Helmets from the AA

[Sheffield_Tiger]

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/RALEIGH-MISSI...65?pt=UK_Cycling_Clothing&hash=item19c4c514d9

One of many to hit fleabay I reckon

 

[Davidc]

More seriously ......

The problem is not looking or simply not responding appropriately to what you see. Most accidents are nothing to do with whether the driver has seen the cyclist or not, it is the fact that they have overtaken inappropriately, failed to stop at a junction, or left hooked.

HiViz is totally ineffective in the scenarios where most accidents occur.

In my humble experience I find an AirZound a much more effective safety aid han HiViz

Do both then.

I've always found that observation and deliberately moving out of harms way is effective. I have however considered an Airzound, mainly for pedestrians. I might yet buy one, and if I do its awesome noise won't be reserved just for pedestrians either.

 

[brokenbetty]

I don't mind helmets and I wear reflective stuff at night.

I think it's abhorrent that when the biggest danger by far to cyclists is a widespread acceptance of poor driving, the AA, who are possibly in the best position to influence that, are wasting their time telling cyclists what to do to at best minimally improve their safety.

Cynical and despicable.

 

[Clandy]

If a driver cannot see me unless I'm decked out in hi-vis, how on Earth do they see pedestrians, lampposts, parked cars, bollards, kerbs etc?

 

[Baggy]

I don't mind helmets and I wear reflective stuff at night.

I think it's abhorrent that when the biggest danger by far to cyclists is a widespread acceptance of poor driving, the AA, who are possibly in the best position to influence that, are wasting their time telling cyclists what to do to at best minimally improve their safety.

Cynical and despicable.

A nice summary.

Our AA car insurance is due for renewal next month, think I'll be looking elsewhere this time and letting them know why.

 

[Davidc]

If a driver cannot see me unless I'm decked out in hi-vis, how on Earth do they see pedestrians, lampposts, parked cars, bollards, kerbs etc?

They don't.

That's why being a pedestrian is more dangerous than cycling on the road.

That's why the councils have a full time job replacing bollards.

That's why there are always lamp posts leaning at silly angles.

That's why my son's car has a big dent in it.

That's why I wear hi-viz on my bike, and have daytime lights running on it.

I still allow for drivers who won't have seen me, as I do when I'm driving. Fortunately I've managed to jump out of the way and not get rear ended on a bike so far. I still suffer the consequences of being rear ended in a car when I couldn't jump to safety. That's why I wear hi-viz on my bike, and have daytime lights running on it.

I've had more life threatning experiences in a car than on a bike but I'm well aware of the possibilities. I was less than a millimetre from death as a pedestrian, but the driver killed a family of 5 sitting in their car instead. The roads are a potentially dangerous place. That's why I wear hi-viz on my bike, and have daytime lights running on it.

I also wear hi-viz when I'm out walking if I'm on country roads. I don't if I'm walking in town and haven't got the bike with me, but should really.

It' also why I'll vote for any party proposing to ban all private cars and severely restrict all other motor transport. Fat chance.

 

[Bicycle]

[/size]


But given that it is, if groups associated with burglars were to start giving out free locks, or the friends and family of rapists giving out rape alarms, you wouldn't see why some people find that ... distasteful?

The analogy kind of breaks down in that burglars and muggers don't have easily identifiable support groups, whereas inattentive drivers and serial motor-assisted lawbreakers with the necessary dosh to spring for AA membership will be entirely welcome there. Let's not forget that the organisation was originally founded to warn motorists of speed traps on their journeys.

I find the above views and all the thinking behind them completely rational, logical and moderate.

I joined the AA in the mistaken belief that they'd still 'fail to salute' when there was a policeman nearby.

It broke my heart to learn they didn't do that any longer. It turns out they only fix cars and tow them home.

It's very difficult for serial motor-assisted law-breakers like me to get any sympathy these days.

Still, as an inattentive driver I'm glad that the AA will stand up for me as an easily recognised support group....

... or something...

 

[Clandy]

They don't.

That's why being a pedestrian is more dangerous than cycling on the road.

That's why the councils have a full time job replacing bollards.

That's why there are always lamp posts leaning at silly angles.

That's why my son's car has a big dent in it.

That's why I wear hi-viz on my bike, and have daytime lights running on it.

I still allow for drivers who won't have seen me, as I do when I'm driving. Fortunately I've managed to jump out of the way and not get rear ended on a bike so far. I still suffer the consequences of being rear ended in a car when I couldn't jump to safety. That's why I wear hi-viz on my bike, and have daytime lights running on it.

I've had more life threatning experiences in a car than on a bike but I'm well aware of the possibilities. I was less than a millimetre from death as a pedestrian, but the driver killed a family of 5 sitting in their car instead. The roads are a potentially dangerous place. That's why I wear hi-viz on my bike, and have daytime lights running on it.

I also wear hi-viz when I'm out walking if I'm on country roads. I don't if I'm walking in town and haven't got the bike with me, but should really.

It' also why I'll vote for any party proposing to ban all private cars and severely restrict all other motor transport. Fat chance.

You don't think that's enabling the acceptance of poor driving standards? Speaking for myself, in 31 years of driving I have never hit a lamppost, a bollard, a cyclist, a pedestrian, a parked car, or a kerb, because I use my eyes and pay attention to what is around me when driving. Those who do hit those things because they 'didn't see them', should not be permitted to operate a motor vehicle.

 

[gaz]

For those on twitter, i fear i started a lot of people having a rant at the president of the AA with the following

why is the @aapresident giving free helmets to cyclists? So drivers can drive more dangerously around us?

 

[Davidc]

You don't think that's enabling the acceptance of poor driving standards? Speaking for myself, in 31 years of driving I have never hit a lamppost, a bollard, a cyclist, a pedestrian, a parked car, or a kerb, because I use my eyes and pay attention to what is around me when driving. Those who do hit those things because they 'didn't see them', should not be permitted to operate a motor vehicle.

Neither have I in slightly longer driving, always the victim. Apart from a kerb.

I agree with you, sadly those who govern us don't.

That's why I wear hi-viz on my bike, and have daytime lights running on it.

 

[corshamjim]

I think the most likely way I'm going to die if I'm going to be cut down on the road is by some hooray in a 4x4 towing a trailer wider than the car and forgetting to leave that bit of extra space. That's why as well as wearing hi-viz and helmet I use a mirror too. Not only does the mirror help me to spot mad trailer-towers behind me, it sticks out the side so makes me seem wider than I am so drivers (usually) give me more room anyway.

 

[jethro10]

It shouldn't be necessary to have locks on your house, or to lock your bike up when leaving it. It shouldn't be necessary for women to take steps to ensure their safety when out at night etc

Welcome to the real world though

LOL
Exactly how i think. I won't let idealism get me killed.

Jeff

 

[brokenbetty]

LOL
Exactly how i think. I won't let idealism get me killed.

Jeff

That's a reasonable response for an individual. You can't influence general driving standards so you do what is within your power. Although the difference it makes in terms of overall risk is miniscule, it's all you can do.

The AA is not an individual and it CAN influence driver behaviour. For them to instead focus on the arguable and at best minimal benefits of a helmet over driver education and standards is unforgivable. Don't let the AA distract you with a debate about helmets, it is a debate about where to focus road safety resources.

 

[Bicycle]

For them (The AA) to instead focus on the arguable and at best minimal benefits of a helmet over driver education and standards is unforgivable. Don't let the AA distract you with a debate about helmets, it is a debate about where to focus road safety resources.

I'm not convinced about helmets, but I do see why some people are keen on them.

I'm not sure the AA have done anything unforgivable....

And I'm not sure they're trying to distract anyone....

They're giving out helmets.

They're a motoring organisation; they're not the baddies in a Bond film or casino card sharps....

I forgive them and I do not feel anyone's trying to distract me.

 

[gaz]

My views on it -->