GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
No helmet, no hi-viz and WEARING HEADPHONES? Must have a deathwish.
Cyclists gets a finger wag !
- Thread starter ozboz
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
To be fair, they are on largely segregated cycle paths, in a country with strong presumed liability, with drivers that are used to cyclists by the thousand. We get Dodgy Dave in a tipper truck trying to make his 15 load of the day.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
How does hi-viz protect you against Dodgy Dave?
It has not been proven that it does or it does not, but it if it gives people a warm glow and gets them riding a bike then that is fine with me.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
What if it deters people by portraying cycling as dangerous?
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
If only it did that.
Big Andy
Über Member
- Location
- Huddersfield & Leicester
Is there evidence that it portrays cycling as dangerous?
martint235
Dog on a bike
- Location
- Welling
From a quick google it appears there is no interest in doing a survey about it. There are loaded surveys about whether or not it should be compulsory. By loaded I mean no indication is given with the question as to whether or not hi viz is actually beneficial, similar to helmet surveys.
However, 67% of non-cyclists in 2013 believed that it was TOO dangerous to cycle. Surely people wearing safety equipment, whether or not it is effective, has to play a part in that perception
To be fair, this thread has descended into the usual anecdotal rubbish seen over in the helmet thread of "my brother's mate's cousin's friend wouldn't be with us now if he hadn't been wearing hi viz. How can you people sleep at night wishing for someone else to be made a widow"
Also I thought openly discussing who you are ignoring resulted in a wrist slap from the Mods
Last edited:
Profpointy
Legendary Member
To be even more pedantic... you are hoist by or with your own petard - not on it...
Extra points if you know what a petard is, without using the google.
And for knowing who famously uses the phrase and who he's referring to
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
Milkfloat offered his opinion on one outcome, regardless of the data supporting or disproving the safety enhancement claims for hi-vis. I'm asking for his opinion should another outcome be true.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
It was a small metal drum containing explosives that would be placed with its open mouth against the wall of a fort or castle and detonated. It could easily blow up the person lighting the fuse, hence the phrase's use to mean being harmed by the very method you sought to harm others. Although I remember it was used by Shakespeare, I can't remember in which play or by which character.
nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
Doesn't it also come from the French "pet" meaning to fart? Or summat like that?
Profpointy
Legendary Member
Correct !
Profpointy
Legendary Member
Like the famous Le Petamaine, gloriously portrayed by Leonard Rossiter
MontyVeda
a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
- Location
- Lancaster... the little city.
I saw an unlit cyclist at around 6.45pm last night. So did the car following him.
It did cross my mind however, that a couple of lights would probably be a bit more useful than his helmet.
HTH
It did cross my mind however, that a couple of lights would probably be a bit more useful than his helmet.
HTH
