Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

OPINION

Should all cyclists use action cameras? Have your say

Avatar
One reader says it’s a moral duty to help protect fellow riders by bringing law-breaking drivers to justice. What do you think?

When 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.”

> Highway Code changes: video submissions made to police rise as cyclists urged to report law-breaking drivers

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.

Add new comment

119 comments

Avatar
ghostrider64 replied to hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
1 like

Have to agree about reviewing the footage as what att he time seems close can be very different on camera and thats what a court will see. it does come with experience over time as to what will be used or not.

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
1 like

Would it stop me getting knocked off or close passed?
Probably not but if the camera is noticeable they might think twice. But get a passpixi sign as a cheap alterantive for that aspect anyway.

Will it help my anxiety when riding? 
Again. Probably not as you are not anxious about having a camera or not. Although if the items mentioned above happen, then it might.

Will it require 'attention' every day and become a chore?
Well the battery / SD card would need to be charged / emptied but is that any different then lights and other things you check / do at the start/end of a ride?

 Will I feel obliged to submit every instance of bad driving to the local portal? 
Depends on you. I have decided not to send stuff after I have reviewed it and only note down really bad ones when I cycle which are normally ones to cause me to swear or shout out. I have also sent in bad driving that hasn't caused me immediate harm (car driving 200 yards down the wrong side of a dual carriageway because they wouldn't make the cycle of lights due to the queues in front). Obviously more civic minded people might report everything as the bad driving for me might be a killer for someone else if they are not pulled up and at least warned about it.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to AlsoSomniloquism | 2 years ago
1 like

I changed the settings on mine so that it fills up a 2 minute buffer and only saves it as a file when I press record, that way I only have one or two files to look at.

Mind you if I do get badly knocked off, I won't be able to press record !

Avatar
peted76 replied to AlsoSomniloquism | 2 years ago
0 likes

Thank you very much  1

Avatar
wtjs replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
0 likes

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

As I have said before about GoPro: hardware good, software dire. However, the software has been working well for the last month except that the sound goes off after a couple of minutes. Sometimes (probably depends on something happening in Windows 11, and the GoPro PC software has been unmaintained for several years) the app won't start at all for several days despite all the tricks. One day it will stop for good.

Avatar
peted76 replied to wtjs | 2 years ago
0 likes

Because of the software, I genuinley don't understand why the things are so popular.

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
0 likes

I suspect it was because they were the first widespread "action" camera that they almost became a verb (he go-pro'd his descent). But they are only really initially designed to film the 10-15 minutes of a ski / mountain bike descent or parachute jump and then insta or Tiktok it.

I do wonder what the cameras some bikes use in the pro tours are like. Do they continously record or are they turned on remotely by someone? You would think they would be quite tiny and lightweight, 

Avatar
grOg replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
0 likes

'Communiting'.. is that something to do with communes or communism?

Avatar
IanMSpencer | 2 years ago
3 likes

I ran cameras for a while, never looked at footage. Then a motorist broke my Fly12 by drowning me going through flooding at high speed so I didn't bother.

Recently I got attacked by a roofer who objected to me complaining about his close pass - tried to trap me against the kerb, leapt out and ran after me trying to push me off the bike. As I was expecting it I got away with it thanks to no oncoming traffic and adrenaline. Then a driver pulled out and I ran into the back of him as he immediately emergency stopped which I think was retaliation for me waving at him. His reasoning was that I should have seen him pulling out and given way to him.

I reckon, riding generally on quiet country roads, that I catch about 5 potentially reportable incidents a ride. I've concluded that it is not worth the grief of reporting them when you consider how poorly resources the police are and if rather they were doing something more useful, so it is more for moral support in my hospital bed.

When I have a rainy day, I'm going to stick together a couple of punishment passes for riding two abreast followed by a sequence of 3 near miss head ons on the same ride, two of which were clearly because the driver could see the oncoming car but thought that they could squeeze between cycles and car, the other seemed simply to be that cycles are so slow that they did not consider the need to think about oncoming traffic.

I've got another one from yesterday where a plumber comes up behind, passes half the group, issues some inaudible words of advice and drives on - they were behind for about 30 seconds checking the video - all because of oncoming traffic, so being single file would not have helped given the road width. If you've got time to pass, slow, talk, accelerate and perform an otherwise clean pass, what could the advice have been?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to IanMSpencer | 2 years ago
9 likes

IanMSpencer wrote:

If you've got time to pass, slow, talk, accelerate and perform an otherwise clean pass, what could the advice have been?

Well I was once overtaken by a car and a woman leaned out and shouted "nice legs"

Avatar
Hirsute replied to hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
5 likes

"shame about the face"

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Hirsute | 2 years ago
10 likes

hirsute wrote:

"shame about the face"

Avatar
grOg replied to hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
1 like

nice beaver..

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to grOg | 2 years ago
2 likes

grOg wrote:

nice beaver..

Nope, just an ugly squirrel.

Here's a comparison pic for future use (ignore banjo for purposes of classification)

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
4 likes

I took a long way in on a commute once. Once I had showered and changed I came up to my floor. A woman in the department came over and said "I saw you today, it was just at the bottom of the hill". I replied I didn't realise it was her. She then stated "I didn't realise it was you either, I was admiring your arse in the shorts and then realised it was you and almost threw up!"

 

Avatar
mdavidford replied to IanMSpencer | 2 years ago
3 likes

IanMSpencer wrote:

Recently I got attacked by a roofer who objected to me complaining about his close pass

Serves you right for riding over people's rooves in the first place.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to mdavidford | 2 years ago
2 likes

Not this one - sound like he was quite roofless.

Avatar
Robert Hardy | 2 years ago
6 likes

I cycle mostly for convenience, cost and leisure, "Oh I need some milk", jump on the bike a swiftly cycle to the Coop or into town. Faffing about with cameras destroys that convenience. My bike cost (for me) a fairly considerable £670 once I had bought new wheels and tyres and a bigger back block and better front brake, most people cycle on bikes that cost considerably less; an effective action cam is not an inconsiderable additional cost and becomes yet another item to be stolen the moment you forget about it and leave it on the bike when chaining it up.
So no I don't see it as my duty to use one and oppose the idea it should become a cycling necessity.

Avatar
brooksby replied to Robert Hardy | 2 years ago
0 likes

Robert Hardy wrote:

I cycle mostly for convenience, cost and leisure, "Oh I need some milk", jump on the bike a swiftly cycle to the Coop or into town. Faffing about with cameras destroys that convenience. My bike cost (for me) a fairly considerable £670 once I had bought new wheels and tyres and a bigger back block and better front brake, most people cycle on bikes that cost considerably less; an effective action cam is not an inconsiderable additional cost and becomes yet another item to be stolen the moment you forget about it and leave it on the bike when chaining it up. So no I don't see it as my duty to use one and oppose the idea it should become a cycling necessity.

I've got to be honest, that's my attitude too.

I just wonder... 

Avatar
grOg replied to brooksby | 2 years ago
1 like

Camera's are unnecessary for local journeys but for those cyclists commuting on busy roads, especially peak hours, they are highly recommended.

Avatar
UrbanCommuter | 2 years ago
4 likes

I have over ten years of inner city commuting experience to draw upon when I observe that when it comes to cycle cameras, the bark is more effective than the bite.

Over the years I've filmed every kind of bad driving imaginable, including road rage incidents, for which to their credit, police have investigated and charged drivers.

There was however one unfortunate recording I made which changed my mind about footage. I found some particularly poor driving from a marked police van which then sped off when I asked why they'd driven so badly. Unfortunately, the police then 'lost' the footage then 'lost' the complaint altogether! Cycle cameras catch bent coppers just as effectively as bad drivers, see? I'll put that aside though.

Here's a hint: wear a cheap bike cam, learn NATO phonetic alphabet (Alpha, Beta, Charlie etc) and make a show of reading out number plates within the field of vision of the poor driver. If they challenge you, tell them it's a police evidence camera and the footage will be submitted for a fixed penalty notice (probably RTA S.36). The driver will squirm, they might get angry. Ignore them and keep going about your commute.

But here's the showstopper. You never need to switch the camera on. After all, your time on this planet is limited and mostly, submitting footage to the police is a bit of a waste of time and effort.

Deterrence is a powerful thing and we can all use it.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to UrbanCommuter | 2 years ago
10 likes

UrbanCommuter wrote:

 Deterrence is a powerful thing and we can all use it.

Mrs H doesn't run a camera, she does however have a PassPixi sign I gave her on the back of her jacket which is just as effective (and the effect is considerable in our experience) as mine, running a camera. The only time a driver did ask her where her camera was she pointed to her Garmin and said "in here" and he believed her.

Avatar
IanMSpencer replied to Rendel Harris | 2 years ago
5 likes

I would always recommend pointing at whatever light, Garmin or snack bag you have on the handlebar and shouting "On camera".

They should then have several days of slight uncertainty as to whether there is something coming in the post. It does generally get them thinking that an argument on camera isn't the best thing.

Avatar
TheBillder replied to UrbanCommuter | 2 years ago
3 likes
UrbanCommuter wrote:

.
Here's a hint: wear a cheap bike cam, learn NATO phonetic alphabet (Alpha, Beta, Charlie etc)

Perhaps learn it better than a fail at 3/26ths of the way through?

Avatar
UrbanCommuter replied to TheBillder | 2 years ago
7 likes

It's 'Bravo' instead of 'Beta', so I failed at 2/26ths there.

Sorry, was that unnecessarily pedantic?

Avatar
zideriup replied to UrbanCommuter | 2 years ago
7 likes

2/26ths can be simplified to 1/13th

Now that was unnecessarily pedantic! 😝

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to zideriup | 2 years ago
4 likes

I prefer 7.692% of the way through myself...

Avatar
mdavidford replied to UrbanCommuter | 2 years ago
0 likes

UrbanCommuter wrote:

It's 'Bravo' instead of 'Beta', so I failed at 2/26ths there. Sorry, was that unnecessarily pedantic?

Not pedantic enough - it's 'Alfa', not 'Alpha'.

Avatar
andystow replied to mdavidford | 2 years ago
0 likes

A as in Aye
B as in Bee
C as in Cue
D as in Djinn
E as in Eye
...

Avatar
grOg replied to UrbanCommuter | 2 years ago
0 likes

I have a very obvious but defective camera attached to the rear of my bike rack; I'm thinking of a rear mount radar triggered white light that would 'gatso' flash at drivers going faster than a set speed..

Pages

Latest Comments