Views and opinions about "war on Britian's roads"

wellbeloved747

I am carrying out a sociology report at college so I ask you the below question. Is you have watched war on Britian's road

What is the overall feeling about the program. Like most do you think that is is a 50/50 problem.

All replies are greatly appreciated.

EdgarAllenPoe

I am a cyclist, obviously, but I found the young cyclist with glasses made me dislike cyclists.

Mikey41

It was very balanced I thought. I found it quite disturbing in places, particularly seeing the CCTV of Cynthias daughter. That was hard to deal with.

It is a 50/50 problem as you cannot say that every cyclist is perfect just as all drivers aren't perfect. I am both and I've made my share of mistakes on two wheels and four. I've written off one car when I was younger, but have never injured anyone, and I don't intend to do it again (it hurts!). The rules of the road exist for a reason - to allow people to travel safely - if they are respected by BOTH sides, then there is no conflict at all.

bigpikle

viewtopic.php?f=40013&t=12893662

Jez mon

Meh, I think some drivers might benefit from appreciating that their cars aren't made from papier mache, and whilst banging on them might make a loud sound, and be taking a bit of a liberty, it is rather unlikely to cause a dent. Otoh, clipping a cyclist when you overtake them too close is likely to cause a nasty accident.

Unfortunately, there are some cyclist behaviours which do antagonise drivers, I begrudgingly agreed with the twonk in the glasses about riding confidently in your lane, shifting the blame for bad driving then onto the cyclist is just stupid.

Mikey23

It did not show the human race in a very good light. For me it confirmed my opinions based on many conversations that have taken place on these forums. There are as many loose cannons and arrogant rissoles among the cycling community as there are amongst motorists. Some of the actions taken and the opinions expressed were deeply disturbing and made me ashamed to be associated with them. At least the poor mother who had lost her daughter is prepared to do something that will hopefully make a difference

supercoley1

I don't think it is as simple as 50/50.

Problem is that 100% of drivers have passed a test. This 'should' mean that they are fully aware of what they need and must do when on the roads. It also means that any transgression is 'in general' intended!!!

That's the driver's side of things.

Then you have the problem with Cyclists. Cyclists are made up of many different types. There are those that know the rules plus have common sense and these can be used in your OP question as they (just like the drivers) know what they are doing when they transgress.

The rest are many groups.
Casuals who cannot ride within a 3ft wide cycle line, let alone keep to the left hand 3ft side of the road.
Casuals who ride to the pub, drink 5 pints and then ride home.
Casuals who ride on the pavement
Casuals who have no lights
Casuals and trendies who have no brakes (or have unclipped them because they make a noise, rubbing)
Many others to add to this list.

I think your question is how does each side (the cyclist who knows the rules) and the driver perceive each other?
I would suggest the cyclist is in this case much more 'in the right'. Most cyclists that do know the rules, don't intentionally break the law. Many (If not most!!!) drivers that have passed a test DO intentionally break the law, yet bark on about the cyclist.

By that I mean?
Drivers KNOW that you should stop when the light goes amber if it is safe and possible to do so yet they and the next 10 cars will accelerate through and the traffic crossing have to wait.
Drivers KNOW that they are driving at 75, 80, 90mph on the motorway or any other road (how many % are 70 or under on the dual carriageways or motorway?)
Drivers know they are supposed to indicate well before they turn. And also even if the lane is a left turn only they are supposed to do so.
Drivers know that a speed camera is only a problem if you are going faster than the speed limit!!!
This list is endless and all should be pulled up.

Same for Cyclists. If they RLJ, ride without lights at night or anything else they should be pulled up. No difference. If you are on the road then you accept that will abide by the law. If you don't know the law then as a cyclist it's hard luck. If you are a driver then how on earth did you get that licence.

I should add that I both drive and cycle. I have never had an accident in my car, however I have been over several car bonnets (twice fullon from the side, meaning car headlights lining up with my wheels) and been clipped (painfully) dozens of times. Both day and night, Always with lights on, always at junctions. Always in the 'rush to work' or 'rush from work' times.

One argued that I was in the wrong lane when I wasn't. the Rest were doing F1 starts from sideroads, overtaking too close, cutting in too quickly. All of these claimed SMIDSY!!!!!

There is a pattern me thinks.

EDIT : Oh and I think there is a little bit of a problem with other drivers thinking that bikes are slow!!!. They cut in or pull out often thinking that they have time not realising that I am not doing 12mph. I would suggest my own anticipation of this has limited an 'accidents' to the low teens.

Pituophis

Just to get a bit of a feeling about the subject, I posed the question on another forum that has no connection with cycling, and I get on well with the other contributors.
So far, to a man, every reply has been negative towards cyclists
Most of the reasons are for things that motorists do anyway, like running red lights, not signalling, riding aggressively and using mobiles???

The programme its self I thought showed cyclists in a negative light in the main, it certainly wasn't balanced :roll:

Did anyone else notice what a terrible punch "Mr hard man from the silver car" threw? Still glad they caught up with him though!

jouxplan

Pituophis wrote:

Did anyone else notice what a terrible punch "Mr hard man from the silver car" threw? Still glad they caught up with him though!

Ha! Ha! Yes, his first punch did not really land, but I thought his second punch (an uppercut I believe) must have hurt a lot :-(
I hope he feels especially macho now he has been on the telly looking like the kn*b he is.

djm501

Yes, it was almost straight into the helmet wasn't it? Didn't do the guy much damage I think. Good that he was exposed on t'internet though.

I thought the programme was reasonably OK with balance and I was quite pleased to see some of the drivers involved getting their say too. I don't think it's going to solve anything though - like someone said on the other thread a studio debate afterwards would have been useful. Plus it is sensationalist. I have a tricky roundabout to deal with on the way home where I have to go to the middle lane to turn right and it's at the end of an uphill. So I 'take charge' of the left lane (which divides at the roundabout) to allow myself to get to the middle. In six months of doing this I've had one car rev his engine behind me and another do that and beep too, followed by an absurdly dangerous undertake within millimetres of me. He then had to stop anyway of course.

Two a***holes in six months isn't a particularly bad problem is it?

Pituophis

Two a***holes in six months isn't a particularly bad problem is it?[/quote]

I'd say you were doing quite well

djm501

Well it's three if you count me ;-)

priory

2 a@holes every 6months.
How many does it take to kill you?
one, with a single touch of his 2ton 150hp machine.

I do not understand why it is that drivers get away with a cheery chat from the police when they have been threatening serious violence against people whose worst crime is to cause some irritation . If I pointed a shotgun at a nasty neighbour and fired it over his head I wonder what the constable would say to that. The uses of vehicles to intimidate shown on the programme were at least as dangerous as that and the drivers allowed to present themselves as innocent, decent guys.

Deliberately careless behaviour such as phone use , sat-nav in the windscreen, programming it while 'driving' speeding etc etc are simply ignored the vast majority of the time. I do not think that being unable to see that it is safe to move a truck absolves the driver who sets off knowing he cannot and does nothing to sort that.

just because behaviour like that is commonplace does not mean we have to shut up and accept it.

at least these camera guys are doing something to prove the problem. Initially I typed that I would not confront people as much as they do , though. But if the police are so incapable of doing it you can understand people thinking they have to do it for themselves.

Lookyhere

i think the biggest prob with the show was that by an large it showed that cyclists can be hit by cars and then get up and walk away, where the reality is the opposite.
Programs like this just re enforce views and wont change opinions, only losing someone close does that - the older Taxi driver...for example.
Hopefully though, motorists may be less willing to get involved with cyclists as they might think we all have helmet cams...pity the 'bill dont take footage seriously.

NITR8s

My views from the program that the cyclists who were RLJ and taking unnecessary risks in my view arnt cyclist but were commuters. The only real cyclists that I saw as the guy from Glasgow and the bunch of Mamils, who didnt do anything wrong.

As for the guy in the glasses, i am not quite sure what he is, other than an arragant twit. On several of the clips he was riding in the middle of the road when there was an empty cycle path next to him. But i guess thats ok cos he cycles at 30 mph all the time, cos he is amaze balls.

EssieP

I can't see any balance in that prog. If they'd interviewed the 10,000s of cyclists who make 100s of journeys each year without incident, then maybe. All were were shown were the adrenaline junkies and the arrogant minority in conflict.

I get shouted at about once every 2 years. What we saw the other night, does not reflect my experience of commuting over the past 25 years. Maybe if the company that made the film were to realise that there is life outside London, then maybe...

However, this morning I did see 3 drivers in a row texting as they drove. I didn't feel the need to put any calling cards through their windows though.

Drumlin

The title and the trailer alone were enough to deter me from watching it. I've been using my bike for commuting for nearly 40 years, I've rarely experienced the behaviours shown in the trailer and I certainly wouldn't call it war.

Simm0

A lot of people who drive cars are not very good at it and by the looks of it in London the same goes for cyclists. The programme was quite interesting but is not a good representation of cyclists across the UK. I and those who cycle with me ride our bikes like we drive our cars. We don't run red lights, undertake or weave in and out of traffic and thank motorists for their patience when appropriate. Building good relations with other road users and a bit of mutual respect goes a long way. I think the programme was too much focused on commuters and the extreme views of both sides.

The young cyclist with the glasses is too confrontational IMO. The 50 odd years cabby talked a lot of sense and I found myself agreeing with almost all his points. You can see the feeling of waste in the mother who lost her daughter needlessly and it is good to see her working positively to make things better which is more than out politicians are doing.

There was little mention in this programme of accidents occurring on rural roads or cyclist hit from behind. The law has to change :!: Having been taken out by a car on a roundabout I am only too aware of lazy policing, the lack of responsibility motorists take for their actions and the hassle, time-scale and frustration involved in getting your bike and body repaired :!: The fact is plain to see, drivers kill cyclists and then claim SMIDSY. This is not accepted in Holland and other parts of Europe and until we have a culture change in the uk we still as cyclists remain cannon fodder

The programme may have caused some awareness of the issues of poor infrastructure and sharing congested road space with vulnerable road users but did not look at any real solutions or interview any politicians about policy change or answers.