Video: Cyclists behaving badly - helmetcam cyclist turns his lens on other cyclists

York cycle commuter films red light jumping, pavement riding… jacket changing cyclists

by Tony Farrelly   April 9, 2014  

CarefulCyclist - how not to change your jacket while riding a bike.png

Cyclists’ helmet cam videos of reckless road users behaving badly or breaking the law are a Youtube staple, but here’s one with a difference those caught on camera are cyclists and it ends with a truly spectacular demonstration of how not to take your jacket off while cycling.

York Cyclists Episode 1, shot over a three week period was posted to Youtube on April 1st ago by a long time cycle commuter calling himself CarefulCyclist, but it's no joke.

Red light jumping, pavement cycling, red light jumping, riding no handed, red light jumping, texting while cycling, phoning while cycling and red light jumping (a bit like Groundhog Day) are all here.

It’s a catalogue of the sort of behaviour that irritates and angers other road users and that divides opinion amongst cyclists between those who believe that the rules of the road apply to everyone and those who say they are the product of a car-centric approach to traffic management and that as long as no-one is harmed the independent minded cyclist should be free to ignore them. Watch the video and judge for yourself. 

“Cyclists are taking more risks”, CarefulCyclist told YorkMix explaining his reason for posting his films to Youtube: “I hope the families of those cyclists will see what those cyclists are doing, putting themselves and other road users at risk and prevent them.

“The cyclists involved should stop and think, is this risk I am taking worth it?”
He also explained why he started filming his journeys.

“I have, on a number of occasions nearly been hit by inattentive or poor drivers. if you combine poor driving with reckless cycling more and more people are going to get injured. Some fatally.”

He described those riding badly as “a small proportion of repeat offenders, I see the same faces over and over again.

“Young men seem prepared to take the greatest risks, but all types of road users flout the Highway Code.

“I see cyclists running red lights, weaving in and out of traffic, but even the most minor indiscretions like cycling on the pavement can have potentially severe consequences if the cyclist is in collision with someone elderly or a child.
“Pedestrians have been killed by cyclists.”

While some of the cycling on display is certainly of the eye-brow raising variety some may also raise an eyebrow at the inclusion of a woman using her mobile phone while cycling along a near empty bike path - on the other hand the chap briefly glimpsed riding no handed on the pavement was lucky a hapless pedestrian didn’t step out of a doorway.

The penultimate incident would seem to be an example of both rider and driver inattention although had things played out differently it is certainly the cyclist who would have paid the higher price, and that last crash? Well, according to CarefulCyclist the man got up afterwards apparently unharmed.

While his film highlights some risk taking individual in his conversation with YorkMix CarefulCyclist reserves some of the blame for poor cycling infrastructure too:

“Some of the cycling infrastructure is poorly designed and poorly maintained, cycle lanes are too narrow and sometimes bring road users in to conflict”.

The recklessness of York’s drivers and pedestrians are the subjects of his next two videos.

122 user comments

Latest 30 commentsNewest firstBest ratedAll

I think on reflection this video has raised a valid point around blame.

Do you know what, there are some people out there who are doing some stupid and dangerous stuff on bikes... this video is a great demonstration of the sort of behaviour that is going on around us all the time...

Its true, cyclists aren't perfect.

There, its done, the 'cat' is out of the bag.

With that admissions, can we move on? Instead of blaming each other, RLJ's or whatever for the tiny minority of drivers that behave awfully around cyclists who in turn blame our attitudes to justify their actions, can we look for a uniformed response to...

"you cyclists, you think you are so superior, but actually, you are the bane of the roads'.

The answer is not ensuring everyone rides perfectly, its negating the argument in the first place... Just because a drug enriched teenager rides the wrong way up a one way street swigging cider and chatting on his phone, does not mean my kids should be put in a situation where their father is taken away from them.

In any other context this would not be accepted... replace the term cyclist, with woman, gay, black etc etc and you'd see how ugly the argument that 'we' all have to behave properly or 'we' deserve it' is.

Its time we moved on.

posted by Jimmy Ray Will [216 posts]
10th April 2014 - 14:36

like this
Like (32)

cyclingDMlondon wrote:
bikebot wrote:
It's terrible that we often find the pain and suffering of others hilarious. I've been watching the last clip (jacket guy) repeatedly for the lat ten minutes to try to understand why this is Rolling On The Floor

I've never understood that mentality, either. As a teenager, a mate and I were hanging around, ogling girls, chatting. I was sitting on a railing next to a busstop, and at one point, fell backwards onto the pavement. No injuries, got up seconds later. My mate was bent double, laughing so hard he was struggling for breath, a line of saliva stretching from his gaping lips, as he clutched his sides.

I really don't get how, when someone sees a fellow human being fall, or stumble, that the first reaction isn't to rush to their aid. I do not find people hurting themselves to be at all amusing.

But then, I don't like slapstick comedy.

“Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die.”

― Mel Brooks

Though actually that's not my philosophy (I probably just don't have a very good sense of humour). That sequence just made me wince and hope he didn't injure any more than his dignity. But I don't really understand what the guy was attempting to accomplish - where was he trying to put the damn jacket?

posted by FluffyKittenofT... [636 posts]
10th April 2014 - 15:47

like this
Like (20)

cyclingDMlondon wrote:

Aaaaaaaaaaaand the point goes straight over the top of your head.

Kinetic energy is not the point. 'risk' is not the point.

What is the point, is that it's illegal.

If you really can't get your tiny brain around that fact, then *shrug* .. have a nice life.

I don't get your point. Many things are illegal, from entering ASLs on red to downloading music without paying the copyright-holder. Does everyone hate motorists because it seems the vast majority of them do the former all the time, or hate owners of computers and phones because many of them do the latter?

The hate has little to do with the legality or otherwise of what some cyclists do, it has other causes. And even if it did, there's nothing much that can be done about it by us non-RLJing cyclists.

I don't hugely care if other cyclists jump reds. There seems little evidence that it causes many accidents. I only care if they do so in a way that menaces pedestrians or other cyclists (one such once shot out across a junction right in front of me - I did care about that, I admit). In other respects its their own look-out and not an important issue for me.

posted by FluffyKittenofT... [636 posts]
10th April 2014 - 15:54

like this
Like (18)

cyclingDMlondon wrote:
I really don't get how, when someone sees a fellow human being fall, or stumble, that the first reaction isn't to rush to their aid. I do not find people hurting themselves to be at all amusing.

But then, I don't like slapstick comedy.

Have you never seen the clip of the midget in a monkey suit being drop kicked by a Mexican wrestler then?

I nearly passed out.

posted by farrell [1305 posts]
10th April 2014 - 16:10

like this
Like (15)

cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
The bit of the guy taking off his jacket is rather droll. Bet he won't do that again in a hurry. Red light running isn't wise on a bicycle in busy traffic either. But I have to say, hopping a kerb and using the pavement when there isn't anyone around harms no one. Several of those clips shows show cyclists avoiding having to wait by using the pavement and in several, there are no pedestrians. So exactly who was at risk there? As it happens I recognised the junction from when I last stayed in York too and it is a busy one at peak times. Hopping a kerb there when there are no pedestrians reduces congestion for motorists as well as cutting journey times and also reduces risk, as long as there are no pedestrians around.

Yes, and doing 180 mph in your Porsche on an empty motorway should be allowed, too. After all, who is at risk?

Any law student quickly learns that there are 'conduct offences', and 'result offences'. The former is complete as soon as the action is taken (with the appropriate mens rea if appropriate). Running red lights comes into that category. It doesn't matter who is at risk, or who isn't at risk. It is illegal, end of bloody story.

As I asked a guy a while back, who had gone through a red light on his bicycle (I still caught up with him): 'mate, have you ever wondered why drivers hate us?'

'No..? he replied.

'Because of stupid c***s like you,' I answered.

(not 100% true, as I've posted before, but not acting like prize twats on bicycles, would go some way to repairing the damage)

There's just a slight difference between your 180mph Porsche and someone hopping a kerb at say 10mph on a bicycle. It's called kinetic energy. There's rather a lot more of it in a 1.5tonne car travelling at 180mph than a bicycle and rider weighing maybe 90kg travelling at 10mph. It's physics. The bicycle can stop in a short distance. The car can't; more physics.

And as a previous post says, the latest guidance to the police is not to bother with pavement cycling when there is no visible risk.

There are degrees.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand the point goes straight over the top of your head.

Kinetic energy is not the point. 'risk' is not the point.

What is the point, is that it's illegal.

If you really can't get your tiny brain around that fact, then *shrug* .. have a nice life.

If it's so illegal to ride on a pavement when there's no one around at risk, why are police now told not to bother if it's not doing any harm? There is a difference.

I do wonder how those car drivers would feel if they had to wait even longer at the junction. Like I said, I know that one and it does have a long tailback in the mornings.

While we're at it have you any more people you want to stereotype?

"There are many 'classes' of people who think like that already. Car drivers. Feminists. And, sadly, some cyclists."

OldRidgeback

posted by OldRidgeback [2132 posts]
10th April 2014 - 16:28

like this
Like (15)

Bugger me, its a happy place here isn't it?

posted by allez neg [4 posts]
10th April 2014 - 17:03

like this
Like (19)

Scoob_84 wrote:
Funny how the film maker is getting more blame than the people in the film.
He's the one damaging my safety, not them.

posted by vbvb [220 posts]
10th April 2014 - 17:51

like this
Like (33)

vbvb wrote:
Scoob_84 wrote:
Funny how the film maker is getting more blame than the people in the film.
He's the one damaging my safety, not them.

No its the bad cyclists flouting the hgihway code doing that

posted by Scoob_84 [184 posts]
10th April 2014 - 18:02

like this
Like (16)

Scoob_84 wrote:
vbvb wrote:
Scoob_84 wrote:
Funny how the film maker is getting more blame than the people in the film.
He's the one damaging my safety, not them.

No its the bad cyclists flouting the hgihway code doing that

Well they both are and neither are. I don't think its fair to hold either responsible for the irrational way others choose to react to it.

posted by FluffyKittenofT... [636 posts]
10th April 2014 - 18:08

like this
Like (21)

Frankly I think anyone who believes the law applies to me but not to them is an ar$e and whether either of us is driving a car, riding a bike or sitting on a sofa is irrelevant.

posted by Nixster [64 posts]
10th April 2014 - 18:13

like this
Like (24)

OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
The bit of the guy taking off his jacket is rather droll. Bet he won't do that again in a hurry. Red light running isn't wise on a bicycle in busy traffic either. But I have to say, hopping a kerb and using the pavement when there isn't anyone around harms no one. Several of those clips shows show cyclists avoiding having to wait by using the pavement and in several, there are no pedestrians. So exactly who was at risk there? As it happens I recognised the junction from when I last stayed in York too and it is a busy one at peak times. Hopping a kerb there when there are no pedestrians reduces congestion for motorists as well as cutting journey times and also reduces risk, as long as there are no pedestrians around.

Yes, and doing 180 mph in your Porsche on an empty motorway should be allowed, too. After all, who is at risk?

Any law student quickly learns that there are 'conduct offences', and 'result offences'. The former is complete as soon as the action is taken (with the appropriate mens rea if appropriate). Running red lights comes into that category. It doesn't matter who is at risk, or who isn't at risk. It is illegal, end of bloody story.

As I asked a guy a while back, who had gone through a red light on his bicycle (I still caught up with him): 'mate, have you ever wondered why drivers hate us?'

'No..? he replied.

'Because of stupid c***s like you,' I answered.

(not 100% true, as I've posted before, but not acting like prize twats on bicycles, would go some way to repairing the damage)

There's just a slight difference between your 180mph Porsche and someone hopping a kerb at say 10mph on a bicycle. It's called kinetic energy. There's rather a lot more of it in a 1.5tonne car travelling at 180mph than a bicycle and rider weighing maybe 90kg travelling at 10mph. It's physics. The bicycle can stop in a short distance. The car can't; more physics.

And as a previous post says, the latest guidance to the police is not to bother with pavement cycling when there is no visible risk.

There are degrees.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand the point goes straight over the top of your head.

Kinetic energy is not the point. 'risk' is not the point.

What is the point, is that it's illegal.

If you really can't get your tiny brain around that fact, then *shrug* .. have a nice life.

If it's so illegal to ride on a pavement when there's no one around at risk, why are police now told not to bother if it's not doing any harm?

I believe the police are told to exercise discretion, and not 'not to bother'.

And I think that that advice is for roads where the traffic speed or direction make cycling dangerous.

But as most pavement cyclists do so because they're lazy ba*tards who don't want to go around a one-way system as it'll cost them another three minutes, I don't support this 'discretion'.

On my commute home, there's a really fast roundabout, where I take the third exit. I've had a couple of close shaves on there. So now, I get off and walk. It would be easy to cycle it. It's about a 45 second cycle, but a four minute walk.

But I was brought up to respect others. And there is also the fact that I whinge when a pedestrian walks across the road in front of me. So what gives me the right to go onto his territory and make him get out of my way?

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning' (Henry Ford)

cyclingDMlondon's picture

posted by cyclingDMlondon [203 posts]
10th April 2014 - 18:20

like this
Like (16)

indyjukebox wrote:
Sara_H wrote:
indyjukebox wrote:
Sara_H wrote:

I'm a very experienced rider, but since I started riding with my child I use the pavements (considerately) more and more as the roads around us are to busy, too unsafe and too complex for a child to manage. There is also one junction on my work commute that is generally far safer for me to go through on red, which is exactly what I do if there aren't any pedestrians crossing.

My son got knocked down last week by another child riding on the pavement. The boy who ran into my son did have his parents in tow.

So what you see as considerate use of the pavement, I see as a danger to my child. Why should I have to accept that just so that you and your child can ride on a pavement?

Then your son has also been let down by the infrastructure.

If you don't like it, campaign for safer infrastructure that everyone from age 6 to age 96 can use safely.

No, the point is that you need to campaign for safer infrastructure for cycling. Not the pedestrian. The pedestrian already has a safe infrastructure. It is the cyclist who makes it unsafe by choosing to ride on a pavement.

Again you pass the buck onto the pedestrian for a lack of cycling infrastructure. That is what bothers me bout everything said above. It is ok as a cyclist to break rules because "we don't have an adequate infrastructure, or the motorists are horrible people or I am very considerate cyclist" etc etc. Stop with the excuses, man up and learn to do things properly rather than taking short cuts.


Not passing the buck, better infrastructure for cyclists will benefit everyone by removing conflict.
Maybe I'm an anarchist, but I don't blindly follow rules if they put people at risk.
My son and I frequently ride the pavement where the road is unsafe, we doi it without causing risk or inconvenience to others. If we can't, we get off and walk.
To put ourselves at risk for no reason whatsoever other than blindly obeying the law would be stupid.

posted by Sara_H [53 posts]
10th April 2014 - 18:31

like this
Like (25)

Yawn

Are the risks worth it? Probably.

And it's not illegal to use your phone whilst cycling. It's a non-motorised vehicle. Also cycling on pavements is not against the law in some areas of Scotland.

Liberty

The glass is 50% capacity.

posted by mrfree [33 posts]
10th April 2014 - 19:36

like this
Like (20)

undoubtedly as cycling becomes more popular, so will the number of idiot cyclists increase. The only solution will be to police cycling more. If necessary create new laws to criminalize obviously dangerous behaviour. Just because there are bad drivers this does not excuse bad cyclists. Those who love cycling should condemn , not condone, the wanton acts of stupidity this person has filmed. I'm glad the guy taking his coat off wasn't badly hurt, eg run over. I hope he wont be so dumb again.

posted by philtregear [72 posts]
10th April 2014 - 20:46

like this
Like (12)

That helmet guy is a pleb, thanks for jacket guy though

posted by funkdubious [11 posts]
10th April 2014 - 21:26

like this
Like (11)

cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
The bit of the guy taking off his jacket is rather droll. Bet he won't do that again in a hurry. Red light running isn't wise on a bicycle in busy traffic either. But I have to say, hopping a kerb and using the pavement when there isn't anyone around harms no one. Several of those clips shows show cyclists avoiding having to wait by using the pavement and in several, there are no pedestrians. So exactly who was at risk there? As it happens I recognised the junction from when I last stayed in York too and it is a busy one at peak times. Hopping a kerb there when there are no pedestrians reduces congestion for motorists as well as cutting journey times and also reduces risk, as long as there are no pedestrians around.

Yes, and doing 180 mph in your Porsche on an empty motorway should be allowed, too. After all, who is at risk?

Any law student quickly learns that there are 'conduct offences', and 'result offences'. The former is complete as soon as the action is taken (with the appropriate mens rea if appropriate). Running red lights comes into that category. It doesn't matter who is at risk, or who isn't at risk. It is illegal, end of bloody story.

As I asked a guy a while back, who had gone through a red light on his bicycle (I still caught up with him): 'mate, have you ever wondered why drivers hate us?'

'No..? he replied.

'Because of stupid c***s like you,' I answered.

(not 100% true, as I've posted before, but not acting like prize twats on bicycles, would go some way to repairing the damage)

There's just a slight difference between your 180mph Porsche and someone hopping a kerb at say 10mph on a bicycle. It's called kinetic energy. There's rather a lot more of it in a 1.5tonne car travelling at 180mph than a bicycle and rider weighing maybe 90kg travelling at 10mph. It's physics. The bicycle can stop in a short distance. The car can't; more physics.

And as a previous post says, the latest guidance to the police is not to bother with pavement cycling when there is no visible risk.

There are degrees.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand the point goes straight over the top of your head.

Kinetic energy is not the point. 'risk' is not the point.

What is the point, is that it's illegal.

If you really can't get your tiny brain around that fact, then *shrug* .. have a nice life.

If it's so illegal to ride on a pavement when there's no one around at risk, why are police now told not to bother if it's not doing any harm?

I believe the police are told to exercise discretion, and not 'not to bother'.

And I think that that advice is for roads where the traffic speed or direction make cycling dangerous.

But as most pavement cyclists do so because they're lazy ba*tards who don't want to go around a one-way system as it'll cost them another three minutes, I don't support this 'discretion'.

On my commute home, there's a really fast roundabout, where I take the third exit. I've had a couple of close shaves on there. So now, I get off and walk. It would be easy to cycle it. It's about a 45 second cycle, but a four minute walk.

But I was brought up to respect others. And there is also the fact that I whinge when a pedestrian walks across the road in front of me. So what gives me the right to go onto his territory and make him get out of my way?

I'm not sure why all pedestrians are male on your commute but I'm sure it'd be possible to ride around them slowly without intimidating them. Riding no hands on the pavement or charging along when there are loads of people around isn't really smart and police would probably use their discretion to charge someone accordingly. But when there's no one around and/or plenty of room then the risks are incredibly low and you're not disrespecting anyone. Where I live, disrespecting someone means something else incidentally.

OldRidgeback

posted by OldRidgeback [2132 posts]
10th April 2014 - 22:43

like this
Like (11)

OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:
OldRidgeback wrote:
The bit of the guy taking off his jacket is rather droll. Bet he won't do that again in a hurry. Red light running isn't wise on a bicycle in busy traffic either. But I have to say, hopping a kerb and using the pavement when there isn't anyone around harms no one. Several of those clips shows show cyclists avoiding having to wait by using the pavement and in several, there are no pedestrians. So exactly who was at risk there? As it happens I recognised the junction from when I last stayed in York too and it is a busy one at peak times. Hopping a kerb there when there are no pedestrians reduces congestion for motorists as well as cutting journey times and also reduces risk, as long as there are no pedestrians around.

Yes, and doing 180 mph in your Porsche on an empty motorway should be allowed, too. After all, who is at risk?

Any law student quickly learns that there are 'conduct offences', and 'result offences'. The former is complete as soon as the action is taken (with the appropriate mens rea if appropriate). Running red lights comes into that category. It doesn't matter who is at risk, or who isn't at risk. It is illegal, end of bloody story.

As I asked a guy a while back, who had gone through a red light on his bicycle (I still caught up with him): 'mate, have you ever wondered why drivers hate us?'

'No..? he replied.

'Because of stupid c***s like you,' I answered.

(not 100% true, as I've posted before, but not acting like prize twats on bicycles, would go some way to repairing the damage)

There's just a slight difference between your 180mph Porsche and someone hopping a kerb at say 10mph on a bicycle. It's called kinetic energy. There's rather a lot more of it in a 1.5tonne car travelling at 180mph than a bicycle and rider weighing maybe 90kg travelling at 10mph. It's physics. The bicycle can stop in a short distance. The car can't; more physics.

And as a previous post says, the latest guidance to the police is not to bother with pavement cycling when there is no visible risk.

There are degrees.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand the point goes straight over the top of your head.

Kinetic energy is not the point. 'risk' is not the point.

What is the point, is that it's illegal.

If you really can't get your tiny brain around that fact, then *shrug* .. have a nice life.

If it's so illegal to ride on a pavement when there's no one around at risk, why are police now told not to bother if it's not doing any harm?

I believe the police are told to exercise discretion, and not 'not to bother'.

And I think that that advice is for roads where the traffic speed or direction make cycling dangerous.

But as most pavement cyclists do so because they're lazy ba*tards who don't want to go around a one-way system as it'll cost them another three minutes, I don't support this 'discretion'.

On my commute home, there's a really fast roundabout, where I take the third exit. I've had a couple of close shaves on there. So now, I get off and walk. It would be easy to cycle it. It's about a 45 second cycle, but a four minute walk.

But I was brought up to respect others. And there is also the fact that I whinge when a pedestrian walks across the road in front of me. So what gives me the right to go onto his territory and make him get out of my way?

I'm not sure why all pedestrians are male on your commute

Not really sure I get this...

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning' (Henry Ford)

cyclingDMlondon's picture

posted by cyclingDMlondon [203 posts]
11th April 2014 - 10:07

like this
Like (8)

Anyone else notice how the jacket guy hits his head really hard, and WASNT wearing a helmet?

I'm taking this as "proof" and counter argument to the usual anecdote garbage from some cyclists that have hit their head, but the helmet *definitely* saved their life

posted by sfichele [96 posts]
11th April 2014 - 12:23

like this
Like (10)

sfichele wrote:
Anyone else notice how the jacket guy hits his head really hard, and WASNT wearing a helmet?

I'm taking this as "proof" and counter argument to the usual anecdote garbage from some cyclists that have hit their head, but the helmet *definitely* saved their life

You MUST be seeing things.

However, you can't take it as proof. You can take it as part of evidence to support your case....

posted by Jimbonic [107 posts]
11th April 2014 - 12:56

like this
Like (11)

He isn't seeing anything, he's right.

To me it looks like he lands more on his upper back / neck area so debate that away helmet worshippers...

posted by northstar [1083 posts]
11th April 2014 - 12:58

like this
Like (8)

EDIT: deleted

posted by sfichele [96 posts]
11th April 2014 - 13:34

like this
Like (2)

Fucking prick filming everything like a cunt. Get a life.

posted by J90 [75 posts]
11th April 2014 - 19:44

like this
Like (6)

Maybe they were all going for KOMs. No one gets in the way of a KOM.

Jamespalmer100's picture

posted by Jamespalmer100 [4 posts]
11th April 2014 - 20:08

like this
Like (6)

Stupid video, common sense prevails, I live in Bridgwater, Somerset.
I ride a lot, generally most cars drive too fast and attitudes to cyclist is poor to aggressive. Regardless how you ride.
I cycle a main trunk road to work Bristol Road (every week people are hit off there, several in work have been knocked off, one hurt badly, the driver didn't stop and was never caught) its a death trap for cyclists, as is Taunton Road. The pavement is usually the only safe place...
The more aggressive you are as a rider or positive, the safer you are, I always wear a helmet, ride with a bright yellow reflective jacket and lights and still get swiped( I don't mean generally aggressive)
I'm not going to be bait or a statistic.

Mark

posted by gin23deluxe [4 posts]
11th April 2014 - 21:12

like this
Like (3)

Stupid video, common sense prevails, I live in Bridgwater, Somerset.
I ride a lot, generally most cars drive too fast and attitudes to cyclist is poor to aggressive. Regardless how you ride.
I cycle a main trunk road to work Bristol Road (every week people are hit off there, several in work have been knocked off, one hurt badly, the driver didn't stop and was never caught) its a death trap for cyclists, as is Taunton Road. The pavement is usually the only safe place...
The more aggressive you are as a rider or positive, the safer you are, I always wear a helmet, ride with a bright yellow reflective jacket and lights and still get swiped( I don't mean generally aggressive)
I'm not going to be bait or a statistic.
So bollox to gentlemanly conduct, you jeopodise my safety you be getting it
Mark

posted by gin23deluxe [4 posts]
11th April 2014 - 21:16

like this
Like (2)

Salmoning - wrong-way cycling has become widespread. It's stupid and dangerous. I'm quite happy for the Police to stop any stupidity by cyclists, but they mustn't just focus on cyclists. They need to pull and prosecute all those incompetent-dangerous drivers out there.

Having recently seen a TV programme about drivers who have obtained a licence other than by the traditional and official route - education, training, and examination, but instead via deception / impersonation etc., I would like to see all motorists involved in traffic violations subjected to compulsory testing.
This might explain why I encounter so many utterly clueless-incompetent drivers out there.

posted by Recumbenteer [142 posts]
12th April 2014 - 9:19

like this
Like (1)

zzzzz

posted by northstar [1083 posts]
12th April 2014 - 9:27

like this
Like (3)

Brilliant! It's like a crazy urban circus and certainly like any day on the streets of Bristol.

-- Hey, how many gears have you got? .. Just one! ... Mate, your bike sucks! --

brylonscamel's picture

posted by brylonscamel [20 posts]
12th April 2014 - 16:48

like this
Like (8)

On a positive note, it's great to see so many people choosing to get around by bike. If 1 RLJing pavement cyclist = 1 less car that can only be considered a good thing. Lets not get too distracted by minor infringments of the law.

posted by Matt eaton [301 posts]
14th April 2014 - 13:58

like this
Like (3)

KnightBiker wrote:
This person should not go to Amsterdam, there almost all cyclists run red lights, ride against traffic, call on their mobile while cycling etc, pedestrians run lights here also. The big thing is you have to be more liberal: what point is there in waiting for a red light when there's no traffic? what point is there against riding on the footpath to steal a light while not posing any dangers or hindrance.

The real and only point of traffic rules is to make traffic safe and flowing, the person who makes this video's his grievances are only in his head, because in most cases no danger or hindrance was caused.

Also: in Holland most one way traffic streets are only one way for cars, not for cyclist: the same rules can apply on streets in england also

The difference is that cyclists who do these things annoy me, but they don't kill me.

You live in Amsterdam? Where would one go to get a reasonably cheap flat (one that doesn't have cockroaches)?

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning' (Henry Ford)

cyclingDMlondon's picture

posted by cyclingDMlondon [203 posts]
16th April 2014 - 13:42

like this
Like (4)