http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Tag: death - Recent Posts en Wed, 13 May 2026 02:58:00 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20902#post-359442 Wed, 06 Apr 2022 21:37:50 +0000 Weeto 359442@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Discussion thread moved to 'Events' section of forum...<br /> <a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20905" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20905</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20902#post-359401 Tue, 05 Apr 2022 18:19:18 +0000 chdot 359401@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well done. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20902#post-359400 Tue, 05 Apr 2022 18:11:32 +0000 Weeto 359400@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ok, me again. Jodi from Cycle Law Scotland has emailed the family and they are more than happy for something to mark her death. They said they would like to know the time to let her friends know and would like photos. I have emailed Jodi saying this is in the initial planning stages and if her friends want to be involved then that would be even better. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20902#post-359397 Tue, 05 Apr 2022 17:14:10 +0000 Weeto 359397@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ok - I have emailed Jodi from Cycle Law Scotland and she's going to check whether the family are happy with something. I said it would probably be something like a minute's silence and flowers. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20902#post-359396 Tue, 05 Apr 2022 16:05:49 +0000 Weeto 359396@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Jodie Gordon from Cycle Law Scotland (who helped the family with their law suit against the Rabbie Tours company) probably has contact details. I personally don't. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20902#post-359367 Sun, 03 Apr 2022 22:33:19 +0000 chdot 359367@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Before anything goes further, is there anyone still in contact with her family? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20902#post-359365 Sun, 03 Apr 2022 20:54:42 +0000 Weeto 359365@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Hello. 31st May 2022 will be the 5th Anniversary of the death of Zhi Min Soh (after her accident on Princes Street). I would like to mark this somehow with an event/tribute. Anyone else fancy helping? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820&page=2#post-7319 Mon, 24 May 2010 13:56:03 +0000 spytfyre 7319@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>In a word, no. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7318 Mon, 24 May 2010 13:54:11 +0000 Dave 7318@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What on earth did you expect? A lively discussion around the merits of the Sheriff's observation that you should check for oncoming traffic before turning right? </p> <p>&lt;confused /&gt; </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7317 Mon, 24 May 2010 13:46:42 +0000 spytfyre 7317@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>you noticed that too huh? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7316 Mon, 24 May 2010 13:45:39 +0000 SRD 7316@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>well, i was hoping to read something sensible about cycling and mental health, and all i got was a helmet debate! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7315 Mon, 24 May 2010 13:36:56 +0000 spytfyre 7315@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>yeah... not sure I am terribly fussed for "who's your favourite muppet" on a thread started on the death of a cyclist... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7312 Mon, 24 May 2010 13:15:22 +0000 SRD 7312@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Zoot is cooler than Animal or Dr Teeth."</p> <p>Finally, a TV show discussion that I have some clue about. I find it pretty impossible to pick a favourite though. favourite episode maybe, favourite guest star, possibly, but favourite muppet? impossible. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7296 Sun, 23 May 2010 12:56:46 +0000 wee folding bike 7296@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Comedy tops mean people can tell when you wear the same shirt all week. I usually go for a plain black T but one of my Animal shirts (of Dr Teeth's Electric Mayhem Band) was top of the pile one day this week so I wore that. A colleague commented on it so I couldn't wear that one again the next day.</p> <p>Zoot is cooler than Animal or Dr Teeth. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7293 Sun, 23 May 2010 10:28:50 +0000 gembo 7293@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>the old hi-vis / not lo-vis debate again. There is no way wearing hi-vis or assertive riding position can help you from blind drivers so the fault is with the driver but I still wear hi-vis myself, up to me and no rigorous evidence that this has any ramifications anywhere else (just subjective opinion).</p> <p>I do not have a binman story but I do have a lollipop woman story for Dave. He may like it as it confirms his views (with slight caveat). The now retired lollipop woman on McDonald road likes playing poker in her spare time and indeed a different kind of poker when she stood in front of traffic when the sun was low as her spot is in a slight dip and if drivers don't look they hit her. Despite her hi-vis full length jacket and big fecking lollipop stick. That she came back to work at all after the first time was astonishing, but after the second time I think she felt her luck was running out. Thus hi-vis is not the answer in combatting blind drivers on low sun days when you work in a dip in the middle of the road. However, drivers do spot comedy tops and some drive closer to you to hurl abuse and some are perfectly well behaved. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7185 Thu, 20 May 2010 21:47:31 +0000 Dave 7185@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It's interesting to see something with which I disagree so strongly re-framed in a useful way - thanks.</p> <p>However, the problem is not that judges are merely observing that locked bikes are less likely to be stolen. </p> <p>To make the analogy more accurate, we'd have to say that bike thieves are being let off lightly, in many cases not prosecuted at all, simply because they are stealing bikes which are not locked up - and the judge is saying, it's hardly the fault of the thief for taking an unlocked bike!</p> <p>n.b. I was going to say that I disliked the analogy because while using a lock conclusively prevents theft, wearing high viz has little or no association (in research, as opposed to received wisdom) with fewer injuries. </p> <p>This is true, but at the same time it does parallel one of the major points of the debate, which is that putting armour and high-viz on the 'minimum requirements' list for sensible cycling causes a huge reduction in cycling levels, but so does the fact that you have to carry a lock wherever you go, undo your front wheel to park and potentially carry off your saddle when you leave. </p> <p>When either problem (recommending high-viz/armour or requiring locks) is resolved, many more people cycle and the casualty rate plummets, despite their woeful bare-headedness and normal-clothed-nicity. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7179 Thu, 20 May 2010 17:13:46 +0000 SRD 7179@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What about someone who has a bike stolen because they haven't put a lock on it? There's no law requiring us to lock up our bikes - the law requires someone else not to take our property. But most of us take reasonable precautions. </p> <p>The debate you are raising is about what are 'reasonable precautions'? The legal requirements are for lights, reflectors etc. Your problem is with a judge saying 'be more visible' which is akin to a judge saying 'people who don't want their bikes stolen should use a (good) lock'. He is not saying it is right for someone to steal your bike, but that it is advisable to use a good lock. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7178 Thu, 20 May 2010 16:59:10 +0000 Kim 7178@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>You are still blaming the victim, you seam to want to make it the cyclist responsibility to be visible. When it is legally the drivers responsibility to look, why should the cyclist be blamed? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7177 Thu, 20 May 2010 16:31:48 +0000 SRD 7177@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"It is actually the same argument."</p> <p>No it's not. Or at least I do not see why you would think these were equivalent situations.</p> <p>The only way it might be the same is if you assume that drivers set out intentionally to murder or injure cyclists. </p> <p>Rather, in most cases cyclists are injured because of poor driving skills, distraction, and so forth. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7174 Thu, 20 May 2010 16:21:54 +0000 Kim 7174@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>SRD "the obsession with bashing hi-viz is starting to really annoy me". Simple wear what you want, but would criticise a young woman for wearing a short skirt on the grounds that she is putting her self at the risk of rape? Would advocate that all women should wear the Hijab or the khimar to protect them from the the lustful gaze of men? It is actually the same argument. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7169 Thu, 20 May 2010 15:52:50 +0000 Dave 7169@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The other thing to pick up on (since we're well on the way to having a controversial thread as it is!) is that the sheriff was apparently forced, much against his better judgement, to agonisingly and hesitatingly "concede" that a bike helmet wouldn't save you in a crash at speed.</p> <p>Why is this a concession? Even helmet manufacturers don't market their product as protecting against crashes above ~12mph, so while I can understand the judiciary making an observation that the speed was too high for a helmet to make any difference, just for the record as it were, there is no need to "concede" that they don't protect outside their design brief.</p> <p>(You can of course buy quality helmets at <a href="http://www.thehelmetplace.co.uk/acatalog/demonff.html">pretty low prices </a>which *are* designed to protect against collisions above 12mph) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7165 Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:23 +0000 SRD 7165@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/8692359.stm">From the BBC</a> "A cyclist's death could have been avoided if he had worn bright clothing and a council worker had driven with greater care, a sheriff has said."...."Sheriff Douglas Small has recommended all cyclists wear high visibility clothing and a helmet.<br /> But he conceded head gear would not have prevented Mr MacIntyre's death." </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7162 Thu, 20 May 2010 14:53:49 +0000 SRD 7162@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes, it would be good if every single judgement said, and newspapers reported them saying 'drivers must be more aware of cyclists, (and all other non-car road users)'. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7160 Thu, 20 May 2010 14:20:40 +0000 Dave 7160@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>So, do you think that no one should wear hi-viz? what about the bin men and the roads workers? Shouldn't we know to 'expect' to see them?</em></p> <p>You raise a good point, and I would be genuinely interested to know whether fewer bin men get mown down as a result of their choice of clothing. </p> <p>I suspect the answer is no, but inconveniently there is no research to tell either way, and my anecdotes have no more weight than anyone else's. I would only suggest that, if there is a safety benefit from high-viz it should be easy to measure, and given the huge value of the high-viz market, a good body of research ought to exist. What we actually have is assumption straight out of "Bad Science".</p> <p>For those of a practical disposition, you can conduct one of my favourite experiments at your leisure. Walk towards a zebra crossing while traffic is approaching, but look steadily and continuously in the wrong direction. You'll find it quite easy to see the car out of the corner of your eye (so that you don't actually end up under the wheels in the name of science). Miraculously, even if you do this at night with normal clothes on, the car will stop, every time. (I spent some years around the zebra crossing on Marchmont Rd and loved every minute of it)</p> <p>I have friends who hate zebra crossings because they're convinced drivers won't see them, and in fact when they walk up to a crossing and timorously wait for the traffic to pass, it does keep passing. But what they confuse as the drivers looking for them *but being unable to see them* is in fact quite different to the reality. </p> <p>There is no obvious reason why car drivers can see people in dark clothes at night, but massacre binmen were it not for their protective neon suits. Unfortunately, "common sense" is so heavily entrenched here that it's almost impossible to argue against (as we will see here, I'm sure).</p> <p><em>I think it would be nice if we could trust every idiot driver to be totally au fait with road conditions, driving skills, highway code etc, but honestly, the obsession with bashing hi-viz is starting to really annoy me.</em></p> <p>So you don't find it annoying that instead of having a focus on drivers taking responsibility for their actions, we have a culture of victim blaming that is even pursued by potential victims against each other? (witness this discussion). </p> <p>It's quite depressing that even cyclists consider it to be too hard for drivers to avoid ramming into people without visual aids, because of all that "road conditions, driving skills, highway code etc" stuff that must be so taxing for them!</p> <p>At the end of the day however, much of this is besides the point. Suppose we reversed this story and a driver died because a cyclist pulled out in front of them, causing them to swerve into a tree. The authorities, newspapers, and drivers associations could make a big noise about how the accident could have been prevented if the driver had only covered their car in luminous paint (you can do this, and it is quite cheap). </p> <p>It would be equally valid and, indeed, it might be just as effective (or not) at preventing accidents. But it would never be mentioned, because the same common sense that says that luminous cyclists will never be killed, says that your car is fully visible in grey or green, and cannot be improved.</p> <p>Strange world, eh? The least we can do is mock it. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7158 Thu, 20 May 2010 14:15:47 +0000 Kim 7158@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>As an ex-driving instructor, I am always worried about the standard of observation of some drivers, they really don't look. Making cyclist wear Hi-Viz is not the solution. </p> <p>I remember a story from a guy complaining about a driver making a right turn directly across his path. He then went on to say that he wasn't out on his bike at the time, no he was at work, driving a fire engine, and as he said, "you paint it red, stick blue flashing lights on it and still some drivers can't see it coming!"</p> <p>The problem is with drivers, and the fact that driving errors are seen as acceptable, "it was just an accident" should not be accepted as an excuse. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7149 Thu, 20 May 2010 13:40:00 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 7149@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Personally, as a driver, I'd have no problem with having to do that at all. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7143 Thu, 20 May 2010 12:48:35 +0000 SRD 7143@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I just find it slightly odd that having said the cause was the driver not paying attention there was no recommendation about how we try and address the problem of drivers in general not paying attention, and instead focussed on what the cyclist can do." </p> <p>good point. </p> <p>I think they should all have to retake their driver's tests every 5 years. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7142 Thu, 20 May 2010 12:45:44 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 7142@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Personally I was bashing the victim-blaming...</p> <p>As with helmets, hi-viz is a matter of personal choice. I make myself more visible with road positioning and so on (the incidents I have are about 99% of the time to do with having been seen and not caring, not with having not been seen in the first place). And in the summer the summer shirts come out to commute in - trust me, if you think hi-viz gets you noticed on a bike you really need to try bringing a bit of Hawaii or Cuba to the commute.</p> <p>I just find it slightly odd that having said the cause was the driver not paying attention there was no recommendation about how we try and address the problem of drivers in general not paying attention, and instead focussed on what the cyclist can do. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7141 Thu, 20 May 2010 12:43:16 +0000 spytfyre 7141@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"the obsession with bashing hi-viz is starting to really annoy me"</p> <p>Ditto </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=820#post-7139 Thu, 20 May 2010 12:35:39 +0000 SRD 7139@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>So, do you think that no one should wear hi-viz? what about the bin men and the roads workers? Shouldn't we know to 'expect' to see them? </p> <p>I think it would be nice if we could trust every idiot driver to be totally au fait with road conditions, driving skills, highway code etc, but honestly, the obsession with bashing hi-viz is starting to really annoy me. </p>