Crosswords0 min ago
London cycle fatality
105 Answers
http://
This is not the first cycle fatality and it certainly won't be the last, but should the authorties now take this opportunity to tighten up on cyclists?
Perhaps they should take on board some of Bradley Wiggins suggestions ie the compulsory wearing of crash helmets, the fitting of lights, and making it illegal to listen to iPods and phones etc while riding?
This is not the first cycle fatality and it certainly won't be the last, but should the authorties now take this opportunity to tighten up on cyclists?
Perhaps they should take on board some of Bradley Wiggins suggestions ie the compulsory wearing of crash helmets, the fitting of lights, and making it illegal to listen to iPods and phones etc while riding?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
With the inadequate cycle-paths in this country, it's going to happen. And no, cycling should be free, let's not tax something with causes almost no impact to the roads.
If lights, helmet and ability to hear aren't already a a priority for someone on a bike, I can't see that making it a legal requirement will help all that much.
If lights, helmet and ability to hear aren't already a a priority for someone on a bike, I can't see that making it a legal requirement will help all that much.
Helmets are useless in most cyclist fatalities which are usually through crushing rather than impact crashes.
It is already compulsary to have lights and a reflector when cycling at night.
Listening on headphones is legal but not advisable. It depends also at what volume they are used at. I use headphones when walking and can hear traffic. How is wearing headphones at a low volume any different than listening to a radio in a car?
It is already compulsary to have lights and a reflector when cycling at night.
Listening on headphones is legal but not advisable. It depends also at what volume they are used at. I use headphones when walking and can hear traffic. How is wearing headphones at a low volume any different than listening to a radio in a car?
Anyone interested how you properly implement a cycle network can read up here: http://
Gromit, I agree with your points. I was hoping to just point out that it's rare to see a commuter without these things (I say commuter because there's no accounting for teenagers on BMXs!).
Gromit, I agree with your points. I was hoping to just point out that it's rare to see a commuter without these things (I say commuter because there's no accounting for teenagers on BMXs!).
Famous5
There is no obligation to use cycle lanes. They are not compulsary. And they are often useless, having been done retrospectively as an after thought.
http://
There is no obligation to use cycle lanes. They are not compulsary. And they are often useless, having been done retrospectively as an after thought.
http://
Here is a leaflet on safe cycling which I wrote and designed in my previous job.
http://
http://
// Undoubtably if people wore a helmet... ...didn't listen to iPods while cycling, there would be fewer fatalities //
I am doubting that.
There is no evidence that helmets work. There is evidence that car drivers drive closer to people with helmets than those that don't.
http://
I have never heard of one fatality attributed to the listening of headphones.
Anyone cycling at night without lights is an idiot.
I am doubting that.
There is no evidence that helmets work. There is evidence that car drivers drive closer to people with helmets than those that don't.
http://
I have never heard of one fatality attributed to the listening of headphones.
Anyone cycling at night without lights is an idiot.
I know that I am in the minority but I have never understood the view that cyclists should keep off of the pavements.
If a cyclist collided with a pedestrian it would be unfortunate but unlikely to be fatal or life threatening. But if a car hits a cyclist it is likely to result in serious injury. And when you see cyclists slowing down a line of cars who then weave about to overtake, everyone is at risk, even the oncoming cars from the other direction.
Also apart from in town centres there are very few pedestrians these days, so I think that cyclists should be encouraged to use pavements except in town centres.
I am not a cyclist, by the way.
If a cyclist collided with a pedestrian it would be unfortunate but unlikely to be fatal or life threatening. But if a car hits a cyclist it is likely to result in serious injury. And when you see cyclists slowing down a line of cars who then weave about to overtake, everyone is at risk, even the oncoming cars from the other direction.
Also apart from in town centres there are very few pedestrians these days, so I think that cyclists should be encouraged to use pavements except in town centres.
I am not a cyclist, by the way.
I disagree bev.
If a cyclist is not connfident on the roads they should take training, they should not take that as a reason to cycle on the pavement. Falalities of pedestrians by cyclists are very rare, but they do cause injuries and inconvenience. If a cyclist sees a junction where they do not feel safe, they should dismount and push their cycle past before continuing.
If a cyclist is not connfident on the roads they should take training, they should not take that as a reason to cycle on the pavement. Falalities of pedestrians by cyclists are very rare, but they do cause injuries and inconvenience. If a cyclist sees a junction where they do not feel safe, they should dismount and push their cycle past before continuing.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.