I think this thread is getting hung up on the semantics of bikers versus cars.
The video back at the beginning of the thread shows two sides to a story both of which contributed to a death
On one side we have a car driver who pulled into the path of a biker because he didn't see him
On the other side we have a biker riding well in excess of the speed limits and riding dangerously.
Change the car in this scenario for a large wild animal, then who is to blame? The resulting accident would still a skyward flying biker most likely end up in
rose cottage
It really doesn't take facts and figures to show why bikers are more likely to get hurt, all their squishy bits are protected by only a thin layer of leather and the occasional piece of carbon fibre "armour" a car driver on the other hand has there nice warm comfortable tin box to protect them.
Pedestrians although not protected like bikers also aren't doing 100mph
So if something is going to happen and someone is going to get hurt that person is going to be the biker, so it's really the bikers who need to be more careful, more aware and set the example, if every biker was the model of how one should navigate the roads of Britain, then every time an accident like this happens the immediate reaction from the general public wouldn't be 'silly bikers need to be more careful'
Of the RTCs I've been directly involved with over the years which have ended in a fatality (which isn't that many) all but one where bikers, and in every one of those cases the biker had done something to contribute to the accident, that's not to say it was the bikers 100% total fault, but they had done or been doing something which had lead to the accident happening.