[Stef Marazzi]

Lots of the definitions seems to encompass a lot of the anti-cycling posts you see on forums, or read on Facebook/see on Daily Mail comments. I wondered what others opinions were.

 

Would getting it recognised as a hate crime make it a lot less acceptable to close pass cyclists?

 

 

Topic

[hawkinspeter]

darrenleroy wrote:

I ‘hate’ the concept of a hate crime. We have perfectly good laws in place (or we can make them) without resorting to little more than penalising subjective thought and expression. Let’s not worry about calling people names; let’s worry about catching and preventing those who cause bodily harm. 

It’s a tricky issue.

On the one hand, hate crimes depend on the motive of the criminal and thus is akin to a thought-crime.

On the other hand, it can be tricky for vulnerable groups to get sufficient protection from the law. Hate crimes are more difficult to investigate due to the lack of a non-hate motive (e.g. pre-existing argument between victim and attacker) and can be more difficult to prosecute if the juries feel sympathetic with the “hating” of the victim.

Personally, I think that the concept of hate crimes is needed and that cyclists should be considered a vulnerable group.

 

[darrenleroy]

I ‘hate’ the concept of a

I ‘hate’ the concept of a hate crime. We have perfectly good laws in place (or we can make them) without resorting to little more than penalising subjective thought and expression. Let’s not worry about calling people names; let’s worry about catching and preventing those who cause bodily harm. 

[hawkinspeter]

brooksby wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2018/may/11/theyre-out-to-get-you-study-finds-cyclists-face-paranoia-about-drivers

I read that article.  Surely riding as if they’re out to get you (ie. riding defensively) is not the same as actually believing that they’re out to get you?

The study was about people’s reported paranoia levels rather than their behaviour. So, although cyclists reported lower general paranoia (i.e. trait paranoia), they reported higher paranoia whilst cycling (i.e. state paranoia). In contrast, the underground users reported less paranoia whilst travelling, but had a higher general paranoia.

And yes, riding defensively doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re feeling frightened.

[brooksby]

hawkinspeter wrote:

It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2018/may/11/theyre-out-to-get-you-study-finds-cyclists-face-paranoia-about-drivers

I read that article.  Surely riding as if they’re out to get you (ie. riding defensively) is not the same as actually believing that they’re out to get you?

[hawkinspeter]

It’s not paranoia if they

It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2018/may/11/theyre-out-to-get-you-study-finds-cyclists-face-paranoia-about-drivers

 

[brooksby]

don simon wrote:

brooksby wrote:

fatsmoker wrote:

Much of the anger in the media is aimed at people on bikes riding on the paths, RLJ-ing etc.  As readers here will know few ‘cyclists’ do those things, but they seem to get the majority of the road rage, possibly because they wear lycra, hence the MAMIL term and because they ride two abreast, blocking the road.  The whingers tar everyone with the same brush. 

A definition of who is hated would be difficult – the lady on Dutch bike going to the shop, the newspaper delivery boy, the kids on their BMXs, or just the MAMILs? 

 I’d say just the MAMILs. 

IIRC a Bristol Post article recently had a comment below it where the commenter said they didn’t know what was sadder – the death of the cyclist, or the fact that a 57 year old man (again, IIRC) was riding a bicycle.

Many people think you have to get a car once you’re a grown-up, and that bikes are just children’s toys.  They don’t see someone using an efficient form of urban transport, they see some stupid f-ing man(or woman) child riding a kid’s toy.

That is the attitude that needs to change (and probably never will…).

But pretending to be Lewis Hamilton is OK?

C’mon – you know that wasn’t what I was saying! ​ 

On your particular point, I’d blame car adverts – speeding through an empty urban environment with occasional pedestrians but no other cars, buses, etc, or speedign through an empty country road in glorious sunshine.  People (some people) think they can do that in real life…

[Anonymous]

Fifth Gear wrote:

srchar wrote:

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

…but should you control / moderate those looking to control / polarise the emotions in others? 

Freedom of speech / incitement… its a fine line. 

Hey look, you certainly couldn’t publically talk about killing black people the way people are happy to say they’d happily kill a cyclist… so what gives? 

Incitement: “Kill all cyclists!”.  Not incitement: “Bloody cyclists wearing stupid clothes, jumping red lights, causing congestion, no insurance, no road tax!”  – seems quite clear to me.  And I don’t think “people” [i]are[/i] happy to say they’d “happily kill a cyclist”.  It’s certainly not something I’ve read, even when sorting Daily Mail comments by “Best Rated”.

Cyclists as a “group” aren’t currently dogpiled with people looking to make mileage out of claiming victimhood on our behalf – and I’m quite happy about that. 

 

Some comments on my YouTube channel:

Sam Sam 2 weeks ago · 
The Biker should die.. annoying Cunts.. running away all talk then calls the police.. coward.. guess in ur Bike then

Gregor Eisenhorn 2 weeks ago · 
My god the cyclist is truly a little cunt. Wish he’d got battered.

jack duggan 1 month ago · 
Make the bloke in the car right. You can tell that cyclist is the type of cunt who calls the police at any given chance. People laugh but in London cyclists are fucking arseholes who think that the road is all for them. Should of ran the little prick over

Bob Smith 1 month ago · 
Could possibly be the best video I’ve ever seen, could only get bet if the patronising, annoying cunt of a cyclist got severely injured aswell

Ian Macbeth 1 month ago · 
Somebody needs to kick the shit out of this fucking irritating cyclist cunt. I wish the bloke in the car had beat the shit out of the cunt.

I could go on…….
 

I blame Mr. Bingo.

https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/may-2013/new-hate-mail-from-mr-bingo/

If you’re going to host that sort of thing on your Youtube channel you should make a rule saying that their communications must either be witty, original or so full of hate that they surpass all previous hatred in the hateful annals of hating. Anything but the dull-witted, predictable crap shown.

 

[Fifth Gear]

srchar wrote:

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

…but should you control / moderate those looking to control / polarise the emotions in others? 

Freedom of speech / incitement… its a fine line. 

Hey look, you certainly couldn’t publically talk about killing black people the way people are happy to say they’d happily kill a cyclist… so what gives? 

Incitement: “Kill all cyclists!”.  Not incitement: “Bloody cyclists wearing stupid clothes, jumping red lights, causing congestion, no insurance, no road tax!”  – seems quite clear to me.  And I don’t think “people” [i]are[/i] happy to say they’d “happily kill a cyclist”.  It’s certainly not something I’ve read, even when sorting Daily Mail comments by “Best Rated”.

Cyclists as a “group” aren’t currently dogpiled with people looking to make mileage out of claiming victimhood on our behalf – and I’m quite happy about that. 

 

Some comments on my YouTube channel:

Sam Sam 2 weeks ago · 
The Biker should die.. annoying Cunts.. running away all talk then calls the police.. coward.. guess in ur Bike then

Gregor Eisenhorn 2 weeks ago · 
My god the cyclist is truly a little cunt. Wish he’d got battered.

jack duggan 1 month ago · 
Make the bloke in the car right. You can tell that cyclist is the type of cunt who calls the police at any given chance. People laugh but in London cyclists are fucking arseholes who think that the road is all for them. Should of ran the little prick over

Bob Smith 1 month ago · 
Could possibly be the best video I’ve ever seen, could only get bet if the patronising, annoying cunt of a cyclist got severely injured aswell

Ian Macbeth 1 month ago · 
Somebody needs to kick the shit out of this fucking irritating cyclist cunt. I wish the bloke in the car had beat the shit out of the cunt.

I could go on…….
 

[tarquin_foxglove]

Paul_C wrote:

Paul_C wrote:

2011 Censur had a question (41) about how you usually travel to work and bicycle was an option

https://census.ukdataservice.ac.uk/media/50966/2011_england_household.pdf

I was thinking more:

Q.16 What is your ethnic group?
E Other ethnic group
Any other ethnic group, write in

& people put cyclist.

Q.20 What is your religion?
blah
blah
Any other religion, write in

& people put cyclist.

[srchar]

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

…but should you control / moderate those looking to control / polarise the emotions in others? 

Freedom of speech / incitement… its a fine line. 

Hey look, you certainly couldn’t publically talk about killing black people the way people are happy to say they’d happily kill a cyclist… so what gives? 

Incitement: “Kill all cyclists!”.  Not incitement: “Bloody cyclists wearing stupid clothes, jumping red lights, causing congestion, no insurance, no road tax!”  – seems quite clear to me.  And I don’t think “people” [i]are[/i] happy to say they’d “happily kill a cyclist”.  It’s certainly not something I’ve read, even when sorting Daily Mail comments by “Best Rated”.

Cyclists as a “group” aren’t currently dogpiled with people looking to make mileage out of claiming victimhood on our behalf – and I’m quite happy about that. 

brooksby wrote:

Many people think you have to get a car once you’re a grown-up, and that bikes are just children’s toys.  They don’t see someone using an efficient form of urban transport, they see some stupid f-ing man(or woman) child riding a kid’s toy.

That is the attitude that needs to change (and probably never will…).

I don’t think this is a given anymore, although there is certainly a polarisation of views, between those who don’t see a car as a status symbol – or want their car to project their environmental conciousness (whether the reality of manufacturing LiPo batteries matches the image or not), and those who simply have to have the latest Audi/Merc (painted white, obviously) with a stupid exhaust, driven through residential areas as though the pedals are simple on/off switches.

Attitudes are changing.  The politicians are always years behind the curve.

[don simon fbpe]

brooksby wrote:

fatsmoker wrote:

Much of the anger in the media is aimed at people on bikes riding on the paths, RLJ-ing etc.  As readers here will know few ‘cyclists’ do those things, but they seem to get the majority of the road rage, possibly because they wear lycra, hence the MAMIL term and because they ride two abreast, blocking the road.  The whingers tar everyone with the same brush. 

A definition of who is hated would be difficult – the lady on Dutch bike going to the shop, the newspaper delivery boy, the kids on their BMXs, or just the MAMILs? 

 I’d say just the MAMILs. 

IIRC a Bristol Post article recently had a comment below it where the commenter said they didn’t know what was sadder – the death of the cyclist, or the fact that a 57 year old man (again, IIRC) was riding a bicycle.

Many people think you have to get a car once you’re a grown-up, and that bikes are just children’s toys.  They don’t see someone using an efficient form of urban transport, they see some stupid f-ing man(or woman) child riding a kid’s toy.

That is the attitude that needs to change (and probably never will…).

But pretending to be Lewis Hamilton is OK?

[brooksby]

fatsmoker wrote:

Much of the anger in the media is aimed at people on bikes riding on the paths, RLJ-ing etc.  As readers here will know few ‘cyclists’ do those things, but they seem to get the majority of the road rage, possibly because they wear lycra, hence the MAMIL term and because they ride two abreast, blocking the road.  The whingers tar everyone with the same brush. 

A definition of who is hated would be difficult – the lady on Dutch bike going to the shop, the newspaper delivery boy, the kids on their BMXs, or just the MAMILs? 

 I’d say just the MAMILs. 

IIRC a Bristol Post article recently had a comment below it where the commenter said they didn’t know what was sadder – the death of the cyclist, or the fact that a 57 year old man (again, IIRC) was riding a bicycle.

Many people think you have to get a car once you’re a grown-up, and that bikes are just children’s toys.  They don’t see someone using an efficient form of urban transport, they see some stupid f-ing man(or woman) child riding a kid’s toy.

That is the attitude that needs to change (and probably never will…).

[fatsmoker]

Much of the anger in the

Much of the anger in the media is aimed at people on bikes riding on the paths, RLJ-ing etc.  As readers here will know few ‘cyclists’ do those things, but they seem to get the majority of the road rage, possibly because they wear lycra, hence the MAMIL term and because they ride two abreast, blocking the road.  The whingers tar everyone with the same brush. 

A definition of who is hated would be difficult – the lady on Dutch bike going to the shop, the newspaper delivery boy, the kids on their BMXs, or just the MAMILs? 

 I’d say just the MAMILs. 

[kil0ran]

Yep, hate crime. On the basis

Yep, hate crime. On the basis of the GMP response to the Sophie Lancaster murder case

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sophie_Lancaster

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/victory-mum-tragic-sophie-lancaster-2511011

Pretty sure the case could be argued that “bloody cyclists” are an alternative group. 

Be interesting to hear if any Manchester area cyclists have tried this approach.

[Paul_C]

tarquin_foxglove wrote:

Bob’sbikes wrote:

I seem to remember someone on here suggesting that everybody put cyclist in the relevent box the next time a national census form comes round.

What a great idea!  Let’s do it. We’ve 3 years to get organised.

 

2011 Censur had a question (41) about how you usually travel to work and bicycle was an option

https://census.ukdataservice.ac.uk/media/50966/2011_england_household.pdf

 

[Author]

Replies