First clip, he's in the right lane safety wise and there is no obligation to use a cycle lane. No cyclist in their right mind would cycle along that sorry excuse for a cycle path. It's too narrow with no space to share safely with pedestrians, people's gate entrances all along it, branches hanging over. All it takes is one person to walk out of their house without looking right and the cyclist could be knocked into the road potentially under a vehicle. Nice video otherwise. I hate red light jumpers too.
Absolutely spot on there , no way would i use that unsafe cycle lane/Pavement , i like how the motorbike criticizes but overtakes the car on pedestrian crossing with double white lines approaching in the middle of the road ,the bike behind actually overtakes on double white lines.
Agreed, sometimes just because it's a cycle path, doesnt mean it's a good idea, to safely use that they would have to go less than 10 miles an hour, and I'd have to slow down more to pass another bike or pedestrians or cross a road then its interrupted.. . When you add my weight, the stuff I carry and my bikes weight I'm around 100kg, going 15 miles an hour I can do some serious harm to a child, a elderly person or anybody in general.... it's just another example of cycling infrastructure being installed to check a box, the only person it benifits really is a car.
@@cbjm4568 The only type of path that pathway is any use for, is a pavement, a pedestrian walkway. There are too many hazards for it to be used in any other way. A Shared Path has an absolute maximum speed limit (so I understand and believe) of 12mph. A Segregated Path (separate sides for pedestrians and cyclists) has, again so I understand, a speed limit of 18mph. Any faster and you are obliged to use the road. Perhaps you should reread the Highway Code to polish up your knowledge of the road rules. Reading Cyclecraft could also be a good idea, as it would open your eyes, to what is and isn't advised for cyclists. It is also up to date information and as is evident, you need to be retaught what you think is right and wrong on the road...!
Cyclist isn't in the wrong lane he's using the lane he is legally allowed to use. Most cycle lanes are designed by 4 year olds with crayons and so are not safe to use.
First clip. The only thing the cyclist did wrong was not taking the lane at the pinch point. Thankfully the car was patient enough to wait till after to overtake. Most car drivers would just plough through not giving a f*ck about the cyclist. Which is why you take the lane.
I am a biker but you want to educate yourself. Just like cars and motorbikes don't have to use motorways all the time, cyclists don't have to use cycle paths, if they choose not to.
Good and considerate motorcycling around the police horses . Fair to point out that police horses undergo extensive training not to be spooked by loud or unexpected noises since they are often used for crowd control and the like .
Cyclists jumping red lights : any cyclist caught doing that should have the penalty ( driving ban ) applied to any driving licence they happen to hold - might just focus their minds a bit !
I maintain that for the safety of road users and especially the horses, they shouldn't be allowed on main roads. There is no need for it. These days horses are only used for recreation and not for transportation.
Outside of a handful of urban areas exactly the same argument could be used for cyclists. Just bear in mind that after pedestrians horses have more right to use the road than anybody else, and have had for nearly 800 years. Where I live there are very few bridle paths so horses have to use the roads to get anywhere. A bit of give and take is all that is needed. Of course, if you're a cyclist competing in the Tour de Finchley (other London areas are available) then none of the above applies.
@@keystonedriving8180 then I suggest that it is wrong for horses to be kept in areas where they have to use the road. Keep them where there are the proper facilities.
@@keystonedriving8180 except a cycle isn't a 300kg animal that can get spooked just by general road users presence and bicycles are always under operators control horses should not be on the roads keep it in a field where it's safe and not putting the public at risk.
cyclist on the wrong lane..... where. the second biker overtook on a solid line and the first one did a dangerous overtake as the car was about to pass
I thought he was being very careful around cyclists He left enough room in the one clip he was overtaking a cyclist, and the rest of the time, the cyclists were overtaking him
Safer for the cyclist to use the sidewalk if slow (regardless of condition of sidewalk). If cyclist is fast however, better for the cyclist to be on the street, if the condition of the sidewalk is bad.
Clip 1, I would probably use the path but I fully understand why the guy is in the road, that cycle path is a sub standard example of a cheap token gesture, a box ticking exercise. Nice one with the van by the way.
First clip, it’s not a legal requirement for a cyclist to use a cycle path and that was a cycle path on the footpath also have you seen some of the half hearted attempts by councils around the country as regards cycle paths?
imm not gona lie, as a cyclist i jump quite a few red lights but its only the one's on a single direction street made for people to cross, and ofcourse i only jump them when there arent people
I would agree that if you carefully check there's nobody there it's not particularly dangerous, particularly if you roll through slowly. But I do think us cyclists should stick to the rules, even though there are many rules which are more designed for cars and are much more dangerous when broken by cars. Partly it doesn't look good when cyclists break rules, it leads to a lessening of the reputation of cyclists by idiots who ignore all the dangerous moves some drivers engage in and focus only on cyclists. It is important to stick to traffic rules.
The more people see you break the rules, the more they feel they can also get away with breaking the rules, so standards get worse until you (or I), as the more vulnerable road user, end up deceased under a taxi.
When it's obviously clear and safe and everyone's crossed and there's no-one approaching the crossing (like in the clip) I don't really see why ALL vehicles can't cross. It's so silly and pointless when everyone's just sitting there looking at an empty road.
Grey car well done you !! Saw the horses and stayed back , you were right she almost lost control of the horse.my mantra before going out cycling ....Expect the unexpected.
Forget slowing down for horses, that just gives 'em a chance to get to you. Pass them as fast and as wide as possible. If necessary, ignore red lights to get away from the horse. Your priority should be to stay out of kicking range. Many years ago, mid 1980s, me and my friend Ken were stopped at a road-works temporary lights. Not revving or messing about, just waiting for the lights to change, Ken on a GP100 and me on an RD125LC, both on standard pipes so not overly loud. Horse and rider came up behind us, horse didn't like the sound of the bikes, kicked Ken right off his bike, bent the frame, destroyed his back, as a result he's spent most of his adult life in a wheelchair. I rode my bike into the hole in the road to get out of the way of the horse, dented the tank and the exhaust on a 6 day old bike. Horses should not be on the road. You can't get in or out of my village without playing "dodge the horse shit". Dog owners mostly manage to pick up after their pets, horse owners leave it to be a road hazard. They don't care that it's illegal to deposit debris upon the highway (S148 or S161 Highways Act 1980), don't give a damn about our safety but expect us to slow right down and endanger ourselves for their safety. I've even had to emergency stop to avoid a scooterist sliding along on his ass after he'd hit a giant horse egg and fallen off, and then had to call him an ambulance because he broke his wrist in the fall. Horses really shouldn't be on the road. If you don't have somewhere off-road to ride your horse then don't get one, same as a go-kart or a motocross bike.
Wow..!!! That is some great story about you and your friend. So sorry to hear what happened to you guys! You are also right about the poo. I was impressed when I rode to Ypres (Belgium) in November 2021 and saw a group of horse riders with a support van cleaning up the mess behind them. Elsewhere I have seen a bag been attached to collect, but mainly when the horse pulls a carriage. I don’t understand why they don’t do any of this in the UK.. Anyone out there knows why horse riders are not fined for polluting, similar to dog owners ???
@@akamood The only reason I can see that they don't get fined is that horse owners are overrepresented in the judiciary, it's the elites and the "horsey set". British Equestrian Society website even used to make the claim that horse owners were exempt from having to pick up their mess, but it didn't quote the law that makes them exempt because there is no such law. I've done quite a bit of research on this, even looked into case law, the most "extreme" prosecution I can find for depositing debris was a lad on a scooter who spilled half a bag of cheetos (corn snacks) from his pocket whilst riding. If you get fined for a harmless hand-full of cheetos it makes no sense that you don't get fined for a 20 pound pile of slippery dung.
Horses should only be allowed on the road with special permission for special events with a road closure in place so that other traffic does not interfere this could apply to something like a wedding, funeral or other big event you might wish to have horses at otherwise they should not be on the road and only to be ridden on private land. Horses have no lights, no brakes, and the rider has no control if they get spooked, they leave horse shit all over the road as stated already and are a hazard to vunerable user and even for a car driver they are going to cost them a fortune in repairs if it kicks their car and could even write a car off, also I don't believe horses are insured to ride on the road in the case where they damage another vehicle so its the motorist expected to front the cost of repair I would assume or take a hit on their insurance.
@@gravemind6536 Nope have to share the road with horses luckily very few riders have a desire to use the road. In rural areas they ride on the grass next to the road anyway and on rare occasions when they are unable to avoid using the road you should deal with it. They can't kick your car if you don't get close enough. Riding on pavement is hard on their legs and hooves so very few rider want to be on pavement any longer than needed. Cart/carriage horses are shod with special shoes to help with grip.
Horses should be subject to the same rules as cars if you can't control them and they cause a danger to other road users that should be riding without due care or if anyone is hurt dangerous riding and subject to the same penalties as motorists this is usually a 300-400kg animal a kick or stomp could be fatal if you can't be safe on them get off the road.
3:23 either they liked the sound or they liked how they caught up with a motorbike even with all the extra power it has Cyclists might be faster, but at least a motorbike sounds better
London, etc has started doing enforcement with Horses where Police go undercover looking for motorist who don't follow the rules when horses are present and then their some that will be in uniform and do enforcement as normal.
Put number plates on all road users, otherwise scofflaw bicyclists will just switch to something that isn't a bicycle and continue to be scofflaws. Equal rules for all, including fines and bans, for everything from a truck driver to a pedestrian.
From looking at July's Road surveying if cyclists had number plate it would Rased 80000 pounds a day in red light violations alone. 15000 pounds a day for illegally cycling on the footway and 7000 pounds a day in no right turn violations.
Police horses are generally very well trained and disciplined, still good to precede with caution none the less. The first horse on the other hand Ideally needs better trained, horses like that are pretty dangerous to both rider and other people. She pretty much lost control of that horse and nearly slammed into that car.
I agree. But then again it´s also the drivers fault. He accelerated witch caused the horse to spooke. I´m a horseback rider myself and it makes me so mad when people do that. I mean I don´t ride on bublic roads but still, if you saw a moose or a deer on the rode, you would probably stop and go around it slowly. Most of the time when people see horses they don´t care. It´s quite the opposite, people accelerate to get past the horse riders just to be assholes.
@@x66Hawk66x you mean bikers? cause I wasn´t talking about bikers, I was taking about cars and bigger cars. So far I have seen very few people who wait for riders. In cities people tend to wait more patiently. Meaby because of more witnessess??
@@riikkka1 Wow splitting hairs bikes, bikers whatever.... You can clearly see the horse was trying to move away from the motorcyclists while being parked. The sight of the motorcycles spooked the horse, not that car. I live in a rural area with plenty of horses, and I rarely see people driving past them in a manner that's inconsiderate it has nothing to do with witnesses. The car driver could have done differently and stopped on sighting the scared and out of control horse but that's about it.
The way police horses get well trained is experiencing the environment they are expected to work in. (It's part temperament as well). It could also be the rider, as the rider you become both lead stallion and mare. If the rider is afraid of the situation the horse picks up on the fear but thinks it's fear of whatever it's noticed. It can act as a vicious cycle. If I can hear the fear in her voice then so can the horse not to mention what her legs and rein hands are saying to the horse. We used to warn new riders of this before rides.
0:06 - Cyclist is not in the wrong lane, he's just choosing not to use the dangerous shared footpath which is his right. 0:31 - Kids an idiot! 1:10 - Cyclists are idiots! 2:48 - Good overtake and exactly how you should overtake a cyclist or motorbike too. 3:10 - Multiple cyclists are idiots!
Thanks Kevin. Why do you think this? Safer for a cyclist on dedicated lanes, no? Otherwise why do they invest all this money doing them and narrowing down the already narrow roads?
@@akamood Much of the time they are placed without any real planning or thought. Also a cyclist has no legal obligation to use them so your assertion that they are in the 'wrong' lane is clearly and demonstrably incorrect. You should know this by now as many, people have already pointed it out to you. But if you don't believe them then read your copy of the highway code and it will tell you the same thing. Cyclists are not obligated to use cycle lanes. Often the cycle lanes are actually LESS safe than the road route. Drivers forego giving them enough room as they think that as long as there is a line between the car and bike then it is enough. The fact that you are doubling down on your ignorance says a lot about your attitude. I sincerely hope that most drivers are not as ignorant of the rules as you are or as belligerent in the face of conflicting evidence. You very much need to educate yourself. Why does it even matter if the car had to slow down for a split second? It doesn't, it's just entitlement speaking.
first few seconds, biker tailgates a car then overtakes on zig zags. next few seconds, kids on bikes will always pull a wheelie. horses, mad as a horse,. cyclists, 6 morons good call. wide berth and pass slowly, also cyclists.
191.. "You MUST NOT park on a crossing or in the area covered by the zig-zag lines. You MUST NOT overtake the moving vehicle nearest the crossing or the vehicle nearest the crossing which has stopped to give way to pedestrians." At the time of the overtake, the vehicle nearest the crossing was either the motorbike behind him or maybe even the one behind that, both the camera bike and car were well beyond the crossing.
@@007floppyboy I think you need to actually read 191 again, rather than just churning out a rule number. It says you must not overtake the vehicle nearest the crossing. He didn't. By the time he overtook the car, the vehicle nearest the crossing was one of the other motorbikes behind him. Even if they had not existed, his own motorbike was between the car and the crossing and was therefore nearer to the crossing than the car.
The bloke who made this video needs to get out more 🤣 Seriously the part where its showing how to slow down for a horse when he just slowed down because he had to stop for a red light anyway 😂 is it parody account?
Teaching people to suck eggs.. yet he also points out some totally incorrect information such as cyclists should use a poorly maintained sidewalk instead of a road.. its a cyclists judgement to use one, absolutely no rule anywhere says you have to!
@@georgebarnes8163 Indeed, they were build for horses and carriages, then many years later they got rid of the cobbles and made them flat because of cyclists... So without horses we wouldn't have roads and without cyclists we wouldn't have flat roads.
@@ThatGoth They were built for people, by people. Without horses, people would still have moved around. Some parts of the world never had horses as a primary means of transportation due to inhospitable climate or due to other animals being used as beasts of burden, but they still got roads.
