I don’t disagree, however I’m just wondering why that doesn’t work with cyclists zooming past vehicles on the inside that might turn left, bombing through red lights and weaving around pedestrians.
Maybe, just maybe the type that does these things are morons whether ‘in control’ of a bike or any car.
I would say that equal treatment and fairness before the law is at least as important as either of those.
Of course. We all know that there would be fewer collisions if we all had to drive cars with a big spike in the steering wheel and no seatbelt. Nobody would get past 20mph.
I don’t disagree, however I’m just wondering why that doesn’t work with cyclists zooming past vehicles on the inside that might turn left, bombing through red lights and weaving around pedestrians.
Point taken, I guess it’s popular usage rather than terminologically correct. Will try harder…On a point of pedantry the use of the word ‘accident’ is, IMV, a little misleading. Most ‘collisions’ that occur on roads are avoidable. There actually are very few circumstances where a collision would be viewed as a genuine accident. Investigating, apportioning liability, and prosecuting is a different matter.
In the '90s when fighting against anti motorbike legislation, the stats in this country indicated that nearly 70% of collisions involving motorbikes and cars were the fault of car drivers. I fell off my bike once, due to the new to me bike having old and hard tyres. I have had 3 car/bike collisions, and in every case the driver was prosecuted. The only other collision was where a cyclist rode out of an alley into my path and snapped my finger. He and his two friends then tried to mug me!
As an aside do you have a view on how ‘accidents’ are reported in the media? There seems to be a tendency to say ‘car crashes into wall’ & ‘cyclist crashes into car/other object’. It doesn’t massively bother me but a lot of in the cycling community get rather irate about it, cars don’t crash by themselves.On a point of pedantry the use of the word ‘accident’ is, IMV, a little misleading. Most ‘collisions’ that occur on roads are avoidable. There actually are very few circumstances where a collision would be viewed as a genuine accident. Investigating, apportioning liability, and prosecuting is a different matter.
You really are an outlier
Point taken, I guess it’s popular usage rather than terminologically correct. Will try harder…
Fair enough but media should be held to higher level of impartiality or scrutiny of fact than some random blokes disagreeing about cables. This holds especially true of the BBC who are often guilty of the practice outlined.
If you want to go that route, it was 3 black youths. Knock yourself out.
