You are reading a single comment by @somebody and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • "They are simply trying to find a theory to explain an observed pattern."

    Their theory doesn't fit with what we know about HGVs involved in fatal RTAs with cyclists. Plus, there's the danger that a lorry driver is sometimes the only living witness. "The cyclist undertook" is offered as an excuse. Case closed. There was a roadside check of lorries in London fairly recently. Every single one of the lorries stopped were on the roads illegally, or were illegally faulty, the tacho was fiddled or the driver was uninsured or on a mobile.

    i think you are absolutely right to post this and it is relevant to the debate.

    i think a lot of vehicles on the road are illegal. many people that drive cannot afford to. but they still do so because driving is the default mode of transport in the uk for example. and i think in this way the oil industry and motor industry are criminalising the less well off. and further that because the government are not doing much about this they are acquiescing in this awful state of affairs.

    i think the government need to redesign our built environment so that people can travel for free (walking and cycling) safely. rather than at the moment many feel intimidated when they walk or cycle.

    and the government needs to reduce the number of illegal vehicles on the road.

    and then hopefully the public realm would be very different (better, quieter and safer for everybody).

    have a lovely weekend everybody.

About

Avatar for somebody @somebody started