Another HGV death in London (split from original thread)
- Thread starter deptfordmarmoset
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
BJ needs to come up with answers. The fact that he deflected the issue onto a peripheral one shows how far away from having any real answers. I wonder whether Gilligan considered resigning at any point today.2777500 said:
Monsieur Remings
Guru
- Location
- Yatton UK
I'd be interested to know what action is taken as a result of the various HGV infractions found by the police. If, as I expect, all blame and as a follow-on any action/prosecution undertaken is levelled entirely at the individual driving the vehicle, then the whole exercise will have little effect beyond the immediate future.
The law itself is a cop-out, whereby all blame is attached to the driver; no action is therefore taken to look at company procedure, health and safety issues, time versus workload, tachograph issues or the role of various manpower agencies effectively exonerating the companies for any wrongdoing because the actual employer is the agency not the company. How, furthermore, good practice can be enforced in the 'precarious employment' sector. To blame the individual alone is a mistake and until the companies themselves doing the hiring (without the need for pesky contracts) are held accountable, nothing will change.
Some twat in a blue uniform who thinks he's clever telling some overworked agency driver (with no employment protection whatsoever) that he alone is to blame just doesn't cut the mustard.
The law itself is a cop-out, whereby all blame is attached to the driver; no action is therefore taken to look at company procedure, health and safety issues, time versus workload, tachograph issues or the role of various manpower agencies effectively exonerating the companies for any wrongdoing because the actual employer is the agency not the company. How, furthermore, good practice can be enforced in the 'precarious employment' sector. To blame the individual alone is a mistake and until the companies themselves doing the hiring (without the need for pesky contracts) are held accountable, nothing will change.
Some twat in a blue uniform who thinks he's clever telling some overworked agency driver (with no employment protection whatsoever) that he alone is to blame just doesn't cut the mustard.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
This thoroughly pìsses me off; it's arrogant and condescending.
The way to look at this is for each road user to assess the potential for harm his particular vehicle brings to those around him. The bigger the vehicle, the greater the burden of responsibility and the greater level of care he must exercise.
GC
Linford
Guest
If you run a red light, or you deliberately put yourself in the blind spot of a vehicle as it is executing a maneuver, then you cannot realistically call yourself a victim. If I top my motorbike out at 160+ miles per hour I have made a conscious decision to do that and would hae to face the consequences it it went wrong.
your attitude diminished the value of cycling, it diminished the equality of cyclists as people who have as much right to be on the road as a HGV, a bus, car, or motorcycle.
stowie
Legendary Member
I think Boris is cleverer than this. I think that maybe he, and TfL, are deeply concerned over the publicity and the thought that this might end up in a court case against them. I wouldn't be surprised if he is trying to shift the conversation away from infrastructure for this reason. He surely isn't stupid enough to think that wearing of helmets or not using earphones would have made a material difference to these deaths.
The immediate response appears to be a show of force by the police on the roads, in an effort to stop more deaths and the resultant publicity. This cannot be a sustained strategy (wish it could) so it sounds to me like a brute force approach until the media have found something else to concentrate on. The ban on HGVs is "being considered", so I suspect this means that they will say they are commissioning reports, canvassing experts etc. until such a time that everyone forgets about the latest spate of deaths and they can quietly drop the whole idea.
I might be being rather cynical but I think he has been rather clever. If cyclists say that we are against a headphone ban it sounds like we don't want to protect ourselves, if we say yes it sounds like a tacit admission that cyclists actions are causing the deaths. It plays very well to the lawless lycra lout narrative.
I have to say that I thought Boris would be a force for good for cycling in London. His actions in the past week has proven otherwise.
Linford
Guest
And I would agree with this, but if I got hit off my bike because I'd RLJ's or put myself into a dangerous position, I'd not be looking to blame the driver of another vehicle as you appear to be doing.
If they are guilty, then let them feel the weight of the law, but if they aren't because someone did something very stupid, then why should an innocent HGV driver carry that guilt if they have done nothing wrong ?
Linford
Guest
We have a duty of care to ourself mister...where there is blame, there is a claim....let's blame the guilty eh
Ha! You couldn't make this sh1t up. I'm going to stop now as it's impossible to continue talking to you without committing a gross breach of forum etiquette.
[QUOTE 2777647, member: 9609"]In the 30cases involving HGVs, how many were shown to be the fault of the driver?
How many of the cyclists were demonstrating good cycle-craft before the collision?
I wish they would publish accident reports, not because I have any desire to read the gory details, but it would be so informative to understand what is actually happening, and why the accidents are occurring - that information could go along way in identifying situations to avoid.
Simply saying a cyclist has died in an accident is meaningless without some detail. I know of three cyclists dying within a 25 mile radius of where I live - (only two appear as fatalities). One had a heart attack and the other crashed into the back of a stationery trailer. The one that did not appear in the stats (because he died a year later of his injuries) was hit by a car at one of those pedestrian crossing with the bollards in the centre of the road.[/quote]
HGVs kill cyclists and pedestrians in numbers out of all proportion to any other factors. It's the constant, there-in-black-and-white, stand-out, all-singing-all-dancing, big ugly elephant in the room. The deaths are occurring because a) HGVs and their mode of operation present an extraordinary and unacceptable level of danger and b) this occurs in a road environment in which motor-vehicle dominance is taken for granted and pedestrians and cyclists are marginalized. What exactly do you imagine you need to know?
How many of the cyclists were demonstrating good cycle-craft before the collision?
I wish they would publish accident reports, not because I have any desire to read the gory details, but it would be so informative to understand what is actually happening, and why the accidents are occurring - that information could go along way in identifying situations to avoid.
Simply saying a cyclist has died in an accident is meaningless without some detail. I know of three cyclists dying within a 25 mile radius of where I live - (only two appear as fatalities). One had a heart attack and the other crashed into the back of a stationery trailer. The one that did not appear in the stats (because he died a year later of his injuries) was hit by a car at one of those pedestrian crossing with the bollards in the centre of the road.[/quote]
HGVs kill cyclists and pedestrians in numbers out of all proportion to any other factors. It's the constant, there-in-black-and-white, stand-out, all-singing-all-dancing, big ugly elephant in the room. The deaths are occurring because a) HGVs and their mode of operation present an extraordinary and unacceptable level of danger and b) this occurs in a road environment in which motor-vehicle dominance is taken for granted and pedestrians and cyclists are marginalized. What exactly do you imagine you need to know?
Linford
Guest
If they pay their VED, and are road worthy, they have as much right as anyone else to occupy that space. The courts don't give a monkeys who has the biggest tonka toy, only who is in the right or wrong.
Try and manipulate that process and you might as well throw away the statute book...you seem to be saying that a cyclist should have a god given right to break every law and get away with it...this works well until the errant rider connects with an innocent one.....and then all your stupid new ethos goes up in the air!
Linford
Guest
You cannot criminalise that act because the HGV might have pulled up alongside a stationary cycllist.
What would be argued is 'contributory neglegence'.
steveindenmark
Legendary Member
Every time this subject comes up, the same arguements get ping ponged around.
Some cyclists say that the roads are not suitable for Lgvs. The truck lobby says there is too much traffic on the roads for it to be safe for cyclists.
You can bang on forever about how many cyclists are being killed by being involved in accidents, but at some stage the penny must drop. We are not going to get trucks off the road. The UK need to look at rest of Europe who are trying to sort the problem out by taking bikes off the road and away from the traffic.
Steve
Some cyclists say that the roads are not suitable for Lgvs. The truck lobby says there is too much traffic on the roads for it to be safe for cyclists.
You can bang on forever about how many cyclists are being killed by being involved in accidents, but at some stage the penny must drop. We are not going to get trucks off the road. The UK need to look at rest of Europe who are trying to sort the problem out by taking bikes off the road and away from the traffic.
Steve
steveindenmark
Legendary Member
Adrian,
I have listed that under "the same arguements"
Rightly or wrongly.
Smeggers. We all have the right to be on the road, no doubt. But having the right does not keep us safe.
User,
HGV is the old term for LGV
In Denmark i would think there as many miles of cycle paths outside of towns as there are in towns. Most of our "main" roads have cycle paths. All of our Urban areas have cycle paths. From my house to the centre of the nearest large town is 5 miles. I live in the sticks. 4.5 miles is on cycle paths.
Steve
I have listed that under "the same arguements"
Rightly or wrongly.
Smeggers. We all have the right to be on the road, no doubt. But having the right does not keep us safe.
User,
HGV is the old term for LGV
In Denmark i would think there as many miles of cycle paths outside of towns as there are in towns. Most of our "main" roads have cycle paths. All of our Urban areas have cycle paths. From my house to the centre of the nearest large town is 5 miles. I live in the sticks. 4.5 miles is on cycle paths.
Steve
Last edited:
