Ghost Bikes

Sam Salt said:

This made interesting reading.

166.70.46.216174465.aspOpen ↗

Sam Salt

This is the web site

ghostbike.orgghostbike.orgOpen ↗

Sam Salt

Sam Salt said:

This made interesting reading.

166.70.46.216174465.aspOpen ↗

Sam Salt

Sorry No.

The main message most people would take from GhostBike is
that cycling is a very dangerous activity that will get you
killed and that cyclists should be protected from cars by
providing separated routes so that any sane person would
avoid cycling on roads.

Yes, cars do end up killing some cyclists, they kill a lot
of pedestrians and motor vehicle occupants as well, they are
noisy and polluting and obesity producing, they make our
cities unpleasant and give our kids respiratory disease.

I ride to work, with motor traffic and am not frightened. To
be honest I find it quite invigorating. I do not want to be
viewed as a nutter or a victim. I do not want to be forced
into protective measures. If some idiot hits me I want him
prosecuted for his bad driving, not let off because I
shouldn't of put myself in danger.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
home.in.tum.deoe quotefixOpen ↗

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 00:03:25 +0100, "AndyMorris"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Sam Salt said:

This made interesting reading.

166.70.46.216174Open ↗
465.asp

Sam Salt

Sorry No.

The main message most people would take from GhostBike is
that cycling is a very dangerous activity that will get you
killed and that cyclists should be protected from cars by
providing separated routes so that any sane person would
avoid cycling on roads.

Yes, cars do end up killing some cyclists, they kill a
lot of pedestrians and motor vehicle occupants as well,
they are noisy and polluting and obesity producing,
they make our cities unpleasant and give our kids
respiratory disease.

I ride to work, with motor traffic and am not frightened.
To be honest I find it quite invigorating. I do not want to
be viewed as a nutter or a victim. I do not want to be
forced into protective measures. If some idiot hits me I
want him prosecuted for his bad driving, not let off
because I shouldn't of put myself in danger.

Then again, I'd still like motor vehicle drivers to take
more care around me than many of them currently do.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

Gawnsoft said:

Then again, I'd still like motor vehicle drivers to take
more care around me than many of them currently do.

Of course, I'm just fed up of people assuming that I'm
taking an almost irresposable risk in cycling on the road.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
home.in.tum.deoe quotefixOpen ↗

AndyMorris said:

Sam Salt said:

This made interesting reading.

166.70.46.216174465.aspOpen ↗

Sam Salt

Sorry No.

The main message most people would take from GhostBike is
that cycling is a very dangerous activity that will get
you killed and that cyclists should be protected from cars
by providing separated routes so that any sane person
would avoid cycling on roads.

Yes, cars do end up killing some cyclists, they kill a lot
of pedestrians and motor vehicle occupants as well, they
are noisy and polluting and obesity producing, they make
our cities unpleasant and give our kids respiratory
disease.

I ride to work, with motor traffic and am not frightened.
To be honest I find it quite invigorating. I do not want
to be viewed as a nutter or a victim. I do not want to be
forced into protective measures. If some idiot hits me I
want him prosecuted for his bad driving, not let off
because I shouldn't of put myself in danger.

I agree with Andy. While I feel that motorists should be
made aware of the fact that cyclists are using the roads, I
don't think it should be achieved at the expense of making
cycling look like a dangerous activity. The best way to
improve conditions for on-road cyclists is to encourage more
people to do it. With increased numbers we automatically
achieve increased awareness.

Terry Duckmanton.

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 18:17:19 +0100, Terry D
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<r1Hzc.128$D4.0@newsfe6-win>:

Quoted message said:

I agree with Andy. While I feel that motorists should be
made aware of the fact that cyclists are using the roads, I
don't think it should be achieved at the expense of making
cycling look like a dangerous activity.

Especially since it isn't. Looking at the figures, most of
the injuries and fatalities are not the result of cycling,
they are the result of driving (badly). OK, the injured and
killed are often cyclists and pedestrians, but why blame
the victims?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

In "]news:[email hidden],
Just zis Guy, you know? <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 18:17:19 +0100, Terry D
<[email hidden]> wrote in message <r1Hzc.128$D4.0@newsfe6-
win>:

Quoted message said:

I agree with Andy. While I feel that motorists should be
made aware of the fact that cyclists are using the roads,
I don't think it should be achieved at the expense of
making cycling look like a dangerous activity.

Especially since it isn't. Looking at the figures, most of
the injuries and fatalities are not the result of cycling,
they are the result of driving (badly). OK, the injured
and killed are often cyclists and pedestrians, but why
blame the victims?

There's also the point that even using the other meaning of
dangerous, it's not particularly dangerous.

A

Ambrose Nankivell said:

In "]news:[email hidden], Just
zis Guy, you know? <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 18:17:19 +0100, Terry D
<[email hidden]> wrote in message <r1Hzc.128$D4.0@newsfe6-
win>:

Quoted message said:

I agree with Andy. While I feel that motorists should be
made aware of the fact that cyclists are using the roads,
I don't think it should be achieved at the expense of
making cycling look like a dangerous activity.

Especially since it isn't. Looking at the figures, most of
the injuries and fatalities are not the result of cycling,
they are the result of driving (badly). OK, the injured
and killed are often cyclists and pedestrians, but why
blame the victims?

There's also the point that even using the other meaning
of dangerous, it's not particularly dangerous.

A

OK, so some of us at least are in agreement that ghost bikes
and similar scare tactics aren't the way ahead. The problem
remains, how does a relatively small group of dedicated
cyclists get through to a very large group of dedicated un-
cyclists with a message that they really don't want to hear?

I have considered writing to the BBC and asking for a
cycling equivalent of 'Top Gear' [1], but even that would
fail because only those who are already interested in
cycling would want to watch such a programme. How does one
persuade those in control of motoring programmes to include
pedal cycles in their programmes so that the drivers of
motor vehicles see pedal cycles as a valid form of transport
rather than something that nutters do just to slow down
motorists?

Terry Duckmanton.

[1] I have a letter half written, but I am having trouble
hitting the right tone.

Terry D said:

I have considered writing to the BBC and asking for a
cycling equivalent of 'Top Gear' [1], but even that would
fail because only those who are already interested in
cycling would want to watch such a programme. How does one
persuade those in control of motoring programmes to
include pedal cycles in their programmes so that the
drivers of motor vehicles see pedal cycles as a valid form
of transport rather than something that nutters do just to
slow down motorists?

I don't think Top Gear is anything to do with
transportation, its all to do with indulging fantasies
(celeb in a boring car) and exploring self image thru car
choice (the cool wall).

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
home.in.tum.deoe quotefixOpen ↗

Terry D said:

OK, so some of us at least are in agreement that ghost
bikes and similar scare tactics aren't the way ahead. The
problem remains, how does a relatively small group of
dedicated cyclists get through to a very large group of
dedicated un-cyclists with a message that they really
don't want to hear?

A programme of shooting and burning of bodies?

The answer, of course, is to make noise. Challenge false
perceptions wherever you see them. Write to the papers and
the Beeb (especially BBCi). And get out there and be seen.
It's the only way I can think of, anyway.

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

Simon Brooke said:

The _last_ thing we want is either a cycling equivalent of
Top Gear or bikes on Top Gear.

Think Jeremy Clarkson meets MBUK <shudder>

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

"AndyMorris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Terry D said:

I have considered writing to the BBC and asking for a
cycling equivalent of 'Top Gear' [1], but even that
would fail because only those who are already interested
in cycling would want to watch such a programme. How
does one persuade those in control of motoring
programmes to include pedal cycles in their programmes
so that the drivers of motor vehicles see pedal cycles
as a valid form of transport rather than something that
nutters do just to slow down motorists?

I don't think Top Gear is anything to do with
transportation, its all to

do

Quoted message said:

with indulging fantasies (celeb in a boring car) and
exploring self image thru car choice (the cool wall).

I agree that Top Gear isn't about transportation, but it is
a hugely influential programme which is capable of
persuading large numbers of viewers to believe that 'abc' is
good and 'xyz' is bad. Simple little statements like "Ooh,
but it's a Rover so it won't work" if repeated often enough
could be enough to bring about the failure of the Rover
company. A similar attitude towards pedal cycles will
convince viewers that such machines do not belong on the
road, at all, ever. We do not need this kind of press.

Perhaps we should seek the help of presenter James May who
is a cyclist himself. He appears not to be keen on lycra,
prefering to ride around in a suit, but it would be a start.

Hows about taking the celebs out of the boring car and
putting them on a reasonably priced Dawes (keep the british
workers happy) instead? 8-)

Terry Duckmanton

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:05:05 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Come to think of it, I bet Peter Eland (Velovision) could
put together a good and interesting TV series.

He could certainly contribute some interesting stuff to
one. What would be nice is a magazine format. Some stuff on
utility cycling, perhaps a tour review (a la C+), some of
Pete's areticles on the use of bicycles around the world
and their use in the UK for businesses, some of the
alternatives (bents, handcycles, etc.) and, god forbid, a
brief mention of sport.

Anyone know an influential TV producer?

Colin

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:05:05 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>
wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

The reason that Clarkson is that funny shape is that he's
already been so far up his own [censored] that he's come out the
top again. Twice.

Thanks for my afternoon laugh aloud.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

Terry D said:

I have considered writing to the BBC and asking for a
cycling equivalent of 'Top Gear' [1], but even that would
fail because only those who are already interested in
cycling would want to watch such a programme. How does one
persuade those in control of motoring programmes to
include pedal cycles in their programmes so that the
drivers of motor vehicles see pedal cycles as a valid form
of transport rather than something that nutters do just to
slow down motorists?

One doesn't. As said elsewhere in this thread, Top Gear is
not about transportation, it's about aspirational fantasy,
neat toys, and promoting "petrolhead" as a community (for
want of a better word). Demonising people (whether seriously
or in jest) who are outside that community is part of what
helps to bind it together. If an edict were to come down
from on high saying "thou shalt have a bike in each show",
the viewers would instantly know it for the token gesture
that it is.

So, what do we need? A programme that promotes cycling as
fast,

performed by people that the viewer can identify with or at
least hope to get a date with. What about a soap opera set
in a cycle courier company? With appropriate stereotyping of
the people they come into conflict with (taxi drivers, BMW
owners, WVM, dopey pedestrians who step off pavements
without looking, bike thieves ...) they could easily be made
to look like sympathetic people the viewer would relate to.

Maybe even after a year of ratings success the lead actor
might be invited on Top Gear for "star in a reasonably-
priced car" ;-)

(NB If you are or have been a cycle courier, please don't
follow up to tell me the job isn't really like that. We're
talking about TV, not reality)

-dan

--
"please make sure that the person is your friend before
you confirm"

Daniel Barlow <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Terry D said:

I have considered writing to the BBC and asking for a
cycling equivalent of 'Top Gear' [1], but even that
would fail because only those who are already interested
in cycling would want to watch such a programme. How
does one persuade those in control of motoring
programmes to include pedal cycles in their programmes
so that the drivers of motor vehicles see pedal cycles
as a valid form of transport rather than something that
nutters do just to slow down motorists?

One doesn't. As said elsewhere in this thread, Top Gear is
not about transportation, it's about aspirational fantasy,
neat toys, and promoting "petrolhead" as a community (for
want of a better word). Demonising people (whether
seriously or in jest) who are outside that community is
part of what helps to bind it together. If an edict were
to come down from on high saying "thou shalt have a bike
in each show", the viewers would instantly know it for the
token gesture that it is.

So, what do we need? A programme that promotes cycling
as fast,

Quoted message said:

performed by people that the viewer can identify with or
at least hope to get a date with. What about a soap opera
set in a cycle courier company? With appropriate
stereotyping of the people they come into conflict with
(taxi drivers, BMW owners, WVM, dopey pedestrians who step
off pavements without looking, bike thieves ...) they
could easily be made to look like sympathetic people the
viewer would relate to.

Maybe even after a year of ratings success the lead actor
might be invited on Top Gear for "star in a reasonably-
priced car" ;-)

(NB If you are or have been a cycle courier, please don't
follow up to tell me the job isn't really like that. We're
talking about TV, not reality)

TG is about the size of JC's private parts and nothing else
IMHO, would anyone on urc volunteer to go in the Nuremberg
rally that is the audience and espouse anything other than
"my fuel injector's bigger than yours"?