My closest pass yet

[Deleted member 26715]

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

Alan...

 

[Dave W]

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

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

 

[Kookas]

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

Alan...

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

 

[Roadrider48]

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

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

 

[Cycling Dan]

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

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

 

[Kookas]

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

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

 

[Deleted member 26715]

t's no different to any other crime.

Sorry!! Close passes are now a criminal offense?

Alan...

 

[MontyVeda]

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

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

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

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

 

[Cycling Dan]

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

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

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

 

[Kookas]

Sorry!! Close passes are now a criminal offense?

Alan...

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

 

[stowie]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[gaz]

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

I think that is debatable.

 

[Dave W]

I think that is debatable.

I don't.

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

You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.

Is simply wrong, which it is.

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

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

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

Have fun.

 

[gaz]

I don't.

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



Is simply wrong, which it is.

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

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

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

Have fun.

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

 

[Dave W]

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

Really want that trophy huh?