Why do we always blame the motorists?
Comments
-
Always Tyred wrote:Personaly, I think that people should be so afraid of the consequences of making an error when driving, thatthat they are afraid to drive sometuimes.
Ban seatbelts. And disc brakes. Make crossply tyres compulsory.Always Tyred wrote:After all, I'm a competent cyclist, but I'm afraid sometimes.
Ban you.0 -
Yes, because you are more likely to be correct than if you blame cyclists. Personally, I rarely make a mistake leading to a near miss. I recall a single incident from the last year and I held my hand up, literally, to apologise to the driver. Whereas, every single day multiple (but not all) motorists make pointless decisions which place me at risk. Yes, I'm perfectly comfortable blaming motorists.DonDaddyD wrote:So AT let me get this straight. It's OK to blame motorists then?
Are you saying that that attitude doesn't help lead to some of the bloody minded cycling that many have witnessed recently?
I'm just tired of some cyclists using cycling as a way of circumnavigating rules and general road safety and then called up upon it or in the face of endangering themselves standing firm to the belife that it was the motorists fault.
In truth I know psychologically why it happens. Much like I know that instinctively we fear what we don't understand and things that appear different to what we are used to. Like those what I'm saying is that the compulsion isn't OK.
Bad behaviour of a motorist will be vastly less safe than equally bad behaviour by a cyclist.
What bloody minded cycling behaviour are you referring to?
I don't have a phsychological fear and lack of understanding. I cycle and I drive.0 -
I don't know that I blame motorists for collisions. I do know that the greater burden of care should rest with the operator or the larger vehicle be it a bike or a car or a HGV. A car driver should be inconvenienced until it's safe to overtake a cyclist safely, for example. I would love for car drivers to have to legally stop on single track roads when faced with a cyclist coming the other way, as much as it could never happen.
I'm far from a car hater (my username is a corner on a race track!) and I don't drive like a granny either.0 -
Always Tyred wrote:
Yes, because you are more likely to be correct than if you blame cyclists.DonDaddyD wrote:So AT let me get this straight. It's OK to blame motorists then?
Are you saying that that attitude doesn't help lead to some of the bloody minded cycling that many have witnessed recently?
I'm just tired of some cyclists using cycling as a way of circumnavigating rules and general road safety and then called up upon it or in the face of endangering themselves standing firm to the belife that it was the motorists fault.
In truth I know psychologically why it happens. Much like I know that instinctively we fear what we don't understand and things that appear different to what we are used to. Like those what I'm saying is that the compulsion isn't OK.
So you are saying that accidents involving bicycles and motorists are usually the fault of the motorists.
You do realise that when you start attributing blame to one and not the other you subsequently shift the responsiblity to the person being blamed. So would you say that motorists are responsible for teh safety of cyclists?
I would argue that it is not OK for either party to cycle or drive badly.Bad behaviour of a motorist will be vastly less safe than equally bad behaviour by a cyclist.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Yes, because there is almost no way I can kill a driver when I'm cycling whereas its really fairly trivial to arrange for a driver to kill a cyclist.DonDaddyD wrote:So you are saying that accidents involving bicycles and motorists are usually the fault of the motorists.
You do realise that when you start attributing blame to one and not the other you subsequently shift the responsiblity to the person being blamed. So would you say that motorists are responsible for teh safety of cyclists?
I would argue that it is not OK for either party to cycle or drive badly.Bad behaviour of a motorist will be vastly less safe than equally bad behaviour by a cyclist.
I couldn't look out for their safety if I wanted to, but they can profoundly influence mine.
This is not to the exclusion of looking after my own safety.
We've had the discussion before, DDD, about the presumption of liability and at that time you ran the argument that this might cause cyclists to start to act irresposibly. I recall that the consensus at that time was that cyclists were unlikely to start hurling themselves into harm's way, since this would run contrary to human nature.0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:
So you are saying that accidents involving bicycles and motorists are usually the fault of the motorists.
You do realise that when you start attributing blame to one and not the other you subsequently shift the responsiblity to the person being blamed. So would you say that motorists are responsible for teh safety of cyclists?
I would argue that it is not OK for either party to cycle or drive badly.Bad behaviour of a motorist will be vastly less safe than equally bad behaviour by a cyclist.
Collateral damage: Being a wuckfit on a bike is more likely to get yourself killed. In a car, others are are also likely to be killed.
Anyway, it looks as if car drivers are mostly to blame, according to the police:snailracer wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study
"...police attributed responsibility for collisions more or less evenly between drivers and cyclists overall, but this was skewed by the fact that when child riders were involved their behaviour was named as a primary factor more than three-quarters of the time.
With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time."
And assigning "blame" to children is unrealistic, IMO. Motorists should know children haven't got a clue what they're doing.
My highlighting0 -
Always Tyred wrote:[....
Just as there is a greater duty of care (and training) imposed on HGV drivers, pilots and so forth.
....
Precisely why cyclists should be apologetic for feeling vunerable and bullied, and precisely why a cyclist should be treated equally, is quite beyond me.
i'm not sure there is a greater duty of care for an HGV driver than for a driver of a van or car.
They may have to do more to get a licence, but I'm not sure duty of care is any different
Do you really mean what you say in the last sentence that it is beyond you why cyclists should be treated equally?Want to know the Spen666 behind the posts?
Then read MY BLOG @ http://www.pebennett.com
Twittering @spen_6660 -
Always Tyred wrote:Yes, because there is almost no way I can kill a driver when I'm cycling whereas its really fairly trivial to arrange for a driver to kill a cyclist.
I couldn't look out for their safety if I wanted to, but they can profoundly influence mine.
This is not to the exclusion of looking after my own safety.
We've had the discussion before, DDD, about the presumption of liability and at that time you ran the argument that this might cause cyclists to start to act irresposibly. I recall that the consensus at that time was that cyclists were unlikely to start hurling themselves into harm's way, since this would run contrary to human nature.
The point I'm making (and I'm going back to it) is that the minute we start to shift blame from ourselves unto another we also shift responsiblity to uphold safety or conduct ourselves properly.
A subsequent result is an increase in careless behaviourFood Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
I think you are exploring some deep philosophical truths about human nature, DDD.DonDaddyD wrote:Always Tyred wrote:Yes, because there is almost no way I can kill a driver when I'm cycling whereas its really fairly trivial to arrange for a driver to kill a cyclist.
I couldn't look out for their safety if I wanted to, but they can profoundly influence mine.
This is not to the exclusion of looking after my own safety.
We've had the discussion before, DDD, about the presumption of liability and at that time you ran the argument that this might cause cyclists to start to act irresposibly. I recall that the consensus at that time was that cyclists were unlikely to start hurling themselves into harm's way, since this would run contrary to human nature.
The point I'm making (and I'm going back to it) is that the minute we start to shift blame from ourselves unto another we also shift responsiblity to uphold safety or conduct ourselves properly.
A subsequent result is an increase in careless behaviour
While you're busy pondering that, the police are happy to lump most of the blame on motorists:
"With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time."0 -
That's a fair point, and I certainly wouldn't propose teaching novice cyclists that when they have an accident, it won't be there fault.DonDaddyD wrote:The point I'm making (and I'm going back to it) is that the minute we start to shift blame from ourselves unto another we also shift responsiblity to uphold safety or conduct ourselves properly.
A subsequent result is an increase in careless behaviour
However, having experienced sharing the roads with an abundance of ignorant motorists for years, I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to increase the average driver's level of consequential thinking, by pointing out that if they drive into something, its probably their fault.
If drivers were generally picked on and unfairly abused by society already, I'd agree with you entirely. As it is, the main problem with driving is the sheer number of other drivers, not the behaviour of the 1% of traffic that they can actually overtake safely if they are willing to wait a few seconds.0 -
snailracer wrote:
I think you are exploring some deep philosophical truths about human nature, DDD.DonDaddyD wrote:Always Tyred wrote:Yes, because there is almost no way I can kill a driver when I'm cycling whereas its really fairly trivial to arrange for a driver to kill a cyclist.
I couldn't look out for their safety if I wanted to, but they can profoundly influence mine.
This is not to the exclusion of looking after my own safety.
We've had the discussion before, DDD, about the presumption of liability and at that time you ran the argument that this might cause cyclists to start to act irresposibly. I recall that the consensus at that time was that cyclists were unlikely to start hurling themselves into harm's way, since this would run contrary to human nature.
The point I'm making (and I'm going back to it) is that the minute we start to shift blame from ourselves unto another we also shift responsiblity to uphold safety or conduct ourselves properly.
A subsequent result is an increase in careless behaviour
While you're busy pondering that, the police are happy to lump most of the blame on motorists:
"With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time."
I think DDDs original point was, as a collective, there is a tendency for cyclists to automatically assume that the motorist was at fault whenever we hear news of an accident involving a car and a bicycle. During the course of this discussion, the focus seems to have shifted to individuals justifying their views that the duty of care always lies with the motorist first and foremost rather than on an equal basis between all road users. Perhaps the stats support that view, but that is not justification for failing to take responsibility for our own actions, whether it be an individual or a group.0 -
snailracer wrote:
"With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.[/i]"
So basically sometimes its the cyclists fault?Always Tyred wrote:However, having experienced sharing the roads with an abundance of ignorant motorists for years, I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to increase the average driver's level of consequential thinking, by pointing out that if they drive into something, its probably their fault.
Equally I don't think it's wrong or taboo to actually say
"The cyclist was at fault"If drivers were generally picked on and unfairly abused by society already, I'd agree with you entirely. As it is, the main problem with driving is the sheer number of other drivers, not the behaviour of the 1% of traffic that they can actually overtake safely if they are willing to wait a few seconds.
Doesn't move away from the fact that it isn't always the motorists fault and the compulsion to immediately blame the motorists is a negative one. Such an attitude, that cyclists can do no wrong on the road can breed reckless cycling and needless risk taking
"It's OK to RLJ because I can cause less harm than a vehicle" Is no reason to RLJ.
Or
"If I was a car I wouldn't do this". Isn't justification or a rationale that increases safety, it's shifting the responsiblity to ensure safety onto the shoulders of others..Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:snailracer wrote:
"With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.[/i]"
So basically sometimes its the cyclists fault?
The stat makes me feel even holier as a cyclist than I did before - I always thought the blame was more evenly spread.0 -
snailracer wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:snailracer wrote:
"With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.[/i]"
So basically sometimes its the cyclists fault?
The stat makes me feel even holier as a cyclist than I did before
Ironically kinda my point...Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
What's also disappointing is that all drivers are supposed to be trained. Well, if they're trained and still screw up 3x more than cyclists (who are not all trained) then that proves the training, and/or the maintenance of driving standards post-training, is sh1t.DonDaddyD wrote:snailracer wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:snailracer wrote:
"With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.[/i]"
So basically sometimes its the cyclists fault?
The stat makes me feel even holier as a cyclist than I did before - I always thought the blame was more evenly spread.
I'm happy for you. But you don't have a point now do you.
Why don't you ride through a junction when the light is red. Don't worry, it won't be your fault.
:roll:0 -
snailracer wrote:What's also disappointing is that all drivers are supposed to be trained. Well, if they're trained and still screw up 3x more than cyclists (who are not all trained) then that proves the training, or the maintenance of driving standards post-training, is sh1t.
I editted my post because I thought it was harsh and I don't wish you ill.
I think its too simplistic to say that training is rubbish. Equally if we actually measured how many cyclists infringe on road laws, practices, regulations, guidelines and compared the percentage of that to the percentage of motoring infringements, it would be interesting given that cyclists are untrained and some seem completely unaware of even the basic road laws. (All of us that don't have reflectors on our bikes would fail that one - I think, could be wrong).
When I learned to drive I became a more competent cyclist.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
I agree with the sentiment DDD puts up and I've often found myself in a bit of a minority on here questioning the actions of the cyclist, particularly when HGV's are posted about.
I'm assuming the accident stats posted are on road collisions. generally cyclists on the road come from the deeper end of the gene pool, I bet if the pondlife that I see weaving around the pavements and hopping onto the road without looking or caring what's already there were on the roads more often the stats would be a bit closer.0 -
IMO you are right in that cyclists probably infringe more rules/laws and are less knowledgable than motorists. However, given the stats, I can only deduce that driving is then simply too dangerous, even for (in comparison) better-trained and better-behaved motorists.DonDaddyD wrote:snailracer wrote:What's also disappointing is that all drivers are supposed to be trained. Well, if they're trained and still screw up 3x more than cyclists (who are not all trained) then that proves the training, or the maintenance of driving standards post-training, is sh1t.
I editted my post because I thought it was harsh and I don't wish you ill.
I think its too simplistic to say that training is rubbish. Equally if we actually measured how many cyclists infringe on road laws, practices, regulations, guidelines and compared the percentage of that to the percentage of motoring infringements, it would be interesting given that cyclists are untrained and some seem completely unaware of even the basic road laws. (All of us that don't have reflectors on our bikes would fail that one - I think, could be wrong).
When I learned to drive I became a more competent cyclist.0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:Why is it that when we read tragic news about a colision between a cyclist and motorists many always and immediately assume that it was the motorists fault and often perceive the cyclist as blameless?
Do you have a particular example in mind?
I haven't seen any evidence that drivers are always blamed, nor is there any evidence that cyclists generally hate drivers.
In cyclist/vehicle collisions it is usually the driver who is to blame but I've not seen anyone aurtomatically blame the driver every time, what example were you thinking of?0 -
As others have said previously, especially in an environment like this forum, it's only natural for the herd mentality to take over.
I'm not sure if I necessarily buy the argument that presuming liability on the car driver when an accident occurs will reduce cycling standards. It just isn't human nature to want to injure yourself (and if you enjoy that thing there are many internet sites and people who'll gladly cater for your needs!). In a way it's similar to the argument with helmets - some claiming that those that wear them inherently take more risks as they feel less vulnerable then those that choose not to wear one. I can say that thought has never crossed my mind! That little bit of polystyrene (with a tinsy bit of carbon fibre in my one!) on my head isn't going to do me much good if I end up under a car is it? All it will do is provide a bit more to sweep up after they've removed my body and bike.....
When I'm out riding I know that other road users aren't necessarily going to spot me, my fast riding style (I say this in comparison to about 75-80% of other cyclists on my routes) and sometimes aggressive filtering mean that I can be missed by some observations. Consequently I'm always vigilant whilst riding to try and avoid collisions. My recent near miss when I was heading towards Stockwell that Gaz captured on his camera might not have happened with another rider as they wouldn't have been approaching at such a speed, as such the driver in the van (assuming they spotted the high-vis coat) might not have anticipated me moving so quickly and presumed they could make it across safely before I got there.
I guess what I'm trying to get across is that your own safety is your own responsibility. When I'm out riding I can only expect other road users to follow the rules of the road and use a bit of common sense. As most of us use both a car and bike we already have a different perspective on things in these instances.0 -
mybreakfastconsisted wrote:I haven't seen any evidence that drivers are always blamed, nor is there any evidence that cyclists generally hate drivers.
Yup, that would be quite hard for me to do, I'd have to hate myself.0 -
snailracer wrote:IMO you are right in that cyclists probably infringe more rules/laws and are less knowledgable than motorists. However, given the stats, I can only deduce that driving is then simply too dangerous, even for (in comparison) better-trained and better-behaved motorists.
How do you combine 2 things and come up with 5, seriously I'm asking.
There are more motorists on the road than cyclists so their are going to be more examples of motoring infringements. If you take the percentage of motorists and identify their infringements and do the same for cyclists and then compare that would give you a more balanced view.mybreakfastconsisted wrote:I haven't seen any evidence that drivers are always blamed, nor is there any evidence that cyclists generally hate drivers.
Firstly, I never said that 'cyclists generally hate drivers'. Don't put words in my mouth.
Secondly, there is a page in this thread with an explanation of herd mentality, which begins to explain that cyclists do blame motorists.
Thirdly, on this site alone there are numerous threads of collisions with vehicles where people in said threads immediately blame the motorist without knowing the facts. Usually this is followed up with Spen666 pointing out that very fact. That very thing recently happened.
But too the point, just because a vehicle and cyclist collide, it doesn't automatically mean its the motorists fault irrespective of how likely.
Assuming that it is likely to be the motorists fault because you believe 'it usually is, is judgmental and could be argued as prejudice.
If we shift responsibility from ourselves onto someone else then we don't act responsible for that very thing. Fact.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
You and lostinthought mentioned hatred of motorists. I've not seen any evidence of this hatred and I don't know anyone who cycles who hates cars. Why would they hate cars?If you take the percentage of motorists and identify their infringements and do the same for cyclists and then compare that would give you a more balanced view.
I don't know if anyone's ever done this. 85% of drivers admit speeding and speeding kills twelve hundred people a year. A minority of cyclists ride on the pavement and cause, on average, half a person's death per year.
City Of London police regularly clamp down on cyclist rljers at the end of the month to boost their detected crime stats, whilst they ignore ASL infringements or drivers on mobiles. The cops have recently admitted they don't penalise ASL offenders because they think the 6 points is draconian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... red-lights
If you peruse motoring forums you see far more hatred of cyclists and unpleasant fantasies about running over and killing them than you see hatred of cars expressed by cyclists.0 -
mybreakfastconsisted wrote:You and lostinthought mentioned hatred of motorists. I've not seen any evidence of this hatred and I don't know anyone who cycles who hates cars. Why would they hate cars?
I've seen evidence on it on this board, but from a select few individuals. Hence why I said 'vehement car-haters'.
Personally I've got no problem with cars or their drivers, I might mutter some choice words to myself if they inconvenience me, but cyclists would get the same treatment. I'm equitable, me. I hate all of you equally. :P0
