You are reading a single comment by @MrDrem and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@MrDrem
My biggest problem with that is (a) it's an estimate, and (b) whilst those 10-16 cyclists may still be alive, around 40% less people would be cycling. The injury level wouldn't be going down either.
It's also a classic example of victim blaming. Drivers are. in most cases** to blame in accidents involving cyclists, how many of those 10-16 cyclists would have been alive if the car driver was doing what they were supposed to be doing?
Rather than trying to put a sticky plaster over the issue of poor driving hurting cyclists, we should be looking to address the root issue. That the laws that are already in place to protect cyclists and other vunerable road users (including pedestrians) are not being enforced, leading to a more dangerous environment for all of us. Rather than pushing for helmet compulsion or segregation, should we not be pushing for a greater enforcement of the laws that are already in place to protect us?just
*Based on my understanding of the %changes following helmet compusion in Australia as I understand it
**Don't have the figures to hand at the second, but I think it was something like 70%driver and 20% cyclist error, with the missing 10% being a bit of both.
n.b. It doesn't follow that of those 10-16 riders, that 70/20% blame split would work, so you can't say for example that 7-13 of those killed whilst not wearing a helmet were killed due to poor driving. You just can't combine the studies.
Sorry for the rant, just trying to get this out of my system :)