Quite a Shocking Article

[CopperCyclist]

The numbers aren't even right. I know of one job my shift dealt with where a cyclist was killed recently that doesn't appear.

 

[Dave Davenport]

The numbers aren't even right. I know of one job my shift dealt with where a cyclist was killed recently that doesn't appear.

Yep, and the member of our club who was killed in May's not listed either.

 

[jazzkat]

However, the term 'accident' does not signify or imply absence of fault. If through negligence, inattention clumsiness I do something by accident and damage results, this damage may be described as having been caused by an accident.

Fair enough, I suppose the Police use it to try to be non judgemental in a situation. However, I feel that by using the word accident in a road/traffic situation almost gives a get out of jail free card to hide behind. "Sorry I crashed into you, I didn't mean to do it" is really no excuse. Yes accidents happen, but they shouldn't happen on the roads. A moment of inattentive driving doesn't end with a broken plate, it can end in the death of an innocent person.
I would like to see strict/presumptive liability, but it sadly isn't going to happen any time soon.

 

[Boris Bajic]

Fair enough, I suppose the Police use it to try to be non judgemental in a situation. However, I feel that by using the word accident in a road/traffic situation almost gives a get out of jail free card to hide behind. "Sorry I crashed into you, I didn't mean to do it" is really no excuse. Yes accidents happen, but they shouldn't happen on the roads. A moment of inattentive driving doesn't end with a broken plate, it can end in the death of an innocent person.
I would like to see strict/presumptive liability, but it sadly isn't going to happen any time soon.

I wouldn't like to see that, but I understand that many do.

I am not picking on your posts, which I find thoughtful and positive; but I disagree with you on presumptive liability.

I think I would dislike living in a land where that was in place.

 

[jazzkat]

I wouldn't like to see that, but I understand that many do.

I am not picking on your posts, which I find thoughtful and positive; but I disagree with you on presumptive liability.

I think I would dislike living in a land where that was in place.

Thanks, I don't feel picked on

Why would you not like presumptive liability?
I'm guessing the 'guilty until proved innocent' angle.

 

[theclaud]

I wouldn't like to see that, but I understand that many do.

I am not picking on your posts, which I find thoughtful and positive; but I disagree with you on presumptive liability.

I think I would dislike living in a land where that was in place.

I find this utterly preposterous.

 

[Crackle]

I find this utterly preposterous.

Good job there isn't a law about presumptive posting.

 

[theclaud]

Good job there isn't a law about presumptive posting.

I simply couldn't bear to live in the kind of country where there was such a law!*


*This is known as a Conditional Pre-Enflouncement

 

[User169]

I wouldn't like to see that, but I understand that many do.

I am not picking on your posts, which I find thoughtful and positive; but I disagree with you on presumptive liability.

I think I would dislike living in a land where that was in place.

Each to his/her own. I quite enjoy living in a place where such a system operates.

 

[slowmotion]

The thing that made a quite deep, and chilling impression on me was the photos of the poor cyclists. All ages, both sexes...just completely normal people who died riding their bikes. The sheer randomness of it made me just a tiny bit apprehensive as I set off across London today. It only lasted for a mile, thankfully, but it was so sad to see those people's photos.

 

[Boris Bajic]

I find this utterly preposterous.

I read this post to myself with a Sylvester the Cat voice and giggled.

Then I tried a Josip Broz Tito public-speaking voice and found it slightly chilling, but still funny.

Then I imagined it in a female Welsh voice and it went a bit Hi-De-Hi on me....

It's one of those posts that just begs for the full range of (non-comedy) accents.

 

[jazzkat]

I am not entirely opposed to it, but I find that on balance I prefer things as they are.

I am slightly fearful that a change as fundamental as that might set more hares running than we can helpfully keep an eye on.

For those reasons and others, I prefer living in a land where it is not on the books. I respect completely the wishes of those who think otherwise.

I can understand your your point of view. I just wish we could do something to stop the needless waste of life and if presumptive liability made one motorist be more careful and stopped one needless death then I find it hard to see that much of a negative. I know presumptive liability a bit black and white but cultural change is slow and we have a culture of USA style motorcar use, crammed into towns and cities planned a long time before the invention of the car, on a small Island. It's a bad mix.

I know with more cycle use things will change, it's just a shame that the people whose pic's appear in that article have paid the ultimate price.

 

[theclaud]

I read this post to myself with a Sylvester the Cat voice and giggled.

Then I tried a Josip Broz Tito public-speaking voice and found it slightly chilling, but still funny.

Then I imagined it in a female Welsh voice and it went a bit Hi-De-Hi on me....

It's one of those posts that just begs for the full range of (non-comedy) accents.

Spare me. Jazzcat puts it better than I can, really. Will you be doing an Andrew Lloyd Webber on us when we get presumption of liability? And, on a more serious note, is there an actual argument against it which amounts to anything more impressive than car drivers wishing to displace the responsibility for their choices onto more vulnerable road users?

 

[Boris Bajic]

Spare me. Jazzcat puts it better than I can, really. Will you be doing an Andrew Lloyd Webber on us when we get presumption of liability? And, on a more serious note, is there an actual argument against it which amounts to anything more impressive than car drivers wishing to displace the responsibility for their choices onto more vulnerable road users?

I'm not sure what the Lloyd Webber reference is. I just said I wouldn't like living in a country where Presumptive Liability was on the books. I wouldn't.

Nor do I like living in a country whose soldiers are killing and dying for nothing in Afghanistan. Many people dislike living in a country where this or that custom or law is in place. That does not mean they are about to flounce off abroad. Nor does it make that view 'preposterous' (in a Sylvester voice or any other).

It doesn't mean I'd leave and I'm not sure why you find the statement preposterous. My views differ from yours on this topic. I've spent much of my adult life living elsewhere, but because I was drawn to those places, not repelled from this one. It's my home.

On your serious question: I (and some others) are not comfortable with the concept of presumed liability when extended to Traffic Law. I write this as a cyclist, a motorist and a former motorcyclist who has been over a few bonnets and under a couple of front valences.

I write it also as the father of three keen cyclists, only one of whom is a driver.

I dare say there are motorists who would see Presumptive Liability as a threat to some perceived wish to 'displace the responsibility for their choices onto more vulnerable road users', but that in itself does not dismantle the legitimacy of any argument against the shift.

Jazzcat does make the point well and without invective, but I find I disagree. I find the current system adaequate and am uncomfortable about a change that would place a presumption of culpability on a party in an incident on the basis of the relative power, mass or speed of the vehicle they were operating. I fear that might skew perception and judgements in an unhelpful way and for the sake of the perceived likelihood of saving one, five or fifteen cyclists' lives I would not be in favour of the change. To my mind it is not an appropriate step to take with the aim of starting to change the mindset with a hope of slowly altering the road culture. I find the current system effective. I find it fair. In my experience I find it fairly applied. The chap whose mother started the charity Roadpeace after he was killed was a friend of mine and it was I who collected his motorcycle from the pound. I am not without loss and personal perspective in this. We've all seen sadness on the roads. However, these losses do not lead me to believe there is a case for change. The views of others will differ. Yours seem to.

One may argue that the system is in place and that it works elsewhere. I've lived in several places with governments and legal systems unlike ours. Many of the citizens have insisted that they are wonderful governments and wonderful legal systems and we would do well to adopt them. Many are no longer in place and some are now subject to ridicule. Just because something is in place elsewhere, it is not necessarily right here.

I am not against change per se, but I am against that change.

 

[jefmcg]

Following the links though...

Anyone know the equivalent number for car drivers/passengers?

I dont think I've seen the answer to this, so I asked Professor Google.

Deaths per billion miles travelled
Deaths per billion vehicle miles
| Car occupants|Motorcyclists|Pedal cyclists|Pedestrians
--------------------------------------------------------------
2005| 7 |171 |55 |58
2006| 7 |189 |52 |57
2007| 6 |173 |53 |57
2008| 5 |158 |40 |50
2009| 4 |149 |35 |42
2010| 3 |141 |37 |37
2011| 4 |125 |35 |41
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/sep/28/road-deaths-great-britain-data

(edit: g'damn it! how do you to a table in here???)