Yorkshire renamed...
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
From: Champ on 5 Apr 2010 12:28 On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 14:48:54 +0100, "Vass" <write2mark(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> As Brunstrom fucks off and the new regime seems to be relaxing their >> discrimination against motorcyclists... >> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8602464.stm >"Motorcyclists account for just 1% of the traffic on the UK's roads, but >almost 19% of all deaths on them" >sort of brings it home a bit don't it. It doesn't bring anything home - it's just a statement of the bleedin obvious. Is there any drive to try and reduce car casualities to the level of train passengers? -- Champ We declare that the splendour of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo neal at champ dot org dot uk
From: Pip on 6 Apr 2010 02:57 Champ wrote: > Is there any drive to try and reduce car casualities to the level of > train passengers? Heh. Drive. Heheh. Yes, of course there is. Every now and again, when there's a perceived gain to be made, a random official or politician will pop up and declare "zero tolerance" on road deaths and announce yet another "initiative" to reduce casualties to something approaching what is obviously the mythical target of zero. Usually because every RTC is alleged to cost the country a million quid, and every death three million or something like that, and the working days lost due to whiplash equate to six double deckers. So they stick some silly signs up and shove some more road furniture in places most likely to decapitate a sliding biker, and slap a shitload of slippery paint right in the middle of a braking zone or an apex on every A road in the county, in the interests of their latest "Road Safety Project". So yes, there is such a drive, or at least lip service thereto. -- Pip: B12
From: Rob on 6 Apr 2010 04:15 On 04/04/2010 17:28, GungaDan wrote: > On Apr 4, 2:48 pm, "Vass"<write2m...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> "wessie"<putmynameh...(a)tesco.net> wrote in message >> >> news:Xns9D5095A001FE8wtymmmsas(a)188.40.43.245... >> >>> to New North Wales >> >>> As Brunstrom fucks off and the new regime seems to be relaxing their >>> discrimination against motorcyclists... >> >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8602464.stm >> >> "Motorcyclists account for just 1% of the traffic on the UK's roads, but >> almost 19% of all deaths on them" >> sort of brings it home a bit don't it. > > Not really, no. > > <rant> > Of course you're more likely to be seriously injured or killed on a > motorcycle - you're not sitting in a padded tin box. A low speed > accident you'd walk away from in a car can quite easily kill you if > you hit the wrong object (or get run over by an oncoming artic). Then > there's the fact that the margin for error is much smaller and the > sensitivity to changing conditions required much greater on a bike > meaning accidents are easier to have in the first place. So it's not > surprising at all. > > The only way to reach parity with respect to accident figures would be > to ban biking altogether, reduce the motorcycle maximum speed to 10mph > or cover all roadside objects and other vehicles in several feet > thickness of cotton wool. > > I wish the police, government,media and assorted do-gooders would > accept the fact that biking is by its nature more dangerous than > driving a car, accept the fact that *we* accept that it's more > dangerous and let us carry on killing ourselves at the current rate. > </rant> I've just done a CBT extra thing (can't remember exact name, free in Derbyshire) and I can't accept your 'natural' argument, and I suspect a good number of accidents/deaths could be avoided by the rider. Just a ton of stuff I learnt that would never have occurred to me. But if you've got evidence that such nanny statism runs counter to your facts, please tell. Rob
From: stephen.packer on 6 Apr 2010 04:53 Rob <patchoulianREMOVE(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I've just done a CBT extra thing (can't remember exact name, free in > Derbyshire) and I can't accept your 'natural' argument, and I suspect a > good number of accidents/deaths could be avoided by the rider. Just a > ton of stuff I learnt that would never have occurred to me. And exactly how many years/miles have you been riding bikes for?
From: Catman on 6 Apr 2010 05:35
stephen.packer(a)gonemail.com wrote: > Rob <patchoulianREMOVE(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> I've just done a CBT extra thing (can't remember exact name, free in >> Derbyshire) and I can't accept your 'natural' argument, and I suspect a >> good number of accidents/deaths could be avoided by the rider. Just a >> ton of stuff I learnt that would never have occurred to me. > > And exactly how many years/miles have you been riding bikes for? Oooh, well. If he's done CBT *plus* it must be several months, by now, I would think. -- Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) 116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6 Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see. www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk |