UK and Europe · Public discussion

Chain reaction on the BBC web site

Started by David Martin · · Last activity · 25 posts · 1,218 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
27 July 2005
Last activity
28 July 2005
Original author
David Martin
Posts
25
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,218
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 25
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719015.stm

    Chain reaction
    By Tom Geoghegan
    BBC News Magazine

    Cycling is undergoing a surge of interest since the London bombings, as
    commuters decide to head to work under their own steam. Could they be
    avoiding the threat of terror only to face a more everyday danger on
    the roads?
    Two hours after the bombings on 7 July, a man walked into a bike shop
    in London Bridge.

    "He said 'I'm never going on the Tube again. Sell me a bike,'" recalls
    Travis Lindhe, manager of On Your Bike, where sales have increased from
    three bikes a day to 15 ever since.

    A cyclists' organisation, the London Cycling Network, reports a 10 to
    30% increase in use of bike stands at three points in central London,
    although it says this news is hardly a cause for celebration, given the
    circumstances.

    Fear has driven primary school teacher Stephen Thorpe, 45, on to the
    saddle of his new bike for his journey from Bow, east London, to
    Kennington.

    "You wake up in the morning and think 'I've got to get on the Tube and
    I'm taking a risk,'" says Mr Thorpe, who used to cycle part-time. "I
    was half an hour behind the Liverpool Street bomb, which was a very
    frightening experience.

    "But when I ride to work I don't have to worry about being a potential
    bomb victim."

    Traffic hazards are not such an issue because his route is on towpaths
    and quiet streets, he says.

    Nationally, there has been a small but steady fall in cycling over the
    past 20 years, with the capital bucking this trend. But the bomb
    attacks momentarily changed this. Birmingham City Cycles reported a
    surge in sales on 7 July, when it was also beset by transport and
    security problems.

    Obesity debate

    Not everyone is reacting through anxiety. Some of London's new breed of
    two-wheeled commuters say it's just to avoid the delays and disruption
    on public transport.

    Bike stands take the strain
    Cycling was already enjoying a boom in the capital and this has
    accelerated that trend, says Barry Mason, of Southwark Cyclists. "The
    congestion charge increase, the obesity debate and then the long dry
    summer meant there were more and more cyclists on the road. Sadly the
    bombs have given it another kick."

    It's fast, healthy and no longer considered nerdy or for the super-fit,
    he says, so the novices should be welcomed.

    "There are fewer men in Lycra looking like Olympians and more people
    cycling in ordinary clothes, so people see them and say 'I can do
    that.'"

    The environmental benefits of this trend are diminished because it does
    not seem that motorists are switching from their cars to bikes. But for
    those new cyclists, there is an uncomfortable fact that they are far
    more likely to involved in an accident than in a bombing.

    But cycling is still very safe, says Mr Mason, because on average you
    would have to cycle non-stop for 96 years before you were killed. And
    the extra risk is offset by the health benefits.

    Yet this mismatch between perception and reality is significant and one
    of the main reasons for it is control, says Professor John Maule, an
    expert on risk and director of the Centre for Decision Research at
    Leeds University.

    "When people get on the Tube, they have no control of what's happening
    but when they're on their bike they feel more in control of their
    behaviour, so the perceived risks are reduced."

    Without the availability of statistics for us to work out the exact
    likelihood of being involved in an explosion, people do their own
    "mental short-cuts", he says.

    Terrorist events which leave very dramatic images in people's minds
    are much more retrievable then their frequency of occurrence means they
    should be

    One factor is the availability of images in our mind, which dictates
    how soon the event could happen again. Pictures of the blast aftermath
    are so powerful and so omnipresent they stick in the memory, so people
    overestimate the likelihood of these events happening again.

    "How readily can you bring to mind the image of a cyclist being knocked
    down?" he says. "Not easily, because the media isn't interested and
    that's the lens through which we learn about the world."

    This principle applies to other areas such as child abductions, he
    says, which happen at the same rate as in 1945 but which are perceived
    to be more frequent nowadays, perhaps due to media coverage.

    Experiences which make you feel frightened increase your perception of
    risk, he adds, so getting on the Tube - and the associated anxiety -
    makes people think it to be more dangerous than it is.

    'Dead hero'

    But it is perception that is the driving force behind people's
    decisions, and without official figures, anecdotal evidence suggests
    it's not just bikes which are in demand from ex-Tube travellers.

    Lorraine Duncan, 45, from Hayes in Middlesex, avoids the Tube on her
    daily commute to central London in favour of a bus from Paddington
    railway station.

    She accepts buses are now targets from terrorists but she feels safer
    above ground.

    "I'd rather be a live commuter than a dead hero. If I'm going to be a
    little inconvenienced, at least I'm alive."

  2. David Martin said:


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719015.stm

    Chain reaction
    By Tom Geoghegan
    BBC News Magazine

    My comment to them:

    "You yet again make a great play of presenting cycling as a dangerous
    activity and yet I see you do not comment that the data in the box shows
    cycling to be 1.4 times safer than walking in London. Do you think
    walking in London is exceptionally dangerous; do you run articles on the
    dangers of walking in London; do you run articles on the importance of
    wearing special protective equipment and high visibility clothing while
    walking in London. If not why not? For some reason people always seem
    to want pick on cyclists as being at uncommon risk."

    --
    Tony

    "I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
    Anon

  3. On 27 Jul 2005 04:07:01 -0700 someone who may be "David Martin"
    <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

    Quoted message said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719015.stm

    Quoted message said:

    Cycling is undergoing a surge of interest since the London bombings, as
    commuters decide to head to work under their own steam. Could they be
    avoiding the threat of terror only to face a more everyday danger on
    the roads?

    Cycling in central London is attractive because it is the fastest
    way of getting around. Only for long trips, such as from the
    outskirts, are there faster ways of travelling.

    I wouldn't travel by public transport in London at the moment
    though. Bombs I can cope with, but police death squads are something
    I cannot. When the death squads are removed I will consider it
    again.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
    I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
    prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

  4. David Hansen said:

    I wouldn't travel by public transport in London at the moment
    though. Bombs I can cope with, but police death squads are something
    I cannot. When the death squads are removed I will consider it
    again.

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    ...d

  5. Tony Raven said:
    David Martin said:


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719015.stm

    Chain reaction
    By Tom Geoghegan
    BBC News Magazine

    My comment to them:

    "You yet again make a great play of presenting cycling as a dangerous
    activity and yet I see you do not comment that the data in the box shows
    cycling to be 1.4 times safer than walking in London. Do you think
    walking in London is exceptionally dangerous; do you run articles on the
    dangers of walking in London; do you run articles on the importance of
    wearing special protective equipment and high visibility clothing while
    walking in London. If not why not? For some reason people always seem
    to want pick on cyclists as being at uncommon risk."

    I don't know why people bother with their "Have your say" section. My
    colleague and I believe that it should be renamed "Have our say" as it's
    edited so heavily anyway, so as to present "balance". Oh the irony.
    Neither he nor I has ever had a comment printed.

    Antony

  6. David Martin said:

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    Nor Brazilian enough.

  7. David Hansen said:


    I wouldn't travel by public transport in London at the moment
    though. Bombs I can cope with, but police death squads are something
    I cannot. When the death squads are removed I will consider it
    again.

    You must have done something very very wrong to think that you are at
    significant risk from a police death squad. You have more risk of dying
    from one of the rarest exotic diseases in the UK than being shot by the
    police. If they had a fatal police shooting in London every weekday in
    the year they would still not have equalled the number of innocent
    deaths on the roads of London.

    --
    Tony

    "I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
    Anon

  8. On 27 Jul 2005 07:22:55 -0700 someone who may be "David Martin"
    <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

    Quoted message said:

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young,

    Correct.

    Quoted message said:

    islamic looking,

    Neither was the man who blew up the offices in Oklahoma City.

    Quoted message said:

    nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    It remains to be seen whether the victim on Friday did this. His
    family say that he passed through the barriers in the usual way,
    using something called a ticket.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
    I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
    prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

  9. On 27 Jul 2005 07:22:55 -0700,

    David Martin said:


    David Hansen said:

    I wouldn't travel by public transport in London at the moment
    though. Bombs I can cope with, but police death squads are something
    I cannot. When the death squads are removed I will consider it
    again.

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    Although some reports are now saying the guy didn't jump over the
    barriers.

    --
    Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
    "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
    - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

  10. In message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:
    David Martin said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719015.stm
    Chain reaction
    By Tom Geoghegan
    BBC News Magazine

    My comment to them:

    "You yet again make a great play of presenting cycling as a dangerous
    activity and yet I see you do not comment that the data in the box
    shows cycling to be 1.4 times safer than walking in London. Do you
    think walking in London is exceptionally dangerous; do you run articles
    on the dangers of walking in London; do you run articles on the
    importance of wearing special protective equipment and high visibility
    clothing while walking in London. If not why not? For some reason
    people always seem to want pick on cyclists as being at uncommon risk."

    I responded as well pointing this out, among other things, but they seem
    to have ignored my comment.

    --
    congokid
    Good restaurants in London? Number one on Google
    http://congokid.com

  11. In message <[email hidden]>, antgel
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:

    I don't know why people bother with their "Have your say" section. My
    colleague and I believe that it should be renamed "Have our say" as it's
    edited so heavily anyway, so as to present "balance". Oh the irony.
    Neither he nor I has ever had a comment printed.

    Me neither. Perhaps it helps if you've filled it full of typos, wild
    ranting and non-sequiturs instead of reasoned debate. Though I've tried
    the former, too.

    Last year I submitted this one back to them, on another topic, though
    strangely back in the news today, with no luck.
    <http://www.congokid.demon.co.uk/photos/bbctoday.jpg>

    Thought I'd save it for posterity.

    --
    congokid
    Good restaurants in London? Number one on Google
    http://congokid.com

  12. in message <[email hidden]>, David

    Martin (') said:
    David Hansen said:

    I wouldn't travel by public transport in London at the moment
    though. Bombs I can cope with, but police death squads are something
    I cannot. When the death squads are removed I will consider it
    again.

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    The man shot was not 'islamic looking' and, contrary to first reports,
    did not jump over the barrier. He used his travel pass in the normal
    way. He was also not wearing a heavy jacket, but a light denim one.

    --
    [email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    [ This .sig subject to change without notice ]

  13. I submit that on or about Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:16:54 +0100, the person
    known to the court as David Hansen <[email hidden]>
    made a statement (<[email hidden]> in Your
    Honour's bundle) to the following effect:

    Quoted message said:

    I wouldn't travel by public transport in London at the moment
    though. Bombs I can cope with, but police death squads are something
    I cannot. When the death squads are removed I will consider it
    again.

    YA Mike Corley & ICMFP :o)

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

  14. David Hansen said:

    Cycling in central London is attractive because it is the fastest
    way of getting around. Only for long trips, such as from the
    outskirts, are there faster ways of travelling.

    I wouldn't travel by public transport in London at the moment
    though. Bombs I can cope with, but police death squads are something
    I cannot. When the death squads are removed I will consider it
    again.


    Reconsider then. The police death squads (sic) are police Taser squads
    now. If you are lucky you might get your bike dynamo recharged as well
    as some physical stimulation when they zap you.

  15. Simonb said:
    David Martin said:

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    Nor Brazilian enough.

    Human rights police shooting statistics show that it is a lot safer
    being Brazilian in London, than in Rio.

  16. Quoted message said:


    Simonb said:
    David Martin said:

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    Nor Brazilian enough.

    Human rights police shooting statistics show that it is a lot safer
    being Brazilian in London, than in Rio.

    If I heard correctly on Radio 4, 15 fatal shootings a month by police in
    Sao Paulo.

    --
    Tony

    "I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
    Anon

  17. Quoted message said:


    Simonb said:
    David Martin said:

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    Nor Brazilian enough.

    Human rights police shooting statistics show that it is a lot safer
    being Brazilian in London, than in Rio.


    Also safer for army aged black males in Iraq than Chicago. But does that
    make their being there any better?
    @-(
    Dan Gregory

  18. congokid said:

    In message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:
    David Martin said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719015.stm
    Chain reaction
    By Tom Geoghegan
    BBC News Magazine

    My comment to them:

    "You yet again make a great play of presenting cycling as a dangerous
    activity and yet I see you do not comment that the data in the box
    shows cycling to be 1.4 times safer than walking in London. Do you
    think walking in London is exceptionally dangerous; do you run
    articles on the dangers of walking in London; do you run articles on
    the importance of wearing special protective equipment and high
    visibility clothing while walking in London. If not why not? For
    some reason people always seem to want pick on cyclists as being at
    uncommon risk."

    I responded as well pointing this out, among other things, but they seem
    to have ignored my comment.

    NOOOO????

    Really?..

    A news organisation ignoring rational debate in favour of dramatic
    irrational impact (Yeah i know their is a better word.. its early ok?)
    I can;t believe that.

  19. Quoted message said:


    Simonb said:
    David Martin said:

    I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    Nor Brazilian enough.

    Human rights police shooting statistics show that it is a lot safer
    being Brazilian in London, than in Rio.

    Vic police have shot no brazilians that I know of.

    Safer here too, statistically 🙂

    (Actually one of my favourite stories a couple of years ago was that
    there had been no serious accidents ever at civilian pstol ranges and a
    couple at police ranges.. so toughter regulations were being brought
    into civilain ranges to improve the safety 🙂

  20. Dan Gregory said:
    Quoted message said:


    Simonb said:

    David Martin wrote:

    > I don't think you really fit the profile of a target though. You are
    > not young, islamic looking, nor prone to jumping over tube barriers.

    Nor Brazilian enough.

    Human rights police shooting statistics show that it is a lot safer
    being Brazilian in London, than in Rio.


    Also safer for army aged black males in Iraq than Chicago. But does that
    make their being there any better?
    @-(
    Dan Gregory

    For them? Likely. I think its illegal to wear kevlar helmets and flak
    jackets in the streets in Chicago.

    On the other hand if the helmets were marketed as ´bicycle.......

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.