# Camsters



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

I have read a lot of references to guys on this site wearing helmet cameras.

Have I misunderstood or are people wearing these for the sole purpose of filming poor driving?


----------



## BentMikey (24 Oct 2011)

There are many reasons to wear cameras - how many can you think of?


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

None


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

Here's a start: There have been numerous incidents of assaults against cyclists, and poor driving resulting in severe injury going unpunished due to the circumstances being one guy's word against another. 

Wearing a helmet cam or similar ensures that the true circumstances are recorded so that, either way, a fair conclusion can be reached. I'm sure if some drivers felt as vulnerable as some cyclists they'd have cams on their dashboard.


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

I would like to think that no cyclists are going out there wearing cams only in the hope of finding poor driving to post on youtube or send to the cops. Im sure most cyclists would be more than happy if they never had to use any of their footage, but it's an insurance policy should the worst happen.


----------



## Bman (24 Oct 2011)

lejogger said:


> I would like to think that no cyclists are going out there wearing cams only in the hope of finding poor driving to post on youtube or send to the cops. Im sure most cyclists would be more than happy if they never had to use any of their footage, but it's an insurance policy should the worst happen.




If you wanted to do that, you could. Just by standing at the side of the road.....


----------



## BentMikey (24 Oct 2011)

D- for effort surely?

Here are some reasons:
Campaigning against aggressive and bad driving, and less often rewarding good driving with compliments to the company involved about their employee. Bringing consequences for the small stuff makes a big difference to future behaviour.
Educating drivers on how to drive better around cyclists.
Educating cyclists on how to ride better. To be honest, I think I've probably learnt more from my own videos about my own riding than I've taught drivers through the campaigning.
Insurance against lies and dishonesty should a collision occur. This one is not a big one for me personally.
Having blatant video cameras often stops any confrontation in its tracks, as very few people are willing to carry on being an arse when they are obviously being filmed.
Recording stuff that happens on the road is a lot of fun, you sometimes catch some cool stuff.


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

I assume that the only way by which a cyclist could end up being assaulted is if they choose to remonstrate with a driver who has driven inconsiderately.

In this day and age wouldnt it be wiser for cyclists (and drivers) to just ride to the best of their ability and to try and avoid any confrontation. Remonstrating with someone who has driven poorly is rarely going to end with an apology and a promise to try harder is it.


----------



## BentMikey (24 Oct 2011)

Who said anything about remonstrating with drivers? I mean we all do it sometimes, but most of us would agree it's better to avoid talking to drivers at all. Sometimes that can be very hard with a driver determined to shout a lesson at you despite you doing nothing to engage with him, and that's where the camera can stop them. Sometimes it might just be about a driver noticing the camera and behaving much better around it, just as they would do around a police car.


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> D- for effort surely?
> 
> Here are some reasons:
> Campaigning against aggressive and bad driving, and less often rewarding good driving with compliments to the company involved about their employee. Bringing consequences for the small stuff makes a big difference to future behaviour.
> ...




mmmmn. Dont see it myself


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I assume that the only way by which a cyclist could end up being assaulted is if they choose to remonstrate with a driver who has driven inconsiderately.



Erm what??

http://londonist.com/2011/07/violent-assault-on-cyclist-caught-on-camera.php
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12334486

Here's two in a 30 second google search


----------



## BentMikey (24 Oct 2011)

Getting the lesson across to drivers, btw., is done very effectively through afterwards posting the video on YouTube, indexing his registration plate and company name if available, and then complaining via Roadsafe (and the company if a liveried vehicle). No need to talk to them then and there.

Oh, and I forgot another benefit of the camera - it helps me to behave better than I might otherwise do. I'm not perfect and a bit of help is gladly accepted.


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> Who said anything about remonstrating with drivers? I mean we all do it sometimes, but most of us would agree it's better to avoid talking to drivers at all. Sometimes that can be very hard with a driver determined to shout a lesson at you despite you doing nothing to engage with him, and that's where the camera can stop them. Sometimes it might just be about a driver noticing the camera and behaving much better around it, just as they would do around a police car.



I did!

I cant yet see why any motorist would be angry with you unless you either had a go at him first or you have done something to cause him concern.

Maybe Ive just been lucky!


----------



## BentMikey (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I did!
> 
> I cant yet see why any motorist would be angry with you unless you either had a go at him first or you have done something to cause him concern.
> 
> Maybe Ive just been lucky!



I doubt that - not having a camera makes it easy for you to brush off incidents, sticking your head into the sand to ignore the bad. Perhaps for you it's good for your mental sanity, but accepting bad behaviour isn't the way to improve cycling conditions for the future.

Some motorists just get angry for no good reason at all, without you doing anything to antagonise them at all. You just need to exist on the road on a bicycle to generate this.


----------



## gaz (24 Oct 2011)

[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQduXO1o0aY[/media]

[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbRR9x0rEJM[/media]


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

lejogger said:


> Erm what??
> 
> http://londonist.com...t-on-camera.php
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12334486
> ...




read the top one.....it says the cyclists remonstrate with the driver!


----------



## I like Skol (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I did!
> 
> I cant yet see why any motorist would be angry with you unless you either had a go at him first or you have done something to cause him concern.
> 
> Maybe Ive just been lucky!



I'm with you on this one Monty because I don't experience all this cyclist/motorist agression that others claim is so prevalent and therefore can't be ars*d with the camera just for the 1 in a million chance that I get knocked off my bike and the guilty party decides to lie through their teeth about the incident.

Where do you live Monty? I live in the Manchester suburbs and have a calm commute everytime and would ride through central Manchester with no qualms but from the posts about problem and agressive incidents that 'flood' in from the London area I guess it's a different world down there?


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> read the top one.....it says the cyclists remonstrate with the driver!



So as humble meek cyclists, we're not entitled to our space on the road and should ignore poor, dangerous and life threatening driving? We can be passed close, we can be beeped at, and we should just put our head down and accept their abuse? We have as much reason to explain to them why their driving is inappropriate as a driver does to find fault with our cycling. Remonstration doesnt have to be aggressive, and is often the only way of getting our point across. And if we don't they'll just do it again.


----------



## lukesdad (24 Oct 2011)

Road position change after the first incident there gaz


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

lejogger said:


> So as humble meek cyclists, we're not entitled to our space on the road and should ignore poor, dangerous and life threatening driving? We can be passed close, we can be beeped at, and we should just put our head down and accept their abuse? We have as much reason to explain why their driving is inappropriate as a driver does to find fault with our cycling. Remonstration doesnt have to be aggressive, and is often the only way of getting our point across. And if we don't they'll just do it again.



All I am saying is if you kick off with another road user its likely that you will get the same back. If you like fighting in the street go for it, if not then just treat it as one of lifes hazards I guess.


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

I like Skol said:


> I'm with you on this one Monty because I don't experience all this cyclist/motorist agression that others claim is so prevalent



Just because it doesn't happen to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It rarely happens to me, in fact I can barely think or an example, but I still accept that these incidents have occurred to other cyclists when there has been no fault apportioned to them.


----------



## gaz (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Road position change after the first incident there gaz



Say whaaaaaaat?


----------



## leemo (24 Oct 2011)

Not soley to capture poor driving if at all. It's more to level the playing field so to speak. Most drivers are fine but if one in a thousand is bad either through carelessness or maliciousness then a camera is a fairly cheap piece of kit that might make a big difference and has done in a number of cases.

Well that's my take on it and why I have started to wear one. But why do you ask monty boy?


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

I like Skol said:


> I'm with you on this one Monty because I don't experience all this cyclist/motorist agression that others claim is so prevalent and therefore can't be ars*d with the camera just for the 1 in a million chance that I get knocked off my bike and the guilty party decides to lie through their teeth about the incident.
> 
> Where do you live Monty? I live in the Manchester suburbs and have a calm commute everytime and would ride through central Manchester with no qualms but from the posts about problem and agressive incidents that 'flood' in from the London area I guess it's a different world down there?




I live in Cheshire and dont ride that often in the City although I do drive about 30,000 miles a year and dont see the sights that others have witnessed.

Perhaps London is a different enviroment that I havent experienced.

Bloomin southerners


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (24 Oct 2011)

*Learning* – I have found it very useful to look back at incidents and see whether I can learn from them. I have also found it very useful to look at other people’s incidents and learn from them. I have also found it useful to get feedback on my own video clips from other experienced cyclists and learn from them. (Actually, it turns out that this has been by far the most valuable aspect.)
*Retribution* – yes, it feels good to be able to name and shame drivers who do bad things to me. (And to show some idiotic things cyclists do as well.)
*Evidence* – the way our laws work makes it very difficult to claim redress if needed. I have never had to do that, thank goodness, but it would help if needed. (See the lawyer’s comments in this One Show clip.) (This was my original reason for getting a camera.)
*Improving the situation* – (admittedly in a very small way) I know of a number of cases of cyclists using video evidence to show the employers of appalling commercial drivers what their staff are doing. This often results in drivers undergoing additional training, often compulsory.
*Behaviour modification* – there are people who claim that the presence of a video camera has the effect of improving the behaviour of drivers. I don’t really know whether this is true, but it seems plausible.


----------



## CopperCyclist (24 Oct 2011)

I'd love a camera, and I know I'll buy one when I can justify the spending. I bought a cheap 10 quid muvi style one, but the mount doesn't work, and I couldn't get it to film the right direction, it just kept slipping - what do I expect for 10 quid though eh?

Next summer I'll be looking to fork out some money on a road bike, and I'll most likely get a contourHD or something similar then.

Why? For protection in the case of an accident. I don't think I'll be uploading to YouTube, but it'll be nice to have evidence if and when I ever need it - hopefully I won't... Secondly, I've started to mountain bike, and I quite fancy filming some of those rides for interest.

For the record, I have absolutely nothing against you-tubers - the first video I saw was CyclingMikeys, followed by Gaz's and I've learnt a lot about cycling from their vids.


----------



## lukesdad (24 Oct 2011)

lejogger said:


> Just because it doesn't happen to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It rarely happens to me, in fact I can barely think or an example, but I still accept that these incidents have occurred to other cyclists when there has been no fault apportioned to them.




Mmm so if it rarely happens and thats my take of 40 years on the roads. What are we to make of cyclists posting scores of incidents on you tube ?


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

leemo said:


> Not soley to capture poor driving if at all. It's more to level the playing field so to speak. Most drivers are fine but if one in a thousand is bad either through carelessness or maliciousness then a camera is a fairly cheap piece of kit that might make a big difference and has done in a number of cases.
> 
> Well that's my take on it and why I have started to wear one. But why do you ask monty boy?




I asked because I thought it seemed an extreme measure just to capture the bad driving of others.

I was curious to find out if things really were that bad or whether it was perhaps a bit of an over reaction from a few.

It seems that maybe London has a character of its own!


----------



## I like Skol (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I live in Cheshire and dont ride that often in the City although I do drive about 30,000 miles a year and dont see the sights that others have witnessed.
> 
> Perhaps London is a different enviroment that I havent experienced.
> 
> Bloomin southerners




I drove a Merc Sprinter 40k a year up to the end of 2007 (not a WVM but a greenVM)







Perhaps this experience from the other side of the arguement make us better or more considerate cyclists? I never had any problems driving in London though!


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Mmm so if it rarely happens and thats my take of 40 years on the roads. What are we to make of cyclists posting scores of incidents on you tube ?


In other words, what are we to make of cyclists posting irrefutable video evidence of scores of incidents on you tube?


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> All I am saying is if you kick off with another road user its likely that you will get the same back. If you like fighting in the street go for it, if not then just treat it as one of lifes hazards I guess.



There's no 'kicking off' though! I've caught up with drivers at traffic lights and politely asked them to leave more room next time. I never go over effing and jeffing as motorists make mistakes and it's only 1 in 10,000 times that there's any malice whatsoever.

Cycling on the road is NOT 'one of lifes hazards'. It's an entitlement that is extended to everyone, and there's no reason why a cyclist should ever have to accept a threat of danger or abuse just because another road user is in a bigger vehicle than they are, or are a more aggressive personality


----------



## Hip Priest (24 Oct 2011)

I can understand why someone would have a camera. It'd be very helpful in the event of an accident. But I'm wary of the attitudes of some camera cyclists. Particularly those who 'name & shame' drivers on youtube.


----------



## I like Skol (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Mmm so if it rarely happens and thats my take of 40 years on the roads. What are we to make of cyclists posting scores of incidents on you tube ?




Be careful what you say Lukesdad. You may be picking an arguement with individuals who like to remonstrate regardless of the implications?


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Mmm so if it rarely happens and thats my take of 40 years on the roads. What are we to make of cyclists posting scores of incidents on you tube ?



It rarely happens to me. I don't speak for all cyclists... Im certain that there are many posts on youtube where the cyclist is just as at fault or more at fault. I completely disagree with going out looking for incidents just to get sympathy from webfolk. That doesn't make their use in all situations redundant however.


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

lejogger said:


> There's no 'kicking off' though! I've caught up with drivers at traffic lights and politely asked them to leave more room next time. I never go over effing and jeffing as motorists make mistakes and it's only 1 in 10,000 times that there's any malice whatsoever.
> 
> Cycling on the road is NOT 'one of lifes hazards'. It's an entitlement that is extended to everyone, and there's no reason why a cyclist should ever have to accept a threat of danger or abuse just because another road user is in a bigger vehicle than they are, or are a more aggressive personality




If you politely as a motorist to leave more room next time you are likely to get a very poor response...fact.

Cycling on busy roads is a hazard....fact.


----------



## gaz (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Mmm so if it rarely happens and thats my take of 40 years on the roads. What are we to make of cyclists posting scores of incidents on you tube ?



OK, i'll come clean, i work with somebody else, we work on a script, get the vehicles, do the dirty work and then post it online.


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I can understand why someone would have a camera. It'd be very helpful in the event of an accident. But I'm wary of the attitudes of some camera cyclists. Particularly those who 'name & shame' drivers on youtube.



Exactly.

There's a lot of bandwagon jumping... some people want attention, sympathy and youtube views. Not all of them however. I've only really seen Gaz's clips online, and they highlight many poor cyclists as well as poor motorists. He's gone about it the right way. 

But if you're wearing it merely as an insurance policy then where's the harm?


----------



## lukesdad (24 Oct 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> FTFY




I doubt if you could fix anything, except through creative editing.


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> If you politely as a motorist to leave more room next time you are likely to get a very poor response...fact.
> 
> Cycling on busy roads is a hazard....fact.



I've never had an aggressive response. It's only the idiots who jump out the cars and threaten violence, It's only the idiotic cyclists who react aggressively to motorists. 

Cycling on busy roads is a hazard, but what you're saying is that if a driver breaks the law to the detriment of you as a cyclist, you have no right to report them with evidence? Just accept that as a cyclist these things are going to happen?


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> I doubt if you could fix anything, except through creative editing.


Care to explain?


----------



## Schneil (24 Oct 2011)

I like Skol said:


> I'm with you on this one Monty because I don't experience all this cyclist/motorist agression that others claim is so prevalent and therefore can't be ars*d with the camera just for the 1 in a million chance that I get knocked off my bike and the guilty party decides to lie through their teeth about the incident.
> 
> Where do you live Monty? I live in the Manchester suburbs and have a calm commute everytime and would ride through central Manchester with no qualms but from the posts about problem and agressive incidents that 'flood' in from the London area I guess it's a different world down there?



Try a ride on the A6 from Manchester city centre to Stockport or some of the busy roads in South Manchester and you'll get a lot of bad or agressive driving!
I got a camera a year ago after a couple of unpleasant run-ins.


----------



## I like Skol (24 Oct 2011)

Schneil said:


> Try a ride on the A6 from Manchester city centre to Stockport or some of the busy roads in South Manchester and you'll get a lot of bad or agressive driving!
> I got a camera a year ago after a couple of unpleasant run-ins.




I cycle commute from Ashton to Hazel Grove with no issues and occasionally divert via Decathlon or similar in Stockport and still have no problems with the behaviour of fellow road users.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> If you politely ask a motorist to leave more room next time you are likely to get a very poor response...fact.


Unfortunately, that appears to be true.



montyboy said:


> Cycling on busy roads is a hazard....fact.


But it shouldn't have to be. There are plenty of drivers who show that it is not difficult to drive safely around cyclists.


----------



## snailracer (24 Oct 2011)

I like Skol said:


> I cycle commute from Ashton to Hazel Grove with no issues and occasionally divert via Decathlon or similar in Stockport and still have no problems with the behaviour of fellow road users.


Well then, strap on a helmet cam so you can show us what you're doing right that everyone else is doing wrong.


----------



## lukesdad (24 Oct 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> Care to explain?




Simple dont edit my posts ! get it ?


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

lejogger said:


> I've never had an aggressive response. It's only the idiots who jump out the cars and threaten violence, It's only the idiotic cyclists who react aggressively to motorists.
> 
> Cycling on busy roads is a hazard, but what you're saying is that if a driver breaks the law to the detriment of you as a cyclist, you have no right to report them with evidence? Just accept that as a cyclist these things are going to happen?




Did I read that correctly? " Ive never had a negative response. Its only the idiots that jump out the cars and threaten violence..."

I never said that you had no right to report anyone. You are able to do as you choose, if you feel it is worth while.


----------



## montyboy (24 Oct 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> Unfortunately, that appears to be true.
> 
> 
> But it shouldn't have to be. There are plenty of drivers who show that it is not difficult to drive safely around cyclists.




It will always be hazardous. I once road straight into a parked car when I was 15 by not looking where I was going,


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> I doubt if you could fix anything, except through creative editing.





MrHappyCyclist said:


> Care to explain?





lukesdad said:


> Simple dont edit my posts ! get it ?


I guess you can't explain your comment then.

You do seem extremely angry though. Sorry if it's something I did.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> It will always be hazardous. I once road straight into a parked car when I was 15 by not looking where I was going,



Agreed, it can be hazardous if you don't look where you're going.


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> Did I read that correctly? " Ive never had a negative response. Its only the idiots that jump out the cars and threaten violence..."
> 
> I never said that you had no right to report anyone. You are able to do as you choose, if you feel it is worth while.



Sorry if I wasn't clearer. I personally have never had a negative response to me asking to leave more room.

The idiots who jump out of cars to argue have never done so to me - i.e. the people I've spoken to weren't idiots, they just took a risk, made a mistake, or didn't realise the danger.


----------



## lukesdad (24 Oct 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> I guess you can't explain your comment then.
> 
> You do seem extremely angry though. Sorry if it's something I did.




Im not angry, ive asked you not to tamper with my posts its not big and its not funny.


----------



## gaz (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Im not angry, ive asked you not to tamper with my posts its not funny and its not big.


----------



## lejogger (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I never said that you had no right to report anyone. You are able to do as you choose, if you feel it is worth while.



Ok, but I'm certainly not talking about petty reporting for reporting's sake i.e. look at DF56 FUF - he made me brake hard... look at YG11 TUR, he shouted at me for riding out in primary to avoid a pothole... 

What if your bike was written off in an accident and you were left without compensation because it was your word against the driver's? What if there were more serious health complications after an incident? What if you did come across one of those small handful of nutjobs who did decide to take a baseball bat to you for holding them up? If I had video footage in any of those incidents and more I'd feel it was worthwhile having the footage. I wouldn't be happy to take a bat to the nuts as a 'hazard' of cycling to work.


----------



## lukesdad (24 Oct 2011)

Mmm....... Now im angry !


----------



## I like Skol (24 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Mmm....... Now im angry !




Now they are dragging you into their world! Take a deep breath and carry on with your life.


----------



## lukesdad (24 Oct 2011)

I like Skol said:


> Now they are dragging you into their world! Take a deep breath and carry on with your life.




They know there is no chance of that ever happening


----------



## Schneil (24 Oct 2011)

snailracer said:


> Well then, strap on a helmet cam so you can show us what you're doing right that everyone else is doing wrong.



For I like skols info

Manchester helmet cammers on youtube

schneil (me)
wonkyknees
39stonecyclist
manchestercyclist
sh4keybloke
MrGrumpycyclist

I can go down the A6 in evening rush hour one night and do Manchester Piccadilly to Decathalon Stockport. It'll be scary viewing as Longsight and Levenshulme are horrible to cycle in. Levenshulme especially as Stockport Road (A6) is a busy road with cars parked at the side. So you can't do a secondary as you're always in a door zone, and you're going uphill so you can't go fast enough to go primary without people cutting you up. A cycling road to hell if ever there was one.

Some roads in this neck of the woods are really really bad. I deliberately take a longer route home to avoid as much trouble as possible! If you know if any decent roads, please let me know, I'd appreciate the "knowledge".


----------



## classic33 (24 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I asked because I thought it seemed an extreme measure just to capture the bad driving of others.
> 
> I was curious to find out if things really were that bad or whether it was perhaps a bit of an over reaction from a few.
> 
> It seems that maybe London has a character of its own!



If I'd had one in March 2005, when I was hit by a car, whose driver was convinced I was a bus, it would have made it easier for me to prove to him I wasn't. It would also have come in handy after the event when he came out & "told me" not to call the police.

Prior to that I'd always carried a single use 35mm. The company I worked for also started issuing them to the drivers. Cyclists are not the only one using cameras on the road by the way.

I don't live in London by the way.


----------



## dawesome (25 Oct 2011)

There are two million uninsured drivers on the road. There are 2 million people driving with an expired license. There are thousands of drivers with more than twelve points on their licence. There are drivers out there who think nothing of using their vehicle as a weapon. All the pressure for road users to film commutes comes from the most vulnerable- cyclists, and from serious professional companies that want to demonstrate their employee's behaviour is exemplary. What does that tell you?


----------



## mr_hippo (25 Oct 2011)

So some 'cyclists' are videoing their rides in case something happens - just like I wear clean underwear every day; I may get knocked down by a bus and do not want A&E staff to see I am wearing dirty underwear!

A question for all of you who post 'incident videos' - a very small percentage of people on this site - do you suffer the same 'fate' when walking in a busy street or supermarket? Do you have the mindset that this is my piece of pavement or aisle and I am not deviating from my route? Have you learnt tp co-operate with other pedestrians and shoppers/ Do you ever hurl abuse at other people because they are in your 'space'? If a pedestrian is on a collision course with you, do you sometimes go into a little dance - you go to your left and he goes to his right and this continues for a few seconds? Something like the Guerini incident on Alpe d'Huez or do you just barge past him/her?

How many have started threads like 'Assault in ASDA', 'Mayhem in Morrisisons', 'Carnage in Carrefour', 'TrolleyTerror in Tesco'? Is it because things like this do not happen or are they small insignificant incidents?

Do any of you 'cyclists' have a God given right to maintain speed and course on the Queen's Highway? Some of the overtake videos I have watched are so 'close' that the 'cyclist' had neither altered speed, applied brakes nor deviated from their course - if you were that concerned then you would do any of all of them but you do not - why?


----------



## rowan 46 (25 Oct 2011)

I like Skol said:


> I'm with you on this one Monty because I don't experience all this cyclist/motorist agression that others claim is so prevalent and therefore can't be ars*d with the camera just for the 1 in a million chance that I get knocked off my bike and the guilty party decides to lie through their teeth about the incident.
> 
> Where do you live Monty? I live in the Manchester suburbs and have a calm commute everytime and would ride through central Manchester with no qualms but from the posts about problem and agressive incidents that 'flood' in from the London area I guess it's a different world down there?



I cycle in Birmingham, don't use a camera and don't argue with motorists. I have had occasions of motorists spitting at me, throwing macdonalds milk shake, cans,swerving into me me while honking their horns and laughing as they drive away. those are the unprovoked attacks where there has been no reason other than that they are knobs. More common is the general abuse which I get as another road user most times I haven't made a mistake just been too slow to get out their way but at least I understand that sort of road rage. It's not just london and it's not just cyclists. Rudeness on the roads is fairly endemic. Don't get me wrong I am not saying incidents happen to me all the time or even a lot but over 40 years of cycling it probably averages out to nearly one unprovoked incident every two years. As to the general road rage that's much more common. I should add that all but one of the senseless acts were carried out by the young lads who were passengers in the car with the connivance of the driver and there was one incident with a group of young women in a fiesta who shouted get a car then sprayed me with champagne (or more likely cava)


----------



## dawesome (25 Oct 2011)

mr_hippo said:


> How many have started threads like 'Assault in ASDA', 'Mayhem in Morrisisons', 'Carnage in Carrefour', 'TrolleyTerror in Tesco'? Is it because things like this do not happen or are they small insignificant incidents?



People don't die from trolley bumps:


*Cyclist killed on superhighway in Bow*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15440182#story_continues_1
A man has died after a collision with a tipper lorry on a cycle superhighway in east London.

The cyclist, aged in his 50s, was involved in the accident on the roundabout at the Bow flyover during the morning rush hour.

Transport for London (TfL) said he was the first person to be killed on the city's cycling superhighway network.

The Metropolitan Police said a man had been arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving in connection with the crash.




http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15440182


----------



## BentMikey (25 Oct 2011)

Ah yes, commentary from Mr Hippo, who filmed himself doing an extremely risky coach undertake, and edited it out of his upload, but forgot to trim back far enough to avoid us seeing the approach. LOOL!


----------



## BSRU (25 Oct 2011)

What a question from someone who drives 30k a year and hardly cycles, must have been caught on a cyclists camera being a naughty boy.

:troll:


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (25 Oct 2011)

BSRU said:


> What a question from someone who drives 30k a year and hardly cycles, must have been caught on a cyclists camera being a naughty boy.
> 
> :troll:



I thought it was just me that was thinking that.


----------



## jonny jeez (25 Oct 2011)

Going back to the OP...I use a camera for a few reasons.

Firstly, I love riding and really enjoy posting snippets of the pleasures that I see for others to witness and enjoy. You will see that my channel mostly consists of this type of video....its a bit like taking photos of a holiday.

Otherwise, I "wear" a camera (sometimes its switched off) as both a deterrent and as a black box. Virtually all my footage is deleted upon reaching my destination (sometimes to my frustration when I then remember that I wanted to share something...the lake of poo comes to mind!).

I have a fairly large and obvious cam (Go Pro) and have had many (already) instances where I am sure others have acted a certain way because they know they are being recorded, in particular at junctions where a good "Glare" from the cam tends to make others pay attention...but this is only a possibility.

you are welcome to check out my channel

http://www.youtube.com/user/jonnygeez?feature=mhee

you'll see that not all camsters just seek evidence of poor driving .


----------



## mr_hippo (25 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> Ah yes, commentary from Mr Hippo, who filmed himself doing an extremely risky coach undertake, and edited it out of his upload, but forgot to trim back far enough to avoid us seeing the approach. LOOL!
> 
> You are talking about the clip on Lat Phrao Road with the junction with Chok Chai 4. Do you know the area at all? I thoiught not. Chok Chai 4 is not on any bus route and the mext bus stop is about 700 metres away. What was risky about it, left lane is for traffic going onto Chok Chai 4 and I was just using the left lane to get ahead of stationary traffic. I know the area well and the traffic pattern so, pray tell me, what was risky about it?


----------



## lukesdad (25 Oct 2011)

dawesome said:


> There are two million uninsured drivers on the road. There are 2 million people driving with an expired license. There are thousands of drivers with more than twelve points on their licence. There are drivers out there who think nothing of using their vehicle as a weapon. All the pressure for road users to film commutes comes from the most vulnerable- cyclists, and from serious professional companies that want to demonstrate their employee's behaviour is exemplary. What does that tell you?




Camera sales are going up. Nooo! more you tube links comming in the near future


----------



## BSRU (25 Oct 2011)

In Swindon, I'm outnumbered by car drivers uploading video's to YouTube, there is at least three of them and just one cyclist camera, me.

I think some drivers are starting to realise that people will lie their arses off to avoid an insurance payout and hence loss of their precious no claims bonus.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Oct 2011)

Yes, Hippo, that'll be why you tried to edit it out then. Convicted by your own opinion, I think.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (25 Oct 2011)

Schneil said:


> For I like skols info
> 
> Manchester helmet cammers on youtube
> 
> ...



Sadly, Wonkyknees posted this comment on his last video (20th October):


> Thanks to this prick. I'm calling a day on cycling, certainly until something is done to protect vulnerable road﻿ users. That'll be a long wait!


----------



## lukesdad (25 Oct 2011)

BSRU said:


> In Swindon, I'm outnumbered by car drivers uploading video's to YouTube, there is at least three of them and just one cyclist camera, me.
> 
> I think some drivers are starting to realise that people will lie their arses off to avoid an insurance payout and hence loss of their precious no claims bonus.




Do they get a reduction in their premiums for using one ?


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (25 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Im not angry, ive asked you not to tamper with my posts its not big and its not funny.


Well, it wasn't supposed to be funny (or big, whatever that means). However, sorry that it annoyed you. I'll try to be more direct in making my points in future.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Oct 2011)

Yes, I imagine Lukesdad didn't like it because of the large element of truth in your edit.


----------



## lukesdad (25 Oct 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> Well, it wasn't supposed to be funny (or big, whatever that means). However, sorry that it annoyed you. I'll try to be more direct in making my points in future.




Thank you.


----------



## lukesdad (25 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> Yes, I imagine Lukesdad didn't like it because of the large element of truth in your edit.




Not talking directly yet then Mikey


----------



## BSRU (25 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Do they get a reduction in their premiums for using one ?



It is possible but probably not, I have "heard" of some companies getting reduced insurance premiums because they fitted cameras to their company vehicles.

As far as I can tell they just became fed up of the sh1t driving they see and the complete lack of traffic police on the roads.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Oct 2011)

I did think having such a wibble over such a minor incident was a bit out of character for you. Don't tell me, you have a camera channel about filming forum activity?


----------



## lukesdad (25 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> I did think having such a wibble over such a minor incident was a bit out of character for you. Don't tell me, you have a camera channel about filming forum activity?




Ha ha now that would be a good use for a camera  This is what he does while posting this crap ! I like it.

Messing about with people s posts is something I dislike. Unlike Camsters who I love really


----------



## BentMikey (25 Oct 2011)

Fair enough, I'll try to remember that about you and not wind you up unintentionally. 

btw, I did think MrHappy's edit was fair and open, as he made it obvious that he'd FTFY'd it, and put the change in bold.


----------



## lukesdad (25 Oct 2011)

I dont mind a wind up as you well know. FTFY is a lazy way to make a point as you also well know.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Oct 2011)

I know you don't like FTFY, but I think it's often funny and/or appropriate. Sometimes it's done badly, sure.


----------



## Herzog (25 Oct 2011)

mr_hippo said:


> So some 'cyclists' are videoing their rides in case something happens - just like I wear clean underwear every day; I may get knocked down by a bus and do not want A&E staff to see I am wearing dirty underwear!



A bit of topic, but if I got knocked down by a bus wearing clean underwear, it wouldn't be when clean when the A&E staff see it.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (25 Oct 2011)

mr_hippo said:


> A question for all of you who post 'incident videos' - a very small percentage of people on this site - do you suffer the same 'fate' when walking in a busy street or supermarket?


What a ridiculous parallel to draw. 



mr_hippo said:


> Do any of you 'cyclists' have a God given right to maintain speed and course on the Queen's Highway? Some of the overtake videos I have watched are so 'close' that the 'cyclist' had neither altered speed, applied brakes nor deviated from their course - if you were that concerned then you would do any of all of them but you do not - why?


How would you know whether they applied brakes?
Without seeing the wheels, how would you know whether they deviated from their course?
I put it to you that you have no basis at all for these assertions. If you believe otherwise, then show the evidence that supports your claims and explain your reasoning.


----------



## Jezston (26 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> I dont mind a wind up as you well know. FTFY is a lazy way to make a point as you also well know.



'FTFY' as a concept is a part of the internet and is here to stay. People aren't going to stop using it just because you say you don't like it.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (26 Oct 2011)

OK, for goodness sake! I've edited it now to make exactly the same point in a different way. My quote of lukesdad's post is now identical to the original. Stop arguing about arguing about arguing!


----------



## Cubist (26 Oct 2011)

Herzog said:


> A bit of topic, but if I got knocked down by a bus wearing clean underwear, it wouldn't be when clean when the A&E staff see it.



No, but as every mother knows, A&E staff have personnel trained to take your underwear and analyse the contents. They are perfectly capable of differentiating between pre-and post-incident skidmarks and nutty slack. They also have a comprehensive communication system to inform others, in pantomime whispers, about their findings.


----------



## goo_mason (26 Oct 2011)

Herzog said:


> A bit of topic, but if I got knocked down by a bus wearing clean underwear, it wouldn't be when clean when the A&E staff see it.




What was a bus doing wearing underwear?  

I suppose that if it _had_ slammed the anchors on before it knocked you down, it may have left skidmarks...

(I'll get my coat)


----------



## snailracer (26 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> I dont mind a wind up as you well know. FTFY is a lazy *efficient* way to make a point as you also well know.


FTFY.


----------



## JoysOfSight (26 Oct 2011)

You, sir, are a legend!

I can't be the only one who wants to ride around with the OP, never experiencing any trouble on the roads. Must be lovely. 

(In fact, although I only do half the distance in a motor that he does, I'd also settle for having him around in the car, for the same reason!)


----------



## BentMikey (26 Oct 2011)

If someone never experiences trouble on the roads, then they are sticking their head in the sand about things that many of us on here don't and wouldn't find acceptable.

Accept bad behaviour, and do nothing to change it, and you're encouraging worse behaviour in the future. That's why I'm so chuffed with those cyclists who do take the effort to report bad or bullying behaviour on the roads.


----------



## JoysOfSight (26 Oct 2011)

IMO the reason people find headcams disturbing is not because they truly think that nothing dangerous ever happens on the roads - that's just a paper-thin conversational gambit. 

They are disturbed in fact by the idea that people might want to do something about it.

YouTube is for video what posting on a forum is for text. I always find it funny that people will suggest something sinister in the motives of anyone who spends five minutes uploading a clip from their commute, whereas it's "normal" to spend that time moaning on the keyboard!

(If you want to get really deep - I think the problem many cyclists have with headcam users is the same problem that drivers have with cyclists, i.e. out-group.)


----------



## BentMikey (26 Oct 2011)

Ah, now that is an insightful post. High-5!!!


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (26 Oct 2011)

snailracer said:


> lukesdad said:
> 
> 
> > I dont mind a wind up as you well know. FTFY is a lazy *efficient* _*effective*_ way to make a point as you also well know.
> ...


FTFTFYFY


----------



## lukesdad (26 Oct 2011)

Ah thats better


----------



## Andrew_P (27 Oct 2011)

The problem I see with Cams is that they extend the stress and tribulation, closes pass are a regualr thing for anyone who cycles daily, filming then showing everyone and re-visiting the situation time and time again just seems to extend the stress of a close pass.

For similar reasons I have stopped recounting my stories of woe to friends and family as it just extends their stress that I am risking my life everytime I jump on my bike in the morning.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Oct 2011)

Yes, I think it might add to stress in family members, but for me it's a nice way to get rid of any tiny bit of stress I might have left. There's usually none, even from a very bad incident, simply because cycling is so much fun, and the physical exertion means ENDORPHINs. Comeback is rather satisfying, especially when it results in the driver doing better in future.


----------



## Origamist (27 Oct 2011)

LOCO said:


> The problem I see with Cams is that they extend the stress and tribulation, closes pass are a regualr thing for anyone who cycles daily, filming then showing everyone and re-visiting the situation time and time again just seems to extend the stress of a close pass.



You don't have to upload the films or even save them - I take pleasure in deleting them and find it quite cathartic...What's more, I've often forgotten to switch the camera on or off, and by the time I get home I have usually forgotten if I was involved in a minor incident.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (27 Oct 2011)

LOCO said:


> The problem I see with Cams is that they extend the stress and tribulation, closes pass are a regualr thing for anyone who cycles daily, filming then showing everyone and re-visiting the situation time and time again just seems to extend the stress of a close pass.
> 
> For similar reasons I have stopped recounting my stories of woe to friends and family as it just extends their stress that I am risking my life everytime I jump on my bike in the morning.


If that's what works best for you, then go for it. I prefer to use the cam and to post the bad cases on YouTube but, as they say, YMMV.


----------



## XmisterIS (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I assume that the only way by which a cyclist could end up being assaulted is if they choose to remonstrate with a driver who has driven inconsiderately.
> 
> In this day and age wouldnt it be wiser for cyclists (and drivers) to just ride to the best of their ability and to try and avoid any confrontation. *Remonstrating with someone who has driven poorly is rarely going to end with an apology and a promise to try harder is it*.



You've very succinctly scuppered your own argument, scored and own goal, peed in your own bed, so to speak ... a very big reason for wearing a helmet cam is so that you *don't* have to remonstrate with bad and/or aggressive drivers. You have the satisfaction of knowing that all you need do is calmly give the footage to the police and they will (hopefully) take action.

Clearly, if you give footage of every single close-pass to the police, then they will rapidly get bored of you - but by submitting the odd few who's driving is shockingly aggressive and dangerous, you remove the need and desire for any kind of remonstration - why would I feel minded to remonstrate with someone who has just nearly killed me if I have video evidence that will get them prosecuted? There is no desire in that instance.


----------



## montyboy (27 Oct 2011)

XmisterIS said:


> You've very succinctly scuppered your own argument, scored and own goal, peed in your own bed, so to speak ... a very big reason for wearing a helmet cam is so that you *don't* have to remonstrate with bad and/or aggressive drivers. You have the satisfaction of knowing that all you need do is calmly give the footage to the police and they will (hopefully) take action.
> 
> Clearly, if you give footage of every single close-pass to the police, then they will rapidly get bored of you - but by submitting the odd few who's driving is shockingly aggressive and dangerous, you remove the need and desire for any kind of remonstration - why would I feel minded to remonstrate with someone who has just nearly killed me if I have video evidence that will get them prosecuted? There is no desire in that instance.




I am sorry but I dont agree.

If you choose to challange people on the quality of their driving you are likely to get a negative response. If you challange them with raised voices and hand gestures you are likely to get thumped.

If you really think that it is a good use of your time and energy to report drivers to the police for poor driving you are are free to do so. I just feel I have better things to do.

I honestly feel that bad driving is usually a mistake or an error of judgement and we can all be guilty of those. I just prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and hope that the next time i make an error they will do like wise. I would like to think that the quality of my driving has enabled them to make a mistake and to avoid what could have been a far worse outcome.

That's the nice kind of guy I am


----------



## gaz (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I am sorry but I dont agree.
> 
> If you choose to challange people on the quality of their driving you are likely to get a negative response. If you challange them with raised voices and hand gestures you are likely to get thumped.
> 
> ...


So it's a mistake when people try to drive you off the road. Now I understand!

Without teaching people about their mistakes, how will they learn?

Note: I'm not talkig about remonstrating with drivers. I am talkin about reporting dangerous drivers to the police.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Oct 2011)

Montyboy, I think you may have missed the point of XmisterIS's very eloquent post. His point is that by filming, you don't need to confront a driver. I'm not sure if you meant that from your original post, but it did also come across to me as though you equate filming people with confronting them then and there, and risking a beating as a result.

Pointing out peoples' mistakes after the event on youtube, and complaining about them via company/police where appropriate, is much more likely to result in an improvement in future behaviour. Not everyone is as nice and well intentioned as you are that they care at all about a driving mistake. Many won't even realise what they did wrong or how they endangered a cyclist, and thus have no chance to learn from it. Unemotional and objective feedback such as from video footage is perhaps the very best way to give such feedback.


----------



## montyboy (27 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> Montyboy, I think you may have missed the point of XmisterIS's very eloquent post. His point is that by filming, you don't need to confront a driver. I'm not sure if you meant that from your original post, but it did also come across to me as though you equate filming people with confronting them then and there, and risking a beating as a result.
> 
> Pointing out peoples' mistakes after the event on youtube, and complaining about them via company/police where appropriate, is much more likely to result in an improvement in future behaviour. Not everyone is as nice and well intentioned as you are that they care at all about a driving mistake. Many won't even realise what they did wrong or how they endangered a cyclist, and thus have no chance to learn from it. Unemotional and objective feedback such as from video footage is perhaps the very best way to give such feedback.




Sorry, if I wasnt clear.

My view is that I wouldnt either remonstrate or report them to the Police.

I just cant imagine anyone deliberately trying to drive someone of the road.....I cant get my head round it. I have seen drivers do all sorts of stupid things but I prefer to believe it was not intending to kill anyone.


----------



## Gandalf (27 Oct 2011)

As a vulnerable road user with empathy towards other vulnerable road users, I'm not really interested in intent, only the outcome. 

If an increase in the use of video cameras and/or reporting can, however indirectly, positively influence those outcomes I'm all for it.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I just cant imagine anyone deliberately trying to drive someone of the road.....I cant get my head round it. I have seen drivers do all sorts of stupid things but I prefer to believe it was not intending to kill anyone.


You're right, but there are drivers who will deliberately drive dangerously close to a cyclist to "teach them a lesson". There are also a great many drivers who really do believe that passing within a foot of a cyclist at 35mph is acceptable behaviour.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> Sorry, if I wasnt clear.
> 
> My view is that I wouldnt either remonstrate or report them to the Police.
> 
> I just cant imagine anyone deliberately trying to drive someone of the road.....I cant get my head round it. I have seen drivers do all sorts of stupid things but I prefer to believe it was not intending to kill anyone.



If I've understood you correctly, you would find it hard not to remonstrate when encountering some bad driving. That's surely nothing to do with filming?

Oh, perhaps you meant you'd just keep quiet and neither remonstrate nor report to the police? In which case my first point: Doing nothing means accepting bad behaviour, and sticking your head in the sand about it. Accepting bad behaviour makes it normal, and will lead to further worse behaviour in the future. Doing something about it is what all socially responsible citizens should do, IMO.

I'd agree that most bad driving is not deliberately trying to run someone off the road, though that does happen too. Careless driving can be very nearly as dangerous, and needs feedback so that driver can improve their future behaviour. If you don't give said feedback, there's very little chance of them even realising what happened and why you were unimpressed with their driving.

Surely we're not all imagining the stupid and dangerous driving that's out there on YouTube? Why even have traffic police if it's all "by accident" and doesn't matter very much?


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (27 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> Surely we're not all imagining the stupid and dangerous driving that's out there on YouTube? Why even have traffic police if it's all "by accident" and doesn't matter very much?



+1.

"by accident" = "driving without due care and attention"


----------



## gaz (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> Sorry, if I wasnt clear.
> 
> My view is that I wouldnt either remonstrate or report them to the Police.
> 
> I just cant imagine anyone deliberately trying to drive someone of the road.....I cant get my head round it. I have seen drivers do all sorts of stupid things but I prefer to believe it was not intending to kill anyone.


I've had several drivers drive me off the road. Purposefully cutting me up, threatening me with weapons and getting out of their vehicles. Just because you haven't experience it, doesn't mean that crazy people aren't in control of motorvehicles.


----------



## snailracer (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> Sorry, if I wasnt clear.
> 
> My view is that I wouldnt either remonstrate or report them to the Police.
> 
> I just cant imagine anyone *deliberately trying to drive someone of the road*.....I cant get my head round it. I have seen drivers do all sorts of stupid things but I prefer to believe it was not intending to kill anyone.


Well I have had that happen to me several times, years before practical helmet cams even existed.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

If helmet cams for cycling commuters were mandatory and all other road users were aware of it then bad behaviour towards cyclists would dramatically reduce overnight.


----------



## montyboy (27 Oct 2011)

There seems to be two types of cyclist on the forum.

Those who seem to cycle fairly incident free and those who seem to be a target for enraged drivers.

Perhaps those who are always being "targetted" by irate motorists are doing something different to the rest of us.

Just a thought.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> There seems to be two types of cyclist on the forum.
> 
> Those who seem to cycle fairly incident free and those who seem to be a target for enraged drivers.
> 
> ...



Probably partly right. To make a start I would guess that they are:

Cycling during busy commuting times in London, Home Counties or in a big city
Not willing to allow themselves to be bullied by motorists when they are simply riding safely and correctly according to government guidelines
Cycling more than most of us


----------



## Jezston (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> There seems to be two types of cyclist on the forum.
> 
> Those who seem to cycle fairly incident free and those who seem to be a target for enraged drivers.
> 
> ...




Your 'thought' is based purely on your prejudices and has no basis in fact.

Try reading through this thread again, except this time stop ignoring facts that don't support your views.


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> Probably partly right. To make a start I would guess that they are:
> 
> Cycling during busy commuting times in London, Home Counties or in a big city
> Not willing to allow themselves to be bullied by motorists when they are simply riding safely and correctly according to government guidelines
> Cycling more than most of us



Those that are incident free or those that are targeted?


----------



## montyboy (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> Probably partly right. To make a start I would guess that they are:
> 
> Cycling during busy commuting times in London, Home Counties or in a big city
> Not willing to allow themselves to be bullied by motorists when they are simply riding safely and correctly according to government guidelines
> Cycling more than most of us



I think 1. and 3. are probably true.

With regard to 2. I dont think that just letting something pass is quite the same as allowing yourself to be bullied. I also think that the older you get the more tolerent you become.


----------



## montyboy (27 Oct 2011)

Jezston said:


> Your 'thought' is based purely on your prejudices and has no basis in fact.
> 
> Try reading through this thread again, except this time stop ignoring facts that don't support your views.




Wrong!

I have no prejudjuces and I never claimed my "thought" to be a fact. That is why I described it as a thought.

Also, I havent ignored other peoples opinions they just havent convinced me to change my opinion.

Interesting that you describe the comments that dont agree with me as facts, many are as my own just opinions.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

ianrauk said:


> Those that are incident free or those that are targeted?


Yes sorry I mean that some riders have more incidents simply because of the obvious reasons stated. I for instance cycle in Warwickshire and only about 50 miles a week. I would imagine that if I cycled 100 miles a week into London at 7.30am I would have far more problems.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I think 1. and 3. are probably true.
> 
> With regard to 2. I dont think that just letting something pass is quite the same as allowing yourself to be bullied. I also think that the older you get the more tolerent you become.



Well I guess I am thinking about things like cycling in primary/outside the door zone which motorists are sometimes impatient with. I think that some less assertive cyclists are "bullied" into driving in a less safe position and therefore trade off their own safety with not irritating some mororists.


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> Yes sorry I mean that some riders have more incidents simply because of the obvious reasons stated. I for instance cycle in Warwickshire and only about 50 miles a week. I would imagine that if I cycled 100 miles a week into London at 7.30am I would have far more problems.



I commute over 150 miles a week in London (I leave home at 7.30am) and have very little problems.


----------



## montyboy (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> Well I guess I am thinking about things like cycling in primary/outside the door zone which motorists are sometimes impatient with. I think that some less assertive cyclists are "bullied" into driving in a less safe position and therefore trade off their own safety with not irritating some mororists.




Ah, I see. I hadnt read point 2 in the right context.

Point taken.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

ianrauk said:


> I commute over 150 miles a week in London (I leave home at 7.30am) and have very little problems.



I have no experience at all cycling in London so would be interested in your opinion. Do you think some people are driving too assertively (aggressively) and their problems stem from that?


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> I have no experience at all cycling in London so would be interested in your opinion. Do you think some people are driving too assertively (aggressively) and their problems stem from that?



Do you mean 'ride' assertively?

If so, then no. 
If anything it's the opposite. There are far too many cyclists not being assertive enough. Control the road and you will have very little problems. Car drivers appreciate knowing and seeing what a cyclist is doing. I have lost count of the number of times I have seen a cyclist either not indicate properly, undertake and rlj in front of motorists. That's what get's a motorists back up. 

There are a huge amount of commuting cyclists in London now and cars drivers are aware of that (how can they not be) & make allowances for the fact. I think it was Delzeqq who said that he counted over 40 cyclists at one junction one morning.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

ianrauk said:


> *Do you mean 'ride' assertively?*
> 
> If so, then no.
> If anything it's the opposite. There are far too many cyclists not being assertive enough. Control the road and you will have very little problems. Car drivers appreciate knowing and seeing what a cyclist is doing. I have lost count of the number of times I have seen a cyclist either not indicate properly, undertake and rlj in front of motorists. That's what get's a motorists back up.
> ...



Yes.

There are a number of assertive riders on this forum who do seem to have a large number of incidents which they post on Youtube, many more than you it seems. How do you account for this?


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> There are a number of assertive riders on this forum who do seem to have a large number of incidents which they post on Youtube, many more than you it seems. How do you account for this?


I do seem to have a fairly high number of "incidents". I think this is partly due to the particular place I cycle (Greater Manchester). When my daughter and I have gone for long rides, we have commented on how much nicer it is once we get outside the Greater Manchester area (Cheshire, across towards Southport, north into Lancashire, etc.) and how unpleasant it gets once we are back in GM.

I do think I have fewer really scary incidents since I started riding more assertively, and looking back at my videos, I think a very high proportion are when I failed to be as assertive as I perhaps should be.

EDIT: I also commute about 100 miles per week, which is not massive, but probably higher than most.


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> Yes.
> 
> There are a number of assertive riders on this forum who do seem to have a large number of incidents which they post on Youtube, many more than you it seems. How do you account for this?



There are very few 'real' incident's being posted in here.
I think we need make a distinction between incident's such as near car misses and smidsy's and those that are 'other' ie motons on mobile, rlj'ers etc. I would not call those incident's.

Seeing as London has more then it's fair share of commuting cyclists, now many with cams, then the amount of vids being posted would be Londoncentric.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

ianrauk said:


> There are very few 'real' incident's being posted in here.
> I think we need make a distinction between incident's such as near car misses and smidsy's and those that are 'other' ie motons on mobile, rlj'ers etc. I would not call those incident's.
> 
> Seeing as London has more then it's fair share of commuting cyclists, now many with cams, then the amount of vids being posted would be Londoncentric.



But a very few helmet camers seem to have several incidents each per week. OK quite a few are not worth the "incident" label but it still seems as though they may have heated exchanges several times a year.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> There are a number of assertive riders on this forum who do seem to have a large number of incidents which they post on Youtube, many more than you it seems. How do you account for this?


Also, one ought to consider cause and effect. Most of the cycle cammers I know say they got the cam because they were fed up with all the bad driving incidents. Perhaps they have also become more assertive for the same reason.


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> But a very few helmet camers seem to have several incidents each per week. OK quite a few are not worth the "incident" label but it still seems as though they may have heated exchanges several times a year.



I have heated exchanges several times a year but that doesn't make it several incident's per week does it?
The difference with me is that I don;t feel the need to capture it on film and show the world.
Others do and fair play to them if they do.

However I do think there cammers out there who do a great job, (of which I can honestly say have helped me become a better commuting cyclist) and there are cammers out there that are pretty rubbish and play up to the cam.


----------



## gaz (27 Oct 2011)

You gotta take into account the kind of roads people are using. Different volumes of traffic, different layouts, bus lanes etc...
I'm normally the only cyclists on the road for half of my route. Where as the other half I'm on a route that has hundreds of cyclists using it per hour. Guess which half I get the most 'trouble' on.

As someone has mentioned distance is an important factor, I do 170 miles a week just commuting, all of which is done in heavy traffic. And I would say I've had less than 10 real bad incidences in 2 years. And most of them involve blackcabs


----------



## BentMikey (27 Oct 2011)

Hey Ian, 'fess up now. You ride with me once and have an incident in just 10 miles. Oh, I see, it's because of my camera, yes? All my fault, I'm dreadfully sorry.


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> Hey Ian, 'fess up now. You ride with me once and have an incident in just 10 miles. Oh, I see, it's because of my camera, yes? All my fault, I'm dreadfully sorry.



If you weren't there Mike I wouldn't have been speeding to get away from you and your camera and I wouldn't have had an incident so yes' it's your fault. be ashamed.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Oct 2011)

LOL!! What I did like most about that is that the driver came on the video and apologised very contritely. I took off her number plate from the title and tags as a result.


----------



## Thomk (27 Oct 2011)

ianrauk said:


> I have heated exchanges several times a year but that doesn't make it several incident's per week does it?



Not sure if you're impling that I meant that you did but if so I didn't. This probably just confirms what I originally thought which is that some cyclists, even you it seems, are far more likely to have "incidents" than others due to location and miles cycled. My other point is that it may be due to cycling style and I guess the cyclists reaction to perceived wrongs which is just a conjecture and I have nothing really to back that up. I should think it unlikely that I will have several heated exchanges in a year (none so far).


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> Not sure if you're impling that I meant that you did but if so I didn't. This probably just confirms what I originally thought which is that some cyclists, even you it seems, are far more likely to have "incidents" than others due to location and miles cycled. My other point is that it may be due to cycling style and I guess the cyclists reaction to perceived wrongs which is just a conjecture and I have nothing really to back that up. I should think it unlikely that I will have several heated exchanges in a year (none so far).



No I didn't read it that way at all Thom. I know what you mean.

Of course, the more traffic and cycling miles done, the more likely of an incident. That is true
But as I said previous, a lot of cyclists bring trouble on themselves when there is no need to.
I like to think I have less 'incidents' then most due to my cycling style.


----------



## gaz (27 Oct 2011)

ianrauk said:


> I like to think I have less 'incidents' then most due to my cycling style.


laid back?
 on the new bike anyway


----------



## Cyclist33 (27 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I did!
> 
> I cant yet see why any motorist would be angry with you unless you either had a go at him first or you have done something to cause him concern.
> 
> Maybe Ive just been lucky!



1. Because some motorists believe that cyclists should not be on the roads, period. Eg, Jeremy Clarkson and my mate Chris.
2. Because different drivers have different ideas about what constitutes good cycling and bad, and good driving and bad, therefore some will have a go at you for doing nothing wrong if it doesn't concur with their understanding of the road.
3. Because some people in cars are just plain c**ts and revel in trying to distract cyclists off their bikes.

None of this is to say there aren't bad cyclists out their, either because they're poor or overly arrogant about their own behaviour. But I'm staggered that you yourself can't think of some of the things that have been mentioned.

Stu


----------



## derrick (27 Oct 2011)

Am going to strap a Go Pro to my helmet on saturday, have found a nice route through Epping forest, a bit of down hill and single track, looking forward to watching it already, lol


----------



## fimm (28 Oct 2011)

ianrauk said:


> However I do think there cammers out there who do a great job, (of which I can honestly say have helped me become a better commuting cyclist) and there are cammers out there that are pretty rubbish and play up to the cam.



This is the point, isn't it? There are good and bad road users in all kinds of vehicles. Just as not all WVM/taxi/insert stereotype here driver is a bad/careless/inconsiderate driver, there are different personalities using helmet cams. Tarring them all with the same brush does no one any favours.


----------



## ianrauk (28 Oct 2011)

fimm said:


> This is the point, isn't it? There are good and bad road users in all kinds of vehicles. Just as not all WVM/taxi/insert stereotype here driver is a bad/careless/inconsiderate driver, there are different personalities using helmet cams. Tarring them all with the same brush does no one any favours.




Indeed.
And it's the same in all walks of life, people only really pick up on the bad ones.


----------



## jonny jeez (28 Oct 2011)

montyboy said:


> I am sorry but I dont agree.
> 
> If you choose to challange people on the quality of their driving you are likely to get a negative response. If you challange them with raised voices and hand gestures you are likely to get thumped.
> 
> ...



Why do you automatically correlate those that film rides with those that get into (start arguments) the two are not diametrically linked and frankly I find this insulting, it shows a lack of understanding of the topic and worse still, suggests a bigoted position.

So do all bike riders jump reds, all ride on pavements, all swear or ring bells at slow moving peds on shared paths? Surely they must because I've seen some that do...



montyboy said:


> There seems to be two types of cyclist on the forum.
> 
> Those who seem to cycle fairly incident free and those who seem to be a target for enraged drivers.
> 
> ...



I agree with that.


----------



## BentMikey (28 Oct 2011)

I disagree with the second quote from Montyboy about "those who cycle incident free". I suspect that some people might well create incidents and conflict, but that by far the larger part of this is that those who claim not to have any incidents are actually just hiding their heads in the sand. Of course they get people pulling out on them and overtaking too closely, but they then dismiss them as nothing, and do nothing about them.


----------



## mr_hippo (29 Oct 2011)

BentMikey said:


> I disagree with the second quote from Montyboy about "those who cycle incident free". I suspect that some people might well create incidents and conflict, but that by far the larger part of this is that those who claim not to have any incidents are actually just hiding their heads in the sand. Of course they get people pulling out on them and overtaking too closely, but they then dismiss them as nothing, and do nothing about them.





It all depends what you class as an ‘incident’! Neither you nor any other road user has a God given right to maintain your chosen speed and course on the highway, there has to be some ‘give and take’. Use your eyes, ears and brain to read the road ahead, think what is happening, what may happenand plan an ‘escape route’. People do dismiss these ‘incidents’ as ‘nothing because that it just what they are - nothing!

There’s a car at a junction ahead, is he going to pull out,wait or nudge forward a bit to get a better view? I don’t know because I am not a mind reader! What I do know is what traffic is behind me, what’s in front and how far away from the junction I am. Whatever the driver choses the do, I am prepared for it; I can adjust my speed and course. He’s pulled out, OK; I’ll just adjust speed and direction and continue my ride. Was that an ‘incident’? A few seconds later and a few yards up the road, that ‘incident’ is out of my mind. Nothing to spoil my ride but some ‘cyclists’ will be seething, letting it spoil their ride and later posting their video on the internet claiming ‘SMIDSY’, ‘deliberate attack’ or even ‘attempted murder’.

I have, often, reviewed my footage and have seen ‘incidents’that I have forgotten about – even though the ride was a few hours earlier. Are some ‘cyclists’ going home, watching their footage and then reporting‘incidents’ that they have forgot about? 

I had a nice ride on Friday of about 90 km, the first 40 km was on one of the main Korat-Bangkok highways; fast moving traffic, artics and heavily laden drawbar trailers; oh and some cows grazing on the central strip! Did I have any incidents? Can’t remember but what I do remember is having to change the last 25 km of my route; it was either 25 km into a headwind or change to 15 km crosswind followed by 10 km downhill into a head wind.

To those ‘cyclists’ who say that they have been ‘deliberately attacked’ and ‘He attempted to run me off the road’, I have some great news for you! Paranoia can be treated successfully these days.

So, please, expect the unexpected, don’t dwell on very minor irritations and enjoy your ride.


----------



## gaz (29 Oct 2011)

You see such a limited view point on how people react to certain situations, it's too hard to comment on their mindset, especially after a ride.
I certainly don't get hung up about incidents, in fact i often forget about them and only remember when i look at the footage.


----------



## lukesdad (29 Oct 2011)

I think its quite obvious your point of view will depend on what you regard as a incident. This of course may change with some, and not with others. The camera has just been the tool to open the debate as everybody can view the so called incidents. If you decide to make the footage public you should expect comments from across the spectrum of views. What some call an incident others wouldn t bat an eyelid. Camera s are great for personal use they an give a great record of life if thats your thing, Ive found some of the stuff posted quite funny, but mostly the rest are quite tedious to be honest.

Just a thought for commuters using them, if you are using the same route at the same sort of time,do you not think some of the idiots you are encountering have worked out you are using them and actually targeting you.


----------



## magnatom (29 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Just a thought for commuters using them, if you are using the same route at the same sort of time,do you not think some of the idiots you are encountering have worked out you are using them and actually targeting you.



Quite the opposite. Just a couple of days ago the muppet Audi driver, soft top 'Hot Audi' man passed me and gave me a huge amount of room. He is fully aware of my camera an YouTube videos....now there's a story for another day!

I find it changes drivers actions around me for the better.

Good to see you in full rant mode again MrHippo. I'm almost tempted to come back more regularly!


----------



## gaz (29 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Just a thought for commuters using them, if you are using the same route at the same sort of time,do you not think some of the idiots you are encountering have worked out you are using them and actually targeting you.


Far too many cars on my route, i rarely see the same car again.


----------



## SheilaH (29 Oct 2011)

I can absolutely see the value in helmet cams on busy commutes, it strikes me that a visual record of incidents can only be a good thing. Well done for being proactive.

That said, of all the camsters I have seen, two people stand out for the wrong reasons. Gaz and BentMikey. BentMikey actively seeks out confrontations, and Gaz... well, the same thing applies to both of you really, you both talk about your cameras influencing driver behaviour but you seem blissfully ignorant that it is affecting YOUR behaviour. 

Before you leap up in defence, you need to go away and engage in a bit of honest introspection. That might involve riding without your camera for a couple of months and see if you have fewer incidents.


----------



## gaz (29 Oct 2011)

SheilaH said:


> I can absolutely see the value in helmet cams on busy commutes, it strikes me that a visual record of incidents can only be a good thing. Well done for being proactive.
> 
> That said, of all the camsters I have seen, two people stand out for the wrong reasons. Gaz and BentMikey. BentMikey actively seeks out confrontations, and Gaz... well, the same thing applies to both of you really, you both talk about your cameras influencing driver behaviour but you seem blissfully ignorant that it is affecting YOUR behaviour.
> 
> Before you leap up in defence, you need to go away and engage in a bit of honest introspection. That might involve riding without your camera for a couple of months and see if you have fewer incidents.



 You really need to come and ride with me and mikey and see what we are like, you see a very limited selection of us and how we react. I could post hours of footage of me sharing the road with others, reading what they might do before they do it and reacting in a positive way so that nothing happens.

I had a lovely ride home last night, no troubles at all, just the way i like it.


----------



## 400bhp (29 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> I think its quite obvious your point of view will depend on what you regard as a incident. This of course may change with some, and not with others. The camera has just been the tool to open the debate as everybody can view the so called incidents. If you decide to make the footage public you should expect comments from across the spectrum of views. What some call an incident others wouldn t bat an eyelid. Camera s are great for personal use they an give a great record of life if thats your thing, Ive found some of the stuff posted quite funny, but mostly the rest are quite tedious to be honest.
> 
> Just a thought for commuters using them, if you are using the same route at the same sort of time,do you not think some of the idiots you are encountering have worked out you are using them and actually targeting you.



Sensible points and agree, bar the last para-not sure that's true?


----------



## 400bhp (29 Oct 2011)

magnatom said:


> Quite the opposite. Just a couple of days ago the muppet Audi driver, soft top 'Hot Audi' man passed me and gave me a huge amount of room. He is fully aware of my camera an YouTube videos....now there's a story for another day!
> 
> *I find it changes drivers actions around me for the better.*
> 
> Good to see you in full rant mode again MrHippo. I'm almost tempted to come back more regularly!



Do you believe it has made a material difference? If so, how?


----------



## lukesdad (29 Oct 2011)

gaz said:


> You really need to come and ride with me and mikey and see what we are like, you see a very limited selection of us and how we react. I could post hours of footage of me sharing the road with others, reading what they might do before they do it and reacting in a positive way so that nothing happens.
> 
> I had a lovely ride home last night, no troubles at all, just the way i like it.




I ll come, and to show my appreciation in return, ill treat the pair of you to a day on the mtbs in the black mountains. You can bring your cameras


----------



## 400bhp (29 Oct 2011)

gaz said:


> You really need to come and ride with me and mikey and see what we are like, you see a very limited selection of us and how we react. I could post hours of footage of me sharing the road with others, reading what they might do before they do it and reacting in a positive way so that nothing happens.
> 
> I had a lovely ride home last night, no troubles at all, just the way i like it.



It's a valid point Shiela has Gaz.

As I'm sure you are aware, other people's perception pf how you act on the roads is very important. This feeds through to camera wearers who make footage public.


----------



## magnatom (29 Oct 2011)

400bhp said:


> Do you believe it has made a material difference? If so, how?


Put it this way. I've had an e-mail from First Buses yesterday. They want my help and advice on how to run and advice on how to run an open day for cyclists. 

This is a direct result of me filming their buses. There is a lot more like this that I don't publicise including many people thanking me for my videos. Today on one of my filtering videos someone said they started cycling to work as a direct result of it.

Does it make a difference. Absolutely. However, I am but one of many and together that's what can make a big difference.


----------



## 400bhp (29 Oct 2011)

I was playing Devil's Advocate slightly. IMO your YouTube coverage is far more balanced than any others I remember seeing.

However, it's a bold statement to say it changes drivers attitudes around you. Is this a personal statement or a wider change of attitudes?

I don't wear a camera, however IMO I believe drivers' attitudes to cyclists seems to be improving. I am having less and less "encounters" and seeing more consideration for my space around the bicycle. Some of this is definately as a result of me riding better but I wonder what, other things have caused this improvement?

My initial thoughts are that more people are cycling and therefore more people understand road use from a cyclists perspective.

Or perhaps I'm just imagining it?


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (29 Oct 2011)

gaz said:


> You really need to come and ride with me and mikey and see what we are like, you see a very limited selection of us and how we react. I could post hours of footage of me sharing the road with others, reading what they might do before they do it and reacting in a positive way so that nothing happens.


That's a good point. I found I was getting a lot of flak from people accusing me of always deliberately holding up traffic and always riding in the middle of the road, of searching out incidents and conflicts, etc. So, I posted a whole typical round-trip commute at 5 times normal speed, in two posts. They seemed to shut up after that.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (29 Oct 2011)

400bhp said:


> Do you believe it has made a material difference? If so, how?


I have seen an amazing change in the driving of First Bus drivers round here since July, when I had discussions with some of their managers about incidents I posted on YouTube, and also some "discussions" with some of their drivers on YouTube itself. They are generally very good and courteous now (with very few exceptions). I think it is because they now understand the issue from a cyclist's point of view much better than they did before. I call that a result!


----------



## BentMikey (29 Oct 2011)

lukesdad said:


> I think its quite obvious your point of view will depend on what you regard as a incident. This of course may change with some, and not with others. The camera has just been the tool to open the debate as everybody can view the so called incidents. If you decide to make the footage public you should expect comments from across the spectrum of views. What some call an incident others wouldn t bat an eyelid. Camera s are great for personal use they an give a great record of life if thats your thing, Ive found some of the stuff posted quite funny, but mostly the rest are quite tedious to be honest.
> 
> Just a thought for commuters using them, if you are using the same route at the same sort of time,do you not think some of the idiots you are encountering have worked out you are using them and actually targeting you.



I guess it's possible, but I don't think so. I've seen a few drivers more than once, but like Gaz, there are just far too many of them.

One was D4NOK, and we all know how much better he drove afterwards. Another was S459OGW, although I filmed his Mrs smoking and on the phone and still driving, and I've only seen the dude since. He beeped once or twice but otherwise didn't drive anywhere near me, despite some fairly angst-ridden youtube comments.


----------



## BentMikey (29 Oct 2011)

Here's that SMIDSY with Ian, btw.:

[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOlS37uXSVE[/media]


Who caused that?


----------



## BentMikey (29 Oct 2011)

Sometimes confrontation is sought - by choosing to speak to the driver. That's all about letting them know what they did wrong, and it's quite different from causing the incident in the first place. That was the driver, causing the incident.

Nowadays I do this far less often, as I know Roadsafe will likely write the driver and they'll get it later.


----------



## Thomk (29 Oct 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> I have seen an amazing change in the driving of First Bus drivers round here since July, when I had discussions with some of their managers about incidents I posted on YouTube, and also some "discussions" with some of their drivers on YouTube itself. They are generally very good and courteous now (with very few exceptions). I think it is because they now understand the issue from a cyclist's point of view much better than they did before. I call that a result!



I would suggest that the main reason for the change in attitude is that the drivers have been made aware by managers that they are increasing likely to be filmed. I am convinced that the single simple thing which would improve behaviour towards cyclists is if all commuter cyclists started wearing cams and other road users were made aware of it. On a similar note if all contributers on the forum were required to reveal their full names and photograph their attitude towards others would improve as well. It's the anonymity which encourages and empowers people to revert away from human and towards mammal.


----------



## gaz (29 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> On a similar note if all contributers on the forum were required to reveal their full names and photograph their attitude towards others would improve as well. It's the anonymity which encourages and empowers people to revert away from human and towards mammal.



That is likely to only do so much, some people have common names and others don't.
What is being human nature and what is being mammal?
I don't see anyone jumping out of bushes and attacking others (mammal)
but i do see people sticking up for their safety and right to be on the road (human)


----------



## Hip Priest (29 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> It's the anonymity which encourages and empowers people to revert away from human and towards mammal.



Humans are mammals. You can't 'revert' from one to the other.


----------



## al78 (29 Oct 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> Humans are mammals. You can't 'revert' from one to the other.



I think what he is trying to say is that some people think that anonymity gives them the right to throw away all concept of social etiquette.

Some people are naturally civilized, others are merely constrained by society to be civilized, and will reveal their true nature once the social barriers are removed.


----------



## Thomk (29 Oct 2011)

al78 said:


> I think what he is trying to say is that some people think that anonymity gives them the right to throw away all concept of social etiquette.
> 
> Some people are naturally civilized, others are merely constrained by society to be civilized, and will reveal their true nature once the social barriers are removed.



Thank you for putting it more eloquently than I was able to.


----------



## Thomk (29 Oct 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> Humans are mammals. You can't 'revert' from one to the other.



Thank you for the correction but I think I was trying to describe the movement toward and away from accepted civilised behaviour and it's correlation with anonymity. I wasn't literally imagining some sort of horrific werewolf scenario.


----------



## Thomk (29 Oct 2011)

gaz said:


> That is likely to only do so much, some people have common names and others don't.
> What is being human nature and what is being mammal?
> *I don't see anyone jumping out of bushes and attacking others (mammal)
> but i do see people sticking up for their safety and right to be on the road (human)
> *



I'm not sure if you thought I was criticising contributors on this forum. My intention was in fact to explain my theory on why some drivers behave so badly toward cyclists. The mention of anonymity on forums was simply another example of where I thought the move away from anonymity might improve politeness and good behaviour. No criticism of anyone here was intended. I visit other fora (forums?) where real names are used, many of the people know or know of each other and the debates do not sink nearly as low.


----------



## gaz (29 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> I'm not sure if you thought I was criticising contributors on this forum. My intention was in fact to explain my theory on why some drivers behave so badly toward cyclists. The mention of anonymity on forums was simply another example of where I thought the move away from anonymity might improve politeness and good behaviour. No criticism of anyone here was intended. I visit other fora (forums?) where real names are used, many of the people know or know of each other and the debates do not sink nearly as low.



Ooooh i see, got the wrong end of the stick.


----------



## Thomk (29 Oct 2011)

gaz said:


> Ooooh i see, got the wrong end of the stick.



No prob. Actually I'm a bit of a fan of your and BM's vids


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (30 Oct 2011)

Thomk said:


> I would suggest that the main reason for the change in attitude is that the drivers have been made aware by managers that they are increasing likely to be filmed. I am convinced that the single simple thing which would improve behaviour towards cyclists is if all commuter cyclists started wearing cams and other road users were made aware of it.


Aw, don't spoil it. I like to believe that they are reasonable human beings who are just trying to do a job and actually take pride in doing it well. Surely that's right isn't it?


----------



## Thomk (30 Oct 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> Aw, don't spoil it. I like to believe that they are reasonable human beings who are just trying to do a job and actually take pride in doing it well. Surely that's right isn't it?



I like to believe that too


----------



## semislickstick (31 Oct 2011)

...now there is the option to make money on you tube videos, does that add another slant?

I'm curious if any of the youtube 'camsters' that have signed up, make on it? Could it change your attitude on the road? Is it per 'hit'?


----------



## gaz (31 Oct 2011)

semislickstick said:


> ...now there is the option to make money on you tube videos, does that add another slant?
> 
> I'm curious if any of the youtube 'camsters' that have signed up, make on it? Could it change your attitude on the road? Is it per 'hit'?



You get money if someone clicks on the advert.
The amount you get per add click is pennies and the amount of people that click on adverts is minimal.


----------



## jonny jeez (1 Nov 2011)

gaz said:


> You get money if someone clicks on the advert.
> The amount you get per add click is pennies and the amount of people that click on adverts is minimal.



Whats to stop you clicking on the add yourself...like 1000 times a day?


----------



## gaz (1 Nov 2011)

jonny jeez said:


> Whats to stop you clicking on the add yourself...like 1000 times a day?


In the agreement that you have to agree to before being allowed to display adverts it states that you are not allowed to click on your own adverts. If you are found to be doing it then you will be removed from the scheme.


----------



## snailracer (1 Nov 2011)

jonny jeez said:


> Whats to stop you clicking on the add yourself...like 1000 times a day?


Ad software can track IP addresses.


----------



## BSRU (1 Nov 2011)

semislickstick said:


> ...now there is the option to make money on you tube videos, does that add another slant?
> 
> I'm curious if any of the youtube 'camsters' that have signed up, make on it? Could it change your attitude on the road? Is it per 'hit'?



The adverts on a few of my video's are the ones added by YouTube when I have uploaded a video with "copyrighted" music or added music using YouTube's audioswap facility.
Any money generated from those goes to the copyright holder.


----------



## semislickstick (1 Nov 2011)

BSRU said:


> The adverts on a few of my video's are the ones added by YouTube when I have uploaded a video with "copyrighted" music or added music using YouTube's audioswap facility.
> Any money generated from those goes to the copyright holder.



There is ANOTHER ad scheme you can join (not the music one). I think it's slowly being offered to everyone.

___________
Gaz and all...

If people are saying it's only pennies why bother? It's just another annoying ad for your viewers that covers up part of the video. Or are people thinking....cha-ching!!!


----------



## BSRU (1 Nov 2011)

semislickstick said:


> There is ANOTHER ad scheme you can join (not the music one). I think it's slowly being offered to everyone.



I would prefer no adds at all but trying to find music that YouTube does not think is copyrighted is virtually impossible. Plus since I have no musical talent and extremely unlikely to write any music of my own, allowing ads so the copyright owner gets a few pennies is something I do not object to.

If I were that bothered I would just pay for Vimeo and upload to that site instead.


----------



## gaz (1 Nov 2011)

semislickstick said:


> If people are saying it's only pennies why bother? It's just another annoying ad for your viewers that covers up part of the video. Or are people thinking....cha-ching!!!



You can close the ad so it doesn't cover up the video.
I tend to put it on the videos i think will be popular.


----------



## Lien Sdrawde (1 Nov 2011)

My best use so far of my 'Muvi' is of our woodpecker (Beryl) - link here 

But, I am surprised you dont hear more from our Police guys & gals who use cycles - they dont look much different from the rest of us, so the worst WMV's etc surely cant adapt their driving without being spotted?

I always felt we'd see loads of reports of video evidence being used as a deterrent / educational tool... and for the Forces own kudos.


----------



## baldycyclist (1 Nov 2011)

a lesser spotted woodpecker I believe.
Saw one when I was very little on holiday in Stoke Fleming!
Thank you for that you have brought back some great memories


----------



## Jezston (2 Nov 2011)

BSRU said:


> The adverts on a few of my video's are the ones added by YouTube when I have uploaded a video with "copyrighted" music or added music using YouTube's audioswap facility.
> Any money generated from those goes to the copyright holder.



LOL we wish.

The UK collections agency, the PRS, won't even tell it's members how little money they get from their music being played on youtube. They did a deal with Google, the terms of the deal requiring it to be kept secret. WTF.

Apparently Rick Astley earned something less than £100 for all the tens of millions of people who got RickRolled. In contrast, get your music played on Radio 1 with listeners in the tens of thousands and you get that every minute.


----------



## CopperCyclist (4 Nov 2011)

Lien Sdrawde said:


> My best use so far of my 'Muvi' is of our woodpecker (Beryl) - link here
> 
> But, I am surprised you dont hear more from our Police guys & gals who use cycles - they dont look much different from the rest of us, so the worst WMV's etc surely cant adapt their driving without being spotted?
> 
> I always felt we'd see loads of reports of video evidence being used as a deterrent / educational tool... and for the Forces own kudos.



I don't have a camera, though I'd like one. However, I'm not sure I'd have enough incidents to put much together (though I would have some...)


----------



## marafi (5 Nov 2011)

Saving up for a good camera. Too many idouit drivers too many problems. To clear it all get the camera and all is sorted especially outside London.


----------



## downfader (5 Nov 2011)

semislickstick said:


> ...now there is the option to make money on you tube videos, does that add another slant?
> 
> I'm curious if any of the youtube 'camsters' that have signed up, make on it? Could it change your attitude on the road? Is it per 'hit'?



I've been offered the chance, as has Magnatom iirc. I refused because it goes back on the Information Commission's guidelines about broadcast. It also sends the wrong message about our aims which in the vast majority of us is to improve road safety and respect for all. 

Now to the OP and similar: You're saying that you disagree with empirical evidence being used for a greater good. It doesn't take an idiot to understand why thousands of cameras have been sold. In true scientific balance you should take up challenge of using a camera and posting examples as to why you or your ride is near perfect and refrain from comment until your walked/ridden in both sets of shoes. 

As a whole I find the OP deliberately provocative in this respect. We as cyclists have much to gain by standing together to combat the problems instead of driving a wedge. "They're not like us" has been used far too much in many walks of life.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (5 Nov 2011)

downfader said:


> I've been offered the chance, as has Magnatom iirc. I refused because it goes back on the Information Commission's guidelines about broadcast. It also sends the wrong message about our aims which in the vast majority of us is to improve road safety and respect for all.


+1
I keep getting these offers from YouTube and just ignore them for exactly the same reasons.


----------



## magnatom (5 Nov 2011)

I do have ads on some of my videos, but never any that are about specific instances or drivers. I only have ads on more general videos, i.e. filtering past hundreds of cars etc. I too am concerned that having ads on videos where specific drivers are the main focus would fall foul of the IC. 

Anyway, I haven't reached the threshold for a payout yet, and will have a while to wait I suspect.


----------



## downfader (5 Nov 2011)

magnatom said:


> I do have ads on some of my videos, but never any that are about specific instances or drivers. I only have ads on more general videos, i.e. filtering past hundreds of cars etc. I too am concerned that having ads on videos where specific drivers are the main focus would fall foul of the IC.
> 
> Anyway, I haven't reached the threshold for a payout yet, and will have a while to wait I suspect.



I was unaware you could specify videos? I honestly thought it related to the whole channel? I stand corrected.


----------



## magnatom (5 Nov 2011)

downfader said:


> I was unaware you could specify videos? I honestly thought it related to the whole channel? I stand corrected.


Aye just specific videos. I get a lot if views but have still made very little. I won't give up my day job....at least not until my book is out.  Over 7000 words done now. Lots to go..... !!!


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (9 Nov 2011)

Just heard a couple of days ago of a successful case.

I complained to the licensing authority about the driving of a private hire driver. After taking a formal statement from me, they took it seriously and called him in for interview. When they showed him the footage, he admitted everything. They didn't revoke hos licence, but did give him a severe reprimand and the incident will stay on his record at the licensing office forever. They said any further complaint will cause this one to become live again and be included in any further action. I think that's a result.

I didn't want him to lose hos job; just to learn that his actions were not acceptable and to start driving carefully. Hopefully word will get around.


----------



## BSRU (10 Nov 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> Just heard a couple of days ago of a successful case.
> 
> I complained to the licensing authority about the driving of a private hire driver. After taking a formal statement from me, they took it seriously and called him in for interview. When they showed him the footage, he admitted everything. They didn't revoke hos licence, but did give him a severe reprimand and the incident will stay on his record at the licensing office forever. They said any further complaint will cause this one to become live again and be included in any further action. I think that's a result.
> 
> I didn't want him to lose hos job; just to learn that his actions were not acceptable and to start driving carefully. Hopefully word will get around.



That's a fair result, shame the level of responsiveness of taxi licensing authorities is not consistent.


----------



## CamPhil (11 Nov 2011)

Another benefit I can see is the prospect of motor insurance companies doing a search of registration numbers on YouTube - they can easily check how long the driver has had that vehicle, so it shouldn't bounce on the wrong drivers.
But if those drivers who are dangerous can be sifted from the majority who are not, it would mean the decent drivers wouldn't need to end up subsidising the motor insurance of the bad risks.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (11 Nov 2011)

I decided to publish (anonymized) this message that came through my blog as it shows further the possible benefits:


> i am the driver of the hgv that overtook you that morning in bolton.the traffic islands that are in the middle of the road are designed to improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists.that morning i
> did not drive according to road safety regulations,for this i appologize.i should have slowed down and given way to you,i didnt and i put you in a dangerous position,again i apologise.my boss who you spoke to explained that this was the first time i had driven this truck,which is true,however this is no excuse.it is just bad driving on my part.it is not my intension to dive badly evertime i get behind the wheel of my truck.my company does not put any pressure on its drivers to deliver loads quickly,to be in two places at once,to bend the rules on drivers hours etc.that is why i have been with the company for more than 10 years.we are encouraged to drive within road regulations and be courtious drivers.that morning i wasnt.i hope you keep the video on You Tube so other people can see what traffic calming measures are actually designed for(and what a dick i was that morning.!.).
> sorry
> <sender's name>
> ps my boss has not asked me to email you, he doesnt know i have,i would appriciate it if he does not find out..thanks


----------



## semislickstick (11 Nov 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> I decided to publish (anonymized) this message that came through my blog as it shows further the possible benefits:



Blimey!! That takes some nads to admit....or it's the boss.


----------



## niggle (12 Nov 2011)

So what camera would the camsters recommend for someone starting out and on a budget?


----------



## gaz (12 Nov 2011)

niggle said:


> So what camera would the camsters recommend for someone starting out and on a budget?



I'd recommend saving up and buy a decent one.


----------



## niggle (12 Nov 2011)

gaz said:


> I'd recommend saving up and buy a decent one.


OK so what is a decent one, and, err, how much?


----------



## buggi (12 Nov 2011)

I wear mine in the hope that if a serious incident occurs (like when some guys purposely leant out their car to push me off which was what made me finally get one) and i am seriously injured or worse, the footage is caught on the camera and my family will get some justice. 

i don't look at the footage i film when i get home because i don't want to end up sitting at my computer 24/7 editing bad drivers and putting htem on youtube (which, with the amount of crap drivers out there, would be very easy to do). so if i'm alive when i get home, i just delete it and don't sweat it. I'm saving my walk into the cop shop for when a really serious malicious incident occurs (like the one mentioned above).


----------



## Bigsharn (12 Nov 2011)

niggle said:


> So what camera would the camsters recommend for someone starting out and on a budget?



Certainly not the best quality, but I find it gets the job done - Motrax kwikcam

Avaliable for £35 off Ebay, and no proprietary battery.

Others will recommend getting a higher quality camera, but if it'slike that at 60mph on a motorbike I'm sure any speed I throw at it will cope


----------



## Jezston (13 Nov 2011)

Bigsharn said:


> Certainly not the best quality, but I find it gets the job done - Motrax kwikcam
> 
> Avaliable for £35 off Ebay, and no proprietary battery.
> 
> Others will recommend getting a higher quality camera, but if it'slike that at 60mph on a motorbike I'm sure any speed I throw at it will cope



Not if it can't handle the vibrations you get from a bicycle.

There was a very cheap spy cam thing that ... err ... that guy who reviews the cameras on youtube ... reviewed. Helpful I know. Anyway, some particular model variant and costs under £40 looked pretty damn acceptable. Might get one as a rear cam at some point.

After that, £150+ for Contour HD off Amazon.


----------



## Jezston (13 Nov 2011)

HOLY CRAP

Amazon doing Contour HD's for *£122.99 *right now!


----------



## mr_hippo (13 Nov 2011)

Firsrt one I had was the ATC3K, no screen so difficult to get set tp right

Next was the ATC5K, similar to the 3K but with a screen and still had the same camers shake. The 5K was stolen off mt bike about the same time as the new ATC9K was launched. I looked on the website at the specs and also the videos and, yes, the shake was still there.

I decided to get a Drift X170, You can align the lens so problem with twisting the camera in the nount as with the 5K, adjustable volume and exposure. Biggest drawback in my opinion is the fisheye lens - not to everyones taste.
Below is a video shot on the same road comparing shake between ATC 4K and X170

ATC5K v X170


----------



## Bicycle (14 Nov 2011)

The only things I'd really like to have on video from many years in the saddle are the following:

1. A buzzard being hassled by crows a few feet in front of my nose for about half a mile while commuting in Gloucestershire some years ago.

It was a quite awesome sight and was happeining at my speed, in my direction, right in the middle of my lane. I don't think I'd have had that view (nor for so long) if driving. 

I have a feeling that footage of it would not be equal to the unrecorded memory... but I'll never know.

2. Maybe also riding into the Desborough Cut on the Thames as a 12-year-old because it was dark and I swerved on a muddy path. A fall of several feet down to the water and then diving to retrieve my bike, guided by the eerie glow of the front light... Freezing, but exhilarating. But I imagine that would have knackered the (yet to be invented) helmet camera anyway, so no footage...

Apart from those two, I prefer my auto-distort memory to flickery video.


----------

