reohn2 wrote:mattheus wrote:I think peetee is making a distinction between your overall approach (in a rush, or safety first, etc) and
the quick, snap judgements we make in many situations (e.g. will that bike get to me before I pull out?). "Decisions" a better word?
The argument FOR visibility is that it can make the decisions more accurate, cos you can see people better.
The counter-argument is that most crashes are caused by impatience etc, not a lack of correct information.
I agree,I was merely pointing out that risk by drivers is unbelievable at times.
I'm either getting more nervous in my old age(not unknown)or a significant increasing element of UK drivers are taking more dangerous risks which becomes more apparent in threat of injury personally when cycling.There doesn't seem to be an appreciation of the dangers involved with such actions ,that or that significant element simply don't care
I agree but would add that IMO vehicle development is partly to blame. The dynamics of the modern car means they corner, brake and accelerate far more effectively. This translates to a potentially safer environment for the occupants but also the potential for greater velocity anywhere and often to the detriment physically, mentally or practically to other road users.
By this I mean the accident statistics don’t tell the whole story. Having just returned to cycling after 10 years out it is very apparent to me just how frequently excessive speed is causing issues. I have blacklisted some local roads and wonder just what this near constant fear of and occasional happening of close misses may have on my mental health.