On 15/04/2022 01:04, JNugent wrote:
> On 14/04/2022 10:08 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>> On 14/04/2022 14:36, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 14/04/2022 02:03 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2022 11:58, JNugent wrote:
>>
>>>>> Buses don't usually proceed along the pavement, of course, and
>>>>> neither do they often stand around on the carriageways of roundabouts
>>>>> - so pedestrians are actually in less danger from buses than they are
>>>>> from criminal fairy-yclists.
>>
>> What is a fairy-yclist?
>
> Someone who rides a fairy-cycle, of course.

There is no "of course" to it when you use terms nobody understands.

>>>> Wrong again. 12 pedestrians were killed by bus/coach drivers last year.
>>
>> I was wrong. It was 2020. 29 in 2019.
>>
>>> In *what* circumstances?
>>
>> Irrelevant. They're dead.
>
> What?
>
> The circumstances in which people meet their deaths don't matter?

Let's do the twist again...

It is not relevant to the danger that pedestrians have to face. It is
relevant to investigators trying to improve the situation.

> On which planet?
>
>> The numbers produce the fact that buses present a greater danger to
>> pedestrians than bicycles.
>
> Not along my road, they don't.

It is remarkable how the anti-cyclist brigade express such lack of
concern for pedestrians when they shrug off killings by motor vehicle.

On 14/04/2022 15:38, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

SENSIBLE:

> QUOTE: Well, according to GMP's #2wheeloperation vid: "So for cyclists and motorcyclists, basically to wear the protective clothing, wear the hi-vis, make yourself as visible as possible to everybody on the road."

UNWISE:

A cyclist's Deadly Cocktail:

*left the pub* at 11.30pm
*did not have lights*
*did not have reflective clothing*
on a *poorly lit road*
*collided with another cyclist*

--
Spike

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:27:32 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Irrelevant. They're dead. The numbers produce the fact that buses
> > present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles.
> Indeed - 150 people killed by buses according to this table.
>
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEi6yDeXMAAnNr4?format=jpg&name=large

Those 150 pedestrians killed by buses is for the whole of the EU though.

On 15/04/2022 08:27 am, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Irrelevant. They're dead. The numbers produce the fact that buses
>> present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles.
>
> Indeed - 150 people killed by buses according to this table.
>
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEi6yDeXMAAnNr4?format=jpg&name=large

Were the buses travelling along the footway?

Or the wrong way along a one-way street?

Were any of them not fitted with brakes?

On 15/04/2022 09:14 am, TMS320 wrote:

> On 15/04/2022 01:04, JNugent wrote:
>> On 14/04/2022 10:08 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>> On 14/04/2022 14:36, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2022 02:03 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>> On 14/04/2022 11:58, JNugent wrote:
>
>>>>>> Buses don't usually proceed along the pavement, of course, and
>>>>>> neither do they often stand around on the carriageways of roundabouts
>>>>>> - so pedestrians are actually in less danger from buses than they are
>>>>>> from criminal fairy-yclists.
>
>>> What is a fairy-yclist?
>
>> Someone who rides a fairy-cycle, of course.
>
> There is no "of course" to it when you use terms nobody understands.

You understand it.

You just don't like it.

When no analogous terms are used of other road-users (and not until
than), I shall reconsider the matter.

>>>>> Wrong again. 12 pedestrians were killed by bus/coach drivers last
>>>>> year.
>
>>> I was wrong. It was 2020. 29 in 2019.
>
>>>> In *what* circumstances?
>
>>> Irrelevant. They're dead.
>
>> What?
>> The circumstances in which people meet their deaths don't matter?
>
> Let's do the twist again...

So you believe that the circumstances in which people die (or are
killed) don't matter.

That's a bit far out, even for you (and that's saying something).

> It is not relevant to the danger that pedestrians have to face. It is
> relevant to investigators trying to improve the situation.
>
>> On which planet?
>>
>>> The numbers produce the fact that buses present a greater danger to
>>> pedestrians than bicycles.
>>
>> Not along my road, they don't.
>
> It is remarkable how the anti-cyclist brigade express such lack of
> concern for pedestrians when they shrug off killings by motor vehicle.

No-one ever drove a bus at me on the footway.

I refuse to believe it's ever happened.

> > >
> > > Irrelevant. They're dead. The numbers produce the fact that buses
> > > present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles.
> > Indeed - 150 people killed by buses according to this table.
> >
> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEi6yDeXMAAnNr4?format=jpg&name=large
> Those 150 pedestrians killed by buses is for the whole of the EU though. *

*The UK was still in the EU when that table was compiled.

On 15/04/2022 10:06, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:27:32 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> Irrelevant. They're dead. The numbers produce the fact that buses
>>> present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles.
>> Indeed - 150 people killed by buses according to this table.

>> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEi6yDeXMAAnNr4?format=jpg&name=large

> Those 150 pedestrians killed by buses is for the whole of the EU though.

The relevance of which is what, exactly?

--
Spike

On 15/04/2022 13:20, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEi6yDeXMAAnNr4?format=jpg&name=large

>> Those 150 pedestrians killed by buses is for the whole of the EU though. *
> *The UK was still in the EU when that table was compiled.

And the relevance of that is what, exactly?

--
Spike

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 9:14:50 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

> It is remarkable how the anti-cyclist brigade express such lack of
> concern for pedestrians when they shrug off killings by motor vehicle.

The Alliance of British Nutters say that they are pro road safety at the same time as railing against lowering the drink drive limit and 20mph zones.

On 16/04/2022 08:56 am, Spike wrote:

> On 15/04/2022 10:06, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

>> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:27:32 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

[Talking to himself again]

>>>> Irrelevant. They're dead. The numbers produce the fact that buses
>>>> present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles.

>>> Indeed - 150 people killed by buses according to this table.

>>> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEi6yDeXMAAnNr4?format=jpg&name=large

>> Those 150 pedestrians killed by buses is for the whole of the EU though.

> The relevance of which is what, exactly?

Don't ask awkward questions!

On 16/04/2022 04:21, JNugent wrote:
> On 16/04/2022 08:56 am, Spike wrote:

>> On 15/04/2022 10:06, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:27:32 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> [Talking to himself again]

>>>>> Irrelevant. They're dead. The numbers produce the fact that buses
>>>>> present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles.

>>>> Indeed - 150 people killed by buses according to this table.

>>>> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEi6yDeXMAAnNr4?format=jpg&name=large

>>> Those 150 pedestrians killed by buses is for the whole of the EU though.

>> The relevance of which is what, exactly?

> Don't ask awkward questions!

Oh! You are awful...but I like you... :-)

--
Spike

On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 1:51:55 PM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> The police's Twitter account states that the drunk driver has been charged with causing serious injury by driving whilst impaired through drink or drugs.

He will appear in court next month - I'll keep the group updated as and when a verdict is reached.

On 16/04/2022 13:25, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

[swldx...@gmail.com...Talking to himself]

> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 1:51:55 PM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

>> The police's Twitter account states that the drunk driver has been charged with causing serious injury by driving whilst impaired through drink or drugs.

> He will appear in court next month - I'll keep the group updated as and when a verdict is reached.

The verdict is the bit where he finds out what he's been charged with,
according to your view of the law.

--
Spike

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:56:39 PM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> QUOTE:
> > "Being a motorcyclist can be even more dangerous because you've got less presence on the road. So there's less for people to see," one of the force's family liaison officers continued.
> ENDS
>
> True - since motorcyclists are only 1% of traffic, but they make up nearly 25% of road deaths - hivis or no.

Sorry - it's "only" 19% of all roads deaths. My mistake.

See: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FQUsPMPXMAgx-ai?format=jpg&name=medium

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:14:28 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> We've seen a few of these social media posts popping up recently as part of the National Police Chiefs’ Council’s '2 Wheels' campaign. On Monday, it was Bedfordshire Police's now-deleted tweet telling cyclists to try not to make "mistakes" to stay safe...
>
> This message was accompanied by a bingo card reminder to: wear a helmet and hi-vis. Unsurprisingly this particular tweet was not the force's most popular, attracting victim-blaming accusations before unceremoniously being deleted.
>
> Today, it's Greater Manchester Police's turn...
>
> The headlines from this shocking story are: a cyclist in Manchester was riding on the pavement because they felt safer than on the road, a drunk driver then hit the cyclist, causing life-threatening injuries that are going to "stay with them forever".
>
> So, what conclusion should we be taking from this? Tougher action on dangerous driving? Infrastructure that makes cyclists feel safe to use the roads, and not have to jump onto the pavement, all without the risk of being hit by a drink driver?
>
> Well, according to GMP's #2wheeloperation vid: "So for cyclists and motorcyclists, basically to wear the protective clothing, wear the hi-vis, make yourself as visible as possible to everybody on the road." Right. Presumably the same goes for dog walkers, children and pedestrians who could have been hit by the aforementioned drunk driver?
>
> "Being a cyclist or a motorcyclist can be even more dangerous because you've got less presence on the road. So there's less for people to see," one of the force's family liaison officers continued.
>
> Someone go get the Surrey traffic cops...
>
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FFlzbDlXsA0mZAM?format=jpg&name=medium

Drunk driving is illegal and therefore never happens because only cyclists break the law.

On 15/04/2022 13:24, JNugent wrote:
> On 15/04/2022 09:14 am, TMS320 wrote:
>> On 15/04/2022 01:04, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 14/04/2022 10:08 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2022 14:36, JNugent wrote:
>>>>> On 14/04/2022 02:03 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>>> On 14/04/2022 11:58, JNugent wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Buses don't usually proceed along the pavement, of
>>>>>>> course, and neither do they often stand around on the
>>>>>>> carriageways of roundabouts - so pedestrians are actually
>>>>>>> in less danger from buses than they are from criminal
>>>>>>> yclists.
>>
>>>>>> Wrong again. 12 pedestrians were killed by bus/coach
>>>>>> drivers last year.
>>
>>>> I was wrong. It was 2020. 29 in 2019.
>>
>>>>> In *what* circumstances?
>>
>>>> Irrelevant. They're dead.
>>
>>> What? The circumstances in which people meet their deaths don't
>>> matter?
>>
>> Let's do the twist again...
>
> So you believe that the circumstances in which people die (or are
> killed) don't matter.

Depends on context. Not this one.

Statistics do not show cause. The numbers produce the fact that buses
present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles. This is opposite
of the "fact" you gave.

> That's a bit far out, even for you (and that's saying something).
>
>> It is not relevant to the danger that pedestrians have to face. It
>> is relevant to investigators trying to improve the situation.
>>
>
>>> On which planet?
>>>
>>>> The numbers produce the fact that buses present a greater
>>>> danger to pedestrians than bicycles.
>>>
>>> Not along my road, they don't.
>>
>> It is remarkable how the anti-cyclist brigade express such lack of
>> concern for pedestrians when they shrug off killings by motor
>> vehicle.
>
> No-one ever drove a bus at me on the footway.

Doesn't matter. Clearly, the danger that a bus presents to you comes in
other ways.

> I refuse to believe it's ever happened.

Your mind is closed to a lot of things.

On 19/04/2022 02:34 pm, TMS320 wrote:
> On 15/04/2022 13:24, JNugent wrote:
>> On 15/04/2022 09:14 am, TMS320 wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2022 01:04, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2022 10:08 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>> On 14/04/2022 14:36, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>> On 14/04/2022 02:03 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>>>>>> On 14/04/2022 11:58, JNugent wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>> Buses don't usually proceed along the pavement, of
>>>>>>>> course, and neither do they often stand around on the
>>>>>>>> carriageways of roundabouts - so pedestrians are actually
>>>>>>>> in less danger from buses than they are from criminal
>>>>>>>> yclists.
>>>
>>>>>>> Wrong again. 12 pedestrians were killed by bus/coach
>>>>>>> drivers last year.
>>>
>>>>> I was wrong. It was 2020. 29 in 2019.
>>>
>>>>>> In *what* circumstances?
>>>
>>>>> Irrelevant. They're dead.
>>>
>>>> What? The circumstances in which people meet their deaths don't
>>>> matter?
>>>
>>> Let's do the twist again...
> >
>> So you believe that the circumstances in which people die (or are
>> killed) don't matter.
>
> Depends on context. Not this one.

So you believe that the circumstances in which people die (or are
killed) don't matter unless you say it does (whereas sensible people say
it always matters.

> Statistics do not show cause. The numbers produce the fact that buses
> present a greater danger to pedestrians than bicycles. This is opposite
> of the "fact" you gave.

Do bus drivers routinely drive their buses along the footway?

I have never seen it happen and do not expect ever to see it happen.

>> That's a bit far out, even for you (and that's saying something).
>
>>> It is not relevant to the danger that pedestrians have to face. It
>>> is relevant to investigators trying to improve the situation.

>>>> On which planet?

>>>>> The numbers produce the fact that buses present a greater
>>>>> danger to pedestrians than bicycles.

>>>> Not along my road, they don't.

>>> It is remarkable how the anti-cyclist brigade express such lack of
>>> concern for pedestrians when they shrug off killings by motor
>>> vehicle.
>
>> No-one ever drove a bus at me on the footway.

> Doesn't matter. Clearly, the danger that a bus presents to you comes in
> other ways.

What about the footway?

>> I refuse to believe it's ever happened.
>
> Your mind is closed to a lot of things.

Only to the impossible or the vanishingly unlikely.

If only it were vanishingly unlikely that one would meet a fairy-cyclist
on the footway, eh?

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 6:26:24 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

> >
> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FFlzbDlXsA0mZAM?format=jpg&name=medium
>
> Drunk driving is illegal and therefore never happens because only cyclists break the law.

You can be under the English drink drive limit and yet if you drive into Scotland suddenly be over their limit.
England and Wales have the highest alcohol limits for driving in the world.