MP thinks cyclists should get out the way?

adskis

PBlakeney wrote:

thecycleclinic wrote:

The problem is cycling is not really dangerous and it is not known the circumtances of the cyclists death that this MP is refering to so it is is entirely possible the MP is making generalisations based on assumptions. Assumption makes an ass out of the assumer.

When you assume you make an ass out of you and me.
Ass - u - me. Don't blame me, but that's the saying.

I think you'll find the correct use of the word should be "Urapedant"

As in U-R-A-pedant!!!

Just to be correct about these things.

pblakeney

Adskis wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

thecycleclinic wrote:

The problem is cycling is not really dangerous and it is not known the circumtances of the cyclists death that this MP is refering to so it is is entirely possible the MP is making generalisations based on assumptions. Assumption makes an ass out of the assumer.

When you assume you make an ass out of you and me.
Ass - u - me. Don't blame me, but that's the saying.

I think you'll find the correct use of the word should be "Urapedant"

As in U-R-A-pedant!!!

Just to be correct about these things.

Is a dictionary on your Christmas list?

kingstongraham

PBlakeney wrote:

Is a dictionary on your Christmas list?

Not for me since I heard they were taking the word "gullible" out of it.

awavey

Steve-XcT wrote:

awavey wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

1. Looking at the extended quote above, he seems to be saying cyclists have rights, but are responsible for decisions about their personal safety. Why do so many cyclists have a problem with this.

because its victim blaming, and the victim he is blaming just died, the roads arent unsafe because cyclists are using them "unwisely", in the same way the pavements arent unsafe because a pedestrian might walk on one and get stabbed by hoody gang members on mopeds, or a woman walking home at night gets raped

Victim blaming is usually a proxy for removing common sense.
I have no idea if this cyclist was a victim or not.... I have however seen lot of cyclists doing their best to become victims.

It's become popular to blame the toothpick manufacturer for not explicitly saying they shouldn't be stabbed into your eyeball.. and when they protest that this is common sense and chimps use toothpicks without stabbing them into their eyes they are accused of victim blaming.

I dont think that analogy holds,and it isnt a very useful way to discuss what isnt that complicated an issue really,the MP whether he thinks he was quoted out of context (yeah right) or not said “Sometimes cyclists must use their judgement and try and stick to routes that have cycle lanes on them. Some roads have been made and improved to ensure cycle access is better and the roads are wider, but we have to acknowledge that it’s dangerous for cyclists on certain roads and that they may need to consider when and where they cycle. "

the only bit of that I agree with is yes we should acknowledge that it is dangerous for cyclists on certain roads, but the solution is to fix the thing causing the danger, not pretend its the cyclists problem by being there.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

Wasn't Itchen Bridge modified for cyclists while Royston was leader of the Southampton Council, where this very death happened this week?

Another cyclist was hit this morning near Brownlow Hill, the Echo article has someone claiming the cyclist died.

The driver who drove through a give way junction without slowing, fatally hitting a cyclist around midday on December 2nd last year, was given a suspended sentence this week instead of time behind bars.

It's hard not to have lost faith in the justice system this week, if you are a cyclist in Southampton.

milemuncher1

NitrousOxide wrote:

Wasn't Itchen Bridge modified for cyclists while Royston was leader of the Southampton Council, where this very death happened this week?

Another cyclist was hit this morning near Brownlow Hill, the Echo article has someone claiming the cyclist died.

The driver who drove through a give way junction without slowing, fatally hitting a cyclist around midday on December 2nd last year, was given a suspended sentence this week instead of time behind bars.

It's hard not to have lost faith in the justice system this week, if you are a cyclist in Southampton.

The guy hit in Lordshill has died. That’s two in two days. I’ve lived, and ridden in London, for years, I’ve lived, and ridden in Southampton for a couple of years, You see incidents and accidents in London, and it’s usually easy to work out what probably happened. I have never seen such incredible ( usually beyond piss poor) driving behaviour, in my life, than round Southampton. It’s like someone has (in)bred a zoo full of monkeys, then lobotomised them, then given them cars, and set them loose. I’m not kidding, some of the things I see round here, on a daily basis, need to be seen to be believed.

wolfsbane2k

Police have confirmed the lordshill cyclist has died.
Rest in peace.

I wonder what royston will say now

N0bodyOfTheGoat

I wonder if these two deaths this week will help make Southampton reconsider their shockingly quick dismissal of Operation Close Pass? I certainly hope so!

mamba80

Slowbike wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

1. Looking at the extended quote above, he seems to be saying cyclists have rights, but are responsible for decisions about their personal safety. Why do so many cyclists have a problem with this.

Absolutely - of course we are responsible for the risks we take that affect our own safety. If he'd said that in general, without referring to this particular accident where a cyclist was knocked off his bike in a 30 limit - then I'd agree with him. What he's inferring is that it isn't safe to ride the roads around there and he said cyclists should stick to places where there is cycle infrastructure - infrastructure he's refused to fund. I appreciate council funds are limited and we can't have everything right now - but instead of sticking up for the cyclists rights to ride there - he blamed the cyclist for the lorry hitting him.

mrfpb wrote:

2. Many people on these forums quote the "cycling in the wet and/or cold makes you a badass" line. Well not compared to a guy who, though unarmed, took on a nutter with a gun shooting innocent people. Respect is due, whatever his tweets say.

Having never been in a situation like that, and never intend to be - I have no idea what it took to disarm the nutter - or what his alternatives were. He can have respect for that particular incident - but that doesn't mean he has cart blanche to spout out any nonsense ... respect is earned and can be lost far easier...

Regardless of the particular context of this MPs remarks, he has a general point, i dont cycle on the A30 DC, its fcuking dangerous, i also stopped doing the A388/A386 loop around Plymouth... because i dont want to die... being right but dead is no consolation, roads are just not Policed anymore, courts hand out paltry punishments..
why is there such a boom in VR/Smart trainers? one reason is whether we like it or not, cycling on the highway is becoming more dangerous.

As for councils not spending on cycling infrastructure? Cornwall council in 2010 got 400m in regional support funding, in 2 years time that amount will be a big fat ZERO.
Cut social care and re engineer a roundabout for cyclists......mmmmmmm dont think so.

pblakeney

mamba80 wrote:

Regardless of the particular context of this MPs remarks, he has a general point, i dont cycle on the A30 DC, its fcuking dangerous, i also stopped doing the A388/A386 loop around Plymouth... because i dont want to die... being right but dead is no consolation, roads are just not Policed anymore, courts hand out paltry punishments..
why is there such a boom in VR/Smart trainers? one reason is whether we like it or not, cycling on the highway is becoming more dangerous.

As for councils not spending on cycling infrastructure? Cornwall council in 2010 got 400m in regional support funding, in 2 years time that amount will be a big fat ZERO.
Cut social care and re engineer a roundabout for cyclists......mmmmmmm dont think so.

All of the above may be 100% accurate.
There is a partial solution in there though.

awavey

mamba80 wrote:

Regardless of the particular context of this MPs remarks, he has a general point, i dont cycle on the A30 DC, its fcuking dangerous, i also stopped doing the A388/A386 loop around Plymouth... because i dont want to die... being right but dead is no consolation, roads are just not Policed anymore, courts hand out paltry punishments..
why is there such a boom in VR/Smart trainers? one reason is whether we like it or not, cycling on the highway is becoming more dangerous.

As for councils not spending on cycling infrastructure? Cornwall council in 2010 got 400m in regional support funding, in 2 years time that amount will be a big fat ZERO.
Cut social care and re engineer a roundabout for cyclists......mmmmmmm dont think so.

he has a point that some roads are dangerous to cycle on yes absolutely, and yes there are roads I absolutely exclude from my routes because of that, but thats not a solution or a fix, what happens when all the roads are that dangerous and all cyclists make that choice not to ride on them, we get stuck as one of those only ride a bike after driving to a forest lot ?

you dont have to spend money to start to fix this, step 1 is just accept the problem that the road isnt the dangerous thing, its the people in the cars,the vans,the trucks,the buses and how they drive on it how they use it, that makes it dangerous for everyone not just cyclists.

milemuncher1

A couple of years ago, I checked out the ‘cycle routes’ on the A34, between Newbury and Oxford. Right, okay, smashing. WTAF, how is it a good idea to ride a bike on that bit of the A34. Having a truck pass you at 59mph, with a couple of centimetres clearance isn’t funny. That’s the sort of ‘joined up thinking’ that goes into cycle infrastructure in this country. I’m never going to give up, and just use a trainer / turbo / stationary bike, but I’d rather not mix it with traffic on a fast A road either. ‘Statistics’ fall down badly on this point as well. “There’s been more cyclist deaths on rural back roads, than on the A34”, well that’s because no one’s stupid enough to deliberately ride a bicycle on the A34, on a regular basis. If you’re sample size is the square root of bugger all, it’s no surprise there aren’t many / any cyclist deaths there is it? If that’s the basis for this genius piece of civil engineering / planning, then I think we’re all screwed.

mroli

Milemuncher1 wrote:

A couple of years ago, I checked out the ‘cycle routes’ on the A34, between Newbury and Oxford.

Unless there are dedicated lanes separated by a barrier from the road, I cannot believe anyone would ride a bike on the a34. It's pretty shocking in a car let alone on a bike

milemuncher1

mroli wrote:

Milemuncher1 wrote:

A couple of years ago, I checked out the ‘cycle routes’ on the A34, between Newbury and Oxford.

Unless there are dedicated lanes separated by a barrier from the road, I cannot believe anyone would ride a bike on the a34. It's pretty shocking in a car let alone on a bike

They are marked in green on maps, there are little pics of bikes painted on the road, I’ve ridden on them, they are a nightmare. The only saving grace, is that drivers really aren’t expecting to see a bike there, so they tend to notice you more.

Ben6899

Getting back to the "disarming a gun-toting nutter on a submarine" story... I read that he was hardly involved, but took the credit anyway.

pblakeney

Ben6899 wrote:

Getting back to the "disarming a gun-toting nutter on a submarine" story... I read that he was hardly involved, but took the credit anyway.

Maybe he assisted by getting out of the way.

milemuncher1

PBlakeney wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

Getting back to the "disarming a gun-toting nutter on a submarine" story... I read that he was hardly involved, but took the credit anyway.

Maybe he assisted by getting out of the way.

He grabbed the barrel of the gun, and shouted at the guy to calm down ( or words to that effect) and whilst he was doing so a couple of the crew rugby tackled the guy with the rifle to the ground, whilst Royston kept the barrel pointed at the roof. He did get an award for it, so he didn’t do “nothing”.

Ben6899

Milemuncher1 wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

Getting back to the "disarming a gun-toting nutter on a submarine" story... I read that he was hardly involved, but took the credit anyway.

Maybe he assisted by getting out of the way.

He grabbed the barrel of the gun, and shouted at the guy to calm down ( or words to that effect) and whilst he was doing so a couple of the crew rugby tackled the guy with the rifle to the ground, whilst Royston kept the barrel pointed at the roof. He did get an award for it, so he didn’t do “nothing”.

He's still a c***.