Top Gear theory.

number9

Clarkson was warned by the beeb bosses that his encouragement of attacks on cyclists and "jokes" about running them over were affecting senior managers' attitude toward renewing the Top Gear programme.

Clarkson complained that his remarks were tongue in cheek, but it was pointed out that a number of cyclists had been seriously injured by drivers who may have read Clarkson recommending using vehicles as a weapon against vulnerable road users in The Sun.

The commuter race was a sop to the management of the BBC, a pro-cycling item would go some way to restore the imbalance of Clarkson's cowardly aggression.

So whilst the attacks continue, like the Essex man who will never walk again after being pushed from his bike in a Clarkson-style assault, the Top Gear producers can claim that they always supported cyclists and recognise what any cycle commuter knows- that they are the fastest urban vehicle.

Anonymous

Oh I get it now. Just as long as you put 'theory' in the OP you can spout any amount and as much b0ll0cks as you feel like doing. :roll:
Bit like using parenthesis in journalism eh?
Have a look at Cycle Chat,should be just up your street. :arrow:

mick_cornick

I agree that Clarkson is certainly promoting violence and intimidation of cyclists and pedestrians; he seems to feel drivers should have the right to go where they want and at the speed they choose.
However I believe most peolple who read his articles or watch top gear see him for the fat angry twat he is. I think censorship will just make a martyr of him and give cycling a bad name.
The place to deal with idiots who do use violence against cyclists is in court and I'm talking hanging (with the drawing and quartering).
:twisted:

hopster

Mick Cornick wrote:

I agree that Clarkson is certainly promoting violence and intimidation of cyclists and pedestrians; he seems to feel drivers should have the right to go where they want and at the speed they choose.
However I believe most peolple who read his articles or watch top gear see him for the fat angry fool he is. I think censorship will just make a martyr of him and give cycling a bad name.
The place to deal with idiots who do use violence against cyclists is in court and I'm talking hanging (with the drawing and quartering).
:twisted:

You are probably right in saying most people think Clarkson is "a fat angry fool" too but it only takes one that thinks he is right to kill someone.

number9

I've linked to The Sun "jokes" about killing people twice now.

"Speed, we're forever being told, kills. Slow down, say the advertisements on television and the digital boards on motorways. Flash flash go the speed cameras. The message is clear and constant, but I'm afraid you might as well try to teach a lamppost how to tie shoelaces. We need speed like we need air and food and water... Speed, as I've said many times before, makes you cleverer." (6 July 2003)

"In the wake of the London bombs we're told that many commuters are now switching to bicycles... can I offer five handy hints to those setting out on a bike for the first time. Do not cruise through red lights. Because if I'm coming the other way, I will run you down, for fun. Do not pull up at junctions in front of a line of traffic. Because if I'm behind you, I will set off at normal speed and you will be crushed under my wheels.... Do not, ever, swear at or curse people in cars or trucks. You are a guest on roads that are paid for by motorists so if we cut you up, shut up." (16 July 2005)

This car is for "Niggaz" (14 March 2004) and "... people who like to slap their Hos" (8 May 2005)

"I never find it touching when men cry. I just think they are gay" (15 September 2004).

"So, they're lowering the age of consent for homosexuals to four, teachers will be allowed to promote sodomy in schools and the Army is to become a hotbed of single-sex fumbling. I therefore find myself wondering. How long will it be before we get "Gay Lanes" on the motorway?" (Feb 18th 2000)

The police are "... jumped up little Hitlers whose penises are very obviously far too small" (14 May 2005)



I don't think it's Clarkson alone - on his own he's just a funny fat bloke who gobs off a bit - but there has been a broad press campaign pushing this agenda (now thankfully it seems to be in decline, probably on account of the backlash from friends and relatives of people killed and injured), and to pretend that it has no influence and makes no difference is as crazy as suggesting it is all the fault of one man.

The Sun ran some great mind-fxxx articles for WVM a while back - silhouettes of cyclists with the by-line "the enemy" lots of bile and rage, little actual content.

In the last few years there have been 4 or 5 newsworthy road rage attacks on cyclists - one resulting in death, at least two of the others resulting in very serious injuries - including a little girl in a cycle trailer needing facial reconstruction after a man deliberately ran over her and her father with his Range Rover.

People simply don't reach the conclusion that cyclists are an acceptable targets for such violence without some environmental influences - peer approval is a vital influence on people's activity. When your perceived buddy group contains an alpha male like Clarkson who does approve of such things, you're bound to feel the influence.

The stakes are very high, and I don't think this hate-mongering is acceptable or worth the risk.

Anonymous

Bog off back to Cycle Chat Bimbly.

dannygcp

whitley wrote:

Bog off back to Cycle Chat Bimbly.

I think Number9 is making a perfectly valid point about Clarkson helping to create an climate in which car drivers feel free to abuse or even injure cyclists.

If you don't agree fine, put up a counter argument. Don't just indulge in abuse.

Anonymous

There is no point in arguing with number9.,it serves merely to encourage his vitriol
His sole purpose is to abuse Clarkson or Safe Speed, depending on his particular mood or agenda at any given time.
If you do feel inclined to sympathise with his views then I suggest you log on to the site known as 'Cycle Chat' where his ilk reside in abundance.
Take note also of the topic heading in his previous post if you have a problem with what you perceive as abuse.

number9

Clarkson's can actually be a good presenter- his VC programme was very good, but I think a warning has been issued to whine his neck in, he had already been reprimanded BEFORE Hamster's crash.

I think stories like this persuaded them to get Clarkson to shut the fxxx up about killing cyclists:

'Jeremy Clarkson-types' carrying out attacks on Oxford cyclistsBack to Communities



Publisher: Jon Land

Published: 11/07/2006 -


Spate of attacks on Oxford's
cyclists "Jeremy Clarkson-types" who resent cyclists' ability to dodge traffic could be to blame for a series of incidents in which riders have been attacked in and around a city, a cycling pressure group said today.

The warning came as a 26-year-old man was shoved from his bike in Abingdon, south of Oxford, sustaining bruising and cuts to his knees, elbows and hips.

Now cyclists in Oxford, which has a long tradition of two-wheeled travel thanks to a combination of students and dons and heavy traffic, fear the attacks, mainly perpetrated by someone in a white van, could be a sign of a "worrying trend".

"It could be that the Jeremy Clarkson-types have taken umbrage to cyclists," Cyclox spokesman James Styring said.

"There has been a lot of coverage about cyclists in the media recently, there are more people taking to their bikes because of summer and maybe motorists get annoyed with their ability to skip traffic queues.

"Although it may seem like an amusing summer activity driving along and pushing people off their bikes, if someone breaks their neck you could be facing a murder charge."

The latest incident happened around 10.30am as the victim was cycling near the Ox public house on the A4183 when he felt a blow to his shoulder from behind and fell from his bike.

He remembers hearing a diesel engine and glimpsing a white vehicle, possible a van, passing him.

In mid-June, 68-year-old retired teacher Bonar Law was pushed off his bike by someone in a small white van on the B4009 just outside Princes Risborough.

In an article entitled Terror in the Cycle Lane, he told the Oxford Mail: "It has made me feel very unsafe. I would like to see these people brought to justice and, as a person who has suffered this, I would like the punishment to fit the crime.

"To them it is like watching Buster Keaton on a silent movie. They do it for laughs."

Police linked that incident with two others in south Oxfordshire.

The first known attack was on a 32-year-old woman, who had abused hurled at her and was punched by two men travelling in passing cars as she cycled on the Banbury Road in Summertown, north Oxford, on the morning of June 12.

Thames Valley Pc Lewis Boyce, investigating the Abingdon incident, said: "I am aware that there have been a number of similar incidents involving cyclists being pushed from their bikes and I will be looking into these to see if there are any clear links.

"This is no prank. Falling from a cycle could easily cause a serious injury and could even prove fatal, particularly if the cyclist were to fall into the path of an oncoming vehicle.

"We are treating these incidents very seriously and doing all we can to catch and prosecute those responsible."


http://www.24dash.com/content/news/view ... ewsID=8007

Parkey

I think the mistake that too many people make is to take Clarkson seriously.

Whilst he is clearly bigoted in certain ways he seems well aware of this and deliberately overstates these views beyond sensible boundaries in the name of creating entertainment. He seems quite happy to make fun of himself in the process.

The arrogant petrolheads who do take these remarks seriously will be around whether Clarkson is on the air or not, and in his absence there would always be the risk of somebody else, who did take it seriously, taking his place.

Tourist Tony

dannygcp wrote:

whitley wrote:

Bog off back to Cycle Chat Bimbly.

I think Number9 is making a perfectly valid point about Clarkson helping to create an climate in which car drivers feel free to abuse or even injure cyclists.

If you don't agree fine, put up a counter argument. Don't just indulge in abuse.

But its sole prupose in being here is to post abuse. It wouldn't be the same forum without our little temporary visitors.

Nigel-YZ1

I've watched Top Gear since I was a kid and I've not killed anyone yet. The tone of the program has moved away from being a serious review program, (remember William Woollard sitting on every wing and bumper) to more of a chat show with burning rubber.
I still enjoy it, although as a cyclist I cringe at some of the comments.

I don't blame the program for people driving around with fog lights on in broad daylight, rain, and during all hours of darkness.
I don't blame it for the man that slammed on the anchors as he passed me as i sat on a roadside bench, leaned out the window and screamed "FREAK!!".
I don't blame it for the asswipe who threw his McDonalds waste into my front wheel from a passing car.
I especially don't blame it for the new craze in pushing and hitting cyclists from moving cars - This I blame on an advert run in cinemas recently which showed nudists driving in a car and belting round the head first a cyclist, and then in another commercial a pedestrian nudist with a large fish. At the time I said to the person next to me -'How long is it before some idiot tries doing that for real?'.
I've never seen film of Top Gear presenters doing this.

The morons doing this stuff are in the pub on a Sunday night, not admiring Helen Mirren for her performance in a reasonably priced car.

Anonymous

Tourist Tony wrote:

dannygcp wrote:

whitley wrote:

Bog off back to Cycle Chat Bimbly.

I think Number9 is making a perfectly valid point about Clarkson helping to create an climate in which car drivers feel free to abuse or even injure cyclists.

If you don't agree fine, put up a counter argument. Don't just indulge in abuse.

But its sole prupose in being here is to post abuse. It wouldn't be the same forum without our little temporary visitors.

Tell us about your your recent trip to Australia again.
I'm having difficulty sleepimg

Tourist Tony

Paggers! I wondered who it was!



Do you actually ride a bike? We never established that one, did we?

Tourist Tony

So you are a previously banned member who rants on about how, er, previously banned members should be thrown out?

I see your brain power is as hot as ever. Perhaps you should speed up. Works for your mate smeggy.

Does your neurone never get lonely?

clarkson

people take him too seriously. i cycle every day and dont encounter 'bad' motorists. i find shit ones who dont notice you but the road is full of them.

as for cyclists that jump the lights thats their own problem if they get abused, sworn at or whatever. they should have stopped and then it wouldnt have happened.

i wouldnt say he is an angry old fool either, more someone who says what almost everyone else thinks, and shoves two fingers up to the PC brigade, health and safety and everything else this world is infested with that is actually needless. he brings an element of fun to the world and freedom that is dominated by gordaon brown and his twats that insist on watching us all the time. everyone is entitled to their own view of other people, just i hink some people take him far too seriously.

sorry, rant over!

spen666

clarkson wrote:

people take him too seriously. i cycle every day and dont encounter 'bad' motorists. i find shoot ones who dont notice you but the road is full of them.

.... !

and they aren't bad motorists?

secretsqirrel

The problem I have with JC is that he has been on the screens for 20 years and never changes and frankly is getting to be a bore.
As for jumping red lights, I'm afraid I see cars do this everyday, it's not just a bike trick. The big difference is that a cyclist does this at their own risk, motor vehicles do it at everybody else's.

clarkson

i wouldnt class them as bad motorists, jus tunobservant ones. bad ones are those that go past you instead of round you, cut you up, brake and turn off in front of you without warning, and those that acknowledge you're there but decide to take a risky move anyway.

Tourist Tony

To pick up on Spen's question, unobservant motorists ARE bad motorists. Due care and attaention...

spen666

clarkson wrote:

i wouldnt class them as bad motorists, jus tunobservant ones. bad ones are those that go past you instead of round you, cut you up, brake and turn off in front of you without warning, and those that acknowledge you're there but decide to take a risky move anyway.

That's ok then the fact s/he just killed 8 pedestrians on a zebra crossing is ok then as s/he isn't a bad driver, just unobservant

Bad driving and bad drivers take many forms

What you describe is an example of bad driving, just as much as those who fail to notice what is going on around them

clarkson

in a way yes, but it isnt blatently deliberate is it?! they didnt go out of their way to do that.

there must be cases in which you've been unobservant? i have been and no doubt will be when im on my bike. people are only human, and can miss things.

spen666

clarkson wrote:

in a way yes, but it isnt blatently deliberate is it?! they didnt go out of their way to do that.

there must be cases in which you've been unobservant? i have been and no doubt will be when im on my bike. people are only human, and can miss things.

Thats ok then- when you are killed by a motorist who wasn't paying attention and failed to observe a red light or pedestrian crossing or even the person in front of them

clarkson

spen have you ever missed something? not paying attentopn? adn besides, the cyclist also needs to be observant, see whats going on.

i take it from what you've just said that you're perfect and do everything as it should be done!?! i think not!

Tourist Tony

The reply to that is simple. Yes, we do make mistakes, and that makes us bad cyclists. The difference is that a bad cyclist ends up dead, rather than killing someone else. A fundamental difference: when operating fast, heavy machinery, you have a greater duty of care to others. I will walk down a pavement when I am absolutely shattered. I won't drive in the same condition. See the difference? That greater duty of care demands greater concentration, more careful observation asnd hence more awareness of what is going on outside one's little heated bubble of glass and steel.

clarkson

yeah, you have a point. but you cant say really that one user has more responsibility than another.

Tourist Tony

Yes you can. That is exactly the point. One user is operating a ton of high-speed heavy machinery. That is why he requires training and a licence, and a pedestrian does not.

clarkson

yes thats true, but a pedestrian/cyclist/driver has a responsibility to look out for themselves and to an extent others.

Tourist Tony

Nobody is denying that. It is simply that one has a greater duty of care because they CHOOSE to operate dangerous machinery around others.

Deuce

The best thing I ever read about Clarkson was in a review of his short run of a chat show in Private Eye where they pointed out that he ran a "dictator of the week" piece until Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and he suddenly dropped this strand like the squalid little coward he is.

turkeytickler

clarkson wrote:

as for cyclists that jump the lights thats their own problem if they get abused, sworn at or whatever. they should have stopped and then it wouldnt have happened.

Absolutely true - but - when I get abused, sworn at or whatever (whatever including acts of russian roulette in which the methaphorical gun is pointed at me) because all cyclists are tarred by the same brush by the likes of clarkson - that makes it my problem, and Im just trying to get to work without breaking any laws.