Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 9214
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby mjr » 18 Dec 2017, 3:18pm

ianrobo wrote:
mjr wrote:
ianrobo wrote:Today here in Birmingham we had 6 people die because of speeding and recklessness (yes you may say do not speculate but the damage shows it is clear).

But the BBC TV news this morning said clearly it was an accident!


ah best not let anyone think drivers are to blame eh ?

Like amazing when they report car flips over, as if no human interaction and it is these form of words that HAVE to change

Exactly! These poor drivers are as much victims of errant cars and vans as any people that they hit. At least people outside the car might be able to run out of the way - the drivers were clearly trapped and helpless, at the mercy of their vehicles, as far as I can tell from the reports. :roll:
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
Pastychomper
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Nov 2017, 11:14am
Location: Caithness

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby Pastychomper » 18 Dec 2017, 4:00pm

Phil Fouracre wrote:Similar to the religion 'argument'! Religionists calling people 'militant atheists' when there is no such thing, and, no 'organisation', just normal people!! How can disinterest/disbelief be defined in militant terms? :-)


Apparently there was such a thing in Soviet Russia, at least until Stalin felt the need to garner support from religious parts of the population. I don't think we've quite reached the stage of having leading pro-helmet-compulsion campaigners executed yet, though.
Everyone's ghast should get a good flabbering now and then.
--Ole Boot

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 9214
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby mjr » 18 Dec 2017, 4:29pm

Pastychomper wrote:
Phil Fouracre wrote:Similar to the religion 'argument'! Religionists calling people 'militant atheists' when there is no such thing, and, no 'organisation', just normal people!! How can disinterest/disbelief be defined in militant terms? :-)


Apparently there was such a thing in Soviet Russia, at least until Stalin felt the need to garner support from religious parts of the population. I don't think we've quite reached the stage of having leading pro-helmet-compulsion campaigners executed yet, though.

I would say that we could just wait for Darwin to work, but I suspect some of them don't cycle much if at all.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

ianrobo
Posts: 320
Joined: 12 Jan 2017, 9:52pm

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby ianrobo » 18 Dec 2017, 4:40pm

mjr wrote:
ianrobo wrote:
mjr wrote:But the BBC TV news this morning said clearly it was an accident!


ah best not let anyone think drivers are to blame eh ?

Like amazing when they report car flips over, as if no human interaction and it is these form of words that HAVE to change

Exactly! These poor drivers are as much victims of errant cars and vans as any people that they hit. At least people outside the car might be able to run out of the way - the drivers were clearly trapped and helpless, at the mercy of their vehicles, as far as I can tell from the reports. :roll:


trying not to comment directly on the accident as such but speed had to be a part and the car can not be blamed for that. Does anyone have any figures as to how much speed contributes to deaths per year ?

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 2756
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby pjclinch » 18 Dec 2017, 6:15pm

ianrobo wrote:
trying not to comment directly on the accident as such but speed had to be a part and the car can not be blamed for that. Does anyone have any figures as to how much speed contributes to deaths per year ?


Stopping power, or rather how much kinetic energy is lost when things stop in a big hurry, is what tends to get people dead.

KE = 1/2 x mass x (velocity squared), so as you get faster speed becomes very significantly more dangerous. That's before we worry about stuff like reaction times etc.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 16084
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby [XAP]Bob » 18 Dec 2017, 9:34pm

Phil Fouracre wrote:Similar to the religion 'argument'! Religionists calling people 'militant atheists' when there is no such thing, and, no 'organisation', just normal people!! How can disinterest/disbelief be defined in militant terms? :-)


Apathetic atheists are not militant, but militant atheists do have a faith based belief system - theybfervent beliece that there is no God, despite a complete lack of evidence...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way.
No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
A good pun is it's own reword

There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 6947
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby Cunobelin » 19 Dec 2017, 6:30am

ianrobo wrote:
mjr wrote:
ianrobo wrote:
ah best not let anyone think drivers are to blame eh ?

Like amazing when they report car flips over, as if no human interaction and it is these form of words that HAVE to change

Exactly! These poor drivers are as much victims of errant cars and vans as any people that they hit. At least people outside the car might be able to run out of the way - the drivers were clearly trapped and helpless, at the mercy of their vehicles, as far as I can tell from the reports. :roll:


trying not to comment directly on the accident as such but speed had to be a part and the car can not be blamed for that. Does anyone have any figures as to how much speed contributes to deaths per year ?


Not quite that easy.

There was an argument that drivers who sped are also likely to exhibit other bad driving behaviour such as tail gating, failure to give way at junctions, close passes etc. There was also evidence that a driver with a speeding ticket was (IIRC) twice as likely to be involved in an injury accident in teh next 12 months than a driver without

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 6947
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby Cunobelin » 19 Dec 2017, 6:30am

ianrobo wrote:
mjr wrote:
ianrobo wrote:
ah best not let anyone think drivers are to blame eh ?

Like amazing when they report car flips over, as if no human interaction and it is these form of words that HAVE to change

Exactly! These poor drivers are as much victims of errant cars and vans as any people that they hit. At least people outside the car might be able to run out of the way - the drivers were clearly trapped and helpless, at the mercy of their vehicles, as far as I can tell from the reports. :roll:


trying not to comment directly on the accident as such but speed had to be a part and the car can not be blamed for that. Does anyone have any figures as to how much speed contributes to deaths per year ?


Not quite that easy.

There was an argument that drivers who sped are also likely to exhibit other bad driving behaviour such as tail gating, failure to give way at junctions, close passes etc. There was also evidence that a driver with a speeding ticket was (IIRC) twice as likely to be involved in an injury accident in teh next 12 months than a driver without

ianrobo
Posts: 320
Joined: 12 Jan 2017, 9:52pm

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby ianrobo » 24 Jan 2018, 2:09pm

Cunobelin wrote:
ianrobo wrote:
mjr wrote:Exactly! These poor drivers are as much victims of errant cars and vans as any people that they hit. At least people outside the car might be able to run out of the way - the drivers were clearly trapped and helpless, at the mercy of their vehicles, as far as I can tell from the reports. :roll:


trying not to comment directly on the accident as such but speed had to be a part and the car can not be blamed for that. Does anyone have any figures as to how much speed contributes to deaths per year ?


Not quite that easy.

There was an argument that drivers who sped are also likely to exhibit other bad driving behaviour such as tail gating, failure to give way at junctions, close passes etc. There was also evidence that a driver with a speeding ticket was (IIRC) twice as likely to be involved in an injury accident in teh next 12 months than a driver without


and of course on top WMP have seen a direct correlation in bad driving, no insurance, tax etc ... now if only you could have a DB that manages all of these hmmmm

fastpedaller
Posts: 1318
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: Mandatory Helmets and hi-vis to be considered in government eview

Postby fastpedaller » 31 Jan 2018, 11:06pm

I had a conversation with a guy last week, which went :-
Guy "I wear a helmet, do you?"
Me 'No, I don't believe it would make it safer for me to wear one'
Guy "But the helmet will protect your head"
Me' There's no evidence to give me that belief, furthermore if you believe it will protect you, do you think a motorist would maybe think the same?'
Guy "yes of course he would"
Me ' so if motorist thinks you are protected, maybe he'll take a chance when he overtakes you (with helmet on) that he wouldn't take if you didn't have a helmet'

He contemplated for a few seconds, and conceded that I may have a point, and then stated that sometimes the government needs to protect the population :( :roll: