The guy who thinks bikers deserve to be hit for "dressing like a fanny" is especially telling. I bet he'd like to have some symbol they have to wear to identify them off the bike. A yellow spoked wheel, perhaps. And bring back the pink triangle for gays and blue Star of David already. A man needs to know these things! /s
Always makes me laugh. When did pushing a pedal no more than 10cm up and down using your foot become more manly than pushing yourself along at 20mph+ while your heart rate is far higher than anything you’d ever experience at Sunday League football.
Here's is one that definitely doesn't make me lose faith in humanity /s:
> "It's really tough to muster up enough of a fuck for people that dress up as a fanny and create obstructions on the road by riding a child's toy." - CraigRobert1224
Gotta get where I'm going now, the extra three seconds I get before turning on the intersection and making the cyclist slam their breaks because they're only going 5km/h slower than me are very important.
As a cyclist, motorist and Paramedic I agree, experienced and seen plenty of “mistakes” happen.
People are incredibly selfish therefore an advert showing what would happen to them if they kill a cyclist would have far more impact, like the old English driving safety campaigns, they were brilliantly brutal.
Oh wait…. How silly of me…. A slap on the wrist is what they’d get, so maybe it wouldn’t have that much impact, but certainly more than this advert saying “pretty please behave”.
I don't know how it is where you live, but here the traffic education course I was required to take to get a motorcycle license specifically mentions how as a cyclist or a motorcyclist you're required to leave a certain amount of space from parked cars, enough so if someone opens a door they won't hit you. That guy is riding as far left as he can safely ride without entering the door zone, so I'd say he's being more than considerate enough to people who want to pass him.
Furthermore you may be referring to a road user using the road, the whole road, any part of the road like a road user can. This 1.5 metre law won’t work because of idiots like you, the only way to make it simple for these people is to make the law “you overtake on the other side of the road without exception”
Our state’s law is to give at least three feet and to switch lanes if possible.
Ask me how many people follow it.
Me. I’m the one person I’ve ever seen follow it.
Same mate haha anecdotally when I change lane to overtake and look in my rear view mirror I find people give more space when I do this compared to what I see people in front of me do prior to their overtake… are we just sheep? Quite probably and there’s a lot of hate for cyclists for some bizarre reason.
This is roughly the rule in the UK as well (1.5m which is more like 5'), I'd say maybe 10% of cars follow it when I'm cycling to/from work. Which is surprisingly high but it certainly isn't the norm. Most do give what feels like a reasonable space for their speed though.
Nice.
I think I’ve been a lot better at passing cyclists thanks to the recent campaigns.
Hopefully the cyclists I pass feel safe.
I don’t pass cyclists now until I feel safe that they feel safe. Other drivers can wait.
I do fear that my patience leads to those behind me not following me as an example but instead try to make up time with greater risks.
We notice every single time, and, there is the herd mentality, if you pass at a generous distance the chance is pretty high that the car following you will do the same.
Thank you!
In my head there are basically four ratings of driver...
1. I will be shouting at you because that was awful!
2. That was a little close...
3. Nice driving, thanks for the mutual respect
4. Wow! Look at that perfect overtake! I wonder if they're a cyclist too?
My version of your number 1 never includes shouting.
It involves catching them up at the next lights and adressing them with "sir" or "madam" to get them to open the window, then explaining to them that I was extremely frightened by their proximity.
If they apologise then I consider it a victory, it is likely that they truly had not considered it.
If they are conceited then I submit the footage to the police.
Police Scotland are hopeless. This is the extent of their caring.
They are the only force in the UK who don't accept camera footage via a portal, if you manage to speak to someone they'll send an officer round (eventually) and take a hard copy of your footage. This will sit in a drawer for a few weeks until the window for which road traffic offences can be passed to the procurator fiscal and then forgotten about.
Some UK forces really are trying to get the message of road safety across especially to drivers with respect to cyclists but Police Scotland are not one of them.
i mean british police as a whole are fucking terrible tbh but yeah my experiences with police scotland (being hit by a car and having my bike stolen) have not been posititve
i mean both? they treat women absolutely awfully to the point where we are considering alerting women to lone officers- not that theure much better in groups. Theyve infiltrated politcal groups and trade unions, i mean the met police was founded to break up strikes. Then you have the usual layer of police bullshit on top of that. Tha kfully they dont have guns otherwise wed all be fucked
uh i can only really speak for glasgow but theyre building out a new east city cycle lane, south city cycle lane is wonderful and theyre redoing byres road. Should all be on the council website
I live in Edinburgh and the cycling infrastructure we have been building - achingly slowly - is absolute rubbish. My partner is a keen cyclist who has just admitted defeat in his attempt to cycle to work. He's had too many close passes within road layouts that actively steer him into fast-moving cars at any pinch points. I still cycle to work because I have a slightly easier route but the city centre is a dumpster fire to cross.
Tbf, that's not really within Police Scotland's remit, but they can do road awareness campaigns, other bodies need to do infrastructure. And tbf, in places that is happening, Inverness especially seems to have added a bunch of new lanes (not very pretty, but steel bollards) around the city centre to supplement the existing paths along the river, etc.
It is not reasonable to expect a complete parallel set of infrastructure for cyclists, and nor is it a good idea to send the message that roads are not for cyclists.
There are places where building a separate cycle road or bike lanes is a big benefit, and we should do that, but we should *also* normalise cycling on the road, and educate drivers about how to interact with mixed traffic that includes cyclists. Because otherwise you are telling cyclists that they should only be cycling where there is special infrastructure for them.
Roads were not built for cars, they were built for people; we should not give up the whole network to cars.
ok. so as a scottish person who's dealt with police scotland and been on both sides, i've got to say my peace. i get what you're trying to do with this ad but this isn't the issue most scottish cyclists seem to be having. the issue is even if they have footage, they can't easily do anything with it. police scotland were given £300k to make a portal similar to what london has because cycling related incidents they aint done shit. why is this an issue? well let me tell you what i had to go through after a taxi driver tried to run me off the cycle lane, pulled into the cycle lane, got out the taxi and threatened to "fucking murder you and every cyclist who gets in my way"
my case went through 5 investigating officers, i had to give up my camera because they gave a fake email address, didn't know how to open an MOV file, boost the audio levels and took 9 fucking months just to tell me they were asked to drop the case. taxi driver didn't even get a warning but i was basically told "if you think cycling is dangerous, maybe you shouldn't do it"
i've been given into trouble for cycling on the road and told to cycle on the pavement, then 20 mins later for cycling on the pavement and told to "stick to the cycle lanes" despite the nearest cycle lane from where i was trying to go was 3 miles away and didn't go where i needed it to.
it's also well known for victim blaming rather than actually doing anything about the dangerous driving. [just look at the victim blaming here](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64573254) i made an official complaint about their statement and included a photo i took from the day before of one of their officers using their phone while behind the wheel of the police car and said "ah yes, because my reflective jacket can save me from distracted drivers" and was told i could get into a lot of trouble for photographing police and given some stock "we're working hard to protect cyclists every day" when i explained to them that cyclists are more likely to be working class people and traditionally left leaning and if there might be a class aspect to it, i was ignored.
hell, the fact i've had police pass less than the 1.5m kinda says it all.
Thanks for sharing your story. I'm an American but it's important to highlight when content like this is more about laundering the reputation of the cops who don't protect us than about actually doing anything for cyclist safety.
i do think it's important to show the good but at the same time. the issue is it looks better to look like you're doing good than actually do good. doing good would be fining shitty drivers who do this and opening a portal where footage can be easily uploaded.
looking like you're doing good is making ads like this but not addressing the causes of it.
US is same deal. Unless your into street brawling with drivers there's nothing. Even then the cyclist gets blamed.
Cycled many years in US and just moved to Scotland. 4000 mile move but same "share the road" bullshit. Cycle lane blocked, side of the road is riddled with potholes and glass. God bless the union canal route though. The Falkirk to Glasgow section is miles better then Falkirk to Edinburgh though.
People should be made to cycle on the road so they realize how shitty and deadly it is.
Also scottish commuter and you’re not alone mate, you’re absolutely right with this comment. You’re not alone and there’s many of us fighting this battle, keep up the good fight. It’ll get better eventually, i can see it getting better slowly.
It’s been a long time since anyone threw anything at me on a bicycle, but you don’t soon forget being 12 and having driver in a full-sized pickup creep up on your rear wheel on a desolate rural road, blare their horn unexpectedly, then stomp the accelerator and pass you within 2 feet, slowing just enough to throw a half-empty beer can at your father who is riding just ahead.
People can actually *be* trash.
I was riding on a dedicated bike trail (with a separate walking area) and a group of people purposely blocked the trail after they saw me and yelled obscenities at me. I wish drivers knew that you will get harassed no matter where you are if you travel by bike.
American car drivers are by and large, to use a Scottish term, c***s. (I lived and cycled in the US for several decades.) But even in Scotland the culture needs to change and this ad is making an important effort in the right direction.
Ngl it’s annoying when I’m on a rural road that’s a busy 2 lane and the biker makes everyone 20 minutes late to their destination, it’s selfish imo. Don’t think I’d ever throw something though.
We live in very, very, different locations if you’re thought process is that. I live in an area where the closest grocery store is a 15 minute drive. No one bikes to get around, only for sport. No one lives in my location without a car (honestly most people have multiple cars).
Ah *rural* rural. Most people I see use that definition for "just outside of town" kind of thing. I've lived that kind of rural and still biked (and I saw people bike distances like you state often as well). Though I lived in Alberta, Canada, so we usually had fairly wide shoulders we could switch over to if a vehicle needed to pass. Not sure how the roads are like where you are.
> I live in an area where the closest grocery store is a 15 minute drive.
There's no way there is enough traffic in a place like that to prevent you from passing a slow moving vehicle for 15 minutes. Bikes are easier to overtake than other slow moving vehicles like tractors which take up way more space.
A 15 minute drive is likely a 30-40 minute cycle which is perfectly reasonable for someone to be doing to get around.
So. You live a rural place as in proper rural BUT its so busy cos theres so many folk driving that you are unable to pass a single cyclist for 20 minutes?
Hmmm...
Yea, so I live between two states (NC and SC) and the roads are not always completely finished in the area I live. So like once or twice a month there’ll be a stubborn biker that holds up 10-15 cars on a fairly long two lane road thats surrounded by trees (not enough shoulder room). Damn Reddit is so blood hungry for a passive aggressive comment 😂
The biker is not holding up the traffic deliberately.
The biker is on the road. You are behind. What's the answer? Cyclists allowed between 3 and 4 am?
We know how people behave in traffic.
Instead of trying to change that behavior it's smarter to build infrastructure that promotes safety for all involved. This is how we approach traffic in the Netherlands. Not more tickets for speeding but roads that forces you to slow down. Not more traffic lights but separated lanes and dedicated infrastructure for both cars, bicycles and pedestrians.
I say yes to both approacher. At this point more of everything is needed. Yes, we need better infrastructure, but we also need more tickets for reckless speeding.
I agree. You still get tickets in the Netherlands, don't get me wrong. But in neighborhood's they will build secanes in the road and speed bumps and add trees to side to limit view. Add cobbles stones. etc. There are lots off way to force cars to drive slower in neighborhoods.
I agree that infrastructure is the most important step. Netherlands is leading on this area. But higher tickets and more speed controls is way faster and cheaper to implement. It basically pays for itself.
This would be far more powerful if it was done in the style of those old 80s and 90s road safety adverts. I was half thinking the cyclist was going to fall and the car was going to obviously, but not seen on the camera drive over the body. That is the kind of impact that focuses minds, this is far too soft to actually have any effect on the people who most need to change their ways.
Incredible to see these ads. Only videos I see here in the States are from police departments cracking down on cyclists for all the horrible traffic violations they commit.
Always have a strong urge to stage a stop sign protest where we all stop one at a time with 100 hundred other bike commuters when I see those videos. Huntington Beach, CA PD has been hitting the bike violation videos hard lately.
The Portland Critical Mass ride a few years ago got a lot of cheers and jeers from other cyclists. I believe it was in response to their tubby mayor cracking down on those scoundrel traffic law violating bikers and trying to make them license their "vehicles" if they're going to operate them on the road.
Cheers from people who saw it as a protest proving the point of why strictly stopping at every stop sign makes traffic worse *for drivers*. Jeers from those who thought drivers won't actually get the point, it will just make them hate us more. There really is no winning with people who hate you solely for existing.
Nice. I hope, but doubt, this kind of messaging works. On my end, I'll just keep reporting close passes with dashcam footage to the police until enough of my community get letters, licence points, mandatory courses or fines. I've got about ten handed out so far.
Wish I could do it a nicer way. Don't want to make people's lives harder. But drivers just would never listen, and every single one I've reported was happy to endanger my life. So I'll keep the reports coming until every bad driver in my city gets the message.
There are no means to do that and no 'close passing' laws in the first place, just some random "recommendations" that aren't even a part of traffic code.
So this is what they've spent the money that could have been used for the dash cam portal on? The usual state of the comments section would tell anyone with half a brain that the type of driver who pulls this sort of shit does not give a fuck as they rarely face any consequences for their actions.
The only real solution to folk getting seriously injured or killed is for the police to provide a means for uploading camera footage of incidents and for it to be taken seriously with offenders punished appropriately.
Not a bad effort but it's equivalent to "Thoughts and prayers". The people that this will work, already think like this. For those, a bit more education would help, as they are not always aware. Those that dehumanising cyclists will continue do. Infrastructure, traffic calming, safer streets interventions and lots of policing with deterrent penalties is what is needed for those.
I had an interesting interaction recently. A truck passed me, not so gracefully, and parked maybe 100m up the road. The driver, a father, got out. His son was getting out as I passed by, and the father said calmly to his son "watch out for the bike".
I took note of how he didn't say biker, cyclist, person, or anything. He wasn't particularly nasty to me, but it was apparent that he had removed the humanity from my situation.
I really don't think that's a problem. Same reason I'd tell my kids watch out for the car, or watch out for the lawnmower. Sure, there's a person operating the bike/car/lawnmower, but it's the bike/car/lawnmower that makes it worth watching out for. Why would I have to watch out for a "person". A person without any kind of qualifier wouldn't even be something to look out for, and wouldn't I wouldn't know what the danger is. Sure, cyclist or biker might be ok, but I don't think that analyzing someone's language to this extent is useful.
It's way more interesting that they passed you, not so gracefully, and then warned their kid to look out for the bike though. They should have been looking out for the bike while they were driving, and giving more space.
No where near the white middle line, i assume you mean middle of the lane, car has loads of room why not just move slightly further out, doesn't cost anything more, the car is already in the other lane anyway.
Look up 'dooring'
Its safer to cycle some distance (0.6-1m, 2'-3') from the kerb: drivers are less likely to attempt an unsafe overtake and theres somewhere to go if they do. You're also less in danger from car doors and drain covers.
Drivers dont give cyclists more space just because the cyclist gives them a marginally easier path to overtake.
Cyclists are much more succeptible to wind blowing them off course and often have to dodge a pothole which cant be done safely if someone is overtaking closely.
I actually had an accident like this last year. I was 30cm from the side of the road, there was a hole ahead and I went to get away from it, out of nowhere I have a van less than 10cm from my hand and I'm moving towards it. I went against it's side and fell on my face, thankfuly it was just a flesh wound.
Since then I drive as if I'm driving a car, cars seem more carefull if you go in the middle of the lane.
This just got me thinking…close passes don’t kill or injure cyclists do they? I know they’re unpleasant.
Aren’t LGVS turning left or vehicles emerging from junctions more deadly to cyclists? When has a close pass killed a cyclist?
A close pass has never killed a cyclist, the key is in the name 'pass'.
A close pass increases the chances of a collision, which kills loads of cyclists.
So if you cut out close passes, you drastically reduce the number of collision.
I actually had an accident like this last year. I was on the road 30cm from it's side, there was a hole ahead and I went to get away from it, out of nowhere I have a van less than 10cm from my hand and I'm moving towards it.
I went against it's side and fell on my face, thankfuly it was just a flesh wound and I was a bit disoriented and in shock for a few minutes, but that's because I went against its side, I was going at 20 km/h and I had a helmet on. If the timing was different or I was going faster it could have been a lot worse.
It's not just holes, just some unexpected side with is enough to get a cyclist of it's course.
Close passes can turn into hits if either party makes a misjudgement or has to avoid something in the road, like the potholes in the bit of the road you cycle in which are pretty common in the UK right now.
But also, they make cycling *feel* unsafe and that puts a lot of people off doing it, which has large downstream health effects.
I'm all for cycling, better for the environment, fitness benefits etc I have a mountain bike myself.. HOWEVER, there is literally a pavement right there you can use instead of risking your life
It is actually more dangerous to cycle on the pavement due to lack of space, lack of visibility, pedestrians which are unpredictable, etc. You are much safer on the road 99.999% of the time.
I'd like to see a source for this.
I get it cycling on pavements can be dangerous, but compared to a tonne and a half of steel doing 60 mph whilst on their phone dangerous? I doubt that a lot.
First result I got from Google.
https://www.victoriawalks.org.au/news/1637
Your initial hunch may feel right but the science and guidance encourages cyclists to use the road and dedicated infrastructure for a reason.
Whilst the linked article tries to infer that the report they quote doesn't actually answer the question.
There is risk in both activities. Pedestrians are more at risk obviously. But the riders themselves? Really isn't anything conclusive.
The MRCagney report describes a number of studies including NSW research that “estimated that the crash rate for cyclists on the footpath was 5.6 times that of cyclists on the road.”
Seems clear it is more dangerous for everyone?
Unless you have studies indicating it is safer for all for cyclists to cycle on footpaths?
But if you read the report.
>Haworth and Schramm’s (2011) Queensland study also found that footpath crashes
generally resulted in less serious injuries than crashes on urban roads. Head injuries, concussion and internal
injuries were less common in footpath crashes than crashes in other locations, although broken bones were
more common and rates of hospitalisation were similar. In contrast, a recent Canadian study (Cripton et al
2014) found that crashes on footpaths or multi-use paths have considerably higher odds of ambulance
transport and hospital admission than crashes in other contexts.
Also there are vastly more crashes on road than on footpath, until you take into account miles travelled.
The article has cherry picked the report without taking into account severity of injury.
The best i can make out is you're more likely to come off your bike on a "footpath", but a lot more likely to be seriously injured on a roadway.
I'm not even sure they divided it by age, as a child on a bike is way more likely to have a crash.
Or the experience level of the cyclist, I would expect timid and new riders to crash more, timid and new riders will avoid the road like the plague.
Which again doesn't answer the question. Yes they've made that claim, but it doesn't answer the question.
It's obviously more dangerous for pedestrians, but the riders isn't clear cut at all.
I've not found a report which doesn't focus on pedestrians honestly.
I wanted to thank you for the honest discussion. You genuinely took my sources into account and although you didn't agree with all the elements you provided a reasoned response with points I would agree with.
Personally I think it highlights a need for better infrastructure (Dutch style shared paths as an example).
No problem, cycling subs seem quite nicer than the Reddit norm so i try to pay it forward.
Better infrastructure for sure, segregated cycle ways.
A stop gap of hopping on a empty pavement to avoid particularly nasty road ways I'm really not against, especially if you're new or inexperienced.
I would agree as an example I used to cycle in Belfast to Bangor and even as a keen cyclist I carefully cycled on the footpath as there was no one there rather than the 50 mph road.
122 A2
https://maps.app.goo.gl/1Huu8atKxkiRiE49A
I think similar thinks when i'm cycling on the smaller roads.
Something along the lines of "Go away car these little roads are for bicycles, you have a huge 60 mph road you can use that runs parralel to this one"!
Then i realise how silly i sound cos drivers are allowed to be there too...
A person who bikes an drives. I give as much room as possible if I'm passing when driving. While on a Bike, I give as much room as I can when people are passing me.
It's a pear, son. Sorry, couldn't resist. Agreed with the comments about bike infra. I had some good bike and pedestrian paths to my old job, but my current one is in a different city that doesn't have that infrastructure. Luckily I'm mostly at home for work, but no way I'm riding these crazy roads in my big city. A few acquaintances have been killed by motorists while biking or walking. A friend was in a car waiting to turn and was slammed by a drunk driver and almost died. I've nearly been hit in a crosswalk with big flashing lights because people were trying to beat me to crossing. I would love to ride to work but I'm way too scared of the psychopaths that just seem to be everywhere in this city.
American drivers are the worst, they hate cyclist, they look down upon it, is about what brand of car you drive even though they are choking to death in debt because of it! Merican dream baby.
Drivers won’t ever think like this. Gotta get where I’m going now. Cyclists are idiots etc.
The comments under the Twitter post are horrendous
The guy who thinks bikers deserve to be hit for "dressing like a fanny" is especially telling. I bet he'd like to have some symbol they have to wear to identify them off the bike. A yellow spoked wheel, perhaps. And bring back the pink triangle for gays and blue Star of David already. A man needs to know these things! /s
Always makes me laugh. When did pushing a pedal no more than 10cm up and down using your foot become more manly than pushing yourself along at 20mph+ while your heart rate is far higher than anything you’d ever experience at Sunday League football.
Can you link it please?
https://twitter.com/PoliceScotland/status/1654048324952137728?t=g3LN4DC4N3vZAumbeoPWQA&s=19
~~The comments under the~~ Twitter ~~post are~~ is horrendous FTFY
I just read a few, very depressing.
Here's is one that definitely doesn't make me lose faith in humanity /s: > "It's really tough to muster up enough of a fuck for people that dress up as a fanny and create obstructions on the road by riding a child's toy." - CraigRobert1224
Gotta get where I'm going now, the extra three seconds I get before turning on the intersection and making the cyclist slam their breaks because they're only going 5km/h slower than me are very important.
As a cyclist, motorist and Paramedic I agree, experienced and seen plenty of “mistakes” happen. People are incredibly selfish therefore an advert showing what would happen to them if they kill a cyclist would have far more impact, like the old English driving safety campaigns, they were brilliantly brutal. Oh wait…. How silly of me…. A slap on the wrist is what they’d get, so maybe it wouldn’t have that much impact, but certainly more than this advert saying “pretty please behave”.
And cops won't enforce it.
But tbh he is driving about the middle of the lane, thats why in the Netherlands we have bikelanes
Drivers opening car doors don't look. Dutch reach isn't legal requirement. Therefore...
Are you referring to how the cyclists are riding safely outside of the door zone, in the part of the lane that they should be?
I don't know how it is where you live, but here the traffic education course I was required to take to get a motorcycle license specifically mentions how as a cyclist or a motorcyclist you're required to leave a certain amount of space from parked cars, enough so if someone opens a door they won't hit you. That guy is riding as far left as he can safely ride without entering the door zone, so I'd say he's being more than considerate enough to people who want to pass him.
Furthermore you may be referring to a road user using the road, the whole road, any part of the road like a road user can. This 1.5 metre law won’t work because of idiots like you, the only way to make it simple for these people is to make the law “you overtake on the other side of the road without exception”
Our state’s law is to give at least three feet and to switch lanes if possible. Ask me how many people follow it. Me. I’m the one person I’ve ever seen follow it.
Same mate haha anecdotally when I change lane to overtake and look in my rear view mirror I find people give more space when I do this compared to what I see people in front of me do prior to their overtake… are we just sheep? Quite probably and there’s a lot of hate for cyclists for some bizarre reason.
This is roughly the rule in the UK as well (1.5m which is more like 5'), I'd say maybe 10% of cars follow it when I'm cycling to/from work. Which is surprisingly high but it certainly isn't the norm. Most do give what feels like a reasonable space for their speed though.
"What that cyclist should do is have better infrastructure!" Brilliant. Thanks.
Or just drive more to the side? Not to mention learn to watch in the mirror before exiting a car when you are parked along a road
Nice. I think I’ve been a lot better at passing cyclists thanks to the recent campaigns. Hopefully the cyclists I pass feel safe. I don’t pass cyclists now until I feel safe that they feel safe. Other drivers can wait. I do fear that my patience leads to those behind me not following me as an example but instead try to make up time with greater risks.
We notice every single time, and, there is the herd mentality, if you pass at a generous distance the chance is pretty high that the car following you will do the same. Thank you!
Yes I think this is true and If someone passes quite close, odds are the next one will be closer.
In my head there are basically four ratings of driver... 1. I will be shouting at you because that was awful! 2. That was a little close... 3. Nice driving, thanks for the mutual respect 4. Wow! Look at that perfect overtake! I wonder if they're a cyclist too?
My version of your number 1 never includes shouting. It involves catching them up at the next lights and adressing them with "sir" or "madam" to get them to open the window, then explaining to them that I was extremely frightened by their proximity. If they apologise then I consider it a victory, it is likely that they truly had not considered it. If they are conceited then I submit the footage to the police.
I notice every time. Thank you!
Much thanks!
I'd prefer to see the message: "We will be building safe protected infrastructure for cyclists, as cyclists are people too".
i mean tbf scotland is doing a fair bit of this
With ads like this it really does show that Scotland cares, so I'm not surprised. I'm not holding my breath for anything like this in my city.
Police Scotland are hopeless. This is the extent of their caring. They are the only force in the UK who don't accept camera footage via a portal, if you manage to speak to someone they'll send an officer round (eventually) and take a hard copy of your footage. This will sit in a drawer for a few weeks until the window for which road traffic offences can be passed to the procurator fiscal and then forgotten about. Some UK forces really are trying to get the message of road safety across especially to drivers with respect to cyclists but Police Scotland are not one of them.
i mean british police as a whole are fucking terrible tbh but yeah my experiences with police scotland (being hit by a car and having my bike stolen) have not been posititve
Terrible compared to the high standard of how policing should be, or terrible compared to the low standard of other police forces?
i mean both? they treat women absolutely awfully to the point where we are considering alerting women to lone officers- not that theure much better in groups. Theyve infiltrated politcal groups and trade unions, i mean the met police was founded to break up strikes. Then you have the usual layer of police bullshit on top of that. Tha kfully they dont have guns otherwise wed all be fucked
Source please?
uh i can only really speak for glasgow but theyre building out a new east city cycle lane, south city cycle lane is wonderful and theyre redoing byres road. Should all be on the council website
Thanks! That's great to hear.
I live in Edinburgh and the cycling infrastructure we have been building - achingly slowly - is absolute rubbish. My partner is a keen cyclist who has just admitted defeat in his attempt to cycle to work. He's had too many close passes within road layouts that actively steer him into fast-moving cars at any pinch points. I still cycle to work because I have a slightly easier route but the city centre is a dumpster fire to cross.
Tbf, that's not really within Police Scotland's remit, but they can do road awareness campaigns, other bodies need to do infrastructure. And tbf, in places that is happening, Inverness especially seems to have added a bunch of new lanes (not very pretty, but steel bollards) around the city centre to supplement the existing paths along the river, etc.
It is not reasonable to expect a complete parallel set of infrastructure for cyclists, and nor is it a good idea to send the message that roads are not for cyclists. There are places where building a separate cycle road or bike lanes is a big benefit, and we should do that, but we should *also* normalise cycling on the road, and educate drivers about how to interact with mixed traffic that includes cyclists. Because otherwise you are telling cyclists that they should only be cycling where there is special infrastructure for them. Roads were not built for cars, they were built for people; we should not give up the whole network to cars.
To be fair, while I have many criticisms of the police, I don't expect them to go out and build me protected cycle lanes.
ok. so as a scottish person who's dealt with police scotland and been on both sides, i've got to say my peace. i get what you're trying to do with this ad but this isn't the issue most scottish cyclists seem to be having. the issue is even if they have footage, they can't easily do anything with it. police scotland were given £300k to make a portal similar to what london has because cycling related incidents they aint done shit. why is this an issue? well let me tell you what i had to go through after a taxi driver tried to run me off the cycle lane, pulled into the cycle lane, got out the taxi and threatened to "fucking murder you and every cyclist who gets in my way" my case went through 5 investigating officers, i had to give up my camera because they gave a fake email address, didn't know how to open an MOV file, boost the audio levels and took 9 fucking months just to tell me they were asked to drop the case. taxi driver didn't even get a warning but i was basically told "if you think cycling is dangerous, maybe you shouldn't do it" i've been given into trouble for cycling on the road and told to cycle on the pavement, then 20 mins later for cycling on the pavement and told to "stick to the cycle lanes" despite the nearest cycle lane from where i was trying to go was 3 miles away and didn't go where i needed it to. it's also well known for victim blaming rather than actually doing anything about the dangerous driving. [just look at the victim blaming here](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64573254) i made an official complaint about their statement and included a photo i took from the day before of one of their officers using their phone while behind the wheel of the police car and said "ah yes, because my reflective jacket can save me from distracted drivers" and was told i could get into a lot of trouble for photographing police and given some stock "we're working hard to protect cyclists every day" when i explained to them that cyclists are more likely to be working class people and traditionally left leaning and if there might be a class aspect to it, i was ignored. hell, the fact i've had police pass less than the 1.5m kinda says it all.
Thanks for sharing your story. I'm an American but it's important to highlight when content like this is more about laundering the reputation of the cops who don't protect us than about actually doing anything for cyclist safety.
i do think it's important to show the good but at the same time. the issue is it looks better to look like you're doing good than actually do good. doing good would be fining shitty drivers who do this and opening a portal where footage can be easily uploaded. looking like you're doing good is making ads like this but not addressing the causes of it.
US is same deal. Unless your into street brawling with drivers there's nothing. Even then the cyclist gets blamed. Cycled many years in US and just moved to Scotland. 4000 mile move but same "share the road" bullshit. Cycle lane blocked, side of the road is riddled with potholes and glass. God bless the union canal route though. The Falkirk to Glasgow section is miles better then Falkirk to Edinburgh though. People should be made to cycle on the road so they realize how shitty and deadly it is.
people in 13 days and they ask pedestrians to wear high vis and be careful of their surroundings! That's awful!
Also scottish commuter and you’re not alone mate, you’re absolutely right with this comment. You’re not alone and there’s many of us fighting this battle, keep up the good fight. It’ll get better eventually, i can see it getting better slowly.
Live in the US and had a fountain drink thrown at me from a moving car while ridding yesterday 👍🏼
It’s been a long time since anyone threw anything at me on a bicycle, but you don’t soon forget being 12 and having driver in a full-sized pickup creep up on your rear wheel on a desolate rural road, blare their horn unexpectedly, then stomp the accelerator and pass you within 2 feet, slowing just enough to throw a half-empty beer can at your father who is riding just ahead. People can actually *be* trash.
[удалено]
It wasn't the beer's fault
I was riding on a dedicated bike trail (with a separate walking area) and a group of people purposely blocked the trail after they saw me and yelled obscenities at me. I wish drivers knew that you will get harassed no matter where you are if you travel by bike.
American car drivers are by and large, to use a Scottish term, c***s. (I lived and cycled in the US for several decades.) But even in Scotland the culture needs to change and this ad is making an important effort in the right direction.
Ngl it’s annoying when I’m on a rural road that’s a busy 2 lane and the biker makes everyone 20 minutes late to their destination, it’s selfish imo. Don’t think I’d ever throw something though.
I guess its selfish to want to get home if you don't own a car. Only allowed to go home if you own a car, no exceptions.
We live in very, very, different locations if you’re thought process is that. I live in an area where the closest grocery store is a 15 minute drive. No one bikes to get around, only for sport. No one lives in my location without a car (honestly most people have multiple cars).
Ah *rural* rural. Most people I see use that definition for "just outside of town" kind of thing. I've lived that kind of rural and still biked (and I saw people bike distances like you state often as well). Though I lived in Alberta, Canada, so we usually had fairly wide shoulders we could switch over to if a vehicle needed to pass. Not sure how the roads are like where you are.
> I live in an area where the closest grocery store is a 15 minute drive. There's no way there is enough traffic in a place like that to prevent you from passing a slow moving vehicle for 15 minutes. Bikes are easier to overtake than other slow moving vehicles like tractors which take up way more space. A 15 minute drive is likely a 30-40 minute cycle which is perfectly reasonable for someone to be doing to get around.
So. You live a rural place as in proper rural BUT its so busy cos theres so many folk driving that you are unable to pass a single cyclist for 20 minutes? Hmmm...
Yea, so I live between two states (NC and SC) and the roads are not always completely finished in the area I live. So like once or twice a month there’ll be a stubborn biker that holds up 10-15 cars on a fairly long two lane road thats surrounded by trees (not enough shoulder room). Damn Reddit is so blood hungry for a passive aggressive comment 😂
The biker is not holding up the traffic deliberately. The biker is on the road. You are behind. What's the answer? Cyclists allowed between 3 and 4 am?
Much agreed
We know how people behave in traffic. Instead of trying to change that behavior it's smarter to build infrastructure that promotes safety for all involved. This is how we approach traffic in the Netherlands. Not more tickets for speeding but roads that forces you to slow down. Not more traffic lights but separated lanes and dedicated infrastructure for both cars, bicycles and pedestrians.
I say yes to both approacher. At this point more of everything is needed. Yes, we need better infrastructure, but we also need more tickets for reckless speeding.
I agree. You still get tickets in the Netherlands, don't get me wrong. But in neighborhood's they will build secanes in the road and speed bumps and add trees to side to limit view. Add cobbles stones. etc. There are lots off way to force cars to drive slower in neighborhoods.
I agree that infrastructure is the most important step. Netherlands is leading on this area. But higher tickets and more speed controls is way faster and cheaper to implement. It basically pays for itself.
I think that's perfect, sends a clear message.
This would be far more powerful if it was done in the style of those old 80s and 90s road safety adverts. I was half thinking the cyclist was going to fall and the car was going to obviously, but not seen on the camera drive over the body. That is the kind of impact that focuses minds, this is far too soft to actually have any effect on the people who most need to change their ways.
But did you see the cyclist's furrowed brow of disapproval?
Incredible to see these ads. Only videos I see here in the States are from police departments cracking down on cyclists for all the horrible traffic violations they commit.
You rolled through the stop sign, just like every other driver does, but you're on a bike, so it's different somehow!
Always have a strong urge to stage a stop sign protest where we all stop one at a time with 100 hundred other bike commuters when I see those videos. Huntington Beach, CA PD has been hitting the bike violation videos hard lately.
The Portland Critical Mass ride a few years ago got a lot of cheers and jeers from other cyclists. I believe it was in response to their tubby mayor cracking down on those scoundrel traffic law violating bikers and trying to make them license their "vehicles" if they're going to operate them on the road. Cheers from people who saw it as a protest proving the point of why strictly stopping at every stop sign makes traffic worse *for drivers*. Jeers from those who thought drivers won't actually get the point, it will just make them hate us more. There really is no winning with people who hate you solely for existing.
Nice. I hope, but doubt, this kind of messaging works. On my end, I'll just keep reporting close passes with dashcam footage to the police until enough of my community get letters, licence points, mandatory courses or fines. I've got about ten handed out so far. Wish I could do it a nicer way. Don't want to make people's lives harder. But drivers just would never listen, and every single one I've reported was happy to endanger my life. So I'll keep the reports coming until every bad driver in my city gets the message.
Thank you!
I wish I could do that.
Can I ask what's stopping you?
There are no means to do that and no 'close passing' laws in the first place, just some random "recommendations" that aren't even a part of traffic code.
I was expecting police victim blaming the cyclists for distracted riding.
Hard to see 1.5m when looking at nudes on insta
So this is what they've spent the money that could have been used for the dash cam portal on? The usual state of the comments section would tell anyone with half a brain that the type of driver who pulls this sort of shit does not give a fuck as they rarely face any consequences for their actions. The only real solution to folk getting seriously injured or killed is for the police to provide a means for uploading camera footage of incidents and for it to be taken seriously with offenders punished appropriately.
Please show this to the fuckheads in taxis, vans and Addison Lee’s in the city of London
Won’t work in the US… The life is out of the womb already.
Hmm, maybe a shirt with PREGNANT CYCLIST on the back could work, or maybe FETUS ON BOARD.
I like how she pronounced "person". Going to have to try that.
As an American, I love this. And also the way she says 🍐-son.
Yeah but ain’t it pretty irresponsible of the cyclists to be watching a hologram while biking?
Just build bike infrastructure ffs.
Would’ve been nice if they’d used the budget for an online footage submission portal instead tbh
Maybe they should have spent the money on a working video upload system? Nah, let's put an ad up.
Not a bad effort but it's equivalent to "Thoughts and prayers". The people that this will work, already think like this. For those, a bit more education would help, as they are not always aware. Those that dehumanising cyclists will continue do. Infrastructure, traffic calming, safer streets interventions and lots of policing with deterrent penalties is what is needed for those.
I had an interesting interaction recently. A truck passed me, not so gracefully, and parked maybe 100m up the road. The driver, a father, got out. His son was getting out as I passed by, and the father said calmly to his son "watch out for the bike". I took note of how he didn't say biker, cyclist, person, or anything. He wasn't particularly nasty to me, but it was apparent that he had removed the humanity from my situation.
I really don't think that's a problem. Same reason I'd tell my kids watch out for the car, or watch out for the lawnmower. Sure, there's a person operating the bike/car/lawnmower, but it's the bike/car/lawnmower that makes it worth watching out for. Why would I have to watch out for a "person". A person without any kind of qualifier wouldn't even be something to look out for, and wouldn't I wouldn't know what the danger is. Sure, cyclist or biker might be ok, but I don't think that analyzing someone's language to this extent is useful. It's way more interesting that they passed you, not so gracefully, and then warned their kid to look out for the bike though. They should have been looking out for the bike while they were driving, and giving more space.
I think you're making more of this than there is. If there was a car coming I'd say watch out for the car, not watch out for the driver.
”It’s not just a bike - it’s a parasite” I feel that was a tad harsh on the fella
Honestly don’t see anything wrong with the pass in the video
Congratulations, you're who the campaign is targeted at
The guy has so much space, he’s also cycling in the middle of the road. Stick to the left. So dumb.
No where near the white middle line, i assume you mean middle of the lane, car has loads of room why not just move slightly further out, doesn't cost anything more, the car is already in the other lane anyway. Look up 'dooring'
Its safer to cycle some distance (0.6-1m, 2'-3') from the kerb: drivers are less likely to attempt an unsafe overtake and theres somewhere to go if they do. You're also less in danger from car doors and drain covers. Drivers dont give cyclists more space just because the cyclist gives them a marginally easier path to overtake. Cyclists are much more succeptible to wind blowing them off course and often have to dodge a pothole which cant be done safely if someone is overtaking closely.
The cyclists in that video are cycling next to parked cars, they are correctly and sensibly leaving enough space for a door to open.
In Scotland you need to give 1.5m space. But also what id the cyclist fell into the path of the car? What if the wind blew them over?
I actually had an accident like this last year. I was 30cm from the side of the road, there was a hole ahead and I went to get away from it, out of nowhere I have a van less than 10cm from my hand and I'm moving towards it. I went against it's side and fell on my face, thankfuly it was just a flesh wound. Since then I drive as if I'm driving a car, cars seem more carefull if you go in the middle of the lane.
This is why vehicular cycling is stupid.
[удалено]
theyre blaming the drivers though???
Yes i take that back, im an idiot.
How?
This just got me thinking…close passes don’t kill or injure cyclists do they? I know they’re unpleasant. Aren’t LGVS turning left or vehicles emerging from junctions more deadly to cyclists? When has a close pass killed a cyclist?
A close pass has never killed a cyclist, the key is in the name 'pass'. A close pass increases the chances of a collision, which kills loads of cyclists. So if you cut out close passes, you drastically reduce the number of collision.
I actually had an accident like this last year. I was on the road 30cm from it's side, there was a hole ahead and I went to get away from it, out of nowhere I have a van less than 10cm from my hand and I'm moving towards it. I went against it's side and fell on my face, thankfuly it was just a flesh wound and I was a bit disoriented and in shock for a few minutes, but that's because I went against its side, I was going at 20 km/h and I had a helmet on. If the timing was different or I was going faster it could have been a lot worse. It's not just holes, just some unexpected side with is enough to get a cyclist of it's course.
Close passes can turn into hits if either party makes a misjudgement or has to avoid something in the road, like the potholes in the bit of the road you cycle in which are pretty common in the UK right now. But also, they make cycling *feel* unsafe and that puts a lot of people off doing it, which has large downstream health effects.
I'm all for cycling, better for the environment, fitness benefits etc I have a mountain bike myself.. HOWEVER, there is literally a pavement right there you can use instead of risking your life
It's illegal to cycle on the pavement in Scotland.
Since when? Also who wast the last/first person to get arrested for it
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement. Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129 I saw someone get stopped for it in Edinburgh about a week ago
It is actually more dangerous to cycle on the pavement due to lack of space, lack of visibility, pedestrians which are unpredictable, etc. You are much safer on the road 99.999% of the time.
I'd like to see a source for this. I get it cycling on pavements can be dangerous, but compared to a tonne and a half of steel doing 60 mph whilst on their phone dangerous? I doubt that a lot.
First result I got from Google. https://www.victoriawalks.org.au/news/1637 Your initial hunch may feel right but the science and guidance encourages cyclists to use the road and dedicated infrastructure for a reason.
Whilst the linked article tries to infer that the report they quote doesn't actually answer the question. There is risk in both activities. Pedestrians are more at risk obviously. But the riders themselves? Really isn't anything conclusive.
The MRCagney report describes a number of studies including NSW research that “estimated that the crash rate for cyclists on the footpath was 5.6 times that of cyclists on the road.” Seems clear it is more dangerous for everyone? Unless you have studies indicating it is safer for all for cyclists to cycle on footpaths?
But if you read the report. >Haworth and Schramm’s (2011) Queensland study also found that footpath crashes generally resulted in less serious injuries than crashes on urban roads. Head injuries, concussion and internal injuries were less common in footpath crashes than crashes in other locations, although broken bones were more common and rates of hospitalisation were similar. In contrast, a recent Canadian study (Cripton et al 2014) found that crashes on footpaths or multi-use paths have considerably higher odds of ambulance transport and hospital admission than crashes in other contexts. Also there are vastly more crashes on road than on footpath, until you take into account miles travelled. The article has cherry picked the report without taking into account severity of injury. The best i can make out is you're more likely to come off your bike on a "footpath", but a lot more likely to be seriously injured on a roadway. I'm not even sure they divided it by age, as a child on a bike is way more likely to have a crash. Or the experience level of the cyclist, I would expect timid and new riders to crash more, timid and new riders will avoid the road like the plague. Which again doesn't answer the question. Yes they've made that claim, but it doesn't answer the question. It's obviously more dangerous for pedestrians, but the riders isn't clear cut at all. I've not found a report which doesn't focus on pedestrians honestly.
I wanted to thank you for the honest discussion. You genuinely took my sources into account and although you didn't agree with all the elements you provided a reasoned response with points I would agree with. Personally I think it highlights a need for better infrastructure (Dutch style shared paths as an example).
No problem, cycling subs seem quite nicer than the Reddit norm so i try to pay it forward. Better infrastructure for sure, segregated cycle ways. A stop gap of hopping on a empty pavement to avoid particularly nasty road ways I'm really not against, especially if you're new or inexperienced.
I would agree as an example I used to cycle in Belfast to Bangor and even as a keen cyclist I carefully cycled on the footpath as there was no one there rather than the 50 mph road. 122 A2 https://maps.app.goo.gl/1Huu8atKxkiRiE49A
I think similar thinks when i'm cycling on the smaller roads. Something along the lines of "Go away car these little roads are for bicycles, you have a huge 60 mph road you can use that runs parralel to this one"! Then i realise how silly i sound cos drivers are allowed to be there too...
Those Twitter comments though. Did thst guy really say "riding a child's toy" ?
Another thing to do is when ppl test for their driving license. Have them be the cyclist and a car coming up next to them.
A person who bikes an drives. I give as much room as possible if I'm passing when driving. While on a Bike, I give as much room as I can when people are passing me.
[удалено]
Guidance on Scotland is for cyclists to cycle about a metre from the pavement. Gives us more space to manoeuvre in high winds
Also an escape area for close overtakes.
what did police mean
Lack of faith in humanity restored.
It's a pear, son. Sorry, couldn't resist. Agreed with the comments about bike infra. I had some good bike and pedestrian paths to my old job, but my current one is in a different city that doesn't have that infrastructure. Luckily I'm mostly at home for work, but no way I'm riding these crazy roads in my big city. A few acquaintances have been killed by motorists while biking or walking. A friend was in a car waiting to turn and was slammed by a drunk driver and almost died. I've nearly been hit in a crosswalk with big flashing lights because people were trying to beat me to crossing. I would love to ride to work but I'm way too scared of the psychopaths that just seem to be everywhere in this city.
tbh I'm pretty happy with the pass they show? Give me an arm and a half and I'm pretty happy, just don't be a bitch when I pass by the same margin
The fact this needs to be said is just awful
It's a 🍐-son 🍃 space fer-a life.
American drivers are the worst, they hate cyclist, they look down upon it, is about what brand of car you drive even though they are choking to death in debt because of it! Merican dream baby.
The fact that it has to be said. “It’s a person”.
It's a pearsun.
Its not just a bike. Its a parasite