"Rick" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
> > Let us not forget there are deaf drivers and cyclists who use he roads
> > every day, are they careless by definition?
>
> But the hearing impaired are used to the nuances of living without, or
> with fewer, aural inputs. Those who are not hearing impaired usually
> are less used to compensating with other senses. I lost a good deal
> of my hearing in SE Asia in the early 70's, and it took me quite a
> while after returning to train my mind and body to use what hearing I
> had left along with other senses to get along. There is simply NO
> comparison between someone who lives with impaired hearing and someone
> who temporarily blocks their hearing.
>
Too right.
The greatest danger to cyclists by far is bad driving by those in motorized
users of the highways; in a collision with one of them, a cyclist is at
great risk of severe injury or death. While this risk is, in absolute
terms, small, it is practically indefensible. No helmet, body armour,
etcetera, will do anything to protect a cyclist should he or she be struck
in a manner sufficient to cause such injury.
It's clear that cyclists who diminish their capacity to be aware of their
surroundings, and to make themselves visible (and ovbious) to other users of
the highways, are being careless in the extreme.