Unhelpful comments by Wiggins after tragic accident

[Red Light]

Cycling up the inside of a long vehicle without an escape route is potentially suicidal. It may be inexperience or it may be foolhardiness. Its not something anyone with any sense of road safety is going to argue with. Its a grade 1 danger

I guess then the designers of the feeder lanes to ASLs have no sense of road safety then,

 

[StuartG]

I guess then the designers of the feeder lanes to ASLs have no sense of road safety then,

Not necessarily. Sometimes they are useful. Sometimes they are lethal. It can depend on traffic conditions. It is up to the cyclist to decide which, when. I agree with you when they are set alongside railings making escape impossible, hence dangerous at all times.

I just go against blanket assertions.

 

[Red Light]

I just go against blanket assertions.

Is that not a blanket assertion?

 

[david k]

Going from being on top of the world yesterday to finding himself immersed in a big controversy of his own making today. All for suggesting that someone who seemingly died of massive internal abdominal injuries could have been saved by wearing a helmet.

Did he suggest that the mans life would have been saved (from internal injuries) had he wore a helmet?

 

[david k]

@sidevalve.

I will also add that this is very bad risk assessment. PPE (which the HSE do not recognise cycle helmets as) should be the last line of defence, after behavioural and intrinsic structural change to a task, not an alternative to it.

PPE is never brought in as an alternative to other safety measure. It is brought in alongside it as the last line of defense as you go on to say.

sidevalve did not suggest helmets compulsion should be done instead of other safety measure

 

[david k]

Wow, you are better at twisting than Wiggo's journalists! Here, for you, is what I said. "one of the main things I like about cycling is not having to wear a helmet, I hardly ever ride my motorbike these days," Does that read "I don't ride a motorbike because I have to wear a helmet"? Of course not, or why would I have a bloody motorbike and scooter? It means, simply, that some days, with free time and a choice of leisure transport, I prefer the cycle over the m/bike and enjoy a helmet free ride. I don't like wearing a helmet and whilst I've a choice, I won't. So there.

is it the non wearing of a helmet that affects your decision to ride the bicycle instead of the motorbike?

 

[mcshroom]

PPE is never brought in as an alternative to other safety measure. It is brought in alongside it as the last line of defense as you go on to say.

sidevalve did not suggest helmets compulsion should be done instead of other safety measure

If [more likely when] helmets are made compusory by all means let the grumblers chuck their bikes in a skip and sit in a corner and mutter about choice and leave more room on the roads for those of us who just want to get out there and enjoy cycling and are prepared to accept wearing a helmet that weighs naff all, only costs a few pounds and may offer some protection in a fall as a small price to pay.

So where are the suggestions to do anything but add a helmet then?

It is poor risk assessment as I stated. Instead of actually making roads safer, you add an unproven item of headgear which may or may not have any benefit (or indeed increase one's danger).

 

[david k]

j

So where are the suggestions to do anything but add a helmet then?

It is poor risk assessment as I stated. Instead of actually making roads safer, you add an unproven item of headgear which may or may not have any benefit (or indeed increase one's danger).

Just because something was not specifically stated does not mean the opposite was meant.

Maybe rather than make an assumption of what he meant you could simply ask him to clarify if this is the case. It would stop any unnecessary friction from unfounded claims. Or 'putting words into his mouth'

Please tell me how an individual could construct a risk assessment and then 'make roads safer' before taking to their bicycle

 

[mcshroom]

Compulsion is not a personal decision but a governmental one. Why should we ask the individual?

 

[david k]

Compulsion is not a personal decision but a governmental one. Why should we ask the individual?

it was his view not the governments and you replied to him, however......

presuming the government is what you meant when you first replied and you addressed them and not him. Have the government done nothing to make roads safer for cyclists? I know they have around here and they also havnt made wearing helmets compulsory, therefore in your view they are doing it correctly as per your risk assessment?