Another young cyclist injured

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 10:09:38 +0000 someone who may be Paul Boyd
<usenet.dont.work@plusnet> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Just seen this on the BBC website:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6212578.stm

Would it be too much trouble to insert a line or two of information,
so that people could decide whether to look at the article?

I'm told that these modern difference engines have a cunning feature
called cut and paste, whereby one can undertake this task without
even going to the trouble of tedious typing.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen said the following on 06/12/2006 13:45:

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 10:09:38 +0000 someone who may be Paul Boyd
<usenet.dont.work@plusnet> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Just seen this on the BBC website:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6212578.stm

Would it be too much trouble to insert a line or two of information,
so that people could decide whether to look at the article?

Well, sorry to put you to so much trouble, but modern computers have a
field called "Subject". That pretty much says it all.

(Just remembered - I turned off my killfile temporarily yesterday.
Clickety-click - that's better.)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Paul Boyd said:

Just seen this on the BBC website:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6212578.stm

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Not sure exactly how this is "news" anyway. A young boy was injured
after a collision with a police car responding to a 999 call.

Do we debate whether more lives are lost by police answering 999 calls
than are saved by them getting to the destination in time? That perhaps
police should use helicopters more so they would get there safer? That
there should be more of them so there would be one around when you
needed one?

Earl Purple said:

Paul Boyd said:

Just seen this on the BBC website:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6212578.stm

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Not sure exactly how this is "news" anyway. A young boy was injured
after a collision with a police car responding to a 999 call.

Do we debate whether more lives are lost by police answering 999 calls
than are saved by them getting to the destination in time? That perhaps
police should use helicopters more so they would get there safer? That
there should be more of them so there would be one around when you
needed one?

We could debate the point that more people are killed on the pavement
by police cars than by cyclists.

spindrift said:

Earl Purple said:

Paul Boyd said:

Just seen this on the BBC website:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6212578.stm

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Not sure exactly how this is "news" anyway. A young boy was injured
after a collision with a police car responding to a 999 call.

Do we debate whether more lives are lost by police answering 999 calls
than are saved by them getting to the destination in time? That perhaps
police should use helicopters more so they would get there safer? That
there should be more of them so there would be one around when you
needed one?

We could debate the point that more people are killed on the pavement
by police cars than by cyclists.

OK. Do you have the figures (with sources)?

--
Matt B

spindrift said the following on 06/12/2006 15:54:

Quoted message said:

We could debate the point that more people are killed on the pavement
by police cars than by cyclists.

Or we could simply debate nothing and treat the article as it was
intended - information. It isn't compulsory to try to find something to
argue about in every post.

I'm sure it's significant to the parents.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Paul Boyd said:

Clickety-click - that's better.)

YABOFHAICMFP

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

Evolution is a harsh mistress.

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

Quoted message said:

Paul Boyd said:

Just seen this on the BBC website:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6212578.stm

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Not sure exactly how this is "news" anyway. A young boy was injured
after a collision with a police car responding to a 999 call.

Do we debate whether more lives are lost by police answering 999 calls
than are saved by them getting to the destination in time? That perhaps

police should use helicopters more so they would get there safer?

Yeah, but I know this very tall bloke who suffered a rotation injury because
he was wearing a helmet and . . .

"OG" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:4tpcsgF14vspdU1
@mid.individual.net:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do we debate whether more lives are lost by police answering 999 calls
than are saved by them getting to the destination in time? That perhaps
police should use helicopters more so they would get there safer?

Or perhaps they should train all police officers and members of other
emergency services who are required to exceed the normal civilian envelope
(i.e. are authorised to exceed the speed limit, go through red lights,
etc.) so that they can do their jobs without endangering the public.

Will Cove said:

Or perhaps they should train all police officers and members of other
emergency services who are required to exceed the normal civilian envelope
(i.e. are authorised to exceed the speed limit, go through red lights,
etc.) so that they can do their jobs without endangering the public.

So as long as someone's had training there's no danger to anyone else?

You really are remarkably (and ridiculously over-) optimistic at times.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> wrote in news:4tq6kjF155mulU1
@mid.individual.net:

Quoted message said:

So as long as someone's had training there's no danger to anyone else?

Almost anything has to be better than the status quo. Panda drivers can go
haring round legally having had no instruction beyond what it took to get
them through their civilian driving test. Where I live, police drivers are
among the most dangerous - often driving aggressively, tailgating, [censored]
road position, etc.

Quoted message said:

You really are remarkably (and ridiculously over-) optimistic at times.

How so? Proper training, including regular check rides, would go a long way
to weed out the prats who shouldn't be behind the wheel of anything, let
alone a police car, and at keep up or improve the skills of the others. I'm
being realistic in recognising that driving beyond the envelope considered
safe for normal drivers must carry some risk. The public deserve that risk
to be minimal and improving hazard perception and risk management in those
that must exceed that envelope will go a long way towards achieving that.

Will Cove said:

Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> wrote in news:4tq6kjF155mulU1
@mid.individual.net:

Quoted message said:

So as long as someone's had training there's no danger to anyone else?

Almost anything has to be better than the status quo.

That's not my point: my point is that *improving* the situation, while
desirable, does not mean you've eliminated the problem, which your
wording suggested it would.

Quoted message said:

I'm
being realistic in recognising that driving beyond the envelope considered
safe for normal drivers must carry some risk.

But that's not what you said. What you said was "so that they can do
their jobs without endangering the public". "Without endangering the
public" and "must carry some risk" contradict one another. Furthermore
"the envelope considered safe for normal drivers" is still one that
produces a remarkable number of accidents, which means that there's risk
there. It isn't black and white, safe and not safe, it's a compromise
between degree of danger and convenience and utility.

Quoted message said:

The public deserve that risk to be minimal

Indeed, but it will not disappear, which "without endangering the
public" implies it will. Hence my assertion that you were being
ridiculously over-optimistic.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> wrote in news:4tqa7kF14kes7U1
@mid.individual.net:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Almost anything has to be better than the status quo.

That's not my point: my point is that *improving* the situation, while
desirable, does not mean you've eliminated the problem, which your
wording suggested it would.

Mea culpa. I should have been clearer. Would you agree with, "... so that
they can do their jobs without placing the public in undue danger"?

We can never completely remove all risk - but IMO it does need to brought
down to an acceptable level.

Will Cove said:

Mea culpa. I should have been clearer. Would you agree with, "... so that
they can do their jobs without placing the public in undue danger"?

Absolutely!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Will Cove said:

Panda drivers can go haring round legally having had
no instruction beyond what it took to get
them through their civilian driving test.

Are you sure about that?

My missus had to go on an in-house advanced driving course before
Bedfordshire's finest would give the keys to a panda car. It was a
good 15 years ago mind you.

Earl Purple said:

Paul Boyd said:

Just seen this on the BBC website:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6212578.stm

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Not sure exactly how this is "news" anyway. A young boy was injured after
a collision with a police car responding to a 999 call.

Do we debate whether more lives are lost by police answering 999 calls
than are saved by them getting to the destination in time?

It would be more sensible if the ordinary citizen had more latitude when
it came to dealing with criminals directly themselves. By that I mean
self defence of body and property.

Quoted message said:

That perhaps
police should use helicopters more so they would get there safer? That
there should be more of them so there would be one around when you needed
one?

Will Cove said:

"OG" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:4tpcsgF14vspdU1
@mid.individual.net:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do we debate whether more lives are lost by police answering 999 calls
than are saved by them getting to the destination in time? That perhaps
police should use helicopters more so they would get there safer?

Or perhaps they should train all police officers and members of other
emergency services who are required to exceed the normal civilian envelope
(i.e. are authorised to exceed the speed limit, go through red lights,
etc.) so that they can do their jobs without endangering the public.

You spout total rubbish. How is a speeding cop driving through the red
haze of emergency duty going to help a youngster crossing the road when he
is recklessly speeding on it at the child who doesn't know whether to
freeze or get quickly out of the way. Hell I've even had the tossers drive
at me at such a high speed that you can see the front of their vehicle
oscillate up and down as it momentarily tries to leave the ground due to
the speed of the vehicle and the slightly uneven road surface.

David P wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

It would be more sensible if the ordinary citizen had more latitude when
it came to dealing with criminals directly themselves. By that I mean
self defence of body and property.

Um, we've already got that.

Mark Thompson said:

David P wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

It would be more sensible if the ordinary citizen had more latitude when
it came to dealing with criminals directly themselves. By that I mean
self defence of body and property.

Um, we've already got that.

so you might think.