Psycholists don't need helmets

Derek C wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:05 pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

How can you totally avoid potential head injury accidents on a push
bike, with all those 'killer' drivers around (according to Doug)?
Derek C
Perhaps we could all cycle on those non-existent cycle paths you were
recommending.

But if you want to "totally avoid potential head injury accidents" why
are you restricting it to only cyclists. They represent a tiny
proportion of head injury accidents.

--
Tony

There are plenty of cyclepaths that cyclists choose not to ride on, so
that they can deliberately get in the way of motorists!

Derek

Yes but you have been saying they should be riding on cycle paths that
don't even exist. You still haven't clarified whether you were wrong or
were actually finally agreeing with the suggestion* you have previously
opposed that cyclist cycle on the pavement to avoid dangerous traffic.

Any your response to my question about helmets is?

Tony


* not a suggestion I agree with though.

On Oct 20, 2:31*pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:05 pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

How can you totally avoid potential head injury accidents on a push
bike, with all those 'killer' drivers around (according to Doug)?
Derek C
Perhaps we could all cycle on those non-existent cycle paths you were
recommending.

But if you want to "totally avoid potential head injury accidents" why
are you restricting it to only cyclists. *They represent a tiny
proportion of head injury accidents.

--
Tony

There are plenty of cyclepaths that cyclists choose not to ride on, so
that they can deliberately get in the way of motorists!

Derek

Yes but you have been saying they should be riding on cycle paths that
don't even exist. *You still haven't clarified whether you were wrong or
were actually finally agreeing with the suggestion* you have previously
opposed that cyclist cycle on the pavement to avoid dangerous traffic.

Any your response to my question about helmets is?

Tony

* not a suggestion I agree with though.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If there is a decent, clearly marked cycle path cyclists should use
it. If not they should ride on the highway, as required by the law. I
accept that many cycle paths are a bit half baked and not decent. I
ride on countryside tracks and private roads as much as I can, so I am
generally well separated from vehicular traffic. Now what was your
question about helmets?

Derek C

On 24/10/2010 10:52, Derek C wrote:
On Oct 20, 2:31 pm, Tony wrote:
Derek C wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:05 pm, Tony wrote:
Derek wrote:

How can you totally avoid potential head injury accidents on a push
bike, with all those 'killer' drivers around (according to Doug)?
Derek C
Perhaps we could all cycle on those non-existent cycle paths you were
recommending.

But if you want to "totally avoid potential head injury accidents" why
are you restricting it to only cyclists. They represent a tiny
proportion of head injury accidents.

--
Tony

There are plenty of cyclepaths that cyclists choose not to ride on, so
that they can deliberately get in the way of motorists!

Derek

Yes but you have been saying they should be riding on cycle paths that
don't even exist. You still haven't clarified whether you were wrong or
were actually finally agreeing with the suggestion* you have previously
opposed that cyclist cycle on the pavement to avoid dangerous traffic.

Any your response to my question about helmets is?

Tony

* not a suggestion I agree with though.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If there is a decent, clearly marked cycle path cyclists should use
it.

Would "decent" mean safe?

On Oct 24, 10:54*am, Marc wrote:
On 24/10/2010 10:52, Derek C wrote:





On Oct 20, 2:31 pm, Tony *wrote:
Derek C wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:05 pm, Tony *wrote:
Derek *wrote:

How can you totally avoid potential head injury accidents on a push
bike, with all those 'killer' drivers around (according to Doug)?
Derek C
Perhaps we could all cycle on those non-existent cycle paths you were
recommending.

But if you want to "totally avoid potential head injury accidents" why
are you restricting it to only cyclists. *They represent a tiny
proportion of head injury accidents.

--
Tony

There are plenty of cyclepaths that cyclists choose not to ride on, so
that they can deliberately get in the way of motorists!

Derek

Yes but you have been saying they should be riding on cycle paths that
don't even exist. *You still haven't clarified whether you were wrong or
were actually finally agreeing with the suggestion* you have previously
opposed that cyclist cycle on the pavement to avoid dangerous traffic.

Any your response to my question about helmets is?

Tony

* not a suggestion I agree with though.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If there is a decent, clearly marked cycle path cyclists should use
it.

Would "decent" mean safe?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

By decent I mean safe, well maintained, properly thought out,
separated from pedestrians and road traffic, and going where people on
bikes are likely to want to go. Unfortunately most of the ones in my
local Borough fall far short of these ideals! Generally they paint a
few white lines, add a bit of coloured paint (apparently at vast cost
to the taxpayers), and then tick the box in the Government targets
saying 'cycling encouraged'!

Derek C

On 24/10/2010 11:12, Derek C wrote:
On Oct 24, 10:54 am, wrote:
On 24/10/2010 10:52, Derek C wrote:





On Oct 20, 2:31 pm, Tony wrote:
Derek C wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:05 pm, Tony wrote:
Derek wrote:

How can you totally avoid potential head injury accidents on a push
bike, with all those 'killer' drivers around (according to Doug)?
Derek C
Perhaps we could all cycle on those non-existent cycle paths you were
recommending.

But if you want to "totally avoid potential head injury accidents" why
are you restricting it to only cyclists. They represent a tiny
proportion of head injury accidents.

--
Tony

There are plenty of cyclepaths that cyclists choose not to ride on, so
that they can deliberately get in the way of motorists!

Derek

Yes but you have been saying they should be riding on cycle paths that
don't even exist. You still haven't clarified whether you were wrong or
were actually finally agreeing with the suggestion* you have previously
opposed that cyclist cycle on the pavement to avoid dangerous traffic.

Any your response to my question about helmets is?

Tony

* not a suggestion I agree with though.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If there is a decent, clearly marked cycle path cyclists should use
it.

Would "decent" mean safe?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

By decent I mean safe, well maintained, properly thought out,
separated from pedestrians and road traffic, and going where people on
bikes are likely to want to go.

Ahhh you mean non existant!

On Oct 24, 11:19*am, Marc wrote:
On 24/10/2010 11:12, Derek C wrote:





On Oct 24, 10:54 am, *wrote:
On 24/10/2010 10:52, Derek C wrote:

On Oct 20, 2:31 pm, Tony * *wrote:
Derek C wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:05 pm, Tony * *wrote:
Derek * *wrote:

How can you totally avoid potential head injury accidents on a push
bike, with all those 'killer' drivers around (according to Doug)?
Derek C
Perhaps we could all cycle on those non-existent cycle paths you were
recommending.

But if you want to "totally avoid potential head injury accidents" why
are you restricting it to only cyclists. *They represent a tiny
proportion of head injury accidents.

--
Tony

There are plenty of cyclepaths that cyclists choose not to ride on, so
that they can deliberately get in the way of motorists!

Derek

Yes but you have been saying they should be riding on cycle paths that
don't even exist. *You still haven't clarified whether you were wrong or
were actually finally agreeing with the suggestion* you have previously
opposed that cyclist cycle on the pavement to avoid dangerous traffic.

Any your response to my question about helmets is?

Tony

* not a suggestion I agree with though.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If there is a decent, clearly marked cycle path cyclists should use
it.

Would "decent" mean safe?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

By decent I mean safe, well maintained, properly thought out,
separated from pedestrians and road traffic, and going where people on
bikes are likely to want to go.

Ahhh *you mean non existant!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No there are cycle paths and a couple of very good trails. Some of the
marked cycle lanes run in very strange places, such as down the middle
of a busy road, and are not continuous. Generally they disappear just
where the road gets narrow and you need them most!

Derek C