Found this article in "Telgraph" a fortnight ago and rescued it before consigning the papers to the recycle bin
IG has been busy posting some basics in this section recently and i gether he has some other points of potential cycling danger. As you must guess - we are family and in contact personal touch and I am aware that IG is very coincerned over a rise in cyclist deaths and even Durham saw a slight rise in these apparently - hence his concerns.
This article appeared in the "Telegraph" about three weeks or so ago...
The opening paragraphs appear to back up Paul's figures in that road deaths were decreasing year on year before the scammers took over and given the increased volume of traffic - despite the apperently high figures if you were to take the actual percentages - deaths have apparently started to increase since 1994....
.
Quote:
New Department for Transport figures for 2004 suggest that the Government is continuing to reduce the number of people being killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads.
The targets, set in 2000 in a review of road safety called Tomorrow's Roads: Safer for Everyone, aim for a 40 per cent cut by 2010 (50 per cent among children), and a 10 per cent reduction in slight casualty rates.
But as the previous 10 years' figures show, these percentage reductions were happening anyway. Since 1994, the number of cars on the road has increased by 5 million (a 25 per cent increase), and the number of motorbikes (over 125cc) has more than doubled; we drive 15 per cent more vehicle miles. Oh yes, and there's been a 3.4 per cent increase in population. It seems that we're all driving really well.
Yes .... I think this is right despite Wildy's rant over her past two commutes to work over on PH where she met the numpties from hell ...who had scant regard for anyone else on the road apparently... If you want to see a rant about drivers - check out that one
.. my wild feline-like wife in a strop is ... just ....
.
Telegraph wrote:
However, the one group that has experienced a statistical blip is cyclists. The 134 killed in 2004 is, at 18 per cent, the biggest rise within the general improvement in the fatality rates for 10 years.
It does not say the circumstances... but we noted too many without lights in the rural areas where we live and if they behave thus in congested areas - I can see a part of the problem - along with an element of complacency and a ridiculously appalling knowlede of the Highway Code and basic manners on the road by our numptiest of all road users whether on two wheels or fur wheels.
Telegraph wrote:
Unsurprisingly, most occur in London, which reflects population size and traffic flows. It is difficult to generalise though, given that in car-centred Milton Keynes, there were just five serious bicycle casualties; while in cycle-mad Oxford, there were 43.
Of course, the more people, the denser the traffic, .the more hazards faced by all road users. It depends as well on road layout. London as I recall from driving and being driven there, has more people intent on getting to where they feel an state of urgency to arrive there, more pinch points and danger zones than Milton Keynes which was more or less purpose buiilt despite the rather dire and uninspiring architecture which do remind more of utilitarian old Eastern Block than quaint old England...
As for Oxford and Cambridge .... probably more student cyclists per head of population - and where there is an abundance of people doing anything - there is a greater danger of an accident - which brings us back to John Franklin, page 51 of his book and ........C O A S T
Telegraph wrote:
Few statistics exist on the blood alcohol levels of cyclists but, suffice it to say, cyclists seem to be becoming more reckless.
In soapbox I noted a thread on binge drinking.... people in the UK seem to see drinking as "something a bit naughty" and all behave like kids in a sweet shop for some reason. Cyclists.. drivers... pedestrians... I see few exceptions overall and I know what my colleagues down in A&E put up with in reality. IG, Ian and Stephen could no doubt give anecdotes of "drunks they have met and who have thrown up over their uniforms..." The legal limit relates to cyclists just as much as it does to drivers but few are breathalysed unless they are unfortunate enough to be involved in an accident. As with drivers, some test positive and some do not - but unlike drivers, cyclists do not get hauled before the courts and any conviction would not doubt fall and be mixed with other drunk and disorderly convictions.
Telegraph wrote:
Unscientifically, I admit, I recently stood in central London, in the 7pm gloom, and counted 134 cyclists without lights in under 28 minutes. Why 134? Coincidentally, this is the last published figure for the number of prosecutions of cyclists riding without lights in 2002 - in the whole of the UK. Back in 1990, there were 1,578 prosecutions brought for lighting and reflector offences.
About same drops in drink drive tests and why bad driving goes as unchecked as bad cycling.
Cyclists really do need to use lights. I find my lights help me see ahead and help all other road users to see me. I wear a fluorescent strip or a high viz vest dependent upon situation I think I will be riding in and find I never have too many problems - despite the odd occasional numpty.
Telegraph wrote:
In 2004, cycling campaigners CTC told the House of Commons Transport Committee: "It's important to understand why these offences occur… even red-light jumping is often justified on safety grounds - at a busy junction, it is safer to move into clear space." Try that one yourself next time.
Hmmm - and this body are first to criticise when a driver sasy they have to accelerate out of danger?
Red light jumping is nevere justified as it is
never ever safe for a driver, let alone a slower moving cyclist opr pedestrian and I fail to see why being "invisible" can ever be justified I actually like to see the road ahead of me and my bike lights show this and any potholes and grids by virtue of their beam and even the cheapest lights can help you see them!
Telegraph wrote:
Maybe a policeman with a notebook and half an hour to spare might be able to reduce the cycling fatality rates better than all the audit-driven government PR campaign managers put together.
For sure... for all road safety issues..... for all of us...
Police spot bad drivers, dangerous drivers, defective cars.... and cyclists who need a wake up call regarding personal safety and responsibility to themselves and others.
In short - the article gives the same message as John Franklin in CycleCraft and all the regulars on this board...
Namely: road safety requires education, skill development, personal responsiblity, constant evaluation with a view to learn and improve and a thorough understanding of the Highway Code and C O A S T!