Anton Savage

Do you know what the words ‘trope’ ‘naive’ and ‘undergraduate’ mean?

Maybe just answer the question, instead of wasting so much verbiage avoiding it.

You found me on line to tell me you thought I said something ridiculous. How do people normally react when you pursue them out of the blue to attack them? Warmly?

So, let me get your position clear - your contention is being visible while walking on a road at night is not safer than not being visible at night? Is that right?

And can we park the correlation/causation stuff? It’s up there with Maslow and Kubler-Ross on the list of ‘naive undergraduate tropes’.

So… your contention, genuinely, hand-on-heart, is that wearing something visible in the dark is no safer than not wearing something that makes you visible.

Really? This is a thing you think?

You have it completely arseways. I mentioned in passing a statistic which shows that pedestrians are safer if they are in hi-vis. Something you agree with. I did not support a hi-vis mandate in any way. Yet you’ve been at me unendingly. We both agree hi vis is good for safety, let’s move on.

So.. you think you’re safer in hi-vis. You are also giving out about legal obligations, which I said nothing about.

You realise you are literally agreeing with me, but doing it in a super-combative way?

No, that’s a tangential treatise that inter alia proves my point. But let’s try to stay on track - what does it mean in your understanding?

What does ‘safer at an individual level’ mean in your understanding?

So it’s a good idea.

So getting people to wear hi vis in the dark is a good idea?

Let’s start with people walking around at night. Any issue with that?

A) who said I want everyone to wear hi - vis?
B) you really, honestly hand on heart believe that walking down a road at night is not made significantly safer by making yourself more visible? That’s what you are saying? Honest?

Any chance of not avoiding the question?

Jesus you use a lot of words to make no point. So are you actually suggesting that it’s not safer for pedestrians to wear reflective clothing at night? Are you? Honestly?

Ah that’s worse. This is too silly to continue

Ah Simon, that’s pathetic.

You realise that says most pedestrian deaths were at night? Are you paying any attention to this conversation or are you just trolling?

Lights. You’re familiar with ‘lights’ right?

Source?

I’m not. You cannot really be that thick

Your point?

Nice riposte. It was figurative. Currently I’ve three but it’s still a pain in the hole dealing with all of ye.

And no-one has yet made a counter-argument to ‘pedestrians are safer wearing hi-vis’ there’s just a vast pile of the usual narcissistic dipshittery.

Nope, get in the dumb queue. I can’t argue with 90 daft contentions simultaneously. Either form a class action or go away.

Getting people to wear hi-vis is bad? THAT’s your contention?

Okay. So ‘yes’. And me pointing that out was bad because..?

Mine first

Hi Simon. Thanks for being distracting. Maybe answer the straight question and I can deal with both of you concurrently.

Hi James. So let me ask
you a simple question- do you think a pedestrian is less likely to be killed wearing a hi-vis vest at night, or wearing dark clothing? Please give a straight answer.

What are you talking about? Are you an actual person? If so, what’s your name?