Safe Speed Forums

Carlisle MP Eric Martlew tried to get compulsory helmets made law last year, but it got "Talked out". One of his arguements was some kids dont think it's hip to wear helmets, even though they know they should, so compulsory wearing would take away the stigma!
I wear one from choice, and my kids have been taught to wear them at all times, and think nothing of it.

As to the type of riding - once you get on the bike, it is often out of your hands - it's the other idiots who influence whether you have a spill, and if it is serious or not.

I once picked up my wife from work, a matter of a 1/2 mile from home but I was on MY way home at the time. She failed to put her seat belt on, so I reminded her. "We're only going 1/2 mile" she said. I pointed out the junction about 100 yards away, where 8 months before, a Taxi driver with no belt had been rear-ended as he waited to turn right, and suffered severe injuries.
We were going to turn right at the same junction.
She got the message.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Close, but no cigar. Oughtn't we, as a priority, to be removing the dangerous from the equation?
On reflection, not close at all.
Hey, what about incarcerating all the potential victims of crime so criminals don't have access to anyone to rob?
Compelling.

You cannot take your own experience, and expect it to fit in with everyone elses - my motorcycle helmet never made contact with anything else - ever, but I have seen lots that did.
I did a 360 degree forward somersault on a 200 cc bike, fractured my pelvis, dislocated my collarbone, and stretched the 4th and 5th vertabrae in my neck and STILL didnt make contact!

As to separating road users, in Bowness, and Kendal, we have railings along the pavement, separating the pedestrians from the traffic. In each location today, I was confronted by pedestrians walking on the road, outside the railings, in Kendal, trying to balance on the kerbstone, and falling off infron to the vehicle in front of me! You cant protect somebody who is moronic enough to be a danger to themselves, except by being alert, and having allowed time and distance to avoid them - and hopefully your average HGV driver will see a garish cyclist and avoid them.
I dont recall ever being cut up by an HGV while on my bike, only Rover drivers in flat caps, camper vans (on hire possibly?) and Volvo drivers! [/Sweeping generalisation]

Paul might confirm, but as I remember, the A9 in Scotland has a cycle path separated from the road, but is rough enough to pose a potential danger to a cyclist without adequate head gear, especially in winter, as they rarely get gritted.
Added:
Come to think of it, cyclists enjoy a good many paths simply because of the desire to separate them from other road users, and many of them are a lot more attractive than the road is in some locations!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

not sure this is my experience.
most of the ones i use or attempt to are:
- dirty
- poorly surfaced
- full of precipitous drops to drain covers
- parked on
- inhabited by people sticking their noses out trying to turn right
- not going in the direction you want
- slower and less convenient than using the road
- randomly stopping & starting
- prone to ending with sudden right angle bends into traffic
- generally a liability to cycle on

my greatest bug bear is the traffic calming chicanes/road narrowings that have a filter straight through for cyclists.. which is inevitably full of gravel & bits of tree.

Sorry, I could'nt find a suitable "irony" emoticon.

I just scratched at the surface of your list!
However my point was without the traffic, we'd still be squeezing riders and drivers on the same piece of tarmac.

Todays cycles have superior lights, brakes, gears, are light weight, fast and still liable to the odd driver or two driving too close.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I'm all for personal choice on this one. The only time I came off my bicycle was on a BMX track and I didn't bump me noggin - I just took all the skin of my arm instead!

I do agree with separating road users though. I was driving to work this morning, patently behind mr 44 tonner doing 40PMH and he came up behind a cyclist. On the road in question its hard enough to get past a cyclsist in a car, let alone in an LGV. So the cyclist was at risk, the LGV driver was frustrated and the queue of traffic behind the LGV couldn't see the cyclist...

All comes down to the same issue - train people in safe road use.

Incidentally, I have a Giro Switchblade, which you can convert between open and full face.

I don't necessarily agree with mandatory use for under 16s though - generally the quality of safety equipment for children is appauling. Having said that, I don't think that children should be cycling on the road anyway... Personally I'd prefer to see cyclists on the pavement.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Aargh no!

Cyclists on the pavement are extremely dangerous for pedestrians. Apart from small children, keep them on the road where they belong.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Cyclists are a hazard to pedestrians yes, but then heavy fast moving traffic is a hazard to cyclists... its an impossible situation...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

... more than a few pedestrians have been killed by a cyclist lately...

only inconsiderate fast moving traffic is a hazard to cyclists... COASTers should of course be fine.

I'm a commuter cyclist, about 4 miles per day, nothing more, other than the odd trip out three or four times per summer. I'd like to do more, but have other more pressing demands on my time. In the last three years I've taken my car to work about 5 times, grudgingly.

I always wear a helmet, and as has been said previously it is no discomfort or hardship, and the little peak on the front of mine is a positive boon when the sun's a bit low.

I think there is a need for good education, and TV advertising using role models to encourage helmet use, rather than to legislate for it. It would be a potential nightmare to enforce, I have visions of CSOs and traffic wardens on mountain bikes careering through busy town alleys and paths after a cyclist who failed to stop for them for not wearing a helmet.

The argument is a difficult one. On one hand, there is virtually no doubt it is safer to have a helmet on. However should we discourage cyclists, by enforcing helmet use? I don't think so.

I haven't dealt with a cyclist fatality for some time now, 10 years in fact. That was a particularly nasty one where the cyclist was knocked off by a SMIDSY motorist, and while lying on the ground nursing his broken leg, he was run over by a FTS drink driver. No helmet worn - would have made no difference in any case.

Three years earlier we had a tandem double fatal on the Kendal Bypass where an HGV collided with the tandem. He alleged that the elderly couple who were climbing a slight gradient at the time had swerved in front of him as he was passing. Cannot recall if helmets were worn on that occasion, but again would have made not a jot of difference.

And does anyone remember the Ambleside milk race fiasco!!! ...... ......

Recently we have had a bit of a run of bike accidents. I've dealt with 5 this year, 3 in the last month. Only 2 of the 5 have involved other vehicles. Of the three where only the cyclist was involved, they were all loss of control downhill on a public road at speed. On each occasion a helmet did help/would have helped. The one who had a helmet on was a semi professional cyclist coming down a steep hill out of Kendal towards Underbarrow. Apparently his dietary programme was not suitable for his exertions in the morning, and he suffered a minor blackout at high speed. His clothing was decent quality, and helped him to a small degree, but

OOOoooooooooooh!

AAAaaaaaaaaaaah!!

Shuddddderrrrrrrr...!!!

I still get goose bumps when I think how sore it looked!
His helmet was badly scraped, and protected his head and face to a large extent.

More recently, we are dealing with a chap who came off his bike coming downhill in Lindale village. He is still critical in hospital, and would definitely have benefitted from a helmet.
Also a couple of days ago, a young lass came off on Windermere road at speed, and cracked her head badly on the kerb corner. Her partner was cursing himself for having dragged her out for an evening run without helmets. He felt very responsible, and swore that he would be wearing them in future. There was no need to lecture him that you often only get the one chance to benefit from them .

Both collisions involving motor vehicles were driver fault. One elderly driver with poor vision. The other, also elderly hit handlebar with mirror while passing. Both minor injury only.

I think the point which needs to be got across is that helmets are not uncomfortable or inconvenient. £30 will buy some protection. I can see absolutely no reason not to wear them.

But the main problem for cyclists is their proximity to vehicles with massive inertia, combined with the ability of cyclists to filter which can make their presence unexpected.

The only way to progress is by the development of mutual respect, the respect and adoption of good driving practices, and the encouragement of selflessness.

Or complete segregation. I'd personally dislike this, but I can see it being the directive most likely to be adopted.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

great post....



i think total segregation would discourage use of a bike as mean of transport even more than compulsory helmet wearing.

you only have to rigidly follow a few cycle lanes to find out its quicker to stay on the road.. with total segregation i dread to think how much more often i'd be stationary at a toucan forced to wait for traffic that would have had to give way to me if i'd stuck to the road.

I would like to see a more sensible approach to cycling on the pavement.

It should be illegal in general, but there should be a defence to using the pavement if at that time it was safer than the road (eg busy road and empty or sparsely used pavement), AND the cyclist was giving precedence to pedestrians.

I have to say I'm really surprised to hear that. I'm a dedicated non-cyclist so I'll openly admit to having very little knowledge about it, but it seems to me that if that's a problem with dedicated cycle paths (as opposed to cycle lanes marked on existing roads) it's likely to be a layout issue. I mean, I can see why cyclists would avoid using a dedicated cycle path if using the road is faster, and if I ever get onto a bicycle (at gunpoint probably ) I'd do the same, but doesn't it suggest that the cycle path is in the wrong place?

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I was nursing a lacerated leg after a cyclist squeezed past me on the pavement a couple of weeks ago. I was walking past gas works on the pavement and he tried to get by me. I did not even hear him coming up behind me - no bell or shout to warn of approach

Ruined my trousers - and it hurt! Damnmit - I needed stitches !

I may give people the needle whna at work but I sure as heck do not like being on the receiving end!

Only good thing about it - my wife - Wildy - waited on me hand and foot and made a fuss of me.

But I ride for pleasure and clock up a lot of miles on my bike. I have a Mountain Bike, a road bike and a RACER

Wear a helmet by choice - saw too much as a junior one way and another - and my helmet use is second nature - as is choosign to wera something in which I am easily noticed on the road.

I would not dream of using the bike paths around here - I do not have any death wishes! But I will admit there is a certain fascination with certain passes and hilly bits both here and in Europe

Do not find cyling around here particularly hazardous - but have no expererience of a daily commute as it's not very practical for me to do so Have ridden my bike in and around St Andrews and Manchester as a student and around Paris and places when on holiday - and it's a question of applying common sense and COAST principles just the same for safety.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

exactly.... design by committee

On my way to work there is a good cycle path which is effectively the pavement on one side of the road as it is a shared area. What I see is:

- few cyclists use the cycle path anyway.
- those that do are all travelling in the same direction as the adjacent carriageway. Cyclists travelling the other way use the road.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.