The Times Cycling Campaign

more blood on the road stuff
how is all this going the 'get more people cycling'?

I don't think Telegraph commenters really care.

It's like the Daily Mail, but with more UKIP members, and an unhealthy fascination with Kiera Knightly. Oh and that tool Toby Young.

even bikebiz are reporting DfT stats show that road danger decreasing for all but cyclists without addressing the fact that many more people are cycling so probably proportionally cycling has become less rsiky
http://www.lfgss.com/thread35356-5.html#post2669904
http://www.bikebiz.com//news/read/dft-stats-show-that-road-danger-decreasing-for-all-but-cyclists

I have re-tweeted the The Times campaign thing from the @lfgss account.

Do I think the 8 points should be seriously looked at? Yes.

Do I think it's the be-all and end-all of campaigning that should be done? No.

The best thing is simply to have more people cycling, and if The Times helps to slowly bring about an increased confidence that cycling is improving (later in their campaign) and that people are listening, then that could make a difference to some.

It seems silly not to support it, even if we don't think it's a comprehensive campaign. Anything that gets the message out there, and creates a bit of heat for the Mayoral candidates in our favour will be a good thing I reckon.

I haven't read page 2 of this thread, you may have all explained why I'm wrong to think it's half-decent.

I regret the Daily Mail style tone used in The Times piece, language designed to provoke fear and horror, e.g. people being 'thrown under lorries' etc. I would be interested in how much they've worked with other orgs (LCC, BC, Sustrans etc). At least they titled it 'cities fit for cycling' and not 'cities safe for cycling'.

No sympathy at all. I'm a pedestrian and I'm sick of them. They ride on the footpath, totally ignore red lights at junctions and pedestrian crossings. One came so close to me on the footpath recently I grabbed him and pulled him off his bike. Pedestrians should fight back. Shout at them, grab them. Hit them with rolled up newspapers. These selfish bastards often don't seem to realise they are doing anything wrong.

.

Coming to a crime statistic near you soon.

If someone cycles towards me on a pavement, I must confess that I am inclined to use my shoulder to put them off balance. I work on the presumption that anyone cycling on the pavement over the age of 12 is likely to be doing so in order to rob or assault pedestrians and I will defend myself.

Cycling on the pavement is intolerable and we as responsible cyclists should condemn it.

I think we should put forward the 1 meter law, cars arent allowed to come closer than 1 meter to a cyclist, or they will be fined or whatever.

we already have similar (overtake as you would a car, rule 163).

as for getting fined, like skydancer said, unenforceable, like the driving with mobile phone (seeing them a dozen a time everyday definitely doesn't look like it's working).

Signed, and letter to David Lammy local MP

Taking a bath isn't dangerous. But people die having one. Does this mean baths should be said as dangerous?

Journalists are great a scaremongering. It is one of the industries worst traits.

However. The press can also promote awareness, and for this issue that's great. It can only grow from here.

we should support this if only to
'not let the perfect be the enemy of the good'
(Voltaire)

If someone cycles towards me on a pavement, I must confess that I am inclined to use my shoulder to put them off balance. I work on the presumption that anyone cycling on the pavement over the age of 12 is likely to be doing so in order to rob or assault pedestrians and I will defend myself.

Cycling on the pavement is intolerable and we as responsible cyclists should condemn it.

Cycling on the pavement isn't dangerous either. Now driving on the pavement...

Cycling on the pavement is bloody dangerous if it exposes you to a collision with a big fat bastard with no scruples like me.

FACT

come on clive i've seen you popping rad wheelies along the pavement on upper street

Bicycling is not dangerous, nor is driving, nor is being a ped.

Its people who are dangerous.

There are probably more cyclists who ride dangerously and ignore the law on a daily basis than car drivers, the difference being that the majority of cycling infringement have little or no consequences.

It is bloody annoying being a pedestrian and getting cut up by RLJing cyclists on crossing, or on the pavement - it is bloody annoying driving a car around london and seeing cyclists move infornt of you without looking, undertaking wihout taking inot account other traffic, etc etc - its also bloody annoying ridng a bike around london for all the reasons that have been done to death on this forum.

It makes me sad to hear someone who is a cycle trainer give such a blinkered view on this - if a driving instructor had the same attitude about cycling i would be shocked

My point is cyclists have to get there own house in order, if they expect others too, the saddest fact about cycling deaths and accidents is that too many are down to rider error and ignorance.

Tiswas, I'm not deliberately trying to get into an argument with you. But I'm truly confused as to what you're point is.

You say X, then claim you didn't say it, then I show you saying X and you say that X is different from misspelled Y.

You then ask me to quantify the danger of cycling, so I give you quantities. Then you tell me that giving you numbers on deaths and injuries from cycling is not quantifying its risk.

You point becomes more and more elusive the more you write.

[Sparky bows out]

My diet, when considered along side my family history of heart disease and diabeties, is dangerous.

Cycling is more likely to prolong my life than shorten it, on this basis it is far from dangerous.

Other people sometimes pose a danger to me, be they pedestrians, drivers or surprise attempted yentzers. These are people being dangerous, not an activity or mode of transport.

I can do things to minimise the danger they pose, like riding no handed playing air guitar so they think I am mad and give me a wide berth. Other things I have picked up from bits of training also help to mitigate the risks that other people take around me.

I shall continue to cycle and I hope to live longer than most of my male relatives from previous generations have.

Cycling to work can be quite dangerous.

BONE FIDE
INTERNET
FACT

:)

I don't actually know how I can make it clearer.

And therein lies the problem. I'll happily meet up at some point, but I think it would be wise to keep conversation off Cities Fit for Cycling.

You are 20 times more likely to die prematurely by not cycling, apparently, all that heart and lung goodness from pedaling.
Most people in the developed world die in their sleep, in bed, or on the sofa, or in cars, or at work etc.
There are dangers associated with cycling, as with every single aspect of our existence on the earth.
That is no reason to paint cycling as a dangerous activity, on the contrary it is every reason to tell people about the goodness of it. This is where the Times is missing a trick.

^ maybe they're serialising the good news over the next few days. Spot on by the way.

censors!

Good on them though. Perhaps cycling is dangerous if you don't know what you're doing? Seems to be a good idea to design out the risk in the first place.