View Full Version : Kids & cycling
Apolgies if this has been posted before - I have a feeling
it might be, but I can't see it anywhere
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3634000/3-
634949.stm
"Cycling's your fave way to travel
Updated 17 April 2004, 13.51
Loads of kids would love to cycle to school but traffic and
safety problems mean just 3% of them make the journey by
bike, a survey has found. More than 50,000 pupils have
filled in the survey for the Young TransNet website, which
helps kids plan a safe route to school.
A total of 30% of pupils said they would like to cycle to
school. The second most popular choice was walking.
The kids said more cycle lanes and less traffic would get
them on their bikes.
Too much traffic was also an issue for the kids who
wanted to walk.
They also said wider and cleaner pavements would encourage
them to stroll to school.
Safe routes
Young TransNet aims to get more kids walking or cycling to
school, using safe routes.
If more people did this, there would be fewer cars on
the road. "
Cheers, helen s
--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get
correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$
--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel
is switched off--
On 18 Apr 2004 15:38:41 GMT, wafflycathcs@aol.comcomcom
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:
>Apolgies if this has been posted before - I have a feeling
>it might be, but I can't see it anywhere
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3634000/36-
>34949.stm
I note that 65%, of those who voted, believe that children
should have to wear helmets. More than 3000 votes have
been cast.
"Gonzalez" <speedy.gonzalez@nospam.basher.com> wrote in message
news:0l8580h0juhi5vgpnssbpfi9s0p39umkq7@4ax.com...
> On 18 Apr 2004 15:38:41 GMT, wafflycathcs@aol.comcomcom
> (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:
>
> >Apolgies if this has been posted before - I have a
> >feeling it might be,
but I
> >can't see it anywhere
> >
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3634000/3634-
> >949.stm
>
> I note that 65%, of those who voted, believe that children
> should have to wear helmets. More than 3000 votes have
> been cast.
And the great majority of that 65% are simply voting for
what seems like a good idea, without bothering to look into
the facts and knowing nothing about it... which is, sadly,
one of the problems with democracy in general!
Rich
dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
> Apolgies if this has been posted before - I have a feeling
> it might be, but I can't see it anywhere
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3634000/363-
> 4949.stm
<snipped>
> They also said wider and cleaner pavements would encourage
> them to stroll to school.
I have to confess that I have never seen dog turds [1] as a
major obstacle to walking anywhere. Sounds like a flimsy
excuse to take the car ;-)
[1] of course, the 1970s-era white ones were easier to see!
dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3634000/36349-
> 49.stm "Cycling's your fave way to travel Updated 17 April
> 2004, 13.51
>
> Loads of kids would love to cycle to school but traffic
> and safety problems mean just 3% of them make the journey
> by bike, a survey has found. More than 50,000 pupils have
> filled in the survey for the Young TransNet website, which
> helps kids plan a safe route to school.
>
> A total of 30% of pupils said they would like to cycle to
> school. The second most popular choice was walking.
>
> The kids said more cycle lanes and less traffic would get
> them on their bikes.
>
I suspect this is code for their mothers won't let them
because they think it's too dangerous.
> Young TransNet aims to get more kids walking or cycling to
> school, using safe routes.
>
As opposed to the much quicker and cheaper approach of
training them to ride safely and confidently in the
conditions that exist now.
Colin McKenzie
dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
> They also said wider and cleaner pavements would encourage
> them to stroll to school.
That has to be one of the most feeble make-weight excuses I
have ever heard. People don't walk/cycle because they are
lazy, and then make up excuses for it. Why do so few people
seem to realise this?
It's just like these "revolutionary" new transporters that
are supposed to be going to save the world (eg Segway, or
C5, or that little 3-wheeled car-moped thing that was
mentioned recently). People drive big expensive cars because
they like the comfort and status, and they won't swap that
for a plastic box that sounds like a lawnmower, however much
money that could save. But they consistently lie about their
motivation, and so designers keep on trotting out
"solutions" to non-problems.
James
--
If I have seen further than others, it is by treading on the
toes of giants. http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/
Actually dog poo seems to be a major deterrent to kids being
active outside. Of course sensible families wouldn't let
that on it's own stop kids being active, but nearly every
green space near me (except the parks) is affected by
significant amounts of dog poo.
It seems like a trivial issue until you've had to hose it
out of your toddlers hair, or the kids have come from school
saying that the whole day was distracted by dog poo walked
onto the classroom carpet. ISTR it's also a recurrent theme
in surveys about children's activity. I agree it may be one
of many excuses but I think it needs taking seriously -
pavements, informal green space (and cycle tracks for that
matter) need reclaiming from the dog-foulers....
I agree about the chalky ones though :-)
--
Paul D
"Zog The Undeniable" <hrothgar19@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4082b09c.0@entanet...
> I have to confess that I have never seen dog turds [1] as
> a major obstacle to walking anywhere. Sounds like a flimsy
> excuse to take the car ;-)
>
> [1] of course, the 1970s-era white ones were easier to
> see!
On 19/4/04 11:38 am, in article c60a6c$15k$1$8300dec7@news.beeb.net, "paul"
> Actually dog poo seems to be a major deterrent to kids
> being active outside. Of course sensible families wouldn't
> let that on it's own stop kids being active, but nearly
> every green space near me (except the parks) is affected
> by significant amounts of dog poo.
>
> It seems like a trivial issue until you've had to hose it
> out of your toddlers hair, or the kids have come from
> school saying that the whole day was distracted by dog poo
> walked onto the classroom carpet. ISTR it's also a
> recurrent theme in surveys about children's activity. I
> agree it may be one of many excuses but I think it needs
> taking seriously - pavements, informal green space (and
> cycle tracks for that matter) need reclaiming from the dog-
> foulers....
I have noticed a significant improvement in Dundee in the
dog-fouling area.. People seem to be much better at picking
up after their pooch. Even so, it still only takes one or
two irresponsible owners to ruin life for everyone.
As a parent of three kids, two primary age and one younger,
it is a major pain to have to be constantly on the lookout
for little offerings.
Summary execution is too mild a punishment.
..d
> I have noticed a significant improvement in Dundee in the
> dog-fouling area.. People seem to be much better at
> picking up after their pooch. Even so, it still only takes
> one or two irresponsible owners to ruin life for everyone.
>
> As a parent of three kids, two primary age and one
> younger, it is a major pain to have to be constantly on
> the lookout for little offerings.
>
> Summary execution is too mild a punishment.
having just found the third in a month on my garden path I
kind of agree. I'm hoping to catch the bugger so that I
can smear it either over him or the dog. Him would be
best, but over the dog would not end up with a policeman
at the door. I suppose I can always claim he fell on it
when I punched him...
Mark Thompson wrote:
>
> > I have noticed a significant improvement in Dundee in
> > the dog-fouling area.. People seem to be much better at
> > picking up after their pooch. Even so, it still only
> > takes one or two irresponsible owners to ruin life for
> > everyone.
> >
> > As a parent of three kids, two primary age and one
> > younger, it is a major pain to have to be constantly on
> > the lookout for little offerings.
> >
> > Summary execution is too mild a punishment.
>
> having just found the third in a month on my garden path I
> kind of agree. I'm hoping to catch the bugger so that I
> can smear it either over him or the dog. Him would be
> best, but over the dog would not end up with a policeman
> at the door. I suppose I can always claim he fell on it
> when I punched him...
Someone I knew said they took the turd to the offender's
doorstep wrapped in newspaper, set light to it, rang the
bell and ran away. Said dog owner came out, saw the fire and
stamped it out with a resultant 'splodge'.
John B
> It seems like a trivial issue until you've had to hose it
> out of your toddlers hair, or the kids have come from
> school saying that the whole day was distracted by dog poo
> walked onto the classroom carpet.
Carpet? I never had carpet in any school classroom I
entered, and they say schools don't have enough money.
--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com "The Lord is my
shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
Originally posted by Johnb
Someone I knew said they took the turd to the offender's
doorstep wrapped in newspaper, set light to it, rang the
bell and ran away. Said dog owner came out, saw the fire and
stamped it out with a resultant 'splodge'.
John B
Good one, although personally I post 'em. Wish I had a picture when they shake out the jiffy bag and get their little dog's "present" delivered right into their hands!
Dog turds can also be a hazard when cycling. If you flick through one of 'em at speed on a mountain bike, the resulting crap spray can be quite appalling for anyone behind you (and I guess you'd get a stripe of the stuff up your back if you haven't got crud guards fitted).
Only dogs that should be tolerated are guide dogs - they are amazing. Those ratty little efforts that you see wandering around doing poops that are disproportionately large considering the size of the dog ought to be shot on sight.
Back on topic... interesting how not many kids mentioned that having your bike stolen or bits of it (e.g. saddle) stolen would be a deterrent to them riding.
"Richard Goodman" <rsk@NOSPAM.homechoice.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4082b85e$1@news1.homechoice.co.uk...
> "Gonzalez" <speedy.gonzalez@nospam.basher.com> wrote in
> message news:0l8580h0juhi5vgpnssbpfi9s0p39umkq7@4ax.com...
> > On 18 Apr 2004 15:38:41 GMT, wafflycathcs@aol.comcomcom
> > (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:
> >
> > >Apolgies if this has been posted before - I have a
> > >feeling it might be,
> but I
> > >can't see it anywhere
> > >
> > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3634000/36-
> > >34949.stm
> >
> > I note that 65%, of those who voted, believe that
> > children should have to wear helmets. More than 3000
> > votes have been cast.
>
> And the great majority of that 65% are simply voting for
> what seems like a good idea, without bothering to look
> into the facts and knowing nothing about it... which is,
> sadly, one of the problems with democracy in
general!
and not all that surprising when the site contains the
standard BBC advice:
"The most important thing to get is a helmet which fits
you, doesn't block your eyes or ears, and is secure on
your head. "
>
> Rich
burt wrote:
> "The most important thing to get is a helmet which fits
> you, doesn't block your eyes or ears, and is secure on
> your head. "
I wrote to them asking what evidence they have to support
that claim. No reply.
--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk (http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/)
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
