# Should magnatom sell his camera?



## User (31 Jan 2009)




----------



## thomas (1 Feb 2009)

Naah, keep it I say. I do use a camera though.


----------



## col (1 Feb 2009)

They can be used for real situations that need the cam evidence or for genuine instruction ,not just for petty,dramatised or choreagraphed things.Ill abstain or ill be accused of being too bias again.

Ah bollocks to it iv voted anyway.


----------



## boydj (1 Feb 2009)

Maggot, I think you'll find that very few of the incidents that Magnatom has posted have been anywhere near 'life-threatening'. What he does post is, I find, very representative of my experience of daily commuter cycling. 

In the future, when the oil runs out, I'm pretty sure that Mag's videos will be seen as an interesting sociological record of the dying days of the supremacy of the motor car.


----------



## Black Sheep (1 Feb 2009)

i do wonder if its partly his riding style (you may guess that i've seen his video's before, including most of the blood bus thing - stops before reminiscing about C+) having relaxed a bit with my own cycling, but still keeping my speed up, taking the lane and pulling across to let cars pass etc i've had many fewer incidents, the odd muppet trying to take my lane on a roundabout or pushing their way through, 

although i do alter my route slightly in heavy traffic to avoid junctions with the main ring road and have stopped weaving through traffic to get to the front of the lights. 

possibly a less aggressive riding manner than head down looking like your trying to race might do the trick?


----------



## marinyork (1 Feb 2009)

I've never met magnatom. Some people seem to judging him on his on-line persona and videos and trying to make out he's some kind of wild eyed nut. I'm sure he's very nice in real life and he should do whatever makes him happy. Some of the videos do show some shockingly bad behaviour which is sadly all too common. If the bad behaviour ceased I'm sure the vids would.


----------



## Black Sheep (1 Feb 2009)

marinyork said:


> I've never met magnatom. Some people seem to judging him on his on-line persona and videos and trying to make out he's some kind of wild eyed nut. I'm sure he's very nice in real life and he should do whatever makes him happy. Some of the videos do show some shockingly bad behaviour which is sadly all too common. If the bad behaviour ceased I'm sure the vids would.



oh, i'm not doubting his personality, I just remember a friend (about 15 years older than I) commenting that i seem to have endless amounts of incidents and couldn't understand how, especially since he had been at uni cycling through various parts of london. at which point i re-evaluated my way of riding and ended up enjoying it more


----------



## col (1 Feb 2009)

Pushing tin said:


> oh, i'm not doubting his personality, I just remember a friend (about 15 years older than I) commenting that i seem to have endless amounts of incidents and couldn't understand how, especially since he had been at uni cycling through various parts of london. at which point i re-evaluated my way of riding and ended up enjoying it more



There might be a few that get wise to driving safely due to some cam footage and maybe even an exchange of verbal,but then you have younger and newer drivers joining the roads everyday,as much probably as the older wiser ones,so its a never ending drip feed of inexperienced drivers,so all the grief is wasted,as it wont make much difference in the whole scheme of things.


----------



## shunter (1 Feb 2009)

I voted for Mags to continue. As a new poster I am unaware of his distant past but I have enjoyed his contributions since I joined. I think his videos remind us that in the UK the cyclist is the bottom of the totem pole and some cowardly car drivers believe us to be insignificant and also cannon fodder for cheap victories on the road. Ask them to ride a bike in the same situation and you will find bicycle clips will not hide their fear. 

Mags is a hero and should be made Dame of the realm


----------



## BentMikey (1 Feb 2009)

marinyork said:


> I've never met magnatom. Some people seem to judging him on his on-line persona and videos and trying to make out he's some kind of wild eyed nut. I'm sure he's very nice in real life and he should do whatever makes him happy. Some of the videos do show some shockingly bad behaviour which is sadly all too common. If the bad behaviour ceased I'm sure the vids would.



+1

A post like Maggot's does make me laugh!! It shows us more about his/her own bias and dislikes than anything about Magnatom.


----------



## beanzontoast (1 Feb 2009)

col said:


> *There might be a few that get wise to driving safely due to some cam footage* and maybe even an exchange of verbal,but then you have younger and newer drivers joining the roads everyday,as much probably as the older wiser ones,so its a never ending drip feed of inexperienced drivers,so all the grief is wasted,as it wont make much difference in the whole scheme of things.



Only a few though.

My gut feeling is that the majority of people who watch Mag's vids are cyclists, not motorists. I doubt very much whether motorists go out of their way to search out cyclist-car incident videos on You Tube in order to improve their driving skills. Hence the number of motorists who learn anything from these videos must be very small indeed. Although the existence of the vids and the publicity around them generates debate, reflection and maybe even education amongst _cyclists_, I don't see them as a major tool for improving driving standards.


----------



## col (1 Feb 2009)

beanzontoast said:


> Only a few though.
> 
> My gut feeling is that the majority of people who watch Mag's vids are cyclists, not motorists. I doubt very much whether motorists go out of their way to search out cyclist-car incident videos on You Tube in order to improve their driving skills. Hence the number of motorists who learn anything from these videos must be very small indeed. Although the existence of the vids and the publicity around them generates debate, reflection and maybe even education amongst _cyclists_, I don't see them as a major tool for improving driving standards.




Good point,i suppose the only drivers who did see these are the ones involved with an altercation and heard it would be on you tube,so yes i stand corrected.


----------



## beanzontoast (1 Feb 2009)

col said:


> Good point,i suppose the only drivers who did see these are the ones involved with an altercation and heard it would be on you tube,so yes i stand corrected.



Best thing that could happen is word getting round the driver's friends and colleagues that he/she was the subject of a cyclists vid on You Tube. That vid of Mags where he tells the driver it will be on You Tube by the evening is probably the one that, if I was another motorist watching it, would make me think again about my own driving.


----------



## thomas (1 Feb 2009)

> I think you mi-understand me. I am concerned that Magnatom is reacting to some situations with a 'this'll look good on camera' thought process going on. I initially enjoyed his posts, but some I think, are "engineered" to show drivers in the worst light possible.


I'm not saying he does, but when using the helmet it is easier to over react. It gives you a sort of safety net that what ever you say or do, if the person decides to get out and thump you, you point at the camera and get them to back down. It can also make you more critical of things.

I don't believe the videos really educate motorists, but from using the camera it forces you to cycle well and you can also see what went wrong in certain instances.

Having cycled around a bit today without my camera (no club members turned up ) I wouldn't say I felt any more at risk. Had I of had my camera with me I would have put it on though. I had a few closish overtakes, a few that made me jump. At times the camera can take away a bit of the joy and freedom of cycling but ultimately if something serious happened I would regret not having it on film for my protection.

I do believe having the camera is a good idea. I do think some motorists see it and therefore care a little bit more - maybe because they think you're a police officer (maybe not). I've got an ATK2000 which is a massive thing and it doesn't stop people doing things, but it can make for some gripping youtube videos.

With that video, the reaction was real. However, my end complaints might have been a bit louder so the camera picked them up. That video can send shivers down my spine even still though!


----------



## mercurykev (1 Feb 2009)

I've watched a couple of his videos and his attitude reminds me a bit of what I was like when I first started cycle commuting. I got into a number of confrontations with drivers, road rage style shouting matches etc. However, I decided to chill out a bit and now these type of incidents are few and far between (though I still encounter bad driving). I also get the feeling that his interactions with drivers are carried out in the knowledge that he is filming the event. 

I also wonder whether riding with a camera is a bit like carrying a gun for self-defence. There may be a bit of the, 'come on then, give me an excuse', sort of attitude, that could result in self fulfilling prophecy situations. 

You might be interested in this thread from an American forum:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=133686


----------



## purplepolly (1 Feb 2009)

mercurykev said:


> I've watched a couple of his videos and his attitude reminds me a bit of what I was like when I first started cycle commuting. I got into a number of confrontations with drivers, road rage style shouting matches etc. However, I decided to chill out a bit and now these type of incidents are few and far between (though I still encounter bad driving).



Yes, but it's drivers like this that puts people off cycling in the first place, maybe he's thinking about them when doing the videos. The problem with putting up with bad and inconsiderate driving is that
a) it seems to be on the increase, and with more congestion and road users is likely to get worse
 the driver may have missed you this time but how long is it going to be before he/she causes an accident


----------



## HLaB (1 Feb 2009)

Certainly not, I can't believe the question has been asked. Amongst other reasons as lee says they are a good source of debate and thing would be boring without them.


----------



## Cab (1 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> How can one cyclist be involved in so many incidents of a life threatening nature?!?!? Surely, for his own safety he should ditch the bloody camera?



Presence or absence of a camera makes no difference to how many incidents I have on the roads. And, if anything, I think that Magnatom has a quieter life on the roads than I do.


----------



## gbb (1 Feb 2009)

I've been watching Mags clips for a while and come to this conclusion..
Unless you ride Mags roads, you cant really compare yourself, and the traffic you encounter.
FWIW, the drivers in that area must be sh1te...he has more close calls in a week than i do in a year 
I've said before, compared to Magnatoms experiences, the drivers in Peterborough are impeccable (well almost). Yes, some drivers come a bit close, but i've learned to shrug my shoulders when i cant do anything about it...and when i can, pull alongside, and tell them a little more room would be appreciated. Occasionally (maybe once or twice every couple of months) i get a really close one, and they get a mouthfull.
For me, its about my attitude to close calls. I dont get het up particually, and accept that people can make mistakes (just as i occasionally do).
Magnatoms responses to close calls often look a bit OTT, but then perhaps thats the attitude that pervades his locality. 
In the end, using the camera doesnt contribute to the initial incident at all...thats entirely the drivers fault. 
Not using one wouldnt lessen the incidents, although i do find myself asking if he used a slightly less primary/ strong secondary riding position, he might get fewer incidents, but thats a different matter. I use primary very very sparingly and have very few close calls...why is that ?

So carry on wearing i say.


----------



## MacB (1 Feb 2009)

Most of the criticism on here seems to be around the impact on cycling as a whole and specifically whether Mags style/attitude antagonises motorists. Yep maybe he could have a different attitude and maybe some of his videos are a bit soft, but he's not claiming perfection on his part. There is absolutely nothing in anything he does that justifies a motorist using his car as a weapon against a cyclist. Motorists responses to irritants, whether real or perceived, are what needs to be addressed. In any other walk of life most folks wouldn't dream of a these responses, even under far worse provocation. Yet put them behind the wheel of a car and they change totally.

On their own I don't think Mags videos achieve a great return for the effort he puts into them. It's a start though and a lot more than a lot of us , lazy buggers, are doing. But I'd love to see the BBC devote one of their 'road cop' style programmes to cycling. They could use a compilation of clips from Mags, and others, to illustrate points they are making.

There you go Simon, do you think that would be a decent use of some of the 'tax' the Beeb gets from us?


----------



## downfader (1 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> How can one cyclist be involved in so many incidents of a life threatening nature?!?!? Surely, for his own safety he should ditch the bloody camera?




Should the BBC stop reporting on war zones? As the always seem to be worse when they film. Should GMTV stop inteviewing families affected by the recession, as it makes them look stupid... Should hollywood stop making violent movies to stop street violence..?

There are a lot of shoulds and this aint one of them.


----------



## magnatom (1 Feb 2009)

Blimey! Pop out for 5 minutes (ok maybe a bit longer) and this has all appeared when I come back! 

Maggot, you swine you! I'll have you know I just happened to be helmet camera'ing at your house as you typed the OP. I have already sent the video to your ISP. I don't expect we will be seeing you around here again....

Actually, I'm surprised that a thread like this hasn't appeared before, as I know what I do creates controversy. Making it a public poll might not be fair to the secret magnatom haters who are scared that I might pop round and film them later if they vote wrong...but I suppose we have to prevent the entire bloodbus forum registering today and voting! 

I'll stay out of the main discussion to keep the bias down , but I will say one thing in my defence....

One person knows me better than anyone in the world. My wife. She is however a little perplexed about my whole video camera cycling thingy. Not so much that I do it, but that anyone else cares! She always laughs when I tell her about new people subscribing to my youtube channel (I've just broken 200!). She does agree that as I video my incidents, and that I use the video for campaigning that I should try my very best not to overreact or swear etc. In this she is of course right, but it is difficult at the time as some of you know... However, I asked her today to be honest when I asked her,

Do you think I would be any different with or without the camera? i.e. am I the sort of person who would ask someone why they cut me up even if I didn't have the camera on?

Her answer, was, I would be exactly the same, camera or no camera. That is just who I am. Some forum members have already met my wife and if anyone else does in the future (I am sure they will) then feel free to confirm this with my wife. 

So there you have it. I am who I am, and I film it. It really is as simple as that. I am trying to improve, i.e. not get wound up, and to be fair I think appart from the odd swear word, I am very restrained! 

Anyway, I'll keep a low profile in this thread from now on, unless anyone wants to ask me or my wife (at the gym at the moment, but she will read this) any questions.


----------



## Tynan (1 Feb 2009)

dear god

magna seems like a sound bloke for a jock, watch them and take part or don't


----------



## magnatom (1 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> You total b'stard. I have just received an e-mail from AOL about the use of their interweb connection while wearing a gimp suit and having a large exotic vegetable stoutly inserted........
> 
> But seriously.... we need a controlled study of your behaviour prior to filming and post filming, but as the only way to do this would be to have a film of you pre-filming we're knackered.
> 
> ...



No offence taken!

Actually, I do have pre-filming footage. I changed recorder back in August (I think) So on my old recorder I have footage of me taking that exit. I will go and have a look fo some if you like. It should be obvious that I haven't just filmed some new footage, as it will have been warmer and sunnier then!


----------



## hackbike 666 (1 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> I think you mi-understand me. I am concerned that Magnatom is reacting to some situations with a* 'this'll look good on camera' thought process going on.* I initially enjoyed his posts, but some I think, are "engineered" to show drivers in the worst light possible.
> 
> I cycle through Bristol and Bath, I see lots of bad driving.



I don't actually believe that.I used to do all this shouting at motorists lark and sometimes I felt a right prat.Like the latest one with the cab after the bad overtake.The cab took the trouble to stop and I'd be annoyed with an overtake like that and may resort to swearing so his vids are only what I have done myself though probably very rarely now.


----------



## BentMikey (1 Feb 2009)

IME cameras only change your behaviour and your riding for the better.


----------



## magnatom (1 Feb 2009)

BentMikey said:


> IME cameras only change your behaviour and your riding for the better.



Agreed. I know that if I post something it will be scrutinised to death, so I try my best to be on good behaviour.

I must be the most scrutinised cycle commuter in the world!!


----------



## magnatom (1 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> Thats interesting, do you not think at times that the temptation of having 'film evidence' could give someone some false confidence in their ability to prove they were in the right? I am not saying this is the case with magnatom, but as a general principle.



But that would mean that you would have to be cycling around actively looking for trouble. If I did that I would never get to work, and it must be very difficult to ride intentionally in such a way to antagonise, but to also loo on video as reasonable. That would take skill. Your not suggesting that I am that skilful?! 

All of this when I am trying to get to and from work as quick as I can! 





(yes I know you weren't specifically aiming this at me)


----------



## magnatom (1 Feb 2009)

Oops! Sorry. I forgot I said I would stay out of this one. See, I can't help myself!


----------



## downfader (1 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> Thats interesting, do you not think at times that the temptation of having 'film evidence' could give someone some false confidence in their ability to prove they were in the right? I am not saying this is the case with magnatom, but as a general principle.



Put it this way. The camera can help in an insurance situation. I already have met two other cyclists who've used the camera to prove they were not in the wrong and get the financial recompense they were entitled to. The camera, it seems, may indeed actually help me in my insurance claim (got hit in september, tried several times to get the insurer to take notice but only my recent letter with video footage seems to have helped so it looks like to me the camera is the way it will go)

I have actually found with my camera that I will swear less. The temptation to give hand gestures is less.. it will be caught on camera otherwise and make me look a fool. I think thats a positive effect, rather than a negative one.

You could equally say personality changes when you change clothes. Wearing black is psychologically proven to change ones mood, is it not. 

The camera is not the be-all and end-all of evidence either. You often have to take into effect the light, weather conditions, mitigating factors like road layout (eg lights) and witnesses. The camera is a tool tht should and probably will be encouraged... I can see insurance companies making it compulsary under policy in a few years for cars as they seem to have done for some busses (if the local drivers are to be beleived)


----------



## BentMikey (1 Feb 2009)

I'd definitely like to see cars with cameras like they're starting to do in the US. It'll make for lots of great road wars style footage.


----------



## purplepolly (1 Feb 2009)

Stop! At once! Hold the poll!

If he sells his camera, someone else will start using it, maybe a novice with all the zeal of a novice. It'll be like groundhog day, only worse, possibly resulting in the destruction of the earth in a time vortex.


----------



## HJ (1 Feb 2009)

I don't think Mag is at any greater risk when using his camera and it has, if I remember rightly, been used to provide some educational material for bus drivers (with the full agreement of the bus company concerned). So he should carry on...


----------



## downfader (1 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> I can't see that happening, with some decent editing skills you would never ever be at fault. I think the buses that have them are more likely to inside the vehicle, watching out for thugs robbing their drivers.



It will evolve. trust me on this.

We had a similar conversation on the bikerader site to this here... the majority of them seemed to agree in some form that in-car cameras are going to happen. It will be like lil black boxes with no way for the driver to control the footage. Several firms already make devices along these lines, working mostly on impact triggered and 30-60 second loops, they are installed in HGVs and busses... some taxis but thats more sporadic in the uptake.


----------



## HJ (1 Feb 2009)

downfader said:


> It will evolve. trust me on this.
> 
> We had a similar conversation on the bikerader site to this here... the majority of them seemed to agree in some form that in-car cameras are going to happen. It will be like lil black boxes with no way for the driver to control the footage. Several firms already make devices along these lines, working mostly on impact triggered and 30-60 second loops, they are installed in HGVs and busses... some taxis but thats more sporadic in the uptake.



Cameras just like that for cars were shown on the Gadget Show (Channel 5) last year...


----------



## QuickDraw (2 Feb 2009)

What a stupid question. Of course he should keep his camera:


it provides endless hours of discussion on here
it may help educate us all on what to do and what to look out for on the roads
it generated enough publicity to make the local TV news so the impact is wider than just this forum or cyclists
it led to the success with FirstBus and a noted improvement in their driver's behaviour
most importantly, he enjoys it


----------



## BentMikey (2 Feb 2009)

Edit the footage to change the blame? Your having a laugh.


----------



## hackbike 666 (2 Feb 2009)

It's not a stupid question.It's an opinion you either agree or disagree with.


----------



## asterix (2 Feb 2009)

BentMikey said:


> +1
> 
> A post like Maggot's does make me laugh!! It shows us more about his/her own bias and dislikes than anything about Magnatom.




++1


----------



## John the Monkey (2 Feb 2009)

The "bin the camera" argument seems like more blame the victim stuff to me.

If drivers stopped overtaking too close, cutting in front, using their vehicles to teach anyone non motorised a lesson &c there'd be no video to post.


----------



## Origamist (2 Feb 2009)

I've asked before about the admissibility of cycle cam footage in court and was greeted by silence. I'd like to know from a legal perspective (and not Judge John Deed wannabes) if it could be used as evidence.


----------



## John the Monkey (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> The scrotes were not charged due to lack of evidence


Part of that could be to do with how risk-averse the CPS are - I don't know if any of you read any of the Police blogs that are around at the moment, but that's a fairly common theme of discontent.


----------



## thomas (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> Surely though, that means all road users would need tamper-proof cameras. Imagine a situation where a pedestrian is flattened for seemingly walking out in front of a car, then the pedestrian says "he waved me across!". We would all be wearing cameras before you know it!!




So you'd run out in front of a moving car, that wasn't slowing down, if they waved at you? You should never rely on a driver waving or flashing!!!

As for tamper proof cameras, if insurance companies insisted on it, they would no doubt only let certain people access the footage. As for my footage, if I'm in the wrong I've got insurance so who gives a poo?


----------



## Origamist (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> I would step out in front of a car that had flashed it's headlights and politely waved me across, yes. If he then does something by mistake and hits me all the video shows is me walking across in front of him. What is so bloody difficult to understand about that?
> 
> I assume from your second point that you are at Uni in Norwich doing a degree course in niaveity? If you have filmed yourself on a helmet cam, you do have one don't you, and make a slight mis-calculation resulting in knocking someone flying, are you seriously telling me you would hand in the footage and take the consequences like a man?
> 
> Which is an interesting point now I think of it, why has magnatom not put up any film of him making a mistake? Or has he never made one in the last year or so?



Magnatom has uploaded film of himself making mistakes. You need to have less of a life and spend it in the commuting forum, 24/7!


----------



## magnatom (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> Which is an interesting point now I think of it, why has magnatom not put up any film of him making a mistake? Or has he never made one in the last year or so?



Ummm, err, I have on a good number of occasions. Mmm. let me see...


View: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7drPCPfWCIQ


View: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ogXrCf6Sqnk


View: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=V1Z6RtWFTjE


View: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oskDUTk2PXw


View: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0-Izv3-sEfA

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=F47UnXydDaY



In the following video I originally didn't think I had done anything wrong. then someone pointed out that the lady coming the other way, might have thought I was turning at the junction. I no longer filter here when there are cars coming towards me.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_xR9k4IAeqk


Apology accepted!


----------



## magnatom (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> I apologise.




Thank you kindly!


----------



## classic33 (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> How can one cyclist be involved in so many incidents of a life threatening nature?!?!? Surely, for his own safety he should ditch the bloody camera?



You seem to have it in for him. Has he upset you in someway.

As for being involved in so many incidents, I've been shot(with an air rifle) whilst at lights. Run off the road by a bus. Shunted onto a roundabout by a car driver, just for fun you understand. Had something sprayed in the eyes from a rear seat passenger in a vehicle that cut me up which led to the temporary loss of sight. Tailgated & rear ended. Had cars driven at me. 

The innocent bystander in an accident where two vehicles collided head on. One driver, over the limit said he didn't see me but moved out over to the other side of the road to avoid me. Hitting the oncoming car, at speed. You seldom see a 4X4 written off in an accident with a Fiat Punto.
A lorry driver jump out of his cab, roundabout A58 j26(Chain Bar) M62, leaving the vehicle to hit the side of the bridge. My sin on that one, I didn't move off from the lights quick enough. Local company, knew the owner so I diverted to his house on the way back. No longer drives for them. That was a result.

I spent three & half years going after a driver who hit me sideways on, pulling out onto the road I was on. The first 12 months were spent tracing the driver on my own.

I could go on but why should I? Should I stop cycling? should I now abandon the camera that I now use?


----------



## thomas (2 Feb 2009)

> I assume from your second point that you are at Uni in Norwich doing a degree course in niaveity? If you have filmed yourself on a helmet cam, you do have one don't you, and make a slight mis-calculation resulting in knocking someone flying, *are you seriously telling me you would hand in the footage and take the consequences like a man?*


You're telling me that if you sent someone flying you, at your own fault, that you wouldn't feel terrible and that you would try and pass the blame..*Shame on you!*..Accidents happen, if I made a "slight mis-calculation" I wouldn't need to hand in the footage as if it was obviously my fault I would "be a man" and admit it. I have third party insurance as part of CTC and if I was with my UNI's Triathlon club (which I go to in between studying for my degree in "niaveity") I would have cover as part of my sport's membership. Therefore other than damages to my bike I would be covered.

On another note, the local police station is well aware that I have the helmet camera so if they wanted to see it, or had a report that someone was hit with something weird on his helmet they already have all my details.

When I cycle I know that I am on film, therefore I make sure that I cycle correctly - not that I cycle like a loony without it! Chances are, if I did send someone flying they would have crossed the road, not realising how fast I was going and I didn't have enough stopping distance. I would still feel terrible for hurting someone, even if it wasn't my fault, but at least then the footage could be used to show what happened.



> I would step out in front of a car that had flashed it's headlights and politely waved me across, yes. If he then does something by mistake and hits me all the video shows is me walking across in front of him. What is so bloody difficult to understand about that?


You didn't answer my question. As a general rule I wouldn't rely on flashed headlights (technically they should just be used as a warning "i'm here"). Waving across, but if the car didn't start to slow down would be a bit suspect.

Your argument seems to be that, if you had a camera and did anything wrong it might show what was your fault and get you in a little bit of trouble...?


----------



## thomas (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> No, thats not my argument at all. My point is the compulsory use of cameras would be fraught with problems. You seem to live in a world of honesty and truthfulness by all. Let me assure you, even if it's on film people will deny it. Look at magnatoms thread. The taxi driver was apparantly bang to rights, on film everything. He denies it, then when he realises there is video, he blames magnatom. You need to take a reality check chap.



You were saying that I wouldn't admit to stuff - "*are you seriously telling me you would hand in the footage and take the consequences like a man?" *see?!



> Even if the police did know you cycle with a helmet cam, well you just didn't have on that day did you? You then promptly put a £10 memory card in, in case they come calling, thus saving you a £250 fine and loss of your no claims discount Then you get a smart student union lawyer and sue the rozzers for harrasment


Or I could just delete the footage if I were that way inclined? What would the fine be for? I don't have a no claims discount so I wouldn't loose anything.

If your point is that if everyone had cameras people would just edit their footage then you're going the complete wrong way about it by attacking me directly with the comments about me editing my camera's footage or not owning up when I've done something wrong.

I said:



> As for tamper proof cameras, if insurance companies insisted on it, they would no doubt only let certain people access the footage. As for my footage, if I'm in the wrong I've got insurance so who gives a poo?


Therefore people wouldn't be able to edit their own footage, delete footage or whatever. Only the companies who could decode the footage would be able to access it. I have a friend who has cameras in his car which he uses to record his journeys. If footage of an accident for tampered with the insurance company would just get an expert and charge the cost of it to the other people when it's proven to be fake.

On another note, *if *everyone had cameras, even if one person edited theres the other would still be real so there would be less point tampering with footage.


----------



## QuickDraw (2 Feb 2009)

hackbike 666 said:


> It's not a stupid question.It's an opinion you either agree or disagree with.



To suggest the presence of the camera creates the incidents is stupid, that's my opinion feel free to agree or disagree.


----------



## QuickDraw (2 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> *like we need help with hours of discussion
> *fair point
> *very good, fair point again
> *how on earth can you prove that? Do we have statistics?
> ...



4 out of 5 aint bad.

On the remaining point I think you're reading too much into what I wrote. All I said was: "it led to the success with FirstBus and a noted improvement in their driver's behaviour ". It's true. He successfully persuaded FirstBus to mount an awareness campaign with their drivers and I noticed an improvement in their behaviour around the time. Of course I can't prove that so you'll just have to take my word for it. And you certainly can't expect it to have an effect hundreds of miles away in Bristol (he's not that good).


----------



## col (3 Feb 2009)

QuickDraw said:


> To suggest the presence of the camera creates the incidents is stupid, that's my opinion feel free to agree or disagree.




Its not the camera,its the person wanting interesting footage to post that creates certain shall we say conditions.


----------



## beanzontoast (3 Feb 2009)

col said:


> Its not the camera,its the person wanting interesting footage to post that creates certain shall we say conditions.



Something along these lines has occurred to me. Do camera wearers, consciously or otherwise, behave differently when cycling because they are wearing a camera and they know their cycling is being recorded - even if only for themselves? If so, does that different behaviour make 'incidents' more likely? And when there is an 'incident', do they behave differently because they know their actions - and the other party's reactions - are being recorded?

In other words, is it correct to assume that wearing a camera really has no effect at all on the actions - cycling or otherwise - of the wearer?


----------



## Bollo (3 Feb 2009)

beanzontoast said:


> Something along these lines has occurred to me. Do camera wearers, consciously or otherwise, behave differently when cycling because they are wearing a camera and they know their cycling is being recorded - even if only for themselves? If so, does that different behaviour make 'incidents' more likely? And when there is an 'incident', do they behave differently because they know their actions - and the other party's reactions - are being recorded?
> 
> In other words, is it correct to assume that wearing a camera really has no effect at all on the actions - cycling or otherwise - of the wearer?



It's a question that was being debated quite well in the earlier posts on the 'Invisible Me' thread. Crackle put the point well.


----------



## Origamist (3 Feb 2009)

beanzontoast said:


> Something along these lines has occurred to me. Do camera wearers, consciously or otherwise, behave differently when cycling because they are wearing a camera and they know their cycling is being recorded - even if only for themselves? If so, does that different behaviour make 'incidents' more likely? And when there is an 'incident', do they behave differently because they know their actions - and the other party's reactions - are being recorded?
> 
> In other words, is it correct to assume that wearing a camera really has no effect at all on the actions - cycling or otherwise - of the wearer?



http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=536790&postcount=9

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=565353&postcount=17


----------



## beanzontoast (3 Feb 2009)

Origamist said:


> http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=536790&postcount=9



Thanks - I missed that.


----------



## magnatom (3 Feb 2009)

beanzontoast said:


> Something along these lines has occurred to me. Do camera wearers, consciously or otherwise, behave differently when cycling because they are wearing a camera and they know their cycling is being recorded - even if only for themselves? If so, does that different behaviour make 'incidents' more likely? And when there is an 'incident', do they behave differently because they know their actions - and the other party's reactions - are being recorded?
> 
> In other words, is it correct to assume that wearing a camera really has no effect at all on the actions - cycling or otherwise - of the wearer?



I think for some people wearing a camera could change their response etc. However, have a look at this post 
http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=569777&postcount=24

Can you argue with the person that knows me the best?


----------



## adunn01 (3 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> How can one cyclist be involved in so many incidents of a life threatening nature?!?!? Surely, for his own safety he should ditch the bloody camera?




as someone who lives not too far from magnatom and cycles a lot of the same roads, particularly the recent 'taxi driver roundabout exit' I have to say that, whether intentional or not, I do believe that Mags takes an unnecessary primary/weak primary road position far too often and, as a result, experiences a lot more incidents than your average cyclist would. Coming off that roundabout there is plenty of room for a car to safely pass in the approach to the pinch point and mags had pulled across the road unnecessarily early.

I'm by no means a gutter hugger when it comes to road position, but we all have to remember that we are slow moving traffic at times and don't have an undeniable right to hold up other road users unless we believe it would be unsafe to act in any other way.

I'd also add that he comes across as far too aggressive with certain road users. Not the taxi driver maybe when i'm sure he was in shock, but the lady driver who was about to reverse into him in a recent clip was obviously apologetic and shocked at what she'd almost done, but still had to sit in her car while an angry looking man shouted at her through her window. Incidents like that one could be good lessons for drivers,but if the cyclist over-reacts it's more likely to simply increase antagonism towards cyclists.

So, I reckon he should give up the cam. Subconsciously I think it does alter his behaviour as he believes it's a safety net which leads to an unnecessarily aggressive cycling style and over-the-top reaction to incidents. 

Actually, if there was no cam there'd be no "have you read cyclecraft?!" clip which i saw for the first time yesterday. cam must stay!

I'm still quite new here and could be totally wrong though.


----------



## John the Monkey (3 Feb 2009)

> *147*
> 
> Be considerate. Be careful of and considerate towards all types of road users, especially those requiring extra care (see Rule 204). You should
> 
> ...




Where's the exception that allows drivers to ignore all this if they think the primary position isn't applicable for that part of the road? Is it some part of an extra test for "professional" drivers outside the Highway Code? Why would you not want people to drive according to the guidance of the Highway Code in general?


----------



## magnatom (3 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> as someone who lives not too far from magnatom and cycles a lot of the same roads, particularly the recent 'taxi driver roundabout exit' I have to say that, whether intentional or not, I do believe that Mags takes an unnecessary primary/weak primary road position far too often and, as a result, experiences a lot more incidents than your average cyclist would. Coming off that roundabout there is plenty of room for a car to safely pass in the approach to the pinch point and mags had pulled across the road unnecessarily early.
> 
> I'm by no means a gutter hugger when it comes to road position, but we all have to remember that we are slow moving traffic at times and don't have an undeniable right to hold up other road users unless we believe it would be unsafe to act in any other way.
> 
> ...



Two other cyclists have since visited the roundabout in question and agreed with my line. I am however, not going to get into a discussion about that one again! 

I agree in general I need to try not to react as much, but I am after all, not superhuman, have emotions and a particular love for continuing to live and not get hurt, so yes when someone endangers me, in the past I have reacted, although I should point out that my reactions have always been of the sort where I ask 'why did you do that?' etc, and not just hurling abuse. 

As for the reversing car, I don't think that I reacted particularly badly! I say, 'you don't just reverse back into me!' in an exasperated tone, she apologises, and I wave her on. Your not seriously suggesting that that was a bad reaction! Look at my hand guestures. Open hand towards the lady in question. That is a fairly neutral guesture which if you find agressive then you are in trouble!

Also read above the comments made by my wife. I think she knows me best!


----------



## magnatom (3 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> She does indeed know you best, I have no doubt. Possibly she quite likes you as well, how un-biased can that be?




Biased yes, but honest as well. She has quite clearly said that I should calm down and not react to incidents as much as I do. How does the fact she likes me or not affect he ability to determine if I would be the same with or without the helmet camera. She knows how I react seeing mobile phone drivers if I am walking along the road, she knows how much I hate tailgaters when I drive the car, so I think she is as qualified as a person can get to answer this question don't you?

Unfortunately most folk who know me well quite like me, so I am not sure how I could remove this bias for you.


----------



## botchjob (3 Feb 2009)

Have to admit that I have found myself wondering how it is that Magnatom has SO MANY close scrapes. I commute 10 miles daily in London and I probably get 1 or 2 camera-worthy moments a year. 

Which leaves me to conclude that one or more of the following must be true:

A) car drivers in Scotchland really really hate cyclists
 car drivers in Scotchland really really hate Magnatom
C) there is something about Magnatom’s roadcraft which contributes to the number of camera-worthy moments he has


----------



## magnatom (3 Feb 2009)

botchjob said:


> Have to admit that I have found myself wondering how it is that Magnatom has SO MANY close scrapes. I commute 10 miles daily in London and I probably get 1 or 2 camera-worthy moments a year.
> 
> Which leaves me to conclude that one or more of the following must be true:
> 
> ...



Ah, but do you have less? If you have time (and you would need a fair amount) have a look at my videos. the majority of them are not serious incidents, more annoyances, bad driving/cycling etc. Most of these are of the type that, had I not filmed them, I probably would have forgotten them. So I too might have looked at 'me' and thought, I don't have as many incidents as magnatom!

I think there is also a D). Although cycling is on the increase in Glasgow, it is still a minority transport. So drivers don't have experience of driving near cyclists. The only way to improve that is to get more cyclists on the roads.

I don't believe in a and b, I can't really comment on c!


----------



## col (3 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> as someone who lives not too far from magnatom and cycles a lot of the same roads, particularly the recent 'taxi driver roundabout exit' I have to say that, whether intentional or not, I do believe that Mags takes an unnecessary primary/weak primary road position far too often and, as a result, experiences a lot more incidents than your average cyclist would. Coming off that roundabout there is plenty of room for a car to safely pass in the approach to the pinch point and mags had pulled across the road unnecessarily early.
> 
> I'm by no means a gutter hugger when it comes to road position, but we all have to remember that we are slow moving traffic at times and don't have an undeniable right to hold up other road users unless we believe it would be unsafe to act in any other way.
> 
> ...





Well put, but be carefull, you will be accused of being overly bias and even a troll if you carry on thinking like that.


----------



## adunn01 (3 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> Two other cyclists have since visited the roundabout in question and agreed with my line. I am however, not going to get into a discussion about that one again!



I won't re-state my disagreement then!



magnatom said:


> I agree in general I need to try not to react as much, but I am after all, not superhuman, have emotions and a particular love for continuing to live and not get hurt, so yes when someone endangers me, in the past I have reacted, although I should point out that my reactions have always been of the sort where I ask 'why did you do that?' etc, and not just hurling abuse.



Don't get me wrong, I'm all for hurling abuse where it's merited. My point is more that I feel you put yourself in unnecessary positions and always seem ready to blame the driver for whatever happens, no matter how imperfect your cycling may have been.




magnatom said:


> As for the reversing car, I don't think that I reacted particularly badly! I say, 'you don't just reverse back into me!' in an exasperated tone, she apologises, and I wave her on. Your not seriously suggesting that that was a bad reaction! Look at my hand guestures. Open hand towards the lady in question. That is a fairly neutral guesture which if you find agressive then you are in trouble!



I don't really think there was any need for you to say anything to the lady who had just slammed on the brakes after you knocked the back of her car as she almost reversed over you. pretty sure her slamming of the brakes was an acceptance that she'd done wrong and realised it!



magnatom said:


> Also read above the comments made by my wife. I think she knows me best!



come on, you've quoted your wife's opinion a few time over the last few days as if a husbands account of his wife's opinion of him is the neutral judgement everyone should be looking for!


----------



## adunn01 (3 Feb 2009)

col said:


> Well put, but be carefull, you will be accused of being overly bias and even a troll if you carry on thinking like that. B)



my opinions been well considered over the last few months, believe me - I've no desire to be seen as the new User3143101010!


----------



## adunn01 (3 Feb 2009)

botchjob said:


> Have to admit that I have found myself wondering how it is that Magnatom has SO MANY close scrapes. I commute 10 miles daily in London and I probably get 1 or 2 camera-worthy moments a year.
> 
> Which leaves me to conclude that one or more of the following must be true:
> 
> ...



I'll ignore the little englander use of scotchland to refer to this great nation. No point starting an argument that's so easily won.

I think it has to be C). There is some poor driving on the roads around Glasgow and drivers definitely need educated, and Mags is right - cyclists are in a minority and suffer from other road users ignorance, but there's something about the way he cycles that seems to bring out the worst in fellow road users.


----------



## magnatom (3 Feb 2009)

OK adunn01. As I can't thnk of any other way of proving to you that I am who I am, how about meeting? We could get a coffee or something similar, have a chat and we could go along to the roundabout in question and have a look, cycle it and you could even film me from another view point. 

I'm serious. I would happily do this. This is open to anyone else on here. Obviously it would have to be organised via PM to keep my, ahem, fans away, but, how about it?

I'll even buy the coffee (don't drink it myself).


----------



## Cab (3 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> I don't really think there was any need for you to say anything to the lady who had just slammed on the brakes after you knocked the back of her car as she almost reversed over you. pretty sure her slamming of the brakes was an acceptance that she'd done wrong and realised it!



Lots of comments like this here. And I don't get it.

For a start, what has 'need' got to do with it? So theres no 'need'; who cares? Do we all only do things we 'need' to do, rather than sometimes things we WANT to do? Magnatom wanted to vent some of what this lady made him feel, what of it? Whats the problem?

More to the point, why isn't there a need? Okay, she slammed the brakes on, but thats quite forgettable really. Some people out on the roads rely on slamming the brakes on far too often, to do so is really no impact at all. Here Magnatom alerted her to what she'd done wrong, the impact of speaking out is likely to have stayed with her.

Will this mean she dislikes cyclists more? Maybe. Who cares so long as it has made her more aware (which is very, very likely I think)?


----------



## Cab (3 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> I'll ignore the little englander use of scotchland to refer to this great nation. No point starting an argument that's so easily won.
> 
> I think it has to be C). There is some poor driving on the roads around Glasgow and drivers definitely need educated, and Mags is right - cyclists are in a minority and suffer from other road users ignorance, but there's something about the way he cycles that seems to bring out the worst in fellow road users.



Every day I see cyclists accept really, _really_ shoddy manoevres from motorists. As bad as the ones Mag. posts or, more often, worse. The difference between Mag. and many other riders is not how badly motorists behave towards him, its how he reacts (he posts the incidents online and discusses them, he's aware of the risks rather than blind to most of them.

I don't post about all of the insane overtakes I see because, frankly, living in Cambridge, I'd do nothing else.


----------



## adunn01 (3 Feb 2009)

Cab said:


> Lots of comments like this here. And I don't get it.
> 
> For a start, what has 'need' got to do with it? So theres no 'need'; who cares? Do we all only do things we 'need' to do, rather than sometimes things we WANT to do? Magnatom wanted to vent some of what this lady made him feel, what of it? Whats the problem?
> 
> ...




i care. i think it's important that we all deal with motorists who show a blatant disregard for our safety. I'd never apologise for the argument I had with a taxi driver a few weeks ago who tried to force me off the road, or for calling him a c*nt. I'm not some shrinking violet, and I wouldn't encourage any cyclist to be. But...when a driver has made a genuine mistake, and is blatantly sorry, what need is there to resort to any sort of remonstration?! 

I remember watching a video of a cyclist who was totally convinced he was in the right as he forced a driver to stop and shouted at him that he should have given way on a narrow-ish road because there was a street sign saying "give way to oncoming traffic" or similar. There was no need for a car to stop given the amount of room there was for the bike and car to pass each other, but legally the cyclist could take the high ground so he did and ran with it. Not saying Mags is anywhere near this level, but he's closer to it than I think there's any need to be.


----------



## adunn01 (3 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> OK adunn01. As I can't thnk of any other way of proving to you that I am who I am, how about meeting? We could get a coffee or something similar, have a chat and we could go along to the roundabout in question and have a look, cycle it and you could even film me from another view point.
> 
> I'm serious. I would happily do this. This is open to anyone else on here. Obviously it would have to be organised via PM to keep my, ahem, fans away, but, how about it?
> 
> I'll even buy the coffee (don't drink it myself).



thanks for the offer! but, i'm not saying you're anything other than how you portray yourself online, I'm just saying that I'm not convinced you do yourself any favours! Anyway, mine's a beer!


----------



## boydj (3 Feb 2009)

boydj said:


> I think you'll find that very few of the incidents that Magnatom has posted have been anywhere near 'life-threatening'. What he does post is, I find, very representative of my experience of daily commuter cycling.



I think the above is worth repeating and I too cycle in Glasgow. The vast majority of drivers are aware and careful round cyclists, but every couple of weeks there's an extra close shave, or a pull-out that causes a sharp intake of breath and a surge of adrenaline. It's these ones that have me wishing I had a camera - if only to encourage me to curb the language that's likely to fly at the errant driver.

Most incidents are simply thoughtless, careless or lack of awareness. The ones I really hate are the 'vigilante' drivers like Mags' taxi driver who think it is their duty to 'teach' cyclists what the correct road position is. I've had maybe four or five of these in the last three years, one of which led to a police interview under caution for the driver. A camera comes into its own in these situations.


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> i care. i think it's important that we all deal with motorists who show a blatant disregard for our safety. I'd never apologise for the argument I had with a taxi driver a few weeks ago who tried to force me off the road, or for calling him a c*nt. I'm not some shrinking violet, and I wouldn't encourage any cyclist to be. But...when a driver has made a genuine mistake, and is blatantly sorry, what need is there to resort to any sort of remonstration?!



Makes sure she'll remember I'd have thought. But in any case, what of it? Whats it matter that Magnatom let off a bit of steam? Either she's a 'bloody cyclist' kind of motorist and it makes no odds, or she genuinely knows she made a mistake and this sticks the message home. No need to resort to remonstration? No 'need' not to either. 



> I remember watching a video of a cyclist who was totally convinced he was in the right as he forced a driver to stop and shouted at him that he should have given way on a narrow-ish road because there was a street sign saying "give way to oncoming traffic" or similar. There was no need for a car to stop given the amount of room there was for the bike and car to pass each other, but legally the cyclist could take the high ground so he did and ran with it. Not saying Mags is anywhere near this level, but he's closer to it than I think there's any need to be.



Oh, that might be one of my videos you're referring to, where some motorists on one narrow stretch of road here in Cambridge assume that because you can _physically_ fit in a gap with oncoming traffic you can _safely_ do so. If it is mine, you've just demonstrated to me that I needn't concern myself with what you're saying any more, because your goal here is passive cycling in response to others taking risks with our safety.


----------



## wesa (4 Feb 2009)

Should Magnatom sell his camera? - No
I have been riding for years, on road and off road but when I started commuting by bike I quickly noticed a very different mindset on the part of the drivers. I did some online digging and quickly found Magantom's videos on Youtube. In turn these led me to this forum, where I have been lurking for some time. I have become a much better & safer rider based on all of the advce, including the arguments. Ok I would have found the forum and the information if Magnatom had not posted his videos but the videos showed me that there are cyclists out there who are not prepared to be treated like s***t by drivers. To those of you post your videos for debate, thank you for putting your heads above the parapet, something that I am not willing to do.


----------



## John the Monkey (4 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> But...when a driver has made a genuine mistake, and is blatantly sorry, what need is there to resort to any sort of remonstration?!


I got knocked off last year by someone who misjudged my speed as I left a roundabout. Waiting a half second would have meant the difference between me losing about 2 inches of skin off my elbow, and not being able to ride for 3 weeks, having a left arm that swelled up to about twice its size...and not.

Every time some halfwit makes a "genuine mistake" they risk that, or far, far worse. "Genuine mistakes" are also more often not paying sufficient attention (tuning the radio, wondering how long Chris Moyles is on holiday for, sending a text, not looking ahead far enough, going too fast for the conditions/road etc etc). Driving cars should be taken far more seriously by drivers than it is. "Lapses of concentration" and "genuine mistakes" should be taken far more seriously by us, because they bloody well hurt, believe me.


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> I got knocked off last year by someone who misjudged my speed as I left a roundabout. Waiting a half second would have meant the difference between me losing about 2 inches of skin off my elbow, and not being able to ride for 3 weeks, having a left arm that swelled up to about twice its size...and not.
> 
> Every time some halfwit makes a "genuine mistake" they risk that, or far, far worse. "Genuine mistakes" are also more often not paying sufficient attention (tuning the radio, wondering how long Chris Moyles is on holiday for, sending a text, not looking ahead far enough, going too fast for the conditions/road etc etc). Driving cars should be taken far more seriously by drivers than it is. "Lapses of concentration" and "genuine mistakes" should be taken far more seriously by us, because they bloody well hurt, believe me.



Well put. It seems ironic that in the burgeoning 'health and safety gone mad' culture we're meant to have, the one where you're meant to report accident 'near misses' at work where you could, say, have cut yourself or something similar, we completely ignore near misses on the roads every day. By not taking these close misses seriously enough we encourage people to continue to endanger us; how does that benefit anybody?


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

I'm actually very serious about coming to the roundabout with me. If it's a beer you want then a beer I will buy!

If your not interested would someone else from Glasgow or nearby area be willing to come down with me one day? I like someone else to help film me and possibly follow me with the helmet camera on. I'm interesting in using this roundabout and exit as an example, and posting video etc in detail to show what happens if you take this position, that position etc. 

Would someone be able to help me out with this? There would be beer involved!


----------



## adunn01 (4 Feb 2009)

Cab said:


> Oh, that might be one of my videos you're referring to, where some motorists on one narrow stretch of road here in Cambridge assume that because you can _physically_ fit in a gap with oncoming traffic you can _safely_ do so. If it is mine, you've just demonstrated to me that I needn't concern myself with what you're saying any more, because your goal here is passive cycling in response to others taking risks with our safety.




Not sure if it was your video, the one I'm talking about showed another cyclist safely passing a car in exactly the same strip of road which was apparently not wide enough for Mr "the sign says i've got priority so you must stop no matter how much space there actually is".

I'm by no means a passive cyclist, but there's a line between cycling in a manner that maintains your safety and taking unnecessary road positions just because we can. The driving standards in this country can be shocking, but too many cyclists hide behind this and use it as an excuse to 'put drivers in their place' when the drivers done very little wrong.


----------



## Origamist (4 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> Not sure if it was your video, the one I'm talking about showed another cyclist safely passing a car in exactly the same strip of road which was apparently not wide enough for Mr "the sign says i've got priority so you must stop no matter how much space there actually is".



Is this the thread you're referring to:

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=15812&highlight=give


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

Here are two. The first is newer. Notice the dirt on the road which is not generally used by cars.
The second is older and interestingly (I'd forgotten this) has hatchings in the area leading up to the pinch point.

Also remember that I come off the roundabout in the inside lane (closest to the roundabout). This from experience is the safest lane (despite the hatching on the roundabout). Cars will sneak out from the junction on the south (bottom) of the picture at any chance. I've been cut up here (check my videos). Therefore taking the inside lane is a must.


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> The driving standards in this country can be shocking, but too many cyclists hide behind this and use it as an excuse to 'put drivers in their place' when the drivers done very little wrong.



That can certainly happen, but do you think this statement is relevant to my incident with the taxi driver, remembering that this is what all this debate started from and is about?


----------



## adunn01 (4 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> That can certainly happen, but do you think this statement is relevant to my incident with the taxi driver, remembering that this is what all this debate started from and is about?



No I don't (putting aside any debate about whether the incident was avoidable by taking a different road position) - your road position was clear to the driver and he should never have overtaken you where he did. He'd have got the same from me, if not worse!


----------



## adunn01 (4 Feb 2009)

Origamist said:


> Is this the thread you're referring to:
> 
> http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=15812&highlight=give




yes, the very one. I don't think that debate needs re-opening. it's pretty much summed up by the cyclist in front getting through with a clear, safe gap and the choice the cyclist makes a few seconds before the incident to go through a far smaller gap between a bus and a moving lorry.


----------



## BentMikey (4 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> If your not interested would someone else from Glasgow or nearby area be willing to come down with me one day? I like someone else to help film me and possibly follow me with the helmet camera on. I'm interesting in using this roundabout and exit as an example, and posting video etc in detail to show what happens if you take this position, that position etc.



I don't think you need to worry, we mostly have consensus here, excluding perhaps one or two raving nutters. You've certainly agreed with my views already. More importantly, your position isn't to blame for the driver's bad driving, as he should have waited.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (4 Feb 2009)

BentMikey said:


> More importantly, your position isn't to blame for the driver's bad driving, as he should have waited.



I think most of us are agreed on this. I know I am.


----------



## BentMikey (4 Feb 2009)

Yup, and most likely also on the possibility of going left to secondary and slower (but not being obliged to), or of going a little faster and more right to full primary.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (4 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> [ATTACH=full]166120[/ATTACH]
> 
> OK, obviously, living in the sticks getting off something like that fills me with dread, so initially I would be following the turqouise line, until I was spat out in the right direction.



 Nice to see some humour in this thread!


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

BentMikey said:


> I don't think you need to worry, we mostly have consensus here, excluding perhaps one or two raving nutters. You've certainly agreed with my views already. More importantly, your position isn't to blame for the driver's bad driving, as he should have waited.




It's alright BM, I'm not worried about what people think here, or am I worried about the trolls elsewhere, however, I think it provided some significant debate and so would make an interesting case study for road position. It is something I'd like to put up on my blog showing the advantages and disadvantages of different road positions.


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

Looking at the pics, and your needing to take a primary position coming off the roundabout to be clearly visible to cars pulling out to your left, IMO you are taking the safest line.

The crosshatched section of the road, if you follow the nearside tyre marks, automatically routes a cyclist into a secondary position with little room for a car to pass safely hence, looking back, signaling and getting into primary would make sense on approach to the pinch point. 

FWIW unless you rode the exit from the roundabout to the pinch point in the gutter or on the cross hatchings you are likely to hold up traffic at some time or other in order to pass these obstacles safely.

It is the duty of any following vehicle to show patience and not theirs to decide what level of safety a cyclist should require. No matter how frustrating that may be.


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


>



LOL! 

Seriously though I wouldn't be able to take the pink dot line as I would have to cut across the lanes on the roundabout where cars try and sneak round. You can see the cleaner road where they do that.


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

User76 I especially like the way you ride straight over the silver car on your exit from the roundandroundandroundabout!


----------



## Origamist (4 Feb 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> Looking at the pics, and your needing to take a primary position coming off the roundabout to be clearly visible to cars pulling out to your left, IMO you are taking the safest line.
> 
> The crosshatched section of the road, if you follow the nearside tyre marks, automatically routes a cyclist into a secondary position with little room for a car to pass safely hence, looking back, signaling and getting into primary would make sense on approach to the pinch point.
> 
> ...



The cross hatchings on the approach to the pinch point have now been removed. I think I'd prefer them to be reinstated.


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

Origamist said:


> The cross hatchings on the approach to the pinch point have now been removed. I think I'd prefer them to be reinstated.



I agree, it even looks as if a car is actually parked on that section in the pic without the hatching.


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

Origamist said:


> The cross hatchings on the approach to the pinch point have now been removed. I think I'd prefer them to be reinstated.



Yes I agree. In fact in an ideal world the hatching could be replaced with pavement/grass/plants, i.e. the road would be narrowed. The extra road serves little purpose and just encourages conflict.


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> I agree, it even looks as if a car is actually parked on that section in the pic without the hatching.



I've never seen a car park before the pinch point. The one in the aerial pic is unusual.


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> The extra road serves little purpose and just encourages conflict.



You don't say?

I want to get a camara now and film myself riding around the Elephant & Castle roundabouts(there be two)at 18:30hrs on a Friday night and see what our more rural friends make of it.


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> I've never seen a car park before the pinch point. The one in the aerial pic is unusual.



Maybe they have pulled over to let the following car pass?


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> Maybe they have pulled over to let the following car pass?


----------



## BentMikey (4 Feb 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> Maybe they have pulled over to let the following car pass?



It's Col, allowing his betters to pass.


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

BentMikey said:


> It's Col, allowing his betters to pass.



Now you come to mention it I think I can see me approaching on my bike...


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> Good idea, I will make every effort today to film myself going over around *the* roundabout in Cheddar, theres only one, then you can all be amazed at my skill and handling of a bike on such a major arterial route



I've given Chedder a quick googlemap, Cliff Road looks fun!


----------



## Origamist (4 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8JIOJ6dSFY
> just promise not to critique my riding Oh and put the sound up for maximum effect




It's N/A...


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

User76 said:


> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8JIOJ6dSFY
> just promise not to critique my riding Oh and put the sound up for maximum effect





FANTASTIC!!

I realise I've been down that road once before in a van in the dark and late for a gig in Locking having driven across from London.
We managed to drive over some fallen rocks and get the second flat tyre of the day.

How rock n' roll is that!


----------



## BentMikey (4 Feb 2009)

But but you were riding in the middle of the road!!! You hypocrite!! LOLOL!


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

It's a shame you didn't catch up with any slower moving cars. It would have been interesting to see if they moved over....


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> Not sure if it was your video, the one I'm talking about showed another cyclist safely passing a car in exactly the same strip of road which was apparently not wide enough for Mr "the sign says i've got priority so you must stop no matter how much space there actually is".



That another cyclist in front chose to take a risk that I may not choose to take, and he gets away with it, does not make it the correct decision. Sign says give way to oncoming traffic in a location which does not have, in my view, sufficient space to pass with a margin of error, then thats what the oncoming traffic has to do. Its my call, not the other guys, and if its safer to stop the traffic and then go around then thats the correct decision.

Could well have been one of mine; you're too passive if you believe that because someone else is in the gutter you should be too.



> I'm by no means a passive cyclist, but there's a line between cycling in a manner that maintains your safety and taking unnecessary road positions just because we can. The driving standards in this country can be shocking, but too many cyclists hide behind this and use it as an excuse to 'put drivers in their place' when the drivers done very little wrong.



It isn't just because you can, its because its the safer location to be in. If that inconveniences someone else because they'd rather break the law than grant you safe space then thats their lookout. You really are a passive cyclist if you believe otherwise.


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> yes, the very one. I don't think that debate needs re-opening. it's pretty much summed up by the cyclist in front getting through with a clear, safe gap and the choice the cyclist makes a few seconds before the incident to go through a far smaller gap between a bus and a moving lorry.



Stuff and nonsesense, as I explained in that thread. IF you want to reopen that debate then do so, don't make pathetic hit and run 'I'm right you're wrong' comments elsewhere.


----------



## magnatom (4 Feb 2009)

User3143 said:


> Having watched that vid, the gap at the start between the bus and 7.5 tonner is wider then the TCM.
> 
> I think adunn01 has a point cab.




Hey! This is a grump about magnatom thread. Don't steal my thunder cab!


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

User3143 said:


> Having watched that vid, the gap at the start between the bus and 7.5 tonner is wider then the TCM.
> 
> I think adunn01 has a point cab.



He doesn't; feel free to open the ther discussion up and I'll correct you.


----------



## Origamist (4 Feb 2009)

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!


----------



## thomas (4 Feb 2009)

User3143 said:


> My point is the gap at the start that you ride through is wider then the gap at the TCM.



I kind of agree on this one...even with Lee . You seemed to be making more of a point out of something than need be. I know some of those signs are in places where there isn't enough room. Once I was cycling, my right of way and I had given way to about 5 cars already...I go, then another car comes to the junction and doesn't wait for me to finish, start to go, then realises there isn't enough room so try moving left - scrapes the side of his lovely jag on a high kerb  - his fault though, he should of just waited.


----------



## adunn01 (4 Feb 2009)

Cab said:


> Stuff and nonsesense, as I explained in that thread. IF you want to reopen that debate then do so, don't make pathetic hit and run 'I'm right you're wrong' comments elsewhere.



hit and run comments? where'd I run to? I thought I'd backed up my comments pretty well, the fact that I get a response like "if you don't agree with me you're a passive cyclist" pretty much sum up how any debate is going to head here!


----------



## adunn01 (4 Feb 2009)

User3143 said:


> Why not?




i meant to be seen as a new troll on the scene. whether or not that reputation is deserved. i reckon yours might be!


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

User3143 said:


> My point is ...



...utterly out of place here. Go back to the other thread and open the discussion up, if you like.


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> hit and run comments? where'd I run to? I thought I'd backed up my comments pretty well, the fact that I get a response like "if you don't agree with me you're a passive cyclist" pretty much sum up how any debate is going to head here!



Here, you said:



> yes, the very one. I don't think that debate needs re-opening.



Before doing precisely that. If you want to criticise my cycling then do so in a thread where I've posted and defended my riding, rather than taking a quick swipe elsewhere. Your attitude both to my riding and indeed to this discussion is, to be blunt, lacking.


----------



## Cab (4 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> Hey! This is a grump about magnatom thread. Don't steal my thunder cab!



Seems like they'll grump about nigh on anything, given the chance


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Feb 2009)

magnatom said:


> Hey! This is a grump about magnatom thread. Don't steal my thunder cab!



Another close overtake by a cab?


----------



## magnatom (5 Feb 2009)

adunn01 said:


> i meant to be seen as a new troll on the scene. whether or not that reputation is deserved. i reckon yours might be!




Actually, for a while I was probably the one shouting troll the loudest at Lee. I think he has settled down a bit and has made some good posts recently. 

I remove my troll label from Lee 

(I'm sure this post will come across as condescending but it isn't meant that way, honest! )


----------



## silverbow (5 Feb 2009)

I ask myself are Mags videos an extension of Big Brother or is he the new Steve Erwin?

If you are the new Big Brother then I'm ashamed of myself for taking an interest. However if you are the new Steve Erwin can you ask Mrs Mags to put any videos of you bouncing down the road on You Tube!!! We the public like a bit of really bad news.

I would like to say Mags, I pray no harm comes your way though - Glasgow looks somewhat more cycle unfriendly than Woodbridge.


----------



## hackbike 666 (6 Feb 2009)

Bad example as Steve got done by a croc.:?:


----------



## tdr1nka (6 Feb 2009)

*ahem*
Irwin was killed by a stingray.


----------



## Crackle (6 Feb 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> *ahem*
> Irwin was killed by a stingray.




Marina or Troy?


----------



## tdr1nka (6 Feb 2009)

'Maaaaaaarriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnaaaaaaaaaaaa,
Aqua Maaaaaaarriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnaaaaaaaaaaaa'..........of course.


----------

