# My closest pass yet



## Monkreadusuk (8 Oct 2013)

Bit of a brown trouser moment on way home today. Cycling through Southampton and the Driver of a BlueStar number 2 service decides he MGIF and to hell with my safety.


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98Apw8EmAcI&feature=youtu.be


----------



## 2Loose (8 Oct 2013)

Overtake was terrible, but loved the 'have you got a licence?' comment! I'd have been spitting!


----------



## glenn forger (8 Oct 2013)

Let it go man, there was nothing wrong with that, jeez.


----------



## Frood42 (8 Oct 2013)

That looked close especially with the car coming the other way. That other car waited as well from the lay by which was nice.


----------



## Dave W (8 Oct 2013)

Yeah was close but the militant recording horn sounding confronting cyclist balances things out. Bus drivers are head and shoulders above most morons on the road.


----------



## Jezston (8 Oct 2013)

Are you serious?

Sounding a horn in the correct manner to inform someone of danger (in this case, serious risk of a 20 tonne bus colliding with a cyclist) is 'militant'? And is in any way comparable to the driver's action?

Get outta here.


----------



## Dave W (8 Oct 2013)

Yes, seriously.


----------



## Dave W (8 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2699227, member: 30090"]You ARE a bus driver and ICAFP.[/quote]

While I admit to having D1 on my driving licence I can't accede that I'm an ICAFP because I have no idea what that is. Is that a militant cyclist term?


----------



## Dave W (8 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2699242, member: 30090"]Yep[/quote]

Damn you militant cyclist none disclosing what ICAFP means person you!!!!


----------



## broadway (8 Oct 2013)

Isn't it ICMFP?


----------



## gaz (9 Oct 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Let it go man, there was nothing wrong with that, jeez.





Dave W said:


> Yeah was close but the militant recording horn sounding confronting cyclist balances things out. Bus drivers are head and shoulders above most morons on the road.


Both of you think there was nothing wrong with that overtake? DAMN!


----------



## Deleted member 20519 (9 Oct 2013)

Looks like the bus driver has registered on this forum


----------



## MrJamie (9 Oct 2013)

That must have felt crazy close, I'm surprised you didn't slam on the brakes and even took a hand off the bars :O

If bus wing mirrors are anything like they used to be, they don't flex and fold in like car ones, they hurt a lot and that one must have been close!


----------



## Monkreadusuk (9 Oct 2013)

30 minutes after reporting the incident to the bus company, I received this reply. 

I am absolutely disgusted at the standard of driving demonstrated in this video clip as I am sure you would expect.

I have shown the footage to my Staff Manager who is equally shocked at what we have just seen and he will initiate our formal procedures with the driver in question this evening.

I can only offer my sincere apologies for this and I imagine it will come as no surprise to you to learn that I am professionally embarrassed by the our driver's actions. 

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.


----------



## ianrauk (9 Oct 2013)

Wow, just seen this. That is a very nasty pass.


----------



## gaz (9 Oct 2013)

Monkreadusuk said:


> 30 minutes after reporting the incident to the bus company, I received this reply.
> 
> I am absolutely disgusted at the standard of driving demonstrated in this video clip as I am sure you would expect.
> 
> ...


That's a good response imo.


----------



## PedalCat (9 Oct 2013)

That kind of driving leads me to expect an aggressive coward behind the wheel. Do society a favour and try to get this imbecile removed from the job he is clearly not capable of.


----------



## jarlrmai (9 Oct 2013)

as i seem to be some sort of sarcasm meter for this forum I can confirm that glen was being sarcastic.


----------



## Twelve Spokes (9 Oct 2013)

I'm pretty sure my Upminster cabs idiot worse than that although it was not bus.How he didn't hit me from the rear I don't know.It happened on the Blackfriars Underpass,another idiot on a mobile phone,no doubt.


----------



## fabregas485 (9 Oct 2013)

MrJamie said:


> That must have felt crazy close, I'm surprised you didn't slam on the brakes and even took a hand off the bars :O
> 
> If bus wing mirrors are anything like they used to be, they don't flex and fold in like car ones, they hurt a lot and that one must have been close!


 I can confirm this. I have been hit by a bus wing mirror before in my younger days waiting for a bus.


----------



## Hip Priest (9 Oct 2013)

Jesus.

Surprised you haven't got a bus stain on your elbow.

I thought you dealt with it well. No histrionics, just a calm and accurate portrayal of a terrible bit of driving.


----------



## sabian92 (9 Oct 2013)

Yeah, had far worse from companies.

Probably won't tell you what they do end up doing but better than most.


----------



## Roadrider48 (9 Oct 2013)

PedalCat said:


> That kind of driving leads me to expect an aggressive coward behind the wheel. Do society a favour and try to get this imbecile removed from the job he is clearly not capable of.


It was a close pass and the bus company has said so. But seriously, you want the man to lose his job? Educate him for the future, don't make him join the dole que.


----------



## Hip Priest (9 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> It was a close pass and the bus company has said so. But seriously, you want the man to lose his job? Educate him for the future, don't make him join the dole que.



Agreed.

I'd rather share the road with a bus driver who's learned his lesson than an unemployed ex-bus driver with a vendetta against cyclists.


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> That's a good response imo.


Fantastic is the word you should have chosen.


----------



## Dave W (9 Oct 2013)

Clearly some cyclists have never ever made a mistake whilst driving or cycling and are above the normal human frailty of us lesser beings.

I'm all for trying to improve driving (and cycling) standards but really, some cyclists are like over zealous evangelicals. It was close yes but does that justify someone losing their job because of a bit of daft driving? We've all done silly things when driving, how about perhaps acceding this fact?


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> It was a close pass and the bus company has said so. But seriously, you want the man to lose his job? Educate him for the future, don't make him join the dole que.


A decision for the company. They will make fair judgement and equal punishment or retraining. Given the response I suspect a written warning. However there could be stuff we don't know. Although I will reiterate its a company decision and if they did dismiss the driver it wouldn't be just because of this incident. If they did so be it. The only person to blame is himself. We don't see the same sympathy for drunk drivers who lose their jobs even though they may not have actually hurt anyone.


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> Clearly some cyclists have never ever made a mistake whilst driving or cycling and are above the normal human frailty of us lesser beings.
> 
> I'm all for trying to improve driving (and cycling) standards but really, some cyclists are like over zealous *evangelicals*. It was close yes but does that justify someone losing their job because of a bit of daft driving? We've all done silly things when driving, how about perhaps acceding this fact?


Now I am convinced you are just throwing words about. "evangelicals" are you for real. No doubt some camera cyclists are also part of the cycleTaliban with the intent to bring ideological warfare to the streets of Britian. FFS


----------



## Dave W (9 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Now I am convinced you are just throwing words about. "evangelicals" are you for real.



Yes, I'm for real. What makes you think otherwise? 

Have you ever done something daft when driving/cycling because you appear to have ignored that bit?


----------



## Roadrider48 (9 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> A decision for the company. They will make fair judgement and equal punishment or retraining. Given the response I suspect a written warning. However there could be stuff we don't know. Although I will reiterate its a company decision and if they did dismiss the driver it wouldn't be just because of this incident.


What "stuff we don't know"? Pure speculation! No one here knows anything about this man. But most are baying for blood like a pack of wolves.


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> Yes, I'm for real. What makes you think otherwise?
> 
> Have you ever done something daft when driving/cycling because you appear to have ignored that bit?


Seriously though cammer cyclists are zealous evangelicals


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> What "stuff we don't know"? Pure speculation! No one here knows anything about this man. But most are baying for blood like a pack of wolves.


Let me make the point, discussion of him losing his job is also pure speculation. Anyhow back to my point, the company is the one who makes the decision and not that of the complainer. The company will have his full history and will make a fair and justice decision. If they do dismiss him it will be for just reasons.


----------



## Dave W (9 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Seriously though cammer cyclists are zealous evangelicals



I can't see where I said that, sorry.


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> I can't see where I said that, sorry.


Last time I checked I was catholic but I have no zeal about it.


----------



## Dave W (9 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Last time I checked I was catholic but I have no zeal about it.



It's not all about you you know.


----------



## Roadrider48 (9 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Let me make the point discussion of him losing his job is also pure speculation. Anyhow back to my point, the company is the one who makes the decision and not that of the complainer. The company will have his full history and will make a fair and justice decision. If they do dismiss him it will be for just reasons.





Dave W said:


> It's not all about you you know.


There is no point carrying this on


Dave W said:


> It's not all about you you know.


there is no point keeping on. He wants justice! Ha ha ha


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> There is no point carrying this on
> 
> there is no point keeping on. He wants justice! Ha ha ha


Yes, because saying the decision lies with the company and they will make the best decision is an exquisite example of bloodlust. It seems logical to me.
I made no judgement of what I think should happen but made point that the company will be of an enlightened position to make any decision.


----------



## Roadrider48 (9 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Yes, because saying the decision lies with the company and they will make the best decision is an exquisite example of bloodlust. It seems logical to me.
> I made no judgement of what I think should happen but made point that the company will be of an enlightened position to make any decision.


Are you for real?


----------



## Cycling Dan (9 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Are you for real?


As real as a zealous Evangelical infidel.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> Clearly some cyclists have never ever made a mistake whilst driving or cycling and are above the normal human frailty of us lesser beings.
> 
> I'm all for trying to improve driving (and cycling) standards but really, some cyclists are like over zealous evangelicals. It was close yes but does that justify someone losing their job because of a bit of daft driving? We've all done silly things when driving, how about perhaps acceding this fact?


You have to think about it like this.
The drivers profession is to drive, a part of that is doing so safely. Coming so close that you almost injured someone is not safe driving.

In other words, if I almost injured someone at my workplace, I wouldn't expect to get fired but I would expect my boss to have words with me about how I operate the tools of my trade.

Your attitude is the worst "yeah people make mistakes, we all do, just let them get on with it"
Indeed, people do make mistakes, and we all do. But the difference in how we handle situations is how we learn from our mistakes. If a driver isn't shown the issues with his driving then he will never learn. In some cases it may come to nothing, but in other cases the driving standard may worsen and someones life could be lost. Could be your life.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> What "stuff we don't know"? Pure speculation! No one here knows anything about this man. But most are baying for blood like a pack of wolves.


Out for blood like a pack of wolves? That's an overestimate. 1 person made a comment about the driver losing his job, 20 people have posted their opinions. 1/20 is 'most are baying for blood like a pack of wolves'

I guess I can apply the old statement of 'head cam cyclists are just after blood' to your self, you're just cherry picking comments and trying to apply them to all of us.


----------



## buggi (10 Oct 2013)

THAT IS CLOSE!!!!


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> Out for blood like a pack of wolves? That's an overestimate. 1 person made a comment about the driver losing his job, 20 people have posted their opinions. 1/20 is 'most are baying for blood like a pack of wolves'
> 
> I guess I can apply the old statement of 'head cam cyclists are just after blood' to your self, you're just cherry picking comments and trying to apply them to all of us.


You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere.


----------



## ceejayh (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere.



What about those cam people who have uploaded the good things drivers have done?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

ceejayh said:


> What about those cam people who have uploaded the good things drivers have done?


I take your point Ceejayh. But they will be few and far between. Just enjoy biking for what it is. Don't make it into some crusade where everything you do is on camera. I bike much, much more than I drive, but a hell of a lot of cyclists I see in London have awful road sense and habits. And it is cars that are continually persecuted.


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere.



Absolute bollocks.


----------



## BSRU (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere.


Yeah I really hate cycling, I mean I live about 3km from work yet force myself to endure cycling 50 to 80km every work day, in all weathers.
And if that is not enough torture, in the summer at weekends I was waking up at 4am in order to go for rides before the family woke up.


----------



## Jezston (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere.



Oh for f***s sake how long do we have to go on with people with this kind of attitude.

Yeah and all cyclists are terrible road users and jump red lights all the time and never indicate cos I saw one once.

People don't put cameras on because they want to have their lives put in danger so they can get some meaningless internet points. How bloody ridiculous is that?

People put cameras on because things have happened to them and it ended up going no further because "its your word against theirs". Or perhaps they just want to capture their ride. Most people who have cameras don't even put stuff on youtube.

What you've said is utterly horrible and to be honest I think you should apologise.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere.


That's interesting, how do you know how I feel?

I love cycling, I've enjoyed it since I first span the pedals to propel me forwards, and since then I've done it throughout my life.
Just because I like to record my rides and share my experiences, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy it, and that certainly doesn't mean I enjoy finding bad drivers and making videos.

What I enjoy the most, is the days when nothing happens, when my trip to work was enjoyed by my self and the other cyclists around me, we had fun, we got to work on time and with a smile on our faces. And guess what, most days are like that .

Now why don't you go back to your little hole and sulk whilst the rest of us enjoy our rides with smiles on our faces.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

ABikeCam said:


> Absolute bollocks.


Temper temper


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Everything is ok as long as everyone agrees with you on the camera wearing issue. But god forbid anyone else to have a different one.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> That's interesting, how do you know how I feel?
> 
> I love cycling, I've enjoyed it since I first span the pedals to propel me forwards, and since then I've done it throughout my life.
> Just because I like to record my rides and share my experiences, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy it, and that certainly doesn't mean I enjoy finding bad drivers and making videos.
> ...


Ha ha ha. Nice one Gaz.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> Oh for f***s sake how long do we have to go on with people with this kind of attitude.
> 
> Yeah and all cyclists are terrible road users and jump red lights all the time and never indicate cos I saw one once.
> 
> ...


You'll be waiting a long time for that!


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

BSRU said:


> Yeah I really hate cycling, I mean I live about 3km from work yet force myself to endure cycling 50 to 80km every work day, in all weathers.
> And if that is not enough torture, in the summer at weekends I was waking up at 4am in order to go for rides before the family woke up.


So do you wear a camera or not? You haven't said.


----------



## benb (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere.



What ignorant drivel.


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Temper temper



Sorry, how's this?

Absolute bollocks. 

Is that better?


----------



## Origamist (10 Oct 2013)

I can understand why some people think cyclists who wear cameras are a bit odd, but some of these anti-camera rants seem to have been penned by insenisble, bigoted loons....


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

ABikeCam said:


> Sorry, how's this?
> 
> Absolute bollocks.
> 
> Is that better?


Better....


----------



## Jezston (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Everything is ok as long as everyone agrees with you on the camera wearing issue. But god forbid anyone else to have a different one.



When that opinion is blatantly nonsense, insulting, and based entirely on ignorance and misplaced prejudice, then it is not an opinion deserving of respect.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Origamist said:


> I can understand why some people think cyclists who wear cameras are a bit odd, but some of these anti-camera rants seem to have been penned by insenisble, bigoted loons....


Bigotry, interesting! Loon, quite possibly.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> When that opinion is blatantly nonsense, insulting, and based entirely on ignorance and misplaced prejudice, then it is not an opinion deserving of respect.


You have your opinion, I have mine. Of course yours is not nonsense. How can it be?


----------



## Jezston (10 Oct 2013)

My opinion is simply that you are wrong that "You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere", because you are.

Perhaps you would like to attempt to explain how you are correct?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> My opinion is simply that you are wrong that "You cam people don't really enjoy cycling. You enjoy wearing your camera in the hope that an incident happens and you can film it and share it. No one is perfect, cyclists and motorists alike. But you relish in the fact that you have filmed someone committing some great crime and you can't wait to upload it somewhere", because you are.
> 
> Perhaps you would like to attempt to explain how you are correct?


 In my opinion, I am right. But that is my opinion. Your opinion on things is yours. You think you are right. You just get angry because I don't agree with you. There really is no need for you to get upset so much. Just a difference of opinion, that's all. But you do jump in all guns blazing.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> In my opinion, I am right. But that is my opinion. Your opinion on things is yours. You think you are right. You just get angry because I don't agree with you. There really is no need for you to get upset so much. Just a difference of opinion, that's all. But you do jump in all guns blazing.


As I pointed out in my earlier post. Your opinion is based on your own miss representation of facts that are right in front of you, pack of wolves and all that with only 1 person. haha!


----------



## Origamist (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Bigotry, interesting! Loon, quite possibly.



What about "insensible" - you don't seem particularly rational.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Origamist said:


> What about "insensible" - you don't seem particularly rational.


Not seeming to be something quite often is the wrong assumption.


----------



## adds21 (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> You cam people don't really enjoy cycling.


 
I don't see how this is any different to any other obviously generalist (and IMO, ridiculous) comment such as "You SPD wearing people...", or "You Welsh people...", or "You cyclists...".


----------



## Origamist (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Not seeming to be something quite often is the wrong assumption.



Is that a riddle, a cryptic crossword clue, an attempt at a haiku, or just gibberish?

In any case, you've inadvertently answered my question.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> As I pointed out in my earlier post. Your opinion is based on your own miss representation of facts that are right in front of you, pack of wolves and all that with only 1 person. haha!


Gaz, my flabber has never been more gasted. Me!, misrepresenting?, no. Camming is invasive and it's wrong! So I stick to my original point. But as I've said numerous times, it's my personal opinion. And nothing will change that.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Origamist said:


> Is that a riddle, a cryptic crossword clue, an attempt at a haiku, or just gibberish?
> 
> In any case, you've inadvertently answered my question.


What question was that Origamist, my old friend?


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Gaz, my flabber has never been more gasted. Me!, misrepresenting?, no. Camming is invasive and it's wrong! So I stick to my original point. But as I've said numerous times, it's my personal opinion. And nothing will change that.


But you base your opinion on misrepresented facts


----------



## Kookas (10 Oct 2013)

Recording and editing videos of my journeys on the bike is great because it's like one hobby within another.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

adds21 said:


> I don't see how this is any different to any other obviously generalist (and IMO, ridiculous) comment such as "You SPD wearing people...", or "You Welsh people...", or "You cyclists...".


That really makes no sense. This is specifically about camming. No generalisations, just camming. But maybe SPD pedals or cleats can record, I don't know.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Kookas said:


> Recording and editing videos of my journeys on the bike is great because it's like one hobby within another.


That is fair enough to say....


----------



## adds21 (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> That really makes no sense. This is specifically about camming. No generalisations, just camming. But maybe SPD pedals or cleats can record, I don't know.


 
So, "You cam people don't really enjoy cycling.", isn't a generalisation? Righty-O.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> But you base your opinion on misrepresented facts [/ I won't change my mind on the camming thing, Gaz my old mate.


----------



## steve52 (10 Oct 2013)

camming invasive? i would say not as long as we have eyes that see, i have nothing to hide am proud of most of what i do and dissapointed with myself of the rest.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

adds21 said:


> So, "You cam people don't really enjoy cycling.", isn't a generalisation? Righty-O.


No, it's specifically about camming! Thankyou though.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

steve52 said:


> camming invasive? i would say not as long as we have eyes that see, i have nothing to hide am proud of most of what i do and dissapointed with myself of the rest.


Hello Steve. Do eyes record and upload? I also have nothing to hide whilst milling about my every day routine. But I would take great exception if someone filmed me without my permission. You're all not getting it are you? These are my thoughts on the camming thing. And I am fully entitled to my opinion.


----------



## benb (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> No, it's specifically about camming! Thankyou though.



You've said that all cammers "don't really enjoy cycling" and that we just go out looking for incidents.
And you don't think that's generalising?


----------



## benb (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Hello Steve. Do eyes record and upload? I also have nothing to hide whilst milling about my every day routine. But I would take great exception if someone filmed me without my permission. You're all not getting it are you? These are my thoughts on the camming thing. And I am fully entitled to my opinion.



You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

benb said:


> You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.


Hello again Steve. You've changed your name to benb. A bit of a silly comment really my friend. I just don't expect to be filmed while I'm out, unless someone asks my permission. But again, that's your opinion, to which you are fully entitled. And I respect that.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

benb said:


> You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.



I'm afraid you're mistaken. The right to a private life is the law, you may have no expectation of not being filmed in public but you certainly have a right of privacy.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Hello Steve. Do eyes record and upload?


 
Do all cameras 'upload'? Mine doesn't. The footage is for me and any relevant authority in the event I'm shunted off the bike.



> I also have nothing to hide whilst milling about my every day routine. But I would take great exception if someone filmed me without my permission.


 
Whilst out and about in public places your permission isn't required.
Do you write to every bus company, petrol station, shop or other cctv protected facility you pass to complain they're filming you without permission?



> You're all not getting it are you? These are my thoughts on the camming thing. And I am fully entitled to my opinion.


 
You are indeed entitled to your opinion. 
Even when it's wrong.

GC


----------



## benb (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Hello again Steve. You've changed your name to benb. A bit of a silly comment really my friend. I just don't expect to be filmed while I'm out, unless someone asks my permission. But again, that's your opinion, to which you are fully entitled. And I respect that.



Who's Steve? Not me.
You might not expect it, but unless someone is harassing you, they can film you. 
If I'm actually taking a photo where someone is the main subject I will ask their permission out of politeness, but it's not required legally.


----------



## benb (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> I'm afraid you're mistaken. The right to a private life is the law, you may have no expectation of not being filmed in public but you certainly have a right of privacy.



You only have a right to a private life when, er, you're in private.
There is no _expectation _of privacy in a public place, therefore there can be no _invasion _of privacy in a public place.

Legally you can be in bother for harassing people - following them down the street filing them for example - but that's a different matter. It's completely legal to film people in public without their permission.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

benb said:


> You only have a right to a private life when, er, you're in private.
> There is no _expectation _of privacy in a public place, therefore there can be no _invasion _of privacy in a public place.
> 
> Legally you can be in bother for harassing people - following them down the street filing them for example - but that's a different matter. It's completely legal to film people in public without their permission.



If you can find the bit here where you bin the right to privacy when you're in public then I'll agree, until then I will maintain that you're wrong.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Do all cameras 'upload'? Mine doesn't. The footage is for me and any relevant authority in the event I'm shunted off the bike.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yon know what I mean about the filming. You're just being silly, aren't you?


----------



## Jezston (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> If you can find the bit here where you bin the right to privacy when you're in public then I'll agree, until then I will maintain that you're wrong.



Do you ask all the customers on your bus permission to film them as they board then?

No.

You can film what you want when you are in a public place.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

benb said:


> You only have a right to a private life when, er, you're in private.
> There is no _expectation _of privacy in a public place, therefore there can be no _invasion _of privacy in a public place.
> 
> Legally you can be in bother for harassing people - following them down the street filing them for example - but that's a different matter. It's completely legal to film people in public without their permission.


I have never said that I have a divine right to privacy in public places. I just don't want a camera stuffed in my face at any given time. Why don't you get that?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> Do you ask all the customers on your bus permission to film them as they board then?
> 
> No.
> 
> You can film what you want when you are in a public place.


Hi Jez, how's it going?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Yon know what I mean about the filming. You're just being silly, aren't you?


That's a clever comment about all cameras. I like that. Missing the point, with a hint of sarcasm. Beautifully put my fine friend.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> Do you ask all the customers on your bus permission to film them as they board then?
> 
> No.
> 
> You can film what you want when you are in a public place.



I didn't mention anything about filming, simply pointed out the factual inaccuracy that you have no expectation of privacy when in a public place, which is wrong.

As for asking customer's permission, hell no, they have to ask my permission to come aboard before daring to put their dirty size 9's on the foot plate.


----------



## Jezston (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> That's a clever comment about all cameras. I like that. Missing the point, with a hint of sarcasm. Beautifully put my fine friend.



You realise you just quoted yourself there, right? Did you forget to log in to your troll account to respond to it?

Also, congratulations on cleverly deducing that my name is 'Jez' - that must have been difficult what with it being half of my username.


----------



## Cycling Dan (10 Oct 2013)

The amount of illogical trolling from roadrider and dave. I wouldn't be surprised if there both getting off on it.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

What's trolling about pointing out a factual inaccuracy? 

Blindly believing something someone wrote on the internet is illogical, I even linked to the law if you're struggling......


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> You realise you just quoted yourself there, right? Did you forget to log in to your troll account to respond to it?
> 
> Also, congratulations on cleverly deducing that my name is 'Jez' - that must have been difficult what with it being half of my username.


Thankyou Jez. I do rather pride myself on my awareness. I like the troll angle btw.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> The amount of illogical trolling from roadrider and dave. I wouldn't be surprised if there both getting off on it.


So to have a different opinion to you is trolling, is it? Nice to speak to you again Dan btw.


----------



## Cycling Dan (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> What's trolling about pointing out a factual inaccuracy?
> 
> Blindly believing something someone wrote on the internet is illogical, I even linked to the law if you're struggling......


Its illogical when the argument you make is wrong and you avoid giving anything to back it up but instead make someone find info to prove you wrong.

I hardly call believing in something correct and factually sound as blind.

There are plenty of videos on the internet just to prove the point you can freely record people in public as long as it does not constitute harassment. Biggest case I have seen is where two CSO challenged a person and they were disciplined by the police force.
I also had a problem with a police officer a few months ago trying to say recording was illegal and was harassment. Going to the extent that he could arrest me. That got escalated to the police sgt or inspector I don't remember which and everything you have been told by other members was confirmed by him. I have a thread for it on here. He was also disciplined.

So lets not beat around the bush. Everyone on this fourm knows that you are incorrect in saying that you have to have permission to film(road) etc. I want you to find the information to prove your point. If you can't well we will all standby are current views of you being trolls.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

I never mentioned filming so you can go on about it as much as you like. Filming in public is absolutely legal. 

It's the assertion made that in public, you forego the right to privacy which is wrong but you're too busy trying to score points to actually read what I wrote.


----------



## Cycling Dan (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> I never mentioned filming so you can go on about it as much as you like. Filming in public is absolutely legal.
> 
> It's the assertion made that in public, you forego the right to privacy which is wrong but you're too busy trying to score points to actually read what I wrote.


It was a post to the both of you since you both seem to be a duo.
Two birds one stone.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Yon know what I mean about the filming. You're just being silly, aren't you?



I know what you wrote. If you meant something else then maybe you should have used different words.

GC


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> It was a post to the both of you since you both seem to be a duo.
> Two birds one stone.


Danny, how are you boy? Although Dave seems to me to be an absolutely beautiful example of free speech, he and I are two seperate knights of the road. The point you all seem to be missing is that we don't want a camera shoved in our faces by some over zealous cyclist. That's all. It's really simple.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I know what you wrote. If you meant something else then maybe you should have used different words.
> 
> GC


Maybe....is that you in the picture?


----------



## hatler (10 Oct 2013)

"A fun and friendly online cycling community."


----------



## Cycling Dan (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Danny, how are you boy? Although Dave seems to me to be an absolutely beautiful example of free speech, he and I are two seperate knights of the road. The point you all seem to be missing is that we don't want a camera shoved in our faces by some over zealous cyclist. That's all. It's really simple.


Don't drive like a nob around cyclists and everything will be A-ok


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

hatler said:


> "A fun and friendly online cycling community."


Hi hatler. Hope you're good. Yeah, you are right. It started with one comment from me and everyone else just jumped aboard. Many people agree with me here, but they won't comment because of the fear of being frozen out by others. It is a bit cliquey here sometimes. I have noticed that before.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Well don't drive like a nob around cyclists and everything will be A-ok


I cycle 99% of the time. But as far as the other 1% goes you might be right. Maybe you or one of your cam friends will film me and put me right.


----------



## Hip Priest (10 Oct 2013)

Have you lot not got bikes you could be riding?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Hip Priest said:


> Have you lot not got bikes you could be riding?


Excellent post Hip Priest. But I can't just sit back and conform, just because a few hate the fact that I don't agree with their cam lifestyle. Hope you had a good day mate.


----------



## Kookas (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> I cycle 99% of the time. But as far as the other 1% goes you might be right. Maybe you or one of your cam friends will film me and put me right.



The camera isn't being 'shoved in your face', don't be so melodramatic.

It's pretty obvious that he's trolling, though. Unless he really believes that helmet cameras are 'a lifestyle'. In which case he's just an idiot.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Kookas said:


> The camera isn't being 'shoved in your face', don't be so melodramatic.
> 
> It's pretty obvious that he's trolling, though. Unless he really believes that helmet cameras are 'a lifestyle'. In which case he's just an idiot.


Not today, no. But on another day, who knows? Camming is bad!


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> I never mentioned filming so you can go on about it as much as you like. Filming in public is absolutely legal.
> 
> It's the assertion made that in public, you forego the right to privacy which is wrong but you're too busy trying to score points to actually read what I wrote.


 

Trolls- let you think your debating one thing then at the end of the debate say you were talking about something else!!
You could of explained what you meant by right to privacy in public but chose not to , why?, you were trolling !!!


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Kookas said:


> The camera isn't being 'shoved in your face', don't be so melodramatic.
> 
> It's pretty obvious that he's trolling, though. Unless he really believes that helmet cameras are 'a lifestyle'. In which case he's just an idiot.


When you go out everyday with a camera strapped to your hat or your bike it is part of your lifestyle. Again, another one. Who just resorts to calling me a troll because I won't conform to what you think is right.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> Trolls- let you think your debating one thing then at the end of the debate say you were talking about something else!!
> You could of explained what you meant by right to privacy in public but chose not to , why?, you were trolling !!!


Replying to posts equals trolling. I never thought of that Ed. Thankyou mate.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> Trolls- let you think your debating one thing then at the end of the debate say you were talking about something else!!
> You could of explained what you meant by right to privacy in public but chose not to , why?, you were trolling !!!



Rubbish, I clearly pointed out what I was talking about and even alluded to the fact that filming in public is perfectly legal. 

If you failed to read it that's definitely your problem, not mine.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2702580, member: 30090"]Yeah go on Roadrider! Show these camera wearing losers the error of their ways...[/quote]
Hello Beano. It's not a case of "showing" anyone anything mate or lady(sorry) I just hate the fact that I am expected to agree with this camera nonsense. They all hate the fact that I won't roll over and die. Thankyou though. Hope your day was good.


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Replying to posts equals trolling. I never thought of that Ed. Thankyou mate.


 
No problem, was glad to help


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> No problem, was glad to help


It's people like you ED that keep this forum real. You are a real stand up guy mate. I'm glad you share my opinion on the camming thing. Cheers pal.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> If you can find the bit here where you bin the right to privacy when you're in public then I'll agree, until then I will maintain that you're wrong.


I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but it doesn't say that you have a right of privacy in a public place :S
It does say this at the start "_Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence." _It doesn't state in public


----------



## Phaeton (10 Oct 2013)

Back to the original post, I clearly see things differently, to the OP 'My Closest Pass Yet' is this really your closest pass yet? I seriously don't see that as particularly close, granted it wasn't nice, the driver could have easily left more room, or dropped back, what do you guys watch these vids on, huge HD enhanced monitors? From the grainy film & not knowing what type of lense is fitted how as somebody who is not there can you make a decision whether it was close or not. Also maybe I can see the point in confronting the driver if the red mist had come down, but why then would you put yourself back out in front of the same driver/bus that you believe had given you 'My Closest Pass Yet'

Alan...


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but it doesn't say that you have a right of privacy in a public place :S
> It does say this at the start "_Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence." _It doesn't state in public



Indeed, it doesn't state that the right is qualified dependant upon whether you're in public or not meaning we can safely assume the right extends to where ever you are. It's a Human Right, not a location right.


----------



## Kookas (10 Oct 2013)

Phaeton said:


> Back to the original post, I clearly see things differently, to the OP 'My Closest Pass Yet' is this really your closest pass yet? I seriously don't see that as particularly close, granted it wasn't nice, the driver could have easily left more room, or dropped back, what do you guys watch these vids on, huge HD enhanced monitors? From the grainy film & not knowing what type of lense is fitted how as somebody who is not there can you make a decision whether it was close or not. Also maybe I can see the point in confronting the driver if the red mist had come down, but why then would you put yourself back out in front of the same driver/bus that you believe had given you 'My Closest Pass Yet'
> 
> Alan...



Look how close the bus is to the edge of the road as it passes him - any closer, and it wouldn't be a close pass, it'd be a collision.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Kookas said:


> Look how close the bus is to the edge of the road as it passes him - any closer, and it wouldn't be a close pass, it'd be a collision.


Close passes and the like won't ever stop. Unfortunately it is one of the hazards of cycling. Drivers can be educated in various ways, but sadly it won't ever stop completely. Lots of drivers these days are wise to cyclists on the road, but not all.


----------



## Cycling Dan (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> Indeed, it doesn't state that the right is qualified dependant upon whether you're in public or not meaning we can safely assume the right extends to where ever you are. It's a Human Right, not a location right.


However non of this is challenged when a cyclist records someone. A cyclist doing so is not an invasion of this right.
If say the cyclist posted the location of his home then I would agree its wrong but that has to my knowledge never happened. This however wouldn't break the humans right act since home is more of a right to bitch and hold land, it would be more applicable to confidential information but this would depend on the situation.
Although ones private life is not the same as their privacy. Privacy is observed or disturbed by other people and a a private life is a social or family life or personal relationships of an individual. Totally different things. So this right wouldn't even be relivent for being recorded and then posted. You seem to have mixed up privacy with the meaning of private life.
So in public you have 0 privacy. Meaning you can be observed or disturbed by anyone. Rights to a private life would be you can be homosexual if you wished or make your own decisions which impact your life.


----------



## Kookas (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Close passes and the like won't ever stop. Unfortunately it is one of the hazards of cycling. Drivers can be educated in various ways, but sadly it won't ever stop completely. Lots of drivers these days are wise to cyclists on the road, but not all.



By that logic we may as well fire the police. It's no different to any other crime.


----------



## Phaeton (10 Oct 2013)

Kookas said:


> t's no different to any other crime.


Sorry!! Close passes are now a criminal offense?

Alan...


----------



## MontyVeda (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Hi hatler. Hope you're good. Yeah, you are right. *It started with one comment from me and everyone else just jumped aboard*.


It started with one sweeping generalisation, which is your opinion... some people disagreed with your sweeping generalisation/opinion.


Roadrider48 said:


> *Many people agree with me here, but they won't comment because of the fear of being frozen out by others*. It is a bit cliquey here sometimes. I have noticed that before.


I don't think that's the case, but you could start a poll. Yes it can be a bit cliquey here... but when lots of forum members turn around and say something like "you're wrong"... it's usually because you're wrong, not because of some clique.


----------



## Cycling Dan (10 Oct 2013)

MontyVeda said:


> It started with one sweeping generalisation, which is your opinion... some people disagreed with your sweeping generalisation/opinion.
> 
> I don't think that's the case, but you could start a poll. Yes it can be a bit cliquey here... but when lots of forum members turn around and say something like "you're wrong"... it's usually because you're wrong, not because of some clique.


Matthew knows all about that so I agree.
Also even though its a forum its also on the internet so when you get it wrong its pointed out quickly and in large numbers.


----------



## Kookas (10 Oct 2013)

Phaeton said:


> Sorry!! Close passes are now a criminal offense?
> 
> Alan...



So you don't agree that we should try to reduce the number of close passes and amount of dangerous driving on the roads in the same way that we try to reduce crime?


----------



## stowie (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> Indeed, it doesn't state that the right is qualified dependant upon whether you're in public or not meaning we can safely assume the right extends to where ever you are. It's a Human Right, not a location right.



It isn't an inalienable right though. Even in a public place there can be some legitimate expectation of privacy, although this requirement is much lower than in a private place. It isn't as black and white as public place means no expectation of privacy or that human right to privacy is without caveat - otherwise all those CCTV recordings, police camera action or "..from hell" programmes wouldn't exist.

So, if I was filmed in public and the video released to the public with comments about my dress sense, or someone published a video of me receiving medical attention in public I would probably have redress with right to privacy (although there is also the fact of whether this would be in the public interest to consider). But if I was filmed engaged in a criminal or anti-social act then entitlement to privacy is much, much lower. As it would also be if the filming was of, for example a car where the number plate and car details are in the public domain anyway.

Ultimately, if you are caught driving a bus whilst passing a cyclist with inches to spare it could reasonably be said that this was antisocial behaviour and possibly criminal if it could be considered to be careless or dangerous driving. I would say that the entitlement to privacy if you endanger someone else's life through carelessness or incompetence is much reduced if that act is filmed and released to the general public. There could be another argument to say that the video demonstrates that some drivers working for the bus company have scant regard / lack of understanding about important aspects of the highway code (specifically interacting with vulnerable road users) and that this information is in the public interest to be shared. 

This is all a long winded way of saying that if you want to retain your entitlement to privacy then don't drive like a moron.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> Indeed, it doesn't state that the right is qualified dependant upon whether you're in public or not meaning we can safely assume the right extends to where ever you are. It's a Human Right, not a location right.


I think that is debatable.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> I think that is debatable.



I don't.

Anyway, the original tiny point which seems to have gone awry in the orgy of internet genital waving is that this assertion clearly made,



> You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.



Is simply wrong, which it is. 

If anyone wants to get in to a massive debate about the HRA then there are plenty of people willing to do this with you, simply google "kaftan wearing hippy". 

I'm happily not one of them and will now go and fettle with my bike then sit down with a nice glass of wine whilst staring at my bike, thinking about the next time I'm going to ride said bike. 

If the rest of you want to try and win an argument on the internet knock yourselves out. I originally posted in the thread with a bit of tongue in cheek ribbing of cyclists who love to catch people making mistakes. I clearly massively underestimated the sensitivity of said cyclists so will retire. 

Have fun.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> I don't.
> 
> Anyway, the original tiny point which seems to have gone awry in the orgy of internet genital waving is that this assertion clearly made,
> 
> ...


You've used the classic debating technique from Thank you for smoking. "If I prove you wrong, then I'm right"
You've not shown us anything that states what you say is correct.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> You've used the classic debating technique from Thank you for smoking. "If I prove you wrong, then I'm right"
> You've not shown us anything that states what you say is correct.



Really want that trophy huh?


----------



## lukesdad (10 Oct 2013)

gaz said:


> I think that is debatable.


 Well thats why you're debating it Gaz ! FFS you must of got the hang of this forum thingee by now, by the way I thinx all the cammers are nobbers 'cept for you of course, you're my friggin hero  Byeee


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> I don't.
> 
> Anyway, the original tiny point which seems to have gone awry in the orgy of internet genital waving is that this assertion clearly made,
> 
> ...


 

I used to work with a guy who would during an argument say " look am not arguing with you" then would argue his point before walking away


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> I used to work with a guy who would during an argument say " look am not arguing with you" then would argue his point before walking away



Must have been annoying that guy. 

If it makes people happy, I'm wrong. Better?


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> Must have been annoying that guy.
> 
> If it makes people happy, I'm wrong. Better?


 
I think your wrong if you have expectations of privacy in public but legally you may be correct.


----------



## gaz (10 Oct 2013)

lukesdad said:


> Well thats why you're debating it Gaz ! FFS you must of got the hang of this forum thingee by now, by the way I thinx all the cammers are nobbers 'cept for you of course, you're my friggin hero  Byeee


Don't come into this thread and be all serious with us :P


----------



## Jezston (10 Oct 2013)

It's a start.

I'm just going to have a bit of fun now in the style of RoadRider48

"Everyone who rides a mountain bike is a d*ck. Also the world is flat and the moon is made of cheese"

Of course this is just my opinion and is as valid as anyone elses. It's not a matter of right or wrong - I believe I'm right and if in your opinion it's wrong that's up to you. And if any mountain bikers take issue with my opinion and attacks me for it well then obviously this forum is a hostile cliquey place and not fun and friendly at all if they attack people who call vast swathes of the community d*cks - I mean you know how friendly this forum is to camera users.


----------



## Deleted member 20519 (10 Oct 2013)

I think this thread might have gone slightly off topic


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> I think your wrong if you have expectations of privacy in public but legally you may be correct.



I expect only what the law states, you can take my photograph as much as you like in public but I still have a right to expect a level of privacy. People who rape and murder children don't forego their human rights so I'm pretty sure popping out my front door won't forsake one of them. 

I'm not even against helmet cammers despite the assumption by many in this thread. They are by far the best form of evidence for prosecutions of imbecile drivers.


----------



## Dave W (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> It's a start.
> 
> I'm just going to have a bit of fun now in the style of RoadRider48
> 
> ...



Just let it go man......


----------



## lukesdad (10 Oct 2013)

jazloc said:


> I think this thread might have gone slightly off topic


 who cares its entertaining !


----------



## 4F (10 Oct 2013)

Shut it you mountain bike riding bike d!ck


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Dave W said:


> I expect only what the law states, you can take my photograph as much as you like in public but I still have a right to expect a level of privacy. People who rape and murder children don't forego their human rights so I'm pretty sure popping out my front door won't forsake one of them.
> 
> I'm not even against helmet cammers despite the assumption by many in this thread. They are by far the best form of evidence for prosecutions of imbecile drivers.


 
I am not a cammer myself and have mixed views , I see the good and bad in them .

If I film you then that's ok but if I then put the film on internet this is where your privacy is invaded IMO but I dont see anybody being prosecuted for it.


----------



## Phaeton (10 Oct 2013)

lukesdad said:


> who cares its entertaining !


Actually I do, I was trying to get it back on topic & have a sensible conversation over whether it was really a close pass & more importantly 'My Closest Pass yet' nobody has yet explained yet why the OP thought it a good idea to put himself back out in front of the vehicle/driver who 30 seconds earlier he thought was trying to kill him. Sorry but there is no logic to it, either it was the closest pass yet & he was being extremely stupid putting himself back there, or he's a drama queen with a helmet cam & it really wasn't that bad but he posted it for effect.

Alan...


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Maybe I read that wrong but that reads to me like you rape and murder children. Anyone else? Unless "one of them" does not refer to your human rights. If it does then it reads exactly as I thought.


 
I read it as even murderers have human rights !


----------



## lukesdad (10 Oct 2013)

4F said:


> Shut it you mountain bike riding bike d!ck


 Commuting over them here welsh hills with a cine camera strapped to me back is becomming a right pain I can tell you.


----------



## lukesdad (10 Oct 2013)

Phaeton said:


> Actually I do, I was trying to get it back on topic & have a sensible conversation over whether it was really a close pass & more importantly 'My Closest Pass yet' nobody has yet explained yet why the OP thought it a good idea to put himself back out in front of the vehicle/driver who 30 seconds earlier he thought was trying to kill him. Sorry but there is no logic to it, either it was the closest pass yet & he was being extremely stupid putting himself back there, or he's a drama queen with a helmet cam & it really wasn't that bad but he posted it for effect.
> 
> Alan...


 Its his moment of fame, cut him some slack


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Phaeton said:


> Actually I do, I was trying to get it back on topic & have a sensible conversation over whether it was really a close pass & more importantly 'My Closest Pass yet' nobody has yet explained yet why the OP thought it a good idea to put himself back out in front of the vehicle/driver who 30 seconds earlier he thought was trying to kill him. Sorry but there is no logic to it, either it was the closest pass yet & he was being extremely stupid putting himself back there, or he's a drama queen with a helmet cam & it really wasn't that bad but he posted it for effect.
> 
> Alan...


 
To be fair to the OP the bus driver had plenty of room so either chose to close pass or was not paying attention .


----------



## lukesdad (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> To be fair to the OP the bus driver had plenty of room so either chose to close pass or was not paying attention .


 Since when did fairness arrive in the commuting fraternity ?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

MontyVeda said:


> It started with one sweeping generalisation, which is your opinion... some people disagreed with your sweeping generalisation/opinion.
> 
> I don't think that's the case, but you could start a poll. Yes it can be a bit cliquey here... but when lots of forum members turn around and say something like "you're wrong"... it's usually because you're wrong, not because of some clique.


So because 10 people maybe disagree I am wrong? My opinion as I have said many times over is my opinion, and I will not go back on that. You have a good evening and sleep well.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Kookas said:


> By that logic we may as well fire the police. It's no different to any other crime.


What are you talking about? I just said it won't ever be eradicated completely. I wasn't advocating close passing. But you're on the ball....I like that!


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> So because 10 people maybe disagree I am wrong? My opinion as I have said many times over is my opinion, and I will not go back on that. You have a good evening and sleep well.


 
Roadrider48 said "My opinion as I have said many times over is my opinion"

Can I keep that one?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Kookas said:


> So you don't agree that we should try to reduce the number of close passes and amount of dangerous driving on the roads in the same way that we try to reduce crime?


Don't get me wrong. I am a very regular cyclist. Everyday infact. But some here are real car haters. Plenty of rule/law breaking is committed by cyclists. But god forbid, the poor defenceless cyclist cannot surely be guilty of anything. Cycling is my passion, but a hell of a lot of bikers break a hell of a lot of rules. But all choose to hide behind the "vulnerable" shield.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> Roadrider48 said "My opinion as I have said many times over is my opinion"
> 
> Can I keep that one?


Sold to that man Ed! It's yours my friend. Treat it well.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

lukesdad said:


> Since when did fairness arrive in the commuting fraternity ?


Good point!


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Sold to that man Ed! It's yours my friend. Treat it well.


 
Thanks, your a star


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> I used to work with a guy who would during an argument say " look am not arguing with you" then would argue his point before walking away


Did he come back?


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Jezston said:


> It's a start.
> 
> I'm just going to have a bit of fun now in the style of RoadRider48
> 
> ...


Maximum respect Jez. I think you're finally getting it....almost!


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Did he come back?


 
Aye to often!


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Phaeton said:


> Actually I do, I was trying to get it back on topic & have a sensible conversation over whether it was really a close pass & more importantly 'My Closest Pass yet' nobody has yet explained yet why the OP thought it a good idea to put himself back out in front of the vehicle/driver who 30 seconds earlier he thought was trying to kill him. Sorry but there is no logic to it, either it was the closest pass yet & he was being extremely stupid putting himself back there, or he's a drama queen with a helmet cam & it really wasn't that bad but he posted it for effect.
> 
> Alan...


"Posted it for effect" that's cam life for you.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> I read it as even murderers have human rights !


They do....and bus drivers alike. The human right not to be plastered all over the internet.


----------



## Origamist (10 Oct 2013)

Stop feeding the troll. He must have approaching 50 posts on this thread. 

If he was spewing this kind of nonsense down at your local boozer there would be no one within 10m of him (apart from me who would be filming and uploading to YouTube).


----------



## lukesdad (10 Oct 2013)

Origamist said:


> Stop feeding the troll. He must have approaching 50 posts on this thread.
> 
> If he was spewing this kind of nonsense down at your local boozer there would be no one within 10m of him (apart from me who would be filming it and posting on YouTube).


 Where as if you were screening your camming vids the boozer would be empty.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Origamist said:


> Stop feeding the troll. He must have approaching 50 posts on this thread.
> 
> If he was spewing this kind of nonsense down at your local boozer there would be no one within 10m of him (apart from me who would be filming it and posting on YouTube).


With my permission of course. Can you really fold paper?


----------



## Origamist (10 Oct 2013)

lukesdad said:


> Where as if you were screening your camming vids the boozer would be empty.



I don't need to screen vids in order to empty a pub, my ugly mug is more than sufficient.


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

Goodnight everyone. And don't forget to charge those cameras ready for tomorrow's journey.


----------



## MontyVeda (10 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> So because 10 people maybe disagree I am wrong? My opinion as I have said many times over is my opinion, and I will not go back on that. You have a good evening and sleep well.



Your opinion that '_cycle cammers don't enjoy cycling_' is a bit like my opinion that '_all Londoners, and those who've moved to London, love jellied eels_' . . . it's my opinion and no matter how many people from the London area put their hands up and say "actually Monty, I don't like jellied eels", I shall continue to hold the opinion that '_all Londoners, and those who've moved to London, love jellied eels_', because that's my opinion and I won't back down from that. 

edit... and they all dress like pearly kings and queens and talk like that chimley sweep in Mary Poppins


----------



## 400bhp (10 Oct 2013)

MontyVeda said:


> Your opinion that '_cycle cammers don't enjoy cycling_' is a bit like my opinion that '*all Londoners, and those who've moved to London, love jellied eels'* . . . it's my opinion and no matter how many people from the London area put their hands up and say "*actually Monty, I don't like jellied eels*", I shall continue to hold the opinion that '_all Londoners, and those who've moved to London, love jellied eels_', because that's my opinion and I won't back down from that.
> 
> edit... and they all dress like pearly kings and queens and talk like that chimley sweep in Mary Poppins



Eh, ..... what they don't?........... When did this happen? .......... I might venture to that there London eh eh eh eh again now.


----------



## MrDampy (10 Oct 2013)

Monkreadusuk said:


> Bit of a brown trouser moment on way home today. Cycling through Southampton and the Driver of a BlueStar number 2 service decides he MGIF and to hell with my safety.
> 
> 
> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98Apw8EmAcI&feature=youtu.be




One Reason I want to get a Camera!
Why should we have to put up with this kind of driving!


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Oct 2013)

I


MontyVeda said:


> Your opinion that '_cycle cammers don't enjoy cycling_' is a bit like my opinion that '_all Londoners, and those who've moved to London, love jellied eels_' . . . it's my opinion and no matter how many people from the London area put their hands up and say "actually Monty, I don't like jellied eels", I shall continue to hold the opinion that '_all Londoners, and those who've moved to London, love jellied eels_', because that's my opinion and I won't back down from that.
> 
> edit... and they all dress like pearly kings and queens and talk like that chimley sweep in Mary Poppins


If that's your opinion, I totally respect it. You, like Me and anybody else are all entitled to their own opinions. Good luck to you Monty.


----------



## User6179 (10 Oct 2013)

MrDampy said:


> One Reason I want to get a Camera!
> Why should we have to put up with this kind of driving!


 
The camera wont stop that type of driving though, the only time a camera will be off any worth is if you get hit unfortunately as the police don't seem interested in close passes.


----------



## Monkreadusuk (11 Oct 2013)

Phaeton said:


> Actually I do, I was trying to get it back on topic & have a sensible conversation over whether it was really a close pass & more importantly 'My Closest Pass yet' nobody has yet explained yet why the OP thought it a good idea to put himself back out in front of the vehicle/driver who 30 seconds earlier he thought was trying to kill him. Sorry but there is no logic to it, either it was the closest pass yet & he was being extremely stupid putting himself back there, or he's a drama queen with a helmet cam & it really wasn't that bad but he posted it for effect.
> 
> Alan...



The bus service in question turns left there whereas I continue. The driver had not threatened me in any way and therefore did not present me with any impact factors for being in front. Secondly, the position I was in (alongside the bus) would have been worse than in front.


----------



## Roadrider48 (11 Oct 2013)

Hi monk. How are you? Back to your film clip for a moment. When you take the first right turn and continue forward, is that section just for buses? I am purely going by the arrow on the tarmac. If I am wrong, I apologise in advance.


----------



## Monkreadusuk (11 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Hi monk. How are you? Back to your film clip for a moment. When you take the first right turn and continue forward, is that section just for buses? I am purely going by the arrow on the tarmac. If I am wrong, I apologise in advance.



No it's a pedestrianised zone that allows buses, cars and cycles :S


----------



## Frood42 (11 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Hi monk. How are you? Back to your film clip for a moment. When you take the first right turn and continue forward, is that section just for buses? I am purely going by the arrow on the tarmac. If I am wrong, I apologise in advance.


 
Arrow on the tarmac?
I can see one at 8 secs, which appears to be a deflection arrow, and which appears to be ushering drivers to the correct side of the dashed white lines... beyond this the road is fairly bare. The road markings are either not finished or left like that as part of the pedestrianisation IMO...


----------



## Roadrider48 (11 Oct 2013)

Monkreadusuk said:


> No it's a pedestrianised zone that allows buses, cars and cycles :S


Thanks for putting me straight. It was close!(the pass)


----------



## Roadrider48 (11 Oct 2013)

Frood42 said:


> Arrow on the tarmac?
> I can see one at 8 secs, which appears to be a deflection arrow, and which appears to be ushering drivers to the correct side of the dashed white lines... beyond this the road is fairly bare. The road markings are either not finished or left like that as part of the pedestrianisation IMO...


Yeah, I was wrong. Monk just told me.


----------



## Mushroomgodmat (11 Oct 2013)

Eddy said:


> The camera wont stop that type of driving though, the only time a camera will be off any worth is if you get hit unfortunately as the police don't seem interested in close passes.




I would disagree - I was reading about one chap who painted a Smartie pack black and stuck it to his helmet - He noticed a marked change in attitude from drivers.

But even if you don't believe that - cameras can and do result in convictions, which can remove said driver from the road, which is only a good thing if you ask me.

Now I don't have a camera, not that interested in getting one. Out in lazy Norwich I don't feel its justified, but I have cycled in London, and no question Id buy one if I lived there!


----------



## downfader (11 Oct 2013)

Just seen this. I've had the very same situation happen along there by the same bus operator. I emailed to complain a few weeks back when one of their drivers barged me out of the way and into the pedestrianised section where people were walking towards the crossing point. I never even got a "naff off" reply. This one firm is the firm I expect tailgating from - even when doing 25mph down hill. 

To make matters worse - where Monk' was overtaken the stones are loose and sunken. You risk either trapping a wheel in a gap or sliding out when there is no margin for error through there. Plus numpty driver forgets that people often dash out along that section to cross. He will hit a pedestrian one day driving like that.


----------



## Cycling Dan (12 Oct 2013)

Mushroomgodmat said:


> I would disagree - I was reading about one chap who painted a Smartie pack black and stuck it to his helmet - He noticed a marked change in attitude from drivers.
> 
> But even if you don't believe that - cameras can and do result in convictions, which can remove said driver from the road, which is only a good thing if you ask me.
> 
> Now I don't have a camera, not that interested in getting one. Out in lazy Norwich I don't feel its justified, but I have cycled in London, and no question Id buy one if I lived there!


I think you would get better results if you wore a wig and didn't have a helmet on in regards to improving behaviour.


----------



## Leodis (14 Oct 2013)

I bought one to protect myself in terms of a witness, I don't want a £2k bike totaled by a hit and rub driver.


----------



## Roadrider48 (14 Oct 2013)

Leodis said:


> I bought one to protect myself in terms of a witness, I don't want a £2k bike totaled by a hit and rub driver.


Fair enough!


----------



## Leodis (14 Oct 2013)

Lol hit and rub...


----------



## Arfcollins (14 Oct 2013)

I've just got in from the pub and lost half an hour of my life reading this. I have concluded:

1. It was a close pass.
2. The OP behaved well and did not put himself in any further danger.
3. The bus company has responded correctly.
4. I'm going to buy some Smarties in the morning.
5. Empty pots make the most noise.

Good night.


----------



## Roadrider48 (15 Oct 2013)

Arfcollins said:


> I've just got in from the pub and lost half an hour of my life reading this. I have concluded:
> 
> 1. It was a close pass.
> 2. The OP behaved well and did not put himself in any further danger.
> ...


Superbly put!....Goodnight sir.


----------



## Monkreadusuk (17 Oct 2013)

Very happy with the reply from the Bus Company. 



> I suspect this communication may come as a surprise to you but I believe it is important that when members of the public submit complaints, they are thoroughly investigated and dealt with in a professional manner.
> 
> I am now in a position to advise you that the driver responsible for the incident where our vehicle passed you unnecesarily close at Guildhall Square in Southampton has been dealt with through our formal procedures.
> 
> ...


----------



## Cycling Dan (17 Oct 2013)

Great outcome and reply.
Its good to see it be taken seriously. They feel its enough to educate the driver and I agree. 
I find it a bit weird they call its a disciplinary award, a tad ironic.


----------



## paulfromthenorth (17 Oct 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Great outcome and reply.
> Its good to see it be taken seriously. They feel its enough to educate the driver and I agree.
> I find it a bit weird they call its a disciplinary award, a tad ironic.


 
Can't see the irony myself.

"Discipline" in the context of employment law relates to emphasising the need for improvement in performance or behaviour. It is therefore a method of education rather than punishment.


----------



## Cycling Dan (17 Oct 2013)

paulfromthenorth said:


> Can't see the irony myself.
> 
> "Discipline" in the context of employment law relates to emphasising the need for improvement in performance or behaviour. It is therefore a method of education rather than punishment.


To contradict you the meaning according to Google is the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behaviour, using punishment to correct disobedience.
So calling it an award is ironic to me.


----------



## benb (18 Oct 2013)

Yeah, it makes it sound like something to strive for.


----------

