Safe Speed Forums

So just texting then? That's a comfort to know.

I wonder how my lover would feel during sex, (hypothetically these days sadly), if I was on the dog and bone and said "but I AM giving you my full attention Hilda - honestly". Would she believe me do you suppose?

How would you feel if you were doing your best moves, both of them , when the mob rang and your partner said, "It's ok hun, keep going while I just get this"?

Moving on...

("FFS sake Tone, let it go will you! No wonder you're single)

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Like the bloke I saw today, on cycle. Phone glued to ear with one hand. Other hand was inside his jacket. And his overall vision was masked by the hood. Another prize candidate for a DARWIN award . Not that he's get stopped on the island he was approaching ,by the traffic car sitting there- he'd no need of VED/INSURANCE or MOT.Didn't matter that he was also short on lifespan ,if a HGV heading for local stores crossed his path with cold steel .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

You didn't recognise me then Botach?

Did I mention I'm in the S.A.S.? (Serious About Safety).

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

I'm also VERY serious about safety - but this bloke was destined to be minced before death. I also hold a lot of safety appraisal awards. But ,I don't have one looking for an IDIOT on a bike .That's perhaps a WEEPY award.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

I know Botach, but before we get into weepej-bashing, (a guy I think is of a similar age to me living in London), the biggest nutters I see with suicidal proclivities in Brum are young fearless guys.

There is no substitute for experience. Trouble is, experience is something you get just after you needed it; as us old uns who survived our 'youth wasted on the young' know eh?

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Boatch, funny you should have a go at the bloke on a bike using his phone, considering you defend mobile phone usage whilst driving and admit to doing it yourself, shouldn't you be supporting the cyclist's freedoms to do what he wants, he didn't crash right so what he was doing must've been safe surely?

A good piece of education on how to behave correctly by demonstrating how not to do something, always a good concept.
Shame it had a few errors ... like the chap took off his seatbelt to emphasis his 'forward fall' as that was un-necessary, and some 'accident' inconsistencies albeit minor. They made their point well.

Experienced motorists will be aware that to text like this highly likely to be highly dangerous and so unlikely to even bother to attempt it.

I would rather have seen exact figures if they have them. I do not think it right to make assumptions of how many deaths occur and state 1000's. I believe that is a guess.

Providing the inexperienced motorists with the right basic tools to drive / ride safely is paramount.

Lets stay on topic here please and discuss this subject.
In the same vain no 'people-bashing' is encouraged but 'point-"bashing"' but preferably debating, please.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

We've had malapropisms, now we on SS are subject to weepyisms ( where something someone has /might have said/can be twisted to suit a purpose) are used to back up a theory /POV ,and when the accuser is asked for proof, departs for foreign parts.

PLEASE READ WHAT I SAID .
1) Cyclist WAS ON PHONE - that leaves only one hand to control cycle.
2) Other hand inside jacket -unless he's now got three hands, that means he's got no control over steering ( except by body movement) and none over braking .
3) One ear was being used to listen to phone, and the hood would have masked any sound to the other ear .
4) Without hood , his vision would only be limited by his field of vision. With the hood , vision would be limited.
And now we're on the tack that because at that moment he didn't crash, he was acting in a safe fashion.

Had this been a car driver ,driving with no hands on wheel ,and defective brakes , no doubt we hear screaming and wailing to have this idiot incarcerated .But as it's a cyclist - it's ok ,then . ( and Tone - it couldn't have been you- I definitely saw hair at the top of his hood ,and if you wanted to get to GE A& E , you'd only have to drive there ,not get there the painful way) .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Can't you see the difference?

Let me guess, the car driver is in a bigger heavier vehicle?

Clearly when the oblivious cyclist breezes through a red and causes a multi vehicle pile-up as drivers swerve to avoid him it's ok, because he's only small and light and so can only hurt himself, right?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Generally faster too, can cause muuuuch more damage when piloted irresponsibly, which is why the penalties and fines are much heavier and higher.

I quite regularly see beat up old cars that don't look very well maintained piloted by people on their phone with limited visibility charging down streets at 20-30 mph +



I'd remind you that green means "proceed with caution".

As for him possibly causing a multi car pile up, I've never heard of such a situation occurring, have you? Think you might be stretching it a bit?

Can't be bothered searching for it now, but I'm pretty certain there was a thread on here in the last year or so about a cyclist who was hit (and, unfortunately, I think, killed) by a car. The car driver was prosecuted even though it was the cyclist who was (a) texting, or otherwise distracted by his mobile phone and (b) had jumped a red light.

Anyway, provided it's not taken to extreme, I don't really have that much of a problem with Weepy's "responsibility based on kinetic energy" principle. The problem is that as stated it's:



when, in fact, without any means of identifying cyclists, the penalties and fines are actually, er, "nil".

Speaking of "scraping"...

You truly do appear to hold some thoroughly ridiculous points of view weepy, particularly when it comes to your unabashed apologetics for bicycles' poor conduct on the roads.

Are you seriously saying it's ok for cyclists to ride no-handed whilst on their mobiles, and breeze through red lights, because green means "proceed with caution" and, as such, all the big, heavy, fast, nasty car drivers ought to be doing the looking out for them?

I've certainly seen countless situations where it's come damned close, thank goodness the drivers involved had their wits about them (and weren't texting on their mobiles) or it could well have done. It's more than enough to demonstrate to me that it's thoroughly plausible. One of the hairiest moments for me on my motorbike came in London, when one of these cycle-zombies flew straight through a red as I was moving off from a green at a cross-roads. On realising that he'd thoroughly f*cked it the cyclist broke pace like a rabbit in the headlights, leaving my only options to pile into him or go head-to-head with oncoming traffic. As I pointed my bike at the oncoming bus, opened the throttle and flicked the bike through the ever-decreasing gap, it occurred to me that had the head of the opposing queue been something quicker off the mark, had there been filtering two-wheelers coming the other way, or had I been riding something with less acceleration at my disposal, then both my bike and I would have ended that journey far less attractive than when we set off, all because some pr*ck on his bicycle thought himself above the rules of the road.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Rule 1. It is always the fault of the non-cyclist.

It cannot possibly be any other way:
[sarc]

The cyclists have spent many hours in preparation for the journey
Their machine is in impeccable condition, frequently serviced and with brakes in tip-top condition
They themselves were definitely not celebrating the night before
They always cycle with due regard to their safety, never overtaking on the inside, and always have regard for traffic lights (as mentioned)
They are always highly aware of their surroundings and their attention is never taken from the road by wearing earpieces and listening to music (I noted one, last week, with a satnav mounted on her handlebars) (!)

[/sarc]

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

Back in the 70’s and to a lesser extent in the 80’s it was commonplace to see “beat up old cars”. My first car was one in fact; a second-hand ‘N’ reg Marina 1800 I bought for £300. I think it was only the rust holding it together; complete with dodgy MOT in hindsight IMO. I had to pull the handbrake up to the roof for it to do anything.

But today, and especially in London, I would say they are very uncommon. As for looks? They are deceptive but I would have thought looks ‘well maintained’ is surly a good sign that the owner is taking responsibility for his or her vehicle’s safety..

I have often wondered where I went wrong because I always seemed to be that rare creature with the beat up old car. So maybe I need to get back down to London and find these ‘knackers’ in a City where you get an extra million pounds on top of your salary for London weighting. (See, I can exaggerate too in an effort to make a case ) So anyways, you then get to the real problem you mention weepej...

Herein lies the problem and reason for the knee-jerk scamera reaction. These cameras do not take account of visibility and if 20-30 mph is under the posted limit they are useless. (Can you see why I think scameras are a pathetic distraction yet after all these years? Even your own analysis of the situation you describe wouldn’t be helped by one.

The truth is there’s rarely such thing as a dangerous car these days or dangerous conditions for that matter; it's the driver who makes it so! (Captain Kirk here).

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Er... no.

A fair few cyclists are absolute idiots, just the same as a fair few car drivers, and some people are idiot car drivers AND idiot cyclists.

I know I'd rather have to deal with an idiot on a cycle than an idiot in a car though!

You sure about that?

I recall eight out of 10 lorries stopped by a police checkpoint recently had some sort of defect, three out of 10 serious.

A colleague of mine got stopped in a police checkpoint a while back (they discovered worn brakes), and he said there were quite a lot of people there with him. Some of the tow trucks that did come to pick up those that weren't allowed to drive away were detained there too for various reasons, worn tyres, leaking pipes etc.., and he said he had problems getting a tow truck as many wouldn't go near him for fear of being checked over too.

Sure, we don't have the sorts of vehicles that would turn over if you took a corner at 25mph these days, but there's clearly a lot of neglect out there.

And again, there's a lot of neglected cycles too, I see them a lot as I regularly work at "doctor bike" sessions where we check over people's bikes for free, but again, a cycle with a side wall that's about to pop is much less of a danger to all than a car with the same issue.