I know lets make sure it’s up to the cyclist to avoid the situation.

Feel free to take on a lorry as point of principle, but I’ll stick to hanging back cheers.

there is a pretty concise example of victim blaming

It isn’t victim blaming it is fact, you as a cyclist will come of worse in a crash so you need to control what you can to make your life safer. Awareness of your surroundings, is far more likely to save you than any helmet or hi-viz ever will.

Of course drivers do stupid things, but so do cyclists, rabidly defending cyclists who in your eyes can do no wrong, is daft. Everyone needs to up their game and use the roads safer, and cyclists not using headphones is a small part of this.

It isn’t victim blaming it is fact, you as a cyclist will come of worse in a crash so you need to control what you can to make your life safer. Awareness of your surroundings, is far more likely to save you than any helmet or hi-viz ever will.
Of course drivers do stupid things, but so do cyclists, rabidly defending cyclists who in your eyes can do no wrong, is daft. Everyone needs to up their game and use the roads safer, and cyclists not using headphones is a small part of this.

Very true. Now off for a coffee and to watch that clip again. 😉

Mummy stop this horrible man being so nasty to me!!!!

dragon – Member
cyclists not using headphones is a small part of this.

Just repeating it doesn’t make it so. What evidence is there that using headphones makes cycling more dangerous?

teamhurtmore – Member
Mummy stop this horrible man being so nasty to me!!!!

I don’t use it much but 🙄

Completely baffled how anyone can think Boris comes out of that well. Ball/player comes to mind.

4th time and funniest yet!

Lifer, of course Boris is being an arse. That’s him to a tee. The ability to mix common sense, truth, distraction, absurdity, lies and BS often at the same time. Good choice of ball/player idea though ( 😉 ) but in is case i think it was neither, more like tying her laces together and then running round in circles. But Jenny Jones is also being a slightly smaller arse. Her accusation that Boris had personally made cycling more dangerous and the slightly absurd statistics that she read out were laughable. No wonder he decided to play with here and he is a past master at that. Not dignified or particularly clever but pretty well deserved in the context. Oh and (sorry) but bloody funny to watch. A frustrated lightweight against and annoying heavyweight – not really a fair contest.

When was that clip?

Boris was trying to answer her question but she kept on interrupting him and then she accused him of repetition, I presume she thought she was on “Just a Minute”.

Boris’s point was that with the huge growth in cycling there were more new cyclists who will not have learnt the road craft which makes riding in London safer. This will impact the statistics negatively, Jones was either not listening or too stupid to understand the point.

I’ve been cycling in London for nearly 30 years. It is a hell of a lot better now than it used to be. I wear a helmet and headphones but disagree with compulsion in respect of forcing/banning. By cycling, I miss out on reading the paper on my journey in so I listen to the Today program to compensate. Obviously this must impact my ability to hear traffic noise but I can still hear it pretty well and it is a risk I am comfortable to assume.

mefty – Member
Boris was trying to answer her question but she kept on interrupting him and then she accused him of repetition, I presume she thought she was on “Just a Minute”.

She has an allocated time to ask questions. He was running down the clock in order not to answer the rather inconvenient question/stop her asking more.

I completely disagree with you THM, there is nothing praiseworthy in the way Boris conducts himself. Heavyweight/lightweight has nothing to do with it, see their previous re his ‘cyclists are at fault in 60% of collisions’ – she kept going for over a year in order to get a retraction.

And it’s never going to be a ‘fair contest’ with a lying, cheating shit like Boris around.

Did I say praiseworthy?

FFS, we need to get a grip. These debates go round and round as always. At the end of the day, there are bad drivers, bad cyclists, bad pedestrians, bad horseriders etc and their good equivalents. As others have said, we ALL need to take responsibility for our safety and the safety of others. When riding, do what you can to minimise risk. Ditto (and more so) when driving. Its not either/or. We all have to play a part. Whining on about it’s more your fault, not its not, it’s yours, doesn’t get anywhere.

Which brings us back to JJ. She needs to learn how to ask questions and to use her time better. She has valid points to make but screwed her chance by letting BJ get under her skin. Perhaps if she had used a bit of humour she could have unsettled him. Instead she went for the whining, offended, it’s not fair route.* Waste of everyone’s time, but made my coffee break more enjoyable!

* I have no idea about the context of the debate and when it happened and what it was designed for. JJ may have personal reasons for feeling so offended other than BJ playing with her. In which case, I would have more sympathy.

What happens if Boris says, you know what I was wrong about the 60% thing. Does it make a scrap of difference re how safe it is to ride on the road or otherwise? I doubt it. Move on and focus on tangible stuff. Perhaps JJ could go and get a place for a young ‘un at some school in Edinburgh. But then again……

The cold facts are that consequence of being hit while cycling is far greater than in a car, so as the cyclist you need to do all you can to minimise the probability of being hit.

So a cyclist who doesn’t hear the roar of an engine behind them and fails to jump out of the way hasn’t done everything they could to save themselves? From wiki “Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act are held entirely or partially responsible for the harm that befell them.” as I said your sentence was victim blaming.

Feel free to take on a lorry as point of principle, but I’ll stick to hanging back cheers.

your post seemed to be focusing on left hooks, in that situation I’m not taking a lorry or any car “on” they are overtaking then pulling in on me, putting me in danger through no fault of my own. Obviously once put in that situation I’m going to do everything I can to try to get out of the way but if I don’t manage it I don’t want some **** telling me I didn’t try hard enough, so I’m partly to blame.

Of course drivers do stupid things, but so do cyclists, rabidly defending cyclists who in your eyes can do no wrong, is daft.

I never said riders do no wrong, of course some do, I just tend to get my panties bunched when politicians start victim blaming and a bunch of “cyclists” follow their lead. And as you’ve noted vehicles are what does the physical damage why is it such a contentious point that we should be focusing on them – the big heavy objects with a lot of kinetic energy – and their drivers?

The headphones “issue” seems to revolve around dodging vehicles, at that point the system – which politicians, police, road planner etc create – has already failed, asking the most vulnerable user to get themselves out of danger is a bit much. Another of often used analogy is you don’t hand out bullet proof vests to the public if there are gun toting idiots firing bullets in public places, you get rid of the gun toting idiots.

teamhurtmore – Member
I have no idea about the context of the debate and when it happened and what it was designed for.

“Published on 20 Nov 2013

Jenny Jones AM, Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb, questioned Mayor Boris Johnson on the cycling death toll in London.

This took place at the 20th November 2013 session of Mayor’s Question Time at City Hall, London.”

So just the whole power/accountability thing that Boris has such obvious disdain for.

Perhaps if she had used a bit of humour she could have unsettled him. Instead she went for the whining, offended, it’s not fair route

Bizarre, it’s not Live at the Apollo FFS.

Not bizarre at all. In my experience clever ladies know exactly how to use their feminine guile to upset a male bully. Sadly, she didn’t and she played into his hands. But you are correct it’s not Live at the Apollo nor is PMQ for that matter. But subject matter aside, it wasnt a bad attempt.

Is taxpayers money spent on charades like that? Blimey.

Any way stay safe out there. I was almost wiped out the other day, 50/50 I would say but the balance would have been irrelevant if I ended up in a wooden box. But I can only take control of my actions. Isn’t that the point? As I was told when I was younger, assume everyone else on the road is an idiot and behave accordingly.

I don’t feel either comes out of this well. Both look stupid.

But it is indicative of how our governing systems are a complete failure.
In a similar fashion to this forum any debate is reduced to point scoring and insults.

In this case what is needed is a solution to people being killed unnecessarily. Be
But instead it’s two tossers quibbling about nothing and the result is nothing gets done

But instead it’s two tossers quibbling about nothing and the result is nothing gets done

Exactly.

Teasel’s post on the other similar thread says it all really.

The headphones “issue” seems to revolve around dodging vehicles, at that point the system – which politicians, police, road planner etc create – has already failed, asking the most vulnerable user to get themselves out of danger is a bit much. Another of often used analogy is you don’t hand out bullet proof vests ……….

Or more accurately matched to Dragon’s arguments, it’s up to me to anticipate when the bullets are being fired and jump out of the way. That doesn’t seem a good game to me – I’m still going to get shot eventually, it might just take a bit longer. I *really* think you should concentrate on the person with the gun and not the person being shot at.

Molgrips…

It makes you turn your head.

If the cars going at 30mph and about to hit you, what good exactly is seeing the car? You won’t have the time to react, only to see the car smash into you with a craned neck.

“I cant distinguish between an overtaking vehicle and one about to plough into the back of me”

I can. Maybe you need more practice using your ears? I suspect you would be able to tell, to be honest.

Really? Your ears are so sensitive that they can estimate the speed of traffic coming at you from behind and accurately locate a 6/10 foot wide object emitting sound uniformly across the front of it?

Trained police have problems estimating speed on visual cues, but your hearing acuity is such you’d be able to accurately place a vehicle coming at you from behind at speed in among all the other white noise?

Are you The Batman ™? 😉

Regardless, I’m calling shenanigans. Having all your senses about you might prevent you making an unsafe maneuver if there’s a vehicle behind. It might also be a cautious and sensible step (although I remain to be convinced), but hearing a potential collision before it happens? I think you’re deceiving yourself.

The cold facts are that consequence of being hit while cycling is far greater than in a car, so as the cyclist you need to do all you can to minimise the probability of being hit. If you can’t hear due to music, then you are increasing that chance, because you are less aware of your surroundings.

CBA to read the whole thread but I commute on my motorcycle when not cycling, but in common with a lot of ,motorcyclists I always wear earplugs to reduce the noise, should I stop doing this to become more aware of my surroundings?

Thanks to the Independent

‘listening to music resulted in reduced visual and auditory perception and reduced speed’

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847811000684

Listening to music while cycling deteriorates auditory perception

Well bugger me!
Now it all makes sense
Who paid for that study then???

auditory stop signals were missed in 68% of the cases

…and this relates to commuting by bike….how?

Stop signals on the road are all visual – if they were auditory ONLY cyclists would be aware of them.

Completing a task on the mobile phone, using both handheld and handsfree sets, resulted in increased response time to an auditory stop signal

Boris is the only phone user I know of 😆

Motorcyclists have the worst safety record out there, so not sure using them as an example is good at all. Plus you have mirrors anyway, so easier to check what’s coming then bikes.

it’s up to me to anticipate when the bullets are being fired and jump out of the way.

That’s a poor example as no sane driver sets out to kill anyone. At the end of the day it’s your life, you have to control the controllable’s. You can’t stop that granny, taxi, white van driving poorly but you can anticipate it and make adjustments for it, and IMO being able to hear is key to that.

you can anticipate it and make adjustments for it,

I just don’t get it. You’re with MolGrips – you seriously believe you can “distinguish between an overtaking vehicle and one about to plough into the back of you”. If not you’re saying that you visually check behind you for every passing vehicle ready to dive off the road if you perceive they’re going to plough into you.

This seems like the opposite of ‘taking the lane’ – you’re saying you pull into the gutter every time a vehicle passes rather than hold a safe position?

How do you deal with an overtaking cyclist? Approach without sound, you move out into them (as you’re relying on your ears not your eyes to tell you if theres something behind) clip them and send them into the traffic coming the other way.

I’d make a completely different case:

All cyclists should be made to wear headphones.

Relying on your auditory senses to detect vehicles is dangerous because cyclists, invalid carriages, and electric motorbikes and cars are silent.

Anything that forces a cyclist to look before making any manoeuvre that changes their position in the road and could bring them into conflict with vehicles approaching from behind is a good thing. Ergo, blocking out hearing to resist the temptation to make any assumptions based on what you’ve heard would improve safety by forcing you to rely on visual checks.

The other case is that it’s distracting, in which case the primary thing to do would be to remove the distraction from the drivers of dangerous motor vehicles.

You can’t claim it’s distracting and not think that this should happen.

Anything that forces a cyclist to look before making any manoeuvre that changes their position in the road and could bring them into conflict with vehicles approaching from behind is a good thing.

I use the cycling equivalent of the HGV/sane driving technique of looking in the mirrors every three seconds. A quick glance over your shoulder, sometimes just using your peripheral, is enough to confirm the road state behind. In most situations, anyway…

I’ll also point out a handful of times over the years I’ve been surprised to find a car next to/behind me when I’ve been riding along sans headphones, nothing too dangerous, JRA and I hadn’t heard them approaching (and I’ve got pretty good hearing as it goes) The introduction of more electric cars will muddy the waters too.

You can’t claim it’s distracting and not think that this should happen.

+1 but the argument appears to be drivers don’t need to concentrate on driving as they have a big steel cage protecting them, which is lovely for them.

can someone do something about the wind noise i get when i ride really fast? It really doesnt help me hear things behind me.

I use the cycling equivalent of the HGV/sane driving technique of looking in the mirrors every three seconds. A quick glance over your shoulder,

You glance over your shoulder every three seconds while cycling?? 😯

How do you deal with an overtaking cyclist?

How do you?

You glance over your shoulder every three seconds while cycling??

😀 I like the pic.

But, yes – on a particular bit of road I turn my head to the right probably more like every 8 seconds if it’s busy, less if it’s early in the day before rush hour.

I don’t always turn and look (although as stated, that’s usually peripheral), I turn my right ear out of the wind and listen as an alternative. Obviously I look directly behind before negotiating RHT etc.

Actually, my partner used to commute and used one of those mirrors that stuff into the end of your handlebar – I reckon it’s got to be the way forward for me, eh. Save the old neck.

I have no idea why it hasn’t crossed my mind before now…

You glance over your shoulder every three seconds while cycling??

Not every three seconds but certainly every 8-10.
One of the things about riding/racing track regularly is that you’re conditioned to look, it becomes an automatic response before every single movement.

That carries over into commuting although I appreciate that 99.9% of commuters have probably never even seen a velodrome never mind raced in one!

Actually, my partner used to commute and used one of those mirrors that stuff into the end of your handlebar – I reckon it’s got to be the way forward for me, eh.

IME they’re shit – too small, they vibrate too much to give any useful info and they stick out so restrict you from getting through gaps.

8-10 sounds more reasonable – though most of the time I’m on quiet roads so if I’m just trundling along the straight I’ll only look back when I hear something coming…

…ah..

crap I think I just agreed with molgrips.

How do you?

By looking behind me before I make any change in road position. Unaffected by whether I’m wearing headphones or not.

– meh

but the argument appears to be drivers don’t need to concentrate on driving as they have a big steel cage protecting them, which is lovely for them.

No the argument is that some drivers are s**t and don’t concentrate, can’t concentrate, never have, never will. This is not right, not how it should be – just how it is, and will continue to be, you can’t change that.

So the only option as a cyclist, with the present poor road infrastructure for cyclists, is to be aware of them, and you get much better awareness by NOT wearing headphones. Surely you don’t need a scientific study or statistics to prove this – it’s bl**dy obvious!

and with that, I’m out.

simons_nicolai-uk

By looking behind me before I make any change in road position. Unaffected by whether I’m wearing headphones or not.

Us motorbikers refer to this practice as the “lifesaver”. If changing road position, turning etc do your lifesavers.

The motorbike makes a nonsense of the headphones consternation – My CBR is hella louder than any music I might have on headphones on the pedal bike, but I’m still paying attention. The issue is more (IMO) with giving drivers audio cues than us needing them to dodge crashes. The posters calling for a ban on in car radio are probably closer to solving issues for cyclists than banning headphones. 🙂

EdLong posted a really interesting link in an earlier debate:

This one:

http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pilot-teach-cyclists/

agent007…

So the only option as a cyclist, with the present poor road infrastructure for cyclists, is to be aware of them, and you get much better awareness by NOT wearing headphones. Surely you don’t need a scientific study or statistics to prove this – it’s bl**dy obvious!

A much better awareness of what? The car about to plough into you? Or the truck overtaking you? If you hear the lorry behind, are you going to pull to a stop? If so you’ll not make good progress!

I just don’t know what not wearing headphones contributes to other than a false sense of security? Do your lifesavers if changing road position, and take up a good road position.

Maybe I’ve been doing all the wrong things in my 20 odd years of cycling, but I can’t see what not wearing headphones helps with.

edlong…

What an RAF pilot can teach us about being safe on the road

That’s the one!

And the one I failed to post properly! 😀

I can’t see what not wearing headphones helps with.

I think it helps with hearing.

Junkyard…

Other than underlining your desire for a career in comedy, were you hoping to make a contribution to the thread?

How does not wearing earphones make things safer for responsible cyclists?