- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Add new comment
4 comments
On the Briggs matter, I'm sure he's had a pretty awful last couple of weeks but I'm not sure it would have been the first thing on my list to do in 2018...
I suspect your question was rhetorical, but the road.cc news blog already has your answer:
...
This.
And this.
That wasn't on the live blog when I was writing my post, so...
On the Briggs matter: the Sky News figures state as follows
Convictions relating to dangerous cycling
2014 - 24
2015 - 23
2016 - 26
Convictions relating to careless or inconsiderate cycling
2014 - 96
2015 - 85
2016 - 63
Can someone more mathematically inclined than me tell me whether the variations in those numbers actually mean anything at all??
I wonder what the comparable numbers/variations are for motorists over the same period?
And, if the laws are so out of date, how come people nevertheless get convicted under them? I didn't realise laws have a 'use-by' date.
I wish the Govt would get on with the general review of road traffic laws that was promised (how many years ago now...?)