Safe Cycling South West?!

[burt]

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 ******** 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!

 

[Tony Raven]

burt wrote on 19/11/2006 15:27 +0100:
> 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.
http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.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

 

[John B]

burt wrote:

> 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 ******** 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

 

[Tony Raven]

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

 

[Rob Horton]

burt wrote:
> 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 ******** 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?

 

[John B]

Rob Horton wrote:

> 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

 

[David Martin]

John B wrote:
> Rob Horton wrote:
>
> > 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