The utility cyclist wrote:
Also this never applies if you drive a motor, I asked police why they weren't giving advice to motorists to wear body armour and helmets and adorning their vehicles in 'visible' colours when one was killed in a crash, yet when that's a cyclist they go into full on Bulls@@@ discrimination mode and ply the whole helmet and hi-vis routine.
Does anyone force you to wear a seatbelt when riding a bike? Or force you to have an MOT?
That has the square root of zero to do with the matter at hand, motorists aren't coerced/forced to wear helmets or hi-vis, in any case an MOT is a test for a single point in time, many motorists drive around in illegal vehicles, people on bikes do so little harm (less than those on foot) that an MOT would be worse than useless but you can still get done for having an unroadworthy bike if you cause an incident due to that.
Or had you forgotten the Charlie Alliston case with his 'demon' bike where he was jailed for 18 months due to not having a front brake and his 10mph impact speed which is apparently warranted a manslaughter charge but was found guilty of causing bodily harm by “wanton and furious driving, a charge and sentence that is massively excessive compared to what motorists are subjected to for same/similar. Or had you forgotten about the poor sods in Rhyll, four cyclists who were mowed down by a motorist driving massively too fast for the conditions and with bald tyres who got off with a £180 fine and penalty points and the police lie about the speed and the fact that not having bald tyres wouldn't have made a difference, but whatever, your point is meaningless in the discussion, just actually highlights further the discrimination by the system!
Oh I forgot, paramedics state that the vast majority of incidents with motorvehicles that cause serious injury or death, the seatbelts cause massive injuries internally due to the forces involved, seat belts and helmets/hi-vis are not remotely the same thing.
Hi=vis wouldn't have saved this women because the killer wasn't looking properly, yet apparently she was still victim blamed by the justice system and the killer let off https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/ ... ly-footage
This is the worst outcome of the push for hi-vis and cyclists needing to protect themselves, utterly @@@@@@@ futile because @@@@@ like the driver and others don't look or see, they don't act and the system then puts the focus on what the cyclist should have done not the killer, truly sickening.
I'm done here, pointless responding further when there's some who really don't get it and are a part of the problem, and to the poster who said I was rude by telling you you don't get it, no, not rude, just pointing out a fact.