ibbo68 wrote:Cunobelin wrote:ibbo68 wrote:Has what?
Not all car drivers are thick,stupid,inconsiderate and irresponsible.If you want to start the car driver/Cyclist debate then do so but there are just as many Cyclists who fall into that category.
Not what was said, there are however some that are, you need to legislate for themNo matter which angle you want to come from the figures RE stopping distances are wrong....miles out in fact.These figures give people like you ammunition that is akin to firing blanks...ie useless
Absolute tripe (apart from totally ignoring the point that the driver is the issue)...... to make these insults you will need to provide evidence..... me I will take that of the TRL and RAC who support my pointCommenting on a new study by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) for road safety charity Brake that suggests Highway Code stopping distances might be due an update, RAC spokesman Rod Dennis said:
“These findings from Brake and TRL are striking and should be taken seriously. From time to time, new evidence will come to light that means it is necessary to update the Highway Code and perhaps this is one such instance.
“While the ability for cars to be able to brake more quickly has improved, our reaction times clearly haven’t. And arguably, our reaction times might even have got worse due to all the distractions that have made their way into the car environment – none more so than the smartphone that constantly demands our attention.
“Many drivers believe they are capable of doing far more at the wheel than they actually are, but the fact remains that driving is one of the most mentally demanding tasks any of us do and we shouldn’t forget that.”
...or perhaps the RAC and TRL are using ammunition that is akin to firing blanks...ie useless (Or simple inconvenient for you?)
I await the evidence from you that supports your claim and shows why the TRL research is invalidDo you drive?
Yes.......If so try the experiment yourself and you will find that a modern car will actually stop at 50mph in the distance quoted at 30mph in the Highway Code...easily.
Thank you so much for supporting my point
The CAR can stop in these distances, it is the drivers who are the problem
Rather than an experiment, lets look at reality?
At the junction in question I have never failed to stop, nor have any of my neighbours, or the many parents doing the School run, nor the drivers attending the frequent car boot sales or other events (thousands of vehicles per year).... yet 12 drivers did, causing injury accidents and one fatality. I think the evidence is that the cars can stop, but either all of these drivers were driving 50 yearly cars (not the case) or simply failed to brake at the junction )evidenced by Police reports)If you don't drive then you really don't have the knowledge to comment
Again ignoring the pettiness, why is this relevant?
There is evidence that a 5 year old could understand, your position is absurd, bit like claiming that you have to be a food inspector to know that al loaf of bread is mouldy or that the lumpy stinking milk in your fridge is "off
What is your point again.I got bored halfway through your(tedious) ramblings?
By tedious ramblings you mean pointing out that the development of cars is irrelevant and that there is evidence to support in.
In the meanwhile dismissing this evidence as "tedious ramblings translates as the fact that you will not admit that you were wrong , and that you will not be attempting to justify your absurd unevidenced and untrue claim that " These figures give people like you ammunition that is akin to firing blanks...ie useless " with any evidence