Woman cyclist killed in Victoria (tipper truck)

[glenn forger]

[QUOTE 3562279, member: 9609"]is that not just a little bit OTT[/QUOTE]

The link to the truckers' forum included the suggestion that lorries bear a sticker that says

"If you overtake this vehicle and anything happens I am not responsible".

 

[glenn forger]

Our society depends upon Goods vehicles

Half of them in London are empty. Thirty different recycling firms service Regent Street alone. A number of HGV vehicle journeys are completely pointless and their record of flouting safety regulations is appalling.

 

[slowmotion]

How about leaving the subject alone? Somebody was killed. None of us know the details. Blaming people at this early stage seems pretty tasteless. The road layout is dreadful, but none of us know what happened there.

 

[glenn forger]

The biggest threat to cyclists is from the road user most likely to break the law. Worth discussing.

 

[theclaud]

Yes, but do you agree that we must also take care?

Yeah, we should take care on the roads. We should also eat our greens, practice safe sex, and wear a woolly scarf when it's cold. What's it all got to do with the absolute responsibility we all have not to kill and maim others?

 

[theclaud]

[QUOTE 3562279, member: 9609"]is that not just a little bit OTT[/QUOTE]

No (and it was more fun before you edited it). Look at the messages the haulage industry and its drivers are putting out, some deliberately by way of so-called exchange initiatives and the like, some unofficially and informally in places like the present forum:

Our vehicles have huge blind spots.

Even a very careful driver acting responsibly cannot be sure he will not crush anyone with his manoeuvre.

Time and financial pressures make it impossible for drivers to exercise maximum care.

We will rule out measures that involve unpalatable costs to the industry, and support any measure designed to regulate the behaviours of cyclists or highlight their responsibility to stay out of the way.

Despite the fact that few people are prepared to state outright that killing vulnerable road users is a price they are prepared to pay for keeping costs down,it is taken for granted that everyone accepts this. See Lilmo's post above about the value of a cyclist's life and the bounds of financial viability.

Drivers are very worried about killing people, but they overwhelmingly identify their interests as being aligned with those that are putting them under such pressures, often for inadequate pay and under poor conditions. They do not often identify with those that are arguing to reduce this pressure, and therefore the danger to others, by improving pay and working conditions. This kind of third-way mindset is not exclusive to lorry drivers, of course - it's a product of wider socio-economic conditions and decades of profit-driven policy. If we need someone to blame, then let's go for Tony Blair. A little more blood on his hands isn't going to cost him any more shut-eye...

 

[subaqua]

Half of them in London are empty. Thirty different recycling firms service Regent Street alone. A number of HGV vehicle journeys are completely pointless and their record of flouting safety regulations is appalling.

lets blame the tories then. they were the ones that opened the free market up and took the refuse services out of local authority control.

not that will do anything as we have 3 large vehicles up our road for recycling refuse and composting waste. all from the same local authority .

I suppose the broken record of

"its not my responsibility to sort it" will be trotted out again when we ask for real workable solutions .

somebody posted earlier about only being allowed to deliver between 8am and 4 pm. one building i have the pleasure of visiting close to the Barbican ( we have a rented office there) has a strict sign up stating no deliveries BEFORE 08.00 or AFTER 12 noon. so that leaves 4 HOURS FOR ALL ITS DELIVERIES - this is in a Multi tenanted building with 2 food retail units and a restaurant in it.

care to suggest how that can be done or is the broken record coming out again.

another building ( again close to residential ) allows 08.00 to 16.00 for deliveries, as it needs to comply with the pollution act and cannot deliver at night as it disrupts sleep etc.

which puts another negative in that night shift workers are far more likely to have health issues http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25812422 than day shift workers. and remember that it isn't just the driving, its the unloading and storing of the materials for building sites. and beleive me there is not a lot of storage space on sites.



but hey lets bang out a failed argument and keep on about night time, not rush hour , not ......

oh and reducing hours available for deliveries is going to do what . oh yes thats right put MORE TIME PRESSURE on people , something we really don't want.


lower smaller cabs, yes great idea and could work for in the city , but a lot of stuff comes long distance and i can't see the smaller lower cabs working on motorways ( which is where lorries really do belong) so the argument could be for marshalling yards where the long distance big trucks get off loaded onto smaller ones , but is there the space around london ( and all major cites in all honesty ) for this ? No there isn't, and again the costs rise and these get passed on to ??

there is also the drip down effect in that big firms will get the smaller cabs but smaller firms who can't afford to replace a fleet will take a while to get to smaller cabs as they come from the larger companies . so it isn't going to happen over 12 months, 18 months, or even 2 years. maybe 5 to 10 years.

in the mean time lets all have a little think about our own riding and some education and most importantly ENFORCEMENT for all road users who break the law.

ironically this morning it wasn't a tipper that nearly offed me, it was the tw@ in the renault Kangoo. who thought he would pass close enough for me to touch the panels . the tipper driver had given me a mahoosive amount of room . Gordens BTW

 

[glenn forger]

There are quite a few cities that strictly control the ingress of HGVs. The denizens are not starving to death. The shops are stocked. The city functions. People don't get killed by lorry drivers. It's really quite simple.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Yeah, we should take care on the roads. We should also eat our greens, practice safe sex, and wear a woolly scarf when it's cold. What's it all got to do with the absolute responsibility we all have not to kill and maim others?

The way you're putting this comes across (correct me if I'm wrong) as if our (the cyclists) responsibility of taking care is just something that could or could not happen, as if an afterthought.
I disagree. If you ride in heavy traffic, be it by choice or by necessity, you must get some road sense. I'm not saying all cyclists should get training because one could ride every day without ever needing to go on roads.
Yes to more safety measures in vehicles with restricted views, but also more awareness from cyclists of the prospective dangers of riding close to a lorry.
You also said:

Drivers are very worried about killing people, but they overwhelmingly identify their interests as being aligned with those that are putting them under such pressures, often for inadequate pay and under poor conditions. They do not often identify with those that are arguing to reduce this pressure, and therefore the danger to others, by improving pay and working conditions. This kind of third-way mindset is not exclusive to lorry drivers, of course - it's a product of wider socio-economic conditions and decades of profit-driven policy.

Spot on here, it's folks wanting to keep their jobs.
They are in a catch 22 situation. If they kill a cyclist or a pedestrian because they are in a hurry or tired, surely the event will scar them forever, nobody turns their engine on intending to run us over.
If they speak out about their concerns they might not have a job tomorrow.

 

[glenn forger]

If they kill a cyclist or a pedestrian because they are in a hurry or tired, surely the event will scar them forever

A proportion of killer drivers try to blame the person they killed for a perceived failure. Beth Mackie tried to blame the cyclist she killed, Joseph Reed tried to blame other drivers, the lorry driver who left a cyclist in a wheelchair tried to blame the cyclist, Timothy John McLoughlin was so upset after killing a cyclist he fled and went on holiday. Dr Helen Measures tried to blame the cyclist she killed for..being there. The killer of Eilidh Cairns was so upset he didn't even bother to get glasses and killed again.. This idea that all killer drivers are wracked by guilt is a crock, they do any and everything to get off.

 

[w00hoo_kent]

[QUOTE 3562273, member: 9609"]I feel you are wrong to say drivers are colluding with the industry - I can assure you they would welcome less pressure and an easier job, and there will be many in horrible pressurised driving jobs where given an opportunity to tell the boss to sod off and walk into a better job would be a dream come true - there is some half decent jobs in driving, but you will never aspire to them if you tell your current boss to sod off. [/QUOTE]

But is there no governing body, or failing that your local MP that you can complain about the conditions to? Have you ever heard of drivers actually highlighting the problems, even anonymously? Because working in a flawed system without making any attempt to change it is colluding.

Our society depends upon Goods vehicles ( a society in which cyclists are a minority and we are a democracy).

Of course pedestrians are also being killed, we are just highlighting cyclists. Pretty much everyone is a pedestrian, I'd make that the majority interest. The problem is that perpetuating the belief that nothing will work isn't going to get anything fixed.

 

[subaqua]

But is there no governing body, or failing that your local MP that you can complain about the conditions to? Have you ever heard of drivers actually highlighting the problems, even anonymously? Because working in a flawed system without making any attempt to change it is colluding.



Of course pedestrians are also being killed, we are just highlighting cyclists. Pretty much everyone is a pedestrian, I'd make that the majority interest. The problem is that perpetuating the belief that nothing will work isn't going to get anything fixed.

there are solutions, but they cost more than anybody is willing to pay out sadly. the easiest solution is enforcment of the laws we have. if the driver is at work then use the HASAWA etc to prosecute the employer. push for the highest offences and get the evidence. this benefits EVERYBODY . and we can all help in making this happen by writing to our MPs our councilors ( county, Borough , ward, whatever ).
by talking to our employers and getting them to make small changes , i have , rather than groaning about the same things and doing feck all about it.

 

[theclaud]

The way you're putting this comes across (correct me if I'm wrong) as if our (the cyclists) responsibility of taking care is just something that could or could not happen, as if an afterthought.

All I'm saying is that the responsibility not to kill and maim is absolute. It is a measure of how badly we have gone wrong when this is controversial. So it's all very well (although as often as not misguided, insulting and simplistic) profferring advice or guidance for particular circumstances, but it is really neither here nor there unless we can oblige those who are doing the killing to take responsibility for it. It's worth remembering that all advice is contingent, and the thing that it's contingent upon here is the normalization of large motor vehicles dominating public space, and the impunity with which they are able to kill and maim vulnerable road users.

I quite agree that drivers who speak out against the crimes of the industry are courting unpopularity and taking a risk. That, unfortunately, is where we are politically. The consolation is they will find allies both in the same position and elsewhere, and the incentive is that if they continue as they are, backing their paymasters, things can only get worse for them, because the industry's gamble is not going to work and we are not going to surrender our right to the road.

 

[glenn forger]

there are solutions, but they cost more than anybody is willing to pay out sadly.

Each road death = £1m.

The mirrors that many lorry drivers refuse to fit that remove blind spots cost £30.

 

[Dan B]

[QUOTE 3562279, member: 9609"]is that not just a little bit OTT[/QUOTE]
I passed a vehicle the otehr day that had a sticker on it saying something to teh effect of "pedestrians, do not approach this vehicle at any time". How is that anything other than an admission it's dangerous?