In the news

This has been covered - a lot. The problem isn't headphones... or lack of hi vis. It's occasionally bad riding or more accurately it's perceived as bad riding by people who think that having access to and using a bike means you are a 'cyclist' to be legislated. I feel I'm a very different creature to the oblivious, pavement weaving, light jumping dudes who are probably the heart of most people's negative perceptions of riders. I don't need broad legislation. I just need people to spot the difference. If there were a few more interested and empowered bobbies about to have a go at the few who do that we wouldn't be coming across as the criminal underclass responsible for our own demise - inconveniently diving under the wheels of innocent road users in a bit to slow everyone's commute.

The main problem is people in really heavy things not taking the appropriate responsibility for what happens when those things are used clumsily in highly populated areas. imagine the clusterfuck if we get legislated off our bikes and onto the already jammed up public transport systems or worse still we get into cars. Bleating on about how dangerous we are is silly considering how few times even the most dozy cyclists are actually responsible for hurting someone else.

"Scrawning" - it's a new word. you watch, it'll be in the OED this time next year.

From the BBC feed. Johnson just came out with this.

CYCLIST DEATHS
0940: "I think headphones are an absolute scourge", Boris Johnson told BBC London 94.9, adding both cyclists and pedestrians need to be aware of the traffic.
He said he would "not be against a ban on cyclists wearing headphones".

He's a victim blaming cunt.

He has a point about twat peds wandering out into the road without looking, immersed in their 'phones. So long as the headphone ban extended to pedestrians within 10m of a road I'm all for it.

Just tried turning my head 4 times in a second. Harder than it sounds.

.....which of course we all do. I mean I wouldn't dream of riding without shoulder checking four times a second to be aware of when something is coming up behind me at speed and therefore likely to overtake.

Then again, as I do like the look so much, I usually ride with a pirate eyepatch on one eye. A policeman did tick me off for this once, but I pointed out he was blaming the victim and should instead ensure that all drivers should have advanced anti-collision radar fitted to their cars and lasers to project their arrival onto the road ahead of me instead as it was none of my responsibility.

Tongue in cheek obv. But I'm a cyclist and a high mileage driver and my responsibility is to exercise the greatest care in both modes.

Hate over-legislation, and usually ride without a helmet (the roads are pretty quiet out here) but voluntarily restricting my ability to know what's going on around me seems to be all flavours of stoopid.

Great, so am I, such pithy statements are not going to garner great affection.

You don't look in your car mirrors 4 times a second, so you don't need to turn your heard 4 times a second. You're exaggerating for no reason. You judge how often you need to look behind based on traffic speed, just like you would in a car. Motorbikes filter past at 20mph higher than your speed, that doesn't mean you need your windows down and your eyes glued to the wing mirror to make sure you spot them and hear them the second they appear on the horizon.

it's not the heaphones thats the issue it's the hi fi seperates system on the trailer behind and the extension cable back to your home plug that causes the problem

I think it would be good to simply ban headphones- I was on the tube this morning and listening to second hand R&B was very definitely infringing on my human rights.

just talk loudly on your phone to drown out the r&b

I sat on them.

I shat on them.

.

Interesting information: turning your head 70 degrees four time in less than a second give you a headrush

What's the difference between wearing your headphone on a bicycle and listening to loud music in a car?

In a car I've got about a square foot of mirror within constant peripheral vision letting me know what's behind me as long as I'm paying attention (not saying all drivers do pay attention o'course).

On a bike, unless you want to go down the full Daglo Derek look and fit mirrors then you don't have this, the only way you know what is behind you is via your hearing or shoulder checking. I usually use my hearing to prompt the shoulder check.

Also, to be fair (unless you are in dense city traffic where the opposite applies) you are much more likely to be overtaken on the bike by motor vehicles.

The failure to judge relative speeds by car drivers when overtaking me coming up to pinch points, roundabouts, traffic lights etc has given me more weight loss moments than anything else - being prepared for an overtake has saved me from a few crashes.

#expectstl/dr

On a bike, unless you want to go down the full Daglo Derek look and fit mirrors then you don't have this, the only way you know what is behind you is via your hearing or shoulder checking. I usually use my hearing to prompt the shoulder check.
#expectstl/dr

Can you also hear cyclist approaching from behind? if so, can you also tell whether they'll overtake or undertake you? were you able to tell how many cars is behind you while in noisy traffic? can you tell whether a car is about to turn left? etc.

It is highly advisable to not rely on your hearing as they don't give you as much information as looking back do.

How strong are your neck muscles...?

I couldn't even turn my head quick enough. There's not enough time to focus in between.

I feel ill now. Someone bring me a puke bag?

What's happening? The walls are folding into the floor.

.....which of course we all do. I mean I wouldn't dream of riding without shoulder checking four times a second to be aware of when something is coming up behind me at speed and therefore likely to overtake.

Just tried turning my head 4 times in a second. Harder than it sounds.

(blithely ignoring the tongue-in-cheek context, as I'm wont to)

It's a better idea when looking behind not to make it just furtive looks, but to look behind with some concentration, turning the head and upper body properly, instead. Once is enough. This will make your face more visible to following participants in traffic*.

(*This is a translation of the German word, "Verkehrsteilnehmer", or "verkeersdeelnemers" in Dutch, which I like a lot. It doesn't quite work in English.)

Simon, my post was a tweet by the Beeb. Don't shoot deputy!

Don't let anyone be tempted by this post into shooting the sheriff, please.

You don't look in your car mirrors 4 times a second, so you don't need to turn your heard 4 times a second. You're exaggerating for no reason..

Aaah, not trying to start a fight here! And I was of course being flippant.

Seriously though - the eyes are innately enormously good at picking up movement in peripheral vision (there used to be predators out there!) and having three mirrors in that peripheral vision is, I would submit, equivalent to looking over your shoulder pretty damn frequently.

Judging how often to look over my shoulder based on road speed is just not as effective as looking over my shoulder based on hearing a vehicle coming up behind me. It just isn't.

I fully appreciate though that there is a different tactic depending on traffic density - riding down Oxford St on a Saturday? Might as well crank the ACDC to full volume because your hearing is redundant in that sort of traffic.

SimonAH if you're not checking your shoulders or relying on sound when riding you're risking a collision with another silent vehicle. Headphones are absolutely not the issue here. Not at all.

I think it would be good to simply ban headphones- I was on the tube this morning and listening to second hand R&B was very definitely infringing on my human rights.

Another issue I'd not considered. Ban this head-mounted scourge!

END THIS STEREOPHONIC PLAGUE!

or similar

Yes, they really went downhill after their first album.

Can you also hear cyclist approaching from behind? if so, can you also tell whether they'll overtake or undertake you? were you able to tell how many cars is behind you while in noisy traffic? can you tell whether a car is about to turn left? etc.

It is highly advisable to not rely on your hearing as they don't give you as much information as looking back do.

I think I've (you've) found the nub of the issue here - we're not comparing eggs with eggs.

Dense city centre traffic =/= Faster roads with lighter traffic.

I appreciate hearing is of less importance in the latter but would still submit that voluntarily blocking out a sense in a life and death activity is not a sensible course of action.

^^... which was also shite!

I think I've (you've) found the nub of the issue here - we're not comparing eggs with eggs.

Dense city centre traffic =/= Faster roads with lighter traffic.

I appreciate hearing is of less importance in the latter but would still submit that voluntarily blocking out a sense in a life and death activity is not a sensible course of action.

Alternatively it might make everyone a better road user if they had headphones on and therefore had to check things visually before performing a manouver?

Jesus this is about as epic a derail from the issue at hand as is possible. Isn't there a fucking Headphones thread for this durge?