knockersbumpMKII wrote:
As an avid cyclist I won't wear it, not because I'm stubborn but because by wearing it (as many seem to do) it panders to the idea that vulnerable road users have to be all glowing with an assortment of colours so that the poor motorist who bombs along in a ton plus of metal (proven to kill and maim in the tens of thousands every year) can get to where they are going a few seconds/minutes quicker.
I'd pay attention to Mike O'Day's epitaph if I were you.
You don't live in Chester by any chance do you? I was setting off somewhere the other day in very dull conditions and an obviously servious cyclist in equally dull clothing was coming along the street. I had to do a double take to register him coming along. Making it hard for yourself to be seen in bad conditions is crazy.
it's the motors that do pretty much all the damage to life so they should be taking the greatest portion of care by far, in most Western European countries they have 'Strict Liability' laws, that assumes that the fault is with that at the top the tree (the motor vehcle) unless proven otherwise (in its simplest terms). This pushes the onus for road safety massively on the metal box drivers as it rightly should be
That is really going to work here with our ambulance chasing legal culture. If you think people falsely claiming for whiplash after the merest tap of a contact between two cars has got out of hand imagine where we would be with the unscrupulous "cyclists" bouncing themselves off cars at every junction!
