i hear what you say about the need to stay positive.
but the fact is that very many people do say it is too dangerous to cycle.
certainly more than say it is safe.
Of course. It is a major anomaly in this country. You'd almost never hear that on the Continent (even where cycling levels are low). It's the result of 80+ years of the pervasive "road safety" culture aimed at getting cyclists and pedestrians off the carriageways of the streets and roads. A good book to read on all this is "Death on the Streets" by Bob Davis.
"The streets/traffic/roads are dangerous" is both false and a perfect excuse not to be part of the solution. Of course road danger needs to be reduced--no-one can deny that there are dangerous and risky situations, brought about by entirely avoidable causes. However, people are caught in the double bind of on the one hand thinking that it's too 'dangerous' to cycle and on the other hand continuing to drive.
It is only by realising that danger is not all-pervasive and that there are very clear solutions to the problems that we can improve things. Continuing to perpetuate indiscriminate danger messages will never convince political will to invest in cycling--who would want to support something that's too 'dangerous'?
I am of course not just saying that for the sake of political lobbying. It's what I firmly believe, based on extensive experience of studying and trying to understand traffic and transportation.
Again, there's lots to do and we need all the help we can get.
and i just dont need some lorry drivers to tell me how and where to ride my bike.
it strikes me that they are saying hey cyclist you need to stay out of our way.
That's exactly what they are saying. They're obviously wrong. It's upsetting, of course, but why? Why would they be put out by someone riding their bike along the street? Surely they should be able to take it in their stride if they were calm, relaxed, and happy? It's hardly a major inconvenience not to be able to race up to the end of the next traffic queue, only to get stopped there.
The truth is that most of the time, people who shout this sort of thing are stressed and also hemmed in by prejudices with which they probably wouldn't agree if they thought about them. They are often helpless victims trying to fight back--but of course not against the people who victimise them and instead against people whom they think they can victimise.
The next time you have such an encounter, think about who is more stressed: they or you? If you allow them to transfer their stress to you, which is part of what they want, even if they are not aware of it, it might well be you. But otherwise be friendly and help them through their day a little bit. You're out riding your bike--you're probably having a far better time of it than they are. Try to show that to them.
i am wondering where the health and safety executive and rospa are on road death and injury ?
they seem to be silent ?
Well, I would say that ROSPA are not the people to appeal to. There's a stub of a discussion on other H&S stuff here:
Of course. It is a major anomaly in this country. You'd almost never hear that on the Continent (even where cycling levels are low). It's the result of 80+ years of the pervasive "road safety" culture aimed at getting cyclists and pedestrians off the carriageways of the streets and roads. A good book to read on all this is "Death on the Streets" by Bob Davis.
"The streets/traffic/roads are dangerous" is both false and a perfect excuse not to be part of the solution. Of course road danger needs to be reduced--no-one can deny that there are dangerous and risky situations, brought about by entirely avoidable causes. However, people are caught in the double bind of on the one hand thinking that it's too 'dangerous' to cycle and on the other hand continuing to drive.
It is only by realising that danger is not all-pervasive and that there are very clear solutions to the problems that we can improve things. Continuing to perpetuate indiscriminate danger messages will never convince political will to invest in cycling--who would want to support something that's too 'dangerous'?
I am of course not just saying that for the sake of political lobbying. It's what I firmly believe, based on extensive experience of studying and trying to understand traffic and transportation.
Again, there's lots to do and we need all the help we can get.
That's exactly what they are saying. They're obviously wrong. It's upsetting, of course, but why? Why would they be put out by someone riding their bike along the street? Surely they should be able to take it in their stride if they were calm, relaxed, and happy? It's hardly a major inconvenience not to be able to race up to the end of the next traffic queue, only to get stopped there.
The truth is that most of the time, people who shout this sort of thing are stressed and also hemmed in by prejudices with which they probably wouldn't agree if they thought about them. They are often helpless victims trying to fight back--but of course not against the people who victimise them and instead against people whom they think they can victimise.
The next time you have such an encounter, think about who is more stressed: they or you? If you allow them to transfer their stress to you, which is part of what they want, even if they are not aware of it, it might well be you. But otherwise be friendly and help them through their day a little bit. You're out riding your bike--you're probably having a far better time of it than they are. Try to show that to them.
Well, I would say that ROSPA are not the people to appeal to. There's a stub of a discussion on other H&S stuff here:
http://www.lfgss.com/post1268815-36.html
May give some information--it's not total inactivity in this area, but of course, again, more can be done and need to be campaigned for.