On 13/04/2022 10:18, Mike Collins wrote:

> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.

Yes, laughable, isn't it.

It's as pathetic as the Swedish doctor quoted by SJM who bemoaned that
"We can't point to anyone that's been saved by wearing a cycle helmet"
as a reason not to wear them.

With those two amazing pieces of advice in mind, we can't point to
anyone that's been saved from COVID because they had been vaccinated. So
was the vaccination effort worth it?

Or, to use a cycling analogy, we can't point to anyone who's been saved
by not cycling on the roads.

Sheesh! Some people are easily taken in.

--
Spike

On 13/04/2022 10:00, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.

30,000 years driving to kill someone...

--
Spike

On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> > > On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> > > >> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> > > >
> > > > About 22000 people.
> > > >
> > > > QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> > > > 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> > > > on average.
> > > There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> > > started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> > > commonly reached NCAP5.
> > Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.

Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:02:42 UTC+1, Spike wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 10:18, Mike Collins wrote:
>
> > "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.
> Yes, laughable, isn't it.
>
> It's as pathetic as the Swedish doctor quoted by SJM who bemoaned that
> "We can't point to anyone that's been saved by wearing a cycle helmet"
> as a reason not to wear them.
>
> With those two amazing pieces of advice in mind, we can't point to
> anyone that's been saved from COVID because they had been vaccinated. So
> was the vaccination effort worth it?
>
> Or, to use a cycling analogy, we can't point to anyone who's been saved
> by not cycling on the roads.
>
> Sheesh! Some people are easily taken in.
>
> --
> Spike

Thank you for proving my point.

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> > > > On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> > > > >> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> > > > >
> > > > > About 22000 people.
> > > > >
> > > > > QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> > > > > 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> > > > > on average.
> > > > There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> > > > started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> > > > commonly reached NCAP5.
> > > Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
> > "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.
> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.

From an ex contributor to this group:
https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/

On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:

> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>
>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
>
>>>>>> About 22000 people.
>
>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
>>>>>> on average.

>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.

>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.

>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.

> From an ex contributor to this group:
> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/

The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned thesis) is
clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
who isn't a clone of himself.

On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:46:03 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> > > > > On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> > > > > >> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > About 22000 people.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> > > > > > 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> > > > > > on average.
> > > > > There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> > > > > started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> > > > > commonly reached NCAP5.
> > > > Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
> > > "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.
> > Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
> From an ex contributor to this group:
> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/

What an excellent letter from our learned ex member.
Spot on as usual.

On 13/04/2022 12:44, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.

Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking cyclists -
even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them.

--
Spike

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> >>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> >>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> >
> >>>>>> About 22000 people.
> >
> >>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> >>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> >>>>>> on average.
>
> >>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> >>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> >>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
>
> >>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
> >>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.
>
> >> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
>
> > From an ex contributor to this group:
> > https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned thesis) is
> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
> who isn't a clone of himself.

Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".

On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:

> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
>>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
>
>>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
>
>>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
>>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
>>>>>>>> on average.
>
>>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
>>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
>>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
>
>>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
>>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.
>
>>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
>
>>> From an ex contributor to this group:
>>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/

>> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned thesis) is
>> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
>> who isn't a clone of himself.

> Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".

Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
has.

On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 01:29:24 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> >>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> >
> >>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
> >
> >>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> >>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> >>>>>>>> on average.
> >
> >>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> >>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> >>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
> >
> >>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
> >>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.
> >
> >>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
> >
> >>> From an ex contributor to this group:
> >>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
>
> >> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned thesis) is
> >> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
> >> who isn't a clone of himself.
>
> > Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".
> Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
> has.

Ask Mike, and read the follow up letter.

On 14/04/2022 07:46 am, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 01:29:24 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
>>>>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
>>>>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
>>>>>>>>>> on average.
>>>
>>>>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
>>>>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
>>>>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
>>>
>>>>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
>>>>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.
>>>
>>>>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
>>>
>>>>> From an ex contributor to this group:
>>>>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
>>
>>>> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned thesis) is
>>>> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
>>>> who isn't a clone of himself.
>>
>>> Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".
>> Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
>> has.
>
> Ask Mike, and read the follow up letter.

Thanks, but no.

I can recognise an idiot on an obsessive mission when I see one.

And I saw one there.

The roads should be for the many, not the few.

On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 4:40:27 PM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> > > Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
> > From an ex contributor to this group:
> > https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
> What an excellent letter from our learned ex member.
> Spot on as usual.

He is now my friend on Facebook like Guy C.

On 14/04/2022 12:08 pm, JNugent wrote:
> On 14/04/2022 07:46 am, Mike Collins wrote:
>> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 01:29:24 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1,
>>>>>>>> swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
>>>>>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from
>>>>>>>>>>> 2012 to
>>>>>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five
>>>>>>>>>>> a day,
>>>>>>>>>>> on average.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the
>>>>>>>>>> levelling
>>>>>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
>>>>>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by
>>>>>>>>> drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
>>>>>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark
>>>>>>>> infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it",
>>>>>>>> Mayer Hillman.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking
>>>>>>> drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when
>>>>>>> it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
>>>>
>>>>>>  From an ex contributor to this group:
>>>>>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned
>>>>> thesis) is
>>>>> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
>>>>> who isn't a clone of himself.
>>>
>>>> Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".
>>> Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
>>> has.
>>
>> Ask Mike, and read the follow up letter.
>
> Thanks, but no.
>
> I can recognise an idiot on an obsessive mission when I see one.
>
> And I saw one there.
>
> The roads should be for the many, not the few.

Incidentally, there is no "follow up letter" on that page. And the
obsessive's letter was published nearly thirty years ago.

The city that lets cyclists jump red lights.

Cyclists in Paris no longer have to stop at every red traffic light - new rules mean that in certain circumstances they can ignore the signals and keep going. The aim is to make the city's roads much safer.

It's easy to enumerate the downsides of Paris cycling.

Parisian drivers can be rude and aggressive behind the wheel. They sound their horns loudly and gratuitously. They stop willy-nilly on busy roads to run errands or do a bit of shopping. Diplomatic plates are the worst.

Most aggravatingly, Parisians are appalling signallers. They turn without advance warning - or to add insult to injury, they start to indicate as they turn. That is like a V-sign to the cyclist. It shows the driver knows about the indicator, but could not care less what it is for.

And one other thing: the way blocks of flats refuse the right to park bikes in communal areas. So you have to leave them on the pavement.

Such are the annoyances.

But it is good to be able to report that in recent years so much has also improved. For bikers today, the boons in Paris are better than the banes.

The latest gift, being introduced over the summer, is a radical step that recognises a regrettable truth: that cyclists in cities often fail to stop at red lights. Rather than step up repression of this misdemeanour, the Paris city authorities have decided to make it legal.

Over July and August, signs are being put up at 1,800 junctions across the capital. They show an upside down triangle, with a picture of a bicycle and an arrow.
New Paris road sign showing bikes don't have to stopImage source, ALAMY
White line 10 pixels
New sign in Paris that reads: "If the light is red but equipped with one of these two panels, you can: Turn right; Go straight on"
Image caption,
"If the light is red but equipped with one of these two panels, you can: Turn right; Go straight on"

What this indicates is that when the signal is red, cyclists can nonetheless - and with all due care and attention - jump the lights. They can, to use the lingo, "griller le feu".

"It required a rewriting of the Code de la Route [the laws governing road use], but what in effect we have done is turn the red light for cyclists into a give way sign," says Christophe Najdoski, deputy Paris mayor in charge of transport.

It is important to note that the change only affects right turns or going straight on at a T-junction - in other words where the cyclist can hug the pavement.

At a crossroads, even if there is no traffic, bikes will still have to wait for the green to go straight on.

"What we want to do is make life easier for the cyclist. Stopping and starting requires energy, and too often it is completely unnecessary. By not having to stop, they can get where they are going more quickly," says Najdoski, who belongs to the Greens.

"It is also a way of regularising a practice that is so widespread there is no point in trying to prevent it. As long as cyclists slow down, and if there are pedestrians they stop, then it is all perfectly safe."
Cyclist in Paris at green lightImage source, ALAMY

Lobby groups are delighted because they have been pushing for the change for years.

"It is a great advance because it shows we are moving away from the idea that red and green lights are all that count," says Kiki Lambert of the group Mieux Se Deplacer a Bicyclette (Getting around better on a bike).

"If we have that attitude, then we turn people into automatons and it is much more dangerous. People end up thinking that just because a light is green it is safe to go - when it might not be... Far better to use all our senses all the time.

"Also allowing cyclists to proceed is safer, because it means they avoid getting caught beside trucks and buses as they wait for lights to change. That is the origin of a lot of accidents."
Cyclist at Arc de TriompheImage source, AFP

Lambert points out that the two ends of the Champs Elysees - the Arc de Triomphe and the Place de la Concorde - have different systems for regulating traffic.

At the Place de la Concorde there are traffic lights; at the Arc de Triomphe - with its 12 avenues entering the bewildering Etoile roundabout - there are none. Yet the accident rate at the Place de la Concorde is five times higher than at Etoile.

"That is because at the Arc de Triomphe drivers are obliged to be careful. The traffic lights act as an automatic trigger, and that is dangerous," she says.

The new red light rule for cyclists is part of a series of measures devised by the Hotel de Ville with the aim of dramatically increasing cycle use.
Cyclists at Place de la ConcordeImage source, AFP

New cross-city cycle routes are being created, as well as 10,000 new parking places for bikes. From 5% of trips today, the hope is to push that up to 15% by 2020.

"In French towns today, 40% of car journeys are less than 3km (two miles)," says Najdoski. "These are trips that could easily be done on a bicycle - so we have to make it logical for people to make that move."

Safety will also play a part. At the moment there are only on average between three and five cyclist deaths every year in Paris - though the figure is deceptive because it does not count accidents outside the perif or ring road.

Inside Paris proper, traffic moves quite slowly and the few fatalities there are tend to be when cyclists are caught on the inside of heavy vehicles.

"The more cyclists there are, the safer it will be - and not just for cyclists. For everyone," says Lambert.

"Because everyone will be going more slowly, and everyone will be keeping their eyes and ears open. And not just waiting for the lights."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33773868

On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 12:10:04 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 14/04/2022 12:08 pm, JNugent wrote:
> > On 14/04/2022 07:46 am, Mike Collins wrote:
> >> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 01:29:24 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >>> On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >>>>> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1,
> >>>>>>>> swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> >>>>>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2012 to
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five
> >>>>>>>>>>> a day,
> >>>>>>>>>>> on average.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the
> >>>>>>>>>> levelling
> >>>>>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> >>>>>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by
> >>>>>>>>> drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
> >>>>>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark
> >>>>>>>> infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it",
> >>>>>>>> Mayer Hillman.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking
> >>>>>>> drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when
> >>>>>>> it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> From an ex contributor to this group:
> >>>>>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >>>>> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned
> >>>>> thesis) is
> >>>>> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
> >>>>> who isn't a clone of himself.
> >>>
> >>>> Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".
> >>> Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
> >>> has.
> >>
> >> Ask Mike, and read the follow up letter.
> >
> > Thanks, but no.
> >
> > I can recognise an idiot on an obsessive mission when I see one.
> >
> > And I saw one there.
> >
> > The roads should be for the many, not the few.
> Incidentally, there is no "follow up letter" on that page. And the
> obsessive's letter was published nearly thirty years ago.

But there are follow up letters in later publications.
Let me know when you have read them.

TR&T's claim about cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.

On 14/04/2022 06:52 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 12:10:04 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 14/04/2022 12:08 pm, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 14/04/2022 07:46 am, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 01:29:24 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1,
>>>>>>>>>> swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2012 to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a day,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on average.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the
>>>>>>>>>>>> levelling
>>>>>>>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
>>>>>>>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by
>>>>>>>>>>> drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
>>>>>>>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark
>>>>>>>>>> infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it",
>>>>>>>>>> Mayer Hillman.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking
>>>>>>>>> drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when
>>>>>>>>> it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From an ex contributor to this group:
>>>>>>>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned
>>>>>>> thesis) is
>>>>>>> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
>>>>>>> who isn't a clone of himself.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".
>>>>> Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
>>>>> has.
>>>>
>>>> Ask Mike, and read the follow up letter.
>>>
>>> Thanks, but no.
>>> I can recognise an idiot on an obsessive mission when I see one.
>>> And I saw one there.
>>> The roads should be for the many, not the few.

>> Incidentally, there is no "follow up letter" on that page. And the
>> obsessive's letter was published nearly thirty years ago.
>
> But there are follow up letters in later publications.
> Let me know when you have read them.

I can't do that. I shan't be reading them.

> TR&T's claim about cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.

"TR&T"?

The roads should be for the many, not the few.

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:52:39 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> TR&T's claim about cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.

The cycle hats that have killed people?

QUOTE: > In absolute terms, the risk of death through wearing a helmet is very small. The information is significant mainly in the context that it is the only unambiguous evidence showing any relationship between fatalities and cycle helmet use. Fatalities are recorded comprehensively and accurately in most countries, but there is no statistically reliable evidence across any population of fewer deaths as helmet use has increased. A doctor in Sweden lamented, with regard to strangulations in that country and its child helmet law, "We know we have killed, but we can't show we have saved anyone".. (Sweden, 1)

On 15/04/2022 08:29 am, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:52:39 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>
>> TR&T's claim about fairy-cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.
>
> The fairy-cycle hats that have killed people?
>
> QUOTE: > In absolute terms, the risk of death through wearing a helmet is very small. The information is significant mainly in the context that it is the only unambiguous evidence showing any relationship between fatalities and fairy-cycle helmet use. Fatalities are recorded comprehensively and accurately in most countries, but there is no statistically reliable evidence across any population of fewer deaths as helmet use has increased. A doctor in Sweden lamented, with regard to strangulations in that country and its child helmet law, "We know we have killed, but we can't show we have saved anyone". (Sweden, 1)

And let's face it... as far as the average fairy-cyclist is concerned, a
helmet makes you "look like a tit".

That's only if you didn't already, of course.

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:29:58 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:52:39 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>
> > TR&T's claim about cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.
> The cycle hats that have killed people?
>
> QUOTE: > In absolute terms, the risk of death through wearing a helmet is very small. The information is significant mainly in the context that it is the only unambiguous evidence showing any relationship between fatalities and cycle helmet use. Fatalities are recorded comprehensively and accurately in most countries, but there is no statistically reliable evidence across any population of fewer deaths as helmet use has increased. A doctor in Sweden lamented, with regard to strangulations in that country and its child helmet law, "We know we have killed, but we can't show we have saved anyone". (Sweden, 1)

The site seems to have vanished! Hope it's only down for maintenance.

"Couldn't connect to MySQL" https://www.cyclehelmets.org/ :-/

On 15/04/2022 14:19, JNugent wrote:
> On 15/04/2022 08:29 am, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:52:39 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

>>> TR&T's claim about fairy-cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.

>> The fairy-cycle hats that have killed people?

>> QUOTE: > In absolute terms, the risk of death through wearing a helmet is very small. The information is significant mainly in the context that it is the only unambiguous evidence showing any relationship between fatalities and fairy-cycle helmet use. Fatalities are recorded comprehensively and accurately in most countries, but there is no statistically reliable evidence across any population of fewer deaths as helmet use has increased. A doctor in Sweden lamented, with regard to strangulations in that country and its child helmet law, "We know we have killed, but we can't show we have saved anyone". (Sweden, 1)

"A doctor in Sweden lamented, with regard to strangulations in that
country and its child helmet law, "We know we have killed, but we can't
show we have saved anyone".

That's what's called a False Argument. You could say exactly the same
about...

the COVID vaccination programme, the polio vaccine programme, the
measles vaccination programme, antivirals for shingles, etc, etc...

The Swedish Doctor is a fool, and greater fools repeat it as gospel.

The British Medical Journal says differently, and has infinitely more
authority.

--
Spike

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:29:58 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:52:39 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>
> > TR&T's claim about cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.
> The cycle hats that have killed people?
>
> QUOTE: > In absolute terms, the risk of death through wearing a helmet is very small. The information is significant mainly in the context that it is the only unambiguous evidence showing any relationship between fatalities and cycle helmet use. Fatalities are recorded comprehensively and accurately in most countries, but there is no statistically reliable evidence across any population of fewer deaths as helmet use has increased. A doctor in Sweden lamented, with regard to strangulations in that country and its child helmet law, "We know we have killed, but we can't show we have saved anyone". (Sweden, 1)

Of course the country with the lowest head injuries is Netherlands where nobody wears a plastic hat.
See:

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/bPpLRAWdqEbEKuuhi_deeZ_vfGo=/1400x1400/filters:format(jpeg)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12619261/IMG_3142.jpg

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 01:07:02 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 14/04/2022 06:52 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> > On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 12:10:04 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >> On 14/04/2022 12:08 pm, JNugent wrote:
> >>> On 14/04/2022 07:46 am, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>>> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 01:29:24 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >>>>> On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1,
> >>>>>>>>>> swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2012 to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a day,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on average.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> levelling
> >>>>>>>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> >>>>>>>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by
> >>>>>>>>>>> drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
> >>>>>>>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark
> >>>>>>>>>> infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it",
> >>>>>>>>>> Mayer Hillman.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking
> >>>>>>>>> drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when
> >>>>>>>>> it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> From an ex contributor to this group:
> >>>>>>>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned
> >>>>>>> thesis) is
> >>>>>>> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
> >>>>>>> who isn't a clone of himself.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".
> >>>>> Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
> >>>>> has.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ask Mike, and read the follow up letter.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, but no.
> >>> I can recognise an idiot on an obsessive mission when I see one.
> >>> And I saw one there.
> >>> The roads should be for the many, not the few.
>
> >> Incidentally, there is no "follow up letter" on that page. And the
> >> obsessive's letter was published nearly thirty years ago.
> >
> > But there are follow up letters in later publications.
> > Let me know when you have read them.
> I can't do that. I shan't be reading them.

So you prefer to remain ignorant.

> > TR&T's claim about cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.
> "TR&T"?

Do some research.

> The roads should be for the many, not the few.

Exactly, there are more pedestrians and and cyclists than motorists.
Motorists are guests on roads paid for by others.

On 16/04/2022 11:48 am, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 01:07:02 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 14/04/2022 06:52 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 12:10:04 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2022 12:08 pm, JNugent wrote:
>>>>> On 14/04/2022 07:46 am, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>>> On Thursday, 14 April 2022 at 01:29:24 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 06:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 15:48:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 02:46 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 13:45:00 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 11:18:43 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1,
>>>>>>>>>>>> swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> About 22000 people.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2012 to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a day,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on average.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> levelling
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commonly reached NCAP5.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by
>>>>>>>>>>>>> drivers to the tune of 60 a day.
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark
>>>>>>>>>>>> infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it",
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mayer Hillman.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Luckily, we have traffic police to crack down on law breaking
>>>>>>>>>>> drivers - even though they bleat about how UNFAIR the law is when
>>>>>>>>>>> it applies to them. Think speed traps and parking wardens.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From an ex contributor to this group:
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg13618486-400-letters-deadly-drivers/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The scribbled letter (which is all it is, it isn't a learned
>>>>>>>>> thesis) is
>>>>>>>>> clearly written by an obsessive "enthusiast" without regard for anyone
>>>>>>>>> who isn't a clone of himself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Translated "This doesn't fit my religious beliefs so must be wrong".
>>>>>>> Please state what relevant academic qualifications that "ex-contributor"
>>>>>>> has.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ask Mike, and read the follow up letter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, but no.
>>>>> I can recognise an idiot on an obsessive mission when I see one.
>>>>> And I saw one there.
>>>>> The roads should be for the many, not the few.
>
>>>> Incidentally, there is no "follow up letter" on that page. And the
>>>> obsessive's letter was published nearly thirty years ago.
>>>
>>> But there are follow up letters in later publications.
>>> Let me know when you have read them.
>> I can't do that. I shan't be reading them.
>
> So you prefer to remain ignorant.

....of false political arguments by totally unqualified people with a
self-centred agenda.

Yes!

>>> TR&T's claim about cycle hats was published about the same time and was withdrawn a year later yet helmet priests still quote it.

>> "TR&T"?

> Do some research.

Fair enough.

Your "argument" is meaningless unless you define your terms.

Fancy your "argument" being meaningless!

ho'dathoughtit?

>> The roads should be for the many, not the few.

> Exactly, there are more pedestrians and and cyclists than motorists.

I'm all for pedestrians (being one myself).

That's why I utterly condemn selfish fairy-cyclists who self-centredly
use the footway instead of taking their chances among the big boys.

> Motorists are guests on roads paid for by others.

You've said that before, many times.

You have never offered the slightest justification for argument for it,
and neither will you ever do so.

The roads should be for the many, not the few.

On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 10:44:08 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Of course the country with the lowest head injuries is Netherlands where nobody wears a plastic hat.
> See:
>
> https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/bPpLRAWdqEbEKuuhi_deeZ_vfGo=/1400x1400/filters:format(jpeg)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12619261/IMG_3142.jpg

Surely those parents should be charged with child neglect?