From Newsgroup: uk.rec.cycling
Spike <
aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
rCLSpeedingrCY cyclists equally to blame for serious collision on bike path, judge rules
According to the judge, both cyclists rCLcompletely failed, for no good reason, to take the steps necessary to observe the presence of the other until the collision was inevitablerCY
by RYAN MALLON FRI, APR 05, 2024 11:56
<snip>
<https://road.cc/content/news/speeding-cyclists-equally-blame-bike-path-crash-307663>
QUOTE
Avatar
stonojnr replied to Fl|oneur | 1 day ago
3 likes
very interesting, cheers.
and it nicely documents the speeds, 13.4mph and 20.1mph, though Im not sure
Im fully on board with their accuracy.
the judge is saying then a safe speed is 7-10mph. I doubt the majority of cyclists who use shared paths to get around, even with a junction like
this, ride at those speeds.
Log In or Register to post comments UNQUOTE
That last comment tells you all you need to know about the attitude of
cyclists with regard to cycling speed. But they know exactly how fast motor vehicles should be going.
They also totally ignore the message from an anti-car article published on
the road.cc web site which noted that Professor Scarlett McNally, a
consultant orthopaedic surgeon and who authored a piece published in the
BMJ titled 'Enabling active travel can improve the UK's health', mentions
that the "horrific injuries I see in orthopaedic and fracture clinics" that
get "exponentially worse with every 1 mph increase in speed".
That is, cars must slow down, but not cyclists. This tale of two colliding cyclists strongly suggests otherwise.
Over the period 2018-2022 official data states that there were some 872 casualties caused by cycle/cycle collisions, some of which resulted in fatalities.
--
Spike
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2