Busted: Idiot driver and two cops on bikes

[dbnm]

Idiot

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/video-driver-recording-abusing-cyclists-didnt-realise-cops/

[ultraman6970]

Well.. there is a bike path next to them... the truck was in the bike path from what I understood... well... I can tell you this, the cops sucks at riding the bike, they were using 75% of the road and this is something that happens all over the place, cops F'ed up? well in my opinion yes... easy they could have using half of the line...

Trucker was mad? well... you have to understand the dude aswell, sure he drives there every day and see bike riders taking the whole line... rule #1 in the road... ride as compact at posible so the cars can pass you with ease. Cops were not doing that. Driver over reacted? hell yeah but at some point if those cops ride like that all the time well they had that coming you know.

How do you think I kept my butt safe all this years? From potatos comments we ride pretty similar in the road and streets... we always agree in stuff like that.

Both sides screwed up... but those cops have no clue how to ride in the road. You cant use over 50% of the road just because you can, thats just dumb thinking.

[mattsurf]

rule #1 in the road... ride as compact at posible so the cars can pass you with ease.

That may be a good idea in the US, where roads are generally wide enough for cars to pass bikes easily, however, in Europe it is a different story: If you ride compact on narrow roads, cars will try to squeeze past, often leaving as little as 18-24 inches clearance (45-60cm), this is really dangerous for cyclists, therefore it is often better for a cyclist to ride in a defensive position, preventing cars from passing unless the road is clear of on-coming traffic

[Nomadmax]

Can someone link the video here ? I don't see a video available on the linked page.

[gasman]

After watching the video I just wonder why the cops weren't on what looked like a reasonable bike path. Yes, the tarmac looked smoother but still the funds had been spent to build what seems to be a fairly nice bike path.
Nevertheless for a driver to go onto the bike path and use his cell phone while driving to harass riders is worse behavior in my mind,
Plenty of fault to go around.

[Peter P.]

Well.. there is a bike path next to them...

I'm inclined to agree with you.

Sometimes we're our own worst enemies.

[rain dogs]

I'm always surprised that out of the 6 comments here, half of them are focusing the blame/criticizing the cyclists.

We have no idea what transpired prior to the video, nor how long any actions were going on other than we do know that a car DRIVER was DRIVING on a bike path.

I don't care if they were riding 1000 abreast at 2 km/h while crossing Australia, one incident is perfectly legal (the cycling), albeit arguably a little clueless, while the other is TOTALLY illegal and equally or, I would argue, magnitudes more offensive and clueless in every possible way.

Once again it goes to show how strongly we identify and have been indoctrinated into the idea that "drivers are correct and deserving" and anyone else is just a nuisance.

Forest for the trees. :rolleyes:

[pobrien]

But, if the cyclists were out for a training ride (i.e. fast), they may not have wanted to ride in the mixed-use path as they; (I) usually have a modest speed limit, and (ii) are used by children and family and skateboarders and 'social' riders who are out for a fun ride.

This is certainly the case in Vancouver. The mix of electric bicycles and also electric skateboards together with kids and parents and in-line skaters really make the local Mixed Use Lanes not appropriate for fast cycling.

I drive to a more open series of roads where I can train and the biggest hazards are distracted drivers and squirrels. Did I mention distracted drivers?

Just another perspective to consider.

[nooneline]

Sometimes I wonder about some comments on here.

I mean, yeah, it's really easy to look at any video of a cyclist and find something that they did wrong, or that you'd do differently.

But how many of us have been harassed, abused, or outright assaulted by drivers while doing nothing wrong whatsoever? I know I sure have.

Which sort of makes you think that there's no real way you can avoid being harassed by drivers. And it kind of makes you think that the responsibilities lies with people not to harass others, eh?

[bcroslin]

One of the many reasons I stopped looking at the general discussion threads: victim blaming of cyclists by the cyclists of paceline.

Were the cops/ cyclists in the wrong? Maybe, possibly, who the F knows?

Was the driver in the wrong? Driving on a multi-use path cursing out cyclists and clearly angry, bitter and entitled. Obviously in the wrong.

But, but, but ... bull$h!t

[mattsurf]

If it was me, I would probably be on the road. Cycle paths are often poorly maintained, littered with broken glass etc. Also if you are riding at a fast average pace then slowing down to get onto the lane, slowing down at intersections, slowing down to rejoin the road all make the lanes less attractive

However, I do ride on cycle lanes too, especially if riding on my own and not pushing to ride as fast as possible, or maybe if I am in a big group, riding on the cycle lane is more social as you can ride 2/3 abreast and have a chat.

As pointed out by others, we do not know why the riders were on the road, but they were legally entitled to be there, while the driver was completely in the wrong

[redir]

It certainly was a very rural area. IDK why they would even have cycle paths in an area like that. The news guy is right, it's a two way street. The driver however is obviously in the wrong. He was trying to prove a point but the reality is that bikes can either ride on the road or on the cycle paths but cars... Nope.

[Gummee]

But, if the cyclists were out for a training ride (i.e. fast), they may not have wanted to ride in the mixed-use path as they; (I) usually have a modest speed limit, and (ii) are used by children and family and skateboarders and 'social' riders who are out for a fun ride.

This is certainly the case in Vancouver. The mix of electric bicycles and also electric skateboards together with kids and parents and in-line skaters really make the local Mixed Use Lanes not appropriate for fast cycling.

I drive to a more open series of roads where I can train and the biggest hazards are distracted drivers and squirrels. Did I mention distracted drivers?

Just another perspective to consider.

Don't forget III: paths cross roads in strange places and drivers aren't usually looking for cyclists to be there. Add in some speed with crossing in a weird place and you get many problems. AMHIK!

IIIa: if they'll miss my 600# BMW GS-Adv, what chance do I have in the above situation on a bicycle that's a third the size and without all the driving lights?!

Nope. Even if I see a 'bike path' next to the road, I'll usually prefer to take my chances with the as 'another road user' rather than a special snowflake that needs their own separate infrastructure. Among other reasons: cars are pretty predictable. MUT users generally aren't.

M

[ultraman6970]

This subject is so long to discuss... you can write a book about it because independently of what dumb car drivers do, you have cyclists like those 2 cops that just from looking at the video the 1st second you know they need to learn how to ride a bike in the road.

As gummee says, probably those cops need a whole infrastructure for themselves.

Put those two cops with a cyclotourist from europe or south america and you will see the differences in the way they ride in the road at the 1st second. Another example... look what people does to cross streets, specially a 10 or 16 y/o compared with an old dude... old dude will look around and will cross fast eventhought you stop for them, because he is respectfull and I bet you his grandpa tought him to cross... 17 y/o kid dont look before crossing...etc etc.. you got the idea. With bikes is the same logic.. you cant take the whole lane because thats just putting yourself in danger...disrespectfull with the drivers too...etc etc..

Remember the lady that sue because she wanted to use an interstate hwy??? you see the pictures that genius was clogging the whole right lane in a f... hwy, she sued because she felt entitled to use it... yes you can but your mind must be missing half of her neurons to think that way. You never have to forget that because you can doesnt have you have to, specially when you have cars, trucks and buses behind you... that's just putting yourself in a bad spot, bad like... at some point you will be run over.

[makoti]

After watching the video I just wonder why the cops weren't on what looked like a reasonable bike path. Yes, the tarmac looked smoother but still the funds had been spent to build what seems to be a fairly nice bike path.


I haven't watched (at work), so maybe there's something in the video but this line of reasoning is what gets me yelled at all the time. Most bike paths around here are just plain dangerous with all the cross traffic but to most people (IE: those who never use them), the paths look reasonable and yep, they personally paid for them so I should use them. :no:

[pasadena]

The cyclists were riding a rural road, probably in Woolongong.
How many of you ride quiet, 2 lane roads into the mountains or rural areas?

It is NO PROBLEM for the car to pass two cyclists on this road or any road.
It requires the motor vehicle to exercise, literally, a few seconds of caution. You can't even say it would delay him, because it wouldn't. There is no patience.

The cyclists don't have to use the cycle path, for the same reason many don't
- the path may not extend far, forcing one to cross the dirt or other less safe alternative
- the path may be poorly maintained
-they may take a turn where the path has no exit
- the path may simply be less convenient

If it were a slow moving car in front of the ute driver, what would he have done? Tailgate, road rage, punish pass them?

This is some bogen raging at cyclists for no good reason.

Web wheelers love to eat their own. That's part of why cycling keeps up with this type of victim blaming mentality.

This is a great read on the depth of victim-blaming and propoganda that just feeds it
https://cyclingtips.com/2018/08/finding-mr-x/

[Tony T]

Can someone link the video here ? I don't see a video available on the linked page.

Here's another link: https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/cop-that-d-head-cyclists-in-viral-video-were-off-duty-policemen-20190131-p50upn.html

..

[cmbicycles]

The logic here seems to be, based on 5 seconds of video, "if there is a path the cyclist should be on it." Many of us on Paceline have written that we don't want to use bike lanes or MUPs for a host of reasons, I'm sure these two officers have valid reasons as well. There just isn't enough information in the video to blame anyone EXCEPT the driver who was clearly wrong on all counts (1. Road Rage 2. Using cell phone while driving 3. driving on the bike path). Cyclists can make mistakes in using roads, but I don't see anything these two did wrong other than riding on the road... oh wait, that isn't wrong.

[zap]

edit

This subject is so long to discuss... you can write a book about it because independently of what dumb car drivers do, you have cyclists like those 2 cops that just from looking at the video the 1st second you know they need to learn how to ride a bike in the road.

Please explain.

[makoti]

edit



Please explain.


Yeah, I'm confused as well. Two abreast, correct side of road, problem?

[ultraman6970]

Well this pictures tells it all... and has nothing to do with riding at the other side of the road like in australia ok?

DO you see the second rider pretty much using between 50 and 75% of the road??? they should not do that, then riders complain why car drivers are full of it for bothering them... even if the road is empty you have to keep yourself and who ever youo are riding with as Compact as possible... if they ride like that all the time clearly there is a problem as a riders aswell, not unreasonable that the driver is pissed off aswell... you know you are in a zone with big trucks, more to the side as much as you can...

Remember that girl in chicago that was run over by a truck while making a right?? she died because probably was looking at the stars at that minute...

similar situation... the truck guy in the video was making a point sure because probably he is tired of stuff like that... they use over 50% of my road, f.. it.. will use theirs... not the right thing to do but for every action you have a reaction... bad cyclist habits cause bad reactions in drivers... we all drive here, we have seen dumb s...T! from cyclists too... you cant side to the cyclist side because you are one... look at the picture... what do you see?? a well positioned dynamic duo over that road??... they arent man....

Gtg...


http://www.stickybottle.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/RR2-600x334.png

[Mark McM]

DO you see the second rider pretty much using between 50 and 75% of the road??? they should not do that, then riders complain why car drivers are full of it for bothering them... even if the road is empty you have to keep yourself and who ever youo are riding with as Compact as possible... if they ride like that all the time clearly there is a problem as a riders aswell, not unreasonable that the driver is pissed off aswell... you know you are in a zone with big trucks, more to the side as much as you can...

I don't know about Australia, but the laws here in Massachusetts are very clear: They say that cyclists have the right to ride in the travel lane, and that they have the right to ride two abreast as long as they aren't blocking other traffic. In the video, the cyclists are riding two abreast, but they are aren't blocking other traffic, because there is no other traffic to be blocked. There is no law in Massachusetts that riders have to ride "as Compact as possible", and in fact many cycling advocates advise against it in certain circumstances - for example, if the road is very narrow, a cyclist squeezing themselves to the edge of the road may just be inviting a motorist to try to pass when there is not enough space to safely do so.

To re-iterate, I see nothing wrong with how those cyclists are riding, given the width of the road and the (lack of) traffic at the moment the video was taken.

[sitzmark]

So apparently ....
-It is legal for cyclists in NSW to ride two abreast so long as there is no more than 1.5 metres between them.
-According to the NSW Road Users’ Handbook, “when a bicycle lane is marked on the road, cyclists must use it.” The bicycle path in the video is separate to the road.
- A cyclist caught not riding in a bicycle lane marked on the road could get a $112 fine, while a motorist caught driving in a bicycle lane could get a $187 fine.

I wasn't there and haven't ridden that road, so can't profess anything more than speculation. That said, it looks like the cyclists were close to the 1.5 meters apart. The rural road looks to be exceptionally narrow - like two cars would have difficulty passing with any speed - so it would make sense the speed limit is probably relatively low.

Quick toot of the horn a fair distance back to let the riders know the driver was approaching and slowing for 2-3 seconds would have inconvenienced no one. Driver is a dick and gets no sympathy from me. Hopefully his $187+ (or whatever the fine is for driving on a non-motorized MUP) goes to add more mixed-use path that cyclists don't use ... just to piss him off more. :banana:

Had the cyclists been riding like that in heavy traffic, they'd be dicks. They weren't. Looks like common sense might prevail in this case.

[redir]

Again as I and others have mentioned they look to be literally in the middle of no where. I can sympathize with that becasue I live in the middle of no where and can take any part of the road I want many times. And I can hear a car coming way off in the distance. Now, why they didn't hear this guy in the distance? IDk maybe too busy talking. But I can also sympathize with the driver too... Why the hell would they put an expensive bike lane out in the middle of nowhere? And since they did why the hell aren't those guys on it?

Look forward to hear the cops version of the story. Anyone seen that? I'm sure they have a reason. Could be they figured they are in the middle of nowhere!

[ultraman6970]

I do get the laws part but IMO taking the laws for granted is a problem too (my personal opinion and is nothing personal ok?) because that a book say something doesnt mean you have to do it as the book says... specially if we are talking about a situation like the one in the picture... so because the law says this and that, you cant feel entitled to it because after all the cars and the cyclist persona both have to share the road aswell....

So why to put yourself and your friend in danger when you know the road is narrow? I do get nobody was coming/using the road but them, but the lack of common sense is the problem here... you have a nice path next to the road... f.. all you want there, but if you have to ride in the road you have to be conscious that you have to share the road with cars, move as close to the side as possible...

That's the whole point of it... of course you have laws but geezzz.... I rather with my bad 3rd world bad customs that have kept me away of problems for 40 years than use those two in the picture as example. or even go by what the law says because after all laws try to generalize issues, the biggest issue with cycling laws is that at the time to analize an accident by what the law books say is usually the driver who gets off the hook almost all the time. Lawyers can twist those words anyway they want, so the only thing that is there to protect yourself is just f... common sense...

Narrow road... lot of traffic... ride as far from the cars and straight as possible...here by law a driver needs to get 3 feet of clearance at your side to pass you, I assure you that in my street you cant get that even if the driver tries to do it...i live in an avenue... what will keep you safe? just ride over the line that is at the right side of the road... I assure you that if i have the bad idea of riding in the middle of my side of the road as soon as I get to the 1st light I will start getting the finger or something for clogging the traffic.

3 years ago sold locally a set of wheels, same day went riding with this dude from DC... we arrive to the second light and this dude was already having issues because we were going straight and he was in the turning line, figuring out how to come back to my line was another issue, at the trail for some weird reason he was going in the left line, even we got some problem with faster riders than us because this dude was swerving a lot and they couldn't pass us.. well you can ride in lines of two at each side of the road in the bike path so no need to cross the median line.... over 40 years riding a bike he said... just bad habits, no idea how that dude made it to 60 to be honest, no idea if he is still alive.

OK... too long :P nights.

[Nomadmax]

Here's another link: https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/cop-that-d-head-cyclists-in-viral-video-were-off-duty-policemen-20190131-p50upn.html

..

Thank you.

As a cyclist and former bicycle cop I will say there is absolutely NO justification for the motorist to drive on the bike path, harass two cyclists (police or not) AND operate a video device all at the same time. To say there is even one iota of justification based on the cyclists using the road (albeit inconvenient for the motorist) is like saying I saw someone (insert traffic infraction here) "so I'm going to run every red light on my way to work today".

In my time as a police cyclist (while on duty) there were times I was buzzed or even crowded to the curb while being shouted at. As a cyclist, it was very satisfying to use the radio to get them stopped and then take the appropriate enforcement action when I caught up. On some occasions, because of warrants, driving without a license etc the drivers were arrested. The very idea that it's OK for someone to act outside the law and what society considers to be civil behavior when delayed tells me it could have just as easily been someone here who did the same thing as the motorist.

On a bicycle enthusiast forum no less.

[William]

Cyclists - By all appearances, riding legally on the road.

Ute Driver - Driving vehicle in the Bike path (illegal), on phone and filming (illegal) while yelling a tirade.

Done, end of story. One can try to justify the drivers actions all they like but that doesn't negate the drivers infractions of the law.



Two possible scenarios...

1). The driver appears to be in the bike path well behind the cyclists. Did he come up behind the cyclists who didn't move over so he went into the bike lane to go around? That would mean he would have had to back off quite a ways before he went over into the bike lane.

Or...

2).Did the driver just see them in the road from a distance (road appears very straight) and turned onto the bike lane well in advance (which appears to be the more likely scenario in the video) before he got to them. In this case, appearing to be smooth black top the cyclists may not have even known he was there until he was passing and yelling at them from the bike lane?

Either way he was still in the wrong.









William

[Blue Jays]

They sure have some quaint country lanes in that section of the world.
Dang...my plan would have been to discard the MUP and just pour the nice asphalt another few feet wider.

[Gummee]

They sure have some quaint country lanes in that section of the world.
Dang...my plan would have been to discard the MUP and just pour the nice asphalt another few feet wider.There is a large movement afoot to have many miles of separated MUTs to keep cyclists off the road and 'safe.'

If you're a 'casual cyclist' and are toodling along 5-10mph, that works out OK. Most traffic planners aren't cyclists. If they actually rode bicycles, they'd quickly find out how unsafe their separate paths can be.

I'd rather have slightly wider lanes too, but that doesn't seem to be the way the world is working right now.

M

[93KgBike]

True story; I hit a 300+ drive into the fairway as part of a foursome, and it rolled up to the pair of geezers in front of us. One of them drove their cart back to us, parked, parked it in the tee-box and tried to read us the riot act.

[Nomadmax]

True story; I hit a 300+ drive into the fairway as part of a foursome, and it rolled up to the pair of geezers in front of us. One of them drove their cart back to us, parked, parked it in the tee-box and tried to read us the riot act.

Civility is gone these days. At least he didn't bring your ball back to you ;)

[gdw]

True story; I hit a 300+ drive into the fairway as part of a foursome, and it rolled up to the pair of geezers in front of us. One of them drove their cart back to us, parked, parked it in the tee-box and tried to read us the riot act.

You're lucky. I would have pulled out a 4 iron and hit it back to you.:banana:

[redir]

Thank you.

As a cyclist and former bicycle cop I will say there is absolutely NO justification for the motorist to drive on the bike path, harass two cyclists (police or not) AND operate a video device all at the same time. To say there is even one iota of justification based on the cyclists using the road (albeit inconvenient for the motorist) is like saying I saw someone (insert traffic infraction here) "so I'm going to run every red light on my way to work today".

In my time as a police cyclist (while on duty) there were times I was buzzed or even crowded to the curb while being shouted at. As a cyclist, it was very satisfying to use the radio to get them stopped and then take the appropriate enforcement action when I caught up. On some occasions, because of warrants, driving without a license etc the drivers were arrested. The very idea that it's OK for someone to act outside the law and what society considers to be civil behavior when delayed tells me it could have just as easily been someone here who did the same thing as the motorist.

On a bicycle enthusiast forum no less.

They even treated you that way when you were in uniform?

[brownhound]

True story; I hit a 300+ drive into the fairway as part of a foursome, and it rolled up to the pair of geezers in front of us. One of them drove their cart back to us, parked, parked it in the tee-box and tried to read us the riot act.

And did you buy them a round of drinks at the end of the round as a way of apology?

That's what I recall happening when someone hit into a group when I was playing growing up decades ago.

[93KgBike]

Originally Posted by 93KgBike View Post
True story; I hit a 300+ drive into the fairway as part of a foursome, and it rolled up to the pair of geezers in front of us. One of them drove their cart back to us, parked, parked it in the tee-box and tried to read us the riot act.And did you buy them a round of drinks at the end of the round as a way of apology?

That's what I recall happening when someone hit into a group when I was playing growing up decades ago.
It's not like I flew the shot into them, but I get your drift; etiquette is important.

If that pair had waited for the four of us at the next tee for an apology (for my unusually long 337 yard drive), they certainly would have had one.

But no, we did not buy the guy that drove a golf cart onto the tee-box more alcohol at the end of our round.

Pretty sure the decade doesn't matter.

[Nomadmax]

They even treated you that way when you were in uniform?


They did in the beginning because they weren't used to seeing police on bikes. After about a year (with tickets and arrests) people drove around us like were the Hells Angels on the way to a rally ;) I wrote a small piece for Bicycling Magazine in 94 or so regarding this very thing, it was called "Pull Over Homer".

[makoti]

True story; I hit a 300+ drive into the fairway as part of a foursome, and it rolled up to the pair of geezers in front of us. One of them drove their cart back to us, parked, parked it in the tee-box and tried to read us the riot act.

I know so little about golf, I can't even figure out if this is a true story or a joke, and if it's a joke why it's funny.