Traffic monitoring group slammed after telling cyclists not to ride at night

David9694 wrote:

To be fair, the advice to drivers is pretty decent, although what happened to point 6 - I think we should be told. 

I think point 6 was to sacrifice other road users to your deity of choice.

Seems OK, but then we stumble across the passive attribution - in more subtle form, this time - that causes "cars to collide with cyclists" or "cars travelling along a road" (all of their own accord, of course).

In this instance, under "8. Be patient...":

"If you’re stuck behind a slow vehicle or a cyclist it can be very frustrating"

Should read:

"If you’re stuck behind a slow vehicle or a cyclist don't allow yourself to become very frustrated"

Agency is everything.  Frustration is not an external constraint, it's an emotional response to an external constraint.  Let's communicate in a way that tells motorists to be in control of their emotions, because our emotions influence how we drive.  (Cyclists too, but, you know, we don't generally kill people!)

"Only cycle where there aren't any cars or lorries"

You say that like it's outlandish rather than an excellent general approach. But who doesn't prefer riding in such places? We all know that's much safer where it's an option.

Shut up now Dave, there's a good chap.

Dave Dave wrote:

"Only cycle where there aren't any cars or lorries"

You say that like it's outlandish rather than an excellent general approach. But who doesn't prefer riding in such places? We all know that's much safer where it's an option.

It's almost exactly like telling women to avoid going out at night or wearing skirts etc to avoid being attacked by men.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Dave Dave wrote:

"Only cycle where there aren't any cars or lorries"

You say that like it's outlandish rather than an excellent general approach. But who doesn't prefer riding in such places? We all know that's much safer where it's an option.

It's almost exactly like telling women to avoid going out at night or wearing skirts etc to avoid being attacked by men.

You sound a bit rapey. It's completely different.

Dave Dave wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Dave Dave wrote:

"Only cycle where there aren't any cars or lorries"

You say that like it's outlandish rather than an excellent general approach. But who doesn't prefer riding in such places? We all know that's much safer where it's an option.

It's almost exactly like telling women to avoid going out at night or wearing skirts etc to avoid being attacked by men.

You sound a bit rapey. It's completely different.

Precisely how is it different?

One is a piece of advice to caution people against going about their legal business due to the criminal behaviour of others (i.e. victim blaming) and the other one is...?

Actually, I don't care for your opinions so I think I'll add you to my troll block list.