Cyclists - what's with the head cams?

Musicman said:
I do.

As do 24 states in the US, which set the legal minimum for passing a bicycle under 30 mph at 3 feet or more for reasons of safety (often increasing by 1 foot per additional 10 mph) and countries in Europe such as Germany and Spain which set it at 1.5m. France sets it at 1.5m also, but reduces its legal minimum to 1m in urban areas. Queensland, Australia introduced a 1m rule in May [PDF, 157 KB - Department of Transport and Main Roads]

UK DfT guidance for passing distances can be found on page 17 of this document, issued in 2008.

They may surprise you.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...9150/ltn-2-08_Cycle_infrastructure_design.pdf

View attachment 21649

An adult male's arm is usually in the region of 25 to 30 inches (63 to 76 cm) in length.
Click to expand...

Like I said, if you say so.

ROFLMAO. those passing details are wider than the average UK road. one would have to pass a cyclist using the footpath on the opposite side of the road. look out pedestrians it's not just cyclists on the footpaths anymore. :jawdrop:
 
AHILL said:
Like I said, if you say so.

ROFLMAO. those passing details are wider than the average UK road. one would have to pass a cyclist using the footpath on the opposite side of the road. look out pedestrians it's not just cyclists on the footpaths anymore. :jawdrop:
Click to expand...

Obviously you are not being serious?

Personally I think the whole 'if the cyclist can reach out and touch your car you are too close' thing is a damn good guide for slower speeds and would still be far to close at 60mph.
 
they are filming for "ST4, the movie"
 
LeeRatters said:
I nearly knocked a cyclist off his bike recently.

As I turned into a one way street they were coming straight towards me.

Who's fault is that & who'd get prosecuted there?
Click to expand...
That kinda depends on who was on the wrong side of the road, surely?
 
His fault , but you'd probably still be in the wrong as there's nearly always a presumption that its the car drivers fault, even if the other party is a complete f*****g cretin
 
LeeRatters said:
I nearly knocked a cyclist off his bike recently.

As I turned into a one way street they were coming straight towards me.

Who's fault is that & who'd get prosecuted there?
Click to expand...

You are at fault. because as long as cycists have hole's in their backsides the cyclist is "ALWAYS" right. and nearly doesn't count! :D
 
LeeRatters said:
I nearly knocked a cyclist off his bike recently.

As I turned into a one way street they were coming straight towards me.

Who's fault is that & who'd get prosecuted there?
Click to expand...
Id think you were at fault. You've got to look out for the weaker in traffic.
 
AHILL said:
You are at fault. because as long as cycists have hole's in their backsides the cyclist is "ALWAYS" right. and nearly doesn't count! :D
Click to expand...

According to whom?

Back to the original topic, read the comments from other cyclists about this helmet cam vid from Manchester on road.cc; most of them are pretty negative about his riding style (and I have to agree with many of them).

http://road.cc/content/news/130079-...y-apologetic-says-manchester-helmet-cam-rider

There are idiots in cars, idiot pedestrians and also idiots on bikes.

Fortunately, there are also a reasonable number of decent drivers, peds and cyclists around, too.
 
the guy has points in those videos but he also doesn't stop when he should. why does he keep going when the bus pulls in that's just dumb
 
POAH said:
the guy has points in those videos but he also doesn't stop when he should. why does he keep going when the bus pulls in that's just dumb
Click to expand...

Because he has a camera on his head and he wants footage?

Some bad driving on there also, but why is he surprised at coming across obstacles when he is filtering at speed?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LeeRatters said:
I nearly knocked a cyclist off his bike recently.

As I turned into a one way street they were coming straight towards me.

Who's fault is that & who'd get prosecuted there?
Click to expand...


If you hit him, and had absolutely no way to avoid it you wouldn't be found at fault.

If on the other hand you had time to react and didn't (for whatever reason) you would be found at fault or partial fault.




AHILL said:
You are at fault. because as long as cycists have hole's in their backsides the cyclist is "ALWAYS" right. and nearly doesn't count! :D
Click to expand...

I would argue the law short changes cyclists more often than not. In the eyes of many they are assumed at fault by default (hence why many have cameras). Even pedestrians get short changed in the same why with regard to motoring accidents - Especially when they are killed and don't have the opportunity to voice their side of the incident...

The lack of proper punishment for motorists who kill and injure has been written about quite extensively over the years.
 
Maybe we need an annual purge and can sort all of this out properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top