On 01/12/2019 14:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/12/2019 01:28, JNugent wrote:
On 30/11/2019 23:38, TMS320 wrote:
On 30/11/2019 18:53, MrCheerful wrote:
On 30/11/2019 14:44, colwyn wrote:
On 30/11/2019 14:04, JNugent wrote:

And this was one of a relatively few posts in uk.r.c to be on-topic?

Oh yes, just tinged with gloating, glee and schadenfreude. Shame on
you!

If enough cyclists get the message then the number of deaths may
decrease.

The message? How about people that know nothing about riding a bike
stop jumping to conclusions and mind their own business?

Is "Watch where you're going" jumping to conclusions?

I think it is reasonable to assume that not looking was a factor.
Pronouncing the cause of not looking is jumping to conclusions.

You are surely being a bit hasty in claiming it must have been suicide.

No, the only reasonable conclusion is that the collision was not
intended and that it happened because the cyclist wasn't looking where
he was going. It isn't as though it's the only example we've ever seen,
is it?

Besides, the message "look where you're going" is stating the bleedin'
obvious, unnecessary and patronising.

It is obvious. I agree.

It is not unnecessary - and very clearly not that. In fact, it is the
opposite. It is very necessary to remind cyclists - some of 'em - to
watch where they're going.

Is it necessary to remind you that had that poor man been in a modern
car (even a quite small one) and wearing a seat belt, he would almost
certainly have survived a shunt like that? Is it necessary to remark on
the vulnerability of cyclists and motor-cyclists and of how looking
where they are going is an obvious imperative?

Everybody gets distracted for some reason at some point.

True, but not A Good Thing, as I am sure you will agree.

Fortunately, most of the time it doesn't coincide
with something that needs immediate attention.

Probably true, but not a matter which is within the control of the
distractee. It's better not to rely on good luck (or "fortune").