I writing to raise my concerns about an article you recently published written by Mr Liddle. It is clear that his opinions aren’t only wrong but ludicrous! Cycling is a vastly loved and popular recreational hobby. Consequently he has managed to insult a good proportion of the cycling community with his sarcastic and, frankly, offensive comments. Throughout the article he has unfairly criticised the behaviour of cyclists on our roads, blaming them for any accident involving a cyclist and totally ignoring any culpability on the part of the driver. This is blatantly outrageous! Not only is it wrong, but it is misleading. How can it be the sole responsibility of the cyclists in every accident? As a result there can be no other option but to take …show more content…
He cannot deny the fact that in 2014, 3,401 people were seriously injured or killed in a road accident. From this he must agree that British roads aren’t safe, not because of cyclists as he has previously stated but because of thoughtless and selfish road users i.e motorists. Furthermore, he describes cyclists as “a menace to society.” However, I say that it isn’t the cyclists that are a menace but the people like him who make fun out of road safety strategies which could be potentially lifesaving. Instead of criticising he should be praising these heroes of the road. Not only aren’t they draining the resources of our struggling NHS, but they are playing their part in saving our environment. How does he have the nerve to say cyclists “are deluded about the impact cycling a few miles makes to the environment”? What planet is he on? With that sort of attitude there is no hope for our future. Surely he must realise we all have our part to play in saving our planet, no matter how small. By continuing to ignore that for every gallon of diesel fuel, 22.38 pounds of carbon dioxide is given off into the environment is …show more content…
How is it helpful to rip into the way cyclists dress? Describing our equipment as “pompous”, “hilarious” and our water bottles as “fatuous” is unhelpful. Liddle would be better spending his time coming up with more constructive criticism rather than finding fault where there is none.
As a result of these comments, as well as Liddle’s so called “jest(ing)”, one might question his sanity. In my opinion “killing cyclists” is no laughing matter nor are his references to “homosexuals, single mothers and … foreigners”. If anyone is being “fatuous”, it is him. His concerns that “cycling will become an acceptable pursuit” are ridiculous. Surely more cyclists on the road must be seen as both environmentally sound and beneficial for all of
...ay of laws and reasonable policy. Dr. Williams is obviously an individual of knowledge and pride, however, his education may not provide the key his views of positive policy. Instead of viewing the governments? attempt at safety as a negative authority, he should reflect on the physical benefits instead of the intangible conflicts. Therefore, the ?Click It or Ticket? article described one way of viewing a current law of governing safety. Dr. Williams clearly disagrees, but an audience should generally view the attempt at safety as the proper acts of government as opposed to the negative. Safety is a necessity for a civil society, and click it or ticket laws allow for a safer than nothing transportation situation. This should be appreciated and will eventually quiet all critics by accurate statistics of saved lives while maintaining a reasonable spending platform.
Millions of people all over the United States choose motorcycles over automobiles for the thrill, speed, and high performance capabilities. On the other hand, motorcycles are not at all the safest way of transportation. Motorcycles do not provide the passenger with the outer protection that cars provide, therefore, when one crashes, the results are usually much more serious. Injuries to the head are responsible for 76% of fatalities when dealing with motorcycle crashes many of which could have been prevented had the rider been wearing a helmet. For this reason, many states have adopted the motorcycle helmet law. The law states that every passengers must wear a helmet at all times when riding on a motorcycle. This law has created a great deal of controversy. One side supports the law, believing that it protects motorcyclists from danger and saves the economy a great deal of money. The other side argues that the law is unconstitutional and it violates our right to freedom. However, statistics show overwhelming support in favor of the motorcycle helmet law. Although wearing helmets cannot prevent motorcycle crashes, they can greatly reduce the number of deaths caused by head injury as well as lowering taxes, insurance rates, and health care costs. Therefore, the helmet law should be put into effect in every state across the United States.
“Driving While Stupid” is about the author, Dave Barry, traveling around the world and observing the driving habits of foreign bus, taxi, and cab drivers, as well as the odd variety of activities he has seen others take part in behind the wheel of their own car. The article is not long. It’s eleven paragraphs and is composed of 780 words. And in this article, he is trying to make and argument. For a mere 780 words, one might not believe that that there is any point to this piece other than for the purpose of comic relief. Many of those words bring out the yuks in people, but what evidence does Barry present that results in a concrete argument, and what is he even arguing about? This piece could have very well worked as a simple informatory article about some of the dangers of driving while adding a few jokes to the mix to lighten up a seemingly depressing topic. But Barry very cleverly shapes his writing to not only inform, but to argue. He argues that while there are chaotic acts of driving everywhere in the world, there is nowhere that could top the antics of Miami drivers right here in the U.S.A. To better understand the points that Dave is trying to make, his article should be looked at in
Repetition is often used in the safe driving campaign in order to successfully convey their message and also to ensure, that the viewer retains their main idea. Fear is also often used in an effort reach the viewer on an emotional level. Presently the Government and the transport department have worked in collaboration with one another to bring forth a message to the public about road safety. And since road fatalities have affected Australia so much that the advice has become propaganda in every sense of the term ? There is one idea propagated repeatedly in an emotional manner with appropriate cartoons and even name-calling. But has the massive propaganda campaign set out by the Government and the transport department been effective in ensuring the safety of motorist
This topic is a constant and heated debate among people. Many people argue that the rider should have the freedom to choose whether or not to wear a helmet. Although, many people feel this is a selfish perspective because when others have accidents, it becomes other people’s concerns. This is said because some people believe that the families, loved ones, or tax payers will be paying for the rider’s injury bills. Along with freedom rights, riders complain that the helmets are heavy. With the weight of the helmet, arguments are made that injuries could increase with the spinal cord or neck. Likewise, people think that helmets can become a distraction or “get in the way”. When riders say this, they are referring to their ability to see or hear what is going on in the environment. “These senses have been studied in the context of motorcycle activity and do not appear to be impaired, and in certain circumstances, may be improved” (Auerbach). Research has been shown that helmets do not cause distractions or impair hearing or vision
There is an estimate of 1.3 million cars in the world, in the United States alone the ration from person to cars is 1.3. That 's almost 255 million cars in the roads every single day. Just imagine, “Burning one gallon of gas creates 20 pounds of carbon dioxide, and the average car emits about six tons of carbon dioxide every year”(Global Warming And Your Car).Imagine how many tons of Carbon dioxide are emitted into the air by everyone in the world. The carbon that gets emitted into the air doesn 't just affect the climate it also affects us by polluting the very air that we breath. Air pollution causes around 3.3 million deaths worldwide every year. One of the biggest places with contamination is China, the main reason for that is because of all of the factories that they have and all the carbon dioxide that gets let out.People and their decisions are the main reason for climate change, they only think about the present and never about the
With the introduction of the automobile in the early 1900s, laws have been instituted to protect drivers on the road. With these laws come lawbreakers who put their agenda in front of the well being of others. Tens of thousands of lives have been lost. billions of dollars have been spent, and pollution has grown exponentially because of this. drivers travelling at high speeds on roads (Hartman).
Assistant City Manager Mike Wanchick said, "A helmet seems to give a false sense of security to the cyclist, who feel less vulnerable and may ride less cautiously," He then went on to add. "As a result, riders wearing a helmet are more likely to have an accident." (Post) Now, the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute (BHSI) statistics show four states accounted for 40 percent of bicycle deaths in 2000, With Texas as one of them. Yet, Wanchick says that "our basic position is that bicycle safety is a parents' primary obligation," adding " What hurts kids are cars and we need to be working the traffic citations out there* people who are licensed to drive cars, not kids learning to ride bicycles." (Post) Even though 10 of the largest cities in Texas have bicycle-helmet ordinances including Dallas and Fort Worth. But, Richardson Texas choose to not act on this issue, but turn a blind eye to one of the silent injuries and the prevention of it by wearing a simple helmet. The BHSI says the statistics show about 800 bicyclists die in the US every year. Plus another one in eight of the cyclists injured has a brain injury.
Opponents feel that bicycle helmet laws are too strict and are misdirected. Principally, they feel that helmet laws do not prevent accidents and point out the fact that "motor vehicles are involved in 90-92% of bicyclist deaths" (BHSI/Compendium 4). Creating awareness among drivers by lowering their speeds would create a safer cycling environment. Furthermore, opponents of helmet laws believe that "requiring motorists to wear helmets will save more lives" (Convissor 1) since statistics show the likelihood of fatality while riding in passenger cars is nearly double that of bicycling (Bicycle 15). They are also concerned for the overall popularity of their sport when helmet laws go into effect. After helmet laws went into effect in Australia, "surveys in Sydney found the helmet law reduced cycling by 38%" (Convissor, 1). Another issue is the argument that helmets are inconvenient and uncomfortable.
This was the original argument used by the carbon industry to discredit climate change and global warming.
The darkness loomed above me, the few remaining stars twinkling sporatically, as if the emptiness was snuffing them out.
Humans and animals breathe out Carbon Dioxide, often referred to as the greenhouse gas, as a waste product. Plants take in this CO2 and use it to make food. This is called photosynthesis. During this process oxygen is released which is then breathed in by humans and animals. This procedure is repeated over and over and a natural balance is obtained. However this natural balance is disrupted by human activity. People of the world are putting more than 5.5 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. 75% of this is caused from the burning of fossil fuels. These fuels are burnt all the time to run factories, power plants and vehicles. The main sources of CO2 emissions are electric utilities, residential buildings, industry and transportation. The other 25% is induced by the destruction of the world's forests. The reason for this is that there are less trees and plants to take in the CO2 but there is just as many, if not more, humans and animals to breathe it out.
I. Teaching anyone to ride a bike is a most memorable experience, but having them obey the rules and regulations when riding is one of peoples first exposures to obeying the law. Cycling is a great way to exercise as well as a convenient mode of transportation. But before you start riding you should take a few minutes to consider some important safety precautions.
“The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status, or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we all believe that we are above-average drivers” -Dave Barry, comedian. The number of accidents over the last ten years have drastically increased, drivers are paying less attention to the road itself. Many individuals behind the wheel of a car believe that their driving does not affect the road conditions, however it always will. The driving habits of today are catastrophic due to the reasoning that the driving will affect other lives through reckless or distracted driving, and disobeying traffic laws.
People ride bicycles for various reasons. Some people ride bicycles for sport, fitness purposes, as a mode of transportation, fun activity, and some people ride bikes to simply relax and clear their mind after a long day. Regardless of the reason you ride, it is important to know the factors that contribute to bicycle and helmet safety. A study in 2014 shows that 103.7 million people rode a bike that year and 34 percent of Americans age three or older rode a bike at least once in that year (“Study: 103.7 Million Americans Ride Bikes”). The importance of bicycle safety cannot be underestimated. According to the 2008 Alabama Traffic Crash Facts, there were 182 bicycle crash injuries and four fatalities. In 2008, children 14 years old and under