# Best way to deal with bad driving?



## Welsh wheels (17 Jul 2017)

I was buzzed at speed again tonight. Didn't get a number plate, so couldn't report it. It did leave me thinking, what's the best way to deal with bad and aggressive driving if you can't involve the police because of lack of evidence etc, which is the case in most incidents? It seems senseless and feels wrong to me to sit around while your safety and that of other cyclists is being put in jeopardy. I don't want to get to the place where I accept bad driving as the norm and never do anything about it. Obviously, I'm not asking if we can go around beating drivers to a pulp, but there must be something to do. I don't want to spend my time moaning about drivers on social media either. Maybe campaigning more is the answer.


----------



## Shut Up Legs (17 Jul 2017)

If there were any easy answers to this problem, the UK and Australia would have become cycling paradises long ago. Except they haven't. 
Best of luck in finding your own solution: I have yet to find mine.


----------



## vickster (17 Jul 2017)

Get a camera if it bothers you that much and you want evidence to take to plod?

Otherwise ride assertively, but safely and defensively


----------



## jefmcg (17 Jul 2017)

I've got a loud voice, so when recently a boy racer passed me very close and at speed, then immediately skidded to turn left across me, I shouted "How are you getting on with your tiny penis?" I heard laughter from the passenger seat.

No, I didn't make the world a better place, but it made me feel better and made someone laugh. And possibly slightly humiliated someone who may - just may - think a little more next time.


----------



## Profpointy (17 Jul 2017)

Just a thought but have a think about riding a bit further out, nearly a metre say. This tends to encourage wider overtakes and if the don't at least there's some space to wobble into. My nearest misses were when I thought I was being a bit too "asserrtive" so tucked in a bit. Got two very near misses in 200 yards, the 2nd of which was a truck and trailer pulling in before actually passing me. F€£# me that wS close. Back out to a metre from kerb ever since and fewer incidents

This may of course not apply to what you decribe, and couls just be shyte or hostile driving, but worth considering


----------



## slowmotion (17 Jul 2017)

If there's nothing practical that you can do, just ignore the bad driving and get on with your life.
BTW, shouting obscene insults at the driver may help you in your quest for inner serenity.


----------



## Debade (17 Jul 2017)

Working on the assumption that some people simply do not know better or are bad drivers, let me suggest some things. (In other words, it is not always intentional.

First, recognize that there is more then one study that says bright shirts do not work in terms of passing distance. Trek just sponsored a study, reported in the WSJ, that bright clothing wrapped around your knees (perhaps like a bright yellow football pad), so it is moving while pedaling, seems to gain drivers attention, while shirts did not. Another study, suggested a vest that said POLICE on the back, encouraged drivers to provide more room while passing. (The yellow vest, without police, made no difference). Knowing you can't wear the police vest, I wear a vest that says "Give 3 Feet - Its The Law" While not a studied approach, it seems to work for me. Finally the Trek sponsored study also suggested rear flashing lights. There are some now that work OK during the day.

I have a friend with a Go-pro. He will take the time to visit police stations with his evidence. He simply asks the police to speak to the motorist. He has had success with this approach but it is one at a time. Having said that, if a lot of cyclists followed this approach, perhaps one at a time would work.


----------



## Drago (17 Jul 2017)

In my experience wearing a Florrie with 'Police' on while riding a bicycle it makes some people try to run you over deliberately.


----------



## KnackeredBike (18 Jul 2017)

For some reason even though most of my riding is in the countryside I always seem to catch up with them at traffic lights or similar.

If this is the case it is surprising how apologetic and meek most drivers are when actually challenged on their driving. It is always a "mistake" or they can't remember it. I like to think teaching them the lesson that cyclists are shouty people who will bang on their window a bit is a good lesson in itself.

I have - once, after a particularly nasty piece of driving - reached in, removed the keys, and thrown them into the thick hedge a couple of hundred metres down the road, mainly because I didn't fancy nobber following me. The danger, of course, is that they will recognise you on another day. Had that happen once but the dimwits were in a company branded van so fairly easy to trace.

tl;dr Some drivers forget that cyclists are actually shouty people. Reminding them of this fact is usually punishment enough.


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Debade said:


> Working on the assumption that some people simply do not know better or are bad drivers, let me suggest some things. (In other words, it is not always intentional.
> 
> First, recognize that there is more then one study that says bright shirts do not work in terms of passing distance. Trek just sponsored a study, reported in the WSJ, that bright clothing wrapped around your knees (perhaps like a bright yellow football pad), so it is moving while pedaling, seems to gain drivers attention, while shirts did not. Another study, suggested a vest that said POLICE on the back, encouraged drivers to provide more room while passing. (The yellow vest, without police, made no difference). Knowing you can't wear the police vest, I wear a vest that says "Give 3 Feet - Its The Law" While not a studied approach, it seems to work for me. Finally the Trek sponsored study also suggested rear flashing lights. There are some now that work OK during the day.
> 
> I have a friend with a Go-pro. He will take the time to visit police stations with his evidence. He simply asks the police to speak to the motorist. He has had success with this approach but it is one at a time. Having said that, if a lot of cyclists followed this approach, perhaps one at a time would work.


The cameras thing would work sometimes. The rest is just top victim-blaming: there is essentially nothing you can wear and no manner of riding which will force others to behave competently.

I agree with the shouting. Sometimes I gesticulate at them. No swearing and usually with some idea of an escape route if it's another road rager who'll turn the car around or stop and jump out.


----------



## Welsh wheels (18 Jul 2017)

KnackeredBike said:


> For some reason even though most of my riding is in the countryside I always seem to catch up with them at traffic lights or similar.
> 
> If this is the case it is surprising how apologetic and meek most drivers are when actually challenged on their driving. It is always a "mistake" or they can't remember it. I like to think teaching them the lesson that cyclists are shouty people who will bang on their window a bit is a good lesson in itself.
> 
> ...


The problem with being a shouty cyclist is that the drivers are in a big metal weapon so you don't really want to aggravate them further. Not that I've never shouted at them though.


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Welsh wheels said:


> The problem with being a short cyclist is that the drivers are in a big metal weapon so you don't really want to aggravate them further. Not that I've never shouted at them though.


All cyclists look tall to motorists sat down near the floor.


----------



## Welsh wheels (18 Jul 2017)

slowmotion said:


> If there's nothing practical that you can do, just ignore the bad driving and get on with your life.
> BTW, shouting obscene insults at the driver may help you in your quest for inner serenity.


It's hard to ignore when you know that you shouldnt have to put up with it as its illegal.


----------



## Welsh wheels (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> All cyclists look tall to motorists sat down near the floor.


Lol that was meant to be shouty


----------



## steveindenmark (18 Jul 2017)

Think about where it happened and if there is anything you can do in the future, with regards to road positioning, to prevent it.


----------



## KnackeredBike (18 Jul 2017)

Welsh wheels said:


> The problem with being a shouty cyclist is that the drivers are in a big metal weapon so you don't really want to aggravate them further. Not that I've never shouted at them though.


Perhaps true, my feeling is that most drivers who do something idiotic do it because they think they can run away and the cyclist can't catch them. Thus when you catch up you effectively have them cornered and they will be cowed rather than seeking more confrontation.

I even had one boy racer lad who studiously ignored me for a minute until he had to acknowledge that he could hear someone banging on his window and shouting.

As @mjr said you also immediately have the advantage that they are flabby and sitting in a low seat and you likely rather fit and standing.


----------



## Debade (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> The cameras thing would work sometimes. The rest is just top victim-blaming: there is essentially nothing you can wear and no manner of riding which will force others to behave competently.
> 
> I agree with the shouting. Sometimes I gesticulate at them. No swearing and usually with some idea of an escape route if it's another road rager who'll turn the car around or stop and jump out.



The safest approach is definitely more cyclists. Motorists pay much more attention when they expect a cyclist on every corner/block. I have been amazed how courteous motorists are in areas that have many cyclists. The best but perhaps most time consuming approach to improve our safety is to encourage more cyclists.

In the meantime, I do not see my initial post as victim blaming. The motorist is definitely responsible for their actions. But, the OP asked for tips to be more noticeable. That was the purpose of the response.

As an aside, I would not suggest too aggressive of approach to motorists in the States, if you happen to ride here. It would not be unusual for a person to have a fire arm with them. And threatening the motorist , may cause a reaction that even a bright yellow cycling shirt would not appreciate.


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

steveindenmark said:


> Think about where it happened and if there is anything you can do in the future, with regards to road positioning, to prevent it.


More victim-blaming. Cycle too close to the kerb and some nutter will probably try to squeeze past in lane - cycle further out and some nutter will probably resent it and close-pass/cut-in to encourage you into the gutter. Probably the only position that would force wide overtakes is cycling along with a proximity-activated weapon aimed to the rear and slightly right!


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Debade said:


> In the meantime, I do not see my initial post as victim blaming. The motorist is definitely responsible for their actions. But, the OP asked for tips to be more noticeable.


I'm not seeing that in the OP.



Debade said:


> As an aside, I would not suggest too aggressive of approach to motorists in the States, if you happen to ride here. It would not be unusual for a person to have a fire arm with them. And threatening the motorist , may cause a reaction that even a bright yellow cycling shirt would not appreciate.


Oh sure, I don't threaten them, even in the UK. Just shout my surprise and maybe helpful tips on how they could improve their driving by boiling their head or worrying less about their tiny penis or maybe more useful advice if I'm not too rattled  and always have one brain cell thinking about an escape route that motorists cannot follow. It sucks that it's like that in some places, though. Thankfully rare these days in Norfolk, Cambridgeshire or London, in my experience.


----------



## Drago (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> I agree with the shouting. Sometimes I gesticulate at them. No swearing and usually with some idea of an escape route if it's another road rager who'll turn the car around or stop and jump out.



I was out driving my Hummer when a cyclist started gesticulating and swearing at me...


----------



## Profpointy (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> More victim-blaming. Cycle too close to the kerb and some nutter will probably try to squeeze past in lane - cycle further out and some nutter will probably resent it and close-pass/cut-in to encourage you into the gutter. Probably the only position that would force wide overtakes is cycling along with a proximity-activated weapon aimed to the rear and slightly right!



It's not really victim blaming to recommend from hard won experience, that you are safer and get fewer close passes if you cycle a metre from the kerb. It does annoy some motorists, and sometimes does provoke agression, but I reckon still best on balance. Some drivers are crap and / or nasty, but every little thing you yourself can do is worth considering, no?


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Drago said:


> I was out driving my Hummer when a cyclist started gesticulating and swearing at me...
> 
> View attachment 362858


Don't make him angry. You wouldn't like Californian drivers when they're angry.


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Profpointy said:


> It's not really victim blaming to recommend from hard won experience, that you are safer and get fewer close passes if you cycle a metre from the kerb. It does annoy some motorists, and sometimes does provoke agression, but I reckon still best on balance. Some drivers are crap and / or nasty, but every little thing you yourself can do is worth considering, no?


This isn't worth considering. Like I wrote, no matter what position you cycle in, bad drivers are gonna drive badly. I wouldn't normally cycle as close as a metre from the kerb unless that's secondary position and I consider it safe to use it. 

It's also not a way to deal with bad drivers and by making it your only point when asked how to deal with bad drivers, it implies that the bad driving is partly the cyclist's fault, with any claims to the contrary being rather like those people who start "I'm not a racist but..."


----------



## jefmcg (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> worrying less about their tiny penis


It wasn't a random abuse. I believe that men who drive fast and dangerously, especially with friends male or female in the car, often do so out of (a possibly) subconscious belief that it is a masculine thing to do, asserts their manhood in the eyes of others. Letting them know that it doesn't make strangers think that he is a "big" man and humiliates them in front of the friends might make them choose more sociably acceptable ways to express their masculinity. I am not alone in this belief.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgV9Oa6z5wY


(I have found the inverse relationship between car size/power and penis size to be anecdotally true.)


----------



## Profpointy (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> This isn't worth considering. Like I wrote, no matter what position you cycle in, bad drivers are gonna drive badly. I wouldn't normally cycle as close as a metre from the kerb unless that's secondary position and I consider it safe to use it.
> 
> It's also not a way to deal with bad drivers and by making it your only point when asked how to deal with bad drivers, it implies that the bad driving is partly the cyclist's fault, with any claims to the contrary being rather like those people who start "I'm not a racist but..."



Isn't that bit silly? You seem to be saying we shouldn't make suggestions that might help a cyclist influence (possibly bad) drivers' behavious as it's "victim blaming".

Granted crassly put, such advice it could be that, but you seem to be decrying any advice altogether.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> More victim-blaming. Cycle too close to the kerb and some nutter will probably try to squeeze past in lane - cycle further out and some nutter will probably resent it and close-pass/cut-in to encourage you into the gutter. Probably the only position that would force wide overtakes is cycling along with a proximity-activated weapon aimed to the rear and slightly right!


I disagree. Encouraging reflection, and suggesting an assertive defensive posture is sound advice, in the circumstances. Well done @steveindenmark 

Equally I agree that no matter what I do, some twunt will find a way to punish me, or unconsciously endanger my well-being.

So in answer to the OP...

Work through your feelings and let it go. Driving standards are sh1te in this country, we have to live with it as the dominant motor-centric culture doesn't want to address this issue. Over time it may change/improve.

(And yes, as a commuter I used a rearward and forward facing camera - so my nearest and dearest would have evidence if the worst happened.)


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Profpointy said:


> Isn't that bit silly? You seem to be saying we shouldn't make suggestions that might help a cyclist influence (possibly bad) drivers' behavious as it's "victim blaming".
> 
> Granted crassly put, such advice it could be that, but you seem to be decrying any advice altogether.


No, I'm saying concentrate the advice on the question asked, which is how to deal with bad driving.

There seems no reason to think that @Welsh wheels is riding badly in any way. Advice on riding position - advice contrary to Cyclecraft, no less! - seems like an unhelpful distraction unless you believe that the OP's bad riding causes bad driving somehow.

I notice you wrote "fewer incidents" not no incidents. What do you do about them? Blame yourself? Or do you actually try to be part of the solution and report the incompetent motorists (assuming you sometimes get the index, unlike the example in the OP) so we might get them off the roads before they hurt someone?


----------



## Profpointy (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> No, I'm saying concentrate the advice on the question asked, which is how to deal with bad driving.
> 
> There seems no reason to think that @Welsh wheels is riding badly in any way. Advice on riding position - advice contrary to Cyclecraft, no less! - seems like an unhelpful distraction unless you believe that the OP's bad riding causes bad driving somehow.
> 
> I notice you wrote "fewer incidents" not no incidents. What do you do about them? Blame yourself? Or do you actually try to be part of the solution and report the incompetent motorists (assuming you sometimes get the index, unlike the example in the OP) so we might get them off the roads before they hurt someone?



you're arguing for the sake of it. Whatever....


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Profpointy said:


> you're arguing for the sake of it. Whatever....


Nope - just trying to extract some suggestions of how to deal with bad driving from you, but I guess you've got none.


----------



## Profpointy (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> Nope - just trying to extract some suggestions of how to deal with bad driving from you, but I guess you've got none.



Well apart from my suggestion on road positioning. I found it help me control or at least influence drivers' behaviour. For some reason you don't consider that an acceptable contribution and would rather snipe instead.


----------



## MontyVeda (18 Jul 2017)

I tend to wave at them, often with my middle finger.


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

Profpointy said:


> Well apart from my suggestion on road positioning. I found it help me control or at least influence drivers' behaviour. For some reason you don't consider that an acceptable contribution and would rather snipe instead.


I don't see how reconsidering road positioning is any way to deal with bad driving after it's happened. I also don't see why you think @Welsh wheels isn't already in a good position or why a metre from the kerb is better than the cyclecraft/bikeability primary position.

It's also only influence and only if you're lucky. It's an illusion of control. That may be why it's so seductive an idea and anyone who dares admit getting buzzed by motorists gets criticism of their cycling (it's their fault for not controlling the motorists' urges better) rather than the post-incident suggestions they actually asked for.


----------



## mjr (18 Jul 2017)

MontyVeda said:


> I tend to wave at them, often with my middle finger.


I can tell by your middle finger that you're warming up to me...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orwVyo2erz4


----------



## Profpointy (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> I don't see how reconsidering road positioning is any way to deal with bad driving after it's happened. I also don't see why you think @Welsh wheels isn't already in a good position or why a metre from the kerb is better than the cyclecraft/bikeability primary position.
> 
> It's also only influence and only if you're lucky. It's an illusion of control. That may be why it's so seductive an idea and anyone who dares admit getting buzzed by motorists gets criticism of their cycling (it's their fault for not controlling the motorists' urges better) rather than the post-incident suggestions they actually asked for.



Well in that case all I can suggest is giving them the v-sign if only after-the-fact suggestions are acceptable

the OP may well be a super cyclist and doesn't want or need advice but I for one would have benefitted from "cycle well out" advice despite having cycled for maybe 40 years previously before I worked it out for myself. I would not have considered it patronising.

Edit: I really don't understand your attitude. At worst i've suggested something the OP already knows, at best it's a helpfull suggestion. I don't get why we cyclists shouldn't at least try and influence motorists around us.


----------



## Debade (18 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> Advice on riding position - advice contrary to Cyclecraft, no less!



I have not read Cyclecraft but many other safe cycling recommendations. I did not recognize recommendations that were not appropriate in these posts. What were you referring to? Not challenging you. I want to learn. Perhaps I missed something.


----------



## davidphilips (18 Jul 2017)

vickster said:


> Get a camera if it bothers you that much and you want evidence to take to plod?
> 
> Otherwise ride assertively, but safely and defensively



Now that seems to be the best advice to me, there was another cyclist killed a week ago close to where i live, the driver hit 3 cyclists killing one, on a long road in day light, that road is a dual carriageway and the driver should not have even been in the same lane.

Its my view that until good bike cameras become more reasonable priced and most groups/cyclists have have them fitted both forward/rear facing and start to report dangerous drivers nothing will change, cyclists will be treated like cotton wool obstructions not like fellow but vulnerable road users.

My advice is if you have a camera fitted and report a dangerous driver or even some careless sod driving and on a mobile phone then you may just save some other cyclists life.


----------



## nicasiri (19 Jul 2017)

I wear hi vis clothing. I do find I get a wider gerth from drivers when wearing it.


----------



## ufkacbln (19 Jul 2017)

jefmcg said:


> I've got a loud voice, so when recently a boy racer passed me very close and at speed, then immediately skidded to turn left across me, I shouted "How are you getting on with your tiny penis?" I heard laughter from the passenger seat.
> 
> No, I didn't make the world a better place, but it made me feel better and made someone laugh. And possibly slightly humiliated someone who may - just may - think a little more next time.



Not as satisfying as pulling up along side, pointing out the camera and something along the lines of "I think we'll see what the Police think about that piece of driving"

Works even better when it is a case of "We'll see what your employer thinks..."


----------



## ufkacbln (19 Jul 2017)

Profpointy said:


> It's not really victim blaming to recommend from hard won experience, that you are safer and get fewer close passes if you cycle a metre from the kerb. It does annoy some motorists, and sometimes does provoke agression, but I reckon still best on balance. Some drivers are crap and / or nasty, but every little thing you yourself can do is worth considering, no?



Guy at work like this, so when he was ranting one day, handed him a sheet of A4 paper.

Then asked if the Institute of Advanced Motorists understood and accepted the practice, than it did not speak highly of his driving knowledge

He was not happy


----------



## Dan B (19 Jul 2017)

Profpointy said:


> the OP may well be a super cyclist and doesn't want or need advice but I for one would have benefitted from "cycle well out" advice despite having cycled for maybe 40 years previously before I worked it out for myself. I would not have considered it patronising.


I think perhaps you two are arguing at cross purposes, and not least because I - and I think most commuter cyclists - would not recognise "1 metre from the kerb" as "well out". I'd view it as "uncomfortably close to the gutter". Without wishing to give the OP unsolicited riding advice, I take my position from the centre line not the edge - try to be in the car nearside tyre track most of the time, or the middle of the lane when (1) moving at same speed as the traffic, or (2) especially wishing to discourage overtakes. 

Back to the subject of the thread, for a couple of months I had a cheap camera and reported bad driving to Roadsafe. I gave up when the camera broke (it was cheap) and I'd had absolutely no feedback from the police that they'd done anything with any of my reports, but the other day I got a letter from them saying that they were prosecuting the vehicles registered keeper in one incident (back in January) for failing to identify the driver, so I reckon that's a result. Probably going to get another (ideally, slightly more robust) camera when I have some cash.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (19 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I wear hi vis clothing. I do find I get a wider gerth from drivers when wearing it.


hi vis doth offend mine eye.

and makes not a jot of difference to careful, nor careless, drivers.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (19 Jul 2017)

Profpointy said:


> Well in that case all I can suggest is giving them the v-sign if only after-the-fact suggestions are acceptable
> 
> the OP may well be a super cyclist and doesn't want or need advice but I for one would have benefitted from "cycle well out" advice despite having cycled for maybe 40 years previously before I worked it out for myself. I would not have considered it patronising.
> 
> Edit: I really don't understand your attitude. At worst i've suggested something the OP already knows, at best it's a helpfull suggestion. I don't get why we cyclists shouldn't at least try and influence motorists around us.


We should also consider that we are posting in here for the benefit of those who come here after us.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 Jul 2017)

Debade said:


> As an aside, I would not suggest too aggressive of approach to motorists in the States, if you happen to ride here. It would not be unusual for a person to have a fire arm with them. And threatening the motorist , may cause a reaction that even a bright yellow cycling shirt would not appreciate.



They don't even need a gun when they can weaponise a 2-ton Volvo.


----------



## mjr (19 Jul 2017)

List it on www.CollideOScope.org.uk ? If nothing else, it lets the Casualty Reduction Partnerships get an overview of stuff that doesn't generate full police reports.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (19 Jul 2017)

[QUOTE 4885808, member: 9609"]If we all went to the poilce and wrote to our MPs at every single incident something would be done about it. Shouting swearing and flapping your arms about is just a waste of time and could even get you attacked.[/QUOTE]
No, it wouldn't. Or at least the something that would get done would probably not be to our tastes.


----------



## Arjimlad (19 Jul 2017)

I got fed up with being able to do nothing about it so got a camera. I don't report every piece of bad driving but I do report close passes and the like. The police will generally have words with such drivers. So I feel happier in the hope that those drivers are more likely to improve their driving in future as they know they can be held to account.

Sometimes if I catch up & get a sincere apology I don't bother reporting it. When I do have words I normally start with a "good morning" or something non-confrontational then I am more likely to get a rational reasoned response. If the driver appears to be a potty mouthed scofflaw from the word go, I'd not bother with words & go straight to reporting.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (19 Jul 2017)

Arjimlad said:


> I got fed up with being able to do nothing about it so got a camera. I don't report every piece of bad driving but I do report close passes and the like. The police will generally have words with such drivers. So I feel happier in the hope that those drivers are more likely to improve their driving in future as they know they can be held to account.
> 
> Sometimes if I catch up & get a sincere apology I don't bother reporting it. When I do have words I normally start with a "good morning" or something non-confrontational then I am more likely to get a rational reasoned response. If the driver appears to be a potty mouthed scofflaw from the word go, I'd not bother with words & go straight to reporting.


How do you know the apology is sincere?


----------



## Welsh wheels (19 Jul 2017)

Arjimlad said:


> I got fed up with being able to do nothing about it so got a camera. I don't report every piece of bad driving but I do report close passes and the like. The police will generally have words with such drivers. So I feel happier in the hope that those drivers are more likely to improve their driving in future as they know they can be held to account.
> 
> Sometimes if I catch up & get a sincere apology I don't bother reporting it. When I do have words I normally start with a "good morning" or something non-confrontational then I am more likely to get a rational reasoned response. If the driver appears to be a potty mouthed scofflaw from the word go, I'd not bother with words & go straight to reporting.


Hopefully you can detect wrong uns before they throw a punch. I'm built for cycling not boxing so I try to avoid confrontations!


----------



## nicasiri (19 Jul 2017)

GrumpyGregry said:


> hi vis doth offend mine eye.
> 
> and makes not a jot of difference to careful, nor careless, drivers.



I'm not sure where you get that idea that it doesn't make a difference? I definitely notice a difference when I ride in hi vis, but I get my jerseys from a place where they are truly hi vis & they're brighter than any I've seen otherwise. It's called See Me Wear. I had put the link in before, but I guess I can't post links on here because I'm new maybe. The moderator removed that part of my reply originally.

As far as offending your eye goes, no offense, but maybe it's better to offend your eye a bit than be roadkill.


----------



## ianrauk (19 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I wear hi vis clothing. I do find I get a wider gerth from drivers when wearing it.




I used to wear it and found it made no difference what so ever.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (19 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I'm not sure where you get that idea that it doesn't make a difference? I definitely notice a difference when I ride in hi vis, but I get my jerseys from a place where they are truly hi vis & they're brighter than any I've seen otherwise. It's called See Me Wear. I had put the link in before, but I guess I can't post links on here because I'm new maybe. The moderator removed that part of my reply originally.
> 
> As far as offending your eye goes, no offense, but maybe it's better to offend your eye a bit than be roadkill.


Used to have a serious hi-vis habit but I definitely notice that a rabbit's foot is just as effective ..


----------



## Arjimlad (19 Jul 2017)

GrumpyGregry said:


> How do you know the apology is sincere?



How do you know anything is? Just from how people interact with each other..


----------



## Arjimlad (19 Jul 2017)

Welsh wheels said:


> Hopefully you can detect wrong uns before they throw a punch. I'm built for cycling not boxing so I try to avoid confrontations!


They're sat in a car, I can scarper PDQ!


----------



## nicasiri (19 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> I used to wear it and found it made no difference what so ever.



Well it doesn't make a difference if a driver's an a**hole, but I have to say I really do notice a difference in general. Anyway, I always wear hi vis because anything that makes it more possible for me to be seen is important. And I definitely notice a difference with many drivers, as they give me wider room. Of course there are 100 other issues as well. Better infrastructure is #1. People in Holland don't even wear helmets when they ride.


----------



## mjr (20 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I'm not sure where you get that idea that it doesn't make a difference?


Studies like http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/12855/ and the failure of the fluctuations in hi-vis cycle clothing sales to correlate with any measures of cycling casualties. You know, science.

Also, I think you'd need to be a special sort of crazy to wear yellow and go cycling among all the yellow crops we grow around here.

I can't make it "more possible for me to be seen". We can all be seen. We're all visible. Except maybe the invisible man. Any motorist claiming otherwise is probably trying to distract from a mistake.

However, dressing as an alien space lemon has other drawbacks, making cycling seen as something that involves special clothes and making cyclists seen as unusual abnormal people. This means people are less likely to think of cycling as something they could or should do.

Edited to add: oh and it uglies up landscapes and people's photographs, which is a bit unwelcome in a tourist area.


----------



## nicasiri (20 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> Studies like http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/12855/ and the failure of the fluctuations in hi-vis cycle clothing sales to correlate with any measures of cycling casualties. You know, science.



Well you found one that proved your point, but there are numerous others that show different. This article names a few, and you'll be able to read it if they don't remove the link here. https://cyclingtips.com/2016/06/does-reflective-and-fluorescent-clothing-make-us-safer/

I'm sure you can find a study or two that says lights don't help when riding at night either, but there's something to be said for pure logic. I definitely notice a difference in hi vis.

If your own sense of fashion is more important to you than your own safety, while riding, I suppose that's up to you. But I disagree that we're all fully visible. And I definitely notice a difference wearing hi vis. And as far as making less people want to take up cycling, are you saying we should all pretend at this point, that they shouldn't have to practice any type of safety?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (20 Jul 2017)

Arjimlad said:


> How do you know anything is? Just from how people interact with each other..


So a large measure of self-delusion may well be taking place.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (20 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Well you found one that proved your point, but there are numerous others that show different. This article names a few, and you'll be able to read it if they don't remove the link here. https://cyclingtips.com/2016/06/does-reflective-and-fluorescent-clothing-make-us-safer/


Epic correlation vs causation fail in several places in that article.


----------



## ianrauk (20 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Well it doesn't make a difference if a driver's an a**hole, but I have to say I really do notice a difference in general. Anyway, I always wear hi vis because anything that makes it more possible for me to be seen is important. And I definitely notice a difference with many drivers, as they give me wider room. Of course there are 100 other issues as well. Better infrastructure is #1. People in Holland don't even wear helmets when they ride.




And that's your own opinion. My opinion and that of others on here is that Hi-Viz makes no difference to what drivers see or react to.
In the UK it's known as urban camouflage, because it's just that. So many people wear Hi-Viz (non cyclists) that's it's lost in the general melee.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (20 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Well it doesn't make a difference if a driver's an a**hole, but I have to say I really do notice a difference in general. Anyway, I always wear hi vis because anything that makes it more possible for me to be seen is important. And I definitely notice a difference with many drivers, as they give me wider room. Of course there are 100 other issues as well. Better infrastructure is #1. People in Holland don't even wear helmets when they ride.



Hi vis is so commonplace that it is not useful in getting the wearer noticed, in fact it has the opposite effect. An auction room in Glasgow was robbed of nearly half a million pounds of jewellery a couple of years back. Why do you think the robber wore hi vis to commit this crime?


----------



## Dan B (20 Jul 2017)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Epic correlation vs causation fail in several places in that article.


The studies it links to are not nearly as conclusive as the authors would like to hope they are, either. 


> The search identified 1172 potentially relevant records. We independently examined titles, abstracts, and keywords of citations
> from electronic databases for eligibility. We obtained the full text of all relevant records and independently assessed whether each met the pre-defined inclusion criteria. *No trials met the inclusion criteria for the primary objectives but 35 papers reporting 42 trials (two were unpublished) met the inclusion criteria for the secondary objectives.*


----------



## Dan B (20 Jul 2017)

[QUOTE 4886981, member: 9609"]As a driver I notice cyclists in HiViz earlier than those not in HiViz, so if it catches my attention it will catch the attention of others, I think it must be a good thing.[/QUOTE]
Supposing that your experience is normal/typical, how often is it the case that by noticing a cyclist earlier you are able to give them more room?


----------



## mjr (20 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Well you found one that proved your point, but there are numerous others that show different. This article names a few, and you'll be able to read it if they don't remove the link here. https://cyclingtips.com/2016/06/does-reflective-and-fluorescent-clothing-make-us-safer/


Others have noted the weaknesses in that reporting and some of the studies it mentions.

I also note that Australia and New Zealand (both mentioned in that article) are in the caboose of cycling casualty reduction, clinging to ineffective measures and failed approaches, some of which are now compulsory by law. They are not good places to cycle. They are now freak cycling environments. Sometimes that may be informative in offering cautionary tales of what not to do, but sometimes they may produce freak results.



nicasiri said:


> I'm sure you can find a study or two that says lights don't help when riding at night either, but there's something to be said for pure logic. I definitely notice a difference in hi vis.


I suggest you may be riding differently in hi-vis somehow, possibly because you believe yourself to be safer, plus you're a sample size of one.

Surely "pure logic" dictates that we look for the best evidence and most reliable reports? And would you expect university researchers, or CyclingTips's Australian editor to provide them?



nicasiri said:


> If your own sense of fashion is more important to you than your own safety, while riding, I suppose that's up to you. But I disagree that we're all fully visible.


Fashion versus safety makes no sense as a comparison because hi-vis is irrelevant to safety.

If you disagree that we're all fully visible can you please explain, how am I invisible? 



nicasiri said:


> And I definitely notice a difference wearing hi vis. And as far as making less people want to take up cycling, are you saying we should all pretend at this point, that they shouldn't have to practice any type of safety?


No, but we could do some stuff that actually works like improving infrastructure and providing training, rather than push discouraging placebos.


----------



## davidphilips (20 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Hi vis is so commonplace that it is not useful in getting the wearer noticed, in fact it has the opposite effect. An auction room in Glasgow was robbed of nearly half a million pounds of jewellery a couple of years back. Why do you think the robber wore hi vis to commit this crime?


 
LOL, Perhaps to use a bike instead of a getaway car?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (20 Jul 2017)

davidphilips said:


> LOL, Perhaps to use a bike instead of a getaway car?



Sadly, no. He was picked up by an accomplice in a car.


----------



## Tim Hall (20 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> And that's your own opinion. My opinion and that of others on here is that Hi-Viz makes no difference to what drivers see or react to.
> In the UK it's known as urban camouflage, because it's just that. So many people wear Hi-Viz (non cyclists) that's it's lost in the general melee.


Note that nicasiri is a new member, joined yesterday, has made four posts, all on this topic and manages to mention a company that supplies HiViz clothing. Jus' sayin'.


----------



## nicasiri (20 Jul 2017)

Tim Hall said:


> Note that nicasiri is a new member, joined yesterday, has made four posts, all on this topic and manages to mention a company that supplies HiViz clothing. Jus' sayin'.


Yeah, you're right. But I'm not associated with the company. I just think it's a really good product for hi viz. In my opinion, see me wear is better than others because of the contrast and pattern, and that they use true fluorescent dyes, which makes you even more visible. Also, I'm not denying the fact that better infrastructure is necessary, and there are a whole slew of other problems. But to even say hi viz makes no difference is completely bizarre.

Do you see a person walking down the street better in hi viz clothing? Of course you do. Why else would all road workers wear hi viz if not because they're seen better. I think we cyclists need to do all we can to be seen and at the same time advocate for the other problems at hand. In certain countries, they're even making prostitutes wear hi viz clothing. Why would that be - to promote prostitution? I doubt it. This is a bike safety forum. Like I said in another post, people in Holland don't even wear helmets and have the lowest amount of cycling/driver accidents. Why? Because they have better infrastructure. So of course that's the main problem, I'd mentioned that before too.

Also, I question a lot of these naysayer studies on hi viz, because there was a huge backlash against it, by both cyclists who didn't think they should have to do anything more to be seen by drivers, ie it wasn't their responsibility. And those who were designing cycling gear, who were more concerned with fashion over safety.

And, do these studies you're quoting take into account that the majority of cycling deaths occur at night, when of course hi viz doesn't make a difference. Even reflective doesn't help that much night, even though brand designers will tell you it does, so they can keep telling you black jerseys are the best to wear.

Also, the reason I keep posting on this topic is because I posted once on the topic, as an opinion on what helps with bike safety, and you keep insisting it doesn't. I've found it helps.

You say it doesn't work in the UK, but someone on here said as a driver they notice cyclists in hi viz more. When I drive, I notice cyclists in hi viz more, and I'm a cyclist, so I'm also trying to pay attention to all, but definitely you notice them more. I'm not someone whose aim is to hit cyclists, but there are some a***hole drivers on the road who don't care what you're wearing. But for those who aren't a***hole drivers, it definitely helps in making you be seen better.


----------



## nicasiri (20 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Hi vis is so commonplace that it is not useful in getting the wearer noticed, in fact it has the opposite effect. An auction room in Glasgow was robbed of nearly half a million pounds of jewellery a couple of years back. Why do you think the robber wore hi vis to commit this crime?



Although interesting, I'm not sure that proves much, except they were wearing a high visibility vest specifically to maybe look more like a roadworker and blend in that way. But hey, to each his own, I just think to say hi viz doesn't help in making you be seen is a very bizarre statement. And to the other things, I addressed in my reply above, as there are some skewed elements in the studies being quoted by the naysayers as well.


----------



## mjr (20 Jul 2017)

It may make one seen earlier. That's not important. It doesn't seem to make one given more room or reduce the risk of being a casualty. Bizarre but true, as often seems to happen in safety topics.

We don't yet know why. There's one theory that motorists see you too early, before they can act on your presence, then they fail to re-notice you at the appropriate time and act. There's another that it makes you look inhuman so drivers' don't intuitively recognise you as a soft squashy human and so ignore you like an invisible gorilla. And there's the idea that they look at you too much and too long and get target fixation. In short, being seen earlier ain't necessarily being seen better.

At least we agree that road design could be better. Let's push for that, not encourage people to wear low contrast yellow jackets.


----------



## mjr (20 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Why else would all road workers wear hi viz if not because they're seen better.


It's a thoughtless application of something that works for railway safety but is unproven for roads, isn't it?

By the way, the East of England Ambulance Service still wear green, Norfolk police still wear mostly black and Norfolk fire still wear mostly mustard, albeit with reflective trim these days. They're not being run over in greater numbers than other counties that have gone the full lemon. Why do you think that might be?


----------



## nicasiri (20 Jul 2017)

I do get more room, like I said, I definitely get a wider gerth, but it also depends on the road. On a crowded car packed-city street, there is nowhere for them to move.

As I mentioned, there is some skewed data in studies about casualties, because most cyclist deaths occur at night... Where yes, hi vis won't help. But really either will reflective help that much in my opinion.

I never suggested people wear low contrast yellow jackets. The reason I mentioned see me wear specifically was because of the contrast and patterns. It's not just a regular all yellow hi vis jacket.

I'm not sure if you're talking about along the side of the road or in the road that they wear these things - the police and the ambulance service? If you're talking about alongside the road for an ambulance service, well I think maybe we can attribute that to people's gruesome habit of slowing down to peer at an accident as well, and that traffic in itself moves slower when an accident occurs. But I don't know where you're referring to that they are wearing this specifically, and that it isn't causing issues.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (20 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I do get more room, like I said, I definitely get a wider gerth...



Wearing hi vis has no discernable effect on the passing behaviour of drivers around me; I get the same crappy close passing, left hooks, right crosses and SMIDSY incidents no matter what I wear.

Wearing hi vis clothing won't ever make a good driver out of a bad one.


----------



## nicasiri (21 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Wearing hi vis clothing won't ever make a good driver out of a bad one.



Well that's true. There are a lot of people who don't know how to drive, hence why there are so many car on car accidents as well.


----------



## nicasiri (21 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> Let's push for that, not encourage people to wear low contrast yellow jackets.



So I didn't know why you kept toting on about yellow jackets, so I watched some videos of cyclists in London. I realize this may not go over so well, but you guys don't think there's any issues with your cycling habits there at all? Quite honestly, I'm surprised you don't get hit more often. 

Call me crazy, but I recognize the fact that a car can kill me, just like when I drive I recognize that a huge truck can smash me to pieces too, and I cycle defensively, aware of that, doing my best to avoid cars. 

You all cut cars off everywhere and give them the finger if they call you on it. You ride 2 or 3 next to each other, so cars can't pass you. You run lights, weave through traffic like you own the road. I've never seen anything like it before. 

Maybe this isn't everywhere in England, but it seemed to be pretty common in London.

And yes, I did see cyclists wearing bright yellow, mainly at night, and officers wearing it during the day. But let's just say hi vis won't protect a cyclist from getting hit and killed, who completely disregards the laws of physics and traffic lights too.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Well that's true.



Excellent. Since the theme of this thread is how to tackle bad driving, and we are now in agreement that hi vis has nothing to do with that, we can leave this hi vis distraction and get back on topic. 

A number of things are needed & here's a few to start with:

strengthened road policing with a return to greater number of officers on patrol;
strict application of the 12-point totting up disqualfication process;
removal of the exceptional hardship clause;
mandatory retesting of all drivers who seek return of their licence after disqualification.


----------



## Dan B (21 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> You run lights, weave through traffic like you own the road.


I don't run lights, but you are correct that I own the road. It's a much better deal than owning the underside of a bridge


----------



## ianrauk (21 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> You ride 2 or 3 next to each other, so cars can't pass you



1: You are not breaking any laws in the UK by riding 2 abreast.
2: Cars can pass at my convenience and for my safety, not the other way round.


----------



## davidphilips (21 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> So I didn't know why you kept toting on about yellow jackets, so I watched some videos of cyclists in London. I realize this may not go over so well, but you guys don't think there's any issues with your cycling habits there at all? Quite honestly, I'm surprised you don't get hit more often.
> 
> Call me crazy, but I recognize the fact that a car can kill me, just like when I drive I recognize that a huge truck can smash me to pieces too, and I cycle defensively, aware of that, doing my best to avoid cars.
> 
> ...



Lost me there? Sorry dont get this at all this thread is about how cyclists can deal with bad driving, have to agree with you that there are some bad cyclists but most if not all on CycleChat take cycling seriously, so to say that (You all cut cars off everywhere and give them the finger) that is just not true or indeed in any way the accepted good cycling of most.
Same as there are some great car drivers and most cyclists are also car drivers but the problem comes with drivers that are so inconsiderate that they put cyclists lives in mortal danger.

As for riding 2 or 3 next to each other well 3 is not good but nothing wrong with 2 abreast conditions allowing may i ask are you even a cyclist?


----------



## Dan B (21 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> :
> 
> strengthened road policing with a return to greater number of officers on patrol;
> strict application of the 12-point totting up disqualfication process;
> ...



The first one (enforcement) is the most important. To get behavioural change, the certain consequence of a "minor" penalty is much more effective than the small risk of a draconian one.

Martin Porter has some good thoughts on the matter: http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/the-governments-proposals-on-sentencing.html


----------



## youngoldbloke (21 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> Studies like http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/12855/ and the failure of the fluctuations in hi-vis cycle clothing sales to correlate with any measures of cycling casualties. You know, science.
> 
> *Also, I think you'd need to be a special sort of crazy to wear yellow and go cycling among all the yellow crops we grow around here.*
> 
> ...


Mostly agree - so wouldn't you also
*need to be a special sort of crazy to wear Black and go cycling among all the Blackness we have at night in the country around here.*
Surely the point is* CONTRAST. *Likewise unwise to wear white if you want to be seen in snow. Like some others I also find I am often able to see riders wearing lighter or reflective clothing earlier when driving at night on country roads*.*


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jul 2017)

Dan B said:


> The first one (enforcement) is the most important.


That's why it's top of my list. 



Dan B said:


> To get behavioural change, the certain consequence of a "minor" penalty is much more effective than the small risk of a draconian one.


Indeed. This can be seen in the continued prevalence of people driving while using a hand-held phone, despite the penalty having been doubled.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jul 2017)

youngoldbloke said:


> Mostly agree - so wouldn't you also
> *need to be a special sort of crazy to wear Black and go cycling among all the Blackness we have at night in the country around here.*
> Surely the point is* CONTRAST. *Likewise unwise to wear white if you want to be seen in snow. Like some others I also find I am often able to see riders wearing lighter or reflective clothing earlier when driving at night on country roads*.*



Well I've got lights for that so how I dress is still irrelevant but we're straying away from the topic. Again.


----------



## mjr (21 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> 1: You are not breaking any laws in the UK by riding 2 abreast.


Not breaking any laws by riding 5 abreast, which I've done. It's discouraged by the highway code but it happens almost inevitably for short stretches in towns and mostly cities where enough people cycle to shoal at traffic lights and so in. It still doesn't excuse bad driving.


----------



## mjr (21 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> So I didn't know why you kept toting on about yellow jackets, so I watched some videos of cyclists in London. I realize this may not go over so well, but you guys don't think there's any issues with your cycling habits there at all? Quite honestly, I'm surprised you don't get hit more often.


Sure there are issues and I do include cycle training as something that would help - but remember that the videos that get put online are mostly stuff that is exceptional or remarkable in some way and often that's bad cycling or bad motoring. Maybe you could look at the videos posted of cyclists in your capital city and see if that seems a fair representation of how you cycle?

And anyway, does someone who makes a mistake while cycling deserve the death penalty?



nicasiri said:


> Call me crazy, but I recognize the fact that a car can kill me, just like when I drive I recognize that a huge truck can smash me to pieces too, and I cycle defensively, aware of that, doing my best to avoid cars.


And no-one has a problem with any of that. It's just the naïve and mistaken belief that the emperor's new cycling jacket will do anything to stop them and so such victim-blaming unnecessary expensive fashion statements should be promoted to other cyclists.



nicasiri said:


> You all cut cars off everywhere and give them the finger if they call you on it.


YYSW, like all Yankees are fat and don't have passports. 



nicasiri said:


> You ride 2 or 3 next to each other, so cars can't pass you. You run lights, weave through traffic like you own the road. I've never seen anything like it before.


Ye gods! You're going to cough up your skull when you discover videos of cycling in the Netherlands!


----------



## confusedcyclist (21 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I do get more room, like I said, I definitely get a wider gerth...



Seriously, stop with the anecdotal evidence. Would you be pleased if you went to your doctor with a persistent cough, and he said to you he notices a reduction in coughs in patients who recently had a circumcision. Would you sign up for one? No of course not. You would want evidence based practice of treatments based on sound statistics and scientific process, not gut based observations which confuse correlation and causation and ineffectual findings of focus groups. The research already exists, and high-viz and reflectives do not stop bad driving.

Back on topic;

For offenses involving vulnerable road users, bad drivers should be fined, sent on driver awareness courses with a theme around sharing the road. There is precedent with speeding, failure to drive with due care around others should be no different, the course can easily be paid for with income from fines, some also being set aside to fund future enforcement. If offences are repeated,larger fine, instant 4 points and or a ban, length of which should depend on seriousness of the offence, and definitely no hardship exceptions. Those are laughable, does a victim get an exception when their life is destroyed by incompetent drivers? No.


----------



## jefmcg (21 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I definitely get a wider gerth



You can call me vain, but I am not going to choose cycling clothing that increases my girth.


----------



## vickster (21 Jul 2017)

jefmcg said:


> You can call me vain, but I am not going to choose cycling clothing that increases my girth.


Ah but you're not a man


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

davidphilips said:


> As for riding 2 or 3 next to each other well 3 is not good but nothing wrong with 2 abreast conditions allowing may i ask are you even a cyclist?



The problem is when you refuse to move into single and let a car pass. Yeah, you have to share the road. You and the cars there both seem to think you own it, and personally I think you're making things worse for yourself in this all out war you seem to have created. From what I saw on many videos, cyclists in London are pretty reckless (as are your drivers), and like I said, the cyclists regularly weave in and out of cars, ride the wrong way on roads, run traffic lights regularly, shoot the finger to drivers, when they're actually in the wrong. 

Of course, that's not everyone. But THE PROBLEM IS IT AFFECTS ALL OF YOU. It seems to be a relatively large issue, at least in London. 

Not sure why so many cyclists refuse to ride on the bikeways that were built there either. I saw one video where a police officer told a group of cyclists they should get on the bike path and they refused to do so. They mouthed off to the officer, who was attempting to help them. The bikeway was right there. So yeah, I don't get it...


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> Sure there are issues and I do include cycle training as something that would help - but remember that the videos that get put online are mostly stuff that is exceptional or remarkable in some way and often that's bad cycling or bad motoring. Maybe you could look at the videos posted of cyclists in your capital city and see if that seems a fair representation of how you cycle?



I have. But there aren't nearly as many as the ones in London. I saw cyclists attacking motor bikers, picking fights with them, swarming around them like sharks. And then some mistakenly hitting motor bikers too and knocking the motor bikers down because the cyclists themselves weren't paying attention. I'm not saying it's everyone, but really, it looks to me like you have some serious issues going on there with your own cyclists refusing to practice better bike safety, and it seems to be quite a big problem.

I slow down at intersections, because I'm aware there are bad drivers. A lot of cyclists in London don't. You're right, you're a vehicle, a car should give you the right away. Doesn't mean they will. I also slow down a bit through intersections and look both ways when driving. Why? Because there are a lot of sh**ty drivers on the road. It's just a fact. Call it survival instincts, whatever you wish.



mjr said:


> And anyway, does someone who makes a mistake while cycling deserve the death penalty?



Well this is kind of a ridiculous question. I'm not saying anyone deserves the death penalty, but the truth is if a driver makes a mistake while driving, they could end up dead via another car. Or some other obstruction. So of course you have to cycle defensively.

There are a lot of you on the road. I think, personally, you've escalated an all-out war with drivers over there, and there appears to a real massive hatred on both sides. Much more than in other places. I'm not saying one side is all right or another is all wrong. But it's not helping your problems either. Yeah, now it appears drivers don't really give two sh***ts if they hit you. You've got a real problem on your hands, and from what I saw, educating cyclists seems to me, as if it might help a bit as well.



mjr said:


> It's just the naïve and mistaken belief that the emperor's new cycling jacket will do anything to stop them and so such victim-blaming unnecessary expensive fashion statements should be promoted to other cyclists.



Well I mentioned a few other things that might help too...


----------



## mjr (22 Jul 2017)

I like cycle tracks, but there's plenty I won't ride because I'd need an operation to fetch my saddle back out.

Maybe we should require all motorists to stick to motorways, to stop their bad driving affecting others? After all, we've built those motorways at massive expense and now many motorists still don't use them. Why aren't the police telling them to get on the motorways instead?


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> The problem is when you refuse to move into single and let a car pass. Yeah, you have to share the road. You and the cars there both seem to think you own it, and personally I think you're making things worse for yourself in this all out war you seem to have created. From what I saw on many videos, cyclists in London are pretty reckless and like I said, weave in and out of cars, ride the wrong way on roads, run traffic lights regularly, shoot the finger to drivers, when they're actually in the wrong. Of course, that's not everyone. But THE PROBLEM IS IT EFFECTS ALL OF YOU. It seems to be a relatively large issue, at least in London. Not sure why so many cyclists refuse to ride on the bikeways that were built there either. I saw one video where a police officer told a group of cyclists they should get on the bike path and they refused to do so. They mouthed off to the officer, who was attempting to help them. The bikeway was right there. So yeah, I don't get it...


You can search you tube for as many anti cyclist videos as you like...I can quite happily show you even more of crappy drivers breaking laws. Once again, its not UK law that you have to use bike lanes. What part of 'cyclists are also traffic' is it that you dont understand? 
What other cyclists do or dont do has no bearing or effect on me. The same as what some car drivers do or dont do has no bearing or effect on other car drivers. 
Have you ever used or in fact seen the terrible state of some of the cycle lanes in London? No you havent.
I cycle in London every single day of the week and at weekends. So If you want anecdotes then let me tell you. Reckless car drivers far outweigh reckless cyclists ten fold. There is no war so you can quit now with that nonsence hyperbole.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> What part of 'cyclists are also traffic' is it that you dont understand?


I understand this just fine. What I don't understand is you complain about needing better infrastructure to solve the problem. When you get it, you refuse to use it. That's what doesn't make sense to me...

Also, I didn't search Youtube for anti-cyclist videos. I was looking in London at videos taken from both sides...



ianrauk said:


> What other cyclists do or dont do has no bearing or effect on me. The same as what some car drivers do or dont do has no bearing or effect on other car drivers.



I'm sorry but this is a very naive statement.



ianrauk said:


> Have you ever used or in fact seen the terrible state of some of the cycle lanes in London? No you havent.
> I cycle in London every single day of the week and at weekends. So If you want anecdotes then let me tell you. Reckless car drivers far outweigh reckless cyclists ten fold. There is no war so you can quit now with that nonsence hyperbole.



Ok, sounds good. You continue your war with drivers. It seems to have helped a lot thus far.  Anyway, I wish you all the best.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I understand this just fine. What I don't understand is you complain about needing better infrastructure to solve the problem. When you get it, you refuse to use it. That's what doesn't make sense to me...



Better infrastructure.. not crap infrastructure that is installed without consultation with cycling groups and organisations but is put in place as some sort of vanity project of incumbent government officials. And as far as I remember, I never asked for or wanted it.



nicasiri said:


> I'm sorry but this is a very naive statement.



Your opinion. Of which is wrong. It may be how it works and is where you are, but not here. I certainly don't tar all car drivers with the same brush if I see one that is acting like a cock as much as I know that colleagues of mine don't tar all cyclists with the same brush. So give that one a rest ok.



nicasiri said:


> Ok, sounds good. You continue your war with drivers. It seems to have helped a lot thus far.  Anyway, I wish you all the best.



And there you go again with this fictitious war between drivers and cyclists. Obviously, you being from outside the UK know far better then someone who cycles in London every day. I will tell you again. There is no war with drivers.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (22 Jul 2017)

@nicasiri Do you have any constructive suggestions how to deal with bad driving, aside from telling the victims of that bad driving to dress brightly and keep out of the way?


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> Your opinion. Of which is wrong.



My opinion's wrong. LOL. Ok. 



ianrauk said:


> There is no war with drivers.



What would you call it?


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> My opinion's wrong. LOL. Ok.
> 
> 
> 
> What would you call it?



As I said before, hyperbole nonsense by people who really haven't a clue.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> @nicasiri Do you have any constructive suggestions how to deal with bad driving, aside from telling the victims of that bad driving to dress brightly and keep out of the way?


I said cycle defensively, not keep out of the way. 

How do you tell car drivers to deal with bad drivers? You tell them to drive defensively. 

You're living in a fairy tale if you think you're going to change how all drivers drive. 

I've also said 100 times here - better infrastructure is the #1 problem. Advocating for that is important. But it seems in London when you get it, that's not enough either for some. So I don't know how you should solve your problem. I'm not even entirely sure you want to.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> As I said before, hyperbole nonsense by people who really haven't a clue.


Sure, ok...


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

Quite honestly, I think you guys want to own the roads. I don't know that you want to share them. So maybe you will one day.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I said cycle defensively, not keep out of the way.



What you wrote was



nicasiri said:


> You ride 2 or 3 next to each other, so cars can't pass you.





nicasiri said:


> The problem is when you refuse to move into single and let a car pass





nicasiri said:


> Not sure why so many cyclists refuse to ride on the bikeways that were built there either



...which is expecting riders to keep out of the way.

I made a few suggestions up thread about dealing with bad driving via enforcement and sentencing. 



> I've also said 100 times here - better infrastructure is the #1 problem. Advocating for that is important. But it seems in London when you get it, that's not enough either for some.



When good infrastructure is provided, it is used. Just look at the many videos of the new protected CSH routes in London and how people of all ages and abilities are thronging to them. 

Guess what happens when crap infrastructure is provided.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> What you wrote was
> 
> ...which is expecting riders to keep out of the way.
> 
> I made a few suggestions up thread about dealing with bad driving via enforcement and sentencing.



No, it's not expecting them to keep out of the way. It's moving into single file to let a car pass, because yes cars do travel faster than bicycles. When you're driving slower than the car behind you, you also move out of the way to let the car pass.

And because, look, you're dealing with human nature, and that's what it appears to me you're trying to change. People get pissed when they have to go slow and wait for things.

Drivers don't go to jail for cutting off other drivers either. Maybe they will in your country though. I wish you all the best with that.

The group's attitude overall though seems to be cyclists shouldn't be punished for bad cycling or making mistakes, only drivers should. I think that speaks to the war you guys have between yourself and drivers. (Though I know no war really exists here.)

You want to be treated like equal motorists, but only when it's convenient.



glasgowcyclist said:


> When good infrastructure is provided, it is used. Just look at the many videos of the new protected CSH routes in London and how people of all ages and abilities are thronging to them.
> 
> Guess what happens when crap infrastructure is provided.



Not true that it's always used. I believe I was referring to when it wasn't... In the case I was referring to, some cyclists were using the bikeway. Others weren't. Because they didn't think they should have to.

Like I said, I don't think you're looking to compromise. You appear to want to own the road. Maybe that's possible. But we should be honest about the goals here.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> In the case I was referring to, some cyclists were using the bikeway. Others weren't. Because they didn't think they should have to.



Do you know that or are you guessing?



nicasiri said:


> The group's attitude overall though seems to be cyclists shouldn't be punished for bad cycling or making mistakes, only drivers should.



I think your imagination is running away with you.

The topic, which you seem to be steadfastly avoiding, is how to deal with bad driving - but you want to focus on what you consider to be bad cycling instead.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Do you know that or are you guessing?



They were all there visible in the video... What would I be guessing about?



glasgowcyclist said:


> I think your imagination is running away with you.
> 
> The topic, which you seem to be steadfastly avoiding, is how to deal with bad driving - but you want to focus on what you consider to be bad cycling instead.



Well, actually I've made quite a few suggestions on "how to deal with bad driving". What I haven't made is suggestions on how to "change" bad driving. That's what you're doing. This is where we disagree. 

I think you're going to have a hard time trying to change all driver behavior. It's a bit of a fantasy in my mind. And in addition, I'm pointing out that if you want to change bad driver behavior, you also need to equally look at bad cyclist behavior. The two are feeding into each other, and making it worse for the rest of you, from what I observed, is what I've been trying to say.


----------



## Dave Davenport (22 Jul 2017)

I've only browsed it but this thread looks fun! Anyroad, in answer to the OP's question; Nuke 'em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> They were all there visible in the video... What would I be guessing about?



This:



nicasiri said:


> Because they didn't think they should have to.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> This:


Ah...well it's true. I think it's kind of along the lines of what you and some others keep repeating about moving out of the way and such and that you shouldn't have to. They didn't think they should have to get on the bikeway instead of the road... I'm not saying it's all of you, but again, there definitely seem to be some real issues there.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Ah...well it's true. I think it's kind of along the lines of what you and some others keep repeating about moving out of the way and such and that you shouldn't have to. They didn't think they should have to get on the bikeway instead of the road... I'm not saying it's all of you, but again, there definitely seem to be some real issues there.



So you are guessing. You don't know whether the bike lane takes them to where they want to go, maybe their destination lies off that route.


----------



## davidphilips (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Ah...well it's true. I think it's kind of along the lines of what you and some others keep repeating about moving out of the way and such and that you shouldn't have to. They didn't think they should have to get on the bikeway instead of the road... I'm not saying it's all of you, but again, there definitely seem to be some real issues there.



nicasiri, If you are not a cyclist then could i ask you to get a bike and start using it. Then you may have a better idea of cycling and understanding of what is on cyclechat, Another question and i dont think you will answer this one either, Are you just having fun on here or are your comments real?

LOL, Theres no war between cyclists and car drivers as most cyclists are car drivers so what side would they be on or is it in your opinion an all out war between anyone and everyone on the road.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> So you are guessing. You don't know whether the bike lane takes them to where they want to go, maybe their destination lies off that route.



I wasn't guessing. I don't know if eventually they would need to go another route, but it was all going one way at the time. Which is why the cop suggested they get on the bikeway. 

Is this really that surprising to you?


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

davidphilips said:


> nicasiri, If you are not a cyclist then could i ask you to get a bike and start using it. Then you may have a better idea of cycling and understanding of what is on cyclechat, Another question and i dont think you will answer this one either, Are you just having fun on here or are your comments real?
> 
> LOL, Theres no war between cyclists and car drivers as most cyclists are car drivers so what side would they be on or is it in your opinion an all out war between anyone and everyone on the road.



Hmm... either you've got A LOT of people putting out bad press for London's cycling and driving issues, or you're really narcissistic thinking there's no war going on, simply because most cyclists also drive. There's what - 25% of you on the road. Who do you think the others are? Non-cyclists.

I do cycle, regularly. Thanks for asking. I also drive.


----------



## mjr (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> No, it's not expecting them to keep out of the way. It's moving into single file to let a car pass, because yes cars do travel faster than bicycles. When you're driving slower than the car behind you, you also move out of the way to let the car pass.[…]
> 
> The group's attitude overall though seems to be cyclists shouldn't be punished for bad cycling or making mistakes, only drivers should.


Punishment's fine as long as it's proportionate to the danger. So where a motorist gets a £60 fine for buzzing a cyclist, a cyclist should get a 50p fine for the reverse.

Two things maybe you didn't realise about London: firstly, most traffic lane widths are narrow enough that it makes no difference whether cyclists are single file or double: motorists must change lane to overtake safely.

Secondly, cars don't go faster than cycles. Average car speed in inner London is around 12mph. Drivers are in each other's way. The cyclists are irrelevant, like how grains of rice can fit among peas without changing the maximum number of peas in a jar.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Sure, ok...



Congratulations, you win the internet.



nicasiri said:


> Hmm... either you've got A LOT of people putting out bad press for London's cycling and driving issues, or you're really narcissistic thinking there's no war going on, simply because most cyclists also drive. There's what - 25% of you on the road. Who do you think the others are? Non-cyclists.
> 
> I do cycle, regularly. Thanks for asking. I also drive.




I will tell you again as you sure didn't listen to the first few times.
There is no war between cyclist and car drivers in London, or any where in the UK for that matter.

How do I know? It's quite simple. I do a 32 mile round commute through London streets and traffic every day and I have been commuting in London since the early 80's. I like to think that experience of that amount count's for something. You on the other hand carry on ignoring people who are telling you there is no such thing as a war as it's far more convenient for you to believe your own agenda.

You are from the USA, I wont go there any more as everyone carry's guns and we will all get shot as soon as we walk out of the airport. It's true, I've seen the You Tube videos of the police killing everyone. It's a war out there.

Hey, did you see what I did there?


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

What's interesting to me as well is how all of you think I'm making this up. Maybe you're just all in denial, or you really don't think there's bad cyclist behavior in your city that's affecting you. That's fine. But let's put this in perspective... Many drivers don't identify you differently from another cyclist, who may have just given them the finger after cutting them off. I'm surprised this is all so shocking to you all. In other words, it doesn't matter if half of you in London who are serious cyclists, you're being grouped with the other half that are obnoxious ones (in a driver's mind).


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> Congratulations, you win the internet.
> 
> I will tell you again as you sure didn't listen to the first few times.
> There is no war between cyclist and car drivers in London, or any where in the UK for that matter.



Half of what I mentioned here were things I saw on videos from cyclists who wear cameras in London. Those are made up too I guess? Maybe they are. But they seem to be cyclists like you, advocating for better safety. Also, safety is an issue in all cities and countries. But the amount of hatred that seems to be in London is more from what I saw than other cities. I'm sorry if it rubs you the wrong way, but it's what I observed.

Your comparison to the USA is ridiculous, considering it was that fathead guy from your country who helped Trump get elected here. Maybe this is just revenge for that.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Half of what I mentioned here were things I saw on videos from cyclists who wear cameras in London. Those are made up too I guess? Maybe they are. But they seem to be cyclists like you, advocating for better safety. Also, safety is an issue in all cities and countries. But the amount of hatred that seems to be in London is more from what I saw than other cities. I'm sorry if it rubs you the wrong way, but it's what I observed.
> 
> Your comparison to the USA is ridiculous, considering it was that fathead guy from your country who helped Trump get elected here. Maybe this is just revenge for that.



I'll leave this info graphic with you. Yes, cyclists are taking over and car drivers are having to get used to it. Once again, I can tell you from personal experience that this is indeed that case.







And I have no idea who that fatheaded guy is. But I've seen loads of people getting in shot in the USA on You Tube, there's hundreds of videos, so I would advise you all to put your guns down and get along. It seems like there is a war going on.


----------



## davidphilips (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Hmm... either you've got A LOT of people putting out bad press for London's cycling and driving issues, or you're really narcissistic thinking there's no war going on, simply because most cyclists also drive. There's what - 25% of you on the road. Who do you think the others are? Non-cyclists.
> 
> I do cycle, regularly. Thanks for asking. I also drive.



Well great you cycle and hope you dont get into to many battles, best advice i can offer is what was wrote on the back of the old blue driving licences ,
Care Courtesy and Consideration saves lives, Safe cycling and Hope some one else can provide better advice than i can.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

mjr said:


> Punishment's fine as long as it's proportionate to the danger. So where a motorist gets a £60 fine for buzzing a cyclist, a cyclist should get a 50p fine for the reverse.
> 
> Two things maybe you didn't realise about London: firstly, most traffic lane widths are narrow enough that it makes no difference whether cyclists are single file or double: motorists must change lane to overtake safely.
> 
> Secondly, cars don't go faster than cycles. Average car speed in inner London is around 12mph. Drivers are in each other's way. The cyclists are irrelevant, like how grains of rice can fit among peas without changing the maximum number of peas in a jar.



Actually I did. Your narrow streets are a definite issue, which is why I think, as I do everywhere, infrastructure is the #1 concern. I did notice there were a lot of issues for motorists as well at times, where they had to pass you safely, while also cut back in when a car was speeding towards them down the other lane. Narrow streets are definitely an issue here as well. Again, better infrastructure is the way to change this. We can all agree on that. It's a concern everywhere.

I do think cyclists should be educated on better cycling and need to be defensive on the road as well. For their own safety. As to punishment fits the crime, ok.

I would argue to say that cyclists are irrelevant to a car, when you guys have a lot of cyclists on the road in London, is a bizarre point to make. Especially when you're upset about not being relevant enough.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

davidphilips said:


> Well great you cycle and hope you dont get into to many battles, best advice i can offer is what was wrote on the back of the old blue driving licences ,
> Care Courtesy and Consideration saves lives, Safe cycling and Hope some one else can provide better advice than i can.



Thanks very much for your advice, David. I don't get into many battles. I'm not sure if you read all my posts here, but I wasn't promoting battling. I think we can all agree on your statement that Care Courtesy and Consideration saves lives, as does Safe cycling...


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> I'll leave this info graphic with you. Yes, cyclists are taking over and car drivers are having to get used to it. Once again, I can tell you from personal experience that this is indeed that case.
> 
> View attachment 363556
> 
> ...



Loads of people do get shot in the USA. But I'd say terrorism is worse in other countries.

I know that's not your point, so let me just say this - I have been agreeing with you all along that you have a lot of cyclists on the road there. That may be part of the problem, however, not all your cyclists are good cyclists in terms of practicing safety themselves. Just sayin'... 

Nigel Farage, that's the fathead I was referring to who helped get Trump elected here.


----------



## Dan B (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I did notice there were a lot of issues for motorists as well at times, where they had to pass you safely, while also cut back in when a car was speeding towards them down the other lane.


Perhaps the rules are different in the US or Disneyland or Central Park or your own febrile imagination (I don't know, wherever it is that you actually do any cycling) but in the UK there is not actually any requirement that a motorist has to pass a cyclist simply because the cyclist is ahead. It's completely optional: no compulsion whatsoever. You do get the occasional car driver that is apparently unaware of this, but they are quite simply wrong.

And as others have pointed out, car traffic average speeds in London are somewhere around 10mph, so 90% of the time it's not even as though there's any real advantage to overtaking a cyclist - all it means is that you waste fuel (what you guys call "gas"), wear out your brake pads (I think you call them "brake pads") and join the queue (not sure what the American for "queue" is, it may be "line" , or "Q" or for all I know you might call them "fruit jellies") at the next traffic light a bit sooner

Hope this helps shed some light on the US-UK differences


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

Dan B said:


> Perhaps the rules are different in the US or Disneyland or Central Park or your own febrile imagination (I don't know, wherever it is that you actually do any cycling) but in the UK there is not actually any requirement that a motorist has to pass a cyclist simply because the cyclist is ahead. It's completely optional: no compulsion whatsoever. You do get the occasional car driver that is apparently unaware of this, but they are quite simply wrong.


Yeah, ok. Like I said a long way back, you want to own the road, so do cars.

We have narrow roads in the US as well, everyone does. City streets also have a lower MPH here. I'm sorry but you're not as unique as you think you are.

The streets I saw this on were not in the downtown of the city itself. They weren't one way streets, but streets with only one lane going each way, and quite narrow. Maybe it's all 10 mph, but no one including the cyclists appeared to be going only 10mph on the streets I'm referring to.

You want to change how motorists drive. You want them to adhere to you. You want to own the road. Ok, go for it.

Arrogance kills. So does stupidity. You think you're bigger than cars are. Or that you don't have to be courteous to them as well. Of course they want to pass you. You want to pass them too, that's why so many cyclists squeeze up ahead between cars and go to the front. 

When you say things like this, and attempt to insult me, and my riding, all I think is you're an idiot, who just wants to own the road, not share it.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> I know that's not your point, so let me just say this - I have been agreeing with you all along that you have a lot of cyclists on the road there. That may be part of the problem, however, not all your cyclists are good cyclists in terms of practicing safety themselves. Just sayin'...



So too many cyclists may be a problem? Jesus wept. 
You are indeed correct that not all cyclists are good cyclists as not all car drivers are good car drivers and not all Peds are good Peds. Do you understand that? More people are injured and killed by car drivers and motor accidents. That is where you should be focusing your ire. Not focusing on a few bad cyclists.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> You want to change how motorists drive. You want them to adhere to you. You want to own the road. Ok, go for it.



That is exactly what is happening here but you refuse to listen.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> That is exactly what is happening here but you refuse to listen.


Actually I think it's you who doesn't listen, or you have selective hearing. I've said repeatedly that cyclists need to cycle defensively because there are so many sh**ty drivers on the road.

And you twist everything I say, it's really quite tiring. All cyclists should practice safe cycling, for their own benefit, as well as the rest of ours. It's really annoying that you don't think they should. I don't know what you're advocating for exactly here.

You're advocating for a takeover. Ok. But you still have to get along with motorists. This is why I think you have a war going on. Because you want to own the road.

You're not changing the way drivers drive, Ian. You may think you are, but it's not true. That's why you're still complaining about bad drivers. Because they're everywhere. And they always will be.


----------



## Dan B (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> When you say things like this, and attempt to insult me


I don't think it's an insult to point out that you clearly have no experience at all of what you're talking about. Judging cycling standards based on Youtube videos is about as sensible as judging Internet users based on Youtube comments


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jul 2017)

nicasiri said:


> Actually I think it's you who doesn't listen, or you have selective hearing. I've said repeatedly that cyclists need to cycle defensively because there are so many sh**ty drivers on the road.
> 
> And you twist everything I say, it's really quite tiring. All cyclists should practice safe cycling, for their own benefit, as well as the rest of ours. It's really annoying that you don't think they should. I don't know what you're advocating for exactly here.



Grow up. I never said that at all. You are getting upset to be repeatedly told there is no war between cyclists and car drivers and it's not cyclists that is the problem. What I am advocating here is for people like yourselves to stop perpetuating a myth of a war and that you should be focusing on the far bigger threat of bad car driving. 

Once again, more anecdata for you from someone who cycles in London. There are far more good cyclists on the road then bad. By tenfold. You really need to look at the bigger picture.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

Dan B said:


> I don't think it's an insult to point out that you clearly have no experience at all of what you're talking about. Judging cycling standards based on Youtube videos is about as sensible as judging Internet users based on Youtube comments


I'm judging this also on what all of you are saying here too. I never said it was the "standard" either. I spoke only of what appeared to be bad safety practices on both sides, from what I observed, and that they were both feeding into each other. And causing a lot of mutual anger. That was affecting even good cyclists. I don't understand why you're so sensitive about this. And why you're so insistent that this never happens? 

And if you go back through this thread you'll see I wasn't actually looking for cycling standards, more for what some of you were referring to as everyone being dressed in "yellow jackets" that were low contrast.


----------



## nicasiri (22 Jul 2017)

ianrauk said:


> Grow up. I never said that at all. You are getting upset to be repeatedly told there is no war between cyclists and car drivers and it's not cyclists that is the problem. What I am advocating here is for people like yourselves to stop perpetuating a myth of a war and that you should be focusing on the far bigger threat of bad car driving.
> 
> Once again, more anecdata for you from someone who cycles in London. There are far more good cyclists on the road then bad. By tenfold. You really need to look at the bigger picture.



You really need to give it a rest here. You're advocating for owning the road. That's fine. But as I said a ways back, then just admit what you want. You even have admitted that here. And yet, you claim there's no war. You want a takeover, but no driver should mind. They just need to get used to it, because that's the way it's going to be. 

You don't think that drivers are resistant to your insisting you own the road? You're either in deep denial or just oblivious to human nature or both. Frankly, I think you're the one who needs to not just grow up, but wake up.

And as I said to Dan above, I don't really get how you can deny there's bad cycling practices in London. There's bad cycling practices everywhere. And when you have more cyclists on the roads, it is logical that there would be more cyclists, who are not practicing good bike safety. You keep insisting that's not part of the problem. But bad safety practices all around are a problem. Cars, cyclists, everyone.

Better infrastructure is the #1 need everywhere. It's not whether cyclists or drivers own the road.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (22 Jul 2017)

It's tiresome. Really tiresome.

Every time a discussion arises seeking answers to the dangerous driving that goes on around people who cycle, someone turns it into a debate about wearing hi vis or helmets or riding defensively. It's a diversionary tactic that is as infuriating as it is predictable.

It doesn't matter what I wear or how I ride, bad drivers do what they do regardless and they (mostly) get away with it. In my opinion this is down to a lack of enforcement (we don't have enough police and they are stretched), a lack of interest on the part of prosecutors, the reluctance of juries to convict, and the often trivial sentences passed when, occasionally, someone is convicted.

I have two cases pending with the police where, despite me doing everything by the book and being vigilant, drivers put me at serious risk of injury. You can talk about 'sharing the road and responsibility' from now till doomsday but it'll still be bullshit.

A number of police forces are running something called Operation Close Pass, directed at drivers who don't give cyclists sufficient room when overtaking. Unmarked police cyclists will ride a route and alert uniformed colleagues when an offender gets too close. It started in one area and is slowly being taken up across the country, much to the annoyance of bad drivers who complain, "But what about bad cycling, not wearing hi vis,not wearing helmets? They all jump red lights. .. blah blah blah"

Here's what the police response was from the Road Policing Unit that started the initiative:
"Once we've stopped people being killed and seriously injured, maybe then we concentrate on those offenders who cause vexation rather than death."

So, they realise that it's a false equivalence to relate bad cycling to bad driving but it's still tough getting that through to a lot of people.

This is why, when you reiterate these tired clichés of yours, you get the reaction you've experienced on this thread.


----------



## nicasiri (23 Jul 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> This is why, when you reiterate these tired clichés of yours, you get the reaction you've experienced on this thread.



Well, listen, you're right. We can all agree this is tiresome. I never said the incidences are the same. Of course there's more bad driving. I've said repeatedly there are a lot of sh**tty drivers on the road. Sh**tty drivers affect not just cyclists, but pedestrians and other drivers as well. They're also bigger than we are. 

What I said was that in London in particular, there appeared to be a real war between cyclists and drivers, moreso even than other cities and countries. And that, yes, there appeared to be bad practices on both sides. And that the bad cyclist behavior was making it worse for good cyclists. From what I observed. I didn't say anyone on here was a bad cyclist. I was just noting what I observed about a lot of mutual anger that was making it worse for the good cyclists.

Here's a comment from someone else, a London cyclist in another forum:

"davidlanen20 | Community Member | 1 year ago
I am a cyclist, and whenever I cycle I see cars speed, drive aggressively, break red lights, all the other things that are complained of. I also see cyclists acting irresponsibly - cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, breaking red lights. Whenever I cycle, I assume that every car, van and lorry is likely to kill me, and ride accordingly. I also see cyclists taking very silly risks, often without helmets. Car and lorry drivers need to realise that they are not the only road users, and that compared to cyclists, they are safe in their metal box, but some cyclists need to help the cause by riding responsibly themselves, and quite a few cyclists could take fewer risks."

There are lots of comments like this from other London cyclists too in other forums. Maybe they're all wrong too, or maybe everyone's making it up, because they're out to get London cyclists, and all the videos and comments are all just rigged, I don't know. 

But again, what's needed is better infrastructure. I don't really think the need is to prove who owns the road.


----------



## sheddy (23 Jul 2017)

Meanwhile, lobby your County Police Commissioner to introduce a reporting scheme like Operation Crackdown
https://webcontact.sussex.police.uk/ASDPRS/


----------



## davidphilips (23 Jul 2017)

A number of police forces are running something called Operation Close Pass, directed at drivers who don't give cyclists sufficient room when overtaking. Unmarked police cyclists will ride a route and alert uniformed colleagues when an offender gets too close. It started in one area and is slowly being taken up across the country.

Now thats like good news, thank you for sharing it. Lets hope with even a few convictions the good news will spread and perhaps more drivers will treat cyclists with respect.


----------



## Levo-Lon (23 Jul 2017)

jefmcg said:


> I've got a loud voice, so when recently a boy racer passed me very close and at speed, then immediately skidded to turn left across me, I shouted "How are you getting on with your tiny penis?" I heard laughter from the passenger seat.
> 
> No, I didn't make the world a better place, but it made me feel better and made someone laugh. And possibly slightly humiliated someone who may - just may - think a little more next time.




Funny how little things make you laugh..

When i was cycling home from school ,i was 16 .
I was waiting at the lights and along side pulls up jack the lad with 3 mates in a Dollamite sprint "pre XR3 knob poseur car"
Driver shouts at me " id like to shag your arse!!
I looked at his car and said i dont do triumph drivers sorry.

His mates roared..


----------



## Moderators (23 Jul 2017)

We see that the last few posts are getting the thread back on track. Well done to those members.

Will everyone else please follow their lead. No more arguing about whether there is a war on the road. Anyone who continues after this point will be removed from the conversation.


----------



## spen666 (24 Jul 2017)

I think there is this method for dealing with bad driving

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4723128/BBC-wildlife-producer-shocking-road-rage-rant.html


----------



## mjr (24 Jul 2017)

spen666 said:


> I think there is this method for dealing with bad driving


Non-DM link/clip:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G971UwCV9-g


Not sure what you mean?


----------



## sheddy (24 Jul 2017)

Some advice on submitting camera footage 
https://www.north-wales.police.uk/advice-and-support/safer-roads/operation-snap


----------



## bozmandb9 (24 Jul 2017)

jefmcg said:


> (I have found the inverse relationship between car size/power and penis size to be anecdotally true.)



I used to drive big engined Porsches, and a Supercharged Range Rover. Now I drive a 1.5 Citroen, presumably I should find myself much better endowed. Hoorayyy! 

(Or it could be complete total and utter rubbish).


----------

