“I just don't think there's enough being done about it”: Cyclist injured by hit-and-run driver calls for police action

Fignon's ghost wrote:

I can only assume that the driver was not identified because cameras were not fitted to your bike.

From the article: The driver of the Golf, which was registered using ‘false details’, fled the scene in the aftermath of the crash and is yet to be traced by police.

Thus the plate was obviously noted by something/somebody, the driver hasn't been found because they gave a false name and/or address when registering.

With all due respect (and I ride with a camera at all times and have racked up 25+ police/court actions since I first started using one two years ago) I vehemently disagree that cyclists must carry cameras or "stick to cycle paths only." Cameras are only useful in catching wrongdoers, it's far more important to have preventative measures in place; cameras and the equipment needed to process their output are extremely expensive, for some people who ride bicycles for transport because they can't afford other means prohibitively so; reporting road crime to the police is an extremely time-consuming and at times depressingly pointless endeavour for which many won't have the time and/or the inclination, a quick glance at the lack of action on most NMOTDs on here shows that. By all means carry cameras if you wish - as I said, I do - but cycling for many people is about economy, freedom and simplicity, all of which cameras to a greater or lesser extent militate against. The idea that cyclists shouldn't be on the road unless they're tooled up with at least two cameras...just no.

Rendel. In a perfect world we would all hold hands and be merry.

I'm sure that any cyclist caught in that moment of criminal behaviour would grab hindsight with both hands if they didn't have evidence to prosecute a bad driver for their sake and that of future cyclists.

Apropos. Motor insurers rely on there being no evidence to prosecute their car insurance clients where poor driving has resulted in a cyclist being injured or worse.

Which side are you on?

Fignon's ghost wrote:

Rendel. In a perfect world we would all hold hands and be merry. I'm sure that any cyclist caught in that moment of criminal behaviour would grab hindsight with both hands if they didn't have evidence to prosecute a bad driver for their sake and that of future cyclists. Apropos. Motor insurers rely on there being no evidence to prosecute their car insurance clients where poor driving has resulted in a cyclist being injured or worse. Which side are you on?

Wow. Because I say I don't think you're right in saying that all cyclists should carry two cameras or not ride on the road at all you're accusing me of somehow being on the opposite side to cyclists? That's so risible it's not worth engaging with.

+1.  I queried someone else a bit ago about CYCLISTS MUST CARRY CAMERAS AT ALL TIMES.  I can't recall who and don't recall any response.  This does seem to be some text running around the net though. I'm delighted for those who do and are prepared to got to the time / effort and expense.  All to - possibly - mildly irritate the police before they bin your footage provoke quibbling on NMOTD help make the roads safer for others.  But it's the same as I admire Cycling Mikey's efforts - from afar.

Due to the disparity between "need" for it (I'm able to avoid the roads for some daily trips) and the effort required on the one hand and likely results on the other I won't be promoting this idea.  Although as the years go by I do start wondering about a camera. Updating my will is probably the priority though!

Fignon, your comment reads like a cousin to the police hi viz tweet we were all laughing at the other day.   You're insisting that cyclists should budget hundreds of pounds for cameras just in case of the behaviour of lawbreaking twunts in cars?  Pass the costs and the inconvenience on to the more vulnerable road user, eh? (again) 

Look. I'm not proposing a fascist dictatorship. Until the day arrives where the driver is entirely accountable for their actions. Cyclists should do all they can to bring motorists (and more importantly, their insurer) to account.
I'm pretty sure you will do whatever you intend. May peace, health and happiness comfort your every ride.

Thank you; I'm sure they will! 

Totally agree with you, I never cycle without 2 bike cameras and 1 helmet cam these days. Unfortunately it is expensive and an inconvenience and we really shouldn't have to police dangerous driving ourselves but society only seems to care about dangerous weapons when they aren't fitted with wheels and an engine. When the Police scrape my mangled body from the road one day i want my loved ones to have the best chance possible of knowing what happened and the police to have the evidence needed to catch the guilty party, even if the 'punishment' will probably be laughably lenient.

Even if the camera videos make up some sort of deathly blooper reel. Something will have come from it. Might get your final moments onto a best selling compilation.

As the gape mouth of that sleeping fat face'd truck driver approaches your rear wheel....

And that's why you always wear a camera. Front and back!

Fignon's ghost wrote:

Even if the camera videos make up some sort of deathly blooper reel. Something will have come from it. Might get your final moments onto a best selling compilation. As the gape mouth of that sleeping fat face'd truck driver approaches your rear wheel.... And that's why you always wear a camera. Front and back!

That was even more dark and depressing than my post!  

I guess you're right though, i could already fill a DVD with near death experiences so I suppose that would be the logical next step although in my experience most HGV drivers are very professional. I expect it will be a Volkswagen Audi Group car that takes me out as they seem to make up nearly half of my reported videos. 2nd place would be BMW and 3rd goes to Mercedes Sprinter vans & chassis cabs.

It's hard to not let it get to you, isn't it. It takes some fortitude to road cycle and to keep some kind of positive attitude about it. We live in a country where the tone from the top is that decency and rules are for losers, but as VRUs these things are our only protection.

I may end up quitting my village's main Facebook group because it's being taken over by white van man thugs who want to justify blocking pavements, straight out of The Sun headline "I'm sorry but I have work to do". It's a shitty world, some times.

The driver I've reported must be a nasty piece of work to behave as he did, and although I've given myself the satisfaction of uploading footage, I kind-of hope they maybe just get him for the vehicle being untaxed and leave me out of it.

Chicken and egg: I'm an arse, so I bought a Range Rover vs my Range Rover is turning me into an arse. 

The test for me is always whether any enforcement intervention (letter, NIP,  etc) will likely make him better or worse around the next cyclist or other VRU he encounters. In the absence of anything serious in prospect like a ban, or better still confiscation, that's a tough one to answer. 

Fignon's ghost wrote:

I can only assume that the driver was not identified because cameras were not fitted to your bike. Even a grainy shot would be helpful to local law enforcement and doubt he's driven far from home with anpr.

.

You clearly spent more time making yourself heard than you spent reading the factual account of the incident. In this case a dozen bike cameras would have failed to identify the driver.