Someone Ran me over..

[platypus]

See now if I saw you on the road without one I'd want to run you off the road just so I could see some soup splash

You have serious issues if you think this in any way.

Also too the people that want these cycle ways feel free to start a charity for it (Maybe cycle tax ), I'd like potholes filling in but they are still in the road damaging peoples cars that actually pay tax for that tarmac.

Did you really go down the road tax route? Oh dear.

 

[joeyjojo]

Tell any Dutch person that you should be wearing a helmet, and watch them laugh in your face.

How much does that have to do with the Netherlands having possibly the best cycling infrastructure in the world?

If I could ride on bike paths the whole way to work I probably wouldn't wear a helmet either.

 

[platypus]

How much does that have to do with the Netherlands having possibly the best cycling infrastructure in the world?

Undoubtedly a lot. It also has a lot to do with their attitude.

If I could ride on bike paths the whole way to work I probably wouldn't wear a helmet either.

This is where the problem lies. No long term-ism. It shouldn't be a case of whether or not you can cycle on bike paths, but rather that the roads are safe enough for you to do so. It'll never happen in this country of course though.

 

[Roady]

We'll continue to argue things that don't really matter, our government will continue to pretend to give a **** about cycling, whilst cutting funding to it and pandering to the motoring lobbyists

Pretty much it.

I personally don't like to trust my 'increased risk' (by cycling) to 3rd parties (like drivers and government), taking whatever personal measures I feel necessary to increase my safety. Equally, I take this choice of increased risk (riding) to benefit my long term health benefits, drastically reducing hidden health risks like heart disease & obesity.

You need to take away your emotional influence, and look at the figures objectively.

OK. Personal stats. Have come off my bike 3 times in what I would call 'accidents'. 2 were my fault, 1 was someone else's. In two of those accidents my head has hit the floor with enough force to damage a helmet. None of these accidents would I class as 'major' (all minor).

So I'll continue to wear a helmet. Here is the distinction most here are missing - IT IS MY CHOICE TO DO SO!

There was a study in Australia that suggests more accidents happen whenbthe cycling population wear more helmets, but it doesn't go into much more detail than that, so we don't know how many were trivial, and how many were more serious. Or indeed how many trivial accidents went unreported, so it's very difficult to get an accurate picture.

Not targetting you matty (just quoting because you're making good points really!). There has been many more studies in Australia around safety when cycling than anywhere else - much surrounding helmets. The point I'd like to make - it is law to wear a cycling helmet when cycling in Australia.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

I wouldn't. Cuts out on my hearing too much Do get what you mean, though.

I wear headphones so not bothered about the hearing thing. Thinking about getting some bone conduction headphones though.

 

[platypus]

So I'll continue to wear a helmet. Here is the distinction most here are missing - IT IS MY CHOICE TO DO SO!

I don't see anyone telling you that you shouldn't wear a helmet, and I think most people support your right to make that choice.

The debate never changes with people telling others that they should be wearing helmets though.

Not targetting you matty (just quoting because you're making good points really!). There has been many more studies in Australia around safety when cycling than anywhere else - much surrounding helmets. The point I'd like to make - it is law to wear a cycling helmet when cycling in Australia.

Ah yes, Australia. That paragon of cycling. Or..not. One of the most overly draconian governments when it comes to cycling, that has systematically reduced the number of cyclists in the country amidst a burgeoning obesity crisis.

The British governments record is pretty bad when it comes to cycling, but it's not a patch on Australia's.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

So I'll continue to wear a helmet. Here is the distinction most here are missing - IT IS MY CHOICE TO DO SO!

That's pretty much what we're saying - it's a personal choice whether to wear a helmet or not.

I wont call anyone stupid for wearing a helmet, but you'll see plenty of people calling others idiots for not wearing one.

It's one thing I hate seeing in court cases where a motorist has caused an accident, with the defence lawyer arguing "well, if they had been wearing a helmet they wouldn't have been as badly injured, therefore our client isn't liable for damages". Erm, no. If your client hadn't have caused the accident, then there would be any injuries full stop. Fortunately, 99% of the time this argument gets dismissed with the contempt it deserves. You see the argument with regards to wearing high vis as well which again generally gets dismissed out of hand.

 

[jonneymendoza]

So the general consense is that wearing a helmet is useless for cycling in some cases and is not part of a law to do so.

And countries that inforced a law to wear helmets have had people stop cycling because of it?

 

[Dis86]

So the general consense is that wearing a helmet is useless for cycling in some cases and is not part of a law to do so.

And countries that inforced a law to wear helmets have had people stop cycling because of it?

Pretty much, yeah.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

So the general consense is that wearing a helmet is useless for cycling in some cases and is not part of a law to do so.

And countries that inforced a law to wear helmets have had people stop cycling because of it?

Spot on - with the added caveat that evidence suggests wearing a helmet changes the way (some) drivers behave towards you with an increase in close passes and risky manoeuvres evident.

There is even evidence that (some) cyclists take more risks when wearing a helmet due to a feeling of invincibility . It's analogous to (some) drivers of 4x4's being maniacs on the road. That's something I need to read up more on.

 

[jonneymendoza]

But in some cases it is useful to have a helmet on?

 

[Cosimo]

But in some cases it is useful to have a helmet on?

Indeed it is...

How is the bike?

 

[Dunks]

[snip]

Also too the people that want these cycle ways feel free to start a charity for it (Maybe cycle tax ), I'd like potholes filling in but they are still in the road damaging peoples cars that actually pay tax for that tarmac.

Oh my god, are you really stating that road tax pays for roads?

Road upkeep comes from general taxation, something that I pay a considerable amout towards, certainly more than a large percentage of road users no doubt.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

But in some cases it is useful to have a helmet on?

Yeah - there's no doubt it would help protect from mild bumps, cuts and scratches.

But I'm not really bothered about those - that's what a skull is for and scratches and grazes don't bother me.

 

[jas72]

Too many dangerous cyclists about

I've started cycling since Jan so now 11 months. It's a 6KM ride each way and I'm lucky that 2km of that is on a cycle path.

I have to agree with Koolpc that most of my near misses have been with other cyclists.

Overtaking with no space between me the cars and pavement going through red lights and causing cars to brake sharply or thinking that dressing in the latest cycling gear gives them right of way.

This happens to me daily.... Grrrr

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3xBDLfq-LM


Cars for the most part have been really courteous which has surprised me since it must be very frustrating watching bikes ignore most road rules each day.

I have had to mount the pavement once due to a car giving me no room on the road but for the most part it's been ok. I cycle really defensively and expect all car drivers not to see me or want to kill me

 

[Doogles]

Oh my god, are you really stating that road tax pays for roads?

Road upkeep comes from general taxation, something that I pay a considerable amout towards, certainly more than a large percentage of road users no doubt.

Well road tax was originally meant for that before they started giving it out in welfare, otherwise what is the point in road tax? How much money do you think is made from it? How many cars on the road in britain? Say 20 million cars pay £100 a year that make £2 billion easily, and £100 road tax is low compared to how much is on higher polluting vehicles. Maybe 20 million cars on the road is a little high but you get the idea.

 

[platypus]

Well road tax was originally meant for that before they started giving it out in welfare, otherwise what is the point in road tax? How much money do you think is made from it? How many cars on the road in britain? Say 20 million cars pay £100 a year that make £2 billion easily, and £100 road tax is low compared to how much is on higher polluting vehicles. Maybe 20 million cars on the road is a little high but you get the idea.

I certainly do get the idea that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

Giving road tax out in welfare? What are you babbling about? There isn't any such thing as road tax. It was gotten rid of in 1937, and even when it did exist, only a tiny fraction of money for roads came from road tax, with the majority coming from local taxation.

The amount of tax received from VED is nowhere near enough to pay for the upkeep of the roads (it's just under £6Bn/year since you don't seem to know); ergo we all pay for them whether we use them or not.

 

[Dunks]

Well road tax was originally meant for that before they started giving it out in welfare, otherwise what is the point in road tax? How much money do you think is made from it? How many cars on the road in britain? Say 20 million cars pay £100 a year that make £2 billion easily, and £100 road tax is low compared to how much is on higher polluting vehicles. Maybe 20 million cars on the road is a little high but you get the idea.

Who cares if it was or wasn't? It's been counted general taxation from 1937.

Your point was that cyclists are damaging peoples cars (lol) on the roads that car drivers pay for, which they don't, anyone who pays tax pays for the roads.

 

[Jamesyboyjim]

I cycle really defensively and expect all car drivers not to see me or want to kill me

You are a sensible man! Some like to think their own safety is everyone else's problem.

On the whole though most cyclists I come across are perfectly fine and will signal when they need to change lanes etc.

The worst two wheeled culprits are the L plate bikers, usually those on scooters and mopeds. Saw one yesterday on my drive home cutting through every gap he could, over and undertaking and using the cycle path to get round cars. I see bikers overtaking etc everyday but this guy made me think to myself he's playing with fire! ten minutes later when I get to the front of the traffic and round the corner I see he's been knocked off! Ouch!

Being an 'indestructible teenager' combined with an inexperience of the road is a nasty combination!

 

[Lethal`]

Well road tax was originally meant for that before they started giving it out in welfare, otherwise what is the point in road tax? How much money do you think is made from it? How many cars on the road in britain? Say 20 million cars pay £100 a year that make £2 billion easily, and £100 road tax is low compared to how much is on higher polluting vehicles. Maybe 20 million cars on the road is a little high but you get the idea.

And that's the part where it's kinda unfair... I pay £500 a year (seems to have gone up £5-10 every year) yet I only do about 3k miles a year. Overall my emissions output is likely less than road users that do more miles a year but I still have to pay more. They should add it to fuel really.

I'm a cyclist too. (in b4 cyclist paying road tax shocker)