Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Jun 06, 2026 11:48

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 20:56 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
Yep, read it in MCN this week.
Apparently, m/bikes are 3.5 times more likely to kill pedestrians than other vehicles.
This is according to infor from various groups concerned in accident reduction.
Me....I think it is yet more of the "pick on a minority" means of reducing accidents. First 4wd's, now bikes. What next ?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 21:04 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
I am not normally a conspiracy theorist but I am beginning to think that there is a secret society in which its members are committed to getting something banned. The more public activities you manage to get banned the higher you rank in the society.

It does not matter what it is…..you just need to get it banned.


just a thought.


There was some Butt Ugly Bitch MP trying to get lads mags banned from the shelves a few months back. I recon her issues went way beyond a few tits and ass in a magazine.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 21:09 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Lets cut congestion and emissions! Yeah!

How'll we do it?!

Dunno, perhaps we should ban the least polluting/congesting vehicles on the road!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 22:38 
Offline
Former Police Officer
Former Police Officer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 00:27
Posts: 351
I sat an read the transcript of that session of the Transport Select commitee the evening it was published (yes the whole way through)

To be fair to MCN Steven Plowden did indeed say those things, however his comments weren't given credibility by anyone else and I especially liked Steven Ladyboy's comments in response to a direct question regarding plowdens comments

Chairman " Does the minister have any comments regarding Mr Plowden...."

Ladyboy " Yes He's talking Cobblers"

_________________
Former Military Police Officer and accident investigator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: !
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 01:53 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
I have just [likewise] read through the transport committee report.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmtran/uc264-ii/uc26402.htm
As you will read, a very biased and blinkered committee.
It seems, for once, that the Minister is the only one with any intelligence there.
The other are just idiots.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 22:32 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 19:19
Posts: 1050
I think that actually means peds may be 3.5 times less likely to look out for a bike when crossing the road.

the most common problem is filtering stationary cars and finding peds crossing between them.

you can predice some of them (busses, logical crossing points etc) but its not always easy


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 11:47 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 20:06
Posts: 77
Gizmo wrote:
I am not normally a conspiracy theorist but I am beginning to think that there is a secret society in which its members are committed to getting something banned. The more public activities you manage to get banned the higher you rank in the society.

It does not matter what it is…..you just need to get it banned.


just a thought.


This Is Very problable.

In the general aviation community there is a story of a professional protester who lead a campaign over several years to close a small local airfield due to noise complaints (I've got the article somewhere) . In the end the airfield owner got feed up and sold the land to developers.

The gentleman in question has since moved next to another small airfield and has started another campaign there. :cry:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 21:59 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 23:18
Posts: 28
Location: Essex
(Slightly off-topic, but) Hampshire Ian's comments remind me of someone who moved next door to a a supported housing project and promptly started trying to get it shut down. The Trust's solicitor remarked "Oh yes, Mrs *******, I've come up against her before. I think she's suffering from CCD - Compulsive Campaigning Disorder!"

Maybe the "I don't like it, so I shall make it my business to stop it" brigade would be halted if we had a few more judges like Lord Denning MR - if you read his judgement in Miller v Jackson (where a newcomer to a village built a house next door to the cricket ground and tried to get the cricket stopped using the tort of nuisance) what he's really saying to the incomers is "Yes, the general principle is that it shall be no defence that the Plaintiff came to the nuisance, but lots of people - me included - like village cricket. I'm Master of the Rolls. What I say goes. Now s*d off and get a life you miserable apology for a human being."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 22:01 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:27
Posts: 361
jomukuk wrote:
Yep, read it in MCN this week.

There is the flaw in the argument.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: !
PostPosted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 21:54 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 15:50
Posts: 249
jomukuk wrote:
I have just [likewise] read through the transport committee report.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmtran/uc264-ii/uc26402.htm
As you will read, a very biased and blinkered committee.
It seems, for once, that the Minister is the only one with any intelligence there.
The other are just idiots.


You only have to look at many of the charactors who have the time or inclination to go on these irritating bloody committees to know that there should be a committee for the prvention of committees, then the same tits will go on it and hopefully up their own rectum.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 18:38 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 14:47
Posts: 1659
Location: A Dark Desert Highway
Icandoit wrote:
jomukuk wrote:
Yep, read it in MCN this week.

There is the flaw in the argument.



I've said it before and will say it again, MCN is little more than a comic. There is always some story or another in there about how bikers are to be harpooned if they ride on a Wednesday morning, or how new euro legislation will mean that new motorbikes will be limited to 6hp and stablisers. They seem to latch on to one line of text that they have taken out of context then whip up a Waily Maily style frenzy, if you ask me anyway...


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 19:31 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
jomukuk wrote:
Yep, read it in MCN this week.
Apparently, m/bikes are 3.5 times more likely to kill pedestrians than other vehicles.
This is according to infor from various groups concerned in accident reduction.
Me....I think it is yet more of the "pick on a minority" means of reducing accidents. First 4wd's, now bikes. What next ?


Why not cycles in town centres --now before we get :furious: :furious: cyclists ,let me explain - it's not the genuine pedaholic who is the culprit, but those I term cycle yobs ,sort that use the pavement as a way round a traffic jam , and use the pavement (why ,defeats me when there is an empty road ).

Bikers - most considerate lot out (got to say that ,else daughter no2 and granddaughter of 12 will nag me to bits)--both to me as a car driver and as a pedestrian.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 16:52 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
The 3.5 times figure is intresting, as alone it completely undermines the claims of another bunch of sanctimonious whiners that 4x4's are "kiddy killers", which is based on the simplistic fact that they're a little bit bigger than cars.

I'm not surprised though, only on friday a moped being driven by a valentino wannabe attempted an overtake as I braked for a zebra crossing. Obviously to anyone with 2+ active brain cells there's a reason why I might brake at a zebra, it only occurred to this chap though as he braked, swerved and nearly lost it avoiding the pedestrian.

Am I correct in thinking you can run around on a moped without ever taking a full test? Bigger bikes are better ridden, 95+% of foolish bikers are on mopeds/small bikes. I'd like to see how much of that 3.5 times is small bikes vs. big.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 19:13 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
hairyben wrote:

Am I correct in thinking you can run around on a moped without ever taking a full test? Bigger bikes are better ridden, 95+% of foolish bikers are on mopeds/small bikes. I'd like to see how much of that 3.5 times is small bikes vs. big.


Looking at my licence which is car etc, I see I am entitled (after passing CBT) to provisional entitlement on class A (Motorcycles up to 25kW(33bhp) and a power to weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kW/kg. Motorcycle combination with a power to weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kW/kg A 17
Any size motorcycle with or without a sidecar )
.No mention on the paper copy as to any time limitation .,but the last bit baffles me ,as I thought you needed to pass a test to drive larger bikes.
Mind you ,it also tells me that I can drive a road roller and tracked vehicles on a provisional
:o

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 21:30 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 02:01
Posts: 20
Location: Kent
you can ride up to 50cc on a car license with no L plates. Most of the worst two wheel capers I see in central london tend to be 50cc scoots. I do approximately 15,000 miles a year commuting in & out of London a year and it never ceases to amaze me the risks these idiots take. Yesterday afternoon, a guy on a small scooter, decides that I'm not filtering fast enough for his liking, so he cuts to the right to overtake the car from the right hand side...this with a barrier in the middle - inevitably not enough room - collides with the barrier, rebounds off the car and ends up on his arse. Did I mention he had no gloves or protective gear...? :o His hands looked like they'd been mashed with a meat tenderiser... :shock:

_________________
www.knobblies.org
the trail bike club


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.015s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]