Cyclists - what's with the head cams?

[JonathanRyan]

It seems that every other cyclist I see has a GoPro (other action cameras are available) strapped to their heads now.

Why?

Is it just for "evidence" if somebody cuts them up or are they all shooting panoramic footage of the Kent countryside and selling it to stock?

Does anybody ever watch the movies?

 

[POAH]

I've got mine to record my off road adventures and my friends who are in front of me. a by product is that you obviously get to record your commute and if anything was to happen you have a record of it. why do you think lots of russians have cameras in their cars? I've got no interest in watching my 30 min run to uni but if anything odd happens you have it on tape. check this mong for instance

 

[JonathanRyan]

why do you think lots of russians have cameras in their cars?

I thought it was some kind of requirement of what passes for insurance in Russia. Also, some of their stuff is really funny.

 

[Big Andy]

They're all TP members looking to fill the OOF section with scandalous road rage incidents .

 

[4wd]

Some of them it gives a reason to be aggressive and on the look out for confrontations to record - apparently.

 

[neil_g]

same reason dashcams are now becoming more popular, there are WAY too many morons on the road.

 

[neil_g]

oh and waiting patiently for this to turn into an anti-cyclist thread.

 

[POAH]

so long as it's anti-roadie that's ok

 

[Major Eazy]

Some of them it gives a reason to be aggressive and on the look out for confrontations to record - apparently.

Trouble is you did gave the finger to him, he would use it as an excuse for his actions. Had you not waved a finger at him, it could have been possible he may have drove on anyway.

 

[Tigger.ufo]

Some of them it gives a reason to be aggressive and on the look out for confrontations to record - apparently.

Bit of a knob really. Why did he have to move right as he was pulling away? Plenty of room for a cycle and the small van to pass safely there.

Making the obscene gesture removes any crediblity he might possibly have had IMO.

 

[Mattyd]

As other have said - its for evidence.

I'm yet to have a major run in (well...Ive had a few but they are minor), but...I know that if and when I do, because im the cyclist there will be a very good chance peoples prejudices towards me might effect the outcome if the police/witnesses are involved. Its a very real problem.

Individual cyclists have no way of combating this attitude, so they fit cameras.

And you would be amazed how much victim blaming goes one when a pedestrian or cyclist are killed. Its another attitude that needs to change.

 

[Mattyd]

Trouble is you did gave the finger to him, he would use it as an excuse for his actions.

Had the cyclist been in a car the van driver would not have acted the way he did. It was only because he was on a bike that he thought him fair game to bully him.

The middle finger is interesting though. From experience when a motorist (edit) and cyclists too, surprise you by doing something stupid (and to a small or major degree puts your life in danger) retaliation (swearing, middle fingers) are almost instinct.

Im sure there have been many a pedestrian whose had a run in with a cyclist on a path. I doubt anyone would excuse the cyclist if he bullied said person because that person gave him the middle finger.

 

[seriousrikk]

Bit of a knob really. Why did he have to move right as he was pulling away? Plenty of room for a cycle and the small van to pass safely there.

Making the obscene gesture removes any crediblity he might possibly have had IMO.

Indeed.

In fact there was still, it appeared, ample room for the van to pass safely.

 

[seriousrikk]

Had the cyclist been in a car the van driver would not have acted the way he did. It was only because he was on a bike that he thought him fair game to bully him.

But I don't think he was bullying, the van driver was well over leaving plenty of room.

The cyclist was, however, a tit.

 

[Nikon_Nick]

I must be missing something, but I dont see where the cyclists life was put in danger. The only time he would have been in danger is if he had suddenly swerved to the right as the van was passing, then that would have been his fault. Hes obviously never cycled around Piccadily Circus on a saturday night...hed have a highway code infraction bonanza!!

Im a cyclist by the way, so this isnt coming from a cyclist hater.


Also, if you flip someone the bird (especially someone who doesnt think theyve done anything wrong), you are likely to cause confrontation.

 

[Mattyd]

But I don't think he was bullying, the van driver was well over leaving plenty of room.

The cyclist is already in the opposite lane, and the van overtakes him. You should never overtake anyone like that.

The cyclist would never expect it, its dangerous if only because of that. In addition (wideangle lens)....I would question how close the van is to the cyclist. But its not a particularly wide road.

Rule of thumb...A manover like that would fail you in a driving test. He could have waited.

 

[KIPAX]

I blame Jeremy Beadle

 

[JonathanRyan]

oh and waiting patiently for this to turn into an anti-cyclist thread.

Soon.....

 

[Mattyd]

I must be missing something, but I dont see where the cyclists life was put in danger. The only time he would have been in danger is if he had suddenly swerved to the right as the van was passing, then that would have been his fault.

Have you passed your driving test?

There are many reasons why a cyclist might need to swerve, and its this particular unknown, unpredictable reason motorist traffic are asked to give vulnerable road users space. Not overtake them illegally.

 

[Major Eazy]

Had the cyclist been in a car the van driver would not have acted the way he did. It was only because he was on a bike that he thought him fair game to bully him.

The middle finger is interesting though. From experience when a motorist (edit) and cyclists too, surprise you by doing something stupid (and to a small or major degree puts your life in danger) retaliation (swearing, middle fingers) are almost instinct.

Im sure there have been many a pedestrian whose had a run in with a cyclist on a path. I doubt anyone would excuse the cyclist if he bullied said person because that person gave him the middle finger.

Not really.

While of course it is possible you are right, but it is equally possible that even if the cyclist was in a car, the van driver would still bully him.

 

[viv1969]

Some of them it gives a reason to be aggressive and on the look out for confrontations to record - apparently.

To be fair, this one is six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Both of them are idiots.

 

[Mattyd]

Not really.

While of course it is possible you are right, but it is equally possible that even if the cyclist was in a car, the van driver would still bully him.

Possible of course, but very unlikely.

For started the van driver would not have illegally overtaken another vehicle while that vehicle was in the opposite lane. But anyway. Semantics....

To be fair, this one is six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Both of them are idiots.

This...

 

[JonathanRyan]

Have you passed your driving test?

There are many reasons why a cyclist might need to swerve, and its this particular unknown, unpredictable reason motorist traffic are asked to give vulnerable road users space. Not overtake them illegally.

Am I missing something? (Probably, I just found out headcam footage makes me dizzy). Bike was stationary - just starting to move. I can't think of a reason why a stationary vehicle would need to swerve suddenly.

The alternative would be an unnecessary stop by the van, then a slow crawl through the roadworks followed by an overtake.

 

[Ian D J]

Simply because headcam technology is now easily and cheaply available as well as being compact and thus has become part of the natural progress?

 

[Mattyd]

I can't think of a reason why a stationary vehicle would need to swerve suddenly.

cyclists are at their most unstable when they start moving.

The alternative would be an unnecessary stop by the van, then a slow crawl through the roadworks followed by an overtake.

The alternative is the correct way though. It would have added maybe 5 seconds to his journey. Any driving instructor will confirm this. You wait until its clear, and safe to overtake - that's outside the roadworks, not inside them. And its certainly not overtaking him in the opposite lane when hes already in said lane.

 

[neil_g]

in favour of the cyclist the van driver failed to follow:

"Road users requiring extra care (204 to 225)
212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162 to 167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.

213
Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make."

or

"2. Overtaking (162 to 169)
give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 213) and 214 to 215).

https://assets.digital.cabinet-offi...at_least_as_much_space_as_you_would_a_car.jpg"

However the finger probably didnt do him any favours.

However (again) the van driver is an aggressive moron. Who should've just shrugged off the finger rather than pursue some form of retribution.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

oh and waiting patiently for this to turn into an anti-cyclist thread.

I see no problem in people venting here on things that frustrate them. A sensitive soul may think that you were being anti road user in the post above by calling them morons. I am a driver and a cyclist, and see no problem in venting against either group - i just try not to be too precious if somebody is criticizing a group that i identify with.

 

[Mattyd]

Small side note....In Bikeability training cyclists are taught to take primary position to block traffic who might take their chances with a dangerous overtake when its not safe todo so. This is what I would have done.

It works wonders, but does take confidence that many cyclists don't have.

 

[neil_g]

I see no problem in people venting here on things that frustrate them. A sensitive soul may think that you were being anti road user in the post above by calling them morons. I am a driver and a cyclist, and see no problem in venting against either group - i just try not to be too precious if somebody is criticizing a group that i identify with.

call it experience. someone will be along shortly to exclaim that cyclists should not be on the road because they dont pay "road tax" no doubt

 

[Nikon_Nick]

Have you passed your driving test?.

No, my carer drives me everywhere

I didnt say the driver didnt do anything illegal, it was just my opinion that he didnt particularly put the cyclists life at risk. As I mentioned in my previous post, I am also a cyclist (and yes I did pass my cycling proficiency badge when I was 8, in case you are wondering), and from the video, I can safely say that it wouldnt have bothered me in the slightest if id been in his position.

 

[JonathanRyan]

cyclists are at their most unstable when they start moving.
The alternative is the correct way though. It would have added maybe 5 seconds to his journey. Any driving instructor will confirm this. You wait until its clear, and safe to overtake - that's outside the roadworks, not inside them. And its certainly not overtaking him in the opposite lane when hes already in said lane.

Fair enough. I do agree that if a car/van hits a bike then it's almost always the driver's fault (since they have far better tools at their disposal to avoid the accident or stop) and that the bike had right of way. But if I'd been the cyclist, when I looked over my shoulder and saw the van obviously not going to stop I would have waited for it to pass. It may not be the "right" thing to do but I'd rather be wrong than dead.

 

[Mattyd]

No, my carer drives me everywhere .

You joke, but its a fair question. The only reason I asked was because of the statement that "swerving cyclists would be to blame" - which is contradictory to what the highway code teaches...which obliviously everyone with a driving license know off by heart

I can safely say that it wouldn't have bothered me in the slightest if id been in his position.

Agree - wouldn't have bothered me all that much either...but then again I wouldn't have allowed it to happen

 

[POAH]

Some of them it gives a reason to be aggressive and on the look out for confrontations to record - apparently.

both of them are dicks

 

[nilagin]

in favour of the cyclist the van driver failed to follow:

"Road users requiring extra care (204 to 225)
212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162 to 167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.

213
Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make."

or

"2. Overtaking (162 to 169)
give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 213) and 214 to 215).

https://assets.digital.cabinet-offi...at_least_as_much_space_as_you_would_a_car.jpg"

However the finger probably didnt do him any favours.

However (again) the van driver is an aggressive moron. Who should've just shrugged off the finger rather than pursue some form of retribution.

The van was positioned completely on the other side of the road, very near the kerb, he gave the cyclist just as much room as he would give another car had he been overtaking one. He did no wrong.

 

[nilagin]

Small side note....In Bikeability training cyclists are taught to take primary position to block traffic who might take their chances with a dangerous overtake when its not safe todo so. This is what I would have done.

It works wonders, but does take confidence that many cyclists don't have.

I'm sorry that is just plain stupid. Why instruct a vulnerable road user to take up such a dangerous thing. No wonder motorists get peeved at cyclists.
I used to cycle to work a few years ago, using residential roads, country lanes and dual carriageways. I can honestly say I never held up a single car, never got in their way, they treated me with respect as a result and it cost me nothing in journey time. Oh and I never once wobbled when moving away from a standstill. Perhaps cyclists need a lesson in adjusting the seat properly and having the pedal in the right place to be able to move off smoothly.

 

[the black fox]

james bond had the right idea ,just spray the road or cycle path for that matter with oil its black ,messy ruins there clothes ,and very VERY SLIPPERY .heh heh heh heh

 

[Mattyd]

The van was positioned completely on the other side of the road, very near the kerb, he gave the cyclist just as much room as he would give another car had he been overtaking one. He did no wrong.

the cyclist was already overtaking an obstruction (the road works), and was himself already a foot or two into the other lane, and the lane is not exactly wide - it is dangerous to overtake anyone like that. If the van is close to the kerb that's also problematic. What would happen if he hit it and lost control?

Had anyone done that as part of their driving test they would fail.

Same goes for any junctions, and slip roads... Don't overtake cyclists here, do it when its safe.

I'm sorry that is just plain stupid. Why instruct a vulnerable road user to take up such a dangerous thing..

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/cy...ze-Bikeability--Part-4--On-Road-Positioning-0

No wonder motorists get peeved at cyclists.

If a motorists gets all uppity because hes held up by someone excising their right to remain safe I dare say that motorist shouldn't be driving. The van driver here could have waited for 5-10 seconds. Its hardly difficult, its hardly rocket science.

I used to cycle to work a few years ago, using residential roads, country lanes and dual carriageways. I can honestly say I never held up a single car, never got in their way, they treated me with respect as a result and it cost me nothing in journey time.

All irrelevant.

Many types of people cycle (from 8 to 80), some cover 100s of miles each week, and others don't. Some are lucky enough to have good infrastructure others are not. Your experiences are not applicable.

Perhaps cyclists need a lesson in adjusting the seat properly and having the pedal in the right place to be able to move off smoothly.

Cyclists do get lessons but apparently you don't like what they are taught.

Cyclists always are at the most unstable at low speed and starting off. It has nothing to do with saddles, its basic physics (im pretty sure even the Highway code stipulates this issue). Consider that kids cycle, oaps cycle and everyone else in between cycle. Just because you're a fantastic flawless cyclist does not mean others are. They are vulnerable and needs to be treated as such.

 

[nilagin]

the cyclist was already overtaking an obstruction (the road works), and was himself already a foot or two into the other lane, and the lane is not exactly wide - it is dangerous to overtake anyone like that. If the van is close to the kerb that's also problematic. What would happen if he hit it and lost control?

Had anyone done that as part of their driving test they would fail.

Same goes for any junctions, and slip roads... Don't overtake cyclists here, do it when its safe.

You've obviously never driven down the third lane of the A10 heading south, lanes are narrow and plenty of drains to negotiate on the offside as well as being close to the kerb. You are closer to the cars you'd be overtaking in the middle lane. That cyclist in the video had plenty of room.

 

[Craig1912]

IMO the van driver didn't do anything wrong ( there is plenty of space and he looked as though he gave the cyclist as much room as he would on a normal road) but, the cyclist needs to take an anger management course as he acted like a prat- not just once but several times. Seen too many of these where the cyclist is deliberately out to cause confrontation.

 

[nilagin]

the cyclist was already overtaking an obstruction (the road works), and was himself already a foot or two into the other lane, and the lane is not exactly wide - it is dangerous to overtake anyone like that. If the van is close to the kerb that's also problematic. What would happen if he hit it and lost control?

Had anyone done that as part of their driving test they would fail.

Same goes for any junctions, and slip roads... Don't overtake cyclists here, do it when its safe.




http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/cy...ze-Bikeability--Part-4--On-Road-Positioning-0




If a motorists gets all uppity because hes held up by someone excising their right to remain safe I dare say that motorist shouldn't be driving. The van driver here could have waited for 5-10 seconds. Its hardly difficult, its hardly rocket science.





All irrelevant.

Many types of people cycle (from 8 to 80), some cover 100s of miles each week, and others don't. Some are lucky enough to have good infrastructure others are not. Your experiences are not applicable.






Cyclists do get lessons but apparently you don't like what they are taught.

Cyclists always are at the most unstable at low speed and starting off. It has nothing to do with saddles, its basic physics (im pretty sure even the Highway code stipulates this issue). Consider that kids cycle, oaps cycle and everyone else in between cycle. Just because you're a fantastic flawless cyclist does not mean others are. They are vulnerable and needs to be treated as such.

From you link, who ever decided that cyclists should ride in the middle of the road is a retard or hates cyclists and wants to see them get hurt. It mentions about the cyclist making sure they can be clearly seen, yet the example they show is a cyclist wearing dark clothing. Yeah great advice, nothing in that link makes it obvious to motorists what the cyclist is doing or why. Why are my experiences not applicable? Just because they don't fall in line with your expectations, doesn't mean they don't apply. I treat cyclists, pedestrians and OAP's in their struggle buggies and other motorists, if they treat the road and other users with respect and consideration.
As for moving off on a bike, you are quite right it is basic physics and hence not hard to do, if the cyclist is that unstable, they shouldn't be on the roads in the first place, they are a danger unto themselves.