UK and Europe · Public discussion

Safe Cycling South West?!

Started by burt · · Last activity · 7 posts · 582 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
19 November 2006
Last activity
20 November 2006
Original author
burt
Posts
7
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
582
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 1–7 of 7
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Having read the thread about BHIT's stunts, I looked at the petition and one
    of the links was to this piece of excrement.
    http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html and click on "cycle safe
    South West"

    You can understand parents who've been fed BHIT's [censored] promoting
    helmets, but this site it way ott: "
    Born out of frustration at the Government's inability to protect young
    cyclists, the parents are demanding that ministers listen to them instead of
    pandering to adult cycling groups.

    Rachael Landymore, whose son Harry suffered a head injury in a cycling
    accident, said: "All the leading health bodies including the British Medical
    Association (BMA), all the leading children's charities including the Child
    Brain Injury Trust, the UK's leading bike retailer, Halfords and the
    majority of parents all support compulsory cycle helmets for children.

    "Yet the Government chooses to ignore all of them and pander instead to a
    few members of a couple of adult cycling groups, many of whose members wear
    cycle helmets."

    and a lot more in the same vein. Fortunately, it appears that almost no-one
    visits the site, 1,129 since April, but ominously, it list 20 or so places
    you can sign the petition in person. Either it's incredibly slow or most of
    the links on it don't work. There ought to be a law against such
    misinformed sites!

  2. burt wrote on 19/11/2006 15:27 +0100:

    Quoted message said:

    Fortunately, it appears that almost no-one
    visits the site, 1,129 since April, but ominously, it list 20 or so places
    you can sign the petition in person. Either it's incredibly slow or most of
    the links on it don't work. There ought to be a law against such
    misinformed sites!

    In another wonderful distortion of the facts they write:

    "The petition has moved. Due the large numbers of people signing the
    petition is now being hosted externally and is more user friendly.
    petitiononline.competition.html"

    Which is the petition with 29 signatures, 20 from from Mr Magoo, Wile E
    Coyote & friends.

    So now we know what their view of a "large number" is. Its nine.

    --
    Tony

    "Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
    his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
    - Leonardo da Vinci

  3. burt said:

    Having read the thread about BHIT's stunts, I looked at the petition and one
    of the links was to this piece of excrement.
    http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html and click on "cycle safe
    South West"

    You can understand parents who've been fed BHIT's [censored] promoting
    helmets, but this site it way ott: "

    For some time now, this group have also been trying to recruit National
    Standard Instructors to work under their banner. It seems they aimed to become
    the main contact point for all NS instructors in the SW. Of course these
    instructors would be expected to follow Cycle Safe South West's line on
    helmets.

    They don't seem to have signed many up though :-))

    There have been some grisly stories on their practices on the cycling
    instructors mailing group.

    John B

  4. John B wrote on 19/11/2006 20:25 +0100:

    Quoted message said:


    They don't seem to have signed many up though :-))

    They seem to have a couple of organisations signed up (and a few bike
    shops they claim carry their petition)

    http://www.budecyclingclub.org/
    http://www.cyclesafe.plus.com/fit2ride.htm which appears to be a rip off
    of a Devon Government initiative
    http://www.devon.gov.uk/index/transport/roads/road_safety/cyclists/fit2ride.htm

    --
    Tony

    "Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
    his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
    - Leonardo da Vinci

  5. burt said:

    Having read the thread about BHIT's stunts, I looked at the petition and one
    of the links was to this piece of excrement.
    http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html and click on "cycle safe
    South West"

    You can understand parents who've been fed BHIT's [censored] promoting
    helmets, but this site it way ott: "
    Born out of frustration at the Government's inability to protect young
    cyclists, the parents are demanding that ministers listen to them instead of
    pandering to adult cycling groups.

    Rachael Landymore, whose son Harry suffered a head injury in a cycling
    accident, said: "All the leading health bodies including the British Medical
    Association (BMA), all the leading children's charities including the Child
    Brain Injury Trust, the UK's leading bike retailer, Halfords and the
    majority of parents all support compulsory cycle helmets for children.

    "Yet the Government chooses to ignore all of them and pander instead to a
    few members of a couple of adult cycling groups, many of whose members wear
    cycle helmets."

    and a lot more in the same vein. Fortunately, it appears that almost no-one
    visits the site, 1,129 since April, but ominously, it list 20 or so places
    you can sign the petition in person. Either it's incredibly slow or most of
    the links on it don't work. There ought to be a law against such
    misinformed sites!


    How come Rachael Landymore didn't get a helmet for her son anyway? It's
    not like they are difficult to get hold of and there's no way she could
    claim ignorance. Maybe she is incapable of independent thought?

    The other problem is that what makes her think her son would wear a
    helmet once he is out of sight?

  6. Rob Horton said:

    How come Rachael Landymore didn't get a helmet for her son anyway? It's
    not like they are difficult to get hold of and there's no way she could
    claim ignorance. Maybe she is incapable of independent thought?

    It seems today that few people want to take any responsibility for their own
    actions - or lack of them. Today's default is to always blame someone, or
    something else.

    Carlie Annets failure to properly maintain her son's bike, also on the Cycle Safe
    South west site, is another prime example.

    In these cases the lack of a law is being used, conveniently forgetting that they
    still had the choice to provide a helmet or not for their youngsters.
    To accept that that choice existed would be to accept some of the blame, and that
    would never do.

    John B

  7. John B said:
    Rob Horton said:

    How come Rachael Landymore didn't get a helmet for her son anyway? It's
    not like they are difficult to get hold of and there's no way she could
    claim ignorance. Maybe she is incapable of independent thought?

    It seems today that few people want to take any responsibility for their own
    actions - or lack of them. Today's default is to always blame someone, or
    something else.

    Carlie Annets failure to properly maintain her son's bike, also on the Cycle Safe
    South west site, is another prime example.

    In these cases the lack of a law is being used, conveniently forgetting that they
    still had the choice to provide a helmet or not for their youngsters.
    To accept that that choice existed would be to accept some of the blame, and that
    would never do.

    It might be thought a bit bad taste to register the site
    cyclesafersouthwest to parody the original..

    ...d

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.