Letter in local paper

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

Quoted message said:

Title "Drivers do not see cyclists". size - 38 kb 56k download time - 10 secs
simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

--
Simon Mason Anlaby East Yorkshire. 53°44'N 0°26'W simonmason.karoo.netsimonmason.karoo.netOpen ↗

It's not just cyclists. I ride a 50cc scooter to and from work, 5 days a week. I always have my
lights on, no matter what the weather, and I also wear a bright green reflective vest. You'd think
that would make me visible.

Oh no! Klingon cloaking device must be activated with the lights.

Peter.

Simon Mason said:

Title "Drivers do not see cyclists". size - 38 kb 56k download time - 10 secs
simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver makes
a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of drivers have
not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to publicise this special
risk which driver are usually unaware of.

smidsy.org.uksmidsy.org.ukOpen ↗
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK safespeed.org.uksafespeed.org.ukOpen ↗ please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives

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

Quoted message said:

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
makes a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of
drivers have not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to publicise
this special risk which driver are usually unaware of.

Judge: You killed a cyclist. That's 20 quid and 3 points.

Driver: But he was behind the windscreen pillar.

Judge: Ahhh!! Contributory negligence by the cyclist. Bloody cyclists, always hiding where you can't
see them. I'll let you off Scot free and award you costs.

If you are driving a tonne of lethal metal you have no excuse for not checking.

Paul Smith said:

Simon Mason said:

Title "Drivers do not see cyclists". size - 38 kb 56k download time - 10 secs
simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
makes a glance check.

"Simply"? You have a LOT to learn. Oh dear I didn't see the cyclist - my windscreen pillar was
in the way.

Your continual excuses for the carnage motorists wreak amplifies your selfish "I can do no wrong"
arrogance.

If the driver cannot see he/she should not move.

You seem to have difficulty grasping that 'simple' concept.

John B

In message <[email hidden]>, Paul Smith
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason said:

Title "Drivers do not see cyclists". size - 38 kb 56k download time - 10 secs
simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
makes a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of drivers
have not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to publicise this
special risk which driver are usually unaware of.

smidsy.org.uksmidsy.org.ukOpen ↗

Isn't this one of the reasons to look several times in each direction?
--
Michael MacClancy

In article <[email hidden]>, John B <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Simply"? You have a LOT to learn. Oh dear I didn't see the cyclist - my windscreen pillar was
in the way.

Your continual excuses for the carnage motorists wreak amplifies your selfish "I can do no wrong"
arrogance.

If the driver cannot see he/she should not move.

You seem to have difficulty grasping that 'simple' concept.

So you didn't follow the link then? The whole page is dedicated to making drivers _more_ aware of
the extra care required in looking out for two wheeled road users and the unacceptability of the
SMIDSY excuse. Or did I miss something.
--
fred

Tony W said:

Quoted message said:

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
makes a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of
drivers have not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to
publicise this special risk which driver are usually unaware of.

Quoted message said:

Judge: You killed a cyclist. That's 20 quid and 3 points.

Quoted message said:

Driver: But he was behind the windscreen pillar.

Quoted message said:

Judge: Ahhh!! Contributory negligence by the cyclist. Bloody cyclists, always hiding where you
can't see them. I'll let you off Scot free and award you costs.

Quoted message said:

If you are driving a tonne of lethal metal you have no excuse for not checking.

Drivers get hundreds of valuable safety messages, and they are supposed to learn them all.
That's good.

Not giving them this particular safety message is a serious policy omission, especially since the
risk is not well known or understood.

It's one we can and should improve with education. It should be in the Highway Code.

And how exactly can a driver take responsibility for mitigating a risk he's never heard of (let
alone been taught) and never considered?
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK safespeed.org.uksafespeed.org.ukOpen ↗ please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives

fred said:

In article <[email hidden]>, John B <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Simply"? You have a LOT to learn. Oh dear I didn't see the cyclist - my windscreen pillar was in
the way.

Your continual excuses for the carnage motorists wreak amplifies your selfish "I can do no wrong"
arrogance.

If the driver cannot see he/she should not move.

You seem to have difficulty grasping that 'simple' concept.

So you didn't follow the link then?

I had looked at it some time ago, but your point is accepted.

perhaps all vehicles should be designed without pillars obstructing vision? A bit like a bicycle ;-)

John B

In message <[email hidden]>, fred <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, John B <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Simply"? You have a LOT to learn. Oh dear I didn't see the cyclist - my windscreen pillar was in
the way.

Your continual excuses for the carnage motorists wreak amplifies your selfish "I can do no wrong"
arrogance.

If the driver cannot see he/she should not move.

You seem to have difficulty grasping that 'simple' concept.

So you didn't follow the link then? The whole page is dedicated to making drivers _more_ aware of
the extra care required in looking out for two wheeled road users and the unacceptability of the
SMIDSY excuse. Or did I miss something.

Dear Fred,

Your argument would be all the better if you chose not to hide behind an anonymous email
address and if you provided more information about yourself. For all we know you might be Paul
Smith in disguise.

--
Michael MacClancy

In message <[email hidden]>, Paul Smith
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Michael MacClancy said:

Quoted message said:

>simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
makes a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of
drivers have not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to
publicise this special risk which driver are usually unaware of.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

smidsy.org.uksmidsy.org.ukOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Isn't this one of the reasons to look several times in each direction?

Absolutely. But you won't find that as clear advice in the Highway Code either. Time for a
change. I did email them about it last year. I don't actually recall getting a reply. I'll give
them a prod.

Yeah, but it's taught in lessons and tested in the driving tests. Stop trying to make excuses for
bad driving.
--
Michael MacClancy

Michael MacClancy said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
makes a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of
drivers have not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to publicise
this special risk which driver are usually unaware of.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

smidsy.org.uksmidsy.org.ukOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Isn't this one of the reasons to look several times in each direction?

Absolutely. But you won't find that as clear advice in the Highway Code either. Time for a change. I
did email them about it last year. I don't actually recall getting a reply. I'll give them a prod.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK safespeed.org.uksafespeed.org.ukOpen ↗ please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives

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

Quoted message said:

Drivers get hundreds of valuable safety messages, and they are supposed to learn them all.
That's good.

Not giving them this particular safety message is a serious policy omission, especially since the
risk is not well known or understood.

It's one we can and should improve with education. It should be in the Highway Code.

And how exactly can a driver take responsibility for mitigating a risk he's never heard of (let
alone been taught) and never considered?

That is the argument of the Health & Safety Nazi. Reduce everything to a check-list. Rule 427
taught, tick, tested, tick, understood, tick - not. Rule 428 ...

Maybe it should be in the HC. Maybe most people learn it when their instructor applies the dual
controls brake and calls them a prat.

Its not very difficult. If you are driving a tonne + of lethal metal you have to take particular
care. Driving through pedestrians, cyclists or other soft targets is not acceptable.

Full stop. End of argument.

The driver is responsible for checking he is not about to kill someone whether the hazard has been
explicitly pointed out or not. He is in charge of a piece of lethal equipment. He is licensed to use
it. He has the responsibility to use it safely.

T

Paul Smith said:

Michael MacClancy said:

Quoted message said:

>simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
makes a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of
drivers have not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to
publicise this special risk which driver are usually unaware of.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

smidsy.org.uksmidsy.org.ukOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Isn't this one of the reasons to look several times in each direction?

Absolutely. But you won't find that as clear advice in the Highway Code either.

More excuses. Now its not in the highway Code.

Quoted message said:

Time for a change. I did email them about it last year. I don't actually recall getting a reply.
I'll give them a prod.

Dear Smithy boy, do you really think they would take you seriously given your track record?

John B

Tony W said:

Quoted message said:

Drivers get hundreds of valuable safety messages, and they are supposed to learn them all.
That's good.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not giving them this particular safety message is a serious policy omission, especially since the
risk is not well known or understood.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's one we can and should improve with education. It should be in the Highway Code.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And how exactly can a driver take responsibility for mitigating a risk he's never heard of (let
alone been taught) and never considered?

Quoted message said:

That is the argument of the Health & Safety Nazi. Reduce everything to a check-list. Rule 427
taught, tick, tested, tick, understood, tick - not. Rule 428 ...

No, you're mistaken. This isn't an obvious risk that any thinking person should be aware of. The
brain appears to filter out the constant image of the pillar and people just don't appreciate that
something might be obscured. It's a real safety concern that can be improved by sensible messages.

Quoted message said:

Maybe it should be in the HC. Maybe most people learn it when their instructor applies the dual
controls brake and calls them a prat.

Not true. Try sampling your workmates or friends. People don't know. Simple as that.

Quoted message said:

Its not very difficult. If you are driving a tonne + of lethal metal you have to take particular
care. Driving through pedestrians, cyclists or other soft targets is not acceptable.

Quoted message said:

Full stop. End of argument.

Quoted message said:

The driver is responsible for checking he is not about to kill someone whether the hazard has been
explicitly pointed out or not. He is in charge of a piece of lethal equipment. He is licensed to
use it. He has the responsibility to use it safely.

And the government has quite rightly taken on the responsibility of giving safe driving advice. But
they've missed this one.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK safespeed.org.uksafespeed.org.ukOpen ↗ please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives

In message <[email hidden]>, John B <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

More excuses. Now its not in the highway Code.

Quoted message said:

Time for a change. I did email them about it last year. I don't actually recall getting a reply.
I'll give them a prod.

Dear Smithy boy, do you really think they would take you seriously given your track record?

John B

LOL
--
Michael MacClancy

Michael MacClancy said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>simonmason.karoo.netzpaper1.htmOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>Sometimes it's simply because the cyclist is hidden behind a windscreen pillar when the driver
>makes a glance check. I've been working to publicise this special risk, but at least 95% of
>drivers have not heard of it or even considered the possibility. The government needs to
>publicise this special risk which driver are usually unaware of.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>smidsy.org.uksmidsy.org.ukOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Isn't this one of the reasons to look several times in each direction?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Absolutely. But you won't find that as clear advice in the Highway Code either. Time for a
change. I did email them about it last year. I don't actually recall getting a reply. I'll give
them a prod.

Quoted message said:

Yeah, but it's taught in lessons and tested in the driving tests. Stop trying to make excuses for
bad driving.

It isn't taught with any consistency. Most will never have received the message.

I'm certainly not trying to make excuses. I'm trying to make the roads safer. I don't even have to
concern myself with blame in this instance.

Of course it might help some cyclists to be aware of the risk and know that when a driver's head
appear to them in a certain position that the pillar might have prevented a driver from seeing them.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK safespeed.org.uksafespeed.org.ukOpen ↗ please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives

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

Quoted message said:

Not true. Try sampling your workmates or friends. People don't know. Simple as that.

Trying to hold a discussion with you is like arguing with a speak-your-weight machine. The answers
never quite the same but equally banal.

It seems my colleagues are more intelligent than yours -- but perhaps yours are all woolly with a
fear of mint sauce 🙂

T

Tony W said:

Quoted message said:

Not true. Try sampling your workmates or friends. People don't know. Simple as that.

Quoted message said:

Trying to hold a discussion with you is like arguing with a speak-your-weight machine. The answers
never quite the same but equally banal.

So let's get this straight. You think drivers should recognise potentially obscure road dangers
without having them explained. And you think there's something wrong with my argument?

Quoted message said:

It seems my colleagues are more intelligent than yours -- but perhaps yours are all woolly with a
fear of mint sauce 🙂

I bet you haven't got that result from a clean sample. Having done various straw polls myself, I
know that folk in general don't know that windscreen pillars are a significant contributor to many
smidsy accidents.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK safespeed.org.uksafespeed.org.ukOpen ↗ please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives

Michael MacClancy said:

Quoted message said:

More excuses. Now its not in the highway Code.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Time for a change. I did email them about it last year. I don't actually recall getting a reply.
I'll give them a prod.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Dear Smithy boy, do you really think they would take you seriously given your track record?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

John B

Quoted message said:

LOL

Feel free to laugh. But Buckled couldn't be more wrong.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK safespeed.org.uksafespeed.org.ukOpen ↗ please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives