not at all
but you keep begging the question there, sparkles.
my point is, hi viz and fucking helmets are a dangerous distraction in the road safety debate because:
a) they presume the victims are at fault in the event of a collision (statistics suggest otherwise)
b) that road safety is the responsibility of the most vulnerable road user, when in fact it is overwhelmingly that of the ones piloting a ton of speeding fucking metal, glass and plastic down the public highways.
(, Thu 30 May 2013, 14:02, Share, Reply)
Hi-Viz and Helmets are a dangerous detraction?
Really? How so?
(
Cerebus Sticky! Sticky! Stick! Stick!, Thu 30 May 2013, 14:58,
Share,
Reply)
Jesus, you're actually serious
You won't wear stuff because road safety is not your responsibility?
See and be seen, simples.
You're on the road, act like a road user.
Safety is everyone's responsibility
Having two wheels does nor absolve you from being a responsible road user,
I can't believe your attitude, do other cyclists think like you? I feel like I'm talking to a Jehovah's Witness or something, it's that stunning logic disconnect that boggles my brain
Edit: let's just agree to disagree.
(
simbosan liked your link on, Thu 30 May 2013, 15:09,
Share,
Reply)
^^ THIS
Yes ( referring to hotpiss' comment)
Cycle safety gear is a distraction in the overall road safety debate, although as a cyclist you're still well advised to wear it. But the point that the real problem and responsibility lies with the drivers of big, heavy and fast motor vehicles is true. Most cycling accidents are the fault of the driver.
(, Thu 30 May 2013, 16:03, Share, Reply)