On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 03:30:23 +0100, Clive Coleman
wrote in message
:

O.K. This argument has gone far enough, and to be honest it's all
about point scoring and no facts are allowed to intervene.

You think? I don't care about point scoring, actually, but I do care
about Daily Mail-style scapegoating of cyclists, because that actually
affects my safety as I travel. YMMV.

If a
cyclist has to brake hard at any obstruction be it traffic lights, road
works what ever he is prepared and it's his own fault if he's not.

Interestingly, a cyclist was held to be at fault when he hit a
pedestrian who stepped out into the road into his path having "looked"
and seen no "traffic". I invite you to consider the likelihood of a
driver being successfully prosecuted for driving without due care (the
equivalent offence) under the same circumstances.

bus driver on the other hand has to take into account maybe up to 70
other persons who are not expecting sudden braking, especially whilst on
their feet walking for the door. If you are a cyclist with half a
brain then you would know why I would hit you rather that injure my load
who may be children or O.A.P.s. Give it a seconds thought, or more
accurately take a PCV test then come back and argue your case if you
think you still have one.

This argument is about the inherent absurdity of raising cyclist
behaviour as an excuse for the behaviour of other road users.

I rarely have a problem with buses, because I ride in a way which
takes account of their special circumstances. I have seen a driver
run into the back of a bus which did the completely unpredictable
(i.e. stopping at a a bus stop), so I suppose I can see where you are
coming from :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University