More cycling deaths

[S10GTA]

I'm getting pretty fed up with seeing anti cycling threads on here. Same old crap gets spouted from both sides.

I've seen two reports of deaths in the last day. A 50 year old killed by a disqualified driver and a 7 year old killed with her dad.

Both links below.

http://road.cc/content/news/152903-police-appeal-w...

http://road.cc/content/news/152907-updated-arrest-...

Can we just all be a bit more careful and respectful please, both on the road and on here. Stop with the cyclists vs drivers and just accept everyone as a road user. Some are idiots, but the vast majority are good.

[vonuber]

Decent cycling infrastructure requires money. We have to spend this money on other important things like vanity projects and lucrative private sector contracts for previously nationalised industries that will provide a decent second job for a mp.

It's all about priorities.

[Cheese Mechanic]

S10GTA said:

I'm getting pretty fed up with seeing anti cycling threads on here. Same old crap gets spouted from both sides.

I've seen two reports of deaths in the last day. A 50 year old killed by a disqualified driver and a 7 year old killed with her dad.

Both links below.

http://road.cc/content/news/152903-police-appeal-w...

http://road.cc/content/news/152907-updated-arrest-...

Can we just all be a bit more careful and respectful please, both on the road and on here. Stop with the cyclists vs drivers and just accept everyone as a road user. Some are idiots, but the vast majority are good.

Who with any sense lets a 7 yr old near a road like that?

Apparently, they were just leaving or had just left the adjacent cycle path. Wonder perhaps if the intent was to cross the road, the cyclists that is.

Awful tragedy.

[frisbee]

Cheese Mechanic said:

Who with any sense lets a 7 yr old near a road like that?

Apparently, they were just leaving or had just left the adjacent cycle path. Wonder perhaps if the intent was to cross the road, the cyclists that is.

Awful tragedy.

I don't see how going out for a cycle ride with a 7 year old on a shared foot/cycle path is a senseless thing.

[Mojocvh]

frisbee said:

I don't see how going out for a cycle ride with a 7 year old on a shared foot/cycle path is a senseless thing.

In normal circumstances no. But being killed isn't normal I would say.

Terrible tragedy indeed.

[Cheese Mechanic]

frisbee said:

I don't see how going out for a cycle ride with a 7 year old on a shared foot/cycle path is a senseless thing.

Unguarded on a fast busy A road? The child is dead, how much senseless do you want.

[PoleDriver]

Regarding the second incident, the tanker driver was without insurance and disqualified, this probably had some bearing on the accident!
It should be useful to know why he was disqualified and how he came to be driving a tanker!

[Mojocvh]

PoleDriver said:

Regarding the second incident, the tanker driver was without insurance and disqualified, this probably had some bearing on the accident!
It should be useful to know why he was disqualified and how he came to be driving a tanker!

Indeed.

[jagnet]

It was the van driver that was arrested rather than the tanker driver: http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/walton...

[PoleDriver]

jagnet said:

It was the van driver that was arrested rather than the tanker driver: http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/walton...

Not according to the article in the OP.
Seems the press are as consistent and reliable as always!

[jagnet]

PoleDriver said:

Seems the press are as consistent and reliable as always!

[frisbee]

Cheese Mechanic said:

Unguarded on a fast busy A road? The child is dead, how much senseless do you want.

So you're basically saying no one can walk or ride anywhere near an A road unless there is a barrier in the way? A barrier capable of absorbing the impact of a 40 ton truck? s this a 5m zone? A 50m zone? Is there a distance limit?

Have you heard of this thing called reality?

[Stevanos]

vonuber said:

Decent cycling infrastructure requires money. We have to spend this money on other important things like vanity projects and lucrative private sector contracts for previously nationalised industries that will provide a decent second job for a mp.

It's all about priorities.

In West Sussex, the council has provided dedicated cycle lanes just off busy roads, but cyclists choose to use the road instead and I'm not talking about a few, it is most of the lycra wearers. The rest of the cyclists, average day-to-day users are fine with it.

[anonymous-user]

S10GTA said:

Can we just all be a bit more careful and respectful please, both on the road and on here.

Apparently not.............

[Diderot]

Stevanos said:

vonuber said:

Decent cycling infrastructure requires money. We have to spend this money on other important things like vanity projects and lucrative private sector contracts for previously nationalised industries that will provide a decent second job for a mp.

It's all about priorities.

In West Sussex, the council has provided dedicated cycle lanes just off busy roads, but cyclists choose to use the road instead and I'm not talking about a few, it is most of the lycra wearers. The rest of the cyclists, average day-to-day users are fine with it.

Indeed - I cannot for the life of me understand why these mentalists persist in riding along th A27 between Chichester and Fontwell. And that's when they're not doing their 'time trials' along the same stretch. Death wish. Likewise the A286 between Lavant and Singleton. Mental.

[Zigster]

Stevanos said:

In West Sussex, the council has provided dedicated cycle lanes just off busy roads, but cyclists choose to use the road instead and I'm not talking about a few, it is most of the lycra wearers. The rest of the cyclists, average day-to-day users are fine with it.

From your tone, I'm guessing you're not a cyclist...

There are several reasons why "lycra wearers" might choose to use the roads rather than cycle lanes:
Cycling facility of the month
Government guidance

Out of interest, what West Sussex cycle lanes were you thinking of?

[Diderot]

Zigster said:

Stevanos said:

In West Sussex, the council has provided dedicated cycle lanes just off busy roads, but cyclists choose to use the road instead and I'm not talking about a few, it is most of the lycra wearers. The rest of the cyclists, average day-to-day users are fine with it.

From your tone, I'm guessing you're not a cyclist...

There are several reasons why "lycra wearers" might choose to use the roads rather than cycle lanes:
Cycling facility of the month
Government guidance

Out of interest, what West Sussex cycle lanes were you thinking of?

Probably the ones that HE pays for out of HIS council theft tax.

[Cheese Mechanic]

frisbee said:

So you're basically saying no one can walk or ride anywhere near an A road unless there is a barrier in the way? A barrier capable of absorbing the impact of a 40 ton truck? s this a 5m zone? A 50m zone? Is there a distance limit?

Have you heard of this thing called reality?

Yes, its called having responsibility for a 7 year old

[exgtt]

RIP to those involved, been commuting to work for 5 years on a bike, had 3 or 4 near misses but the drivers involved recognised what happened and appologised. I think most motorists are cycle aware. Seen countless countless cyclists put themselves in danger.

More money needs to be put into cycle lanes for sure (proper ones, not lines on the road)

My n01 fear is being hit from behind from no fault of my own which could have contributed from the above deaths. You could be hit head on in a car by a lorry with failed brakes.

Roads are dangerous but i dont see cycle ignorent drivers that oftern.

Issue is you can buy a bike and take to the roads with no training. Having done a CBT i dont think thats enough to take to the roads on a 125.

I dont however want a test before you can ride a bicycle

Makes no sense i know

[oyster]

Stevanos said:

vonuber said:

Decent cycling infrastructure requires money. We have to spend this money on other important things like vanity projects and lucrative private sector contracts for previously nationalised industries that will provide a decent second job for a mp.

It's all about priorities.

In West Sussex, the council has provided dedicated cycle lanes just off busy roads, but cyclists choose to use the road instead and I'm not talking about a few, it is most of the lycra wearers. The rest of the cyclists, average day-to-day users are fine with it.

Why do these posts come up time and time again?

Cycle lanes are not compulsory. Just like it's not compulsory for a car to go on a motorway next to an adjacent A road.

FFS, this is simple.