Tom Macdonald

More on unsafe design and drivers
Rockaway appears 31 times here

www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/st...

For Jan 2026 only

Replied elsewhere

Every time this happens it seems such a senseless loss

And so often nothing changes

Blaming the driver or the parent wont ultimately change anything and the comments here show few are interested in your point in the op

bsky.app/profile/nott...

The driver is certainly more responsible than the 4 year old or the mum here. But the "design" of the roadway seems bizarre for what looks like a residential area with a large hospital an urgent care centre and what i presume is a church
As you say design for slow speeds not for speeders

(Rules in your jurisdiction may vary, but imo they are wrong if they do)

Both road CC and the road safety advice are in the uk
The law (legislation) is very clear that opening the door is part of the road traffic act (within the construction and use regulations iirc)
Yes we all need to look out for each other but the car occupants carry the legal responsibility here

I was definitely too close to the first 3 black vehicles but was slow. Could/should have waited for oncoming car there.
Lesson for me was if you see someone prioritising their convenience over others safety, be prepared for them to act with even more selfish ignorance

I always try to give myself space, but a doors width from my 66cm handlebar is a long way tyre to tyre and I think I usually am too close
I was too busy tutting at the zig zags parking here to consciously stay wider, but luckily my default is to stay wide

people behave unpredictability
We also need to recognise why the vehicle ahead is giving itself space when we follow and not intimidate or squeeze them left.

The onus is on the car occupants
However riding close to parked vehicles also risks crashing if a pet or small child crosses closely in front (or in between vehicles, the picture is a rare occurrence for me) or even a large adult if its a van or SUV
We need to give ourselves space,

It doesnt happen often (took me ages to find this) but seems unnecessary
Not my Lime Bime bell by the way

Even the adult supervision is recommended 😬😉

A perpendicular translucent barrier creates a nice wind break for passengers but opaque carries and advertising boards should be illegal for exactly the reason you say

We should always proceed carefully, especially where we know there are likely to be unseen pedestrians, but these are nonsensical

literally injure and kill people in the thousands worldwide
Yes some drivers are inherently dangerous (drugs alcohol speeding etc) but so many aren't and KSI as well

so lazy and illogical though.
Particularly in the circumstances as described
Its such a shame so many have knee jerk reactions in so many circumstances (not limited to the roads)
A bit of thinking and a bit of empathy would so often be better
Add the danger we all pose in cars and these attitudes

Almost every time I travel someone does something that they could do better and I find annoying (pedestrians/cyclists/car, bus or lorry drivers) no matter my mode
Probably means nothing to you but I think I am turning into Victor Meldrew!
The whole bikes/cyclist need to get out of the way thing is

that your and my opinions align here

Others should as you say make
up their own minds

Maybe not thinking too deeply or they may also experience somatic effects (dont forget size cna go down as well as up, speaking generally of course)

I clicked the link in the article
The Sun journo, who it seems sought out the treatment, seemed to think it worked so make of that what you will 🤷🏻‍♂️
Seems most hypnotherapists believe in somatic effects
There is also scientific merit in at least some of these claims
But having said all that I feel

nothing that they can do
With the push for autonomous vehicles tech companies are likely to also push for such restrictions
IMO we should collectively resist any such nonsense as robustly as possible

As you say in op, seems they are looking to blame pedestrians for not using the infrastructure as intended
It's not a giant leap therefore to postulate that rather than looking at infrastructure failures and redesigning; they may simply say without a restrictive law on pedestrian movement there is

And nor should there be

Then drilling down to see how each modality could be better protected. And its not Jaywalking laws as seems to be suggested in the piece

certainly didn't die
The headline also seems plain wrong as it is the proportions by modality not the fatality rate (which would need to me per capita, or per journey taken) being discussed
Ultimately none of that matters and the fact 218 people died needlessly in 4 years should be the focus

2025 RTC deaths @ 50; pedestrians 24 or 48%

2024 RTC deaths @ 49; pedestrians 21 or 42.857%

2023 RTC deaths @ 57; pedestrians 43% or 24.51 people

2022 RTC deaths @ 62; pedestrians 23.5% or 14.7 people

There are definitely some errors in simplifying the percentages as 0.7 and 0.51 people almost

Looking at the majority of their posts i will give Sam the benefit of the doubt there.
But far too many would agree with him wholeheartedly.

cars
This is something that I try not to do, but also think I am often less than 1m from parked cars unintentionally
Bear in mind also that animals or small children may dart from between the cars and be unseen until the last minute

100% agree, and drivers (and passengers) should be educated thus
But I am talking to cyclists
As we cannot influence others behaviour then we need to be aware not to cycle close to danger and drivers need to be aware of why we might do this
The OP is good info, but IMO the cyclist is too close the

And to be fair to old Diesel no 77 in from was going far faster when it could

So i realised today what part of the "speed limiting" problem is
Lovely brand new BYD double decker in Wandsworth, Garret Lane which is entirely 20mph but the bus recognises it as a 30 on the dash
Only reached an indicated 23mph once as we spent more time at 0mph than moving

harming others
The role of the regulator here also needs looking at. If Prof H did indeed cause harm to patients of course he shouldn't hide this in court and why let him off the hook? Stopping the investigation due to voluntary erasure seems bizarre (the investigation may also have cleared him)

IANAL but I have worked with patients and patient safety / governance teams in NHS trusts
Whatever happened here, it highlights to me that we dont have the skillset inside individual trusts to properly investigate events like this nevermind find out what is happening in real time and stop it from