Good Morning Britain asks should cyclists have to wear a “hi-vis uniform” to ride a bike? (+ Mr Loophole makes the case for mandatory helmets); Danny MacAskill doing Danny MacAskill things; But cyclists; One day ’til the Classics + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Good Morning Britain asks should cyclists have to wear a "hi-vis uniform" to ride a bike?
It has been one of those weeks — helmet talk, claims cyclists should be made to use cycle lanes and now another old favourite… mandatory hi-vis…
Should cyclists have to wear a HI VIS uniform to ride a bike? 🚴♂️
— Good Morning Britain (@GMB) February 24, 2023
Courtesy of the (self-dubbed, might I add) UK’s most talked about breakfast television show, but maybe that’s the point; stir the pot with ‘debates’ and hot topic discussion points, get the people going and watch the calls and social media coverage roll in?
Anyway, we’ll be on the look out for if the topic appears on GMB this morning to watch it so you don’t have to. And while someone will probably tell us just to ignore it, like Chris Boardman said: “Don’t give it air time. Don’t answer stupid questions” when these silly comments about cycling pop up, but this isn’t just your usual anonymous Twitter troll spouting off… it’s one of our biggest broadcaster’s headline breakfast show.
Then again when you’ve got national police forces making headlines such as this…
> Police ask pedestrians to wear hi-vis following spate of road deaths in Scotland
Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised…
But what should GMB be debating if they really care about road safety?
Plenty of replies to point GMB’s producers in the direction of future discussions that might be a more useful use of everyone’s time…
“Should healthy, sustainable transport choices be made more uncomfortable and unappealing and what might the consequences be when responsibility for road danger is deflected away from those posing the greatest risk of harm to others?” pic.twitter.com/wGUOULWm1M
— Black Country Ste 🇺🇦 (@CCSteV) February 24, 2023
No amount of hi-viz will help nd motorists don’t even look where they’re going.https://t.co/WH3kixsZW6
— 4 Chords No Net (@4ChordsNoNet) February 24, 2023
The discussion should really be about road danger, not road safety.
Reducing danger works for everyone. Increasing safety usually results in more risks being taken.
— Fonant @fonant@mas.to (@fonant) February 24, 2023
Nope. But we should have many more cycle lanes pic.twitter.com/Q8ujrLKESR
— Bob From Accounts 🚲 (@BobFromAccounts) February 24, 2023
Deal.
Yes, every cyclist should be issues a free fluro orange perfetto jersey from Castelli!
— Tom Sanders (@TomSanders4) February 24, 2023
Danny MacAskill doing Danny MacAskill things
Oh look a bicycle… just gone 10 and that’s the first one of those the live blog has seen this morning…
Fighting the breeze on this one whilst out exploring #Newcastle… pic.twitter.com/wThL7k9Cgv
— Danny MacAskill (@danny_macaskill) February 23, 2023
Mr Loophole makes the case for mandatory helmets
It’s a live blog full house this morning. The radio and TV producers of the world have hit a brick wall, must be a slow news day because all the greatest hits are on repeat… (he loves us really)…
Delighted @mrdanwalker is recovering well and that he endorses my long held but highly criticised view that helmets save lives and should be mandatory #cyclists #helmets #roadsafetyhttps://t.co/6jLlt2U2oQ
— Nick Freeman (@TheMrLoophole) February 23, 2023
BBC Three Counties Radio joined the party, getting Mr Loophole on to talk about helmets…
“Cyclists are so vulnerable,” he told Jonathan Vernon-Smith. “They are exposed to massive dangers on the road from motorists, from the road surface itself and it just seems to be common sense to say you need to wear these items to protect yourself.
“I’ve been talking about this for a long time. What’s astonishing to me is why anyone’s astonished that anyone would suggest this because we get into a car which is a mass of metal, you’re protected and you have to wear a seatbelt because it makes you safe… how can you possibly get onto a bicycle with that degree of vulnerability and say ‘I don’t really want to protect my head and I’m not that bothered about being seen’.
“What sort of mindset enables you to have got that thought process? If you have that thought process, is it right that society, the NHS or whoever should pick the bill up?
“This isn’t just about cyclists. Motorists have to play a roll as well but while we are talking about cyclists it just seems to make common sense to do what you can to protect yourself and if you’re not going to I’m sorry but we’re not going to give you a choice.
“It’s going to be a mandatory requirement because as Dan Walker very happily said, it saved his life. Irrespective of blame. We all make mistakes when we’re cycling, we all make mistakes when we’re driving, but if those mistakes could be fatal and that could be avoided by simply wearing something then surely as a society we have no choice, we have to adopt that.”
But cyclists
Make sure you’ve got your hi-vis on…
— zizi (@ziephus) February 20, 2023
Are we the baddies?
oh crap I do. I feel dirty now. so very dirty pic.twitter.com/gM6DRS821m
— Real Gaz on a proper bike: gazza_d@toot.bike (@gazza_d) February 24, 2023
Spring Classics Eve: One day 'til the cobbles
Cycling is a religion. 💙 #OHN23 #FLCS pic.twitter.com/gP3PNeKBkm
— Omloop Nieuwsblad (@OmloopHNB) February 22, 2023
It’s almost time for proper racing. Keep your UAE Tour and early season stage races, this is what it’s all about…
One week to to Omloop Het Nieuwsblad folks #OHN23 pic.twitter.com/8BkxjU1o7a
— Eemeli (@LosBrolin) February 17, 2023
Women’s and men’s race both tomorrow, there’s no excuse to leave the sofa all day, except maybe for snacks and to refill your glass. There are plenty of savage bergs to be conquered before the finishing double-header of Muur and Bosberg. Will anyone escape? Will there be a sprint? Van Vleuten, Bäckstedt, Kopecky, Vollering, Wiebes, Balsamo, Longho Borghini…
Pidcock, Van Baarle, Asgreen, Wright, Campenaerts, Stuyven, Mohoric, Kristoff, Sagan, De Lie, Wellens, Küng, Stewart, Pollit, Meeus, Van Avermaet, Naesen, Lampaert, Ballerini, Benoot, Laporte…
Who are your favourites?
Cav gets closer but Groenewegen wins UAE Tour sprint
UAE Tour: Dylan Groenewegen wins stage 5 whilst Mark Cavendish is 8th. pic.twitter.com/VDgKywe2Zg
— British Cycle Sport (@VeloUK) February 24, 2023
18th yesterday, eighth today. One more sprint tomorrow to crack that first Astana win?
How big?! Victor Campenaerts to use Classified rear hub with 62 TOOTH chainring at Omloop Het Nieuwsblad
These god damn time trialists are at it again…
Race against the clock specialist turned Classics contender Victor Campenaerts is taking an innovative approach to the Opening Weekend, and is set to become the first pro to race one of Classified’s rear hubs. Oh, what’s more, he’s reportedly pairing it with a 1x 62t front chainring…
Victor Campenaerts (Lotto-Dstny) ne conduira pas l’Omloop avec son dispositif de vitesse Shimano normal, mais avec un système de commutation belge révolutionnaire appelé classifié pic.twitter.com/cBFdTwWJh4
— Stef le belge (@stef170560) February 23, 2023
The tech from Classified does away with the need for a front mech, effectively allowing riders to run a 2x set-up while enjoying the benefits of 1x (one front chainring rather than two). In short, and hopefully without boring you, there are aero gains from running just a single chainring, plus efficiency gains to be had from a larger number of teeth up front.
> REVIEW: Classified Powershift Kit & Wheelset
But how does it work? Well, the hub has a two-speed gear system that gives you 100 per cent of whatever chainring you have fitted, and then a reduction gear of around 70 per cent of that chainring, essentially doing the job of your ‘missing’ smaller chainring. So it’s like having your front derailleur hidden away in your rear hub. Still with me?
According to Wielerflits, Campenaerts could run a 62 or 63-tooth front custom-made chainring and was spotted using the eye-catching set-up during Lotto Dstny’s recon of the route this week.
The only thing that remains to be seen is if his hoods are turned in so far they actually touch…
"Keep yer clean air! We don't want it!"
Not in Doncaster!! We want to protect our economy. #stronglocaleconomy #doncasterisgreat https://t.co/RbtAiNGalB
— Nick Fletcher MP (@NickFletcherMP) February 24, 2023
He’s back…
> Tory MP attacks 15-minute city concept with known conspiracy theory
Simon MacMichael: What can Thamesmead – once the 'Town of the Future' – teach us about 15-minute cities?
Whatever its opponents may claim, it categorically has nothing to do with some global conspiracy aimed at restricting movement, of forcing people to remain within a mile or so of their home.
No-one’s saying you can’t drive to the next town to do your weekly supermarket shop, or go into the centre for a night out.
But what it does do is give people the choice of whether or not to do that by having options available to them locally, while at the same time making the areas they call home more liveable, more attractive, and more human.
Is that really such a bad thing?
> What can Thamesmead – once the ‘Town of the Future’ – teach us about 15-minute cities?
One. More. Sleep.
The Classics are back. 🔥 #FLCS #SetThePace pic.twitter.com/kafgm8ZEgj
— Flanders Classics (@FlandersClassic) February 22, 2023
Until next time, folks… have a great weekend whatever you’re up to (as long as it’s cycling-related)…
Stanley Johnson vs Cristo Foufas: Hi-vis debating
Am I agreeing with… St…Sta…Stanley Johnson?! What’s the world coming to? He was doing pretty well until the final few second of this clip…yep, it’s the sequel to the poll nobody asked for — Johnson vs Foufas…
‘Should HI VIS be mandatory, should helmets be mandatory, no no no.’
Former MEP @StanleyPJohnson refuses to wear to wear HI VIS or a helmet and says he’s been cycling for over fifty years & hasn’t had an accident. 🚴♂️ pic.twitter.com/EfCT9KxMGJ
— Good Morning Britain (@GMB) February 24, 2023
‘Why would you want to put your safety in the hands of people that are fallible, they make mistakes.’
Broadcaster @cristo_radio believes cyclists should take responsibility and wear HI VIS and a helmet. 🚴♂️ pic.twitter.com/s9rnE8zrTw
— Good Morning Britain (@GMB) February 24, 2023
24 February 2023, 09:06
24 February 2023, 09:06
24 February 2023, 09:06
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
90 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@MaxiMinimalist Agreed. The big problem I see now is today's parents grew up being driven to their schools, and therefore, see private motor vehicles as the only viable form of transport. The vast majority of UK infant and primary schools have a catchment area that is within easy walking distance from home to school. Yet, the traffic caused by pupils being driven to/from school is astonishing. Banishing the "School Run" should be a priority for all schools.
When I was a kid (that was during the previous millenium when phones were connected to a plug in the wall), I rode my bicycle to school, music academy, sport grounds, parties even during the winter. The government didn't have to spend, correct that, didn't have to think of spending massive amounts of money to build cycling specific infrastructures. Over the past 3 or 4 decades, cars have grown bigger, taller, safer (for their drivers) and faster. Meanwhile, motorists have become abusive, aggressive, hypersensitive to people moving on two wheels, aka cyclists. Spending billions upon billions on new infrastructure won't address the crux of the matter. Sadly.
Obree had some actual talent in his legs though, in addition to his bike/aero engineering talent.
Малко като опит за доказване е излязло... Никой няма нужда от толкова голям въртящ момент и мощност на шосеен велосипед с тънки гуми, които дори трудно ще предават тази мощност върху пътя. А ако има и ограничение от 25 км/час е още по-безмислено.
Not sure how informative that is. I imagine for all most of us know it could be Europe's only 'volumetric modular building'. 🤷♂️
Yes, but they're copying the adults of today...
Indeed - but alas I think this is an effective argument for very few folks indeed. As for push-back, what else could we expect *? I think there are ways of selling this but we're far more likely to see headlines about the problems, while the successes are relegated to footnotes, because at that point it just works and there's nothing to see... * Given that this time there aren't politicians being persuaded to overlook thousands of deaths and the demolition of property by the billions from the motoring trades (and the excitement of being able to drive out with the bright things for a party at a roadhouse). Nor are we as tolerant of "accidents". (And noting that publicity about the cases of a handful of people killed by cyclists continues to reach the media; deaths related to motor vehicles not so much).
That rather ignores that the children of today are the adults of tomorrow.
@belugabob Arguably it's easier this way - we don't actually need to do anything to the streets except stop drivers driving down every scrap of tarmac. Where I live, a few well-placed bollards would make walking/cycling/scooting the quicker option and safer, while maintaining 100% vehicular access - just not allowing through routes in every direction.
Sweet dreams from Bike@bedtime! Thank you for featuring this classic beaut.
90 thoughts on “Good Morning Britain asks should cyclists have to wear a “hi-vis uniform” to ride a bike? (+ Mr Loophole makes the case for mandatory helmets); Danny MacAskill doing Danny MacAskill things; But cyclists; One day ’til the Classics + more on the live blog”
Not the Joan Collins story ?
Not the Joan Collins story ? https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/joan-collins-cyclist-collision-black-cab-taxi-london-rules-restaurant-b1062646.html
Awavey wrote:
She has had trouble with things being in the wrong places, like that time she had that tree in her house
She was wearing black and
She was wearing black and getting out of a black cab. It’s a wonder the cyclist saw her at all.
Should have been wearing hi
Should have been wearing hi vis 😉
Awavey wrote:
Pedestrians need to do more to help themselves. Whilst you should be able to walk on the pavement without being knocked over by a cyclist, the reality is sometimes a cyclist mistakes a pavement for a shared use cycle track and accidents can happen.
As Cristo rightly says, why put yourself in the hands of people who are fallible?
You should take precautions when pedestrianising in the dark. Hi-vis for sure, but also body armour and a helmet would be prudent. At least Joan was sporting a stiff perm – that is an excellent choice for head protection, offering far better impact absorption than even a cycling helmet!
Often it’s safer to avoid walking on pavements altogether. A sturdy mobility scooter can be a good choice.
Alternative routes from the cab to the restaurant should also be considered. Perhaps there is a rear entrance to the restaurant that would avoid using the busy pavement?
Pedestrians should use a zorb
Pedestrians should use a zorb ball.
hirsute wrote:
I’d pay money to see them trying to get on and off trains
Escalators.
Escalators.
chrisonatrike wrote:
Me watching Prometheus: “Run to the side!”
HoarseMann wrote:
Why wasn’t she wearing HiViz and a helmet?
It’s very instructive to see
It’s very instructive to see the difference between the reporting of this story to the reporting of the Dan Walker one. On this one, all the emphasis is on the cyclist, and nothing on what JC could or should have done to ensure her own safety. On the DW story, the opposite was true – all about what he should have done, and nothing about the driver.
FWIW – other than blaming of all cyclists for the actions of one (as our dear Martin has done) I agree with the balance in the JC story. But the difference is extremely informative.
Why would anyone watch a tv
Why would anyone watch a tv show where 85.2% of the people watching it are misinformed? Ahhhh……I think I might have answered my own question there.
It must be a slow news day if
It must be a slow news day if they’re talking about hi-viz… I do wish media companies would employ better researchers and journalists.. I wonder is ‘researcher’ a job for the thick or/and lazy?
For once being genuine,
For once being genuine, rather than snarky, if people genuinely believe that vulnerable road users need hi-vis to be seen by motorists, how many motorists could correctly read a number plate from 20 meters away?
I appreciate a lot of this is not genuine, it’s an outlet for hate and no logic could penetrate it. You also can’t see hi-vis when you are looking at your phone. But I think some people genuinely do believe it and their friends and family owe to society to take the keys off them.
JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote
By the very design of our driver “licencing” system we won’t know until they are in a collision or happen to be otherwise spotted by the police and checked.
But even then, there is no
But even then, there is no way to test eyesight posthumously, so if the driver is killed as well you can’t tell, it is the same with drivers falling asleep.
Exactly this, it’s ridiculous
Exactly this, it’s ridiculous that anyone should turn up in court and use a previously diagnosed medical as mitigation and nobody thinks that their may be thousands of others who continue to drive with the same condition.
JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote
I struggle to read some number plates – because they are almost completely obscured with dirt. I just hope that drivers who talk about visibility with bicycles have nice clean plates.
Surely the reason why
Surely the reason why cyclists should wear a “hi vis uniform” isn’t so you can see them but so you can see they’re cyclists?
EDIT – maybe they should have bells ON their “uniform” too so pedestrians know when one is coming? Won’t you think about those who’re blind or partially-sighted?!
It’s sweet that 85% of GMB
It’s sweet that 85% of GMB viewers (or Twitter followers) care so much for our safety that they’re willing to force us all to wear hi viz.
AidanR wrote:
But not enough, say, to wait patiently behind us until it is safe to overtake.
How can you have 8.5 people
How can you have 8.5 people though?
I’ve never got the appeal of
I’ve never got the appeal of these breakfast news shows, do people really want to watch all this faux angst outrage whilst eating their cornflakes (or insert breakfast option of choice) every morning ? Or are they just watching because they want to know what the weather will be like today and check WW3 hasnt started overnight.
And is this why people are always grumpy on the roads in the morning ?
Porridge for me. With
Porridge for me. With blueberries. And banana.
Cake, breakfast of champions.
Cake, breakfast of champions.
Agreed. I also do like a
Agreed. I also do like a cheese and tomato sandwich for lunch. Cheese and turnip not so much.
Down south, turnips are the
Down south, turnips are the small pale, hard ones with purple bits. Swedes are the larger, yellow and delicious ones. As you move north the names mysteriously swap over. Meaning somewhere in the middle of the country things will get very confusing.
nothing wrong with turnips,
nothing wrong with turnips, we grow lots of the “swede” looking ones locally 🙂
Well I thought there was a
Well I thought there was a government decree that we had to eat them. And work longer hours to pay for them
Huge fearnley whittingstall:
Huge fearnley whittingstall:
Roast turnips, shallots and dates with watercress (p135)
Turnip and red lentil chilli (p87)
Potato and turnip dauphinoise (P60)
Where do you buy turnips from though ?
Swedes 1 Turnips 0
Swedes 1 Turnips 0
More to the point, does
More to the point, does anyone actually watch at all?
Grumpy on the roads because
Grumpy on the roads because not cycling (and not being paid to cycle). Some would still be grumpy if they were because going to work. They might be less grumpy though?
I must say I have wondered
I must say I have wondered the same. So you are already predisposed to frothing at the mouth over whatever issue winds you up, could be cyclists but plenty of other candidates, so you spend your breakfast time and/or morning commute frothing even further. Doesn’t sound very healthy to me.
If we all have to take
If we all have to take responsibility for our own health and safety, then it follows that all journeys that could be made using active methods must be made that way. This would reduce obesity, heart disease and diabetes, improve mental health and reduce pollution.
TheHungryGhost wrote:
As long as they don’t take more than 15 minutes
New vehicles weigh almost 2
New vehicles weigh almost 2 tonnes now.
I did not realise that helmets were rated for this.
It’s dangerous cycling on the road
Solution: PPE
hirsute wrote:
No it is not dangerous cycling on the road – that is, until you introduce selfish people in big, powerful metal cages.
THAT is when the problems start for everyone, whether it’s due to collisions, air pollution (including from vehicle tyres), damage to buildings and infrastructure, noise pollution, aggression and threats of violence, pavement parking… the list is a long one.
At 2t cars are 150 times more
At 2t cars are 150 times more dangerous than a cyclist.
Isn’t it the driver behind
Isn’t it the driver behind the wheel that’s the danger, not the inaminate object they’re (not) in control of?
I suspect that was the point
I suspect that was the point of the original post
marmotte27 wrote:
A baby cyclist?
Cristo has created lots of
Cristo has created lots of straw men there, but no actual cogent argument for his cause. Sadly, all of his false statements were left unchallenged…
“dressed all in black and appear out of nowhere” – No cyclist has the ability to appear out of nowhere.
“No lights on” – motorvehicles have headlights so the driver can see what is there. Pedestrians, cyclists, houses, deer, trees, kerbs, etc. all do not need lights to be seen.
“The onus should only be on the cyclist to be seen” – cyclists cannot control drivers’ eyeballs and cyclists are not invisible.
He then tries to claim that not wearing a helmet is virtuous. Utter illogical nonsense.
They only invite these brainless morons on because they no longer have the credibility to get experts on. Or maybe it’s deliberate to stoke hatred and get views that way. Cause-effect maybe.
I’m not sure what else you’d
I’m not sure what else you’d expect from someone so utterly ignorant and unintelligent. But there you go.
In Bradford on Wednesday, a
In Bradford on Wednesday, a driver ploughed into a queue of people waiting at a bus stop, killing one and seriously injuring another. Arrested on suspicion of death by dangerous driving.
clearly pedestrians and bus stops need high vis.
also, looking at the local news, the driver was in a black car. Wouldn’t have happened if the car was luminous yellow.
Is it me or is there a marked
Is it me or is there a marked increase of pedestrians being killed by motor vehicles whilst on the pavement or protected walkways ?
I know there was a survey out there that had an average of around 40 to 50 per year but it feels like this is increasing ?
If it was cyclist it would be a full on attack by the usual red tops but these incidents almost seem accepted ?
“Police ask pedestrians to
“Police ask pedestrians to wear hi-vis following spate of road deaths in Scotland” – Feb 2023
https://road.cc/content/news/now-police-ask-pedestrians-wear-hi-vis-299283
the little onion wrote:
Is anyone calling for the pedestrians to wear helmets as it would have “saved thier life”?
Is it groundhog day? It feels
Is it groundhog day? It feels like groundhog day because the same “debates” seems to come up again and again.
(Also, for a bit of Friday morning fun, try googling “groundhog day”).
OnYerBike wrote:
It’s been Groundhog Day all week in the comments threads. q.v. Dan Walker & lights “discussions”
OnYerBike wrote:
I’m not sure that calling Cristo a groundhog is pc. Or particularly fair to groundhogs.
With the number of vehicle to
With the number of vehicle to vehicle collisions in mind, should all cars have to be painted dayglo yellow or orange?
What always amazes me is
What always amazes me is collisions on a motorway. How on earth can vehicles, travelling in the same direction, still collide with each other?
I’ll wear a helmet when one
I’ll wear a helmet when one is invented that makes drivers pay attention to what they’re doing and Hi-Viz once every motor vehicle has been re-painted the colour of a Post-It note!
I’d prefer it if they were
I’d prefer it if they were quiet, comfortable, cool (in the sense of temperature) and cheap, oh, and effective against vehicle collisions might be good as well.
My personal view on helmets,
My personal view on helmets, hi viz, daytime lights etc:
1) It is a sensible personal choice to make yourself visible and protect your head, based mainly on the precautionary principle.
2) It would be terrible policy to make this mandatory, as it will put many people off cycling, with detrimental impacts on public health etc which would far outweigh any potential safety gains.
AidanR wrote:
On 1 there are the arguments that even seeing other people dressed in hi viz and armour reduces cycling level as it sends a message that cycling is dangerous (and so has the same impact as your point 2).
But, notwithstanding that, I agree with you.
There’s some TomTom data
There’s some TomTom data showing their traffic index for various cities in 2022: https://www.tomtom.com/traffic-index/ranking/
London is firmly in first (last?) place for journey times etc. and it’s getting worse as it’s up (down?) 1m 50s since 2021.
36 minutes 20 seconds to travel 10km.
You couldn’t make it up.
Stop… you’ll have them
Stop… you’ll have them going on about how its cycle lanes that have increased congestion!
hawkinspeter wrote:
I’ve never been a great runner, but my 10km PB is 40:09.
I have many friends who can easily run 10km quicker than 36 mins.
It shows that private motorvehicle is not the way to travel across London.
Maybe London needs more of
Maybe London needs more of these…so one doesn’t arrive late or looking like a soggy explosion.
Dark cars are 47% more likely
Dark cars are 47% more likely to be involved in accidents (at dawn and dusk) There’s actual proper stats and studies and stuff, even the Telegraph agrees. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/7845366/Black-cars-more-likely-to-be-involved-in-crashes.html#:~:text=A%20study%20over%2020%20years,the%20safest%2C%20the%20research%20found.
So… cyclist should have to wear hi-viz as soon as all cars are only available in hi-viz.
Get your highlighters ready!
skeuomorph wrote:
Pointless anecdote. We had a great family friend (now long dead) who was a senior civil servant in the Department of Transport. When I got my first car (a dark brown mini) in 1990, he told me that some years before they had done a study of which colour car was safest. It had been pretty inconclusive as it depended on conditions (so for example dark cars were bad as night, but white cars were bad in fog, I think). The only strong conclusion was that brown cars were the worst overall.
He may, of course, have just been winding me up. I’ll never know now.
Imagine taking advice from
Imagine taking advice from that fat toe-rag
Cristo has decided to block
Cristo has decided to block me on Twitter, even though we have never communicated with each other, mentioned or commented on each other’s tweets. Has this ShockJock ever ridden a bicycle, scooter or any other non-motoristed device with wheels?
Don’t comment on something that you have no experience in using. Oh and make sure you wear a helmet next time you get in a car, or board a bus, train or aeroplane. They are much faster and heavier, and will exert a much greater force on your head when colliding with another object.
He must have suspected you
He must have suspected you are eburt in another guise.
Were all these cyclist haters
Were all these cyclist haters denied bikes when they were kids?
Is that the simplistic truth of it …. these people had to watch from the sidelines in jealousy, while their bike owning friends went out and enjoyed themselves?
Wtjs is going to love this.
Wtjs is going to love this. Took my ebike in for a firmware update and they rang up to say there is a risk it will brick it ! So I am not doing it !
It’s not just ebikes!
It’s not just ebikes!
I upgraded the firmware on my SRAM Red eTap AXS components on my SystemSix and the left controller (shifter) bricked.
Support calls with SRAM couldn’t fix it, and as it’s out of its 2 year warranty, SRAM have washed their hands of it.
The bike is currently in the shop awaiting identification and fitting of the correct new component – something that is likely to cost me north of a grand!
Strangely enough, the next bike I buy will have a Shimano groupset!
And it is stories such as
And it is stories such as this which reinforce my thoughts that I will be a luddite, and stick with mechanical groupsets on all my bikes. Utter madness. Just see how many problems the pro teams are having with electronic gears.
Biker Phil wrote:
I like my Di2 gears, but then I enjoy playing with tech. I periodically check for any firmware updates and apply them whenever they’re available as usually updates make things better. There’s often a small risk of bricking devices, but most of the time the problem is with interrupting the update. Most well designed devices will have a way to recover, but there’s always the ones that need you to open up and muck around with some reflashing interface.
Nevermind the discussion
Nevermind the discussion about high Vis and helmets. It’s the patronising attitude from so many non-cyclists that really makes me wanna puke.
We have some high quality
We have some high quality journalists in the UK.
Durham Roads Policing Tweeted a picture of a damaged police car with the caption “Cyclists!! Please wear more hi-viz clothing! As you can see, that prevents all collisions”. The tweet has since been deleted.
And that has been transformed into “Drama as police car hit by a cyclist on County Durham road – causing extensive damage”
https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrLBwn5xPhjv68KRUIM34lQ;_ylu=Y29sbwNpcjIEcG9zAzEEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1677276537/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fuk.news.yahoo.com%2fdrama-police-car-hit-cyclist-110930043.html/RK=2/RS=fqyr06q_nyp1iNIprV2ZbaDMwa8-
The damage to that car was
The damage to that car was caused in a collision with a person riding a bicycle?
Was the cyclist fired from an artillery piece? Or perhaps someone was testing a depleted uranium tipped cycle helmet?
(Not sure if you realise this
(Not sure if you realise this already and I’m being whooshed). No, the damage was not caused by the bike. Durham police were making a humorous point about the ineffectiveness of hi viz, and the journalist misunderstood.
Do I need medication now that
Do I need medication now that I find myself in agreement with Stanley Johnson?
jaymack wrote:
You’ll be OK. A broken clock is right twice a day, he was always going to stumble on something eventually.
Thank you for being so
Thank you for being so reassuring, my mind is now at ease
JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote
Do I need medication now that I find myself in agreement with Stanley Johnson?
— JustTryingToGetFromAtoB You’ll be OK. A broken clock is right twice a day, .— jaymackIn this case, a broken cuckoo clock.
Isn’t this this the chap who
Isn’t this this the chap who applied for EU / French citizenship after his son decided to follow the swivel eyed loon path? Have to agree with him on that too.
It’s more than a little
It’s more than a little ironic that the actual data – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5168492/ – makes a better case for putting helmets on motorists and their passengers than on cyclists given the second leading cause of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) is among people in cars that are involved in crashes. The first leading cause, of course, is among old people falling down. Maybe there needs to be a discussion of at what age it should become mandatory to wear a helmet at all times when out of bed.
I wish we could put Hi-Viz
I wish we could put Hi-Viz (and helmets) away for ever.
The problem is that, it’s a no brainer for people without brains.
Mr Loophole (the voice of reason) says :-
“Cyclists are so vulnerable. They are exposed to massive dangers on the road from motorists, from the road surface itself and it just seems to be common sense to say you need to wear these items to protect yourself”
You cannot argue with that, and there may even be a tiny bit of truth in his statement. It is of course addressing the symptom and not the cause of the problem whilst going down the route of Cyclist Responsibility > Victim Blame > Excusing Drivers.
Parliament is full of such clear thinking people and I believe it is only a matter of time before Hi-Vis becomes a legal requirement, AND it will pull in votes from the motoring lobby at the same time. It’s a no brainer (I think I’ve already said that once).
Cycling UK has issued a fact sheet on Hi-Viz which tells us what I think most cyclists aready know. Hi-Viz makes cyclists more visible but does not significantly reduce the collision rate.
While we are talking Hi-Viz – What do we mean by the term? There is no legal definition, I could market a camo jacket as Hi-Viz, (and it would be if you were standing in field of daffodils). If it was made a legal requirement i suspect parliament would go for BS 471, which is basically road workers safety jackets. It’s a very tight spec which would mean the end of all cycling wear as we know it. (there is a lesser spec, BS 17353 which is not very good) My club colours are Red, White, and Black and would not be described as Hi-Viz, but it is the same colour combination as used for Give Way and most other warning signs signs, so there’s absolutely no excuse for not seeing me.
Regarding the daffodils, etc,
Regarding the daffodils, etc, the logic driving the hi-viz brigade will be used in such circumstances to exonerate motorists who fail to see the hi-viz:
“Oh well, you see, due to the particulars of the background and lighting, the hi-viz didn’t work, so the motorists was not at fault.”
Agreed
Agreed
As a cyclist you are always competing against your background to be seen.
You can choose what you wear, but you cannot choose your background.
Generally speaking Hi-Vis will be a good option, but not always and in the event of a SMIDSY collision you can always claim that you took the most responsible option when you left home.
Being seen is a lottery – Don’t ride alongside a Dyno Rod van wearing orange!
An estimeed poster has
An estimeed poster has mentioned dangers for blind pedestrian, surely their biggest problem is cars parked on footpaths.
Yes, alwas try setting
Yes, alwas try setting marginalised groups one on another. In my town they took away bike racks to make space for a handicapped parking bay. Instead of taking away one of the fifty other parking bays at that place.
I was happily cycling
I was happily cycling yesterday with my helmet on, lights on (in daylight) hi viz jacket and a van pulled out from a side road so I had to apply the brakes sharpish. Driver was looking at his mobile phone and didn’t even look up to acknowledge me. Just kept going.
Shocking footage
Shocking footage
“This was Jarrow, Tyne & Wear In March of last year. I’m mostly recovered now.”
Careless driving because no one was killed.
http://citizenrider.blogspot
http://citizenrider.blogspot.com/2023/02/bike-zoos.html
Thank you.
Thank you.
I always enjoyed reading the musings of citizenrider, but it’s one of those blog names I forget.
And he still writes, many of the blogs I really liked stopped.