Nuxx:A907987a-f746-4cf5-97f5-f7cca83463f6@y27g2000prb.googlegroups.com

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!postnews.google.com!y27g2000prb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Britons unmoved by pro-cycling campaigns Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 16:36:13 -0700 (PDT) References:  Lines: 51 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1307144173 22518 127.0.0.1 (3 Jun 2011 23:36:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 23:36:13 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: y27g2000prb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=WrLs9woAAAD151hWKA9yknAtxFHW4kE4 User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:2.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0.1,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 4032 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:811797

On Jun 3, 8:50=A0pm, Judith  wrote: > Well, well well - they need not have done the research they could just ha= ve > asked some of us here.

But the people here are eeeeevil....

> Years of government efforts to promote cycling have had almost no impact = on a > sceptical population who largely view bikes as either children's toys or = the > preserve of Lycra-clad hobbyists, a university study has found.

That did make me laugh, I must admit. Once again it's a case of the car-haters speaking for all cyclists and letting the side down (and, it has to be said, getting what they deserve, even if the reasonable cyclists are caught up in it as well). So often we have "cycling" organisations calling for restrictions on the motorist that most people now subconsciously think of cyclists in general as being anti- car bigots. The solution, as ever, is simple: those who speak for cyclists need to start prioritising making cycling easier/safer, rather than prioritising making driving harder. Deliberately reducing roadspace and bringing cyclists into unnecessary conflict with motorists has been shown to increase cyclist KSIs, yet some "cyclist" organisations continue to promote it, presumably on the basis that discouraging motoring will "eventually" lead to fewer motorists and "therefore" safer roads. Bullshit, it just pisses people off unnecessarily. Surely this kind of news is proof that this divisive and belligerent approach has failed utterly?

If cyclists ever wish to be taken seriously then they need to stop this kind of nonsense. Once they all start minding their own business, and only calling for measures which improve the lot of cyclists (rather than those which bully motorists), then everyone wins. Contrary to what the dishonest Chapman Brigade would like us to think, it's not a zero sum game: improvements for drivers do not necessarily entail making things worse for cyclists, or vice versa. We need to make honest and transparent efforts to improve road conditions for *all* modes of transport. Once this is being done, and "improvement for cyclists" has been decoupled from "bullying motorists" in the public mind, people will no longer despise cyclists or feel threatened by them.

Once we have the first cycling organisation admitting that speed cameras make things more dangerous for cyclists (as well as other road users), and thus calling for their removal (despite their "useful" anti-motorist effects), we'll know that we're finally getting somewhere, all of us. It really is time that road safety efforts became more honest and less discriminating and unpleasant. There are plenty of other ways for people to shove their prejudices down others' throats which don't involve costing innocent lives.