AIBU to ask if bicycle towing a child carrier looks unbelievably unsafe?

[longwayoff]

I don't spend much time in traffic but noticed one of these the other day which made me feel a bit concerned. Today, the Mail has video of someone crossing 3 lanes of traffic with one attached. They look dangerous on so many levels. How can they be legal?

I'm not looking down on anyone Wiggle. As I say, I often use the car. My point was just about assessing risk - to refute this idea that parents who cycle with their kids are 'thick cunts' - as described earlier in the thread and to expand risk to account for other factors.

I totally understand the point that risk has to embrace all aspects f risk. And sure cycling routinely every day increases levels of activity.

Activity level increase is entirely relative!

Vehicle risk assessment is government overseen, police monitored and strict in the UK. Car seats/belts, safety testing, crumple zones, licensing, spot alcohol/drug checks.

Bikes have none of that and are free to share the same space and risk.

It is not a situation I find satisfactory and I think it lets cyclists down and exposes them to greater risk than if they were subject to the same level of monitoring.

Ivy because the trailer was lower than the cyclist himself and did not appear in my door mirror. Possibly also because he was cycling uphill, it was dusk and raining, so visibility wasn't good.

I look out for them now, as that shook me up so badly, but at the time I'd never seen one and had no idea such things existed.

*There's an article here on in-car pollution.

www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/12/children-risk-air-pollution-cars-former-uk-chief-scientist-warns

There's nothing there about air-conditioning or what-not.*

Thanks Teyem. The article includes this "often the car has the fans on, just sucking the fresh exhaust coming out of the car or lorry in front of them straight into the back of the car". I'd have thought that having air con meant that the car wasn't taking in air from outside the car, otherwise it would just keep trying to chill the hot air from outside.

But I don't really know, I just know that when the trees are shedding pollen or the oilseed rape is out, I'm nowhere near as snotty and sneezy when I have the aircon on.

I have always seen trailers before seeing that little flag. I do think the flag is totally useless.

The solution is to decrease people’s overreliance on cars. They could start by taking the licenses off the 80-90 y/os straddling the white lines and driving up banks and all the other dangerous car fetishists who think that getting from A to B on time is more important than people’s lives.

A lot of the drivers round here are total dangerous pricks to pedestrians and cyclists. A bunch of roads have had the speed limit dropped and they’re all on FB being cunts about the Lycra clad idiots going faster than them now, how it’s just so pedestrians and cyclists feel safer etc. Yes, how dare other people be safe from you?!?

Ageist much?

I had one when my kids were little and I loved it. It made the school run with 3 under 3 and a school age child a pleasure instead of a chore. I lived in a quiet backwater so felt perfectly safe.

That said, this was before I discovered MN so I was probably naively cycling along, completely unaware how angry the general population appears to be and how much it was pissing drivers off!

wigglexx many wheelchair users find cycling easier

www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/jan/02/cambridge-disabled-people-cycling-rolling-walking-stick

No it is not victim blaming. It is recognising the reality as a vulnerable road user. You could as easily say that telling a cyclist they should wear a helmet is victim blaming.

Telling a cyclist to wear a helmet is victim blaming, the same as telling a cyclist to wear hi viz

Sorry but it’s victim blaming that makes matters worse and not better, identify the cause of the crash and work on that - don’t tell people to wear particular clothing or alter their behave to stay safe

Can you imagine the out cry if we told woman to dress a particular way to stay safe

I assume all the people saying things like "victim blaming" never use a child car seat or seat belt while travelling by car.

Since accidents are ALWAYS obviously going to be another road users fault, so why take precautions to protect yourself?! Other road users should just be more careful, right?!

Telling a cyclist to wear a helmet is victim blaming, the same as telling a cyclist to wear hi viz

If you refuse to wear a helmet on the basis that you shouldn't have to, then quite frankly you're an idiot. If someone hits you whilst you're cycling with their car it may be absolutely their fault, but if your helmet makes the difference between smashed skull and not too badly hurt then it's quite a good idea to wear one. Nothing to do with victim blaming.

It's absolutely wrong and illegal to steal, but we all lock our doors, close our windows when we go out, and keep valuables out of reach and sight. If someone steals from us then the thief is absolutely to blame, but we still take steps to avoid this happening to us.

You can make your risk assessments based on an ideal world of safe roads and no accidents, but most of us live in the real, dangerous world.

The solution is to decrease people’s overreliance on cars.

That would be great, but can you really see any government ever being prepared to make the necessary investment in public transport for it to happen?

For a lot of people, outside of big conurbations, public transport is infrequent and expensive. Even if we had buses before 9am and after 5.40pm, and more than one an hour, it would still be more expensive and less convenient than driving to work and paying to park. And even though our office is relatively well served by trains and buses, if your journey starts at most of the towns in the county, you won't be able to get a train or a bus to it!

I'm an essential car user, so I have to have my car available anyway. Around 50% of the jobs in the organisation are, because we do home and community visits.

We use ours regularly. We live in a very bike-friendly city in the US and in the warmer months you see people pulling their children every day. I wouldn't necessarily use the burley (the brand we have) on a major road, but on quieter residential streets I wouldn't be concerned. We are lucky, though - we have miles upon miles of bike paths here so we could get from one end of the city to another with only about 150 meters of travel on the roads.

Telling a cyclist to wear a helmet is victim blaming, the same as telling a cyclist to wear hi viz

What about motor cyclists? Is it victim blaming to make them wear crash helmets and have headlights that are on whenever the engine is running?

AliceAforethought

There is little evidence that if anyone is hit by a 1.5 ton car travelling at 40mph, that wearing a helmet makes any difference, they are designed for low speed collisions.

Blaming the cyclist for his or her accident doesn't solve pollution, congestion in towns and cities or the shockingly high levels of obesity and the cost to the NHS in increased taxes and poor health services.

cycling, walking and better public transport are what will make our living environment better for everyone.

I once had to do a driver awareness course, the chap in charge said one thing i ve never forgot "what will i do with those 2 mins i've saved because i drove like a dick?"

This victim blaming stance is hard to understand from a practical perspective. I would no more put my child in danger in a bike trailer than allow him to walk the streets unaccompanied at night.

Surely the bottom line is that you are knowingly placing them in a position where there is an increased risk of contact with motorised vehicles. And that they do not have the protection to survive that contact unscathed, AND they are unable to consent to this.

Telling a cyclist to wear a helmet is victim blaming, the same as telling a cyclist to wear hi viz

Sorry but it’s victim blaming that makes matters worse and not better, identify the cause of the crash and work on that - don’t tell people to wear particular clothing or alter their behave to stay safe

I saw a cyclist recently who was wearing black cap, black jacket, black trousers and black backpack. He went from bright sunlight into a patch of deep shade under a bridge, and was invisible. The cause of the crash, if there had been one, would have been that the other driver couldn't see him because of his black clothes. It is not victim blaming to say he would have been safer in light coloured clothing with some high viz. Or is no-one supposed to take responsibility for their personal safety any more?

Nobody is blaming someone for being a victim of an accident that is not their fault.
But if you refuse to take sensible precautions on the basis that there should be no bad car drivers, you are an idiot.
And yes wearing a hi viz top at night does make sense. I have one from when I used to cycle a lot.

And would you think it is victim blaming if I said you should not let your 8 year old walk somewhere at 12pm at night? Yes it is not their fault if someone attacks or snatches them, but you have to be sensible.

That would be great, but can you really see any government ever being prepared to make the necessary investment in public transport for it to happen?

But it probably makes sense when the cost is set against net gains - increase in health outcomes as a result of greater activity with a beneficial effect on the NHS, the decrease in pollution and another gain for the nhs, an improvement in mental well-being - increased productivity in the workplace.

Not that the powers that be would let logic come into it when they're too busy buying software that doesn't materialise, paying for contracts that can't be delivered and spending £58 million on fancy bridges that never happen.

jasjas however effective cycle helmets are (or not), the advice to wear one is not to "victim blame" but to protect, as has been explained and exemplified many times over on this thread.

No one is blaming cyclists for anything, merely pointing out that it is wise to take certain precautions when heading out into a road, whatever sort of road user you are, and whoever happens to be responsible for any accident that you may be involved in.

I saw a cyclist recently who was wearing black cap, black jacket, black trousers and black backpack. He went from bright sunlight into a patch of deep shade under a bridge, and was invisible. The cause of the crash, if there had been one, would have been that the other driver couldn't see him because of his black clothes. It is not victim blaming to say he would have been safer in light coloured clothing with some high viz. Or is no-one supposed to take responsibility for their personal safety any more?

I could not agree more. What nonsense to call this victim-blaming. Frankly if you're wearing all black at night with no reflectors than you are the cause of the accident. I say this as a very keen cyclist.

Telling a cyclist to wear a helmet is victim blaming, the same as telling a cyclist to wear hi viz

Are you joking? Surely you can't be serious.