis clothing can make you invisible when travelling into the sun, whereas a dark jersey lets you be seen.
There has been many studies that have cast doubt on the common conception that cyclists must wear bright clothing.
And as pedestrians also get killed / injured by cars you should really extend that to them - hi vis for all. And cars should all have hi vis as that stops the accidents doesn't it?
SmallTown
Well-known member
Haha I love this! Even if that wasn't a ridiculous over estimation (which it is)
It's funny that the only defence people have of breaking the law is that other people also break the law.
I must remember that next time I'm in court for GBH: "yes your honour, but Harold Shipman"
SmallTown
Well-known member
You would be shocked if you came to London. Even the briefest of cycle rides and you'll see the red light jumpers. Flying through pedestrian crossings
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
I'm not excusing any behaviour from a cyclist by saying drivers speed often.
I also was not talking about speeding convictions. I was talking about drivers who on their usual car journeys break the speed limit. In fact it might be 100%. Speeding up in a 30 before the 60 limit starts, being slightly late slowing down from 40 to 30... every driver has done it. I am not saying it is dangerous or makes you a bad person but everyone has done it.
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
And with all that dangerous law breaking a cyclist, on average, kills 1 pedestrian a year. Care to tell us how many pedestrians car drivers kill?
Brian Marwood
Well-known member
Ah there it is, another attempt by SmallTown to steer a completely unrelated topic into politics.
Linny
Well-known member
I'm surprised people see more cyclists breaking the rules of the road than motorists.
We aren't just talking about mobile phone use with motorists. Speeding, tailgating, not using indicators, undertaking, using their horns inappropriately etc etc.
It takes me 20 minutes to drive to work and I see numerous examples of this every single journey.
However, at the end of the day, its not simply down to "drivers" or "cyclists", its down to the individual. The same people taking liberties in a car would probably do the same on a bike and vice versa.
People just ain't no good.
We aren't just talking about mobile phone use with motorists. Speeding, tailgating, not using indicators, undertaking, using their horns inappropriately etc etc.
It takes me 20 minutes to drive to work and I see numerous examples of this every single journey.
However, at the end of the day, its not simply down to "drivers" or "cyclists", its down to the individual. The same people taking liberties in a car would probably do the same on a bike and vice versa.
People just ain't no good.
r00fie1
Well-known member
Road traffic collision information and statistics
View free traffic collision statistics, and find out how to request more detailed road collision reports.
www.northyorks.gov.uk
Selected information - other information can be accessed via the website address above.
Power BI
app.powerbi.com
DRIVER / RIDER [Above]
PASSENGERS [Above]
PEDESTRIANS [Above]
Collisions by Vehicle Type:
There are further in-depth details and statistics for those interested:-
Microsoft Power BI
app.powerbi.com
Last edited:
newusername
Well-known member
How do drivers manage in everyday life wandering round bumping into things not lit up like Christmas trees?
Now all new cars have to have daytime running lights, no doubt all traffic collisions will cease as drivers will finally be able to see other vehicles.
If you don't accept the big difference between grey clothing and something bright set against a grey road you're in cuckoo land
How silly.
coluka
Well-known member
I agree, but it is a part of the safety solution, cyclists could and should help themselves with their personal safety by adopting it, especially when so many still like to ride on a road without any lights on, or maybe one not working, i see some that do, just like some irresponsible car drivers venture with bulbs gone.
The problem is often the selfishness of the road user (driver or cyclist) who because of their situation are willing to take a chance as it is unlikely they’ll get caught or be in an accident, unfortunately the just this once mentality will happen more than just this once. Hi vis exists for a reason, it makes common sense to do everything to be safe as you can in my eyes.
r00fie1
Well-known member
If you`ve ever done more than ride around the park - high vis does not:-
* prevent drivers from speeding,
* passing too close to cyclists including hitting riders on the overtake.
* parking all over pavements and blocking combined pedestrian/cycle lanes,
* using mobile phones on their laps [!] whilst driving,
* cutting illegal left turns, causing accidents and damage to other road users,
* opening driver-side doors without looking in the rear-view mirror,
* pulling out in front of cyclists and not giving way at signed junctions,
* abusing other road users and pedestrians as a matter of course,
* driving without the required lights including indicators and headlights / tail lights.
* overtaking on marked [two solid white lines] roads, into cyclists and other road users.
* Speeding into blind bends and corners, risking death and serious injury to other road users, including cyclists.
* Illegal U-turns in busy and open roads.
* tailgating cyclists risking death or serious injury.
* deliberately forcing cyclists off the road into the gutter,
* stopping / parking on zig-zags outside schools and on pelican crossings.
* stopping in the cycle-priority boxes at traffic lights.
* not paying due care and attention to other road users and pedestrians - forced breaking and swerving at risk of injury to others.
Its the same as "Did the cyclist have a helmet" (?)
* Helmets dont prevent careless, dangerous and negligent drivers from being behind the wheel of a sofa-in-a-box.
r00fie1
Well-known member
Thats fair comment
More often , the cyclist is blamed for the motorists dangerous driving!
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
If you look into this issue it's not as 'grey and white' as you suggest. For example at this time of the year when the sun is low hi vis clothing can make you invisible when travelling into the sun, whereas a dark jersey lets you be seen.
There has been many studies that have cast doubt on the common conception that cyclists must wear bright clothing.
And as pedestrians also get killed / injured by cars you should really extend that to them - hi vis for all. And cars should all have hi vis as that stops the accidents doesn't it?
View attachment 32342
The_Lizards_Jumpers
Well-known member
It's basic victim blaming, and not far removed from blaming say rape victims because of how they were dressed. As others have said, if we're going to insist that hi-viz is compulsory for cyclists then let's extend that to pedestrians. If we're going to insist on helmets for cyclists then let's extend to drivers, as head injuries in cars as more common than for cyclists.
newusername
Well-known member
I don't understand why when drivers talk about making things safer for cyclists/pedestrians their first recourse is to always mention Hi-Viz & helmets, when PPE is the least effective measure for improving safety.
Drivers are introducing danger into the environment by travelling at 30mph+ in 2 tonnes of metal but somehow they still want to blame the other person for not being demonstrably visible, when in the vast majority of collisions the other person/vehicle is there to be seen, it is just the driver is not paying attention.
