[QUOTE 2683505, member: 45"]No-one has suggested that mirrors improve hearing. That's silly.[/quote]
Sorry to jump in but I find the need for this discussion quite sick. However I would be very willing to discuss it further in an alley somewhere at night. Only the deaf will be spared the screams.
The lack of a sense is a serious impairment. It increases risks to individuals. That's why we give blind people dogs and white sticks so they can use the streets freely. We don't allow them to become airline pilots 'cos not seeing the runway might be fatal to the two hundred folks behind. Its when we stop them being in the two hundred behind that trouble starts. That actually happens with deaf people. A certain airline refuses to fly a group because "they won't hear the emergency announcements". Yep, right but if they are prepared to take the risk should they be deprived of going on holiday together?
And so returning reluctantly to this debate. Not hearing is a serious issue for deaf cyclists. It is compensated to some extent by enhanced visual awareness which we hearing people do not develop. The threat is one they can choose themselves and it applies almost exclusively to themselves. A cyclist's threat of causing a KSI to other road users through not hearing is vanishingly small. The car is a more visual environment (mirrors) and the balance of benefit/disbenefit probably tilts the other way. You may have less to fear from deaf driver than a hearing one.
Of course we could just lock the blind, deaf and immobile in institutions and throw away the key. It would prevent the continual need to repeat the arguments above.
Sorry to jump in but I find the need for this discussion quite sick. However I would be very willing to discuss it further in an alley somewhere at night. Only the deaf will be spared the screams.
The lack of a sense is a serious impairment. It increases risks to individuals. That's why we give blind people dogs and white sticks so they can use the streets freely. We don't allow them to become airline pilots 'cos not seeing the runway might be fatal to the two hundred folks behind. Its when we stop them being in the two hundred behind that trouble starts. That actually happens with deaf people. A certain airline refuses to fly a group because "they won't hear the emergency announcements". Yep, right but if they are prepared to take the risk should they be deprived of going on holiday together?
And so returning reluctantly to this debate. Not hearing is a serious issue for deaf cyclists. It is compensated to some extent by enhanced visual awareness which we hearing people do not develop. The threat is one they can choose themselves and it applies almost exclusively to themselves. A cyclist's threat of causing a KSI to other road users through not hearing is vanishingly small. The car is a more visual environment (mirrors) and the balance of benefit/disbenefit probably tilts the other way. You may have less to fear from deaf driver than a hearing one.
Of course we could just lock the blind, deaf and immobile in institutions and throw away the key. It would prevent the continual need to repeat the arguments above.
