- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
OPINION
Should all cyclists use action cameras? Have your say
Sun, May 22, 2022 14:32
135
kitvision-escape-4kwWhen I introduced myself as road.cc’s community editor a couple of weeks ago, I mentioned that one of the things the role involves is writing regular articles about broader issues related to cycling that go beyond a typical news story – and the first of those, sparked by a recent discussion thread, asks whether all cyclists should use action cameras? It’s an issue that from a personal point of view came into sharper focus a couple of weekends ago when a friend was knocked off his bike twice by the same driver in a matter of minutes – but with no video proof of what the motorist had done, landed himself with a caution for criminal damage.
We’d had a pleasant afternoon at the football, and after a swift pint following the match went our separate ways, me on foot, he on his bike. The following morning, he phoned me to tell me what had happened.
He was moving off from traffic lights to cross the South Circular Road in London, and since he was going straight on, had positioned himself in the middle of the three lanes, when his rear wheel was clipped by an Uber driver, sending him flying. The driver then berated him, insisting – incorrectly, of course – that he should have been riding in the gutter to the left.
With the driver continuing to insist he’d done nothing wrong, my friend, who pointed out that since he was going straight on he was in the correct lane, was unsurprisingly getting a bit steamed up and in his frustration kicked out at the car, knocking off the front number plate, before getting back on his bike and heading off.
A short time later, the same driver, who presumably had called the police in the meantime, pulled across my friend and knocked him off his bike again, before getting out of his car and putting him – still on the ground and somewhat dazed – in a chokehold. Moments later, a load of police turned up.
Despite my friend telling them what happened, the officers sided with the driver, and gave my friend – who had no witnesses to the first incident, and no evidence of the driver knocking him from his bike – a caution.
While I’m not condoning kicking out at the vehicle, it’s an understandable reaction in the circumstances, but it struck me as a clear example of one of those cases where video footage would have made all the difference – and could well have resulted in action being taken not against the cyclist, but against the motorist.
And it resonated with the piece I’d already been planning to write on the subject, based on readers’ comments to a news article that I posted last month in which Detective Chief Superintendent Andy Cox of Lincolnshire Police urged cyclists to use cameras to catch law-breaking drivers, saying that “the police can’t be everywhere all the time, but the public can be.”
That article reported how police had seen a rise in submissions of video evidence of poor driving following the changes to the Highway Code earlier this year.
One comment to the article in particular caught our eye, from road.cc reader Fignon’s Ghost, who argued that all cyclists have a moral obligation to use cameras and help make the roads safer for their follow riders. They wrote:
It should be read that ALL road cyclists have a responsibility to bring those rule breakers to account.
By doing so, you could be saving the life of a fellow cyclist.
If we cannot hold motorists to account for the terrible consequences their illegal driving has then we may as well stay on our paddleboards.
Your camera footage could mean the difference:
In a guilty verdict.
A criminal conviction.
The payment of personal injury compensation.
The mindset change of ALL those drivers out there who will have to face the fact their actions will no longer only have consequences for OTHER road users.It's essential that we help our underfunded road traffic police and put forward evidence to arrest irresponsible driving.
If it's not today. It could be you on that future ride that succumbs to that moment of breathtaking motoring ignorance. It could be you...
Road cyclist. It's not about weight, cost or tedium.
That's why YOU always wear a camera. Front and back!
Unsurprisingly, the comment sparked a debate, with hawkinspeter, for example, saying it would be better if motorists were encouraged to use dashcams.
It'd be better if the onus was on drivers to run dashcams and submit evidence. Car dashcams are cheaper as they don't need a big internal battery, they don't need to be waterproof and weight is much less of an issue.
In reply to that comments, AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
I do wonder how many drivers submit dashcam footage and what level of driving they submit them for. Forgetting actual collisions, there are several YouTube channels who release weekly videos filled with many examples of bad driving (both from Cammer and subject) and not one indicates whether it was submitted.
However WMP [West Midlands Police] sent me an email on Wednesday asking me for a resubmission over a mistake on my original form and it was above 1,850 submissions this year. I can't believe that is all from cyclists (although 15 of those would be mine).
And jh2727 pointed out that it appears it is cyclists who are more likely than drivers to submit actual examples of offences being committed (we suspect in part that may be because, being unprotected by a vehicle’s body, cyclists’ perception of the danger they have been subjected to is higher). He write:
There was a story about this not so long ago. I think the upshot of it was that the police agreed that an offence was committed more often on the videos submitted by cyclists than videos by motorists.
It’s not impossible to envision a future in which all motor vehicles will be equipped with dashcams and other TV systems – many are already standard on fleets of commercial vehicles and those providing transportation services such as buses and coaches, of course (and such footage can and has been used to help convict law-breaking drivers.
But what do you think of the suggestion that all cyclists have a duty – albeit a moral rather than legal one – to use cameras?
One potential effect of that, of course, would be that just through sheer weight of numbers, many more examples of dangerous, as opposed to careless, driving would inevitably be captured – but that could risk overloading the system, with the result that many less serious crimes might go unpunished.
And as a number of readers pointed out, there’s also the issue of consistency in the approach taken by different police forces, some of which are much more proactive than others in enforcing the law and ensuring that drivers who break it are punished – although as IanMSpencer wrote, one potential solution to that might be to take the matter out of the hands of individual forces, and act upon such footage centrally.
I don't see why there can't be a national department for dealing with these, with a clear set of standards, which could be published so we know not to waste our or their time (or get to argue about the criteria). A specialist team could rattle through them, filtering out exceptions like likely repeat offenders for special local police treatment.
Certainly it’s an interesting idea, and as the articles published in our Near Miss of the Day series, now approaching 800 submissions, show, the issue of drivers putting cyclists in danger is an ever-present problem.
Let us know your thoughts on the issue in the comments below.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
More Opinion
Latest Comments
- Daclu Trelub 4 sec ago
Incredibly bone-headed.
- chrisonabike 4 min 59 sec ago
Cones on AVs might be even safer... https://slate.com/business/2023/07/autonomous-vehicles-traffic-cones-san...
- mark1a 3 min 40 sec ago
They were running Oracle, probably couldn't get out of the contract. Also work in IT.
- Mr Blackbird 13 min 41 sec ago
I'm not suggesting that anybody give in to the IDSs of the world. But why give them ammunition, if it can easily be avoided.? Avoiding breaking the...
- mdavidford 53 min 30 sec ago
They both start with 'A' and are six letters long, though
- wtjs 1 hour 33 min ago
after I said that if they wouldn't tell me the outcome of a submission I would have to make an FOI request for it...
- Bungle_52 1 hour 40 min ago
In Gloucestershire I've been having an email dialogue with Robert Vestey who has recently decided that close passes will get an advisory letter...
- Sriracha 2 hours 2 min ago
Lidl have a window poster emblazoned, "Black Friday. Starts Sunday".
- Dnnnnnn 2 hours 7 min ago
I take "rat running" to be taking shortcuts through streets which aren't really suitable (at least when lots of people do the same thing)....
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 5 min ago
Note that only one of them was actually used by him as a race bike (the 2010 Madone) and that not in his "glory" years, I'm sure one of his Tour...
Add new comment
119 comments
I'm an avid cyclist & former Police Officer who was almost killed recently by an aggressive driver. Rather than share the video with Twitter, I shared it with the POLICE who are enforcing the motorist. I documented the UK process for submitting cycle cam video evidence to the Police. If you're tired of aggressive drivers threatening your lives DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!: https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/q/84148/52565
I agree, but luckily I'm covered by Avon & Somerset who are good at dealing with cam footage. Unfortunately, different police forces have vastly different standards and some appear to find any excuse to avoid dealing with close-passes.
Which area are you in?
Suspicious! 3 posts and 'I'm a cyclist myself' variant. The police are almost certainly not 'enforcing the motorist' because mostly they don't bother. They do a lot of pretending, but when they won't tell you what they've done (citing entirely false interpretations of GDPR regulations) it means they've done essentially nothing- they're waiting until you're killed or seriously injured when there won't be any witnesses and the cameras are broken: Win-Win as far as they're concerned. The Stackexchange item mentioned is rubbish, and restates the nonsense that you are obliged to provide evidence against yourself- if the driver wishes to blame you for causing the close-passing assault they carried out, they need to provide the evidence- like we have to.
Not every new poster is a troll and not every Police force is terrible, although i agree the evidence we see regularly indicates the good one's are few and far between (Police forces, not new posters).
I'm just guessing but a cycle hating driver troll is unlikely to be encouraging us to report drivers to the police. It would be a shame if they were put off ever posting again, why not give it some more time to make sure before posting comments like that?
I think he might be a cyclist and that he might ride a penny-farthing.
It's a step beyond "also rides a bike..."
Which police force - how many of them actually do anything other than write a letter ?
I can't speak for PFG but I'm in court soon over a close pass or red light jumper and that's West Midlands Police. It could be either as they both happened at the same set of lights and i only know the date but neither of them hit me or anyone else.
Hertfordshire, theres even a link to an edited clip of the close pass the force are enforcing...via that bicycles.stackexchange guide they put together.
only points Id quibble on your guide is dont quote the time frame for reporting incidents as just a, "I believe", it only takes a few secs to double check the standard legal limit, and to add something like some forces in the country like to use quicker turnarounds on letter notifications so always check with your local force what their rules are.
also I dont believe intent is a factor at all in prosecuting careless driving charges for close passes, it is often by its very nature an unintentional act that is simply an inadvertant error through carelessness.
Since about 2013 I've been recording every ride running the matchbox sized Mobius cameras front and rear using 1080 30 fps video images. I've been fortunate to have only involved plod in about one case per annum with about 40% success in getting them to get up off their arses and do something. Recently, to make them understand the closeness of passes, when I get home after a bad pass, I take a video from both of my cameras showing the line of my road space and then a line of the legal distance the vehicle should be away from me. Then I superimpose these lines over the still images of the incident to show the extent of the breach. I use pieces of timber on my loungeroom floor with its 4" boards as markers in the post ride video. In conjunction with the video it's fairly compelling info that can be hard for plod to find an excuse to ignore. Remember that the exclusion zone is from your extremity, not the centre of the bike.
As the cyclist to be the first ever to go to court in the country for being close passed I agree that the police can't be everywhere which is why when West Midlands Police started operation close pass members of the public were only to happy to help bolster the catch rate by chipping in making the operation seem much bigger than it actually was, sending a message that you never know when and where you might be caught. Clearly now most, not all by any means, have adjusted their driving but there are still many to catch. The driving laws in the UK are stil very antiquated and its easy to see why the police get frustrated, but likewise when forces demonstrate a lack of action when given perfectly good evidence so do members of the public. I have had some horrendous events if Staffordshire only to be told a warning letter has been sent..no prosecution when clearly it should have been so.
As for cameras being fitted to cars just as in buses and trucks etc that only works if the driver is honest, here in the West Midlands our largest bus operator National Express West Midlands is notorious for claiming the onboard system wasn't working if their vehicle is involved in an incident to which their driver is at fault. They actually tell all their drivers, and have done for decades, if you're involved in collision say nothing - wait for the inspector to arrive. The process then is that the driver is whisked away and will only be interviewed by the police if warrented at a prearranged appointment, unless there has been a fatality and even then the driver is told to wait for the company solicitor. Bus companies have the fastest vehicle recovery rates in the country to protect their image. When our first ward wide 20 mph zone was introduced you should have heard the bus companies crying because their drivers were getting caught by the police who were out in force to make the point about the zone, West Mids police responded by telling them the amnesty for bus companies was over - sadly self policing 20 zones do not work as tiem has proven. Teh only way to address poor driving is with tougher laws and sentencing. What does our system do to the driver, as a first offence, of vehicle taken without consent, who fails to stop when police get behind them, and who has a bladed article on the m when finally stopped? probably a fine and maybe probabtion. Try doing that in Thailand, a poor but very respectful of law country, your sentence for those offences if its your first time is 30 years no plea barganing no time off for good behaviour either, as sadi the Thai people are very respectful of the law.
Mark? Is that you?
I wouldn't want to start copying Thailand's approach to road safety - they've got the worst record outside of Africa. I don't have a huge amount of faith in the Thai police either as they are well known for targetting tourists with scams.
I don't agree so much with increasing the fines and penalties as it makes no difference if the driver thinks there's no chance that they will get caught. What we need to do is to get more police and cameras on the roads and consistently catch drivers. I don't mind if we give drivers a slap on the wrist for non-injuring poor driving (e.g. using a phone or a close-pass) as long as the drivers get the message that poor driving will be responded to.
Agree - what's most important is prompt feedback so people don't have a feeling of impunity / "it's normal" / "it doesn't matter, everyone's doing it".
Also agree that while I think we can usually learn something from other cultures importing ideas from the Thai police and criminal justice system isn't something I'd recommend.
Although if they put road.cc's John Stevenson in charge of roads policing I bet you'd notice a change pretty quick.
Here's one from this morning for Martin73 and any other "camera vigilante" critics: approaching a three-way junction with broken traffic lights, I take primary position and carefully signal that I am turning right. The white car drives at speed up the opposing lane into the face of oncoming traffic and cuts straight over the top of me, forcing me to brake, and turns left. In response to my startled "Oi!" the driver stops illegally in the middle of the junction and shouts, "Go and suck your mother you fucking poof." I'd love to hear how this was due to the way I ride and how it represents me going looking for incidents to report?
Well, obviously you shouldn't be getting in your dad's way.
I record all my rides, and I upload them to YouTube too.
At some stage* in my life, I will be no longer able to ride a bike and I want something to remind me of when I could ride - it's a scrap book, but with moving pictures rather than stills.
I've also found it very useful when people ask me about routes I've ridden - especially if they have not ridden it before - and they have found it useful.
I don't go out of my way to publish poor driving - even out here in the sticks there's plenty of that; although I have had a couple of incidents used on NMOTD. I'll report dangerous driving where I know an offence had been committed (Police Scotland have been really quite canny by only accepting video by email - means you *really* are serious about the incident), and to be honest, incidents that stand a chance of being prosecuted are few and far between.
"The memories of a man in his old age, are the deeds of a man in his prime" ... I know that I have memory problems following a TBI, and they are likely to get worse.*
* I was hit by a poorly driven car back in 2018 that was life-threatening, and has left me with life changing injuries. I ride an e-bike as I am no longer physically able to ride a normal bike. Some of the injuries I've received will only degenerate over time, both physically and mentally. Due to the brain injury I received, I have memory problems ... So I'm just trying to make sure that I don't lose more of my life in the future.
Presumably, the police gave the cyclist a caution because he admitted kicking the plate off the car, while the uber driver likely denied doing anything wrong; point is, never admit to anything.. deny, deny, deny; of course, having bike cams are good for evidence but make sure your own camera doesn't film you doing the wrong thing and above all, don't be a vigilante like a certain well known white African.. just provide the evidence to the proper authorities, refrain from road rage and especially attempting to enforce road laws (unless you are an actual policeman).
Elon Musk? I suppose as a billionaire he probably does go out with gadgets to fight crime.
Has Prue Leith been taking matters into her own hands again? Maybe overcome by deliveroo rage?
I assumed we were talking about Camus - "the only moral value is courage" and all that.
Fight crime? I'm pretty sure that he's a super-villain/cult leader
He only set up The Boring Company because he needed to do something else with all the digging equipment he'd bought to make his secret volcano base.
Oh yes, the brilliant idea that putting cars underground will completely solve congestion problems.....
https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7n74d/traffic-jams-are-possible-in-elon-musks-tunnels-apparently
But we know his real reason...
What a peculiar thing to write, in what way is his colour relevant? Would you describe Nelson Mandela as "a certain well-known black African"?
Is that what Froomey's doing now?
I had/have a go-pro which has gathered dust in the garage for about three years.. I found it clunky to use, slow to do anything with, the software frankly awful and the battery life very poor. That put me off cameras to be honest.
Communiting to work now through the 'mean streets' of Coventry, Kenilworth and Warwick, probably 50% of journeys there'll be an incident which gives me a fright, some worse than others. I do 'wonder' about getting another camera, but I also figure that it might be a major faff and investment and for what 'end'? Would it stop me getting knocked off or close passed? Will it help my anxiety when riding? Will it require 'attention' every day and become a chore.. Will I feel obliged to submit every instance of bad driving to the local portal?
Firstly, I don't believe that it's a cyclist's duty to run a camera, though I would encourage their use if you've got the spare money etc.
Something like a Cycliq is much better designed for commuting than the go-pros (not that I have experience with a go-pro). They fill up the sd card and then overwrite the oldest video, so you don't have to worry too much about maintenance, though they do "lock" a video file if your bike falls over, so sometimes they need to be deleted manually. 99% of the time, I just take it off my bike after a ride and stick it on charge and the other 1% being when I want to check the footage due to a close pass etc.
I don't think they stop close-passes (except in the long-term after prosecution) and it probably won't help much with anxiety either. I do find it helps keep me calm after an incident as it provides peace of mind that I can do something later to get justice etc. I don't feel obliged to submit every instance of bad driving - if something happens, I have a look at the footage and see how bad it looks from the video and often think that it's not worth submitting.
It does take time and effort to submit footage, so it very much depends on how angry you feel about bad driving as to whether you want to get involved (also don't bother if you're in Lancs).
Thanks for that insight
Pages