The War on Britain's Roads (BBC Documentary / tabloid tv)

There are good and bad cabbies but getting Eddie Spanner, cab number 337, to pontificate loudly about law-breaking cyclists when the cyclists aren't doing anything wrong is blatant misrepresentation.

I literally despise them for not only cycling reasons. So many of em just drive around bullying people. Once saw one of the massive skinhead, british bulldog looking ones literally shouting, screaming and blowing his horn right behind some poor women in her car. as far as i could make out, she wasnt doing anything wrong other than not pulling forward a bit more. and in any case, she was literally petrified. felt so bad I almost went over even though the prick was twice my size.

@Buffalo Bill blog post,
Really interesting reading.

Are you happy to be quoted off that? The line about riding well vs badly is dynamite.

spindrift I agree, but thats something the program failed to set straight. So many cabbies just DO NOT understand what we are allowed to do.

spindrift I agree, but thats something the program failed to set straight. So many cabbies just DO NOT understand what we are allowed to do.

Yeah, that's why the prog was a missed opportunity, none of those thicko cabbies had it explained to them why they were wrong, and in particular whether the indication of a good, safe overtake is if the cyclist gesticulates afterwards!

Yeah when you think about it, its outragous. Now most of the population still have the wrong idea.

We sure do our own version as a response and lay bare the crap we have to put up with, in perticular from cabbies and addy lee drivers. Plus put it straight on issues like positioning.

Just one more little rant about cabbies. I absolutely hate it when you get in a cab (which i havnt for a long long time) and they start banging on about their love of history. As a past History student, I would then ask something like "oh yeah, which parts of History interest you?" knowing full well that the answer will always be and was "the second world war mainly" haha. So in reality you read some generic books, no contradicting arguments and a few documentaries on the history channel and now you are some fucking expert.

Plus they always claim to know everything about the united kingdom, when in reality they mean "London" and have absolutely no idea about the rest of the country.

Proper idiots.

Now most of the population still have the wrong idea.

To be fair, most of the people I've spoken to either didn't watch it because they knew it would be a sensationalist load of old trousers, or they saw it and just thought it was meh. Then again. most my my mates are cyclists. I think they've got a cast to answer on the dishonesty. It's like getting Eddie Spanner to walk around pointing at black people and saying:

"Walking in a built up-area, that's an offence. Using a cycle lane, more criminality. See him turn right then! Rampant law-breaking!"

"the second world war mainly"

WAYNE Rooney was so moved by a trip to a Nazi death camp that he is now hooked on books about the Second World War.

His interest in military history was revealed by Roy Hodgson in an exclusive interview with the Sunday Mirror.

Hodgson added: “Wayne is quite well-read on the subject. Most of his generation, unlike mine, aren’t as aware as we are. But Wayne is very interested in all aspects of the Second World War. He has all the World At War television series.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/manchester-uniteds-wayne-rooney-hooked-1480844

haha yeah.

Only thing though, I think people outside of London watching it will just believe the cabby.

In the past Ive been quite shocked at some of the things friends and even family members of mine have said regarding similar matters

ha amazing. Rooney must be getting a page read to him everynight before bed.

BBC's War on Britain's Roads: even more fake than we feared
Footage passed off as genuine in cycling documentary was choreographed by a filmmaker with paid participants, it emerges

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/dec/13/war-britains-roads-fake

Sign of the times. Funny that we are apparently watching "reality TV" constantly now, but in a lot of cases, its the furthest thing from reality.

Bring back the good old programmes like knightrider, the A Team and Airwolf haha.

Manimal

The black area around the Keltbay lorry is not the blind spot. That is the area which a driver MUST be able to see in the mirrors of a lorry registered after 2006. Older lorries that don't have to have the forward facing mirror will only show the area to the left of the lorry.
The real blind spot is the area further to the left, say 1.8 to 4 metres out where a driver can't see a thing. That's where people often get hit. There is a serious problem with the false view of the blindspot. I would say that any cyclist hit in the area shown in black (~= ASL) should have been seen by the driver. The crap propaganda from TfL has re-inforced some of the confusion over this. Prosecutors and courts fail to understand the rules and often tend to blame the cyclists.

Why did the LCC have this on their card, indicating a "lorry risk zone"?

picture is slightly different as the lorry is yellow and there's a subtitle under it that said "avoid the front-left of lorries near junctions".

Cabbies = The Scousers of the south.

Don't be fooled by the cheeky chirpy myth. The reality holds much more menace.

WTF is that meant to mean?

It is about as cheap and thoughtless a comment I have ever heard.

Grow the fuck up and grow a set. Walk into the centre of Anfield and say that and I'll buy you a beer.

wanker.

Calm down

I've been to Anfield and said far worse.

Showing cyclists undercutting lorries implies they're to blame in collisions and that's not true.

Undercutting lorries when you know the driver is not likely to have seen you surely is reckless to say the least ,consequently a portion of the blame must be with the cyclist.
Though some form of proximity alarm fitted to lorries should be mandatory!

No. That is the "she was wearing a short skirt and so is responsible for having been raped" argument.

Why did the LCC have this on their card, indicating a "lorry risk zone"?

picture is slightly different as the lorry is yellow and there's a subtitle under it that said "avoid the front-left of lorries near junctions".

The risk zone is not the 'blind spot'. As Charlie says, cyclists often do get hit in the black area, or the red area on the card, but much of that is where drivers of lorries equipped with the more modern equipment must see/should have seen them. Charlie doesn't mention it here, but there's a serious problem with the 'blind spot' defence often used and accepted in court, as areas that aren't, strictly speaking, 'blind' are passed off as such in defence of drivers. I'll leave it to him to explain the rest, as I can't say that I fully understand it.

Obviously, regardless of the technicalities, cyclists should still avoid the front left of lorries at junctions. Whether or not drivers of newer lorries are legally obliged to see them there, an older lorry may not have the equipment, or the driver may still make a mistake. The key aim is to prevent serious or fatal crashes and worry about blame or not later.

@Buffalo Bill blog post,
Really interesting reading.

Are you happy to be quoted off that? The line about riding well vs badly is dynamite.

Happy to be quoted.

thankyou Bill
take it you know Peter Walker, or he reads Moving Target
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/dec/13/war-britains-roads-fake

Childley

.

(He did get the spelling right the first time.)