BBC stirs trouble for cyclists

[flecc]

On Tuesday 26th May at 12.15pm, the BBC Radio 4 "You and Yours" program is a phone in one. They are asking people who have ever felt threatened by cyclists to phone in their stories. To stir things up this blurb appears on the website:

"A child is recovering after being hit by a cyclist riding on a pavement, the cyclist rode off.
Have you ever been put at risk on the road by a cyclist?"

There does seem to be an attempt to make it seem balanced with a mention of cyclists contributing, but we'll have to see how that pans out.

If you can't listen live at that time, the broadcast will be available shortly afterwards on the i-player on this link
.

 

[Simo]

Blimey do they not have bigger issues to troll about, the BBC is really starting to annoy me!, almost to the point .....oh never mind......stay calm.

 

[Deus]

Im not surprised some people are feeling threatened when there are idiots like the one who knocked the girl over riding on pavements.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3090830/Shocking-moment-toddler-knocked-hit-run-cyclist-outside-Blackpool-home.html

 

[Simo]

There are plenty of idiots about everyday, its the blatent ......let's wind up the population or what can we rant on about phone ins and etc on a national level that wind me up.

 

[flecc]

The program is on at the moment. You'll be able to listen to it a few hours after transmission on the BBC i-player on this link
.

 

[pdarnett]

I though the footage was a bit odd, there seems to be a gap between the accident and the dad leaving for hospital. The cyclist has turned himself in but refutes the fact he just rode off, stating he stopped with them until the dad went to hospital. That video is omitted and the video of the dad leaving seems to have no timestamp on the version the dailys are running.

 

[nichodia]

Regardless of any editing that may or may not have taken place...he should not have been cycling on the pavement in the first place!

 

[pdarnett]

Regardless of any editing that may or may not have taken place...he should not have been cycling on the pavement in the first place!

Sorry if that came across wrong. there's no doubt he was in the wrong and should be prosecuted for it. the point i was making was about how the press will use this to further damage the image of regular cyclist.

 

[Benjahmin]

Undoubtedly the guy in the video is in the wrong, especially the speed he was doing. Still I suppose the high viz jacket makes him in-vulnerable!
However, I listened to the program and thought that, despite the presenters attempts to whip it up, most of the responses were quite measured. The question of insurance and registration plates was mostly seen as impractical, whilst the training issue was inconclusive. There was a chap making the point for primary school training in road awareness and consideration, but all round not just for cyclists. Isn't that a parents job?
Chris Boardman seemed calm and reasoned, giving sensible comments. There was one guy who said he'd been a truck, van and bus driver, who I think would see us all banned.
Overall far less hysteria than I expected and more moderation too.

 

[flecc]

Yes, it certainly could have been worse. I think the program's producers belatedly woke up to how bad it could have been and ensured the direction and contributions kept it under control.
.

 

[Jimod]

On Saturday up here, a jogger was knocked down by a cyclist on a pavement. The jogger died today. There is a problem with some reckless cyclists.

 

[Ajax]

Im not surprised some people are feeling threatened when there are idiots like the one who knocked the girl over riding on pavements.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3090830/Shocking-moment-toddler-knocked-hit-run-cyclist-outside-Blackpool-home.html

Point 1. The bloke clearly hung around long enough to get his photo taken, stood there next to his bike, yet the way the tabloids report this, makes it seem like he rode off without showing any concern.

Point 2. The parent should share the blaim, as they live on a main road
and the least they could do is close that gate. What toddler wouldn't run after their mother. That child could just as easily have been knocked over by someone running to catch the bus.

Thank god it wasn't someone on an ebike, or there would have been real pandamonium to change laws etc ala pit bulls and the like. Its what they call 'moral panic' and it comes in all shapes and guises.

 

[selrahc1992]

Point 1. The bloke clearly hung around long enough to get his photo taken, stood there next to his bike, yet the way the tabloids report this, makes it seem like he rode off without showing any concern.

Point 2. The parent should share the blaim, as they live on a main road
and the least they could do is close that gate. What toddler wouldn't run after their mother. That child could just as easily have been knocked over by someone running to catch the bus.

Thank god it wasn't someone on an ebike, or there would have been real pandamonium to change laws etc ala pit bulls and the like. Its what they call 'moral panic' and it comes in all shapes and guises.

i felt the same, it brought to minid the families who blamed the police for not stopping their daughters joining ISIS. Blimey, i thought, next we'll have thieves taking the police to court for not protecting them from their antisocial impulses. However, we have a completely populsit government now, who is totally comitted to the most lunatic fringe of the daily mail readership, so i'm sure scapegoating is here to stay.

 

[2Lazy]

I won't listen to this programme, it'll only wind me up. Surely the air time that is given to such issues should be commensurate to the risk? The number of cyclists who die every year because of careless and inconsiderate motorists is orders of magnitude more than pedestrains who are injured by cyclists using the pavement.

I think the cycling on the pavement thing is blown out of all proportion. As a general rule I would not cycle on the pavement but there are many situations where it is the safest and pragmatic option if speed is reduced to near walking pace. In such situations I have no qualms about cycling on the pavement. Would rather take a fine for cycling on the pavement than be flattened by an HGV at a busy road junction.

 

[flecc]

The media love to exaggerate. The commentator of a recent Channel 5 program about a UK police force stated that some 5000 UK motorcylists are killed every year.

In fact that is the number of injured recorded, those killed in the last year figure I saw recorded was 328, somewhat less than 5000.
.

 

[Ajax]

The media love to exaggerate. The commentator of a recent Channel 5 program about a UK police force stated that some 5000 UK motorcylists are killed every year.

In fact that is the number of injured recorded, those killed in the last year figure I saw recorded was 328, somewhat less than 5000.
.

I wouldn't be at all surprise to find there's a financial motive to this hysteria. Or a 'think tank' considering the possibilities for yet another means to taxation or insurance? Growing numbers of cyclists will be seen by some for its potential income. I expect there'll be more regional headlines promoted to the fore for national attention, with untold numbers of motor mouths reving up the anti.

There again this is one of those CCTV stories, a story which otherwise would not have made it this far. As one commentator on this story said, this family could afford to install cctv but not a fit a gate to their property. Makes you think. That cyclist was more than likely doing what he's always done on that stretch of road to avoid cars parked up on a busy main road.

BTW can anyone say if cyclists are taxed or require insurance anywhere in Europe?

[Its seems the answer to the question above is to be found on that link posted earlier, eg the BBC radio program, which on the whole was actually well balanced with the likes of Chris Boardman]

 

[jonathan75]

I wouldn't be at all surprise to find there's a financial motive to this hysteria. Another avenue for insurance and taxation? Growing numbers of cyclist will be seen by some for its potential income. I expect there'll be more regional headlines promoted to fore for national attention with untold motor mouths reving up the attention.

Some people are always hysterical! So I wouldn't worry about tax and insurance.

 

[jonathan75]

Not because the end is near but because tax etc just ain't gonna happen

 

[flecc]

Growing numbers of cyclists will be seen by some for its potential income.

Probably true of the insurance industry, but not the government. Successive UK governments have rigidly opposed any measure that could conceivably lead to a decline in cycling.

That even extended to firmly stamping out an attempt to introduce cycle helmet wearing law for the young, a measure one might have thought consistent with their usual safety obsessions.
.