Victim Blaming daffodil :-(

[HLaB]

Apologies for my language and I've not read the full story but the headline makes me hopping mad

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24999302

 

[Markymark]

We don;t live in an ideal wrld and the infrastructure will be dicded by politicians who do not have any particular group's safety at heart.

My guess is that, as a politician, he will be trying to appease all sides to make any change to make things safer. Not how it should be done, but again, he is a politician. I think changes will come that benefit cyclists, but there will also be new rules for cyclists to obey and exisiting rules better enforced as a consequence.

 

[glenn forger]

Boris is disgusting, he's diverting attention from his crappy, lethal facilities.

 

[cosmicbike]

Nothing like deflection..
Sorry but peds are just as bad with their headphones in. Whilst I don't condone cycling with headphones (I never have, or will for the reasons stated by Boris), to blame them for the recent fatalities is absurd.
Interesting that he has now started referring to a 5 year period when looking at fatality rates. Presumably because his PR man cannot think of a way to get him out of the fact that there have been the same number this year as last. Sadly this is likely to increase before the year is out....

 

[glenn forger]

Number of deaths of cyclists where headphones were implicated? Zero.

 

[Dangermouse]

Personally I do like to hear whats going on around me, so don't wear earphones, he may have a point, especially in large cities like London.

 

[glenn forger]

Boris is on record as supporting cyclists using mobiles whilst cycling, he twists in the wind like a great big twisty thing.

 

[Jon George]

A classic insensitive and political knee-jerk reaction. I could rant on, but I can't escape the irony of this post also being a knee-jerk response ...

 

[Mile195]

The headline is rather sensationalist. He isn't considering a headphone ban. He says he would support one. That sounds rather hypothetical to me and represents only four very short paragraphs of the entire article.

 

[glenn forger]

It's meaningless, look how few drivers on mobiles get caught, making more things banned on the roads with no enforcement is utter bollocks.

 

[donnydave]

Best introduce a maximum sound-deadening level in cars then to guarantee drivers can hear other traffic (or make it the law that everyone drives round with their windows open), and lock off all car stereo volume controls at something barely above a whisper....

 

[Wobblers]

It's meaningless, look how few drivers on mobiles get caught, making more things banned on the roads with no enforcement is utter bollocks.

Ah, but that's not its purpose. It's there so that drivers have an excuse when they mow someone else down: "But I'm innocent your Honour, I must be he was wearing headphones (when I didn't see him but mysteriously managed to spot that he was wearing headphones, pretty neat, eh?)"

 

[albion]

"In Paris last year there were no cyclist fatalities."
So dO they cycle in Paris?

BTW I like some of CB's comments.
He is often quite practical in his advice.

 

[albion]

"Mr Johnson said the latest person to die was in a collision with a lorry around midday, not during the rush hour."

The guy loses the plot as usual whenever asked to go beyond super slogans.

 

[albion]

The guys is a dickhead.

Why do you have to hear that car come out in front of you when most of us get to see the darn thing going to hit us?