Hertfordshire Police have released a video to warn of the dangers of a car-swerving ‘game’. It focuses on Paul Belcher who was involved in a collision in October last year.
Sergeant Leah McDermott from the Borehamwood Safer Neighbourhood Team pointed out that drivers faced with an impending collision are likely to try and take evasive action, which could lead to an incident in itself.
“This so-called ‘game’ just doesn’t make sense. Those who attempt to swerve in front of cars are not only putting themselves in real danger, but also those in the vehicles.”
Belcher’s mum, Lesley, said that she learned her son had been involved in a collision after his friend posted the footage to Instagram.
“When he walked through the door and looked at me, I just thought ‘you’re so stupid’. I can’t… I just genuinely can’t believe how stupid you are.”
The driver slowed sufficiently that Paul escaped with just severe bruising, but his bike was destroyed. “He needed a new bike, but he didn’t get one,” said Lesley. “He’s going to have to earn himself a new bike.”
McDermott thanked Lesley for appearing in the film, adding: “This is not a game you want to play. You versus a car – you are not going to come off best.”
89 thoughts on “Video: Police release footage highlighting danger of cyclists’ car-swerving ‘game’”
I’m beginning to think Darwin
I’m beginning to think Darwin’s death was actually just a cover up…
I’ve seen this video before,
I’ve seen this video before, yes the kids a dick. but he’s right in front of the car for a significant period of time and the car driver drivers straight into him it’s not like he swerved in front at the last second. It’s that sort of self entitlement that landed CA in prison for 18 months. There any number of reasons somebody could end up in the wrong lane it doesn’t mean a motorist should do nothing to avoid a collision, it’s a kid FFS.
Housecathst wrote:
Don’t think you can say that, no one expects a kid to purposely ride into you path.
DF9 wrote:
I’ve seen this video before, yes the kids a dick. but he’s right in front of the car for a significant period of time and the car driver drivers straight into him it’s not like he swerved in front at the last second. It’s that sort of self entitlement that landed CA in prison for 18 months. There any number of reasons somebody could end up in the wrong lane it doesn’t mean a motorist should do nothing to avoid a collision, it’s a kid FFS.
— DF9 Don’t think you can say that, no one expects a kid to purposely ride into you path.— Housecathst
on purposely, by mistake, it doesn’t matter if your going to hit somebody you stop. Cyclist have been sent to prison for anything less.
Housecathst wrote:
Care to provide an example ?
HurdyGurdy wrote:
Charlie Alliston, he had no brake I hear you cry!
He was found not guilty of man slaughter and only guilty of W&F. Read the judges comments,
“On your own evidence by this stage you weren’t even trying to slow or stop. You expected her to get out of your way. Thus I make it clear that it was not merely the absence of a front brake but your whole manner of riding that caused this accident.“
and how about the Highway Code,
“The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident.”
This motorist could have stop but didn’t and contribute too the incident. If the kid and fallen on there head and die do you think the driver would have thought there was nothing they could have done, do you think they would have felt no guilt ?
Housecathst wrote:
Comparing someone willfully riding against traffic versus an accidental collision between a cyclist and distracted pedestrian. Nice shoehorning of some agenda, but totally different cases
HurdyGurdy wrote:
No you miss my point, I’m comparing mrs Briggs to your ferial child, and Charlie to the motorists. she will fully walked into his path. It was CA not bothering to stop which resulted in his conviction.
Also not that I’m matter in this case but the suggestion that mrs Briggs was on the phone at the time was withdrawn in court.
No comment on the Highway Code ?
HurdyGurdy wrote:
Clearly, but being stubborn isn’t usually considered a virtue.
For which they should be held to account. That does not mean they deserve to be seriously injured or killed or that a driver has the right to continue to drive at them when they are in a position not to.
Again, no-one is defending the
yobscyclists, that would be a straw man. We are pointing out that the driver was in a position to avoid the collision or at the very least minimise the impact, that they had a responsibility to do this and that for some reason (choice or incompetence), they didn’t do this.With respect to the vehicle they are using the [i]are[/i] vulnerable, especially when it comes to interactions with motorised vehicles.
Certainly, the other cyclists and pedestrians are [i]also[/i] vulnerable. Not so much the cars (or more accurately, the drivers of those cars).
I don’t have to be religious to have an expectation that drivers who have the very real potential to KSI me when I’m on a bicycle, not only recognise that potential, but also drive in a manner that respects that potential. Also, the
feralcyclist in no way endangered the driver in this video.Pudsey Pedaller wrote:
That ‘s your opinion. If the driver had to do an emergency stop or evasive maneuvre, the outcome could have been as dangerous. But keep defending the feral, go for it .
HurdyGurdy wrote:
Holding the driver responsible for failing to do enough to prevent the collision is not the same as excusing the lad from causing it. Constructing straw man arguments doesn’t strengthen your position and it doesn’t weaken mine.
The driver could have come to a safe and controlled stop in time shown in the footage, let alone given the extra time available from before the footage begins.
As for evasive manoeuvring, this would be a more compelling argument had the driver attempted to actually evade the cyclists instead of steering the vehicle toward them, either through choice or through incompetence.
HurdyGurdy wrote:
Describing them as feral isn’t making you seem particularly enlightened. It’s actually making you seem reactionary, biased and binary.
Kids following a movement dedicated to showing off on bikes (as opposed to much more antisocial behaviour) take over the roads for a few moments and a bunch of Hyacinth Buckets lay eggs over it: hilarious.
Personally I’d rather they took over the streets for longer periods than the death machines that they obstruct. The street in this particular video is residential – I’d much rather live in a neighbourhood with streets full of kids pulling wheelies and pratting about as opposed to adult drivers on phones squashing pets, and occasionally kids, and polluting the air.
davel wrote:
I bet you want to join in with them, but your wheelies aren’t good enough.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I bet you want to join in with them, but your wheelies aren’t good enough.
— davel
I can look out the window and dream, can’t I…? 🙂
davel wrote:
I bet you want to join in with them, but your wheelies aren’t good enough.
— hawkinspeter I can look out the window and dream, can’t I…? 🙂— davel
When I were a kid, we had BMX Bandits to aspire to. Not quite as cool as these guys.
DF9 wrote:
That’s because our chief weapon is surprise…surprise and fear…fear and surprise…. Our two weapons are fear and surprise…
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
…. and a fanatical devotion to the pope. Bring on the comfy chair!
DF9 wrote:
I’ve seen this video before, yes the kids a dick. but he’s right in front of the car for a significant period of time and the car driver drivers straight into him it’s not like he swerved in front at the last second. It’s that sort of self entitlement that landed CA in prison for 18 months. There any number of reasons somebody could end up in the wrong lane it doesn’t mean a motorist should do nothing to avoid a collision, it’s a kid FFS.
— DF9 Don’t think you can say that, no one expects a kid to purposely ride into you path.— Housecathst
yes they do. Anyone who’s ever been a kid knows they do stupid things, and anyone who’s seen kids doing stuff like this knows to stop and let them past. Continuing to drive when they saw this is criminally irresponsible in my opinion.
Housecathst wrote:
Stupid people (kids included) eventually get their dues and leave this world prematurely. It’s not up to the rest of us to help them survive.
As for this kid, he was wheelying in the path of an oncoming car for some time, he could have moved but chose not to, got what he deserved.
bikeman01 wrote:
yeah, tell that to Kim Briggs….
Housecathst wrote:
She wasn’t entirely blameless. She like many glued to her phone din’t look when stepping into the road. Like I said stupid people…
bikeman01 wrote:
If we’re in a position to help, then yes, it is, especially when it comes to kids.
Pudsey Pedaller wrote:
If we’re in a position to help, then yes, it is, especially when it comes to kids.— bikeman01
Not with these kids who already lost any sense of respect. I gladly protect innocent kids but not these packs of ferals.
HurdyGurdy wrote:
judge, jury and executioner. You’re no better than Ian Brady.
ConcordeCX wrote:
if that makes you happy sure, not going to change my opinion – i see this ferals in action almost weekly on my commute, they will do this to unsuspecting motorists, toursists on pavements and other cyclists giving litte time to respond on busy london roads.
I can’t believe the cycling community here has evolved into a group defending these yobs.
HurdyGurdy wrote:
as opposed to people like you who want to kill children because they don’t show you enough respect.
ConcordeCX wrote:
if kids start throwing themselves willfully in front of cars , then it might be an unintended consequence. I am not going out planning to kill them though if that is what you are implying
HurdyGurdy wrote:
you describe them as
Geraldferal,you don’t think the drivers should stop their cars, and you think they deserve what they get. That’s not ‘unintended consequences’, that’s planning to kill children you don’t like who get in your way.Edit: feral, not Gerald!
HurdyGurdy wrote:
Dehumanising these kids in order to justify not trying to protect them from harm is the same kind of attitude many drivers exhibit when they decide to put cyclists at risk.
In the same way that I want drivers to see me as a person, I would hope others could see these kids as people and not just a ‘pack of ferals’. Likewise, just because the kids have chosen to act in a way that makes them more vulnerable, does not mean they deserve to be injured or killed any more than I do because I have chosen a mode of transport that makes me more vulnerable.
Pudsey Pedaller wrote:
I will do so if they start showing respect again – they are not vulnerable, the people they are doing these acts against are the vulnerable ones. Accompany me on a nice evening cycle ride in London one night, these ferals are doing it to cars, pedestrians and other cyclists.
Let’s see if you going to be all so holier than the pope when they hit someone close to you.
bikeman01 wrote:
He was wheelying in the path of an oncoming motorist, not a car. The car is just a thing, it’s the driver who made the decision to continue driving toward the cyclist.
And no, he got far more than he deserved. What he deserves is a bollocking for being stupid – not injuries for riding into a motorist who decided he wasn’t going to slow down or change his course.
bikeman01 wrote:
Then why do we print “do not drink” on bottles of bleach?
zanf wrote:
Because bleach isn’t for drinking?
zanf wrote:
Stupid people (kids included) eventually get their dues and leave this world prematurely. It’s not up to the rest of us to help them survive.
— bikeman01 Then why do we print “do not drink” on bottles of bleach?— Housecathst
I think most kids would know that being hit by a car is going to hurt. so cars don’t need labels. With bottole of bleach it’s not quite so obvious so they have a warning.
Too stupid to take notice, you get what you deserve.
It’s a shame the little sod wasn’t hurt, it might have knocked some sense into him. As it is I expect he’s just revellling in his brief notoriety.
bikeman01 wrote:
You never do anything a bit daft when you were a teenager? You never feel a bit susceptible to peer pressure?
Was it filmed and put on social media, for people you’ll never meet to suggest you deserve to be hit by a car for it?
Interesting that you refer to ‘little sod’, on the bike? Why not ‘big sod in the car who doesn’t know when to stop’?
There’s your bias.
bikeman01 wrote:
Saw some stupid sh*t doing this a few weeks ago on tower bridge – driver had no means of taking evasive action as there is nowhere to go
Kid got everything he deserved, those blaming the driver let’s see what you are going to do when idiots like this swerve around your car.
bikeman01 wrote:
As it happens I’d say he did, through luck not judgement, get about what he deserved – i.e. a trashed bike and a stint as a pedestrian. The God of random chance seems to have called that one about right. The trouble is the ouctome could have been worse, and the event doesn’t give me much confidence in the driver’s reflexes or attitude.
Housecathst wrote:
It’s worse than that. I looked at it again and the driver appears to swerve AT the cyclists prior to the collision, so far as to even cross over the centre line. Yes the cyclists are behaving in a stupid manner, but the car driver appears to retaliate inappropriately.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-41849928/dangerous-game
Shock news! Teenagers behave
Shock news! Teenagers behave like teenagers. At least they weren’t twocing cars and driving like that.
Lots of people that age take risks, it’s part of growing up, rebelling against authority. The only thing that makes this newsworthy is that they did it on bikes, which I’m sure every cyclist finds rather annoying as it gives the drivers yet another stick to beat us with. Hopefully the lad has learned his lesson and has a slightly more realistic awareness of risk.
Did anyone else notice the illegally parked car causing danger half on the pavement at the junction in the background while the policewoman is talking? I wonder if she did anything about it?
I have to concur with the
I have to concur with the other comments here.
I would not do this, but when I was young I did do other stupid things.
What I have never done, as both a young or mature driver, is to drive towards a kid on a bicycle like that driver did.
Also it is shameful that our kids don’t have safe places and segregated onfrastructure so that they can explore their environment safely on a bicycle.
Ramz wrote:
wow do you really believe these kids play chicken on the roads because they don’t have a park? Get real, they do it because of peer pressure and for excitement. If they weren’t doing this they’d be leaping in front of trains or something else equally dangerous. Stupid people do stupid things, a bit of infrastructure will never change that.
Anyone with any sense isn’t
Anyone with any sense isn’t going to continue driving with a silly kid wheelying toward them.
Leaving aside any possible prosecution (however unlikely) – nobody should want to hit a bike – fixing your bonnet is going to be £100s.
The kid was immensely stupid
The kid was immensely stupid for doing what he did and he was lucky to come away only walking wounded. Unfortunately, teenagers and adolescents take risks that other age groups wouldn’t; it’s part of growing up. That’s not to excuse their actions, but it does mean that if you see them behaving in risk-taking behaviour, you have a responsibility to do what you can to reduce that risk, not add to it. This is especially true if you are in control of a vehicle that has the very real potential to kill another human being.
However, the driver doesn’t appear to take any kind of evasive action despite the group of young cyclists obviously not cycling in a safe manner. As has already been mentioned, the cyclist by no means swerved into the driver’s path at the last second.
There’s also the fact the car is positioned against the centre white line as the video begins despite one of the other cyclists riding on and even slightly over the white line.
Finally, as the cyclist is hit, you can see the car is actually pointing toward the oncoming lane, not toward the kerb as you would expect if they were trying to avoid a collision.
I’m not suggesting the driver deliberately aimed for the cyclist, only that their hazard perception is so woefully lacking that they’d surely fail that part of the theory test. That would mean their driving fell below the standard expected of a competent driver which in turn means that this was careless driving at the very least.
Also, this behaviour should be considered a ‘game’ only in the same way hunting can be considered a ‘sport’.
Why didn’t the car stop?
Why didn’t the car stop?
And where did plod find the resources for this video?
When are we going to get the piss poor driver being singled out in a plod video?
don simon wrote:
Quite (and seven also makes the point). On the many occasions that a driver has overtaken me into oncoming traffic at far higher speeds than the kid here, I’ve yet to experience the oncoming driver not being able to stop or slow down sufficiently to avoid a collision. Pudsey Pedaller’s observation that the driver turns to the offside is also baffling (the action not PP’s point).
Most of all though, when adults (the driver) behave as badly as that kid, you know something is seriously wrong with their maturity.
don simon wrote:
Having being on the end of Herts ‘finest’ too often I’m shocked as to where they found the resources because they’ll do fuck all when it’s people on bikes being cut up, driven at, assaulted, hit and run etc and will stoop so low as to harass the victim of assault and pervert the course of justice so that the person acting out the assault gets off.
They have such integrity that an inspector will blow you off without any notice (literally turned up and no-one at the station so had to phone the command centre) when you turn up to resolve a complaint because you aren’t prepared to turn up at an unmanned station at 10pm instead!
You’ll also get the chief inspector protecting her minions and spouting bullshit to try to explain away their unlawful/criminal acts.
But yeah, we can spend time and money on something like this, fucking wankers!
As for the bullshit about the skull being like an eggshell, just lol, it’s not, it offers more protective qualities than a cycle helmet for a start off.
The most upsetting thing
The most upsetting thing about this video is the thought that these kids will trade in their bikes for cars and be granted driving licences in just a few short years time.
The wee nyaff got his just
The wee nyaff got his just desserts but the “on a bike you’re not insured” line is trotted out by the mother, and she actually praises the driver who clearly could’ve stopped but didn’t. The level of societal conditioning involved in inculcating such a stance is stupendous. People have so little perspective it beggars belief.
seven wrote:
Human beings have an unfortunate tendency towards power-worship, it’s why fascism is an ever-present possibility (see also the return of one of our unimaginative trolls on this thread – I wonder if he was aroused from standby-mode by LBC, which shows no sign of reigning in its 24/7 petrol-head anti-cycling hate campaign)
The driver was obviously
The driver was obviously allready distracted by the advanced guard of morons and the little dick at the back got what he deserved.You have to laugh as he desperately trys to steer his bike out of the way when hes pulling a wheely.No sympathey here at all.
john1967 wrote:
Best teach the little shit with a couple of tons of car, here’s hoping the little scrote doesn’t go on to become a bus driver or HGV driver after having been taught that might is right. Apologies as there isn’t a slow clap emoticon.
Fuckwit. Shame he got off so
Fuckwit. Shame he got off so lightly.
These morons aren’t “cyclists”. They aren’t representative of anyone who visits this website. They’re dicks looking for a reaction.
Is there another longer clip
Is there another longer clip to watch?
There are comments about why she didn’t stop, but where did the bike appear from? Off the pavement, from behind the dash cam car? I didn’t see anything that showed where the lad came from.
hirsute wrote:
Yeah, there was a longer clip, probably found on the older article on this foolish child meeting a dangerous driver. The kid was in the other lane for a while before the collision.
I can appreciate what this police video was trying to achieve, but they used a completely inappropriate example which mostly shows a dangerous driver… Or, is driving into oncoming cyclists merely careless these days?
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Nice history rewriting going on
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Thanks for that.
You can drive on the wrong side of the road round a bend and hit a cyclist who has fallen off and get away with it if you are a female doctor (can’t remember the name).
hirsute wrote:
who cares – he is an idiot who got what he deserved
Driver decides to play
Driver decides to play chicken, despite the kid obviously having no use of the front brake or steering.
Kid is an idiot, that said there were some truly shocking examples in the intro montage of cyclists actually swerving at cars which does not appear to be the case in the collision. Very hard to swerve with front wheel off the floor.
Also the wheelie on the roundabout was very impressive.
I tried to watch the video
I tried to watch the video but the backing music was unbearable. You wouldn’t have backing music during a lecture or a public meeting so why does this video need it?
Killer driver Helen Measures
Killer driver Helen Measures
ktache wrote:
ktache wrote:
Thanks.
I don’t see how anyone could
I don’t see how anyone could condone the reckless behaviour of these, clearly feral, kids.
Yet so many on this forum appear to be solely blaming the driver for the collision. I have seen no more of the footage than is included on this page, so I have no idea whether we saw the start of the encounter with this gang of youths, or whether there had also been other earlier intimidation. We also cannot see what is happening behind the view point of the camera (which was being carried by another member of the gang). Were there other riders behind the holder of the camera? If there were, what were they doing, and where were they on the road?
It has been suggested that the driver was culpable because they did not stop sooner, and also appeared to turn to the centre of the road at the last moment as the collison occured. The camera angle is not helpful, but it seems to me that the rider of the bike was close to the kerb for much of the clip and veered suddenly (out of control apparently) to his left towards the centre of the road, at the same time as the motorist, who was then left with no other course to avoid the collision.
Why did the motorist slow down, but not stop? I don’t know, although in similar circumstances, if it looked initially as if the oncoming bike was going to pass by on the near-side, then I might be reluctant to come to a complete halt amongst a gang of apparently lawless thugs, unless I absolutely had to.
I hope I’m never put in such a situation.
No Sweat wrote:
If you are reluctant to come to a complete halt (stop is much easier to say), then I suggest that you hand your licence in immediately. it is not your job as a driver to choose who you do or don’t run over based on your prejudices or fears.
don simon wrote:
don simon, you forgot to highlight the references to the lads being part of a gang.
No Sweat, I haven’t seen anyone ‘solely blaming the driver for the collision’, though they have held the driver responsible for their part in the collision, or more accurately failing to prevent it. Only one of the two vehicles involved in the collision has the potential to cause real harm to the occupant of the other. Regardless of the actions of the cyclist, the driver had a responsibility to not collide with them if possible. Even given the limited footage, it seems clear that stopping much sooner would have prevented a collision, or at least minimised the risk. The driver for whatever reason chose not to do this.
Pudsey Pedaller wrote:
If you are reluctant to come to a complete halt (stop is much easier to say), then I suggest that you hand your licence in immediately. it is not your job as a driver to choose who you do or don’t run over based on your prejudices or fears.
— don simon don simon, you forgot to highlight the references to the lads being part of a gang. No Sweat, I haven’t seen anyone ‘solely blaming the driver for the collision’, though they have held the driver responsible for their part in the collision, or more accurately failing to prevent it. Only one of the two vehicles involved in the collision has the potential to cause real harm to the occupant of the other. Regardless of the actions of the cyclist, the driver had a responsibility to not collide with them if possible. Even given the limited footage, it seems clear that stopping much sooner would have prevented a collision, or at least minimised the risk. The driver for whatever reason chose not to do this.— No Sweat
I decided that gang was ambiguous enough to be left out, but yes, maybe you’re right.
The driver was probaly a fellow Daily Mail reader, like no sweat, and was in fear for their life having read about the wild streets that are roamed by feral kids.
The fine upstanding lady (she was going to the theatre) that recently drove into me, once confronted about it, called me “people like you”, she couldn’t tell me what it meant. Perhaps no sweat could.
don simon wrote:
I don’t think we’ve ever met, how would I know?
No Sweat wrote:
My apologies, I wasn’t aware that you’d met the kids in the video.
No Sweat wrote:
Alas, as much as I enjoy road.cc, it has to be said that many here are so completely biased in their view that the cyclist is never at fault.
bikeman01 wrote:
I think the issue has less to do with the alleged bias of myself and the other commenters and more to do with your ability to read what we have written and view this objectively.
The driver had other, safer options. Either through choice or incompetence, they didn’t take those other options and in doing so they bear some (by no stretch, all) of the responsibility for the collision.
The kids were wrong and put themselves in a dangerous situation but that in no way means they deserve to be killed or seriously injured as some have suggested and it doesn’t mean this or any other driver is entitled to ignore their obligation to avoid a collision in order to deliver their own brand of ‘justice’.
bikeman01 wrote:
Absence of bias looks like bias to those whose own bias is so deeply-rooted they aren’t aware of it.
I don’t understand why the
I don’t understand why the motorist is being given a hard time here. I think I would be incredulous in the face of such reckless cycling. It’s not beyond the wit of most reasonable people to expect that a normal person will take the precautions necessary for their own safety, especially if they are a vulnerable road user.
if pedestrians started throwing themselves in front of your bike like lemmings you’d likely hit them unless you took the precaution of slowly cycling or breaking at the sight of one – which in a busy London Street would get you precisely nowhere. You’d no longer be a cyclist then.
the rules are there to protect road users. The car, as much as you don’t like it, has a ‘right of way’ and should not be held hostage to any other road user.
i doubt very much that the car driver wanted their car damaged, and even less to hurt the cyclist. I would guess that they did slow their car, but couldn’t quite believe what was happening.
Colin Peyresourde wrote:
yeah, you need to read the Highway Code again.
“The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident.”
Did the motorist follow this or not ?
Colin Peyresourde wrote:
It’s far from clear to me how the driver’s behaviour was any better than Alliston’s. So why shouldn’t they be subject to the same criticism, and indeed prosecution?
Colin Peyresourde wrote:
Your comment unavoidably brings to mind the Aliston case, though. Where’s the police reconstruction to estimate car braking distances in this one?
The main difference [other than the seriousness of the outcome of course] seems to be what was in the mind of the vulnerable road-user – the deliberate stupidity of a young male vs the distracted multi-tasking of an adult. I’m not sure how important that difference is.
You’re all being too harsh on
You’re all being too harsh on the driver, they probably tried to help the kid on the bike.
There’s obviously no kudos if you miss the car by miles, so the driver recognising this, tried to make this GTA loving kid look awesome and become the envy of his peers.
Sadly the kid forgot to put god mode on and ended up wasted. Oh well.
This is a different
This is a different perspective of what the kids are doing; it’s the only piece on this ‘game’ that actually tries to understand them, rather than just tell them off.
Telling them off ain’t gonna work btw…
http://www.huckmagazine.com/ride/bikes/bikestormz-movement-cycling-bikelife-survival-london/
scouser_andy wrote:
thanks for this, it’s very interesting. I see a lot of these Bikestormz. I didn’t know they had a name, I’ve thought of them and described them as bike swarms, or something like Critical Mass, which the article also refers to. Also rather like the mass motorcycle gangs of the 60s, or the Mods, making those of a nervous disposition clutch their pearls and call for military service and the return of hanging because they’re being inconvenienced briefly in their Austins.
ConcordeCX wrote:
It’s always good to be able to read beyond the headline and see the underlying story.
That’s not what the article seems to imply:
“I like the scars. I can’t lie: it just makes me want to go faster.”
Some will wear their scars as badges of honour. It’s possible being featured in a near 7-minute video produced by Hertfordshire Constabulary has earned Paul Belcher some misplaced kudos (though having his mum featured may have undone all of that).
While I’d agree that being killed or so seriously injured so as to prevent them getting on a bike again would put a stop to their behaviour (on an individual level), it is not the responsibility of the driver to hasten this outcome.
scouser_andy wrote:
A few of them run over by a van, taxi, bus or full laden car will though.
The last load of teenagers who learnt the hard way are now adults. They use to play a game where they would suddenly decide to cross the road in front of a vehicle so the vehicle had to do an emergency stop, they would then proceed to walk really really slowly across the road. Unfortunately a few of them decided doing it in front of a bus or van was a good idea but found that they got run over.
Oh and gangs of teenagers in London and other UK cities are scary as historically they have used the cover of being in a gang to steal things including bikes.
On a wet Monday morning,
On a wet Monday morning, reading the comments of mouth breathers jumping on a moral panic about – Horror! Kids Pulling Wheelies On Roads! has cheered me up no end, and made me thankful that my adolescence never overlapped for long with such joyless, narrow-minded saps.
Much appreciated – thanks.
ps Don – loving your work on this thread.
scouser_andy wrote:
Thanks for that, I’ll have a proper read later. Very insightful.
don simon wrote:
This is a different perspective of what the kids are doing; it’s the only piece on this ‘game’ that actually tries to understand them, rather than just tell them off.
Telling them off ain’t gonna work btw…
http://www.huckmagazine.com/ride/bikes/bikestormz-movement-cycling-bikelife-survival-london/
— don simon Thanks for that, I’ll have a proper read later. Very insightful.— scouser_andy
Very insightful indeed. I think “Knives Down Bikes Up” is a slogan we can (hopefully) all agree on.
I see a lot of this near where I work (Wythenshawe) which is one of the most deprived areas in Manchester – in fact in the country. Pulling idiotic wheelie stunts is definitely better than puling a knife (or a baseball bat – see link below) on somebody.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/teenage-boy-fighting-life-serious-14292337
That said, it seems a fairly popular stunt in more affluent neighbourhoods too.
Natural selection in action!
Natural selection in action! This is biology class material
Knives Down! Wheels Up!
Knives Down! Wheels Up!
Nothing new here.
Nothing new here.
Many years ago, a friend of mine had some kid bounce off his bonnet while driving along a dual-carriageway part of the A4 in Slough. Bunch of kids playing a “game” of trying to cycle the wrong way on the line between lanes 1 and 2 – i.e. between 2 lanes of approaching cars – to see how far they could get. When he reported it, the police told him it was a regular thing and they were trying to crack down on it.
Well thank you davel…
Well thank you davel…
I’m sorry that I’m so late to
I’m sorry that I’m so late to this particular party, but I’ve (finally) had a chance to watch the video. Truly hate the whooosh!: here’s Hertfordshire COnstabulary beginning
Anyway, so there’s a group of kids being twats in a residential road, not a major A road or anything as far As I can see, and some of them are pulling wheelies.
Am I missing something? If there’s a horde of feral teenagers
coming toward you while wheelying on bikes – not being aggressive, not brandishing weapons or stolen tellies – and taking up the whole road, why not just stop or at least slow down??
It seems ludicrous to just keep on coming without varying your speed or direction and to then say “Well, it’s was their fault because they were mucking about and being stupid”.
I mean: yes they were mucking about and being stupid, but last time I checked that didn’t carry the death penalty…
I came across a group of
I came across a group of these “feral” youths on bikes today as I rode through Farnborough, the driver in front of me slowed and stopped as some of them harmlessly rode badly over the junction. No one hurt, no one threatened. None of them doing wheelies, but one of the youths did comment to his mates “good moustache”. Nice.