Cyclist wears a helmet camera to film abusive drivers
 

You may have seen this on the news today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12330181

Before watching it, my sympathies were with the cyclist, especially as I used to cycle through central London every day for 7 years. But after watching it I'm not so sure. The van driver overtakes, is shouted at by the cyclist and is then accused of causing the collision.

Maybe the cyclist could have just backed off, accepted that the van has blind spots, needs more room as it is wider and that just letting it go ahead would be better in the grand scheme of things? I always found pedestrians who stepped into the road without looking, either texting or listening to an iPod, were the worst.

You're lagging 8 hours behind BBC news :D

No excuse for the van driver getting out and being so aggressive, I am not into cameras but some people do take some huge liberties with your safety to save a few seconds, you do get quite defensive, I suspect I may have ended up scrapping with that gobby van drivers though, not good !

Cyclist sounded an arse as did the van driver

Deserved each other :thumb:

or maybe the van driver should have carried on past the cyclist still giving him room then when he checks his n/s wing mirror and can see he has safely past the cyclist then he should have pulled over.

always going to be this argument as long as there are motorists and cyclists.

And about 17 months behind Scoobynet:

OK, so who has been upsetting cyclists?

Defensive driving/riding is the way to go; why put your life in jepody in the blind assumption others will steer clear of you?

Generally I apply this to moped riders. Who usually are the worst for their blinkered road habits.

But in this case I think the cylicst should have given way...he has ALOT more to lose if he got caught under the van.

Yup, as per Ali, I just back off when it gets a bit hairy. I've just had the one time when white van man deliberately overtook at speed within an inch of my bars - I'd held him up for at least 30 seconds! :Whatever_

+1. The temptation not to apply brakes in the hope of saving momentum in a 50/50 situation like that can be strong, but experience has certainly taught me to resist (close calls/near misses only, I might add, no actual harm ever done).

I thought the BBC were suppose to put both sides of the argument? where were the cyclists jump red lights weaving through stationary traffic knocking wing mirrors and scrapping the paint?

They deserved each other watching the video

What century are you living in? You must be thinking of another BBC :lol1:

The cyclist is to blame here I reckon. He'd no business shouting at the van driver before the turn, that probably just annoyed the driver. If he'd have just backed off there wouldn't have been an issue. I think he purposefully hit the van to prove a point. If he'd have hit my car, I'd have got out and twatted him too! :D

I think there has been far too much emphasis on every 'accident' being the fault of the motorist. Cyclists and pedestrians alike just meander out into the road and dither about. I presume they think they're in the right and will be able to sue the motorist in the event of a collision...which is fine, till they end up dead!

Personally, I just look out for my own safety regardless of who may or may not be in the right.

Cyclists are a menance on the roads tbh they shouldn't be on there roads are a dangerous place as it is never mind adding some muppet on a bike wearing a camera. As for hitting the van a slap what did he expect the driver to do! :mad:

gob****e cyclist. They can feck off imho

I don't think the one that got knocked off at the mini-roundabout deserved it at all! Quite distressing.

I had a lorry cab nearly not stop for me on a roundabout last year. Puts the wind up you I can tell ya!

There are good and bad drivers just as there are good and bad cyclists.

Having said that wearing a cam and posting crap on YouTube is antagonistic as I said in that wonderful thread in 2009.

Muppet, meet muppet! :lol1::lol1::lol1:

So, all cyclists should stop, hmm, that is going to happen.

Stop ****ing whinging yep!

Why should cyclists stop using the roads? I am a motorist, and a cyclist - Spring/Summer mainly. I try to make myself easily seen, but you have to cycle defensively, even on country roads and always predict what a motorist is going to do - basically keep your wits about you!

Yes, I agree cyclists shouldn't ride on pavements, jump traffic lights etc. etc. Not all do like not all drivers don't see cyclists. Some of you really need to take a chill pill. If everything that was dangerous was banned, half of you would be walking to work.... :)

Ok, if you stop posting, deal ?

Cyclist came across as being a lentil eating, tree hugging tw@t
Van Driver came across as someone who ain't getting any clunge at home.

I agree that the cyclist was making a big deal about the van and that he could have backed off as you cant win on a bike when faced with a Transit, would be very easy to get some decent footage of the underside of a Transit, the van driver might get prosecuted or whatever but you still wouldnt be able to walk or be still breathing, I do think the camera does tend to make them play to it but it has caught some really awful driving in some cases, its a case of balance if you choose to use one, are you actually at risk or have been wronged or are you just playing to the camera.

Cyclist did come across as a victim in waiting and the van driver lived up to a stereotype of being a knuckle dragging arse, 50/50 I reckon.

It was a vauxhall movano van in this case not a transit. Tbh the cyclist spead up and caused the situation to happen by his actions. I do however agree that there is innocent victims of rage on the roads

If a cyclist banged on the side of my car then I think I would have responded in the same way as the van driver.

Although I would have given the cyclist more room in the first instance so the above would probably never needed to have occurred.

But what does annoy me about cyclists is that there no need for them to have road tax, there is no compulsory insurance requirements, and there is no safety requirements apart from that of a helmet.

They use the road just as we drivers do, yet they pay nothing towards the up keep of the road etc etc.

But its seems they feel as though they own the road. They feel as though they have a right to occupy more road than us drivers. They also have more rights as a cyclist if you go by the highway code.

I am surprised the government have no started some form of cycling tax!

Not all cyclists, and drivers are the same so it would be unfair to tarnish them with the same brush. But in all fairness, the majority of cyclists I have been unfortunate enough to encounter have acted like complete cocks!

For the 100th time, has it never crossed your mind that most cyclists do actually own cars but you just don't see that as it's kind of tough to drive and ride your bike at the same time? This means that they are paying for the maintenance of the roads through their car's road tax but they ain't even using the car?

The need for occupying more road than the car user (which I'm glad to say I don't and do see plenty roadies doing this) in many ways is down to the state of the roads. Yup, I'm sorry I'm not tucked away cycling in the 2 inches between the double yellow lines but there are these minor hazards called big feckin pot holes and sunken drains at this time of year that often force you out a foot or two.

You are correct that slot of cyclists do act like cocks but in their defence (apart from the ones that are indeed complete self righteous tools) you can feel really isolated, threatened whatever when 2 tonnes of metal passes within 1 inch of you just because you inconvenienced mrs BMW X5 by slowing her down by 10 seconds. The reason most lash out is because they feel threatened, which in truth they are due to the shocking driving you see every day.

IMHO opinion, EVERY car, lorry, taxi or bus driver should be forced to cycle through towns and cities once of twice ( if they ate are able to ) and I assure you that their treatment of cyclists on the road would change forever.

All cyclist should be forced to wear helmets (controversial I know), wear lights and reflective clothing all year round (not just winter), be required to sit a proficiency and highway code knowledge test and perhaps be required to be insured, certainly against damage to 3rd parties.

If nothing else, it would stop 100s of posts like Dazzas, repeating themselves again and again, every time cycling is mentioned on here :rolleyes:

Off to cycle to work

FFS, Road tax was abolished in 1937 THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ROAD TAX..... :brickwall

Everyone pays for the 'up keep of the road' via general taxes.

Just because you have a car and pay VED, it gives you no more right to use the road than a cyclist... The main reason tax was abolished.

Forgetting the semantics of the situation the fact remains that if I buy a car I have to pay insurance and VED and if I buy a second car I have to pay more insurance and VED whereas if I have no cars and just a bike I pay nothing. Personally I don't think that is fair! Bikes should at least need to be insured in the same way cars are.

What damage do bikes do to the road to justify the price of the VED?

How miles do people drive per day versus use their bikes for?

Seems I have upset some of the cyclist crew. Not my intention, I am just pointing out the facts, nothing less, nothing more.

I used to make a 14 mile trip on my bike to work 5 days a week, so don't think I don't know what the score is, yes, the majority of drivers will give enough room and there are some that don't.

But as has been pointed out, when your on a bike you do feel very vulnerable and threatened, so it is just human nature to react the way that some cyclist do on the road.

Road Tax, VED, whatever, its still something that a motorist has to pay to even have the vehicle on the road. The same should be for cyclists.

Also, it should be compulsory to have insurance, for the safety of the cyclist more than anything else.

oh, and its DoZZa, not dazza :rolleyes: