tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-568852931152106119.post6151188353257016541..comments2024-03-17T18:53:05.139-07:00Comments on CycaLogical: Chelsea Bridgecrossriderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00896858165635612158noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-568852931152106119.post-575451151881088552011-03-22T01:42:39.596-07:002011-03-22T01:42:39.596-07:00Prosecuting cyclists on the footpath is entirely j...Prosecuting cyclists on the footpath is entirely justified, if the 'no-cycling' sign is prominent. <br /><br />Since the authorities seem completely disinterested in prosecuting drivers of motor-vehicles that are parked on the pavement and were presumably driven there. There is undoubtedly a significant bias against cycling and cyclists. A bias that is entirely justified by the extreme and overwhelming deadly menace presented by cyclists on the pavement to pedestrians, when compared with benign motor-vehicles, who everybody knows are almost totally harmless.<br /><br />An examination of the UK statistics shows the reason for this bias:<br />Between 1998 and 2009, pedestrian fatal casualties* on the pavement:<br />Caused by Pedal cyclists: 3 – The appallingly high rate of one every 3 years two hundred days.<br />Caused by motor-vehicle drivers**: 862 - The extremely low rate of only slightly over one every five days.<br />Notes: <br />*Assumes 10% of pedestrian casualties occur on 'pavement or verge', as was the case in 2007-2008.<br />**Drivers includes motorcycle riders.<br />DfT figures.<br /><br />As we can see, cyclists are a menace and clearly the most significant danger to the walking public. ;)amoebahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15783694650121687459noreply@blogger.com