Ludgate Circus cyclist tipper lorry
Discussion
Vonhosen -that's absolute rubbish, also - what about Eilidh Cairns, run down by a lorry driver who refused to wear the glasses he needed to correct his vision?
Was it her fault that the lorry driver wouldn't wear his glasses? No, not at all.
It's absolutely baffling why people insist that the victims bear some blame for being the victim.
We're back to 1950's attitudes here, and it's frankly disgusting: "That black/gay/foreign guy should have known never to have gone in there, it's his own fault he got such a beating" etc etc.
Was it her fault that the lorry driver wouldn't wear his glasses? No, not at all.
It's absolutely baffling why people insist that the victims bear some blame for being the victim.
We're back to 1950's attitudes here, and it's frankly disgusting: "That black/gay/foreign guy should have known never to have gone in there, it's his own fault he got such a beating" etc etc.
swisstoni said:
It has to be ignorance or lack of attention that causes these incidents. Basic education like this used to be handled by government campaigns. Annoying as they seemed at the time, the drip drip effect of the Green Cross Code and Clunk Click must have saved thousands of lives.
So what's the answer- annual testing for HGV drivers so the basic lesson of "look before and during your turn" sticks?Diderot said:
Hope she makes a full recovery. But they will just have to learn to not filter down the inside - not exactly a difficult concept to grasp. The number of cyclists I saw last week doing just that in central London beggars belief given all the publicity. Mental.
MInd you, IMO these contraptions need to be banned from the road:
I mean what are otherwise responsible parents thinking when bunging their precious little Johnny in the back of one of these and riding on a busy road? Do they imagine the stupid flag sticking up will save them from being crushed to death? Lunacy.
Started a thread on these a while back... utterly irresponsible to be lugging your kid around a busy main road on one of these. Head high with bumpers, diesel exhausts and half-blind truck drivers.MInd you, IMO these contraptions need to be banned from the road:
I mean what are otherwise responsible parents thinking when bunging their precious little Johnny in the back of one of these and riding on a busy road? Do they imagine the stupid flag sticking up will save them from being crushed to death? Lunacy. 
Dammit said:
Vonhosen -that's absolute rubbish, also - what about Eilidh Cairns, run down by a lorry driver who refused to wear the glasses he needed to correct his vision?
Was it her fault that the lorry driver wouldn't wear his glasses? No, not at all.
It's absolutely baffling why people insist that the victims bear some blame for being the victim.
We're back to 1950's attitudes here, and it's frankly disgusting: "That black/gay/foreign guy should have known never to have gone in there, it's his own fault he got such a beating" etc etc.
Didn't sound like rubbish to me at all and the opposite to the example you give. Was it her fault that the lorry driver wouldn't wear his glasses? No, not at all.
It's absolutely baffling why people insist that the victims bear some blame for being the victim.
We're back to 1950's attitudes here, and it's frankly disgusting: "That black/gay/foreign guy should have known never to have gone in there, it's his own fault he got such a beating" etc etc.
He said if one party makes a mistake, often it's ok because the other party can make allowances and both parties go home happy. It's when the other party is unable to make allowance or also makes a mistake it goes pear shaped.
Assuming there is more than one party
EH? So when he says "there is invariably fault on the side of both parties", how much fault (and of what nature is said fault) belongs to the cyclist for the lorry driver running her down due to uncorrected vision?
And in the Ludgate Circus example, you are, presumably, suggesting that it was the cyclists fault for being at the left hand side of the road when the tipper lorry turned left?
And in the Ludgate Circus example, you are, presumably, suggesting that it was the cyclists fault for being at the left hand side of the road when the tipper lorry turned left?
Dammit said:
Vonhosen -that's absolute rubbish, also - what about Eilidh Cairns, run down by a lorry driver who refused to wear the glasses he needed to correct his vision?
Was it her fault that the lorry driver wouldn't wear his glasses? No, not at all.
It's absolutely baffling why people insist that the victims bear some blame for being the victim.
We're back to 1950's attitudes here, and it's frankly disgusting: "That black/gay/foreign guy should have known never to have gone in there, it's his own fault he got such a beating" etc etc.
Firstly I said without talking about individual cases & secondly I used the word invariably. What I said therefore doesn't cover all cases, it covers the core of cases.Was it her fault that the lorry driver wouldn't wear his glasses? No, not at all.
It's absolutely baffling why people insist that the victims bear some blame for being the victim.
We're back to 1950's attitudes here, and it's frankly disgusting: "That black/gay/foreign guy should have known never to have gone in there, it's his own fault he got such a beating" etc etc.
Day in day out cyclists can be seen putting themselves into positions they shouldn't & day in day out drivers get lazy in the checks or aren't proactive in their checks.
It isn't that in 100% of cases there is blame on both parties, but in the vast majority of cases it will exist. That won't necessarily be 50/50 either, but there is enough of a mistake by both parties that just one doing the right thing could have covered for the other.
If both parties are sufficiently aware & proactive with their & other's safety, then the vast majority of these incidents could be avoided. Not all could be eliminated, but the vast majority could.
Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 19th October 10:05
Dammit said:
swisstoni said:
It has to be ignorance or lack of attention that causes these incidents. Basic education like this used to be handled by government campaigns. Annoying as they seemed at the time, the drip drip effect of the Green Cross Code and Clunk Click must have saved thousands of lives.
So what's the answer- annual testing for HGV drivers so the basic lesson of "look before and during your turn" sticks?Dammit said:
EH? So when he says "there is invariably fault on the side of both parties", how much fault (and of what nature is said fault) belongs to the cyclist for the lorry driver running her down due to uncorrected vision?
He didn't say always.but if youre on a bike and it looks like the truck driver hasnt seen you, if you can make allowances, all will be well with the world
If you cant, the outcome wont be too good
Is that any more than stating the obvious?
Just seems to be lazy victim blaming to me. Where should cyclists "not be"?
I agree that there is some heart-stopping stuff when you see people scoot down the inside of large vehicles, and that that should stop, but "invariably" it's the fault of lazy, innatentive or aggressive driving that causes most accidents.
I agree that there is some heart-stopping stuff when you see people scoot down the inside of large vehicles, and that that should stop, but "invariably" it's the fault of lazy, innatentive or aggressive driving that causes most accidents.
saaby93 said:
e didn't say always.
but if youre on a bike and it looks like the truck driver hasnt seen you, if you can make allowances, all will be well with the world
If you cant, the outcome wont be too good
Is that any more than stating the obvious?
How does that work given the tendency of vehicles to pull alongside then turn in, when it comes to this kind of accident?but if youre on a bike and it looks like the truck driver hasnt seen you, if you can make allowances, all will be well with the world
If you cant, the outcome wont be too good
Is that any more than stating the obvious?
Dammit said:
swisstoni said:
It has to be ignorance or lack of attention that causes these incidents. Basic education like this used to be handled by government campaigns. Annoying as they seemed at the time, the drip drip effect of the Green Cross Code and Clunk Click must have saved thousands of lives.
So what's the answer- annual testing for HGV drivers so the basic lesson of "look before and during your turn" sticks?Dammit said:
saaby93 said:
He didn't say always.
but if youre on a bike and it looks like the truck driver hasnt seen you, if you can make allowances, all will be well with the world
If you cant, the outcome wont be too good
Is that any more than stating the obvious?
How does that work given the tendency of vehicles to pull alongside then turn in, when it comes to this kind of accident?but if youre on a bike and it looks like the truck driver hasnt seen you, if you can make allowances, all will be well with the world
If you cant, the outcome wont be too good
Is that any more than stating the obvious?
But that's not much use to any of us.
If youre on a bike and you see it happening dop back out of closing space, take to the pavement, anything before it gets you.
Do the same if you see a tiger stalking you
Dammit said:
And you're contribution to stopping the classic left-hook would be?
Simultaneously to educate cyclists about the dangers, and explore technological solutions for HGVs. But until I'm in charge of transport policy,the answer is really simple: don't filter up the inside of a lorry or bus. You're saying lorry drivers belong in zoos?
Anyway - there's generally not a lot of point arresting the lorry driver as juries almost never convict due to "there but for the grace of God" issues with poor driving.
See the low conviction rate of drink driving before it was changed to a straight "above this figure and you are guilty".
Anyway - there's generally not a lot of point arresting the lorry driver as juries almost never convict due to "there but for the grace of God" issues with poor driving.
See the low conviction rate of drink driving before it was changed to a straight "above this figure and you are guilty".
Diderot said:
Simultaneously to educate cyclists about the dangers, and explore technological solutions for HGVs. But until I'm in charge of transport policy,the answer is really simple: don't filter up the inside of a lorry or bus.
I'll ask again - how does a cyclist defend against a vehicle coming up alongside and then turning in on them?That's not a filtering issue.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff