Holding cars up...

[StuartG]

FakeKam: more protection than a bike helmet or TC in leathers.
Coming soon to a website near you ...

 

[theclaud]

That's a really thought provoking post. Who is FM?

Flying_Monkey of this parish. Knows a thing or two about surveillance. And quite a lot of other stuff...

 

[dellzeqq]

OTOH I recently found myself on the end of a completely unjustified tirade from a motorist (no camera so no proof either way) which was abruptly halted mid-sentence after he appeared to glance at my helmet. He then sped off & I was left pondering on the resemblance of my helmet light to a camera.

it happens a lot. I know one of BentMikey's victims. He's still smarting about it months after the event, but that's because he's worried. He's really quite nervous around cyclists now.

 

[Crackle]

As for the normal thing - people react to the idea that such and such behaviour is not thought to be generally acceptable. Now that Maggers' vids are going on the telly (thanks, in part, to a primetime ITV show coming your way soon, courtesy of the Cosmodemonic Telly Company) he will play a part in re-forming civility. In the 70s people thought that drink driving was acceptable - now they don't because the mass media made it unacceptable. Thusly with crap driving of the type filmed by the redoubtable Maggers.

You've struck at the heart of it here. I'm ambivalent about helmetcam footage being posted but the jury is out as to whether it does any good. judging by the arguments on here and the difference of opinion, right now, I'd say no, it doesn't.

Do I want my values dictated at me by media opinion driven by a small, vocal, slightly odd, broadly unrepresentative group, again, no, I don't. Will I accept it if it delivers a greater cycling nirvana; tricky. I happen to think it won't, it strikes me it sounds more populist journalism, than investigative journalism and I do believe there was some strong evidence on the effect of drink driving and it wasn't just the swaying of popular opinion.

 

[dellzeqq]

Sorry DZ! Bingo's off, then, is it?

Bingo's most definitely on. Our thoughts turn to Tahrir Square!

 

[dellzeqq]

You've struck at the heart of it here. I'm ambivalent about helmetcam footage being posted but the jury is out as to whether it does any good. judging by the arguments on here and the difference of opinion, right now, I'd say no, it doesn't.

Do I want my values dictated at me by media opinion driven by a small, vocal, slightly odd, broadly unrepresentative group, again, no, I don't. Will I accept it if it delivers a greater cycling nirvana; tricky. I happen to think it won't, it strikes me it sounds more populist journalism, than investigative journalism and I do believe there was some strong evidence on the effect of drink driving and it wasn't just the swaying of popular opinion.

I use the Tom Forrest argument on this one. Old Tom was a gamekeeper in Ambridge who thought of himself as a nice person. He wasn't. He was a shoot from top to bottom. Now there are a lot of people like Tom, people who read the Mail and go tut-tut, people who think of their car as the last word in personal space but they care about public esteem. You'll always get a minority of drivers who are just nasty, and know they're nasty, but if you undercut the self-esteem of those who behave badly, but don't think they behave badly then you'll achieve something.

That's how it was with drink driving. The threat of prosecution, combined with the worry that people might think less of you if you drove under the influence made a big difference. I think helmet cams might really help raise driving standards. The helmet cam-istes don't have to be representative, and you may not like them (I'm proud to know BM as a friend) but they are doing a job for us all.

 

[Crackle]

I use the Tom Forrest argument on this one. Old Tom was a gamekeeper in Ambridge who thought of himself as a nice person. He wasn't. He was a shoot from top to bottom. Now there are a lot of people like Tom, people who read the Mail and go tut-tut, people who think of their car as the last word in personal space but they care about public esteem. You'll always get a minority of drivers who are just nasty, and know they're nasty, but if you undercut the self-esteem of those who behave badly, but don't think they behave badly then you'll achieve something.

That's how it was with drink driving. The threat of prosecution, combined with the worry that people might think less of you if you drove under the influence made a big difference. I think helmet cams might really help raise driving standards. The helmet cam-istes don't have to be representative, and you may not like them (I'm proud to know BM as a friend) but they are doing a job for us all.

I take your point, I do. Ultimately you don't change what people think but you do make it unacceptable for them to do what they think.

I also must clarify, that I don't dislike camsters, a few are objectionable, belligerent, single minded, damned eccentric and sometimes infuriating but I can put that to one side and see the person behind. Maggers, for instance is very hard to dislike.

I question only if this is misguided. Certainly it's turned up the heat for most cyclists and I don't think we've seen the half of it yet. Where it ends up, only Russell Grant can foretell.

 

[Mugshot]

I question only if this is misguided. Certainly it's turned up the heat for most cyclists and I don't think we've seen the half of it yet.

In what way has it turned up the heat Crackle?

 

[gambatte]

Where it ends up, only Russell Grant can foretell.

I now have the mental image of maggers vid. The 'lady' in the car gets out and they both do a rather camp samba down the road......

 

[Crackle]

In what way has it turned up the heat Crackle?

Simply put, exposure. Over the past 2 years or so, we've seen a number of cyclists with cams on TV. Arch and Maggers are but two, both from this forum. Likewise cam footage has featured on TV. The result is a rise in consciousness of commuter cycling and the natural forming of opinion that that creates. However, the use of cams, seems to make that opinion far more divisive.

 

[Mugshot]

Simply put, exposure. Over the past 2 years or so, we've seen a number of cyclists with cams on TV. Arch and Maggers are but two, both from this forum. Likewise cam footage has featured on TV. The result is a rise in consciousness of commuter cycling and the natural forming of opinion that that creates. However, the use of cams, seems to make that opinion far more divisive.

Have you experienced a change in attitude from either cyclists or motorists as a result of this?

 

[Crackle]

That sounds like paranoid nonsense to me.

Is that your best contribution or do you have something constructive to say. Mind you I'm surprised: Normally you're ambivalent enough to be able to argue your contribution either way.

 

[Crackle]

Have you experienced a change in attitude from either cyclists or motorists as a result of this?

On the road no, off the road more people seem to have views on cycling.

 

[Mugshot]

On the road no, off the road more people seem to have views on cycling.

Then I'm struggling to see how it's turned up the heat I'm sorry, turned up the heat for whom and how? Also where do you think it's leading to, you say you think we've only seen the half of it, what does this mean?

 

[Crackle]

Then I'm struggling to see how it's turned up the heat I'm sorry, turned up the heat for whom and how? Also where do you think it's leading to, you say you think we've only seen the half of it, what does this mean?

Mugshot, I'm not trying to be obtuse deliberately, it's a turn of phrase which I didn't think was particularly unclear. It refers simply to cyclists asserting their right to be seen as equals on the road, nothing more, nothing less.