We have had a call from Kate Cairns, whose sister was killed by a HGV lorry in February, to support an short demonstration tomorrow calling on the Crown Prosecution Service to take a stronger line dealing with drivers involved in cyclit's deaths. So far this year 7 cyclists have been killed by lorries in London...====================== === Dear All You CylistsPROTEST TOMORROW FRIDAY 3 JULYSorry dont really know where to post this on your site. There is a protest in Reading at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) following the lack of action when a van mowed down and killed a cyclist with the excuse of not seeing him. Guess you guys are all based in London.And how about doing the same at the London CPS at the same time tomorrow?!?Crown Prosecution Service 4pm 50 Ludgate Hill EC4I am desparately trying to get Eilidh's case to court so the driver doesnt just walk away and continue this precedent of - never mind mate, sh!t happens, off you go.The case should be going to the London CPS any day now.
I completely agree with Reg.
Dear Mr. Johnson,I recently read a statistic which, if true, I find deeply shocking: that, of the female cyclists killed in London between 1999 and 2004, 86% of them were victims of HGVs turning left across them - the "left hook". Women cyclists ‘risk death’ by obeying traffic lights - Times Online refers. I believe that last month alone, there were three further deaths in London from exactly the same cause. Try as I might, I could find no reference on the BBC website to these last three deaths.What is it about cyclists, and female cyclists in particular, that when they are killed in a particularly nasty way, the rest of us just shrug our shoulders and take no notice? The Times report I linked to in the above paragraph claims that the study, by TfL, had been kept secret. Why was this? Compare the number of cyclists killed in London last month to the number of swine flu deaths nationally. Which number was greater? And which was given more media coverage?No amount of media coverage will being those victims back to life, but raising public awareness of a problem is the first stage towards solving it. It seems that the main factor is the height above the road that a driver sits. I understand that some companies have been retraining their HGV drivers, and that some are fitting a certain type of mirror which will improve the driver's sight of the road, although I believe that central government have delayed the compulsory fitting of those mirrors. But to me, even those measures are not enough. If it is necessary to send large and dangerous vehicles into crowded areas with narrow streets and tight turns, then surely the onus should be on those companies who do so to make those vehicles safe?I have no idea of the charges or sentences meted out to the HGV drivers who killed the cyclists mentioned in the report, but I would be surprised if they were anything other than far too lenient. Causing death by dangerous driving is a crime which carries a maximum sentence of 14 years. However, I would argue that the very act of driving vehicles over a certain size on certain London streets, and round certain London corners, is in itself so inherently dangerous that it should never be undertaken by a single driver who cannot possibly see exactly who is being affected by his vehicle.In my view, there should be an absolute ban on vehicles over a certain size entering the capital unless a specific journey licence has been applied for, and a condition of that licence being issued should be that there should be a motor cycle outrider at the front and back, to warn other road users of the dangers, and to warn the driver also. Many farmers do this routinely (although they tend to use vans rather than motor cycles) when moving large vehicles around country lanes at harvest time, but so far as I am aware there is no law enforcing this. Why should the capital's road users be subject to more danger from large vehicles than the relatively lightly-used minor roads which are the area most affected by combine harvesters?We are aware that, everywhere, local authorities pay lip service to the advantages of getting people on bikes, to cut pollution, ease congestion, improve fitness levels and to save on road upkeep, but for the most part the onus is put upon the cyclist to bear the brunt of the inherent risks of sharing the road with dangerous vehicles. It is up to people like yourself, in positions of authority, to identify areas where cyclists need protection and I would say that the clearly identifiable problem of HGVs as a danger to all cyclists, but particularly to females, would be a good place to start.Yours sincerely,
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.
Wow, any chance you could send a copy of this, maybe slightly modified, to James Duddridge?
Quote from: Domestique on 04 July, 2009, 10:36:10 amWow, any chance you could send a copy of this, maybe slightly modified, to James Duddridge?Why do you think that would be anything other than a complete waste of time. Duddridge is a total arse!
