"DavidR" wrote in message
I live in the UK so French stats are irrelevant.
The worst roads for pedestrian KSI in 2004 were the motorways with 1 for every 68 plus 1 Km. The average for all roads was 1 ped KSI per 578 Km. So on the roads with the fewest pedestrians because they are not allowed (unless their vehicle has broken down or they are involved in road repairs) has by far the highest KSI rate per Km.
cyclist nicked 346were saying : I'm a cyclist, sometimes. I'm also a driver. A driver who - a few years ago - was following a car that was hit in the side by a cyclist who shot...
cyclist nicked 347On 14 Jul 2006 13:36:09 GMT, Adrian As a driver I have had my car damaged by a cyclist who refused to pay for the damage he had caused. He ran into...
In 2004 cycles versus pedestrian accidents end 2 cyclists and 1 pedestrian. 6 cyclists were seriously injured in such collisions and 42 pedestrians. Thus there were 43 pedestrians KSI by cyclists. Cycles covered 3.86 billion Km, thus the KSI rate was 1 every 90 million Km.
In 2004 in motor vehicle versus pedestrian accidents 671 peds died and 6807 were seriously injured. A total of 7478 KSI. Motor vehicles covered a total of 498.6 billion Km, thus the KSI rate was 1 every 67 million Km.
Therefore I still consider that cycles aren't much safer around pedestrians than motorised traffic. As to other types of accident involving cycles it would be more difficult to work out blame as the government's accident data doesn't apportion blame, it just says what vehicles were involved.
Incidentally, if you insist on comparing the UK with France our rate of road rests per 100,000 population in 2003 was 6.0 and the French had 10.2. In terms of the rate of road rests per billion motor vehicle Km ours was 7.2 and the French 10.9. Thus British roads are much safer than French roads.
Ian
