Another HGV death in London (split from original thread)

[Origamist]

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.

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.

Indeed - it's a classic diversionary tactic. Boris has form in this area. In 2012 he said:

"I've seen a figure, I think, of 62%, which is the high proportion of cycling KSIs that are associated with some infraction by the cyclists themselves of the rules of the road."

When asked for corroboration of this figure, none was forthcoming from TFL, TRL, City Hall, or The Met.

It's also worth remembering that Bojo "used" to be an inveterate RLJer and would squeeze along the inside of buses. I would take everything he says regarding cyclist safety with a large pinch of salt...

 

[theclaud]

Where do you get that from?

The usual place...

 

[theclaud]

It's also worth remembering that Bojo "used" to be an inveterate RLJer and would squeeze along the inside of buses. I would take everything he says regarding cyclist safety with a large pinch of salt...

https://twitter.com/adamtranter/status/402767072608153600/photo/1

 

[theclaud]

No left turn danger right there and you can see the light cleanly enabling you to judge whether or not you can make it before things start moving. The only problem is that the light is green, so that lorry is going to be moving already or very soon.

I've not really got a problem with the manoeuvre - only with Boris being a ****.

 

[Linford]

Combine this stuff with the earlier "If you want to play in the traffic with the big boys", and see Linford's true colours.

What true colours mightthey be then ?

A bicycle on the highway is a serious proposition when mixing it up with other vehicles. It is a very quick and cost effective mode of transport in an urban area. It is most certainly not a childs toy as this public highway environment is not a sterilised playground.
Don't dilute its value by implying that user standards should be any less than any other mode. Those standards are what keeps its riders alive.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

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 ?

You are ascribing to me something I haven't said.
I don't think I can put it any simpler than I already have.

GC

 

[theclaud]

You are ascribing to me something I haven't said.
I don't think I can put it any simpler than I already have.

GC

Oodathortit?!

 

[theclaud]

Where do you get this idea from?

See post #127

 

[PK99]

As anyone who knows anything about the Mid Staffs case knows, the figure of 1,200 additional deaths is a complete urban myth - whipped up by the media who who misunderstood and misrepresented the statistics. In the Francis report it is made clear that the figure is spurious...

thank you for that link - most informative. As always the press take the dramatic spin while boring science takes a back seat

 

[RedRider]

Indeed - it's a classic diversionary tactic. Boris has form in this area. In 2012 he said:

"I've seen a figure, I think, of 62%, which is the high proportion of cycling KSIs that are associated with some infraction by the cyclists themselves of the rules of the road."

When asked for corroboration of this figure, none was forthcoming from TFL, TRL, City Hall, or The Met.

It's also worth remembering that Bojo "used" to be an inveterate RLJer and would squeeze along the inside of buses. I would take everything he says regarding cyclist safety with a large pinch of salt...

He went through a red light avoiding a collision with me by inches. We both slammed the brakes on. He bumbled through a 'charming' apology and we went our separate ways. This was more than a decade ago, I remember it was around the time he'd made some crass remark about church bells and Ken Bigley.

 

[stowie]

[MET Chief Superintendent Glynn] Jones said half of all cyclists killed on London’s roads since January 2010 have been going down the inside of lorries, adding: “They may well have the right to be there but the fact is it is a dangerous manoeuvre

From : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24989985

54 cyclists have died since 2010, 30 of them in collision with HGVs. So the above statistic means that 27 were in a situation with the cyclist progressing down the inside of the lorry whilst only 3 involving HGVs weren't.

Not sure what to make of this. The number I have above includes the six recently killed by HGVs.where I would assume that the exact circumstances are being investigated. If I eliminate these 6 from the figures it means every single instance of HGV / cyclist collision had the cyclist undertaking - which seems not to chime with some reports of some of the accidents. Because of a lack of information about the circumstances of the incidents I guess it is almost impossible to work out exactly what he means by going down the inside. It sounds as if in all these cases the cyclists were undertaking large lorries but maybe he means the number hit by the side of the HGV?

 

[newfhouse]

'They still kill' is a fairly unambiguous statement. If that isn't specifically what you mean, would you like to reword it ?

No, it stands. Are you going to answer the question or simply use this as a diversion? Why are so many cyclists killed by vehicles that make up such a small proportion of the traffic in London?

 

[newfhouse]

To kill implies responsibility for the death of someone. You cannot make that claim if the person has deliberately put themselves in harms way....would you say that a train driver is responsible for the death of someone who lies down on the track and waits for it to roll over them ?

Another false analogy I'm afraid, and a rather distasteful one. How many cyclists go out with the intention to commit suicide?

 

[newfhouse]

At the risk of appearing harsh here, good. I am comfortable with a one strike and you are out policy for all drivers involved in another person's death.

An acceptable risk under the circumstances I think.

 

[Linford]

Where do you get this idea from?

Another false analogy I'm afraid, and a rather distasteful one. How many cyclists go out with the intention to commit suicide?

Obviously not what people set out to do, but that is realistically what happens when they put themselves between a set of railings and a left turning HGV.
You might find it distasteful, but this is a far too regular an occurrence. If people are ignorant of the dangers of this maneuver, they shouldn't be riding in this environment.