Number of pedestrians killed or maimed by cyclists doubles in a decade

This article implies that the Daily Mail does analysis on the drivel it prints.

I call bs on that..

The Telegraph article is not too bad with the stats.  In particular, they state that the rate per billion miles cycled has increased from 18 to 32, so it's not just down to more cyclists.  Moreover, it shows the graph from 2005 onwards, showing the rise is not just cherry picking years (though there was a sustained decrease before 2005 apparently).

While walking to the station in Glasgow a couple of weeks back, I watched a young woman walk straight through a red light and into the side of an X77 bus, which is a full sized double decker coach... To cap it all, she was walking down the protected cycle lane in Waterloo st. Yes, she was on her phone.

And the increases in both Cycling in general and "smart" phone usage by pedestrians over the same period is??? Probably a match...

Noting that at least one of those deaths mentioned could be attributed in part to inappropriate mobile phone use (whilst crossing the road, from recollection), it would be interesting to see whether mobile phones were a factor in the increase in pedestrian injuries.  

Not trying to shift blame here,  but to understand the reason for this increase.  Over the period in question the use of so-called smart phones has increased significantly - far outstripping the increase in cycling.  But it's not so smart to use one instead of looking where you're going.   Indeed, mobile phone use as a factor in other road injuries would be interesting in this context.   

I still can't believe no one ever mentions the increase in "shared space" foot/cycle paths that many motorists would have cyclists use instead of riding on the road.
With this focus on cyclists causing accidents with pedestrians, you'll never find me putting myself in the firing line by sharing space with people on phones, listening to music, prams, old people hard of hearing, blind people, dog walkers, children running around etc etc. No, I'll take my chances with cars, vans & lorries thanks.

Jesus H Briggs.

"No comment." Is it that fucking difficult to say?

I think Brake were a bit mamby pamby.

I'm sorry but someone needs to tell Mr Briggs quite clearly that his wife's death was caused by her inability to cross a fucking road and rather than chase ghosts maybe spend some time with his kids and ensure they know how to cross a road!

"Recent cases", have I missed any apart from the Alliston case recently?

"At the moment, there is simply no effective, relevant legal remedy for anyone killed or seriously injured as a result of criminal wrongdoing by a cyclist. This represents a huge gap in UK law."

Charlie Allison not now in prison? Unlike motor vehicle drivers who kill people on pedestrian crossings or on the pavement or hit cyclists head on when the cyclist is on the correct side of the road and the driver is not.

I would like Mr Briggs to point out a single case where a driver has killed a pedestrian who stepped into the road 6m in front of them and the driver received a longer sentence than in this case.

Not to mention the case in Reading where the cyclist died when a pedestrian stepped into his path. No charges were brought against the pedestrian.

 A Government spokesperson said: “We already have strict laws that ensure that drivers who put people’s lives at risk are punished.

Yeah but forgot to say that it's their Justice system that is the problem with out of touch sentences, judges that don't live in our reality.

Also, as to the rise in accidents from 2006. This was about the time that the first smart phones started to really take off, but again, no mention of gormless pedestrians wandering about with their faces stuck in their phones instead of watching where they're going. About time they enforced Jay walking charges here too.

The government's an ass.

There are lies, damned lies and then statistics

You can use simple meaningless statistics to prove any point you want.. 93% of people know that.

I feel terrible for Mr. Briggs' loss, and any death on the road is always a tragedy, but I wonder if one day in the years to come he looks back in hindsight and wishes he'd handled things differently. It's only natural look for someone or something to blame, but the media are simply exploiting him for their own gains... Its easy to use words like "double" for shock value, but the fact is these figures are relatively empty without context. It says in the article that these figures do not apportion blame, and there certainly is no clarification of whether there was any unlawful behaviour in any of the incidents, so this meaningless statistic does very little to reinforce the need for news laws against cyclists. The current media campaign to demonise cyclists is wearing thin now, I think the best thing we can do is head to the Winchester, have a pint and wait for this whole thing to blow over!

Well everybody knows that the cycling problem is the cause of all the major issues we have in the world right now, including particulate emissions in our major cities from vehicles idling due to bicyce clogged roads and of course pedestrian deaths and injuries.

If it hadn't been for cyclists, Houston wouldn't have been flooded and nor would Trump have found himself in all the legal complexities involving Russian influence (or not) in the last US election. Cyclists almost certainly are responsible for global warming and also for the tensions surrounding North Korea, not to mention instability in the Middle East. If only cyclists had to tax their bicycles for road use, wear helmets, ride 20-30cm from the pavement edge and use cycle lanes where installed, Saint Theresa May would be able to deliver a healthy Brexit to make Britain truly Great again.

If the road traffic laws are rationalised so that cyclists are treated "the same as" motorists, then we'll find that cyclists are actually treated waay more harshly by the legal system.

If the court system treated cyclists more leniently or even "the same as" it treats motorists, at present, then young Mr Alliston would never have been serving time at HM Pleasure.

I keep reading and hearing this line that the laws we have in place 'ensure' justice is done, peddled by politicians and journalists alike. 

Like fuck they do.

As mentioned already there are a number of other factors

Increase in Population

Increase in shared use paths, many of which are poorly designed or often simply an existing footpath re-designated as shared use.

Increase in use of smartphones. This is probaly the most relevant factor as so many people are so engrosed in their phone they seem completely oblivious to what is going on around them.

Despite the increase in cycling in the UK, cycling as a mode of transport is still not seen as a major part of our culture therefor other road/path users have an inherrant low level of awareness to begin with.

The key question is not how can the current laws be updated to bring wrongdoers to justice but how can we educate the population into behiving with more responibility for themselves and others and therefore prevent accidents from happening in the first place. The last thing I want as a cyclist is to collide with a pedestrian but I'm becoming increasinly anxious that one day I may not be able to avoid such a collision. Even when a cyclist on a well maintained bike with both brakes working at full efficiency  is riding  at a speed appropriate to the conditions there is a limit to how quickly that cyclist can react and avoid a collision. I've had a few too many near misses because a pedestrian suddenly veres into my path without looking. I've even been walked into whilst stationary and shouted at by the other party who'd had their face buried in their phone at the moment of impact.

Quite simply prevention is better than cure and a simple update of the law is not sufficient.

Quote:

the newspaper notes that its data “does not apportion blame for the accidents in question”.

=we think it's all the fault of those darned cyclists but we dare not come out and actually say it, so we'll give you statistics and lead you there instead...

In 2007 three people were killed by bee stings while the daily mail claims that over 22,000 people require hospital treatment for the same.

When, oh when, oh when will bee keeper be held responsible to the dangerous animals act 1971 like other animal owners?

(I'm sure you get the point)

I have to wonder, is the increase only down to more cyclists, or cyclists being forced off the road by increased road traffic / aggression / deaths?

There are so many variables that determining whether or not this is significant is pretty difficult.

Cycling has increased massively over that period as has the overall population.

More pedestrians and more cyclists will inevitably lead to more collisions.

The increased use of shared paths also brings the two groups in to greater contact.

The advent of smartphones is likely another factor.

Problem is with citing just the doubling figure is that it needs more information to be useful/representative. Are these where cycling's increased - and how much ? On quiet (sub) urban routes or otherwise ? Junctions ? Etc...

Bear in mind the significant rise of smartphones in the last decade - is it partly a matter of downward gazing users stepping out into a quiet road, only glancing (if that) for cars ?
Interesting, but devil, detail, etc, and the figures are still so small that it may be difficult to make much stastical use of them.

A good rule of statistics is that a 100% increase on bugger all is still bugger all. Deaths and serious injury in collisions involving cyclists and pedestrians isn't close to being the same size as the statistical noise  in the deaths and serious injury in collisions involving motor vehicles.

We should always remember that the labour government in 1997 promised to half the number of deaths on roads in 10 years. People laughed. Through a concerted effort they did it in 9 years. These efforts, involving things like a massive increase in speed cameras, are now labelled a "war on motorists". If the government cared, they could continue this trend. They are more scared of tabloid labels around "wars on motorists" than of protecting legitimate road users.