Old street roundabout crash

[Simon_m]

Simon, I think you are going down a very dangerous metaphorical route with that line of argument!


There is a risk of getting things out of proportion after one accident. Remember that most cyclists who ride round it do live to tell the tale! It's not a regular route for me but I've been round it a good few times.

If you live or work nearby, it may not be easily or conveniently avoidable. I don't think that there should be no-go areas or sections of road for cyclists - least of all self-imposed ones.

Remember 'safety in numbers'. If people avoid it, it makes it more dangerous for those who do use it. That can't be what you are advocating?

I'm off the mind set that if something is bad, dangerous or may kill me, them I stay away from it. For example, I'm not going to join the army as I might get shot or blown up. I cycle a lot and I take calculated risks, but if there is a dangerous piece of road, or whatever, i am going to avoid it. That's just me. If people want to cycle in places which I consider dangerous, that is up to them, I ain't going to stop them, probably because I won’t be there lol

It's simular to the helmet threads, if people want to wear them, or not wear them, it's up to them.

 

[mickle]

I had an off on that roundabout in1986.

 

[frank9755]

I'm off the mind set that if something is bad, dangerous or may kill me, them I stay away from it. For example, I'm not going to join the army as I might get shot or blown up. I cycle a lot and I take calculated risks, but if there is a dangerous piece of road, or whatever, i am going to avoid it. That's just me. If people want to cycle in places which I consider dangerous, that is up to them, I ain't going to stop them, probably because I won’t be there lol

OK but the flaw in the argument is that people tend not be very good at judging the degree of risk (or lack of risk) that they are exposing themselves to.

To illustrate:

Could you write a list of roads that you know for certain that you could not have an accident on?

Could you write a list of ten things that you do that you know for certain could not under any circumstances lead to you being killed?

 

[Dan B]

There is a risk of getting things out of proportion after one accident. Remember that most cyclists who ride round it do live to tell the tale!

+1 to this. If I assumed that everywhere that had ever been the site of a bike/vehicle collision was too dangerous to ride, I'd not have a lot of options for riding anywhere at all.

 

[frank9755]

Back on topic:

UPDATE

The injuries are now thought to not be life threatening. 2:05 pm 24/02/2011


http://www.hackneyhive.co.uk/index/2011/02/female-cyclist-hit-by-lorry-at-old-st-roundabout/

 

[Dan B]

On a side note, the Hackney Gazette seems remarkably balanced in its reporting: uses "collision" not "accident" and a blessed absence of the usual victim-blaming. Some bigger papers could stand to learn from this example.

 

[Simon_m]

OK but the flaw in the argument is that people tend not be very good at judging the degree of risk (or lack of risk) that they are exposing themselves to.

To illustrate:

Could you write a list of roads that you know for certain that you could not have an accident on?

Could you write a list of ten things that you do that you know for certain could not under any circumstances lead to you being killed?

lol it's not flawed in any way, I am talking about minimising the risk to my life, (such as the army example). If I think that my route to work takes me a way which I think I'm more likely to be bit off, then I will not take it. And I'm sure there are other people on here too that avoid "hotspots". I avoid Elephant and Castle, not becuase there might have been a crash there last week or not, but because I take one look at it and think, no-way-jose.

It is pointless having this debate becuase its not going to come to any conclussion. Good news on the cyclist

 

[benborp]

On a side note, the Hackney Gazette seems remarkably balanced in its reporting: uses "collision" not "accident" and a blessed absence of the usual victim-blaming. Some bigger papers could stand to learn from this example.

Yes, I was impressed when I first came across their website (unfortunately due to the reporting of a serious incident). What most caught my attention was their running of the Hackney Cycle Safe Campaign - a fairly neutral, easily understandable attempt to effect change. It's well trailed across their website.

Hackney Gazette - Cycle Safe

The Gazette team has compiled three pedal pledges to encourage all road users to take responsibility for cyclists’ safety in the borough.

They were drawn up with the help of London Cycling Campaign to unite cyclists, motorists and lorry drivers in a common goal.

Readers are urged to sign up to the pledges to take direct action to improve safety.


Cyclists

1. Position yourself correctly and safely in the road
2. Make sure other drivers can see you and what you are planning to do at all times
3. Get as much training as you can

Motorists

1. Do not let yourself be distracted (by phones, SAT navs, stress)
2. Always be aware of where cyclists could be
3. Go slow

Lorry drivers

1. Check mirrors and check again
2. Use left hand indicators
3. Install the best equipment to help you detect cyclists

While news like today's is obviously upsetting, and everyone's thoughts are with those involved, it is heartening to see a newspaper taking its obligations to its readership seriously enough to use its position to try and prevent more of these incidents appearing on its pages.

 

[frank9755]

lol it's not flawed in any way, I am talking about minimising the risk to my life, (such as the army example). If I think that my route to work takes me a way which I think I'm more likely to be bit off, then I will not take it. And I'm sure there are other people on here too that avoid "hotspots". I avoid Elephant and Castle, not becuase there might have been a crash there last week or not, but because I take one look at it and think, no-way-jose.

It is pointless having this debate becuase its not going to come to any conclussion. Good news on the cyclist

Of course you are sensible to minimise risk, but I think that it is important to challenge victim-blaming.

By saying that you thought that the roundabout was too dangerous to be sensibly used, you implied (maybe not intentionally) that it was her own fault for riding on it that she got knocked off. I think those assertions, and the thinking behind them, should always be challenged.

 

[her_welshness]

Of course you are sensible to minimise risk, but I think that it is important to challenge victim-blaming.

By saying that you thought that the roundabout was too dangerous to be sensibly used, you implied (maybe not intentionally) that it was her own fault for riding on it that she got knocked off. I think those assertions, and the thinking behind them, should always be challenged.

No he is not saying that at all. Simon has a right to his own opinion. It's rather different from theories/assertions. Yes of course the roads would be safer if there were more and more cyclists, but there are some sections which scare the bejasus out of myself and other cyclists in London. To make my life easier and chilled out I sometimes use quieter routes. If I feel confident to use main roads I do. Horses for courses.

An excellent example is the Elephant & Castle roundabout, I would rather do the silly-arse cycling diversion than do that quite frankly.

Choose life

 

[frank9755]

sounds like it is best to avoid this roundabout at all costs. Have to ask yourself, is it worth it?

This is the comment. I read it as a criticism of the cyclist for using the route.

 

[her_welshness]

This is the comment. I read it as a criticism of the cyclist for using the route.

Yes I saw the comment. This is yours to Simon:

that it was her own fault for riding on it that she got knocked off

He was not even remotely saying that it was her fault.

 

[frank9755]

He was not even remotely saying that it was her fault.

Good!

 

[Simon_m]

Thanks "her welshness", I think people on here just cruise for a confrontation and pick holes/pulls at a thread to get a response. Pointless really, but I guess it's the same type of people who left the comment on the original news story "his unfortunate incident shows just how dangerous cycling on London streets really is...". He can think and say what he likes. Cycle safe her welshness

 

[Tynan]

That is a big and busy rab as is E&C

Big roundabouts need sound technique and confidence to apply it

Riders with neither shuldn't tackle them imho