UK and Europe · Public discussion

It's a bad day

Started by wafflycat · · Last activity · 21 posts · 459 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
3 January 2007
Last activity
4 January 2007
Original author
wafflycat
Posts
21
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
459
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 21
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Not only the news of events in the courtroom of the case of Zak Carr's
    death, there's also report of another cyclist getting hit. This time on the
    A47 cyclist hit by a bus as the bus was overtaking him.

    http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/News/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=News&tBrand=enonline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED03%20Jan%202007%2009%3A40%3A23%3A533

    or

    http://tinyurl.com/tgygm

    That particular stretch of the A47 is notorious for bad driving. Drivers
    going too fast, too close to the vehicle in front, getting impatient as it's
    busy pretty much all day now (when I first moved to Norfolk this bit of road
    would have been relatively clear of traffic at the time of day the cyclist
    was hit) and even though it's the main east/west traffic artery in Norfolk,
    much of it is single carriageway and it's unusual nationally in terms of the
    number of junctions it has along it. Even the Highways Authority has
    acknowledged that the road is unusual nationally in terms of the high number
    of side roads it has.. People get impatient at the junctions and there's
    many a crash as people pull out from side roads on to the main carriageway
    when they shouldn't due to the volume & speed of traffic on the main road.
    This time it looks like a bus overtaking a cyclist and not enough room
    between the bus & the cyclist. Admittedly, it's a part of the A47 I won't
    cycle on and wouldn't recommend anyone to cycle on simply due to what I see
    when driving on the road. I see some cyclists on there regularly and it
    terrifies me when I see cars, busses & HGVs overtaking and giving so little
    room to the cyclist they are overtaking. When I cycle to Norwich I use the
    back roads rather than use the A47 because of the behaviour of motorists on
    the single carriageway stretches. I've cycled on some of the dual
    carriageway bit of the A47 and that's not bad if you are doing it out of
    rush hour times, but I wouldn't be happy cycling it in rush hour. Some time
    ago, Vernon & I went to a meeting in Swaffham aboout the prospective
    dualling of the A47. We cycled there. I went the back roads. Without telling
    me, Vernon cycled the A47 - single carriageway between our place & where the
    meeting was being held for the majority of the journey. He did not find it
    enjoyable and found it frightening. At the meeting the Highways Authority
    guys made it clear that they do not consider cyclists to be road users. A
    definition of 'road users' was given and they did not include cyclists or
    pedestrians or, in this rural neck of the woods, horse riders. Apparently
    cyclists don't use the road so they don't count. It was not recognised that
    cyclists were actually afraid to use the road due to volume and speed of
    traffic. One of the sad things is usually when the subject of dualling is
    brought up, the cry is 'dangerous road' rather than getting we motorists to
    take responsibility for our driving practises :-(


  2. Quoted message said:

    Not only the news of events in the courtroom of the case of Zak Carr's
    death, there's also report of another cyclist getting hit. This time on the
    A47 cyclist hit by a bus as the bus was overtaking him.

    And another just down the road from me :-((
    The road in question is one with 'traffic-calming' AKA humps.

    It follows radio reports yesterday of a 57 year old MTB-er being found dead on a road also near Basingstoke (no web link yet)

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/6226999.stm

    Boy, 12, seriously hurt in crash

    A 12-year-old boy is in hospital with serious head injuries after colliding with car while cycling near his home.

    The boy was cycling with an 11-year-old friend when he collided with a Vauxhall Corsa in Pack Lane in Basingstoke, Hampshire, on Tuesday afternoon.

    He is in a stable condition and has been transferred to the neurological unit at Southampton General Hospital.

    A 17-year-old woman was arrested on suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm and driving offences.

    The 11-year-old boy was taken to hospital for a check-up but was not seriously injured.
    <quote ends>

    John B

  3. John B wrote on 03/01/2007 13:54 +0100:

    Quoted message said:


    And another just down the road from me :-(( The road in question is
    one with 'traffic-calming' AKA humps.

    It follows radio reports yesterday of a 57 year old MTB-er being
    found dead on a road also near Basingstoke (no web link yet)

    It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half days.
    If we report each of them here there will be little room for anything
    else as well as making cycling, which is actually very safe, appear
    inordinately dangerous.

    --
    Tony

    "...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
    wildly inaccurate..."
    Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

  4. Tony Raven said:

    one killed every two and a half days.

    I'd hate to be that person.

    -dan

    --
    http://www.coruskate.net/

  5. Tony Raven said:

    John B wrote on 03/01/2007 13:54 +0100:

    Quoted message said:


    And another just down the road from me :-(( The road in question is
    one with 'traffic-calming' AKA humps.

    It follows radio reports yesterday of a 57 year old MTB-er being
    found dead on a road also near Basingstoke (no web link yet)

    It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half days.
    If we report each of them here there will be little room for anything
    else as well as making cycling, which is actually very safe, appear
    inordinately dangerous.

    The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public just end
    up being blase about them? (as tends to be the case with other deaths on the
    roads)

  6. cupra said:

    Tony Raven wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half days.
    If we report each of them here there will be little room for anything
    else as well as making cycling, which is actually very safe, appear
    inordinately dangerous.

    The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public just end
    up being blase about them?

    Oh, so you think the general public reads this newsgroup.

    --
    Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
    "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
    - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

  7. Andy Leighton said:

    On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 14:30:30 -0000, cupra <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Tony Raven wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half
    days. If we report each of them here there will be little room for
    anything else as well as making cycling, which is actually very
    safe, appear inordinately dangerous.

    The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public
    just end up being blase about them?

    Oh, so you think the general public reads this newsgroup.

    I was going to add that to my post, however I know that newsgroups do get
    mentioned in mainstream media sometimes, so (again IMV) it's worthwhile to
    keep highlighting what carnage dangerous drivers are capable of.

  8. cupra said:
    Andy Leighton said:

    On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 14:30:30 -0000, cupra <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Tony Raven wrote:

    Quoted message said:

    > It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    > seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half
    > days. If we report each of them here there will be little room for
    > anything else as well as making cycling, which is actually very
    > safe, appear inordinately dangerous.

    The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public
    just end up being blase about them?

    Oh, so you think the general public reads this newsgroup.

    I was going to add that to my post, however I know that newsgroups do get
    mentioned in mainstream media sometimes, so (again IMV) it's worthwhile to
    keep highlighting what carnage dangerous drivers are capable of.

    I'm afraid I have to disagree. Fatal RTAs get plenty of local media
    coverage - especially if they involve children. There is no chance
    that they are going to get ignored.

    There are, of course, obvious exceptions - if the incident involves a
    poster to this newsgroup, or it is a major incident (like the one in
    North Wales last year - which was made more newsworthy due to the
    immediate pronouncements by the police officer at the scene).

    Also I have seen very few (if any) mentions of newsgroups (as opposed to
    websites) in mainstream media.

    --
    Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
    "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
    - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

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

    Quoted message said:
    Andy Leighton said:

    On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 14:30:30 -0000, cupra <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Tony Raven wrote:

    Quoted message said:

    > It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    > seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half
    > days. If we report each of them here there will be little room for
    > anything else as well as making cycling, which is actually very
    > safe, appear inordinately dangerous.

    The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public
    just end up being blase about them?

    Oh, so you think the general public reads this newsgroup.

    I was going to add that to my post, however I know that newsgroups do get
    mentioned in mainstream media sometimes, so (again IMV) it's worthwhile to
    keep highlighting what carnage dangerous drivers are capable of.

    Apart from the fact I've not seen anyone reporting each of the average six a
    day injured and every death, so the odd report hardly crowds the newsgroup
    of other items, I do *know* the risks of cycling are actually rather small
    and the benefits are rather good. Nevertheless, from a personal point of
    view, it's been a less than good day. The day the court proceedings of the
    death of someone I knew (not a best buddy by any means, but an acquaintance)
    showing the person who did it seems to trying to get out of responsibility
    for his actions and then the report of another death on a stretch of road
    only a few miles away: it got to me. Sorry if that's a bit girlie and all
    that to the macho bunch on here, but it got to me. Emotions, eh, damn
    awkward things. Obviously it's so much better not to feel anything like one
    or two of the blokes on the newsgroup. :-/

  10. Andy Leighton said:

    On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 15:09:27 -0000, cupra <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:
    Andy Leighton said:

    On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 14:30:30 -0000, cupra <[email hidden]>
    wrote:
    > Tony Raven wrote:

    >> It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    >> seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half
    >> days. If we report each of them here there will be little room for
    >> anything else as well as making cycling, which is actually very
    >> safe, appear inordinately dangerous.
    >
    > The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public
    > just end up being blase about them?

    Oh, so you think the general public reads this newsgroup.

    I was going to add that to my post, however I know that newsgroups
    do get mentioned in mainstream media sometimes, so (again IMV) it's
    worthwhile to keep highlighting what carnage dangerous drivers are
    capable of.

    I'm afraid I have to disagree. Fatal RTAs get plenty of local media
    coverage - especially if they involve children. There is no chance
    that they are going to get ignored.

    The media may highlight them on occaision, but most road deaths (certainly
    on news.bbc.co.uk) are limited to a paragraph or two and rarely are they
    followed up (IME).

    Quoted message said:

    There are, of course, obvious exceptions - if the incident involves a
    poster to this newsgroup, or it is a major incident (like the one in
    North Wales last year - which was made more newsworthy due to the
    immediate pronouncements by the police officer at the scene).

    Also I have seen very few (if any) mentions of newsgroups (as opposed
    to websites) in mainstream media.

    BBCNews24 mentioned uk.sci.weather a couple of weeks back....

  11. wafflycat wrote on 03/01/2007 15:25 +0100:

    Quoted message said:


    Apart from the fact I've not seen anyone reporting each of the average
    six a day injured and every death, so the odd report hardly crowds the
    newsgroup of other items, I do *know* the risks of cycling are actually
    rather small and the benefits are rather good. Nevertheless, from a
    personal point of view, it's been a less than good day.

    Nothing against your original post which was as much about the A47, your
    experiences and upgrade proposals as the death. But the subsequent
    additions of "another one" and "yet another one" were making it seem as
    if something unusual was going on which it isn't.

    Quoted message said:

    The day the
    court proceedings of the death of someone I knew (not a best buddy by
    any means, but an acquaintance) showing the person who did it seems to
    trying to get out of responsibility for his actions and then the report
    of another death on a stretch of road only a few miles away: it got to
    me. Sorry if that's a bit girlie and all that to the macho bunch on
    here, but it got to me. Emotions, eh, damn awkward things. Obviously
    it's so much better not to feel anything like one or two of the blokes
    on the newsgroup. :-/

    Go and get a good big hug from that Vernon of yours and don't apologise
    for emotions - emotions are good.

    --
    Tony

    "...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
    wildly inaccurate..."
    Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

  12. wafflycat said:

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

    Quoted message said:
    Andy Leighton said:

    On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 14:30:30 -0000, cupra <[email hidden]>
    wrote:
    > Tony Raven wrote:

    >> It may sound rather callous but there are on average 6 cyclists
    >> seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half
    >> days. If we report each of them here there will be little room for
    >> anything else as well as making cycling, which is actually very
    >> safe, appear inordinately dangerous.
    >
    > The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public
    > just end up being blase about them?

    Oh, so you think the general public reads this newsgroup.

    I was going to add that to my post, however I know that newsgroups
    do get mentioned in mainstream media sometimes, so (again IMV) it's
    worthwhile to keep highlighting what carnage dangerous drivers are
    capable of.

    Apart from the fact I've not seen anyone reporting each of the
    average six a day injured and every death, so the odd report hardly
    crowds the newsgroup of other items, I do *know* the risks of cycling
    are actually rather small and the benefits are rather good.
    Nevertheless, from a personal point of view, it's been a less than
    good day. The day the court proceedings of the death of someone I
    knew (not a best buddy by any means, but an acquaintance) showing the
    person who did it seems to trying to get out of responsibility for
    his actions and then the report of another death on a stretch of road
    only a few miles away: it got to me. Sorry if that's a bit girlie and
    all that to the macho bunch on here, but it got to me. Emotions, eh,
    damn awkward things. Obviously it's so much better not to feel
    anything like one or two of the blokes on the newsgroup. :-/

    You don't need to apologise to me - someone I knew was killed by a motorist
    (while cycling to school) many years ago and if Usenet were around then I'd
    have been venting my spleen on it.

  13. Tony Raven said:

    John B wrote on 03/01/2007 13:54 +0100:

    Quoted message said:


    And another just down the road from me :-(( The road in question is
    one with 'traffic-calming' AKA humps.

    It follows radio reports yesterday of a 57 year old MTB-er being
    found dead on a road also near Basingstoke (no web link yet)

    It may sound rather callous....

    It does a tad.

    Quoted message said:

    but there are on average 6 cyclists
    seriously injured every day with one killed every two and a half days.
    If we report each of them here there will be little room for anything
    else as well as making cycling, which is actually very safe, appear
    inordinately dangerous.

    I understand your point, but just occasionally it is worth highlighting
    what horrors bad driving (or poor road design) can cause. I don't see any
    risk of the group being filled with such reports, not least because cycling
    *is* so safe.

    However you could always ignore them if they do get posted.

    John B

  14. Daniel Barlow said:
    Tony Raven said:

    one killed every two and a half days.

    I'd hate to be that person.


    Presumably the person in question just respawns, a la Dr Who.

    A

  15. John B said:

    The road in question is one with 'traffic-calming' AKA humps.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/6226999.stm

    A 17-year-old woman was arrested on suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm and driving offences.


    I've just posted something to uk.legal.moderated because GBH doesn't
    sound like a normal charge to me. AFAIAA she either got out of the car
    and hit someone or she deliberately drove at or over someone.

    Tim.

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

    Quoted message said:


    <snip>

    Quoted message said:


    The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public just end
    up being blase about them? (as tends to be the case with other deaths on
    the roads)


    Unfortunately the response of that part of the public known as drivers is
    often 2 stage:

    1. I wouldn't like to kill a cyclist.
    2. Ergo get cyclists off the road!

    I seriously believe that this is at the bottom of the antipathy of many
    drivers towards cyclists - they view accidents with other motor vehicles as
    an 'occupational hazard', with roughly equal (and usually trivial) physical
    consequences to both parties, but they know that if they hit a bike they
    will likely be responsible for injuring someone whilst being unscathed
    themselves. And unfortunately the selfish response to this perceived risk is
    not to take more care and accept responsibility, but to want the risk to
    magically go away.

  17. In news:[email hidden],
    [email hidden] <[email hidden]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
    tell us:

    Quoted message said:
    John B said:

    The road in question is one with 'traffic-calming' AKA humps.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/6226999.stm

    A 17-year-old woman was arrested on suspicion of causing grievous
    bodily harm and driving offences.


    I've just posted something to uk.legal.moderated because GBH doesn't
    sound like a normal charge to me. AFAIAA she either got out of the car
    and hit someone or she deliberately drove at or over someone.

    It occurs to me that the GBH could be unrelated - i.e. she'd batted someone
    in the gob elsewhere. Typical Deplorable Standards of Reporting we've come
    to expect from the BBC these days.
    </grump_old_git>

    --
    Dave Larrington
    <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
    Flies are the work of Stan, and should be killed by all means
    available.

  18. Budstaff said:

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

    Quoted message said:


    <snip>

    Quoted message said:


    The problem, as I see it, is if they are ignored won't the public
    just end up being blase about them? (as tends to be the case with
    other deaths on the roads)


    Unfortunately the response of that part of the public known as
    drivers is often 2 stage:

    1. I wouldn't like to kill a cyclist.
    2. Ergo get cyclists off the road!

    I seriously believe that this is at the bottom of the antipathy of
    many drivers towards cyclists - they view accidents with other motor
    vehicles as an 'occupational hazard', with roughly equal (and usually
    trivial) physical consequences to both parties, but they know that if
    they hit a bike they will likely be responsible for injuring someone
    whilst being unscathed themselves. And unfortunately the selfish
    response to this perceived risk is not to take more care and accept
    responsibility, but to want the risk to magically go away.

    I think you've hit the nail on the head - there's so much focus on car
    safety standards these days that drivers probably do feel a little
    invincible. As a driver and a cyclist (who's had a SMIDSY and several near
    misses) I know how vunerable cyclists are (and indeed pedestrians/riders
    etc...) and drive accordingly.

  19. in message <[email hidden]>, wafflycat

    ('w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com') said:

    The day the court proceedings of the
    death of someone I knew (not a best buddy by any means, but an
    acquaintance) showing the person who did it seems to trying to get out of
    responsibility for his actions and then the report of another death on a
    stretch of road only a few miles away: it got to me. Sorry if that's a
    bit girlie and all that to the macho bunch on here, but it got to me.

    Don't apologise. Yes, I know you're being ironic, but - this actually is a
    serious issue, far more serious than the merits of Sturmey Archer
    epicyclics or how to fix a dualdrive. Many motorists no longer feel the
    need to exercise much care around more vulnerable road users; we're
    developing social mores and values which says driving carelessly is OK;
    and the law is doing very little about it. So while I agree with whoever
    said that it isn't appropriate to post here every single death, it's
    extremely important to keep reminding ourselves of this issue.

    --
    [email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    ;; in faecibus sapiens rheum propagabit

  20. Simon Brooke said:


    Many motorists no longer feel the
    need to exercise much care around more vulnerable road users;

    Do you actually have any evidence to support that extremely provocative
    assertion?

    Quoted message said:

    we're
    developing social mores and values which says driving carelessly is OK;

    Or that one?

    Quoted message said:

    and the law is doing very little about it.

    I agree that 'the law' is doing very little to create the environment
    necessary to eliminate road casualties.

    Quoted message said:

    So while I agree with whoever
    said that it isn't appropriate to post here every single death, it's
    extremely important to keep reminding ourselves of this issue.

    The issue is that we refuse to accept that roads will only be
    significantly safer when we remove the laws and regulations which
    reinforce the de facto position that motorised traffic has priority, and
    woe betide those who get in its way.

    We must remove the regulations, signs, signals, lines, kerbs etc. and
    give the roads back to all the users.

    We must build a comprehensive inter-urban motorway network and banish
    inter-urban motorised traffic to it.

    --
    Matt B

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.