An exchange of views

Another snippet of Taypet21's photostream showing how abusive cyclists can be just because you swerve past them and then in without warning.



Some comments for the elusive Taypet, who, whether they intend it or not, is becoming our Fishponds correspondent.

1. It's not clear that swearing helps you achieve your goal, unless being beaten up is your goal.
2. Yes, you had an exit strategy -and we can see how V484ETF tried to swerve after you, but unless you could be confident that the driver would not catch up with you later, that wasn't a sustainable plan.
3. Lodge Road, eh? You know that Kingswood is getting a bit of a reputation of a place where people on bicycles get beaten up? Just bear that in mind before being quite so abusive. It also doesn't help you if you wish to raise the issue with the polis, as they may have some paperwork for you too.
4. At least he saw you. You weren't going to get Smidsy'd here, and he gave you lots of clearance for the first half of his overtake -right up to the moment he saw the traffic and decided to swing in rather than brake.

As for the driver

1. The emergent ubiquity of cycle cameras means that your actions are more likely to be documented. When at 0:40 you swerved completely into the oncoming lane to pass the (electric) cycle doing approximate 15-20 mph, you should have indicated.
2. Why did you swerve in before you'd actually passed him? There was no oncoming traffic, and if you'd gone past him and then pulled in followed by a full-ABS brake then you'd have stopped before going in to the van (not ours, it is new, clean and has all brake lights lit up), leaving the bicycle to deal with the problem that it was going to have to filter left rather than stop.
3. Finally: why bother, really? You can see the van in front stopped, if your  V-reg doesn't have ABS then your stopping distance on bald tyres isn't going to be great, so look at the speed of the bicycle before trying to pass. 
4. It's not worth the hassle of running them over, especially when the police get called out and those issues about insurance crop up.

We explicitly mention insurance because a quick check of askmid says:

NO V484ETF is NOT showing as insured on the Motor Insurance Database today.

That's despite the fact the DVLA site says the Lexus V484ETF has paid its road tax. 
You need to be glad that Taypet's video has him swearing enough it it that he can't forward it to the police and say "I have evidence that this car is being driven without insurance".

Regarding a Grey Van on Romney Ave/Shaldon Road, Lockleaze

Some tax-dodger emails us:

"were you the idiot driver of the grey van who on Wed Feb 1 was swearing at me down at Muller Road because all the way down Romney Ave he hadn't been able to pass me, because I didn't get out of the way of traffic?"

"If you were, can I point out that I was doing 30 mph, so you had no justification to pass me, and as I was following a car doing the same speed about three bike lengths in front, you had nowhere to go anyway."

"I hope you enjoyed the long traffic jam on Muller Road with no bicycle in your way to get upset about"

We have looked at our van and no, it doesn't look grey, more a white with a brown layer on top, "dirty!" written on the back. (that's our brand, incidentally).

We understand the grey van driver. We don't think bicycles should be on the road, so the fact that you were there -and the fact that he couldn't get past- made it very frustrating. If you had cycled slower and stayed to one side he would still have hated you, but a bit less.

That's something the advocates of "vehicular cycling" don't understand. They think if you imagine that you are a car, and position yourself appropriately, you will recognised as a vehicle and made welcome. Not so: you will just become an arrogant cyclist who doesn't know their place -and deserves the abuse they get.

It is your very presence that is the issue, not just your positioning.

Not our van: WU10JCY

Someone points us at this video as says "That you?"

No. Pink shirts and white dungarees don't suit us. Or him. We are just more aware of the fact.

Also: that van still has two wing mirrors. This video may have been made in Bristol, but whoever it is, they live in the suburbs.

update: "The initial pass was on Stockwood Lane and the chat was by the junction of Lacey Road and Stockwood Lane"

S56JCW? Wasn't us in the van abusing the cyclist.

Someone emails us:

"Hello, is the Bristol Traffic white van the one with the registration number S56JCW? -that is Shithead-56-Jesus-Christ-Wanker to use the phonetic alphabet the van deserves?

I was waiting by Muller Road at 18:15 on August 16 for the pedestrian crossing lights to change so I could get to Boiling Wells Lane when this white transit van drove past and the passenger shouted something like "you fucking cunt" at me" as they carried on over to the M32 approach traffic jam

Not us.

1. We checked on askmid and yes, S56JCW is registered to a Ford Transit 80; our kind of vehicle. First registered in Preston, incidentally.
2. We don't recall abusing your anyone on a bicycle today.
3. We checked which number plates were taped to the back of the van today and no, not that number.
4. If they were abusive, they probably had a good reason.
5. Probably they were resentful of the way you hold them up on the way to the M32 traffic jam, or just pointing out that if you didn't have enough money to own an S-reg transit van, you must be very poor indeed and probably an anarchist criminal looter.
6. If you had issues with the van passenger for pointing this out, you could have chased them to the queue for the M32 and got beaten up. Why complain to us?

There is a web site, 101 Wankers, which documents the harassment a woman gets while cycling round London -she thinks she's being persecuted for riding a bicycle. Not so, if she walked round more she'd recognise we proposition women on foot too. The big difference between Bristol and London is it's smaller, so that one day the van S56JCW is going to meet the same tax-dodger and then the van driver and passenger can give the cyclist the beating they clearly deserve.

Even so, such drive-by abuse does let down the team. There's a bike lane in Muller Road they could have swerved onto, got up onto the pavement and then come after the cyclist. Must try harder.

Nisa Today's drivers shows their awareness of pedestrians

While in London the cyclist campaigners mourn the fact that HGV drivers are often oblivious to cyclists, in Bristol the large delivery vehicles are aware of more vulnerable road users, and rather than use their indicators to warn of impending actions, use hand signals and voice calls to ensure that everyone is aware of the issue.

Here we see FJ59DFF making their intent clear to pedestrians crossing the road, using hand and voice, and by engaging in a dialogue, understanding that their manoeuvres will be carried out, such as the turn from Cotham Brow into Kingsley Road, and from Kingsley road to Zetland Road, where we see the driver adding some voice and eye contact, to make sure that they have been seen.

You could indicate before your truck turns, but then you may not be sure that the pedestrians planning to cross have actually seen it. Hand signals and shouting are more effective.

Note that Nisa Today's are a community set of shops who work together for better pricing; their deliveries are all handled by DHL -hence the little DHL logo on the side of the van. The driver is paid by DHL, so their impact on Nisa Today's branding by appearing in such videos is of little direct consequence.

The Bloomsbury Problem

Another issue we had with the Russel Square area is that this marked a clear attempt to bring cycle-friendly infrastructure into the inner city, rather than, as in Bristol, leave it places where we hope it doesn't get in the way of anyone important.

First, signs, encouraging cyclists to find their way round

Full green bike paths, with raised kerbs to make it slightly harder to accidentally park in them.

Junctions for the bicycles themselves, with no cyclists dismount signs

And here, worst of all, an "except cycles" get-out clause on a one way street. Not "except cycles, taxis and van drivers", but cycles only.

What is really depressing here is that the Camden council staff behind such schemese visited the proposed GBBN Whiteladies Road development, the one that will help motorists driving in to town by removing the zebra crossings in our way and making cycling more dangerous. We know this as we infiltrated the event, keeping track of what people were saying, and whether complaints were being dismissed -as expected- or actually listened to, and tried to slip our own ideas in to distract them.

On the topic of that camden council cycle team visit, can we extend our apologies to the woman driving the green nissan micra down WL road who was held up for fifteen seconds by the funny bicycle people. Yes, you were right to beep your horn at us for not being in the bike lane, even though cyclists don't have to cycle in them, they can cycle two abreast legally, and the traffic jam ahead meant you weren't losing any time. Yes, you were right to complain that eight people on bicycles at 08:50 on a weekday were causing utter chaos, which is why the local council had arranged the cyclist visit to during the quiet period mid-morning.  Sadly, some of the cycle troublemakers had spotted the flaw there and pressured for a rush hour visit, which is why you were held up by three people cycling two-abreast down whiteladies road.

Because we were trying to blend in with these subversives we did have to come up and argue with you while you were stopped at the traffic lights, as anything else would have aroused the suspicions of the rest of the group.

Sorry!

We didn't really mean to call you a selfish idiot who would clearly benefit from getting out of their car and trying to do some exercise! It's your right to get fat and stay unfit by driving to work and back, stopping only in the supermarket to buy ready-to-fry fast foods.

We didn't really want to dispute the niceties of the highway code and the fact that nowhere in it does it say "bicycles should be banned from our roads"  -because like you, we think it ought to! It was just something we had to do to blend in!