I dont ride on pavements unless they are also a shared path and even then I still use the road more often than not. But I am just so sick of one of the most common winges I hear about cyclists is that there a danger when cycling on pavements.
A while ago I saw some figures on pedestrians killed on pavements in London and over a three year period I think one pedestrian was killed by a cyclist and something like 100 were killed by motorised vehicles.
I never kept where this information came from and I'm kind of annoyed with myself for that. Since then I've done Google searches without luck. If anybody knows what I am talking about and can point me to the paper and/or a reference with information on how these figures were obtained I'd be really greatful.
I think these figures would just be a really good come back without justifying or not pavement cycling, but I want the source info just in case I'm remembering something from some strange dream.
Kevin
Pedestrains killed on pavements
I remember seeing some figures for a five year period for London and I think the total number of pedestrians killed on the pavement by motor vehicles was 17.
Check out http://www.gmcc.org.uk/main/wp-content/uploads/issue5_200702poth.pdf - it has a couple of tables for pedestrian fatalities involving cycles and motor vehicles between 1998 and 2005.
Will
Check out http://www.gmcc.org.uk/main/wp-content/uploads/issue5_200702poth.pdf - it has a couple of tables for pedestrian fatalities involving cycles and motor vehicles between 1998 and 2005.
Will
-
Philip Benstead
- Posts: 2097
- Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
- Location: Victoria , London
Will wrote:I remember seeing some figures for a five year period for London and I think the total number of pedestrians killed on the pavement by motor vehicles was 17.
Check out http://www.gmcc.org.uk/main/wp-content/uploads/issue5_200702poth.pdf - it has a couple of tables for pedestrian fatalities involving cycles and motor vehicles between 1998 and 2005.
Will
I did produce a table of ped/cyclist accidents for all of London, the woest/best place to get hit on the pavement was westminster, but that was from none cyclist.
If you want to get by a cyclist you need to go to Bromley for that to happen
Philip Benstead | Life Member Former CTC Councillor/Trustee
Organizing events and representing cyclists' in southeast since 1988
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic
Organizing events and representing cyclists' in southeast since 1988
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic
-
gerry36
cant remember where i saw them, but i do remember noticing that in %terms of killed by vehicles while on pavements, cyclits caused 2%. Roughly the same as the figure for people who regularly cycle.
What i am aware of , is that the fear of being hit by cyclists is much higher. I'd be interested to see by age group, where people place this risk category. I've worked in pesticides, pharmaceuticals and genetic altered crops and i know all three of them get rated as very very dangerous by the general public, whereas the statistics rate them as very very safe. What i have learnt in those industries, is that the perception of risk is very very real and has a powerful effect on people lives.
What i am aware of , is that the fear of being hit by cyclists is much higher. I'd be interested to see by age group, where people place this risk category. I've worked in pesticides, pharmaceuticals and genetic altered crops and i know all three of them get rated as very very dangerous by the general public, whereas the statistics rate them as very very safe. What i have learnt in those industries, is that the perception of risk is very very real and has a powerful effect on people lives.
I hate snow.
-
Basil W Bloke
- Posts: 191
- Joined: 4 Apr 2007, 9:37pm
Ladyman gave a reply to the question in the Commons a couple of years ago. I can't seem to find the original Hansard at the moment, but here'smention of it.
Note that there is a difference in numbers of pedestrians killed when hit by a cyclist and those hit by a cyclist while on the pavement.
Note that there is a difference in numbers of pedestrians killed when hit by a cyclist and those hit by a cyclist while on the pavement.
We are normal and we want our freedom
We are normal and we dig Bert Weedon
We are normal and we dig Bert Weedon
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36740
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
I'm a bit bemused by this thread but I am not sure that the statistical comparisons being bandied about (remembered or forgotten) clarify much.
I would expect that the vast majority of pedestrians killed on the footway by motor vehicles have the terrible misfortune to be hit by a vehicle running out of control when on the carriageway and mounting the footway. There will, of course, be some hit by vehicles accessing premises across the footway and there will be some crushed during parking manoeuvres. I doubt if many cars are habitually driven along the footway in preference to the carriageway.
I would expect that pedestrains killed on the footway in collisions with cyclists are hit by honorary pedestrians.
The casualties are all equally dead.
I would expect that the vast majority of pedestrians killed on the footway by motor vehicles have the terrible misfortune to be hit by a vehicle running out of control when on the carriageway and mounting the footway. There will, of course, be some hit by vehicles accessing premises across the footway and there will be some crushed during parking manoeuvres. I doubt if many cars are habitually driven along the footway in preference to the carriageway.
I would expect that pedestrains killed on the footway in collisions with cyclists are hit by honorary pedestrians.
The casualties are all equally dead.
I think that the point of this thread, and I may be wrong, is to counter some anti-cyclist claptrap. I.e. you all ride on the pavement, jump red lights etc. Just useful to know that as ever cyclists are way more likely to be the victim of a serious accident rather than the cause.
"Marriage is a wonderful invention; but then again so is the bicycle puncture repair kit." - Billy Connolly
Thanks fatboy. That's pretty much it.
For example on the few occaisons I have dealt with the local county councillor on transport, each letter or email I get from him always counters anything I say with a comment about how bad cyclists are riding on the pavements and ignoring traffic lights, and it takes an exchange of 3 or 4 e-mails before he starts responding to the issues that have been raised. He always claims to be safety focussed and if this was the case then he would be forcing the different motoring organizations to become part of a stop at red campaign, or a keep to the speed limit campaign somehow in the same way he has achieved this for the local oxford cycling campaigning group. Could you imagine what would happen if this is how he treated every driver who wrote to make a comment/suggestion/complaint about the road system if rather than discussing the issue at hand he berated the motorist for the failings of all the local motorists.
Or for example when a cyclist was recently killed in central oxford. All the comments in the local papers where vitriolic about cyclists ignoring the law and what a danger they are. This is typical treatment of an outgroup where a different standard is set compared to that of the dominant car driving public.
Kevin
For example on the few occaisons I have dealt with the local county councillor on transport, each letter or email I get from him always counters anything I say with a comment about how bad cyclists are riding on the pavements and ignoring traffic lights, and it takes an exchange of 3 or 4 e-mails before he starts responding to the issues that have been raised. He always claims to be safety focussed and if this was the case then he would be forcing the different motoring organizations to become part of a stop at red campaign, or a keep to the speed limit campaign somehow in the same way he has achieved this for the local oxford cycling campaigning group. Could you imagine what would happen if this is how he treated every driver who wrote to make a comment/suggestion/complaint about the road system if rather than discussing the issue at hand he berated the motorist for the failings of all the local motorists.
Or for example when a cyclist was recently killed in central oxford. All the comments in the local papers where vitriolic about cyclists ignoring the law and what a danger they are. This is typical treatment of an outgroup where a different standard is set compared to that of the dominant car driving public.
Kevin
-
hubgearfreak
- Posts: 8212
- Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm
essexman wrote: I've worked in pesticides, pharmaceuticals and genetic altered crops and i know all three of them get rated as very very dangerous by the general public, whereas the statistics rate them as very very safe.
did these statistics look at the synergistic effects of all man made compounds, or simply fail to prove a problem with each one, separately ?
That's some really useful data from DfT courtesy of Will and GMCC website. To save everyone else crunching the numbers, to put it in a nutshell:
In 8 years, a total of 22 pedestrians were killed when collided by a cyclist, but most of these were in the road, only 5 were somewhere a pedestrian might expect to be safe from traffic danger, i.e. the footway, verge or central refuge, or on a pedestrian crossing (including the zig-zag marked approaches and exits). So a pedestrian gets killed in a place of safety by a cyclist, about once in two years.
Compared to that, on average, 126 pedestrians are killed in a place of safety, by motorists every year.
To put it another way, as a careful pedestrian, who does not step into the road without looking first and uses pedestrian crossings where possible, you are 200 times more likely to be killed nevertheless by a motor vehicle than by a wayward cyclist.
In 8 years, a total of 22 pedestrians were killed when collided by a cyclist, but most of these were in the road, only 5 were somewhere a pedestrian might expect to be safe from traffic danger, i.e. the footway, verge or central refuge, or on a pedestrian crossing (including the zig-zag marked approaches and exits). So a pedestrian gets killed in a place of safety by a cyclist, about once in two years.
Compared to that, on average, 126 pedestrians are killed in a place of safety, by motorists every year.
To put it another way, as a careful pedestrian, who does not step into the road without looking first and uses pedestrian crossings where possible, you are 200 times more likely to be killed nevertheless by a motor vehicle than by a wayward cyclist.
Chris Juden
One lady owner, never raced or jumped.
One lady owner, never raced or jumped.
I couldn't be a***d to to do the working out.
I must admit though that I do not think that all this anti car stuff does cyclists any favours and it alienates so many people.
Cyclists cannot continue to condone bad cycling and illegal practices however minor they may seem to cyclists and yet rant on about motorists.
Yes the outcome is disadvantgous to the cyclist between a motor vehicle and bike.
I personally do not think that there is as big a problem as some would like us to believe but then that is my opinion and probably will court yet more diatribe against me, but hey thats life.
I must admit though that I do not think that all this anti car stuff does cyclists any favours and it alienates so many people.
Cyclists cannot continue to condone bad cycling and illegal practices however minor they may seem to cyclists and yet rant on about motorists.
Yes the outcome is disadvantgous to the cyclist between a motor vehicle and bike.
I personally do not think that there is as big a problem as some would like us to believe but then that is my opinion and probably will court yet more diatribe against me, but hey thats life.