執行緒： 是駕駛更比騎自行車者和行人不小心嗎？

刹車，道路安全慈善機構，從最新的廣告宣傳提供道路消費者的視圖，則過於簡單化很難支撐刹車的新的道路的認識運動，呼籲要堅持 20 英里每小時在樓宇密集區，以改善行人和騎自行車者安全的驅動程式的邏輯的金塊的故障。這是常識。
我不反對，不過，是該運動的過於簡單化概念是壞的驅動程式和其他道路消費者都是好。作為一些你上周觸及騎自行車者詹姆斯 · 魯珀特的博客的答覆中，生活中的事情永遠不是相當清晰切作為制動的運動暗示。
這是我的經驗： 正如汽車司機顯示路況不佳的認識一樣，同樣有騎自行車者和行人在我們的公路和小路上顯示一個令人發狂缺少責任感的人。
關於京士頓附近我每天上班，它令我多少晨運人士堅持忙著過路的行人過路處 50 米範圍內莫名其妙。高峰時刻，那些行人經常發現自己被困之間交通的車道作為他們等待中斷迎面而來的汽車。
另一方面，或許他們是謹慎使用，官方的交通燈控制的通道，因為一些騎自行車者似乎公然無視紅燈，如果他們只適用于驅動程式和步行者。
經驗豐富的日常通勤上一輛自行車 — — 另一汽車工作人員告訴我他的妻子 — — 問候隨機行人為更多的危險上她比車司機的旅程。
當然，駕駛者的沉重、 快速的物件，在他們的處置，那些和因危險駕駛每年受傷的道路消費者的數目勝過幾個事件的由隨機騎自行車者造成傷害。
不過，我覺得會更值得在制動的運動中，如果它使用相同的平臺，承認需要騎自行車者和行人通過相同級別的認識作為它的驅動程式的要求。在蒸餾其運動過於簡單化的口號，我擔心制動風險疏遠和光顧的人就想要的目標。
制動選擇倫敦，傳達它的資訊通過媒介的看板作為頭車使用一系列的慈善機構介紹的海報。
與大多數看板網站在主幹道，毗鄰首都，我以為該慈善機構想要做的最後一件事是道路消費者的回頭和分散其注意力經營的汽車、 自行車或他們用作為一種運輸模式的鞋。

The latest advertising campaign from Brake, the road safety charity, offers a view of road users that is too simplistic It's hard to fault the nugget of logic that underpins Brake's new road awareness campaign, which calls for drivers to stick to 20mph in built-up areas to improve the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. That's common sense.
What I do disagree with, however, is the campaign's overly simplistic notion that drivers are bad and other road users are all good. As some of you touched upon in your responses to James Ruppert's blog about cyclists last week, things in life are never quite as clear cut as Brake's campaign is suggesting.
My experience is this: just as there are car drivers who show poor road awareness, similarly there are cyclists and pedestrians who display a maddening lack of sense on our highways and byways.
On my daily commute near Kingston, it baffles me how many walkers insist on crossing busy roads within 50 metres of pedestrian crossings. At rush hour, those pedestrians often find themselves stranded between lanes of traffic as they wait for a break in the oncoming cars.
On the other hand, perhaps they are wary of using the official traffic-light-controlled crossings, because some cyclists seem to brazenly disregard red lights as if they only apply to drivers and walkers.
Another Autocar staff member tells me his wife – an experienced daily commuter on a bicycle – regards random pedestrians as more of a hazard on her journey than car drivers.
Of course, motorists are the ones with the heavy, fast objects at their disposal, and the number of road users injured by dangerous driving each year outweighs the few incidents of injuries caused by random cyclists.
Nevertheless, I would find more worth in Brake's campaign if it used the same platform to acknowledge the need for cyclists and pedestrians to adopt the same level of awareness as it is asking of drivers. In distilling its campaign to a overly simplistic slogan, I fear Brake risks alienating and patronising the people whom it is trying to target.
Brake has chosen to convey its message via the medium of billboards across London, using a series of posters that the charity describes as head-turning.
With most billboard sites in the capital situated close to major thoroughfares, I would have thought the last thing the charity wants to do is turn the heads of road users and distract them from operating the car, bicycle or shoes they're using as a mode of transport.