To date I haven't seen any of these in Edinburgh. I think anything that makes you consider how you drive or cycle is to be encouraged.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Ghost bikes: memorials to road victims blamed for putting people off cycling
(22 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
There is the counter argument (hinted at in the subject heading), and I'm playing devil's advocate here, in that a proliferation of ghost bikes makes cycling itself look dangerous and makes people think there's a greater chance of being killed while cycling...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Tell you what is putting me off cycling is the bike locked to the OUTSIDE of the anti-pedestrian railings at end of Brougham Street. It has been there all week, taken the usual beatings and kicking, is falling apart and is now sagging into the road meaning that you can't filter up the inside. (although it's so tight here, with no painted filter to the ASL that I usually just sail down the wrong lane as the traffic sequence means that there is no oncoming traffic)
Posted 13 years ago # -
Sez who?
Edit- referring to subject title
Posted 13 years ago # -
Anth - is the devil's advocate an ever so subtle reference to the ghost bike? Is your point akin to, one perhaps shouldn't sit on a memorial bench as it reminds you that someone died and the bench reminds you of that?
Posted 13 years ago # -
That's a very different situation. If the memorial bench was commemorating someone who died while they were sitting down on a bench then maybe.
Ghost bikes commemorate those people actually killed on a bike at the spot the bike is placed - I don't think it's too much of a leap for a non-cyclist to look at that and think, with the benefit of media back-up and so on, 'cycling is dangerous, look, someone died there'.
And yes, there are memorials at the sides of roads for people killed while driving, but again that comes down to driving being 'normal' and Joe Public does not make the same assumption that memorial to someone who died driving = driving is dangerous.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Actually, I think part of the point of the roadside memorials is to say 'driving is dangerous' or, at least, 'this is a dangerous spot where someone has died'. Their proliferation and permanence in Ireland, for instance, is justified on those grounds and when there were proposals to remove them by some councils, that was opposed on the grounds that they served as a warning.
But in a way that makes your general point - ghost bikes highlight the 'risk' of cycling. Roadside memorials highlight the dangers of (that bit of) the road. Mind, I don't think the public need that message drummed into them. I think drivers need the message that cyclists can be killed by their stupidity and inattention. Could ghost bikes do that?
Posted 13 years ago # -
"I think drivers need the message that cyclists can be killed by their stupidity and inattention. Could ghost bikes do that?"
Only if they come with big posters explaining the circumstances that lead to the death... Otherwise disassociation is very very easy to achieve.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Who ya gonna call...
Sorry I couldn't resist thatIf I get mushed on the road - I would like a ghost bike please. Cyclists should put it in their will and if it's not in a will there shouldn't be a ghost bike.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Cyclists should put it in their will and if it's not in a will there shouldn't be a ghost bike."
I like this idea.
Posted 13 years ago # -
This is just another form of road side memorials which are unfortunately cropping up all over the place. They serve as a sombre reminder that our roads can never be 100% safe for cyclists, pedestrians & motorists alike, no matter what safety precautions people take,and make us think about our own mortality.
whether you agree with them or not, I think they are here to stay.Posted 13 years ago # -
I think TJ meant to add link -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/nov/10/ghost-bikes-memorials-cycling-victims
Posted 13 years ago # -
Thanks, I'd never heard of this phenomenon.
I thought for a minute that you were talking about "ghost riding", like this:
(which I got from this Amsterdamize post)
If cycling is or seems too dangerous, I see no reason why we should keep quiet about it.
Posted 13 years ago # -
RIP Yet Another One! Please Please Please Give Us A Better Infrastructure For Cyclists And Pedestrians!!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15703169Posted 13 years ago # -
I like this idea.
Wait... what? I said something sensible??
That Anth likes?
I...This sleep deprivation must be getting to me...
Posted 13 years ago # -
"If cycling is or seems too dangerous, I see no reason why we should keep quiet about it."
I can understand us being noisy about it if it is dangerous, but it if only seems to be that suggests that is isn't dangerous, but the perception is that is it, and therefore if we don't keep quiet about it then we confirm that perception which may stop people who would actually cycle if they knew the facts rather than the perception...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Anth, I think you're conflating two concepts of danger. The first is: "the probability of death is small". That's true (but actually it's true in almost every circumstance). The second is: "if I get hit, I die".
Between those two lies the unknowable quantity of "what is the probability of being hit". And the thing is, I think most people don't get far enough to consider that one. They don't get past, "if I get hit, I die". They see lots of people in circumstances that appear potentially deadly and think that it's not worth taking the chance of being hit.
So, having thought about this for a couple of days now, I think we shouldn't base anything on the 'maybe one day' cyclists and work on the basis of preserving the safety of current cyclists. Yeah, ghost bikes. Someone died here. Focus on the drivers: one of you killed a cyclist here.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Yeah, ghost bikes. Someone died here. Focus on the drivers: one of you killed a cyclist here."
That I agree on - how do we make ghost bikes say that?
Posted 13 years ago # -
If I wasn't a reader of cyclism-bias media output I'm not sure that I'd know what they were, though anyone passing through London would probably be able to work it out. Is there anything which could be appended to ghost bikes which clearly says "dead" without recourse to use of traditional religious markings? A mounted skellington would be perfect, but they're not cheap.
Posted 13 years ago # -
chdot - thanks for adding the link that I neglected to post.
I am still of the view that reinforcing the fact that a cyclist has been 'killed' is the most important point here. A penalty system of vehicle drivers having to resit the driving test if they were involved in a death or serious injury accident with a cyclist. This together with a punitive premium added to vehicle insurance if they continue to drive? Perhaps the perfectly reasonable measures like changing the road layouts etc are not draconian enough to change the average driver's behaviour.
Posted 13 years ago # -
paint it white - splash on red paint - hang it upside down - attach mashed h***** if there was one
Posted 13 years ago # -
I think ghost bikes are a great idea, a salutory reminder to all, not only cyclists to be aware of the dangers but also it will make some, if not all, drivers more aware, and anything that raises their awareness is a good thing. Some great ideas there TJ, swingeing increases in their premiums, bans and making them resit their tests.
Off topic here a bit but a friend of mine told me that he was turning right and moved into the right lane only to be tooted at vigourously by a van driver, who when asked what the problem was, stated that cyclists were not allowed in the right hand lane and should stay in the bike lanes!! He wondered, my friend, this misconception was based on this driver's knowledge of the highway code and how bikes fit in, and wondered about how drivers awareness of cyclists rights could be incorporated into the driving test?
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
