Images of a man riding across the US with a vast array of lights and technology and the message ‘Armed Cyclist’ on the back of his jersey have led to discussions about cycling safety, and just how much is too much when it comes to protecting oneself from harm on the bike.
The pictures were taken by Jonathan Maus, who explains on his BikePortland website that he happened across the ‘Armed Cyclist’ on the Interstate 90, east of Coeur d’Alene in the US state of Idaho.
“When I looked at the images, I was amazed at what I saw”, says Maus.
“This guy was not messing around.”
this is the AI response to “how to stay alive as a cyclist in North America.” https://t.co/f9yrRgPJUU
— BC Ministry of Ending Car Reliance Ⓜ️ (@CarRelianceBC) August 1, 2023
Bike riders if they followed all the ‘safety measures’ drivers told them to
— Marc Wion ?️⚧️❤️ (@marcwion) August 1, 2023
Sucks that a person on a bike has to be armed, have 2 flags and a dozen tail lights to be able to claim a bit of public space to ride in the US among distracted entitled planet/people killing car drivers.
— sam (@sam80554826) August 1, 2023
He has a right to defend himself. Don’t threaten him, and you’ll not have anything to worry about.
— J Nan Adams (@SlimEden44) August 5, 2023
As pointed out by some of those replying to the original Twitter post, it turns out the cyclist in question is James Whelan, a resident of Florida who has built up something of a cult following on his Instagram page and YouTube channel (called Armed Cyclist, of course) where he posts images from his cycling trips across America and, sometimes, run-ins with local law enforcement officers.
Whelan told road.cc that he runs 28 lights on his rear rack and eight on the front handlebars.
“I don’t get people turning left or right in front of me at all because they pay attention when they see a bright burst of light coming towards them”, says Whelan.
“For the tail light I came up with that idea because I got tired of people not seeing me. Now people typically change lanes a half mile behind me when they see my lights.”
Whelan also attaches flags to his bike to stop drivers from passing him too close, runs two GPS computers and carries a search and rescue beacon. He says that motorists bother him much less while wearing the Armed Cyclist jersey compared to a regular one.
“In South Florida there is a lot of road rage against cyclists just for being on the road.
“Most people can read what it says. When they see my jersey it has a huge calming effect on the people that don’t like cyclists.”
> Texas cyclist shoots driver who deliberately crashed into his riding partner
With statistics showing that cyclist fatalities have been steadily rising in the US over the past ten years, the extreme set-up has led to some conversations about cyclists’ safety in the country, and some mixed reactions.
Some praised Whelan for exercising his rights, suggesting that the not-so-subtle warning could do much to deter careless or dangerous drivers, while others expressed dismay that someone would feel the need to take such drastic action to feel safe.
While the message on the back of Whelan’s jersey informs those around him that he is armed, whether his provocative outfit would break any local laws or customs in US states that allow concealed or ‘open’ carry of firearms is a grey area (Whelan says he always openly carries a gun where it is allowed).
Indeed, the video above that Whelan uploaded to his YouTube channel in 2020, that has racked up 3.4 million views at the time of writing, shows two police officers pulling him over due to alleged complaints from members of the public about his Armed Cyclist jersey. Whelan refuses their request for identification, saying he is not breaking any laws and goes on his way, leaving the cops “speechless” as he puts it.
Whelan is currently on a bike ride across America, having embarked on 27 previous trips over 43 years. He says he’s been stopped twice by the authorities on his latest adventure.
“One time the guy just asked me about my lights. It was a consensual stop. The other some deputy didn’t like my jersey. I reminded him of the First Amendment and then went on my way”, he said.
Whelan’s current trip started in Key West, Florida and will have to end in a different location to the one he originally planned – Prudhoe Bay in Alaska – due to wildfires. He said he has met some “great people” along the way, and we’re assuming he wouldn’t count any law enforcement officers who might want to disrupt his journey for spurious reasons among them…



















69 thoughts on ““How to stay alive as a cyclist in North America”: Florida man spotted riding with ‘Armed Cyclist’ jersey, close passing flags and countless bike lights sparks cycling safety discussions”
Only in America. Or maybe
Only in America. Or maybe South Africa or Brazil!
OldRidgeback wrote:
Definitely needed in the “Rainbow Nation”, Been there, done that.
…but it still doesn’t stop
While his polite demeanour with the Police officers was comendable advertising that he’s armed still doesn’t stop a dickhead driver ploughing into the back of the rider and leaving him for dead.
jaymack wrote:
Indeed. In fact, the jersey message might well induce another of the same mindset but carrying a larger weapon (aka the car) to perform a stand-me-grounder” action. “I had to run him over, officer, as he was cycling my ground and coulda shot me first”.
Violence, often of the
Violence, often of the extreme kind, is the Number One go-to “solution” to any and all problems in the minds of many denizens of the benighted Disunited State of Amerika. Those of a more amenable and tolerant disposition are labelled “pussy” or “snowflake”, deemed fit only for a good Billy The Kidding should they disagree with one’s dogmas.
The problem is that extreme violence, along with the means and inclination (even permission, in the form of “stand your ground” laws) to apply it, is an immense tradition there with much of the mass media devoted to celebrating and cheering it, one way or another. Large organsiations also exist to employ the corrupt mechanism of US so-called government to keep it that way.
The cyclist in question is an emblem of the tradition. He has no faith in any kind of human goodness but rather a religious belief in another pervasive and associated US dogma of social Darwinism – “a war of all against all”, as Thomas Hobbes long ago described his concept of the human “state of nature” (nasy, brutish and short) in “Leviathan”. “They’re out to git me. I’ll git them first”.
Even in Blighty, a carloon confrontation usually results only in a bit of foul language; maybe a small prosecution if a camera is drawn (rather than a gun) and a polis can be bothered to take note. Presumably the armed fellow will, if confronted by a car loon unwise enough not to thoroughly run him over as the first loon-move rather than just bump him, will find themselves in a high noon situation toot-sweet; or dead of armed cyclist pre-emptive action, lying in a morgue.
***********
If Toryspiv go the Full Repuglican, you can see them rescinding the law curtailing the freedumb of loons to have handguns, in Blighty. We too would soon be jes liike Idyho. The Daily Hate Mail would be more than happy to promote the condition ‘cos think of the increased sales!
Cugel wrote:
. . . . practiced every day by drivers of lethal weapons all over the world against pedestrians and cyclists and tolerated by society but everyone loses their s**t when a lone cyclist puts on a ‘armed cyclist’ shirt, a few extra lights and a close pass flag?
We might not have guns in the UK but we are just as bad as the US. I recently complained to a driver that he had nearly hit me with his car so he got out and tried to hit me with a golf club!
NOtotheEU wrote:
‘S a good job you ain’t got no gun, eh pardner? Mind, I’d confiscate that carloon’s clubs as well (golf and otherwise).
It may not be that long before the polis disappear altogether, except from around Toryspiv locations where they’ll be crouched behind the razor-wire keeping the millions of disaffected serfs at bay. We will all then be free to deal with our many enemies as we choose. Golf clubs will be the least of it!
I’ll be hiding somewhere well away from that Ingurland, me. I’ll probably get loon-clubbed anyway.
The UK seems to be less
The UK seems to be less effective at killing people.
Killed on USA roads in 2022: 43,000 people.
Killed on UK roads in 2022: 1700 people.
Ratio of 25:1.
The population ratio is 5:1.
Interesting, I wonder why
Interesting, I wonder why this is. Maybe the amount of huge pick up trucks with limited visibility?
Purely anecdotally in the thousands of miles I’ve travelled in the US as a car and bus passenger I’ve always felt a lot safer than in the UK as most drivers don’t seem in much of a rush and the odd idiot in a hurry really stands out. Over here every driver always seems to be late for something really inportant
Being a pedestrian in New York however is another story altogether.
Lots of factors, but maybe
Lots of factors, but looking at just one – average distance driven? That is somewhat related to time driving which obviously has bearing!
Lots of not-quite-comparable figures but it seems that Americans (unsurprisingly) drive more – quite a lot more.
USA 11,467 miles per car (2019)
Or 13,476 miles per person (2022 it seems?)
UK – this source say 7,400 miles per car (with some analysis about “less miles per car but more cars” here). I tried to calculate this but got something a bit less using data from here)
And in the UK “only 4.5% of vehicles were driven over 15,000 miles in 2021”.
UK Distance markedly dropped in 2020 but is well on the way to being back to 2019 levels again.
I think that’s a good point.
I think that’s a good point. There’s been many times we’ve been with American friends and they’ve said “let’s go out to eat/drink/shop, there’s a great place about two hours away”. Cheap petrol compared to the UK means they haven’t really cared about it until recently.
You may feel safer on the
You may feel safer on the road in the US, but you most certainly aren’t. Ironically, NYC is one of the safest places to be on the road in the US.
You’re about 4x as likely to
You’re about 4x as likely to be killed in a road crash in the US as in the UK/head of population if you compare NHTSA and DfT statistics. Some states are better than others and some worse. NY State is one of th best for road safety while FL, NC, SC and TX are amongst the worst. TX has the dubious honour of being worst for DUI. To put things in persepective, there were about 1700 people killed on the roads in NC (pop 10.6 million) in 2021 compared with just over 1500 (pop 67 million).
There are various reasons for this. The US scores poorly for enforcement of speeding and DUI laws and both are rife. Driver training is poor in much of the US. Many states have no mandatory vehicle inspections and some of the heaps you see on the road are shocking.
I know how he feels.
I know how he feels.
I used to carry a blank firing 22 starting pistol/revolver in the 80’s to frighten attacking dogs off mainly, but one or two motorists got the six shot routine. (so satistying)
Used to work very well, unfortunately it was stolen in a burglary along with my Bowie knife, machete, hunting crossbow and replica blank firing 357 magnum handgun. (Strangely they left my Weihrauch HW 35 air rifle which was worth the most!)
Police caught the culprits (neighbours) and returned my replica blank firing 357 magnum but never recovered the other stuff. (did get a victim payment)
Obviously society has changed since then and it would be frowned upon these days to do such a thing, (so I would not recommend it) but luckily I do not see so many unaccompanied savage dogs around the place like I used to.
That footage of a stop was
That footage of a stop was hilarious. “We’re stopping you because there’s been a complaint about your lights” “Are they illegal?” “Well, no…” “Okay, thanks, I’ll be on my way then”
Armed cyclist with a CCW in
Armed cyclist with a CCW in the US are not happy with this character. One tail camera and the weapon suffice much better than the proclamation and desired confrontation..
Turk wrote:
Isn’t the entire point of the proclamation to avoid confontation?
hawkinspeter wrote:
Sounds confusing to me – unless this is Batesian mimicry. Otherwise why not just have your plasma rife painted in stripy colours and slung over your shoulder?
I’m not up to speed on the US carry laws though…
hawkinspeter wrote:
Hardly! It seems to be to invite one, t’ see who be quickest on the draw. Are the carloon punks feelin’ lucky, eh? My bicycle don’t like you laughin’ at him.
Cugel wrote:
I was under the impression that most gun ownership in the U.S. was driven by fear and insecurity. There may well be brave gun owners as well as old gun owners, but there’s precious few old and brave gun owners.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I suspect you’re correct (“most”) but I did find out there is such a thing as “recreational gun” and indeed recreational machine gun…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RlHzy2LtS4k
… and some of their rules are framed in terms of sport or collecting. Bit like cars – quite a lot of people strongly associate them with “fun”.
chrisonatrike wrote:
I’ve got nothing against gun sport, though I don’t like hunting. I’ve even done a bit of archery myself. It’s the owning of a gun “just-in-case” that leads to many accidental discharges and injuries/deaths.
I’m not a fan of cyclists carrying guns, whether concealed or not as it seems unneccessary to just get from A to B. I can’t see that there’s many situations that are improved by someone drawing a gun and intending to use it.
A mate of mine who lives in
A mate of mine who lives in Washington DC found himself stuck in a small town in Texas and to kill time went into a gun store (he hates guns, was just curious). He was looking at a semi-automatic 7.62mm assault rifle when the salesman came up and said, “Y’all interested in guns as a hobby or for killin’ bad dudes? ‘Cos that’s a good gun but it’s more a hobbyist gun, y’know?” A hobbyist assault rifle…
Rendel Harris wrote:
Presumably that’s the kind you spend almost all the time tinkering with? Or is it the chap was pointing out that with that cartridge you might also take out some dudes through the wall in the next house?
Still rules are for playing with for some. Just look at what you can get a “sporting exemption” for.
I go to the US regularly for
I go to the US regularly for work. Me and a colleague often go to shooting ranges and rent pistols and blaze away at targets. It is a curious experience to go to a range, show them a driver’s licence, pay some money and then get handed a 9mm pistol and a box of bullets. They generally ask you if you’ve shot before and take your word for it when you answer, “Yes.” I mean I’ve quite a bit of experience with pistols, but if I didn’t I could easily lie about it. When I explain to Americans I meet how we can’t do this in the UK, they just can’t believe UK gun laws.
I like shooting but I’m glad we have the gun laws we have here in the UK.
OldRidgeback wrote:
I don’t see a problem with people using shooting ranges and I don’t think there’s much restriction in the UK on who can use them – it’s easy enough to go clay pigeon shooting without needing to own your own gun. It’s the casual gun ownership that’s the problem in the U.S. and especially the ease with which people carry (and use) them in public.
Exactly this….
Exactly this….
Rendel Harris wrote:
Something you can’t kill with a gun.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Perhaps the gun store owner knows what he’s talking about… There are multiple reasons why NATO has moved down to smaller 5.62mm calibre for standard battle rifles, from the 7.62mm of old.
7.62mm in civilian use for similar reasons would be a “hobbyist” thing – e.g., someone into long-range rifle shooting, collector, etc.
Paul J wrote:
A mate of mine who lives in Washington DC found himself stuck in a small town in Texas and to kill time went into a gun store (he hates guns, was just curious). He was looking at a semi-automatic 7.62mm assault rifle when the salesman came up and said, “Y’all interested in guns as a hobby or for killin’ bad dudes? ‘Cos that’s a good gun but it’s more a hobbyist gun, y’know?” A hobbyist assault rifle…
— Paul J Perhaps the gun store owner knows what he’s talking about… There are multiple reasons why NATO has moved down to smaller 5.62mm calibre for standard battle rifles, from the 7.62mm of old. 7.62mm in civilian use for similar reasons would be a “hobbyist” thing – e.g., someone into long-range rifle shooting, collector, etc.— Rendel Harris
I think both points are valid (the UK bafflement at the whole idea and the knowledgeable suggestion that is not ideal personal / home defence). And (totally OT now) apparently the pendulum / fashion is swinging again – the US now wants “a little bit bigger / moar power” apparently for all troops (TBC).
Nato went 5.56mm so grunts
Nato went 5.56mm so grunts could carry more ammo in this smaller calibre, majority of engagement is under 400 metres, 7.62 is still used as a machine gun round or for short/mid distance sniping as opposed to the long range .50 antimaterial rifles such as the M82 or AX50.
Though am sure if you live in Texas you could probably still buy the any of the above.
Americans feel they need a
Americans feel they need a gun to protect themselves from all the other people with guns.
Peter Aretin wrote:
The evidence doesn’t support that view though
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M21-3762
There’s also some gun myths debunked here: https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/debunking-myths-about-gun-violence
The disconnectfulness between
The disconnectfulness between human beliefs and evidence is terrific! (See e.g. “if our customers can’t drive to our shop we’ll have no business” and thousands of others).
I wonder if the beliefs themselves are secondary to our general psychological “style” and our need to fit in with others. I think ideas normally come as a package deal too.
I used to be a bit nonplussed or even turned off at what seemed to be empty rhetoric and appeals to emotions in “debate”. Without being all “Kirk vs. Spock” I think of it differently now. It’s not “the only language they understand” but this seems to be our primary or most powerful communication and decision-making mode.
Even the more geeky are prey for the salesman.
And those with a darker skin
And those with a darker skin tone too.
Orange doesn’t seem to count…
69 in September licenced for
69 in September licenced for decades. None of my peers advertise, nor have any of us used a weapon to date.
Turk wrote:
In some ways, it’s similar to running bike cameras. Some people like to advertise it and some don’t, and I can understand both approaches (I’m in the non-advertising group). It would be clearly wrong for police to go around stopping and harrassing cyclists for advertising that they’re running cameras.
As with most media frenzies, the actual odds of being involved in a gun fight are exaggerated and it’s human nature to focus on the unlikely, big events (e.g. plane crashes) versus the common but small events (e.g. car crashes).
It would be clearly wrong
It would be clearly wrong for police to go around stopping and harrassing cyclists for advertising that they’re running cameras
Particularly when the dodgy forces (Lancashire and, I’m told on here, Sussex) insist that you advertise it: this is on the opening page of OpSnap Lancs. The motive for Lancashire, since they know that essentially zero % of the people reporting to OSL display these notifications, is to discredit the reporter if they need to.
wtjs wrote:
As you well know, that requirement is utter bollocks
As you well know, that
As you well know, that requirement is utter bollocks
We know that but, unfortunately, Lancashire Constabulary and the Information Commissioner don’t. They’re fighting me at the Information Tribunal in favour of that and in favour of the right of the police to tell you nothing at all about what happened about indisputable offences against you!
wtjs wrote:
“footage taken is in the public domain”? This is clearly bollocks. Whoever wrote this text is obviously not a lawyer, nor sought legal review of this text.
hawkinspeter wrote:
A misunderstanding of the GDPR that you are identifying Natural Persons has led some police services to reject ‘improperly collected’ video.
However they are in error because vehicle registration doesn’t identify a Natural Person. Only the police service can request the Registered Keeper of the vehicle (DVLA data) because they are data controllers going about their lawful primary purpose. Thus the video provider doesn’t need to advise that they are capturing video like a building CCTV.
So showing a PassPixi badge to advise video capture is for the purpose of Deterrence.
Personally I’m not convinced that visually inattentive road users would even notice words or symbols but don’t have the data to prove that. Thus I don’t advise video capture.
Just like most motor vehicles fitted with a dash camera.
Also, the Information
Also, the Information Commissioner acknowledges that dashcams are not subject to the same rules (e.g. advising that recordings are being made) as fixed CCTV: https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/domestic-cctv-systems/
lonpfrb wrote:
Also, there’s exceptions to GDPR for the purposes of crime detection/law enforcement. If someone stabs you and runs away, there’s not really any problem with using your phone to video them. Of course, with dashcams and their ilk, it’s slightly different as they’re recording constantly, but they’re used in a public place where there’s little expectation of privacy.
Of course, with dashcams and
Of course, with dashcams and their ilk, it’s slightly different as they’re recording constantly, but they’re used in a public place where there’s little expectation of privacy
However, the Information Commissioner thinks that the Lancashire Constabulary requirement I display below is perfectly OK. If this were to be accepted as anything other than ‘a load of bollocks’ you can imagine all the shyster lawyers lining up to get their clients off, because they ‘didn’t see the notification that they were being filmed ‘
guns are for cowards
guns are for cowards
How’d it work out? Road side
How’d it work out? Road side with law enforcment, soley to stoke his ego mouthing the cops.That is a confrontation that could go as sideways as a close pass.
Turk wrote:
Why do people get causes confused so much?
On the one hand, you’ve got someone wearing a slogan on a shirt and on the other hand you’ve got law enforcement that decide to target a cyclist for a made up reason. How do you figure that the cyclist caused that?
As Car Delenda Est mentioned, it’s not unusual to have gun positive stickers on cars and they’re never pulled over for that reason. If you want to blame anyone for encounters with police going “sideways”, then you need to consider the police’s behaviour first as they are supposed to be trained to deal with the public and uphold the law. Stopping a cyclist for no sensible reason (“you’ve got a lot of lights”) doesn’t seem like a good use of their time and it’s bizarre that you think that the cyclist was to blame for that.
“supposed to be trained”, you
“supposed to be trained”, you’re not paying attention to US law and enforcement here. That you can banter on obviously not knowing US firearms laws, the current crime climate here, and firearm laws enforced by at least 51 jurisdictions is painfully obvious. OK here ya go, as a 140 lb bicycle rider, head in a bar/pub with a tee proclaiming I am the baddest toughest SOB in the place. Give it a 30 mile bike rides time and then get up n leave. Now imagine on a bicycle with a small hand gun, and a sign proclaming same. When you encounter a cop here which I never have on a bici, have twice in a vehicle.No1 you don’t argue, you tell him I have a CCW and I am armed. This confrontation is real imagined, or what ever. It would not have happened with out the TEE shirt !!! Or piss off a nitt witt in a vehicle, ride away and find he had a rifle capable of a 1 mile shot. Your proclamation is asking for trouble from any loon, scared, pissed off or derainged person. There is always a tougher guy out there this is a good way to find him.
Turk wrote:
The fact that there may be some other people looking for trouble does not mean that the intention of the shirt is to pick a fight with people. Is it common for every U.S. citizen that visibily open carries to get into constant gun battles as everyone tries to prove themselves tougher or did you make up quite a bit of your statement?
To be honest, it sounds like victim blaming to be trying to blame the cyclist rather than the anti-cyclist police or some supposed nutter with a 1 mile shot rifle. Put the blame for violent actions on the person performing it, not a slogan on a shirt.
Open carry is a bit different
Open carry is a bit different than a CCW, the dude doesn’t have a hawgleg strapped to him, it’s advertised CCW. Obviously your view is the proper one, from far too much time unarmed save for a keyborad. Carry on you win.
Turk wrote:
Over here, I encounter police on biscuits daily (mostly kilted polis on shortbread, actually). Your country is amazing but ours has its advantages.
Here, perhaps, the USA could be ahead of us. Imagine being able to compute the parabolic flight of the bullet over that mile to hit the target, knowing the muzzle velocity, projectile mass, acceleration due to gravity, wind velocity and take account of a wobbly cyclist. Almost too good to be rhetoric. I salute you and the country you doubtless inhabit.
TheBillder]
Quite right. There are a lot of peek freans out there; you never know when some bandit from Abernethy might be away with your gold bars – or even your empire!
hawkinspeter wrote:
To deter confontation
Sorely tempted to get one of
Sorely tempted to get one of those flags for my town bike…
https://bikerumor.com/pbe15-take-your-lane-makes-the-3-foot-rule-come-to-life-with-adjustable-safety-flag/
A rider I wholeheartedly
A rider I wholeheartedly agree with.
Not sure if legal in US. I’d stock limpet mines on my utility belt. Ready for magnetic deployment upon the most hideous of close pass vehicles.
Fignon's ghost wrote:
I find that 1.5m of white plastic pipe 15mm attached perpendicular to the top tube onto the seat tube is effective in helping the spacially challenged to understand the minimum acceptable separation to a bicycle. On the offside, obviously.
Because it’s unusual it gets noticed, which is the point.
It doesn’t require a firearm nor explosive license so is open to everyone at a cost of about £1 from a hardware store or local plumber.
Yes. I do agree.
Yes. I do agree.
Stateside. I’d prefer GUNISHMENT.
I cycled from the southern
I cycled from the southern tip of Argentina to the far north of Alaska 20 years ago and only ever felt threatened while riding in the good old US of A.
Sad that a cyclist thinks this get up is the only way to stay safe on the road, but it says more about the country he travels through than the individual himself.
Having said that, such a set up would come in quite useful in South Africa.
Owd Big ‘Ead wrote:
Both useful and necessary in Mandela’s Rainbow Nation.
it’s no longer Mandela’s is
it’s no longer Mandela’s is it ? and, have you a problem with race or liberal politics ? cycling is about freedom, and you cant be free if you are caught up in right-wing idealogy- ideas of confinement
I’ve been riding busy roads
I’ve been riding busy roads for about 30 years.
I learned two things about drivers seeing me:
– from behind, if the driver does not see me with a regular tail light and regular reflective bands – he’s texting or doing something else except paying attention to the road and other travelers.
– from the front, high/low beams are a must. Many do not lower their headlights at night to oncoming cyclists. I need to see the road too. Usually, one flash is enough. I ride mostly on low beams even with an empty road ahead, otherwise.
You can dress as a Christmas tree – if the driver is playing with their phone you’re still mashed potatoes.
Not stepping into the guns
Not stepping into the guns debate but similar bumper stickers are common, at least in New England, but I have never heard of a motorist being stopped for this.
Some people seem to have
Some people seem to have forgotten just how important the Information Commissioner is within the administration of GDPR, FOIA etc. It is all very well to make definitive statements about these acts on here because nobody important is listening. However, the police and the Commissioner are actually fighting in favour of an opposite interpretation, so someone has to oppose them. I am doing that.
Are you sure you are posting
Are you sure you are posting on the right article? What has a gun nut got to do with GDPR?
Also I presume you are talking out the privacy disclaimer on the Rozzer Camera sites? Whilst the cops are taking a “cop out” view there is no evidence to suggest the ICO shares that view, in fact plenty to contrary. Failing to stop the coppers doing it doesnt mean they support it – it just means they dont see it as a priority (and they are probably right)
I think the whole
I think the whole conversation went from gun nut to cameras, and thence to GDPR (and I think wtjs was intending to reply to something further down the thread instead of creating a new comment…).
Are you sure you are posting
Are you sure you are posting on the right article?
Yes- the Information Commissioner and GDPR were mentioned and I have quite a lot of experience of both
wtjs wrote:
That’s what I said was going on!
Given the high number of
Given the high number of dangerous close pass videos posted on here it’s quite refreshing to see an elderly Floridian’s solution. Good job we have Draconian firearms laws in the UK as it would be so so tempting to pop a cap in the ass of pig ignorant motorists whilst out on the bike!????