Sorry, but some "cyclists" are asking to get hit.

spen666

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

wizzlebanger wrote:

Just because you have a statistic to 'prove' that not many accidents have been directly linked to riding without lights or riding recklessly doesn't justify the action of doing so.

.

I didn't justify anything.

I merely said if you want to reduce cycling deaths and injuries it would be better to focus on driver behaviour because that is easily the main cause of the accidents.

what about this statistic?

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Kurako wrote:

Hah! I found it. MBC is Boris Johnson and I claim my reward :shock:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/drivin ... 442754.ece

[EDIT: Reading some of the others BoJo is either taking the p!ss or a complete buffoon. I'm not sure which]

He's extracting the urine, as am I. That's a pretty funny interview actually, I wish he'd do more interviewing and less mayoring.

Number of people killed by cyclists on a mobile or cyclists using a mobile last year?

Zero.

Number of people killed by drivers on phones?

Eleven.
...!

mybreakfastconsisted

Around 30 deaths on the roads each year are linked to mobile phone use, but the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) believes this is "just the tip of the iceberg" because so few drivers admit to using mobile phones when they cause crashes.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... crash.html

jeremyrundle

spen666 wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

[quote="
where is the source of your figure of 11 cyclists killed by drivers on phones? you know the one you posted earlier. Or are you just inventing figures? If you have a source, let us know it

BTW quoting a statement of opinion from a pressure group or interested party like in this quote is not fact

All you have to do is google cyclists killed by drivers using phone and you will see there are many links, all genuine, so I don't believe anyone is "making it up"

Anyway, I have SIX lights on my Saracen at the front, two Lenser P7 on full and FOUR three watt lights flashing, on the back I have FIVE RSP's and one on the helmet and today an old MORON in a Volvo still managed not to see me as I was on a roundabout and came within a yard of hitting me, blame drivers mostly as even with lights they can't see you.

He had a shock though, I also have TWO Airzounds, :twisted:

mybreakfastconsisted

jeremyrundle wrote:

spen666 wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

[quote="
where is the source of your figure of 11 cyclists killed by drivers on phones? you know the one you posted earlier. Or are you just inventing figures? If you have a source, let us know it

BTW quoting a statement of opinion from a pressure group or interested party like in this quote is not fact

All you have to do is google cyclists killed by drivers using phone and you will see there are many links, all genuine, so I don't believe anyone is "making it up"

Anyway, I have SIX lights on my Saracen at the front, two Lenser P7 on full and FOUR three watt lights flashing, on the back I have FIVE RSP's and one on the helmet and today an old MORON in a Volvo still managed not to see me as I was on a roundabout and came within a yard of hitting me, blame drivers mostly as even with lights they can't see you.

He had a shock though, I also have TWO Airzounds, :twisted:

Ironically, because of the shrill, hysterical accusations of dishonesty, I never said 11 cyclists, that's something the poster's plucked from thin air. For 2007:

Last year, there were 23 fatal accidents, as well as 64 serious-injury and 259 slight-injury accidents, involving illegal mobile phone use.


http://itn.co.uk/c3d871edb0dbfcdd25880938ee4d1a60.html

spen666

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Around 30 deaths on the roads each year are linked to mobile phone use, but the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) believes this is "just the tip of the iceberg" because so few drivers admit to using mobile phones when they cause crashes.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... crash.html

Yopu quoterd a figure as Fact

now you are seeking to use belief and opinion evidence to back up your random figure.

A blief that something is the tip of the iceberg is not the same as you stated - namely the "fact" of there being 11 deaths.

Where did this figure of 11 deaths come from?

you regularly harrang people to produce evidence, not opinion or hearsay, yet you refuse to provide the source of your allegations

spen666

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

jeremyrundle wrote:

spen666 wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

[quote="
where is the source of your figure of 11 cyclists killed by drivers on phones? you know the one you posted earlier. Or are you just inventing figures? If you have a source, let us know it

BTW quoting a statement of opinion from a pressure group or interested party like in this quote is not fact

All you have to do is google cyclists killed by drivers using phone and you will see there are many links, all genuine, so I don't believe anyone is "making it up"

Anyway, I have SIX lights on my Saracen at the front, two Lenser P7 on full and FOUR three watt lights flashing, on the back I have FIVE RSP's and one on the helmet and today an old MORON in a Volvo still managed not to see me as I was on a roundabout and came within a yard of hitting me, blame drivers mostly as even with lights they can't see you.

He had a shock though, I also have TWO Airzounds, :twisted:

Ironically, because of the shrill, hysterical accusations of dishonesty, I never said 11 cyclists, that's something the poster's plucked from thin air. For 2007:

Last year, there were 23 fatal accidents, as well as 64 serious-injury and 259 slight-injury accidents, involving illegal mobile phone use.


http://itn.co.uk/c3d871edb0dbfcdd25880938ee4d1a60.html

Now its increased to 23 from 11?

So what is the figure or is this all guestimate work and quoting of opinion. The reality seems that even you do not know how many people were killed despite stating it was 11., now 23 people killed

The ITN link you quote is no evidence to back you up. It quotes a figure from no identifiable source. Its no more accurate and reliable a source than me saying 500 people were killed

Wallace1492

Who cares how many it is. Use of mobiles obviously is a contributing factor in accidents and has more than likely led to the death of cyclists as well as pedestrians, and probably a lot more mororists.

Let's not bicker about how many there are, theer probably is not a comprehensive database to give the stats.

I am sure even Spen would agree that using a hand help mobile when driving or cycling can and does lead to accidents.

Personally, I have a high regard for my safety, and will do all in my power to get to where I am going alive and uninjured. Bright, high viz clothes, reflective bands, plenty of lights, anticipation of vehicle movements, treat them all like they have not seen me, careful filtering, stop at red lights.

What I cannot cover are the idiots on the road, the ones that undertake along bus lanes, the ones that see you, make eye comtact then pull out in front of you, the ones that overtake you then turn left right across you. The buses that do the same and pull into lay by's. The cars that go through red lights at 70 in a 30 zone (happened to me and i was literally 2 feet from death)

It is these ones that scare me. It is these ones that need to be stopped.

spen666

Wallace1492 wrote:

Who cares how many it is. Use of mobiles obviously is a contributing factor in accidents and has more than likely led to the death of cyclists as well as pedestrians, and probably a lot more mororists.

Let's not bicker about how many there are, theer probably is not a comprehensive database to give the stats.

I am sure even Spen would agree that using a hand help mobile when driving or cycling can and does lead to accidents.

Personally, I have a high regard for my safety, and will do all in my power to get to where I am going alive and uninjured. Bright, high viz clothes, reflective bands, plenty of lights, anticipation of vehicle movements, treat them all like they have not seen me, careful filtering, stop at red lights.

What I cannot cover are the idiots on the road, the ones that undertake along bus lanes, the ones that see you, make eye comtact then pull out in front of you, the ones that overtake you then turn left right across you. The buses that do the same and pull into lay by's. The cars that go through red lights at 70 in a 30 zone (happened to me and i was literally 2 feet from death)

It is these ones that scare me. It is these ones that need to be stopped.

There is little point in quoting "facts" when these are just random figures, not supported by anything.

If figures are to be wquoted to support an argument, they need to be identifiable as to their source.

You may be better served by directing your ire at the person quoting fiures that even he contradicts and is unable to provide a source for.

The figure of 11 was quoted in such a way as it was a factual figure.

All I am doing is seeking to identify the figure so I can understand the same and interpret it correctly.

EKE_38BPM

Spen, give up. You won't get any sense from MBC.

I have the results of an extensive survey, conducted by an organisation that I won't name, which conclusively prove that 104.987% of responders to the survey believe that MBC is an absolute idiot.

The results are here and provide interesting reading.

EKE_38BPM

jeremyrundle wrote:

Anyway, I have SIX lights on my Saracen at the front, two Lenser P7 on full and FOUR three watt lights flashing, on the back I have FIVE RSP's and one on the helmet and today an old MORON in a Volvo still managed not to see me as I was on a roundabout and came within a yard of hitting me, blame drivers mostly as even with lights they can't see you.

He had a shock though, I also have TWO Airzounds, :twisted:

Were you a Mod in a former life? Gotta see pics of your bike and all of the bits you've added to it.

Nigel Bennett

I think unlit cyclists get seen (far more often than they deserve!) because the animal instincts of drivers suddenly become aware of a sort of "Stealthy Movement" - is it a threat? They look harder and of course see that no, it's only some <suitable obscene phrase> cyclist without lights.

Per contra, like Jeremy Rundle has discovered, cover yourself in lights and you disappear against the background clutter of other lights from cars and such and drivers don't see you.

That's my theory, anyway.

(My next theory is about the brontosaruus...etc etc)

jeremyrundle

EKE_38BPM wrote:

jeremyrundle wrote:

Anyway, I have SIX lights on my Saracen at the front, two Lenser P7 on full and FOUR three watt lights flashing, on the back I have FIVE RSP's and one on the helmet and today an old MORON in a Volvo still managed not to see me as I was on a roundabout and came within a yard of hitting me, blame drivers mostly as even with lights they can't see you.

He had a shock though, I also have TWO Airzounds, :twisted:

Were you a Mod in a former life? Gotta see pics of your bike and all of the bits you've added to it.

Happy to oblige will post when I have time, as I have just spent (in the process of spending ) £1500 on parts to build another bike.

chuckcork

Not sure at times that cycling with lights on is that good an idea.

Tonights example, close to home, see a group of 4,what, 10-12 year olds up ahead? Wary that at this age they do stupid things, like jump in front of you because being hit by a 90kg cyclist+bike moving at 20mph is fun, gave them a wide berth. For my trouble had one of them flick a rubber band at my face. One of them was audibly disappointed his mate missed (not by much, I felt it go past)

If I had been riding lights off they wouldn't have seen me coming...

What to do with such little sh!ts is of course another question. Call the police, that will never show up (only for snowballs thrown and missed)? If the cops did show up, it would be to give them a slap on the wrist, to add to all the other slaps on wrists that have done nothing to stop them being little sh!ts? Go back and give them a hiding, then have the Police after you yourself for your own violence, and get a criminal record?

Knowing that they will live depressing lives as the bottom feeders they are is something, that they will struggle to ever get a job and will be useless spongers on society paid for out of my taxes is not of course encouraging...

evil_breakfast

chuckcork wrote:

Not sure at times that cycling with lights on is that good an idea.

Tonights example, close to home, see a group of 4,what, 10-12 year olds up ahead? Wary that at this age they do stupid things, like jump in front of you because being hit by a 90kg cyclist+bike moving at 20mph is fun, gave them a wide berth. For my trouble had one of them flick a rubber band at my face. One of them was audibly disappointed his mate missed (not by much, I felt it go past)

If I had been riding lights off they wouldn't have seen me coming...

What to do with such little sh!ts is of course another question. Call the police, that will never show up (only for snowballs thrown and missed)? If the cops did show up, it would be to give them a slap on the wrist, to add to all the other slaps on wrists that have done nothing to stop them being little sh!ts? Go back and give them a hiding, then have the Police after you yourself for your own violence, and get a criminal record?

Knowing that they will live depressing lives as the bottom feeders they are is something, that they will struggle to ever get a job and will be useless spongers on society paid for out of my taxes is not of course encouraging...

I work for the Jobcentre and handle new claims to benefit
On Wednesday i took a mobile call from a mid 20's male with "history"
Upon asking what the distracting background noise was he replied "i dunno, I'm on my bike"
*incredulous silence for several seconds*
"You're contacting us to make a new Jobseekers claim, and you're riding a bike?"
"Yeah, so what?"
Call mysteriously terminates.......

Even now, when i'm writing this and thinking about it, it's winding me up again.
How stupid can one person be??????

P_Tucker

chuckcork wrote:

Not sure at times that cycling with lights on is that good an idea.

Tonights example, close to home, see a group of 4,what, 10-12 year olds up ahead? Wary that at this age they do stupid things, like jump in front of you because being hit by a 90kg cyclist+bike moving at 20mph is fun, gave them a wide berth. For my trouble had one of them flick a rubber band at my face. One of them was audibly disappointed his mate missed (not by much, I felt it go past)

If I had been riding lights off they wouldn't have seen me coming...

What to do with such little sh!ts is of course another question. Call the police, that will never show up (only for snowballs thrown and missed)? If the cops did show up, it would be to give them a slap on the wrist, to add to all the other slaps on wrists that have done nothing to stop them being little sh!ts? Go back and give them a hiding, then have the Police after you yourself for your own violence, and get a criminal record?

Knowing that they will live depressing lives as the bottom feeders they are is something, that they will struggle to ever get a job and will be useless spongers on society paid for out of my taxes is not of course encouraging...

Dunno, if the choice is to get hit with a bloody elastic band vs a car, I know what I'd choose.

snailracer

evil_breakfast wrote:

...
I work for the Jobcentre and handle new claims to benefit
On Wednesday i took a mobile call from a mid 20's male with "history"
Upon asking what the distracting background noise was he replied "i dunno, I'm on my bike"
*incredulous silence for several seconds*
"You're contacting us to make a new Jobseekers claim, and you're riding a bike?"
"Yeah, so what?"
Call mysteriously terminates.......

Even now, when i'm writing this and thinking about it, it's winding me up again.
How stupid can one person be??????

Isn't that exactly what Norman Tebbit told the unemployed to do?

EKE_38BPM

snailracer wrote:

evil_breakfast wrote:

...
I work for the Jobcentre and handle new claims to benefit
On Wednesday i took a mobile call from a mid 20's male with "history"
Upon asking what the distracting background noise was he replied "i dunno, I'm on my bike"
*incredulous silence for several seconds*
"You're contacting us to make a new Jobseekers claim, and you're riding a bike?"
"Yeah, so what?"
Call mysteriously terminates.......

Even now, when i'm writing this and thinking about it, it's winding me up again.
How stupid can one person be??????

Isn't that exactly what Norman Tebbit told the unemployed to do?

Nothing wrong with using a bike to look for work.

When I was made redundant one summer I would go for long rides with my Bluetooth headset on so that if any agencies or jobs I had applied for called, I would be able to take the call. I didn't make calls whilst riding and when I took a call I would stop as soon as possible, but I did this to make sure I was ready to take calls from prospective employeers.

jeremyrundle

evil_breakfast wrote:

I work for the Jobcentre and handle new claims to benefit
On Wednesday i took a mobile call from a mid 20's male with "history"
Upon asking what the distracting background noise was he replied "i dunno, I'm on my bike"
*incredulous silence for several seconds*
"You're contacting us to make a new Jobseekers claim, and you're riding a bike?"
"Yeah, so what?"
Call mysteriously terminates.......

Even now, when i'm writing this and thinking about it, it's winding me up again.
How stupid can one person be??????[/quote]


I can only assume that your complaint is that he is cycling and using a phone therefore an idiot as would adriver be, I see nothing wrong with an unemployed person riding a bike.

shouldbeinbed

ChuckCork & Evil Breakfast you are both joking aren't you? Otherwise I've ridden through a terrible portal into Richard Littlejohn world.

evil_breakfast

shouldbeinbed wrote:

ChuckCork & Evil Breakfast you are both joking aren't you? Otherwise I've ridden through a terrible portal into Richard Littlejohn world.

I think the points been lost a little (perhaps in translation)
I know for a fact that the person wasn't using blue tooth, and it's not the 1st time i've observed people in that age group riding along speaking into a mobile.
I don't have a problem with his unemployment but i have an huge problem with someone having thier spatial awareness comprimised for a call that normally lasts about 20-30 mins.
Besides, ask yourself this. when YOU'RE cycling along, do you feel the need to apply for a bank loan or credit card?

jeremyrundle

I agree 100% with EB, my son, for the first time (he is 20) rode into town with me the other day, and right in front of me took his phone out to look at a text, he swerved three feet to the right, I do not care how old he is I told him exactly what I thought, after all I could have been driving at the time and hit him through no fault of mine.

cougie

I rode a borisbike thru town chatting on my iPhone handsfree - car drivers cam do it legally - cant I ? I did stop to make and terminate the call though - but I felt fine about it ? I didn't feel I was risking my safety at all.

elvisthelonerider

When I had hurt my shoulder and had my arm in a sling, I rode with one arm, but with care, since it limited my ability to sprint standing on the pedals, etc. (need both arms for that right unless you really practice...) I think the objection to a law banning cell phone use by cyclists as impacting one-armed riders is rooted in the fact that the use of the cell phone takes up one of the arms. That's as may be but using only one hand because that's all you got is different than taking stupid risks. I'd put cell phone us down as usually a stupid risk. Sure, some of us might ride a block carrying a cup of coffee in one hand or something -- I've done that once or twice, but on low traffic streets which are totally familiar to me, and keeping my speed down because if it. I admit it detracted marginally from my safety, but how much? Not as much as a phone call -- because I wasn't conversing with my coffee! The distracting feature of the cell phone isn't so much that it occupies one hand, it's that the call itself is distracting. This is why where hand held cell phone use is outlawed, but hands free devices allowed, drivers still hit people.

A cyclist is more impinged upon than a driver by having a hand occupied by a phone, but then what about takign a hand off your bars to put your sunglasses up or drink from a water bottle on a long road ride? Some things are generally stupid, others should be rider's discretion.. I'd say cell phone use is dumb. I don't even have mine turned on while riding or driving. So just because a law against riding with cell phones hasn't been passed, doesn't mean it's not unsafe in some - maybe many - instances.

This isn't to say the cyclist is "asking to get hit" -- but is certainly upping his chances of an accident, much like a cell phone using driver.

jeremyrundle

cougie wrote:

I rode a borisbike thru town chatting on my iPhone handsfree - car drivers cam do it legally - cant I ? I did stop to make and terminate the call though - but I felt fine about it ? I didn't feel I was risking my safety at all.

And the sooner they BAN hands free in cars which will happen the better, on bikes too.

For your information I owned a mobile phone before most even knew what they were, and have probably owned one longer than many here have been alive, I have NEVER EVER used one when driving, and like the previous person turn mine off, and I would never be foolish enough to cycle and use one.

Ans NO I have never eaten and driven nor drank from a can, shaved or anything else, one of my most precious belongings is my licence and I could not live with myself if my actions caused death to another and whilst I also consider the previous person foolish for carrying a coffee and cycling at least he can drop it in an amergency no loss would a cyclist drop a phone, I doubt it.

Philcho

I remember riding a whole commute home whilst on the phone, if you have good balance and are reasonably aware of your surroundings then it ain't too bad...I'd usually take the side streets so the roads aren't busy with cars. Also it's harder to keep up a decent pace when cycling with one hand whilst talking on the phone so i feel my threat to other people is minimal.

spen666

jeremyrundle wrote:

cougie wrote:

I rode a borisbike thru town chatting on my iPhone handsfree - car drivers cam do it legally - cant I ? I did stop to make and terminate the call though - but I felt fine about it ? I didn't feel I was risking my safety at all.

And the sooner they BAN hands free in cars which will happen the better, on bikes too.

For your information I owned a mobile phone before most even knew what they were, and have probably owned one longer than many here have been alive, I have NEVER EVER used one when driving, and like the previous person turn mine off, and I would never be foolish enough to cycle and use one.

Ans NO I have never eaten and driven nor drank from a can, shaved or anything else, one of my most precious belongings is my licence and I could not live with myself if my actions caused death to another and whilst I also consider the previous person foolish for carrying a coffee and cycling at least he can drop it in an amergency no loss would a cyclist drop a phone, I doubt it.

What's it like to be perfect? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

jeremyrundle

Very nice thank you at least I can look back with pride.

Or is it that I simply do what the law says..............

Did you watch "Police camera action" where a lorry driver murdered a 22 year old women when he crushed her car so badly he thought he had hit the car "in front of hers", he was using a mobile phone.

6 points, BAN THEM.

Do you have children, pray that never happens to them, no I am not perfect, I just care.

spen666

jeremyrundle wrote:

Very nice thank you at least I can look back with pride.

Or is it that I simply do what the law says..............

Did you watch "Police camera action" where a lorry driver murdered a 22 year old women when he crushed her car so badly he thought he had hit the car "in front of hers", he was using a mobile phone.

6 points, BAN THEM.

Do you have children, pray that never happens to them, no I am not perfect, I just care.

i think you are misleading yourself if you think it was MURDER.

Killing someone is not necessarily murder. Where was the malice aforethought?
Murder is described as

Murder is defined at Common Law as.
Where a person of sound mind and discretionunlawfullykills any reasonable creature in being and under the Queen's peace, with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm

In most motoring cases it is not possible to prove the necessary intent, hence why there are specific offences eg death by careless / dangerous driving

This is not to excuse the action, but to ensure people are punished appropriately

jeremyrundle

spen666 wrote:

jeremyrundle wrote:

Very nice thank you at least I can look back with pride.

Or is it that I simply do what the law says..............

Did you watch "Police camera action" where a lorry driver murdered a 22 year old women when he crushed her car so badly he thought he had hit the car "in front of hers", he was using a mobile phone.

6 points, BAN THEM.

Do you have children, pray that never happens to them, no I am not perfect, I just care.

i think you are misleading yourself if you think it was MURDER.

Killing someone is not necessarily murder. Where was the malice aforethought?
Murder is described as

Murder is defined at Common Law as.
Where a person of sound mind and discretionunlawfullykills any reasonable creature in being and under the Queen's peace, with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm

In most motoring cases it is not possible to prove the necessary intent, hence why there are specific offences eg death by careless / dangerous driving

This is not to excuse the action, but to ensure people are punished appropriately

NO I am NOT misleading myself and forget the legalities, if I killed another human because of MY selfish conceted actions in using a phone whilst driving I believe I have murdered someone, I am talking HUMANITY not the law. And I bet you dont have children, god help it if you lose someone close, then your feelings will change, I HAVE lost someone.

spen666

jeremyrundle wrote:

NO I am NOT misleading myself and forget the legalities, if I killed another human because of MY selfish conceted actions in using a phone whilst driving I believe I have murdered someone, I am talking HUMANITY not the law. And I bet you dont have children, god help it if you lose someone close, then your feelings will change, I HAVE lost someone.

Jeremy, you are misleading yourself.

murder has a clear definition and the example you gave does not fall into that definition.

It is irrelevant whether you have children or not ( Which I do?)

It is also irrelevant whether or not you have lost someone ( I have incidentally)

Why is it irrelevant? It is irrelevant because it does not change the definition of murder.

Murder need the intention to kill or cause grevious bodily har. The intention to use a mobile phone is not the same thing.

no amount of ignorant ranting that something is murder when it clearly isn't will change that fact. All you do is lose most people from supporting you when you make clearly false and inaccurate allegations as to the offence committed.

Remember of course, you were the one to choose to refer to the commission of a criminal offence as murder, when it clearly was not.

It is a criminal offence and one punishable by 14 years imprisonment to kill someone by driving dangerously, and no right thinking person is trying to excuse the driver's actions