The war on Britains roads, 5th Dec BBC

zx6man

Rick Chasey wrote:

I've had a moped get angry enough with me trying to pass me on the inside by the curb that he wrote my back wheel off and didn't stop. I've had women get out of their car and try to hit me because she knocked me on the head with her wing mirror. I've had a guy try to run me over before getting out and kicking me on the ground because he felt I was slowing him up (despite being inside a painted cycle lane).

I've seen my mate be properly left hooked (flying over the windscreen) in front of me and the driver didn't stop.

Worst, some lads in a car thought it was funny to push me off. I was in hospital with a broken pelvis. First I knew about it was on my way towards the floor.
.

Do you get any luck out of these via the police?

rjsterry

gtvlusso wrote:

I think the other thing that annoys me is; Who is Gaz to presume that he is so great that he can educate people? That stinks of pure arrogance, there are cyclist all over the country who have been happily plodding away commuting, racing and so on for decades without Gaz's 'education'....

Gaz and co do seem to have a higher number of incidents than anyone else, so, I would presume that the camera makes them feel 'safe' and worthy......

How did Gaz really think that he was going to be edited in a programme called 'the war on Britains roads'? For real, did he think that it would portray him or anyone else involved in a good light? I mean, really, it beggars belief....

I know that I am getting a bit ranty and my views on bicycle cameras is well documented, but a few years ago, this was not a problem.....and now it f*cking well is. I realize that cyclist numbers have shot up and social media has allowed more of a forum for raising issues, but is filming every little moment of your life a uploading to youtube really the way to enlighten the populace? I think that this show in it's entirety proves the negative, no, it is a sh*t idea and has pi$$ed off an awful lot of people...

Stuff analyzing the individual videos in the show. The show did exactly what it sought to do - it proved that there is a 'war on Britains roads' and there are t*ts on both sides.....

Re-watched it last night - less drunk!

No. There isn't. The whole thing is a self-reinforcing fabrication.

rick_chasey

No.

The guy who kicked me got pulled in for questioning but denied it. Police put out an advert appealing for witnesses but none came forward. Not even the guy who pulled the agressor of me.

The police needed me to go into the station for the moped driver who wrote off my wheel and I literally didn't have the time. I was out of the country for the 48hr time or whatever. I didn't have any details beyond it being an indian guy with glaseses on a moped.

The woman I didn't bother with. Not worth it. I was 17 at the time.

The lads - I reported but no witnesses on a dark road. No description, since the first I saw was when I was on the ground.

My mate who got left hooked. I filled in a witness report and that was the last I heard of it.

So no not really. I don't feel particularly protected by the police when I'm on my bike. Especially after one fined me for ridng a dutch bike with a dynamo and a back pedal brake.

gtvlusso

rjsterry wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

I think the other thing that annoys me is; Who is Gaz to presume that he is so great that he can educate people? That stinks of pure arrogance, there are cyclist all over the country who have been happily plodding away commuting, racing and so on for decades without Gaz's 'education'....

Gaz and co do seem to have a higher number of incidents than anyone else, so, I would presume that the camera makes them feel 'safe' and worthy......

How did Gaz really think that he was going to be edited in a programme called 'the war on Britains roads'? For real, did he think that it would portray him or anyone else involved in a good light? I mean, really, it beggars belief....

I know that I am getting a bit ranty and my views on bicycle cameras is well documented, but a few years ago, this was not a problem.....and now it f*cking well is. I realize that cyclist numbers have shot up and social media has allowed more of a forum for raising issues, but is filming every little moment of your life a uploading to youtube really the way to enlighten the populace? I think that this show in it's entirety proves the negative, no, it is a sh*t idea and has pi$$ed off an awful lot of people...

Stuff analyzing the individual videos in the show. The show did exactly what it sought to do - it proved that there is a 'war on Britains roads' and there are t*ts on both sides.....

Re-watched it last night - less drunk!

No. There isn't. The whole thing is a self-reinforcing fabrication.

You and I know there is no war, we cycle daily and have very few incidents, but Joe Public motorist does not know this - the largest demographic.......The program portrayed exactly the title to them, out there. They have no idea or care about editing; It showed that there is a war between cyclists and motorists.

Done.

Lefthook

DonDaddyD wrote:

Perhaps I have had media training? Perhaps my 1st rule is to never become the story.

It might be your first rule, but I don't know how closely you follow it!

DonDaddyD

Lefthook wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Perhaps I have had media training? Perhaps my 1st rule is to never become the story.

It might be your first rule, but I don't know how closely you follow it!

HUGE difference between some pumped up drama contained on this website and having people flame my twitter/facebook accounts, having my face on TV, newspapers and youtube video footage of me being a prick.

Editted to add: 6 posts and you seem to know my reputation on here, Porgy?

roger_merriman

rjsterry wrote:

So exactly how media-savvy are you both? If you were approached in an apparently genuine way to comment on a subject, about which you feel strongly, would you really tell them to get stuffed? I've had some family experience of being stitched up by a BBC journo who had already decided what the story was before the interview, so I think we could cut Gaz some slack. As I said, what makes you think the programme's portrayal of him is accurate, given how skewed the rest of it was

snips

While hindsight is a wonderful thing, being stitched up by the media is not a new story. In this case it was a dead cert.

big_p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9fwA-ntF4Y

Lefthook

DonDaddyD wrote:

Lefthook wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Perhaps I have had media training? Perhaps my 1st rule is to never become the story.

It might be your first rule, but I don't know how closely you follow it!

HUGE difference between some pumped up drama contained on this website and having people flame my twitter/facebook accounts, having my face on TV, newspapers and youtube video footage of me being a prick.

Editted to add: 6 posts and you seem to know my reputation on here, Porgy?

Afraid not, long time lurker, new poster. Always, well almost always, enjoy the drama you create with your posts, wether I agree with your view or not.

mybreakfastconsisted

Why did nobody ask the cabbie why he thought his overtake was safe? It plainly wasn't, and he's driving around London thinking overtaking with inches to spare is ok and the programme never corrected this.

il_principe

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Why did nobody ask the cabbie why he thought his overtake was safe? It plainly wasn't, and he's driving around London thinking overtaking with inches to spare is ok and the programme never corrected this.

Meh, London's roads are busy and quite narrow, most drivers pass with inches to spare. You just have to grin and bear it.

mybreakfastconsisted

Bikes are faster than cars in London, it was a pointless and aggressive overtake and the driver thinks it's fine, he did it to three cyclists in a row for no apparent reason. When you're doing the same speed as a vehicle and it veers into your lane a tap on the car alerts the driver better than shouting.

Kieran_Burns

So hang on.

by some people's definitions here, I'm a self-righteous arrogant pr*ck for daring to use a helmet cam?

Yeesh - talk about sub-grouping a sub-group.

I'm going to drive my Audi from now on.... Oh feck, wait. I'm f*cking sh*t driver for owning one of them as well aren't I?

gtvlusso

Il Principe wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Why did nobody ask the cabbie why he thought his overtake was safe? It plainly wasn't, and he's driving around London thinking overtaking with inches to spare is ok and the programme never corrected this.

Meh, London's roads are busy and quite narrow, most drivers pass with inches to spare. You just have to grin and bear it.

^^Very good point. Small country, large population for the land mass, dated infrastructure - make the best of it!

mybreakfastconsisted

See, the programme WAS divisive and aggressive, it's set people squabbling. If they wanted balance the programme makers could have countered the alley cat footage with the 140mph M1 fatalities and pretended that's the sort of normal driving you get on our roads.

gtvlusso

Kieran_Burns wrote:

So hang on.

by some people's definitions here, I'm a self-righteous arrogant pr*ck for daring to use a helmet cam?

Yeesh - talk about sub-grouping a sub-group.

I'm going to drive my Audi from now on.... Oh feck, wait. I'm f*cking shoot driver for owning one of them as well aren't I?

Nope - you are not. You do not seek to 'educate'. You did not naively share your films with a documentary maker. You do not upload to youtube (as far as I know!).

Personally, I don't give a rats if you film and use the films for your own interests....but if you make them publicly accessible, comment and pretend to educate cyclists and drivers then yes, I would presume arrogance....in both camps from my POV.

I think I have been driving and cycling for longer than Gaz has been alive!

notsoblue

Il Principe wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Why did nobody ask the cabbie why he thought his overtake was safe? It plainly wasn't, and he's driving around London thinking overtaking with inches to spare is ok and the programme never corrected this.

Meh, London's roads are busy and quite narrow, most drivers pass with inches to spare. You just have to grin and bear it.

Maybe, but *that* road wasn't. He basically just wanted to be in the lane that the cyclist was already in and tried to muscle his way in there because he was in a larger vehicle. The infrastructure in London isn't an excuse for sh*tty driving. I'm all for a bit of give and take, but saying that drivers can get away with dangerous driving because of the infrastructure is like excusing cyclists for going through red lights because road design sometimes makes it safer to do so.

Why grin and bear it? Why not do something about it after having identified the infrastructure as being a problem?

Kieran_Burns

gtvlusso wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

So hang on.

by some people's definitions here, I'm a self-righteous arrogant pr*ck for daring to use a helmet cam?

Yeesh - talk about sub-grouping a sub-group.

I'm going to drive my Audi from now on.... Oh feck, wait. I'm f*cking shoot driver for owning one of them as well aren't I?

Nope - you are not. You do not seek to 'educate'. You did not naively share your films with a documentary maker. You do not upload to youtube (as far as I know!).

Personally, I don't give a rats if you film and use the films for your own interests....but if you make them publicly accessible, comment and pretend to educate cyclists and drivers then yes, I would presume arrogance....in both camps from my POV.

I think I have been driving and cycling for longer than Gaz has been alive!

Sorry, but I have over 40 vids on YT at the last count. I thought my "daft tart" vid was almost famous

il_principe

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Bikes are faster than cars in London, it was a pointless and aggressive overtake and the driver thinks it's fine, he did it to three cyclists in a row for no apparent reason. When you're doing the same speed as a vehicle and it veers into your lane a tap on the car alerts the driver better than shouting.

Which is all well and good. I've tapped a few cars on my time, once went postal on the doors of a sightseeing bus that forced me on to the pavement. Not clever, but the adrenaline kicks in (i guess this is why we cyclists can be a shouty bunch). I just don't see the need to film these encounters, edit it, comment on it and then post it on youtube. Primarily because I'd rather spend my spare time riding my bike, and also because I don't happen to think I'm God's gift to cycle safety.

However, we all know how angry people get at having their cars touched (I get pretty irate when strangers cop a feel of one of my bikes without asking), so it's not the most intelligent thing to do. Aggression tends to breed aggression anyway. If we all had a quiet, polite word at the next set of lights etc, rather than screaming, swearing and banging, then the roads might be a nicer place...

mybreakfastconsisted

I think it would have been good to explain to the driver that if a cyclist can touch the vehicle, you're too close. That thick cabbie is driving around London bullying cyclists off the roads.

gtvlusso

notsoblue wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Why did nobody ask the cabbie why he thought his overtake was safe? It plainly wasn't, and he's driving around London thinking overtaking with inches to spare is ok and the programme never corrected this.

Meh, London's roads are busy and quite narrow, most drivers pass with inches to spare. You just have to grin and bear it.

Maybe, but *that* road wasn't. He basically just wanted to be in the lane that the cyclist was already in and tried to muscle his way in there because he was in a larger vehicle. The infrastructure in London isn't an excuse for sh*tty driving. I'm all for a bit of give and take, but saying that drivers can get away with dangerous driving because of the infrastructure is like excusing cyclists for going through red lights because road design sometimes makes it safer to do so.

Why grin and bear it? Why not do something about it after having identified the infrastructure as being a problem?

Sorry - missed your point here. We are talking about a documentary that sought to give no answers to legitimate questions and camera cyclists that see other road users as the issue.

The documentary was what it was - 'war on the roads' - If you want an intelligent debate about infrastructure then this should have been the focus of the film, something sadly lacking - the film maker went for cheap sensationalism.

And will you be stumping up the tax money to make the identified improvements? Yes, you probably will, because you ride a bike. Do you think Mr Cab driver will stump up the readies? No, because as far as he is concerned the roads are fine apart from to$$ers on bikes who should pay tax for their own road improvements!

il_principe

notsoblue wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Why did nobody ask the cabbie why he thought his overtake was safe? It plainly wasn't, and he's driving around London thinking overtaking with inches to spare is ok and the programme never corrected this.

Meh, London's roads are busy and quite narrow, most drivers pass with inches to spare. You just have to grin and bear it.

Maybe, but *that* road wasn't. He basically just wanted to be in the lane that the cyclist was already in and tried to muscle his way in there because he was in a larger vehicle. The infrastructure in London isn't an excuse for sh*tty driving. I'm all for a bit of give and take, but saying that drivers can get away with dangerous driving because of the infrastructure is like excusing cyclists for going through red lights because road design sometimes makes it safer to do so.

Why grin and bear it? Why not do something about it after having identified the infrastructure as being a problem?

Like what? I've been on a few protest rides, written to my MP on a number of occasions, written to the Mayor etc etc, it doesn't change the fact that the roads are busy and narrow. If I shouted at every infringement on my commute I'd lose my voice every day. When we filter through traffic, many of us will be passing cars with inches to spare. If we didn't, we'd get nowhere faster than the ambient traffic.

mybreakfastconsisted

When a cyclist passes a vehicle closely the cyclist is in charge and is sensitive to the knowledge that a collision with anything hurts. Not so with that thug cabbie.

Origamist

Il Principe wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Why did nobody ask the cabbie why he thought his overtake was safe? It plainly wasn't, and he's driving around London thinking overtaking with inches to spare is ok and the programme never corrected this.

Meh, London's roads are busy and quite narrow, most drivers pass with inches to spare. You just have to grin and bear it.

LOL. I know a copper in the Met's Cycle Task Force and he is at pains to point out the remarkably different way he is treated when riding in his uniform. When in police clobber he receives hardly any close passes and vehicles patiently hang behind - when he's in civvies he gets treated like you and me - close passes a go go. This has nothing to do with "narrow lanes" in London, but everything to do with driver behaviour.

gtvlusso

Kieran_Burns wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

So hang on.

by some people's definitions here, I'm a self-righteous arrogant pr*ck for daring to use a helmet cam?

Yeesh - talk about sub-grouping a sub-group.

I'm going to drive my Audi from now on.... Oh feck, wait. I'm f*cking shoot driver for owning one of them as well aren't I?

Nope - you are not. You do not seek to 'educate'. You did not naively share your films with a documentary maker. You do not upload to youtube (as far as I know!).

Personally, I don't give a rats if you film and use the films for your own interests....but if you make them publicly accessible, comment and pretend to educate cyclists and drivers then yes, I would presume arrogance....in both camps from my POV.

I think I have been driving and cycling for longer than Gaz has been alive!

Sorry, but I have over 40 vids on YT at the last count. I thought my "daft tart" vid was almost famous

Well, you are not the other 2 anyway and I like your posts! Gaz always came across as a bit of a 'know it all' and quite naive IMHO when he posted on here.

**Shows how often I watch youtube!

DonDaddyD

Kieran_Burns wrote:

So hang on.

by some people's definitions here, I'm a self-righteous arrogant pr*ck for daring to use a helmet cam?

Yeesh - talk about sub-grouping a sub-group.

I'm going to drive my Audi from now on.... Oh feck, wait. I'm f*cking sh*t driver for owning one of them as well aren't I?

I'll say it.

No you are not. As far as I can tell you may upload footage on youtube, you do not however upload every single negative element of your commute and brand it as "Educating others on how to better road users".

Seriously, there is nothing wrong with using a camera when on your bike. Whether to review that enjoyable ride and/or for security reasons there is nothing wrong with it. However, a problem can occur when you decide what to do with that content and people need to be mindful of how said content or the constant stream of similar content is perceived by others*. In Gaz's/Traffic Droids case it was to be selfrighteous and all it did was create a perception of yet two milltant and indignant cyclist - fighting their own personal war on road users.

They demonised themselves. You, KB, haven't.

*Honestly did they think an overwhelming amont of negative footage was going to be perceived as other than divisive?

spen666

Kieran_Burns wrote:

So hang on.

by some people's definitions here, I'm a self-righteous arrogant pr*ck for daring to use a helmet cam?....

No, you're a self-righteous arrogant pr*ck whether you use a helmet cam or not


:twisted: :twisted: :twisted:



PS I was only joking

mybreakfastconsisted

I don't think traffic droid's got all his chairs in the dining room.

il_principe

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

I don't think traffic droid's got all his chairs in the dining room.

Been thinking the same, but didn't really want to post it!

gtvlusso

Il Principe wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

I don't think traffic droid's got all his chairs in the dining room.

Been thinking the same, but didn't really want to post it!

Just to make that legible:

I don't think traffic droid's got all his sprockets on the freehub.