Cycling Controversy

1045 Words3 Pages

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

More about Cycling Controversy

Open Document