A story to cheer Helen up

A decent article in The Times for a change

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...018454,00.html

In a flash
As fast as a camera traps you, you could kill someone

The Government has announced an increase in the maximum sentence for causing
death by driving dangerously, or while under the influence of drugs or
alcohol. Road safety campaigners are sceptical that increasing the maximum
penalty - from ten to fourteen years' imprisonment - will be a sufficient
deterrent. The maximum sentence is rarely imposed; more commonly, judges hand
down terms of three to five years for causing death on the roads. Campaigners
believe that if a minimum penalty of two or three years' imprisonment were
imposed, it would send a clearer message to those who might otherwise not
think twice about careering recklessly on the roads.

Among motorists generally, speeding is seen, in the same way that drinking and
driving once was, as acceptable; it is only getting caught that is socially
unacceptable. This is partly out of bravado, and a mis- taken belief that "I
can handle it". It is partly because overregulation has created dis- respect
for speed limits. To win back respect for the law, the Government should
consider raising speed limits where conditions allow it: on empty motorways,
for instance, or on straight, quiet roads at night. Modern vehicles and road
surfaces are safer as well as faster than those commonly in use when most
speed limits were set.

As long as speed limits do exist - and even if they are unreasonably low -
they should be rigorously enforced. The current debate over the use, and
occasional over-use, of speed cameras shows, however, how easily the balance
of the law is upset. Ministers have rightly become concerned at plummeting
respect for a system which will issue up to three million fines this year.
They will now tell police and local authorities to publish the accident
history of every speed camera site, before and after installation of the
camera.

For the key to acceptable enforcement, as to government in general, is
accountability. And the facts about the efficacy of cameras speak for
themselves. A camera may be installed on a road only if there have been four
deaths or serious injuries as a result of speeding in the previous three
years, and nearly all adhere to this rule. Publishing the figures will winkle
out the ones that do not. According to the Government, cameras cut the number
of casualties and serious injuries in their area on average by 35 per cent,
although the figures can range from a 67 per cent fall to a 15 per cent rise.
Publishing the outcomes will help to convince public opinion where the cameras
are effective, and shame police into removing them where they are acting as
cash machines, not as deterrents.

More importantly, the figures may act as a small step towards changing a
culture which refuses to acknowledge how dangerous driving is. Those who
champion the "freedom of the road" at all costs cut into the liberties of
others, often to the extent of cutting them down completely. There are an
unacceptably high number of deaths on the roads: around 3,400 people each
year, 2,600 of them motorists, cyclists or passengers rather than pedestrians.
The numbers who die in train accidents are tiny by comparison: ten in 2002-03,
five the previous year and seventeen the year before that.

Yet, as a culture, we react with horror to rail crashes while accepting the
far higher number of motoring casualties as a price somehow worth paying.
There is an inherent casualness in our driving culture - we are aware of the
benefits, but have never properly factored in the responsibility that
accompanies the potential danger posed by the automobile. Scare
advertisements, fines and tougher sentences will make a contribution to the
raising of our consciousness, but, in the end, the individual behind the wheel
has the lives of others in his or her hands

A decent article in The Times for a change

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...018454,00.html

Yes, I read it this morning whilst sipping a cup of tea ;-)

It is good to see more articles appearing which are challenging the view of
some motorists who think that breaking the speed limit is somehow not wrong and
not dangerous. I just hope the feeling develops that we all have to be very
aware of the potential disasterous nature of driving illegally & in and unsafe
manner. Perhaps it would be a positive step if, before being considered for
taking of a driving test, said applicant had to use a pedal cycle as main means
of transport for...ohh... at least a couple of years or so ;-)

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove dependency on fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**s@$*$a$$o* *l.c**$*$om$$

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
Perhaps it would be a positive step if, before being
considered for taking of a driving test, said applicant had to use a pedal
cycle as main means of transport for...ohh... at least a couple of years or
so ;-)


Nooooooooooooh

London Taxi drivers. I rest my case

Tony

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers posted ...

A decent article in The Times for a change

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...018454,00.html

Yes, I read it this morning whilst sipping a cup of tea ;-)

It is good to see more articles appearing which are challenging the
view of some motorists who think that breaking the speed limit is
somehow not wrong and not dangerous. I just hope the feeling develops
that we all have to be very aware of the potential disasterous nature
of driving illegally & in and unsafe manner. Perhaps it would be a
positive step if, before being considered for taking of a driving
test, said applicant had to use a pedal cycle as main means of
transport for...ohh... at least a couple of years or so ;-)

It's my belief that a lot of the problem 'nowadays' is the easy way people
can acquire vehicles and the lack of them ever having used cycles at all.

When I were a lad, 'scuse the pun, there were much fewer families with cars,
let alone multiple car ownership. We all, even the poorest kids, had bikes
of one form or another, and the roads _were_ much clearer. But, we were
specifically taught safe cycling techniques at school, at the Youth Club, at
the local Cycling Club, even at Sunday School fercrissakes. Now there is
easy access to vehicles and people are being brought up having never gone
onto a road in anything other than a car they appear to have no concept of
the requirements of the cyclist or of their obligation to sharing road
space.

As a driver and a cyclist I know there's a balance to be made, but it seems
that there are too few drivers who are also, or who used to be, cyclists.

I would suggest specific training sessions in _every_ school from Primary
school upwards, with the help of local cycling clubs if possible, or regular
cyclists, not just from teachers who might cycle occasionally, may be a way
of addressing the imbalance, but then, not every child has a cycle these
days ..

Just a thought ..

--
Paul

(8(|) Homer rocks ..

It's my belief that a lot of the problem 'nowadays' is the easy way people
can acquire vehicles and the lack of them ever having used cycles at all.


I think you have a valid point.

When I were a lad, 'scuse the pun, there were much fewer families with cars,
let alone multiple car ownership. We all, even the poorest kids, had bikes
of one form or another, and the roads _were_ much clearer. But, we were
specifically taught safe cycling techniques at school, at the Youth Club, at
the local Cycling Club, even at Sunday School fercrissakes. Now there is
easy access to vehicles and people are being brought up having never gone
onto a road in anything other than a car they appear to have no concept of
the requirements of the cyclist or of their obligation to sharing road
space.

Eee, lad, when I were a snip of girl it t'were same :-) I can remember getting
a prize for getting a really high mark on my cycling proficiency test and being
really chuffed about it! I'm sure that cycling a lot when a kid and having done
the cycling proficiency test at school (one that took several weeks of after
school training followed by the test itself), which included being tested on
bike handling skills and a knowledge of the HC, it stood me in good stead when
I later learned to drive.

As a driver and a cyclist I know there's a balance to be made, but it seems
that there are too few drivers who are also, or who used to be, cyclists.

Yup - it's one of the reasons I encourge my offspring to cycle to & from school
and not view his mother as an always available taxi service. There were real
problems with getting any form of cycle training for him in my locality, so his
Dad & I used to cycle with him for a long time - we'd be having running
commentaries about how to cycle safely, what to be concerned about, following
the HC, not cycling on footpaths, making turns safely and the like. Offspring
is quite happy to cycle wearing reflectives, using lights etc., etc and is not
impressed by stealth cyclists and cyclists of any age where they should know
better cycling on footpaths. I've seen cycling give him a sense of independence
and growing confidence, with a well-developed "road sense". I think this will
be of benefit as and when he learns to drive in a few years' time.

Plus, joining a local cycling club, where older, more experienced riders have
given him the benefit of their experiences and lots of encouragement has all
helped. The end result is I have a kid who had no interest in sports at school,
as he's not that good at ball sports, find a sport and exercise he enjoys and
is happy to take part in. The time trials may be a solo effort but he cheers on
all the riders of his club when at an event, be it as a rider or a spectator.
As a mother, I found it hard to not wrap him in cotton wool and allow him to
cycle unaccompanied, but I realise the letting go and learning to judge & face
risks is all part of growing up. Still worry though - I think that's part of
the job description of motherhood ;-)

I would suggest specific training sessions in _every_ school from Primary
school upwards, with the help of local cycling clubs if possible, or regular
cyclists, not just from teachers who might cycle occasionally, may be a way
of addressing the imbalance, but then, not every child has a cycle these
days ..

There are various schemes available, but national coverage seems to be patchy
in terms of what's available and quality.

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove dependency on fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**s@$*$a$$o* *l.c**$*$om$$

In article ,
"Paul - xxx" writes:

When I were a lad, 'scuse the pun, there were much fewer families with cars,
let alone multiple car ownership. We all, even the poorest kids, had bikes

Bah, you lucky swine ... I wanted one, but didn't get it until I spent
time in Sweden c/o my uncle and aunt who were richer than the parents.
"Even the poorest kids" suggests to me a well-to-do social circle.

of one form or another, and the roads _were_ much clearer. But, we were
specifically taught safe cycling techniques at school,

I was aware of cycling proficiency at school, but by the time I had
a bike that was all for younger kids.

at the Youth Club, at
the local Cycling Club, even at Sunday School fercrissakes.

Heh! Luxuries of the rich ...

Now there is
easy access to vehicles and people are being brought up having never gone
onto a road in anything other than a car they appear to have no concept of
the requirements of the cyclist or of their obligation to sharing road
space.

I think it's simpler than that. Thoughtlessness, and frustration.

As a driver and a cyclist I know there's a balance to be made, but it seems
that there are too few drivers who are also, or who used to be, cyclists.

A requirement of the driving license should be a certain number of hours
on two wheels per year.

--
Nick Kew

Tony Raven wrote:

A decent article in The Times for a change

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...018454,00.html

In a flash
As fast as a camera traps you, you could kill someone

for speed limits. To win back respect for the law, the Government should
consider raising speed limits where conditions allow it: on empty motorways,
for instance, or on straight, quiet roads at night. Modern vehicles and road
surfaces are safer as well as faster than those commonly in use when most
speed limits were set.


No no no. There are quiet, straight roads around here - but they still
contain cyclists (even at night) - including Helen and me A limit of
60mph is already too high for many of these roads.

--
Chris

(Nick Kew) wrote in news:23a6h1-k7f.ln1
@webthing.com:

"Even the poorest kids" suggests to me a well-to-do social circle.

Or unlocked bikes of the "well to do" :-) When I was wee, a reasonably well
off friend of mine had a couple of bikes of his nicked due to not being
bothered to lock them. Mind you, he did have one of those old 3 digit
combination locks, the ones with transparent coloured plastic covering a
laughable chain. I used to show anyone who had them just how easy it was to
work out the combination (not that a thief would bother, a pair of pliers
would probably do the job).

Graeme

Tony Raven wrote:

A decent article in The Times for a change

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...018454,00.html

In a flash
As fast as a camera traps you, you could kill someone

The Government has announced an increase in the maximum sentence for causing
death by driving dangerously, or while under the influence of drugs or
alcohol. Road safety campaigners are sceptical that increasing the maximum
penalty - from ten to fourteen years' imprisonment - will be a sufficient
deterrent. The maximum sentence is rarely imposed; more commonly, judges hand
down terms of three to five years for causing death on the roads.

As good as far as it goes but unless the judiciary increase sentences
then nothing will change and it will be just _another_ example of this
government's empty rhetoric.

As the article later suggests perhaps minimum sentences should be introduced.

John B

No no no. There are quiet, straight roads around here - but they still
contain cyclists (even at night) - including Helen and me A limit of
60mph is already too high for many of these roads.

--
Chris

Indeed Chris. The road between Shipdham & Swaffham has many straight bits, but
as they are country roads, they can be "interesting" to cycle on... it reminds
me of one morning when I got up really early and was cycling the lanes
hereabouts and was confronted by some idiot who was using the "quiet roads" as
his own private rally stage, presumably because one doesn't expect to see a
cyclist on them that early in the morning... He woke up with an expression of
"Oh sh*t!" when he saw me..

I've been out in the car this morning round some of these straight roads which
already have a 60mph limit on them. Due to the snow, the roads are passable
with relative ease as long as a bit care is displayed - as what already narrow
roads are effectively narrowed due to build up of snow at the sides and in the
centre. The number of motorists who were clearly going at around the speed
limit on what were now even narrower roads was appalling. B*gger the fact that
the conditions made it dangerous to be driving at that speed as they were
effectively taking up more than half the available width of the road and the
slippy, wet conditions would have a negative effect on the braking distances of
their vehicles...

Cheers, helen s



--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove dependency on fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**s@$*$a$$o* *l.c**$*$om$$