To those who use a helmet camera in London

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

gaz

Cycle Camera TV
I've listend to the start, impressive dave.

I find it amusing that he basically brings up people like lucas brunelle, The police know who i am and some officers are subbed to me. If they wanted to convict me of an offence, they could easily come round to my house and knock on my door.
 

Origamist

Legendary Member
Mags - v well done.

You handled the usual ambush/diversions/strawmen well. The advantage of a telephone interview (I assume that's what it was) is that you can prepare a crib sheet of ripostes and counter-arguments in advance (only a couple or so rebuttals per point) to the usual comments/questions that get dredged up in these kinds of interviews. I was pleased that you fielded the questions without coming across as a militant, nut-job ;)

Debating these issues on cycling fora is actually good practice and I thought you acquitted yourself admirably given the set-up of the show, line of questioning, and time constraints.
 

crumpetman

Well-Known Member
Just listened to it on iplayer, well done Mags! I think Berry was allowed more air time and his points were not very good. License plates on bikes? How about more education both for cyclists and drivers?

You came across very well with sensible comments and diffused the whole motorists vs cyclists nonsense straight away.
 

MrHappyCyclist

Riding the Devil's HIghway
Just listened to it in iPlayer as well. You came across very well. The first bit about good vs bad road users was excellent.

I was disappointed, though, with the way the whole thing was hijacked by the registration issue, including the summing up at the end, which diverted attention away from the real issue of ignorant drivers who think it's OK to take huge risks with the lives of vulnerable road users. Like many here, I have taken the trouble to read as much as I can on good cycling practices (including Cyclecraft) and to analyse my own practices. I always stop at red lights, I give motorists space to pass when it is safe, I use cycle lanes when I think they are safe, I try to adopt the recommended road position at all times, I give very clear hand signals, and so on, but I still have problems every single day with these idiots, including the angry, impatient, ignorant prats who insist that I should be riding in the gutter at all times.

Having said that, on my commute, I am definitely very much in the minority when I stop at red lights. I see more red light jumping cycle commuters than not. I see cyclists riding without lights, on or off the pavement, and moving out without looking back or signalling. This is no excuse for the motorists to behave the way they do, but until that stops, the argument will always by diverted onto this "cyclists are all bad and not accountable" nonsense.
 

Dan B

Disengaged member
Sounds like we need a simple and easily memorable response to the "unaccountable" argument, then. Magnatom made a good comparison with pedestrians, which I liked, but Mr Moton claimed (incorrectly) that wasn't relevant as pedestrians don't use the roads.


I'd be thinking something along the lines of "this is a valid concern and obviously nobody is suggesting that cyclists should be above the law. But in practice, if you drive regularly I'm sure you see many many laws broken by all kinds of road users which the police just don't have the time or the will to tackle even if they're told the full number plate and a description of the vehicle - because, rightly, they will be concentrating on the more dangerous behaviours. So I think the question that needs asking about registration plates for cyclists is how often the cyclists are actually causing danger to other road users, and is the problem big enough to be worth introducing such a vast bureaucracy in registering them and enforcing that? And on that note it's worth looking at the hire bike scheme in London which does have licence numbers on the bikes, where we see that over the x months of its operation there have been a total of only two offences which were reported with the bike registration numbers"

I wouldn't go down the "it would discourage cycling" route, because the listening motorist is not automatically going to accept that encouraging cycling is a good thing and convincing them of that is a whole other argument. And it's too long already.
 

joebingo

Über Member
I don't understand why it always comes back to bloody accountability. We are accountable, we run the risk of dying with any mistake we make. Oh, and any mistake any other road user makes when they are near us, which is exactly what the debate should be about, not some self gratifying legal one-upmanship.

I'm going to check out your debate when I'm back from work Mags, though from the response here it seems you did well :thumbsup:
 

crumpetman

Well-Known Member
Dan B that is an excellent counter to the accountability argument. On the whole, cyclists are not the cause of collisions and in the event of a collision the cyclists is most likely to come off worse. It is just not worth the vast sums of money it would take to introduce a scheme to have bikes registered nor the impracticalities of having a license plate on a road bike.

Such a system would put off so many people. You would be left with the die hards (such as the commuters on here) and people with no respect for the law who would ride regardless just as many people drive with no license/insurance/MOT etc.
 
Sounds like we need a simple and easily memorable response to the "unaccountable" argument, then. Magnatom made a good comparison with pedestrians, which I liked, but Mr Moton claimed (incorrectly) that wasn't relevant as pedestrians don't use the roads.

A point to also make here is that cars have registration plates yet it doesn't stop them having crashes, and just reporting someone in a car with a plate rarely gets anywhere anyway.
 

Origamist

Legendary Member
Sounds like we need a simple and easily memorable response to the "unaccountable" argument, then. Magnatom made a good comparison with pedestrians, which I liked, but Mr Moton claimed (incorrectly) that wasn't relevant as pedestrians don't use the roads.


I'd be thinking something along the lines of "this is a valid concern and obviously nobody is suggesting that cyclists should be above the law. But in practice, if you drive regularly I'm sure you see many many laws broken by all kinds of road users which the police just don't have the time or the will to tackle even if they're told the full number plate and a description of the vehicle - because, rightly, they will be concentrating on the more dangerous behaviours. So I think the question that needs asking about registration plates for cyclists is how often the cyclists are actually causing danger to other road users, and is the problem big enough to be worth introducing such a vast bureaucracy in registering them and enforcing that? And on that note it's worth looking at the hire bike scheme in London which does have licence numbers on the bikes, where we see that over the x months of its operation there have been a total of only two offences which were reported with the bike registration numbers"

As I understand it, in Switzerland the administrative costs of the cyclist registration scheme outstrips the revenue.
 

joggingbob

Well-Known Member
Magnatom,

Well done, you came across with a balanced and open minded view which can only help cyclists. Clearly not what the programme was seeking!
 

HLaB

Marie Attoinette Fan
What's the file size, it cuts off for me, 6:57 @ 6.37mb - correct?

The Audacity download I made was 10.5mb (about 11.5min iirc). But I forgot I'd left the mike on so its got me sniggering a few times, especially when he mention 50cc mopeds.
 
Top Bottom