PhilDawson8270
Veteran
She chose to have a chat on her mobile.
EU should do something useful and build signal blockers into all motor vehicles. So that there's no phone signal inside the vehicle at all. I bet that would save a lot
She chose to have a chat on her mobile.
Whilst loosing the country billions in revenue from business reliant upon communication.EU should do something useful and build signal blockers into all motor vehicles. So that there's no phone signal inside the vehicle at all. I bet that would save a lot
Whilst loosing the country billions in revenue from business reliant upon communication.
More thought, less reaction
Nationally yes, but London specifically to keep the situations in context? and in the same time period?That's right nationally. So 1.8% of pedestrians injured and hurt by cyclists, who are 2% of traffic, so cyclists are less likely to injure peds than drivers even after you allow for the respective disparate numbers.
Yes we have got that but it is a bit meaningless without the context of ratio of cycles to motor vehicles in the same city in the same time span.In London (1998-2007), just 2% of pedestrian collision injuries on the pavement involved cycles; the other 98% involved motor vehicles.8
http://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_public/pedestrians4rrv2.pdf
Yes we have got that but it is a bit meaningless without the context of ratio of cycles to motor vehicles in the same city in the same time span.
Again with the repeats. Context please & similar link as you're providing for collisions, what proportion of traffic were cyclists in that now quite distant time span in London?Cyclists are 2% of traffic nationally, much higher in London, yet cyclists are LESS likely to injure a ped nationally or in London.
Hands up all them cyclists that have never ever cycled on a footpath!!!
Cyclists are 2% of traffic nationally, much higher in London, yet cyclists are LESS likely to injure a ped nationally or in London.