My pet hate!

[GAVSTER]

I listen to the radio on the bike in one ear.

It does not mean that I can't hear what's going on around me.

... who said that ????

 

[Archie_tect]

...but when anything of note happens on the roundabout just outside Auchtermuchty Gavster thinks it's Gavin Hasting's fault.

 

[GAVSTER]

I've always been happy to blame Gavin Hastings ...

Currently I'm blaming him for the fact that I'm working today from home and the sun is shining and I should be on my bike.

Rather than find out who really is to blame it's much easier to elect a scapegoat !!!!

Today's it Gavin Hastings - tomorrow Noel Edmonds !

 

[OvertheHill]

I'm a cyclist, and a car driver, so I do give consideration to cycles when I am approaching them. However if there is one thing that P's me off, it's seeing a cyclist bombing along with headphones on.
Really, they are just asking for trouble.
Anyone agree?

Why does it P you off? Personal choice if you ask me.

 

[simongrant]

Yes. They obviously are.

There was a program on the TV last week talking about a young man who was killed at a level crossing. The crossing had no barriers, just flashing lights and bells. he was wearing a parker with the hood up, so he didn't notice the lights, and using an iPod, so he didn't hear the bells. Walked straight in front of a train.

Anything that impairs your vision or hearing is obviously going to increase risk. I would also argue that listening to music will effect your concentration too.

And obviously this dickhead would have done the same if a 20 foot sign came down in front of him and said TRAIN COMING STOP.
Ok,use the ipod as an excuse for his lack of hearing the bells(lame)but what about NOT seeing FLASHING LIGHTS??????

 

[Archie_tect]

.... seeing the train must have been a bit of a giveaway too.

Clearly he had never learned to Stop, Look and Listen as a child

 

[Mr Pig]

And obviously this dickhead would have done the same if a 20 foot sign came down in front of him and said TRAIN COMING STOP. Ok,use the ipod as an excuse for his lack of hearing the bells(lame)but what about NOT seeing FLASHING LIGHTS??????

I told you, he had a parker on with the hood up, I guess it was a cold night. I'm not saying he was right to hinder his senses like that, the point is that he did.

If you have headphones in your ears playing music they will do two things. They will act as blocks to outside sounds entering the ear and the music will raise the noise floor and mask external noise. By how much will depend of the type of earphone and volume of the music but this will happen to a lesser or greater extent.

Even if you're listening to music at low volume it will hamper you're hearing. Maybe you'll still hear cars coming up behind you but you'll hear them at twenty feet rather than forty but it will have an effect, and not for the better.

It's worth thinking about another aspect of the boy's story. He'd lived next to the level crossing all his life. He probably walked across it hundreds, maybe thousands of times, knew the workings and timing of it back to front. So how did he walk in front of a train? Simple. He got complacent. Exactly the same folly I see constantly exhibited by cyclists on here.

Maybe the first time you cycle with headphones in you're a little apprehensive about the idea but after many uneventful trips you develop the feeling that there is no added risk after all. But there is. Maybe you'll never have an accident in which your impaired hearing is a factor. Maybe you could cycle around for years with one eye closed without incident. Neither would alter the fact that impairing your senses in any way whilst cycling does make you more vulnerable and increase your risk. You can choose to accept that risk if you like obviously, it's your life, but please stop trying to argue that it doesn't exist.

 

[simongrant]

who is arguing it doesn't exist???Everytime you leave your house,on a bike in a car or on foot there are risks,thats life,one big risk from start to finish.I dont need a lecture from the cycling nanny brigade.All you nanny types achieve is exaggerate the risks of cycling and put lots of people off cycling,fkin doom merchants

Good day

 

[Davidc]

who is arguing it doesn't exist???Everytime you leave your house,on a bike in a car or on foot there are risks,thats life,one big risk from start to finish.I dont need a lecture from the cycling nanny brigade.All you nanny types achieve is exaggerate the risks of cycling and put lots of people off cycling,fkin doom merchants

Good day

Well said.

It's personal choice. Using a mobile 'phone's the only one I'd criticise. Even then, unlike a moton on the phone, a cyclist usually only puts themselves at serious risk.

On a bike I chose to have my ears fully on the hazard detection job. My Choice. I chose to keep my eyes open. My choice. I usually chose to use daytime lighting. My Choice.

I don't want compulsion or for that matter advice on these things. Or helmets. Or wearing hi-vis. They're My Choice.

I'm quite prepared to accept compulsion where things affect other people. Night time lighting, having working brakes. Of course there's more that affects other people, so I accept much much more compulsion, if I'm driving my lethal 2 tonne motor car.

 

[thomas]

What about car drivers/bus drivers with earphones in?

I wouldn't cycle with earphones and don't think it is the best thing to do, but don't really care that much. I have never really tried it.

I certainly wouldn't cycle with my earphones in (very, very good sound cancelling earphones - even without music on you can barely hear anything). However, most standard pairs of earphones are so rubbish that you can hear the outside world anyway.

 

[simongrant]

Maybe the first time you cycle with headphones in you're a little apprehensive about the idea but after many uneventful trips you develop the feeling that there is no added risk after all. But there is. Maybe you'll never have an accident in which your impaired hearing is a factor. Maybe you could cycle around for years with one eye closed without incident. Neither would alter the fact that impairing your senses in any way whilst cycling does make you more vulnerable and increase your risk. You can choose to accept that risk if you like obviously, it's your life, but please stop trying to argue that it doesn't exist.[/QUOTE]

I will repeat for the umpteenth kin time,earphones,10 years,40mile RT,340 ish days a year.The engine noise of a large truck will drown the noise of a small car,so i use my EYE'S,and i repeat again,i have phones at such a level than the wind often drowns it out,why do you numpties think that just coz u got phones in you are completely deaf to your surroundings??????

Numpties

 

[Grendel]

Why does it P you off? Personal choice if you ask me.

Then it's my personal choice to be Peed off. I do feel that the ability to hear warnings/other road users/sirens, etc is important.

 

[Grendel]

And obviously this dickhead would have done the same if a 20 foot sign came down in front of him and said TRAIN COMING STOP.
Ok,use the ipod as an excuse for his lack of hearing the bells(lame)but what about NOT seeing FLASHING LIGHTS??????

Er, the hood may account for that? Or maybe he just thought he could beat the train. It happens all the time.

I'm a railway signalman, and level crossing misuse is a concern for us.
Level crossings have an audio and a visual alarm, the siren and the lights. Block out the sound with an overly loud ipod and you are then reliant on your sight. Bring a large hood into the equation and you are asking for trouble.
I actually had a car trapped between the barriers of my crossing, because although he ran through the warning lights the exit was blocked, and he was stuck in the yellow box (which as you know, if you can't get out of, you don't go in). Luckily I have to operate a button to acknowledge the crossing is clear. With AHB's he wouldn't be so lucky, they are treadle operated, and are not monitored.

 

[Grendel]

Maybe the first time you cycle with headphones in you're a little apprehensive about the idea but after many uneventful trips you develop the feeling that there is no added risk after all. But there is. Maybe you'll never have an accident in which your impaired hearing is a factor. Maybe you could cycle around for years with one eye closed without incident. Neither would alter the fact that impairing your senses in any way whilst cycling does make you more vulnerable and increase your risk. You can choose to accept that risk if you like obviously, it's your life, but please stop trying to argue that it doesn't exist.

I will repeat for the umpteenth kin time,earphones,10 years,40mile RT,340 ish days a year.The engine noise of a large truck will drown the noise of a small car,so i use my EYE'S,and i repeat again,i have phones at such a level than the wind often drowns it out,why do you numpties think that just coz u got phones in you are completely deaf to your surroundings??????

Numpties[/QUOTE]
With respect, bollocks.

 

[lit]

Then it's my personal choice to be Peed off. I do feel that the ability to hear warnings/other road users/sirens, etc is important.

Well as someone who does listen to music (I don't care if you disagree, it won't stop me doing it) whilst cycling from experience I have heard Sirens everytime before a emergency vehicle has past me, maybe it'd be better if you sort peoples experiences before ranting.