Car -vs- Cycle Lane incident 😲

[mjr]

It happens daily everywhere and no one bats an eye lid, but some poor old giffer does it and its suddenly newsworthy.

Except that most of those also go unreported.

The newsworthy aspect here is actually hitting people, instead of doing what they usually do and stopping or reversing course.

Another one this morning, stopped, trying to pull out into a junction from a cycleway, which I think means they'll have to pull out into oncoming motor traffic because Norfolk doesn't give cycleway mouths the recommended corner radii. I didn't wait to see what happened as I'd an appointment to keep!

 

[Drago]

Dozens of people are struck by vehicles on the footway and killed each year (I did know the figure but cant recall it - perhap I shouldn't be driving if im getting forgetful!)

It only when an older driver does it that it draws comments in the media about health, eyesight, etc.

When a young buck or a middle aged woman is responsible the question of their medical fitness to drive never raises an eyebrow in the media or among society in general.

I've no issue with eye tests for drivers. As a responsible road user who wears glasses to drive im well up to leading from the front on that one.

However, this constant emphasis on the medical fitness of older drivers while demographics with higher casualty and offending rates is ignored is nothing short of ageist.

Measures should be evidence led, and the evidence is that older drivers are actually far from being the most dangerous demographic on the road. To target them or start with them first is utterly beyond reasoning and comprehension, particularly when 48 year old female Defender drivers are (allegedly) losing consciousness behind the wheel and ploughing into primary school children in the playground. Where is the call for middle aged people such as Claire Freemantle to be subjected to any kind of health assessment?

Either bring in such measures universally, or if to be phased in start with the most dangerous demographic. To do anything else is illogical enough to make Mr Spock face palm.

 

[Fastpedaller]

A few months ago I stopped at the Post Office and after emerging I unlocked my bike and was pushing it along the pavement to the nearby Lidl store. Nothing unusual or newsworthy there! I then became aware of a car in the road scraping the kerb - 'Wow", thought I -that was weird. Next thing, there was a shout from the scaffolder to his colleague, both on the building across the street, "Did you see that car on the pavement, he nearly drove into the guy pushing the bike!" Maybe I should wear a helmet whilst I'm walking on the pavement, along with a mirror to see them approaching - Surely that would be the view of the 'general standard motorist' . I hope compulsory eye test results will be linked to RFL renewal for vehicles - surely it will provide a slightly safer road environment, although the issue of illegal/uninsured drivers doesn't seem to be tackled, despite the (surely) easy linking of computer records.

 

[blackrat]

All the folk round here that wilfully drive up and park on the cycle lanes and shared paths are quite youg, middle aged at most.

It happens daily everywhere and no one bats an eye lid, but some poor old giffer does it and its suddenly newsworthy.

So it seems, and by users of this site too.

 

[mjr]

Measures should be evidence led, and the evidence is that older drivers are actually far from being the most dangerous demographic on the road.

Although imperfect, the evidence in https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/car-vs-cycle-lane-incident-😲.306971/post-7513104 and its replies seem to directly contradict that. I would welcome whatever better evidence you have, but per mile, older drivers seem to have the worst casualty rate and it appears to remain stubbornly high.

 

[blackrat]

Although imperfect, the evidence in https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/car-vs-cycle-lane-incident-😲.306971/post-7513104 and its replies seem to directly contradict that. I would welcome whatever better evidence you have, but per mile, older drivers seem to have the worst casualty rate and it appears to remain stubbornly high.

Although imperfect, you will need to provide 'better' evidence in support of: 'older drivers' seem to have a worst casualty rate..' and ' it appears to remain stubbornly high'.

 

[Alex321]

Although imperfect, you will need to provide 'better' evidence in support of: 'older drivers' seem to have a worst casualty rate..' and ' it appears to remain stubbornly high'.

In other words, you have no evidence to contradict what has been presented.

 

[mjr]

I think the elderly generally tend to drive less, but Copilot can't find me can't find any stats on the subject.

I think the National Travel Survey should have some data on this. Copilot is not trustworthy.

I'd be surprised because I'm often told the elderly in England rely on their cars and I'm an evil ageist for wanting to take their road space and use it to protect younger cyclists.