No traffic lights – what if?

@jackcycles I'm hoping that you're being ironic in your defence of DM readers, but on reflection, maybe not. Anyone who posts 'People love their cars, and quite rightly so.' is a fool or perhaps AI. As the Dalai Lama said "People were created to be loved, and things were created to be used; the world is in chaos because we love things and use people" If you love your car, be careful you don't burn your foreskin on the exhaust.

@jackcycles Here he comes again, blaming lefty cyclists for a 'culture war' and roping in all manner of things unrelated to the matter at hand. You don't get to go 'Oh, those people are bad. But you know what? I've got an explanation for why they are.' No, you haven't. Because none of your made up drivel would explain the comments even if they weren't made up drivel. They'd be an excuse. So you're little better than those horrorshows.

FTFY

@chrisonabike er, no. But thanks for playing.

@jackcycles And the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids?

Let's be clear, anyone defending that collision is either trolling or a complete idiot. That said, cycling has been on a wrong side of a culture war for years now, used by left wing warriors and revenue-hungry YouTubers to make either outrageously self-entitled or anti-freedom statements. People love their cars, and quite rightly so. They are ingrained as part of a societal normality which embodies democracy, the rule of law and personal freedom and responsibility. An attack on these precious values - by activists who want 15 minute cities, state control of every facet of our lives, or preferential treatment for one group of road users - provokes a strong, and sometimes hyperbolic, reaction. That context helps explain comments like those in the Daily Mail, even if they are unjustified.

@Blackthorne83 Or it implies that cycling is unfair because although her fiancé deserves his millions she ought to be getting something like the same? I did look on Instagram to see if he'd come back with some explanation but couldn't see one nor his original comment. What is slightly surprising is that Urska picked that comment out of a rich selection of patronising sexist tripe, if I were to choose one I think the guy who said "Your injury is God's sign that it's time to prioritise looking after your husband and not your career" was most deserving.

It's all meaningless. Ride where you want as long as you're not taking the piss. The bridleway/footpath distinction is often entirely arbitrary. In my experience there are very few people who actually care about cyclists on footpaths and those people's opinions are definitely not worth worrying about.

@TedC I have one of their ti flat bars on my seemingly retired Getting to Work bike and their alloy risers on my Good Bike. I always wanted one of these.

“in his defence, he clearly didn’t see her as he was driving up hill directly into sun and she’s wearing dark clothing” This is not a defence; it’s an admission (albeit not by the criminal). When will people accept that the laws of physics mean cyclists are not invisible? They may be hard to see… if you don’t look for them… but there will always be circumstances where hiviz or lights won’t make a difference. The only solution is that drivers accept responsibility for positively assessing that the road ahead is clear before they drive into it.