Daft lady on bike.

[rendelharris]

ed_pete Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rendelharris Wrote:

>

> > Can we please stop calling cyclists dangerous

> when

> > they add no danger to the environment at all;

> the

> > only thing that makes the roads dangerous and

> > unhealthy is motor vehicles.

>

> I'm a daily commuter cyclist and I would never say

> that. There are plenty of nutters amongst all

> road users and pedestrians that cause danger to

> others. How about the guy who knocked down and

> killed a woman at Old Street ?

> https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/

> 18/cyclist-charlie-alliston-jailed-for-18-months-o

> ver-death-of-pedestrian

Fair point (though although Alliston is a prick I think that case was extremely dubious) - I meant lawfully used.

[dirac]

@rendel

All good points and taken on board; I do indeed wear a helmet. I just get tired of the high jacking of practically every thread to do with cycling with the old "you lot all jump red lights and don't wear helmets etc" and the hissing you hear from members of the public chastising people they don't know for something that doesn't affect them.

FWIW I don't think motor bike helmets are rubbish because they are fundamentally and structurally different to a bicycle helmet that offer considerable more protection than the small bit of foam on the top of my head. Perhaps I should get a full face helmet - but then my peripheral vision may be impaired?

[rendelharris]

dirac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @rendel

> All good points and taken on board; I do indeed

> wear a helmet. I just get tired of the high

> jacking of practically every thread to do with

> cycling with the old "you lot all jump red lights

> and don't wear helmets etc" and the hissing you

> hear from members of the public chastising people

> they don't know for something that doesn't affect

> them.

>

> FWIW I don't think motor bike helmets are rubbish

> because they are fundamentally and structurally

> different to a bicycle helmet that offer

> considerable more protection than the small bit of

> foam on the top of my head. Perhaps I should get

> a full face helmet?

I entirely agree - unless and until cycling helmets are compulsory (something I don't feel is desirable simply due to the fact that it would cause numbers to fall) ain't nobody's business but the rider's, however apparently some of the good people on here feel it's fine to criticise cyclists for doing things that are perfectly legal!

Of course motorcycle helmets are far better, and cycle helmets are absolutely useless in high-speed impacts, but they still have their place for impacts at lower speeds and they do protect the face a bit - 33% reduction in facial injury with normal helmets. I do wear a fullface one for downhill forest trails on the MTB, but a bit overkill for the streets - plus I'd look like (even more of a) twat.

[dirac]

I agree! I have seen quite a few people with full face helment in in and about london and when I asked them why they gave pretty much the same answer as above. Anyway, Sorry for the diversion off topic!

[se22cat]

Some of you might enjoy the exploits and shared frustrations of South London's finest, Cyclegaz.

https://www.youtube.com/user/CycleGaz

[Earl Aelfheah]

There is some debate about whether helmets are actually a good thing or not https://road.cc/content/news/111258-chris-boardman-helmets-not-even-top-10-things-keep-cycling-safe

[Earl Aelfheah]

tomskip Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've often wondered why there are such strict laws

> around the safety of children in cars and yet

> there doesn't seem to be the equivalent for

> children being transported on cycles.

Because cars travel at high speed.

[rendelharris]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is some debate about whether helmets are

> actually a good thing or not

> https://road.cc/content/news/111258-chris-boardman

> -helmets-not-even-top-10-things-keep-cycling-safe

And it's a very valid argument - but it's not one about the efficacy of helmets, rather than they've become an overblown issue.

The thing is, Boardman (who I think is fantastic) likens telling cyclists to wear helmets instead of addressing making roads safer is like telling someone being shot at to wear body armour instead of stopping the shooter. A fair point. But until the roads are made safer, the "shooter" is still there, so it makes sense to carry on wearing the armour until you're not being shot at, no?

[alex_b]

rendelharris Wrote:

> I would be delighted if the

> police would focus more on stopping this sort of

> behaviour and fining those who do it - such

> cyclists (who are a minority) just give the

> anti-cycling mob a free stick with which to beat

> us (it's rare to see a light turn red in these

> parts without three or four cars running it of

> course, but that's another matter).

I'm in two minds about this. Of course I too hate cyclists jumping lights and agree with your general point. However in terms of police priorities it has to be massively below cars jumping red lights (at pretty much every light change at every major junction in East Dulwich at least one car goes through on red), the constant speeding (most cars around here) and the use of mobile phones while driving (again I see at least five instances a day around here). I have some sympathy with the view that using police resources to target cyclists while rampant criminality from motorists is lightly policed is vindictive and only occurs because of an anti-cycling bias.

[rendelharris]

alex_b I entirely agree with you, I should have expressed myself better: I meant I would be delighted if the police had the resources to address it as well as all the motorist transgressions you mention, not that I'd like to see them specifically focus on it at the expense of more serious issues such as speeding etc.

[malumbu]

There is a sign at work in our back entrance yard "caution cyclists"

Not sure if this is a "be careful cyclists" (as service vehicles use the road, including classically the Royal Mail Driver on his mobile"

Or "be careful of bikes, pedestrians" for those who share the yard with us.

Or "watch out for monster raving cyclists with axes who will cut you up and eat you alive"

I prefer the latter, equating cyclists with axe murderers and cannibals, I think I will get a t-shirt printed. Here's a start

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/565905509406183467/

[malumbu]

Anyway to return to the subject I happily cycled my young daughter a couple of times a week to the child mnder without either of us wearing a helmet. I took care, avoided the worst routes etc. Am I a monster? Virtually nobody wore helmets in those days which weren't that long ago. I'm on a cover of a LCC mag in the 90s at the first critical mass ride - 100s of cyclists, no helmets.

So views change and you may see me in one now. And if I was cycling with a young daughter on a carrier I may do same. It amuses me seeing kiddies on scooters with helmets. But then that is the decision of the parents, and I am seeing this from a personal perspective.

So on this point, and my lack of helmet wearing in my first 40 years of cycling - go to the Netherlands and you'll hardly see a helmet there.

Here's a great article with some good pictures from that progressive country

https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/cycling-with-babies-and-toddlers/

So why don't those of you who get so angry go over there and shout abuse at the Dutch?

[Sue]

malumbu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is a sign at work in our back entrance yard

> "caution cyclists"

>

> Not sure if this is a "be careful cyclists" (as

> service vehicles use the road, including

> classically the Royal Mail Driver on his mobile"

>

> Or "be careful of bikes, pedestrians" for those

> who share the yard with us.

>

> Or "watch out for monster raving cyclists with

> axes who will cut you up and eat you alive"

>

Maybe it's an instruction to the police :))

https://www.gov.uk/caution-warning-penalty

[Asset]

Can we close this thread? It's just turned into the usual, predictable, boring, uninformed, scare-mongering, small-minded anti-cyclist/pro-cyclist debate.

[malumbu]

Are you accusing me of cycling drunk, stealing from shops whilst in possession of a Class B drug Sue? How perceptive, you've got me worried.

Asset, it can be a bit of fun, yes it's done its time but just to correct you "small minded anti cyclist vs broad minded but somewhat superior cyclists"

[apbremer]

Let me finish this as I started it.

I am a mature cautious cyclist. I have come off my bike twice in the past year, once due to a huge hidden pothole and once when a lorry driver (very apologetic) did not see me. Each time I was blameless and luckily received only a few bumps and bruises. Any child perched up with me would probably have been killed.

Bicycles are flimsy, vulnerable machines and inherently unstable. Common sense tells us that this dangerous practice should be banned.

And don't get me started on the lunatics riding at night with dark clothes and no lights......

[Sue]

Asset Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Can we close this thread? It's just turned into

> the usual, predictable, boring, uninformed,

> scare-mongering, small-minded

> anti-cyclist/pro-cyclist debate.

It's the lounge!

If you don't like the thread, nobody is forcing you to read it!

Or do you have plans to set yourself up as the forum censor? :)

[Sue]

malumbu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you accusing me of cycling drunk, stealing

> from shops whilst in possession of a Class B drug

> Sue? How perceptive, you've got me worried.

>

> Asset, it can be a bit of fun, yes it's done its

> time but just to correct you "small minded anti

> cyclist vs broad minded but somewhat superior

> cyclists"

:)) :)) :))

[rendelharris]

You appear to be a cyclist-hating cyclist, an uncommon breed but I've encountered them before.

Firstly, why are you venting your ire against parents carrying their children on bicycles, which according to you is highly dangerous, instead of the authorities and motor vehicle drivers who are making the roads so highly dangerous? Secondly, do you have any evidence or statistics as to the dangers represented by carrying children on bikes? I can't find any - which would in itself suggest that there aren't hordes of children being killed and injured every year by being carried on bikes. It would be very interesting to know how many children are KSI when being carried on bikes as opposed to when being driven in cars.

99.99% of parents I see carrying/towing children on bikes do so extremely responsibly, use proper approved equipment (despite your nonsense about "homemade plastic carts"), and take extreme care. To be fair to drivers, 99.99% of them are very cautious and respectful around bicycles carrying children as well.

You've basically got a massive bee in your bonnet (enough to make almost identical posts two years running!) about a non-issue that you have made up in your own head, for heaven knows what reasons. You are the first person I can ever recall calling for carrying children on bikes to be banned. I would suggest that your outrage would be more profitably directed at the real dangers children face on the road, whether on bikes, in cars or walking, the overwhelming majority of which are caused by motor vehicles and incompetent town planning.

[Asset]

It's just boring Sue, been gone over many times before on many threads. And you're right I don't need to read it but that's why I hardly engage with this forum anymore. I occasionally pop in to see whats happening and get some info on my area and behold, it's this...

[Asset]

I expect more from the lounge :-)

[hellosailor]

When I see someone cycling on a busy road with their child perching on the cross bars or getting a backy my mind boggles. It?s especially bizarre when only the child or only the parent is wearing a helmet yet the other isn?t, what?s the thought process? However good a cyclist you are you can never trust that a bad driver or even a good driver who is distracted by something doesn?t hit you. I have a friend whose 4 year old son ended up seriously injured in hospital because they were cycling on a road with the boy perched in front of the dad on his bike and they were knocked off by a car. I can?t even begin to imagine what they said by way of explanation to the paramedics or to their child who presumably assumed he was safe because his parents were saying it was ok. No parent is perfect but it blows my mind when I see this. Another friend works in Kings A&E and says they genuinely despair when kids get brought in because an adult has risked this.

Edited to add : this isn?t an anti cyclist thing, I?d think the same if people drove around with kids sitting on their car bonnet or boot. I?m 40, I can?t drive, I haven?t got a pro car / anti cyclist agenda. It just seems nuts.

[rendelharris]

Does your A&E friend also genuinely despair that parents have risked their kids walking on the street when children are brought in having been knocked over as pedestrians? Or when they come in injured from an accident caused by them riding in a car? Because those are both more common scenarios. The obvious extension is to say that nobody should ever cycle because some idiot might knock them off.

[hellosailor]

Can you really not see the difference between someone cycling with a helmet sitting on the seat and someone perching a kid on the handlebars with no helmet?

You genuinely feel that putting a child in the back seat of a car with a seat belt on or walking down a pavement with them is the same in terms of the risk you?ve exposed them to?

If my kids were hit by a car walking down the pavement I would feel horrified but not that I?d done anything that was a mistake but if my child was injured because I balanced them on my bike with no helmet on I?d feel absolutely stricken with guilt.

So no, In answer to your question my friend has never mentioned despairing of the parents decision when a child has been injured by a car mounting the pavement or while strapped into the seat of a car because it?s sinply incomparable.

Presumably you think proper safety seats for children to ride on a bike with an adult are for snowflakes and a waste of cash when the kid could just balance and grip onto part of the frame? I genuinely can?t get my head round this viewpoint.

[rendelharris]

I said nothing of the sort.The entire debate of this thread has been about whether it's acceptable to carry children on bikes using proper equipment.Of course it's not acceptable to do so without it - nobody has suggested otherwise, so not quite sure why you're introducing the topic.