Nuxx:J1e5v6$ps4$1@dont-email.me

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Reduced speed limit saved boy's life. Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 14:14:09 +0100 References: <27866385-19d5-4f1e-9e89-007a2446c0f9@z17g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>  <4IKdnRo3KeeF6KTTnZ2dnUVZ8sGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>    Lines: 44 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Reply-To: nuxx.bar@live.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:14:14 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8VY5uu/CK0XISrS5UTJ+SA"; logging-data="26500"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19I7FNg06sXy1UtJcLrtFR1jfYNYXtsZkORifrtiICCNw==" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 In-Reply-To:  Cancel-Lock: sha1:2ZgW54zErhv2w5ljociZll1LqUA= Bytes: 3090 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:848435

On 04/08/2011 09:46, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: > On 04/08/2011 08:32, Simon Mason wrote: > >> "Abo"  wrote in message >> news:j1c3rl$tk0$2@news.albasani.net... >>> On 03/08/2011 17:19, bugbear wrote: >>>> Abo wrote: >>>>> On 03/08/2011 15:26, Simon Mason wrote: >>>>>> QUOTE: "THE parents of a teenage cyclist caught in a road >>>>>> smash will fight for greater speed restrictions in >>>>>> residential areas after their son "miraculously" escaped >>>>>> death on a busy main road just weeks after a new 30mph zone >>>>>> was introduced. >>>>> >>>>> It could be argued that if the speed limit were higher then the >>>>> car would already have been further along the road when he fell >>>>> off therefore no accident would have happened at all >>>> >>>> Not if he'd started further back. >>> >>> Good point :P >>> >>> *but*, if he had started even further back then he'd have seen it >>> in time despite the extra speed :D > >> Assuming there was going to be a collision, the reduced speed would >> have contributed to his survival. > > And of course if he'd been going slower still he would also have missed > the cyclist.

No shit Sherlock.

> It is very clear here that the low speed of the collision was a major > factor in the lad surviving. The sources seem to be in complete > agreement on that and as far as I can tell it is not even remotely > controversial as a conclusion.

Even if that is the case this time, it's not the case at all often, is it? Yet pretty much all road "safety interventions that drivers encounter are to do with "speed". This is to discourage motoring rather than to improve safety, and you know that, hence your support.

How's the helmet BTW?