Bradley Wiggins calls for safer cycling laws and compulsory helmets

[Linford]

Half the population regularly drive? I was just correcting the figures you chose to use but unsurprisingly you have chosen to use crap figures to make your case.

Half the population are regular occupants in cars - not just drivers - or is this a bit too obvious ?

 

[Linford]

On a cycling forum?

When was the last time you were conveyed in a car ?

 

[Red Light]

I'm agitating for seat belt compliance. why would they need to wear a helmet if they were properly restrained - most occupants who die of head injuries don't buckle up.

But if they wore a helmet and helmets are as good as you claim, it wouldn't matter so much whether or not they buckled up. But look at the numbers you quoted. 2/3rd of motorist deaths were from head injuries and that would only be reduced by 30% if they all wore their seat belts. Which still leaves a large number of belted up motorists who suffered fatal head injuries. Or do they not matter to you?

 

[Linford]

One small flaw.........

You have shown a massively and I suspect deliberately underestimated number of cyclists....

The actual number of cycles in the UK is estimated as 20 million, some 7 times the number you have used to extrapolate your figures!

You just made that up didn't you

 

[Red Light]

Half the population are regular occupants in cars - not just drivers - or is this a bit too obvious ?

Not given the average car occupancy which is a tad over one person.

 

[Red Light]

You just made that up didn't you

He's only following your example. Where did you get your number of 3 million cyclists from? Its less even than the number of bikes sold a year.

 

[Linford]

But if they wore a helmet and helmets are as good as you claim, it wouldn't matter so much whether or not they buckled up. But look at the numbers you quoted. 2/3rd of motorist deaths were from head injuries and that would only be reduced by 30% if they all wore their seat belts. Which still leaves a large number of belted up motorists who suffered fatal head injuries. Or do they not matter to you?

From the World health Organisation Source

Failure to use a seat-belt is a major risk factor for road traffic deaths and injuries
among vehicle occupants. Passengers who were not wearing their seat-belts at the
time of a collision account for the majority of occupant road traffic fatalities. In
addition, passengers who do not wear seat-belts and have a frontal crash are most
likely to suffer a head injury.

 

[Linford]

He's only following your example. Where did you get your number of 3 million cyclists from? Its less even than the number of bikes sold a year.

- Around 8% of the population (3 million people) cycle 3 times a week or more, in total 34% of the population (20 million people) say they cycle one a year or more.
- Approximately 750,000 use a cycle to get to work, either directly (~675,000) or as part of a journey involving others modes, for example, cycling to the station. (Census 2001)

http://beta.ctc.org.uk/ctc-cycling-statistics

Plenty get sold, but not so many get regularly used. What do you class as a 'regular cyclist' as there are a damned sight more than 750k of cars being commuted every day in the UK

 

[Red Light]

From the World health Organisation Source

All your quotes show is that some people get head injuries as a result of not wearing seat belts. They don't say that belted up drivers don't get head injuries or even that their numbers are small. So I repeat, are you not concerned about saving the lives of those belted up drivers who did get a head injury.

P.S. Its good that you've actually started to learn how to use Google now to search for evidence - this thread has apparently achieved that much despite the sceptics. But its no good hopping from data to data as each piece gets shot down. You started with the RoSPA quotes and when those were shown not to do what you wanted, you just abandoned them and hopped onto the WHO report instead.

 

[Linford]

Trusting that there is a point to this, I drove to the supermarket for supplies on Monday.

2 days ago then. That will make you a regular car user. Need to look back to see the relevance of this.

The CTC even state that only 1% of the population are regular cycle commuters in the link above ^ That is a long way off the 30 odd percent which cunobelin just came up with.....

 

[theclaud]

Trusting that there is a point to this, I drove to the supermarket for supplies on Monday.

Sweet!

 

[Linford]

All your quotes show is that some people get head injuries as a result of not wearing seat belts. They don't say that belted up drivers don't get head injuries or even that their numbers are small. So I repeat, are you not concerned about saving the lives of those belted up drivers who did get a head injury.

P.S. Its good that you've actually started to learn how to use Google now to search for evidence - this thread has apparently achieved that much despite the sceptics. But its no good hopping from data to data as each piece gets shot down. You started with the RoSPA quotes and when those were shown not to do what you wanted, you just abandoned them and hopped onto the WHO report instead.

We can go back to the ROSPA ones if you wish.

Cycling Accidents

• Around 75% of fatal or serious cyclist accidents occur in urban areas
• Around half of cyclist fatalities occur on rural roads
• 75% happen at, or near, a road junction
• 80% occur in daylight
• 80% of cyclist casualties are male
• Almost one quarter of the cyclists killed or injured are children
• Around three quarters of cyclists killed have major head injuries.

http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/cycling/facts-figures.aspx

Those LSE ones are quite ridiculous claims wouldn't you agree ?

 

[Linford]

Regular yes. The last time was exactly one year earlier so regular is literally true.

You get your shopping once a year - you must have a huge boot

 

[Linford]

Is it just me but, with 75% occurring in urban areas and around half in rural, there does appear to be a need for further clarification?

Read them again, they state 'fatal and serious' in the first statement.

 

[Red Light]

We can go back to the ROSPA ones if you wish.




Those LSE ones are quite ridiculous claims wouldn't you agree ?

Some interesting cycling numbers from RoSPA but what has that got to do with the topic in question of belted up motorists killed by a head injury?