If you read the thread you’ll understand I’m not being a hypocrite.
I'm not going to comment further except to say, given first-hand evidence of dangerous cycling involving a collision with a pedestrian, I'm told I must be mistaken. When I quote figures from a cycling group's website, I am told they must be wrong. There's not point me arguing.
-
-
There's no point focussing on 0.6% rather than 99.4%.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A very 'interesting' analysis. Few claim there aren't bad cyclists, that incidents don't happen or figures are wrong. But you're ignoring the context for no good reason. Why focus on the very small risk from cycles when better results could be achieved with reduction in MV KSIs?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
As per my previous tweet, one idiot on a bike does not represent all people who cycle, just like the one idiot in a BMW that missed my handlebars by an inch with his mirror this morning doesn’t represent all BMW drivers or vehicle operators.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not arguing, I'm pointing out your skewed tweet
@brianpaddick where you deliberately left out key points to get knee jerk reaction you wanted! But I guess that's to be expected from a politician!@WeAreCyclingUK@TopHat_247@CliffMatthews@bicycal_life@_bransby_@theJeremyVinepic.twitter.com/yPLmwThxYU
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.