Re: 13.5 million motoring offences!

Douglas Steel (doug_steel1@xxxxxxxxx) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

What's the difference between a cyclist jumping a red light, ignoring
barred turns and using routes they aren't allowed to - and a car
driver doing it?

About 22 megajoules of kinetic energy (assuming 100kg of cyclist +
bike and 1000kg of car traveling at 7m/s (a touch under 16mph)).

You forget the difference between contact area, and the likelihood of the
frontal aspect presenting sharp pointy bits.

Cars are specifically designed - and independently rated - to not hurt
people much when running them over. Bikes aren't.

Both are illegal, immoral and I condemn them both, however the car is
massively (deliberate pun) more dangerous than the bicycle - so given
limited police resources, where do you think the emphasis should be ?

I'll tell you where it IS - The ones that are easy to prosecute by posting
a photograph.

The very fact they're prosecuted by photograph shows that the prosecution
isn't on safety grounds, unfortunately, because it's no bloody use to have
a piccy of somebody being run over, is it?

In the ideal world with unlimited police resources - book 'em all I
say, but in the real world compromises have to be made, and I'm afraid
that I find that cyclists are just not as big a problem as drivers.

You don't live in London, then?

Any why were cyclists supposed misdeeds brought into this thread ?

Look at the group title. uk.transport. Not uk.rec.cars.misc or
uk.rec.driving.

They are irrelevant to the point initially raised by Doug, or is this
trying to drag things down into a "Pot! Kettle!" scenario ?

Gotta raise it to Duhg's level, haven't you?
.

Quantcast