Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

Martin567

magicbastarder wrote: »

this would seem to show different stats; about two thirds of the way down, 'Deaths by age group, 1916 and 2014'

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-1916/1916irl/bmd/deaths/

in 2014, 38 children between 1 and 4 died; and 249 under 1 (i assume a significant number of these are pre- or post-natal deaths).
but there are another 56 in the 5-14 age bracket.

Therefore the 36.7% stat is incorrect? It's amazing how a representative body can issue stats that don't stand up to any sort of scrutiny.

mr spuckler

The Kop wrote: »

The amount of kids killed in cars has as much to do with my opinion on those kids trailers for bikes as how many kids die from sky diving every year.
Btw you don't get to tell me who I can judge or not.

I don't agree with your opinion on the subject of trailers but I absolutely agree with this.
that said, "judging" people without any evidence base for that judgment doesn't reflect well on how critically you've thought about the topic that you're arguing.

The Kop

mr spuckler wrote: »

I don't agree with your opinion on the subject of trailers but I absolutely agree with this.
that said, "judging" people without any evidence base for that judgment doesn't reflect well on how critically you've thought about the topic that you're arguing.

I'm not arguing anything buddy. I don't like those trailers end of. I haven't argued anything only just given my opinion. I personally don't care who uses one. I won't ever use one though.

Fighting Tao

The Kop wrote: »

I'm not arguing anything buddy. I don't like those trailers end of. I haven't argued anything only just given my opinion. I personally don't care who uses one. I won't ever use one though.

Just because you don’t like something does not necessarily make your arguments valid or accurate.

AndrewJRenko

The Kop wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It has everything to do with evidence, facts and data. You are of course welcome to your personal opinions and personal choices. You are not welcome to judge personal choices of others without some evidence.

The amount of kids killed in cars has as much to do with my opinion on those kids trailers for bikes as how many kids die from sky diving every year.

Except that you don't take your kids sky diving, but you do choose to drive them in your car - despite the fact that a significant number of kids die in cars every year.

Fighting Tao

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Just because you don’t like something does not necessarily make your arguments valid or accurate.

Except that you’ve been proved inaccurate.

The Kop

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Except that you don't take your kids sky diving, but you do choose to drive them in your car - despite the fact that a significant number of kids die in cars every year.

Still has nothing to do with my opinion on kids trailers for bikes. I did actually take my 16 year old with me on a charity skydive recently though.

RebelButtMunch

CramCycle wrote: »

Looking at the risks involved though, why would you put your kid in a car, let them near stairs, swim and so on. As a species we weight risk all the time to what we feel appropriate. because many people drive, they, incorrectly, presume it to be the safest way to get around, even though it would not add up like that.

And that is the problem with biases, we let them skew our view and opinion. We cannot help it, the evidence says that using a child trailer is inherently not dangerous for kids but yet many of us are apprehensive to use one. People die of Heart issues and cancer every day but we don't accuse the person eating fast food of being a risk taker.

That comparison though, doesnt take into account that heart issues/cancer etc are self inflicted risks so to speak. There isn't anyone out there causing that but lifestyle and terribly bad luck.

However on the public road, there are people driving head down in their phones and all other types of bad driving. They have the potential to cause others harm no matter what precautions or care others take.

If I were to have toddlers on the road and let's face it, how else do we get from A-B most of the time, I'd rather they were surrounded by metal and airbags.

CramCycle

The Kop wrote: »

The amount of kids killed in cars has as much to do with my opinion on those kids trailers for bikes as how many kids die from sky diving every year.

I see a few trailers a day with kids, I have not heard of any children sky diving. I get your point, it is not widely in use, but it is used enough that if there was an inherent danger, we probably would have examples in some of the papers about them.

The Kop wrote: »

I'm not arguing anything buddy. I don't like those trailers end of. I haven't argued anything only just given my opinion. I personally don't care who uses one. I won't ever use one though.

I suppose a good question would be why not use one? Other than you don't feel safe with them, which is fine, just not a good enough reason to call other parents irresponsible. Cars seem to give more space (although this is not proved so I don't use it). Llooking at safety test of the trailers and how they behave in a crash, I'd sooner my child in a trailer than in a pram, buggy, child seat etc. most have decent roll cages and are light enough to move with the crash. It is counter intuitive because we associate light with flimsy/weak but in the case of these trailers, it is a huge benefit. They go with the crash, connection joints buckle taking out some of the energy, five point harnesses making sure the kids stay securely fitted and so on.

mr spuckler

I've plenty of experience of having my son on my bike and in the bike trailer.

others on this forum who use bike trailers also speak of them in glowing terms. the people decrying them here today have never used them yet are very clear on the 'risks' they pose and how irresponsible people such as me are for using them.

don't knock it till you've tried it, eh?

plodder

mloc123 wrote: »

In 2017 30 pedestrians were killed compared to 15 cyclists.. Maybe it is safer to cycle than it is to walk.

In 30 years, 14 people were killed in space shuttles - so about 0.5 people per year. Doesn't mean space shuttles are safer than walking or cycling though.

Personally, I wouldn't use one of those trailers, but I agree that motorists do tend to take more care when they see them, and at the end of the day, the risk depends on the specifics of your journey. It's up to everyone to judge that for themselves.

The Kop

CramCycle wrote: »

I see a few trailers a day with kids, I have not heard of any children sky diving. I get your point, it is not widely in use, but it is used enough that if there was an inherent danger, we probably would have examples in some of the papers about them.



I suppose a good question would be why not use one? Other than you don't feel safe with them, which is fine, just not a good enough reason to call other parents irresponsible. Cars seem to give more space (although this is not proved so I don't use it). Llooking at safety test of the trailers and how they behave in a crash, I'd sooner my child in a trailer than in a pram, buggy, child seat etc. most have decent roll cages and are light enough to move with the crash. It is counter intuitive because we associate light with flimsy/weak but in the case of these trailers, it is a huge benefit. They go with the crash, connection joints buckle taking out some of the energy, five point harnesses making sure the kids stay securely fitted and so on.

Fair enough buddy. Good points made there. Doesn't change my opinion but I respect yours.

Dr_Colossus

Can the chat of trailers and statistics be put to bed and get to talking about Near Misses. In relation to statistics to quote the knowledgeable Homer:
"Oh people can come up with statistics to prove anything Kent, forty per cent of all people know that."

mackeminexile

2 issues on yesterdays commute. First was a taxi driver beeping me while I was in the bus lane heading out of town on the South Quays just before Wood Quay. I was moving at a pace even with the traffic and not causing an obstruction. Had a chat with him at the lights outside the Brazen Head and was told that I was in the middle of the road, to which I agreed and pointed out that I was fine there, avoiding gratings potholes etc. Warned that I needed to be careful... did I know that the Tour de France was on? I said yes, I was aware of that. He said, yeah its in France not here. I replied that the Formula One was on last week in Austria, not Ireland! He was a bit of a d*ck.

Second incident was on the M50 flyover, doing 42kph and a blue Saab pulls alongside and matches speed, last minute indicates left and only jerks back when I let out a shout. Apologetic wave to my verbals and drove on. That one was nervy.

ewc78

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

Can the chat of trailers and statistics be put to bed and get to talking about Near Misses. In relation to statistics to quote the knowledgeable Homer:
"Oh people can come up with statistics to prove anything Kent, forty per cent of all people know that."

I had a near miss with a Swan on the canal today..does that count !

mloc123

plodder wrote: »

In 30 years, 14 people were killed in space shuttles - so about 0.5 people per year. Doesn't mean space shuttles are safer than walking or cycling though.

I take your point, it would be nice to have figures on the number of people that make a trip by foot and by bike each week, but I cannot find anything.

As an individual person I can say... I am more likely to be killed while out walking than I am while cycling or while I am in a space shuttle.

AndrewJRenko

The Kop wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Except that you don't take your kids sky diving, but you do choose to drive them in your car - despite the fact that a significant number of kids die in cars every year.

Still has nothing to do with my opinion on kids trailers for bikes. I did actually take my 16 year old with me on a charity skydive recently though.

So you got into one of these planes, but you think that cargo bikes are dangerous?

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0513/963243-offaly-plane-crash/

And the earth is flat too, right?

Seth Brundle

ewc78 wrote: »

I had a near miss with a Swan on the canal today..does that count !

I'd rather a near miss with a swan than one of the feral kids

mloc123

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I'd rather a near miss with a swan than one of the feral kids

Those swans are pretty aggressive

rushfan

Slightly off topic I know but while in the back of a minibus travelling southbound on the M50 earlier after Junction 5, we spotted a halfwit on a bike in the hard shoulder. He did have his hivis on though.

plodder

mloc123 wrote: »

I take your point, it would be nice to have figures on the number of people that make a trip by foot and by bike each week, but I cannot find anything.

As an individual person I can say... I am more likely to be killed while out walking than I am while cycling or while I am in a space shuttle.

Statistics can be problematic because they tell a different story depending on what you measure the accident rate against. A common metric is km (or billion km) travelled. Bizarrely, the space shuttle still turns out to be safer than both walking and cycling by that metric. A better one might be per journey, or hours travelled. It's probably the time spent doing the activity is what drives perception of safety. I'd guess that walking far outstrips cycling in terms of hours and journeys at least. Less so on distance traveled obviously.

The Kop

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So you got into one of these planes, but you think that cargo bikes are dangerous?

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0513/963243-offaly-plane-crash/

And the earth is flat too, right?

If you're gonna start posting random news stories to prove your non existent point here's one for you..

https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/features/bicycle-accident-injury/bicycle-accident-injury-bike-5.html#.W0i9nM_TWyU

Now move on like everyone else has there's a good chap.

CramCycle

MOD VOICE: I think we are done with the stats and trailer talk, lets leave it there for now.

mr spuckler

The Kop wrote: »

https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/features/bicycle-accident-injury/bicycle-accident-injury-bike-5.html#.W0i9nM_TWyU

the number of times that they use the word 'accident' in that piece is staggering! if a man drinks a load of beer, steals a truck and drives it the wrong way down a road / track then the result is a foreseeable consequence of his actions, not an 'accident'.

Balanadan

Had a near miss a couple of days ago. Two cyclists broke a red light on temporary traffic lights coming against me on a stretch where roadworks were taking place and the road was reduced to one lane. One of them stopped before the road fully narrowed as they saw me and the oncoming traffic, the other amazingly decided to keep cycling against the traffic. I'm not here to bash all cyclists, but that was complete stupidity.

tommythecat

Balanadan wrote: »

Had a near miss a couple of days ago. Two cyclists broke a red light on temporary traffic lights coming against me on a stretch where roadworks were taking place and the road was reduced to one lane. One of them stopped before the road fully narrowed as they saw me and the oncoming traffic, the other amazingly decided to keep cycling against the traffic. I'm not here to bash all cyclists, but that was complete stupidity.

Yes it was.

Eamonnator

Balanadan wrote: »

Had a near miss a couple of days ago. Two cyclists broke a red light on temporary traffic lights coming against me on a stretch where roadworks were taking place and the road was reduced to one lane. One of them stopped before the road fully narrowed as they saw me and the oncoming traffic, the other amazingly decided to keep cycling against the traffic. I'm not here to bash all cyclists, but that was complete stupidity.

No argument from me, utterly stupid.
What did you do?

Balanadan

Eamonnator wrote: »

No argument from me, utterly stupid.
What did you do?

Slowed down and cursed to the person next to me in disbelief.

site_owner

Doing the rounds on Facebook now.
Full details here
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/shocking-moment-car-ploughs-group-1783682

Weepsie

Wow. The sentence was even more lenient than I'd expect here. 2 year ban and a 20 quid victim surcharge. 18 months in which he can be put into prison if he does anything else. Shouldn't be allowed near a vehicle for as long as he lives as a minimum.