Boss Doesn't Want Me to Cycle - Page 23 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

06-20-2004, 08:47 PM

On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 11:00:26 -0400, Rick Onanian <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote (more or less):

>On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 02:14:13 +0100, Gawnsoft
><[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].antispam.ne t> wrote:
>>"...
>>Contrary to the impression created by cycle helmet legislation,
>>cycling on public roads is a low-risk activity. One hour’s use of a
>>bicycle in Britain is not more likely to result in road death than one
>>hour of driving, and is most probably less likely [5], because the
>>risks imposed on third parties by cyclists are trivial. An increase in
>
>While it may be sufficient to convince her boss, there are three
>reasons why that is not applicable to the OP's question:
>
> 1. Comparing risk per hour is great if you're choosing between
>driving for an hour or riding for an hour (as in recreation), but
>the time spent will be different, while the _distance_ remains the
>same. A more appropriate statistic to use would be per kilometer.

In urban conditions, often a bicycle is /faster/ than a car, therefore
time at risk would also be smaller.

At worst, the car and bike times are roughly comparable

> 2. Her boss wasn't concerned about third-party risk. His expressed
>concern was for _her_ safety; so the statistic should be limited to
>driver/rider risk.

True - but these stats are more difficult to come by. (and yes, I
realise that it's a 'looking for keys under the lamppost' affair).

To what extent car drivers are likely to kill without being killed is
a key issue, but unlikely, I would suggest, to be overwhelming. (It is
difficult to see how a driver could be likely to kill another
motorised vehicule user without exposing him/herself to a similiar
degree of danger. A significant number of those killed in the UK in
motorised RTAs are motorised vehicle users. Taken together, this
suggests that the difference will be significantly smaller than an
order of magnitude effect.)

> 3. I believe her other option was not driving herself, but rather
>public transportation. Comparing to driving, then, is entirely
>irrelevant.

No, as the boss would have no objection to her driving, or being
driven, on safety grounds. (The fact that Elisa would not drive is,
therefore, the irrelevance).

>Maybe the statistics exist that would work properly for the OP's
>situation, but the quote above certainly does not include them.

And I disagree, for the reasons stated. (barring point 2, the
significance of which is arguable)

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Symbian/Epoc wiki: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

06-21-2004, 01:10 AM

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:47:12 +0100, Gawnsoft
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].antispam.net > wrote in message
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>It is
>difficult to see how a driver could be likely to kill another
>motorised vehicule user without exposing him/herself to a similiar
>degree of danger.

- driver of vehicle fitted with airbag crashes; passenger (no airbag)
dies
- car T-bones car; driver hit dies due to inadequate side impact
protection

That sort of thing. But it's less unequal than car v bike, for sure.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

06-21-2004, 01:10 AM

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:47:12 +0100, Gawnsoft
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].antispam.net > wrote in message
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>It is
>difficult to see how a driver could be likely to kill another
>motorised vehicule user without exposing him/herself to a similiar
>degree of danger.

- driver of vehicle fitted with airbag crashes; passenger (no airbag)
dies
- car T-bones car; driver hit dies due to inadequate side impact
protection

That sort of thing. But it's less unequal than car v bike, for sure.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

06-21-2004, 01:10 AM

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:47:12 +0100, Gawnsoft
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].antispam.net > wrote in message
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>It is
>difficult to see how a driver could be likely to kill another
>motorised vehicule user without exposing him/herself to a similiar
>degree of danger.

- driver of vehicle fitted with airbag crashes; passenger (no airbag)
dies
- car T-bones car; driver hit dies due to inadequate side impact
protection

That sort of thing. But it's less unequal than car v bike, for sure.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

06-21-2004, 01:10 AM

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:47:12 +0100, Gawnsoft
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].antispam.net > wrote in message
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>It is
>difficult to see how a driver could be likely to kill another
>motorised vehicule user without exposing him/herself to a similiar
>degree of danger.

- driver of vehicle fitted with airbag crashes; passenger (no airbag)
dies
- car T-bones car; driver hit dies due to inadequate side impact
protection

That sort of thing. But it's less unequal than car v bike, for sure.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

06-21-2004, 01:10 AM

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:47:12 +0100, Gawnsoft
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].antispam.net > wrote in message
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>It is
>difficult to see how a driver could be likely to kill another
>motorised vehicule user without exposing him/herself to a similiar
>degree of danger.

- driver of vehicle fitted with airbag crashes; passenger (no airbag)
dies
- car T-bones car; driver hit dies due to inadequate side impact
protection

That sort of thing. But it's less unequal than car v bike, for sure.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University