P
Pyromancer
Guest
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as "Just zis
Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> breathed:
>On Fri, 21 May 2004 17:49:12 +0100, Pyromancer
><[email protected]> wrote in message
><[email protected]>:
>>So, someone is driving along at 25 mph in a 30 zone through (say) a
>>badly lit old industrial area, well away from both housing and pubs,
>>when all of a sudden a drunk cyclist with no lights comes shooting out
>>of a built-up side-road directly ahead at high speed, the driver swerves
>>to avoid the cyclist, succeeds but causes a truck coming the other way
>>to also swerve and collide with a parked vehicle, and somehow you think
>>that's the first car driver's fault?
>Exactly. You really have to grope for an example which is even
>vaguely believable; it's a very unlikely scenario indeed.
Possibly, but something like it happened to me in the Kelham Island area
of Sheffield. Ok, there was no oncoming truck and no actual accident,
but the nutter on the unlit bike who came screaming down from under the
railway bridge, straight through a red light, did cause me to do an
emergency stop in the middle of the junction.
And don't try to tell me nutters on bikes jumping red lights are
uncommon, as I used to see several a day in Sheffield, though they do
seem rarer in Leeds.
>Much more
>likely is that the driver will be doing 40 in the 30 limit, the
>cyclist will die and the driver will not even be prosecuted.
I'll merrily do 90 on a quiet country motorway, but around town I tend
to drop to 3rd gear and stick between 25 and 30. Partly because staying
under the limit (well under in bad conditions) is the right thing to do,
partly because I'm opting out of paying the so-called camera tax, partly
because it makes it easier to be nice to other cyclists, in the hope of
karmic returns when I'm cycling, and partly because I'm very well aware
just how much momentum a moving motor vehicle has.
>And don't forget that the majority of cyclists KSI are not at fault.
I'm well aware of that, having seen some of the idiocy on the roads from
motor vehicle drivers. Just the other day I saw a sleeping truck driver
demolish a tall roadworks sign with his mirror, he jerked awake at the
bang, swerved back into lane and carried on, the remains of the mirror
hanging from its frame and the sign falling onto an adjacent roadway
(this was at a Y junction).
>88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
You'll be pleased to know I don't wear one - having read all the info, I
don't think the discomfort and extra hassle (as in nutters throwing
stuff, etc) one would cause is worth the minimal gains in protection it
would give. A motorbike helmet would be effective protection, but I
really don't fancy cycling in one of those!
--
- Pyromancer.
- http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
- http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
- http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.
Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> breathed:
>On Fri, 21 May 2004 17:49:12 +0100, Pyromancer
><[email protected]> wrote in message
><[email protected]>:
>>So, someone is driving along at 25 mph in a 30 zone through (say) a
>>badly lit old industrial area, well away from both housing and pubs,
>>when all of a sudden a drunk cyclist with no lights comes shooting out
>>of a built-up side-road directly ahead at high speed, the driver swerves
>>to avoid the cyclist, succeeds but causes a truck coming the other way
>>to also swerve and collide with a parked vehicle, and somehow you think
>>that's the first car driver's fault?
>Exactly. You really have to grope for an example which is even
>vaguely believable; it's a very unlikely scenario indeed.
Possibly, but something like it happened to me in the Kelham Island area
of Sheffield. Ok, there was no oncoming truck and no actual accident,
but the nutter on the unlit bike who came screaming down from under the
railway bridge, straight through a red light, did cause me to do an
emergency stop in the middle of the junction.
And don't try to tell me nutters on bikes jumping red lights are
uncommon, as I used to see several a day in Sheffield, though they do
seem rarer in Leeds.
>Much more
>likely is that the driver will be doing 40 in the 30 limit, the
>cyclist will die and the driver will not even be prosecuted.
I'll merrily do 90 on a quiet country motorway, but around town I tend
to drop to 3rd gear and stick between 25 and 30. Partly because staying
under the limit (well under in bad conditions) is the right thing to do,
partly because I'm opting out of paying the so-called camera tax, partly
because it makes it easier to be nice to other cyclists, in the hope of
karmic returns when I'm cycling, and partly because I'm very well aware
just how much momentum a moving motor vehicle has.
>And don't forget that the majority of cyclists KSI are not at fault.
I'm well aware of that, having seen some of the idiocy on the roads from
motor vehicle drivers. Just the other day I saw a sleeping truck driver
demolish a tall roadworks sign with his mirror, he jerked awake at the
bang, swerved back into lane and carried on, the remains of the mirror
hanging from its frame and the sign falling onto an adjacent roadway
(this was at a Y junction).
>88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
You'll be pleased to know I don't wear one - having read all the info, I
don't think the discomfort and extra hassle (as in nutters throwing
stuff, etc) one would cause is worth the minimal gains in protection it
would give. A motorbike helmet would be effective protection, but I
really don't fancy cycling in one of those!
--
- Pyromancer.
- http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
- http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
- http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.
