Reduce fatalities or danger rates instead?

""I don't want to moderate oppression; I want to eradicate it," is how
Aurora put it. She was one of the organisers of a small conference on
'Bike Politics' at Lancaster University held on Thursday and Friday
(16th and 17th). It brought together 25 sociologists, town planners,
campaigners and activists from all over the UK and beyond.

The theme of the cities and the streets being designed around
motorists was a re-occurring one. There are powerful vested intersts
to keep selling cars and to mantain the status-quo. It was emphasised
not to create a false war between cyclists and cars. In before the
1930s the road was seen as a commons, the public highway, an cycle-
lanes framed as a type of enclosure. What was a space for all has
become a zone entirely for the motorised. It is about reclaiming our
spaces for the benefit of all. There was also a discussion on direct
action and if braking unjust laws whilst cycling was a form of this.
By using sections of pavement to avoid dangerous junctions to make
people take journies that would otherwise not be taken, by ignoring
one-way streets which are one-way solely due to cars we could be
argued as reclaiming our space.

Robert gave a provocative talk about reducing danger and continued in
a highly confrontational attitude to road safety. Instead of trying
to reduce fatalities and injury he wants people to look at reducing
danger rates. .."

Mo
http://northern-indymedia.org/articles/958

Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Whose streets? Our streets".

On Sep 18, 7:28*am, Doug wrote:
""I don't want to moderate oppression; I want to eradicate it," is how
Aurora put it. *She was one of the organisers of a small conference on
'Bike Politics' at Lancaster University held on Thursday and Friday
(16th and 17th). *It brought together 25 sociologists, town planners,
campaigners and activists from all over the UK and beyond.

The theme of the cities and the streets being designed around
motorists was a re-occurring one. *There are powerful vested intersts
to keep selling cars and to mantain the status-quo. *It was emphasised
not to create a false war between cyclists and cars. *In before the
1930s the road was seen as a commons, the public highway, an cycle-
lanes framed as a type of enclosure. *What was a space for all has
become a zone entirely for the motorised. *It is about reclaiming our
spaces for the benefit of all. *There was also a discussion on direct
action and if braking unjust laws whilst cycling was a form of this.
By using sections of pavement to avoid dangerous junctions to make
people take journies that would otherwise not be taken, by ignoring
one-way streets which are one-way solely due to cars we could be
argued as reclaiming our space.

Robert gave a provocative talk about reducing danger and continued in
a highly confrontational attitude to road safety. *Instead of trying
to reduce fatalities and injury he wants people to look at reducing
danger rates. .."

Mohttp://northern-indymedia.org/articles/958

Critical Mass Londonhttp://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Whose streets? Our streets".


I stooped reeding the artical affter the foreteenth spalling mistoke.

Doug wrote:
It brought together 25 sociologists, town planners,
campaigners and activists from all over the UK and beyond.

Just goes to show the level of support you ****wits have. You could only
raise 25 other *******! Ha ha ha!

SNIP BOLLOX

There was also a discussion on direct
action and if braking unjust laws whilst cycling was a form of this.
By using sections of pavement to avoid dangerous junctions to make
people take journies that would otherwise not be taken, by ignoring
one-way streets which are one-way solely due to cars we could be
argued as reclaiming our space.

Serial lawbreakers once again. I wonder if Lancaster University publicly
condone this?

Robert gave a provocative talk about reducing danger and continued in
a highly confrontational attitude to road safety. Instead of trying
to reduce fatalities and injury he wants people to look at reducing
danger rates. ..

He went on to say - "In the 1920/30s the cyclists successfully resisted
compulsory registration, compulsory rear lights and compulsory cycling in
bike lanes so that the blame for cars hitting bikes was not transferred onto
the bike for not being correctly equipped - the responsibility should rest
on the danger causing the one causing injury or death"

So cyclists have been against regulation for nearly 100 years - and have
been trying to avoid blame for their own stupidity.

Bunch of fruit loops.

Great header though - "Cyclists or road lice"?

Road Lice - great!


--
Dave - intelligent enough to realise that a push bike, like a skateboard, is
a kid's toy, not a viable form of transport.

On 18 Sep, 08:49, Marie wrote:
On Sep 18, 7:28*am, Doug wrote:



""I don't want to moderate oppression; I want to eradicate it," is how
Aurora put it. *She was one of the organisers of a small conference on
'Bike Politics' at Lancaster University held on Thursday and Friday
(16th and 17th). *It brought together 25 sociologists, town planners,
campaigners and activists from all over the UK and beyond.

The theme of the cities and the streets being designed around
motorists was a re-occurring one. *There are powerful vested intersts
to keep selling cars and to mantain the status-quo. *It was emphasised
not to create a false war between cyclists and cars. *In before the
1930s the road was seen as a commons, the public highway, an cycle-
lanes framed as a type of enclosure. *What was a space for all has
become a zone entirely for the motorised. *It is about reclaiming our
spaces for the benefit of all. *There was also a discussion on direct
action and if braking unjust laws whilst cycling was a form of this.
By using sections of pavement to avoid dangerous junctions to make
people take journies that would otherwise not be taken, by ignoring
one-way streets which are one-way solely due to cars we could be
argued as reclaiming our space.

Robert gave a provocative talk about reducing danger and continued in
a highly confrontational attitude to road safety. *Instead of trying
to reduce fatalities and injury he wants people to look at reducing
danger rates. .."

Mohttp://northern-indymedia.org/articles/958

Critical Mass Londonhttp://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Whose streets? Our streets".

I stooped reeding the artical affter the foreteenth spalling mistoke.

They were mainly typos. Odd though that the writer wasn't using a
spell checker. I wonder what antiquated software they were using?

Doug.