Sums it up really......

[RainbowFire]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40960346

 

.....I think the phrase "I had no idea it was illegal......" sums a lot of riders really. In one, very sad incident, this justifies the need to have the riders certified, the "vehicles" subject to inspections and compulsary insurance for on-roaduse.

Removing the front brake? Really? Not only is it illegal, but the shear stupidity out-weighs the illegality, but the supidity of using a fixed wheel "vehicle" on the public highways too.

For those who are interested, the "gentleman" quoted in the article, rides like this, and has the arrogance to say they are not the ones who cause 99.9% of the accidents......

 

[mac11irl]

What a complete and total tool.

A certain amount of young and stupid.. but a lot of just arrogance..

 

[Rooted]

Lots of references to Track Bikes / Olympics etc in other media articles but people have ridden Fixed  wheel/gear Bikes on UK Public Highways for decades, and then also bikes with coaster brakes.

Many BMX'ers ride brakeless now, and not fixed wheel.

 

But dangerous riding is dangerous obviously.

Failing to find the UK law on having to have a front brake fitted to a pedal bike bit someone maybe can find and post a link.

 

So many think they are a movie star now.

The latest big thing is not Couriers & Courier Racing but Fixed Gear Street Trials.

 

 

Edited 17 August, 2017 by Awayoffski

[camelspyyder]

The way he (the perp) has been quoted talking in court is hardly going to get the judge onside come sentencing time is it.

[KenONeill]

@RainbowFire - When, and under what statute, did "riding fixed" (with a front brake) become illegal in the UK?

[RainbowFire]

2 minutes ago, KenONeill said:

@RainbowFire - When, and under what statute, did "riding fixed" (with a front brake) become illegal in the UK?

 

Ken, can you show me exactly where I said riding with a fixed wheel was illegal (with or without a front brake).

 

I said the fixed wheel is stupid, not illegal. A bit like having a welded diff, not illegal, just very stupid and impractical.

 

 

 

[Rooted]

I just read the bit you posted 3rd line down after the BBC link,

'not only is it illegal'  that is regarding removing the front brake.  I assumed you took that from what you had read or heard.

 

The court case will i suppose show where if that is illegal in UK law or if it is some EU law on bicycles.

 

Pure stupidity on the riders part his behaviour and the court will decide the guilt or not as the prosecution currently in court.

Edited 18 August, 2017 by Awayoffski

[matt_theforce]

I personally think the phrase "I had no idea it was illegal...."  also sums up a lot of motorists who don't think their actions are illegal too. 

 

I don't condone the actions of the accused & I think there should be some kind of system in place to ensure that all vehicles that use the roads are in a legal & road worthy condition. How this could be done & enforced I have no idea but even the current MOT system for Cars/Lorries/motorbikes etc can be easily worked around.

 

The article also doesn't say how the unfortunate incident took place, did he ride through a red light/did he collide with her on a crossing of some kind/ was he riding on the pavement/ did she step into the road without looking & seeing him.  

There are far too many unknowns to start casting assumptions that he is to blame and that a front brake could have stopped what happened, more information is needed. 

 

My thoughts go out to Mrs Briggs family

[Guest FurryFriend]

I've seen some stupidity in my life, and arrogant people turn me right off. The combination of both in this snot nosed clowns attitude is beyond breathtaking. 

 

With an attitude like his, he will no doubt learn a few life lessons in prison. Justice comes in many forms...... 

 

[Ttaskmaster]

Idiot, idiot, clueless flippin' idiot. Just get rid of him.

I regard myself as pretty liberal in many cases, but this is clearly causing death by dangerous 'driving' and he should be slammed for it.

[Rooted]

Not posting in defence of him but someone has made it in defence.

 

In this past week it is unreal how many times people have crossed in front of me when i was at around 15 mph in town doing about the same speed as motor vehicles. Thank goodness i have a 200 mm front disc brake and a good rear and can then do a track stand.

Front brakes pulled on hard is rather risky on a bike as most learn early when riding bikes.

 

Personally i think this guy is riding like a Twa-t and have no idea why he thinks he should not keep to the lanes and stop behind the stopped cars.  The lady crossing has as much right to the public highway as him, and to cross a road having looked and judged when safe to do so.

He could stop if riding safely and giving due care and attention.

'Full working brakes but not a full working brain IMO.'

 

Edited 18 August, 2017 by Awayoffski

[KenONeill]

18 hours ago, RainbowFire said:

Removing the front brake? Really? Not only is it illegal, but the shear stupidity out-weighs the illegality, but the supidity of using a fixed wheel "vehicle" on the public highways too.
 

 

5 hours ago, RainbowFire said:

Ken, can you show me exactly where I said riding with a fixed wheel was illegal (with or without a front brake).

 

I said the fixed wheel is stupid, not illegal. A bit like having a welded diff, not illegal, just very stupid and impractical.

Maybe I misread what you meant to say, but I hope you can at least see how the earlier paragraph can be read as "Removing a front brake and/or 'riding fixed' are illegal." The last I saw on the subject removing a front brake was illegal, but it was legal to ride fixed without a rear brake.

 

Oh and on your other point, I'm not sure about a welded diff either way (but wouldn't trust most welders to do it), but running a spool or a Detroit locker were both legal.

Edited 18 August, 2017 by KenONeill

[RainbowFire]

2 hours ago, Awayoffski said:

I just read the bit you posted 3rd line down after the BBC link,

'not only is it illegal'  that is regarding removing the front brake.  I assumed you took that from what you had read or heard.

 

The court case will i suppose show where if that is illegal in UK law or if it is some EU law on bicycles.

 

Pure stupidity on the riders part his behaviour and the court will decide the guilt or not as the prosecution currently in court.

 

George, old chap, it might be different north of the border (I understand your legal system is different to ours), but in this country, the CPS would be unlikely to take a case to court, make up a phrase about the legality of requiring front brakes, and still expect to be there after lunch, with the judge sitting there with a straight face. Plus, I suspect that legal brains far superior to those that frequent Briskoda would have had a field-day with it too.

 

Mind you, Charlie says that it was several seconds between seeing his victim and the impact and that front brakes wouldn't have made any difference in those seconds? What would be the purpose of having front brakes if they make no difference? Conversely: what's the point of removing the brakes? Are they not a safety device? Does removing them increase the bike's performance in any measurable way, or make it safer in any way at all?

(Liked your video though, however, what's that written on the road at 0:13? Kind of implies that a LHD bus will be driving against the flow of traffic. That, in itself, would be interesting to watch.)

[RainbowFire]

10 minutes ago, KenONeill said:

 

Maybe I misread what you meant to say, but I hope you can at least see how the earlier paragraph can be read as "Removing a front brake and/or 'riding fixed' are illegal." The last I saw on the subject removing a front brake was illegal, but it was legal to ride fixed without a rear brake.

 

Obviously you mis-read it, and carried on mis-reading it too, as you've now gone on to talk about rear brakes, which hasn't been mentioned at all. I said riding with a fixed wheel is stupid, and drew a comparision is driving on the highways with a welded differential.

 

It's funny that most people want more brakeing power (just look at the threads about having better brakes), but in this instance we've found someone who want less brakeing power. Given that you're more intent on trying to shoot the messenger, I can only assume that you must think that removing any part of the brakeing system must be a good idea.

[RainbowFire]

 

2 hours ago, DarkPeakCycles said:

I don't condone the actions of the accused & I think there should be some kind of system in place to ensure that all vehicles that use the roads are in a legal & road worthy condition. How this could be done & enforced I have no idea but even the current MOT system for Cars/Lorries/motorbikes etc can be easily worked around.

 

Oh yes, indeed the current MOT can be worked around (as many things), however, at least there is a system in place, and gets updated periodically as loop-holes are plugged and technology changes.

 

 

2 hours ago, DarkPeakCycles said:

The article also doesn't say how the unfortunate incident took place, did he ride through a red light/did he collide with her on a crossing of some kind/ was he riding on the pavement/ did she step into the road without looking & seeing him. 

 

A more in-depth transcript would be helpful, agreed.....but cyclists going through red lights, or riding on the pavement? Say it ain't so Next you'll be saying there's those who dress in black and ride around at night with no lights on

[Rooted]

I am interested in if it is removing a front brake that was added to a bike that was manufactured without a front brake, 

or a Cover all, riding an unsafe bicycle in an unsafe way!

 

I will look with interest at the wording of the Prosecutors summing up in the case against the defendant, then maybe if the accused is found guilty the appeal if there is one.

 

PS

RainbowFire,

Was it you that was complaining on here before about the brightness of motorcyclists DRL's?

PPS

So maybe best we do not have you as a Road Safety Advisor, just another Jo Public / Grumpy old or young person like many of us.

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/244001-hids-now-bikes-are-at-it 

Edited 18 August, 2017 by Awayoffski

[CWARD]

1 hour ago, FurryFriend said:

Justice comes in many forms......

 

What no Vaseline in prison 

 

People step out into traffic a lot without looking properly, usually with their head stuck in the phone screen as Facebook is more important than getting knocked down. I've had it in the car, motorbike and push bike and usually you can see by the movements and predict their stupidity but that is only because you have your head up and looking out on the road and paths as you drive along the road.

There is an increase in cyclists on the road who are treating it like a race with their head down only bothered about beating their time up an hill or getting past the cyclist in front. I regularly pass around 5-6 cyclists on my way home all but one of them are just using the road as a means of commuting. One of them however is a complete bell-end, race bike with matching lycra, pulling out without looking, up and down paths edging through the smallest of gaps with little regard to his own safety or any one else's just so long as they're making progress. Occasionally he is joined by another muppet and it is full on idiot mode between them. The problem is that you then see other motorists become reactive to these idiots making sure there are no gaps for them to get through and sticking nose to tail, cutting them up at junctions. You can virtually see peoples attitudes change as they have passed the others giving them plenty of space, hanging back to let them get round overhanging branches to be suddenly becoming passive aggressive to the idiot cyclists but also any of the other cyclists who have got caught up in their antics.  I would have no doubt that the lad in court is part of the later section of cyclists.

[Rooted]

Read the various stuff now and seen the 1983 legislation.

http://theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/aug/25/cycling-without-brakes 

http://cyclinguk.org/cyclists-library/regulations/construction-use 

http://cyclinguk.org/cyclists-library/regulations/standards 

http://thesun.co.uk/news/4269587/illegal-ride-bike-without-brakes-cycle-pavement-laws 

Edited 18 August, 2017 by Awayoffski

[Guest FurryFriend]

4 minutes ago, CWARD said:

 

What no Vaseline in prison 

 

People step out into traffic a lot without looking properly, usually with their head stuck in the phone screen as Facebook is more important than getting knocked down. I've had it in the car, motorbike and push bike and usually you can see by the movements and predict their stupidity but that is only because you have your head up and looking out on the road and paths as you drive along the road.

There is an increase in cyclists on the road who are treating it like a race with their head down only bothered about beating their time up an hill or getting past the cyclist in front. I regularly pass around 5-6 cyclists on my way home all but one of them are just using the road as a means of commuting. One of them however is a complete bell-end, race bike with matching lycra, pulling out without looking, up and down paths edging through the smallest of gaps with little regard to his own safety or any one else's just so long as they're making progress. Occasionally he is joined by another muppet and it is full on idiot mode between them. The problem is that you then see other motorists become reactive to these idiots making sure there are no gaps for them to get through and sticking nose to tail, cutting them up at junctions. You can virtually see peoples attitudes change as they have passed the others giving them plenty of space, hanging back to let them get round overhanging branches to be suddenly becoming passive aggressive to the idiot cyclists but also any of the other cyclists who have got caught up in their antics.  I would have no doubt that the lad in court is part of the later section of cyclists.

Couldn't have put that better myself   

Whilst being tolerant to most driving these days, I don't have any time at all for the outright Lycra louts who get away with appalling and frankly, very dangerous riding for which car drivers would get heavily fined. 

[Rooted]

RainbowFire,  look at the video @ 59 seconds and behind the bus on the other side of the road.

No idea how the bus halts work or are marked and if that road was maybe one way at some time and traffic came out that street.

Maybe someone local to where ever that is knows.

[Ttaskmaster]

3 hours ago, Awayoffski said:

Front brakes pulled on hard is rather risky on a bike as most learn early when riding bikes.

 

Personally i think this guy is riding like a Twa-t and have no idea why he thinks he should not keep to the lanes and stop behind the stopped cars.  The lady crossing has as much right to the public highway as him, and to cross a road having looked and judged when safe to do so.

 

 

Front braking hard on bikes is NOT risky if you do it right, ie progressively... which is taught from the moment you start CBT!

 

This guy is doing 27kmh, which is about 16mph, at the point where the women starts to step out - Not exactly dangerous, let alone like a twa-t. She also steps out with barely two car lengths between her and the oncoming bike, judging from the traffic on the right when her legs first commit to the crossing. I don't have sound here at work, but I doubt she'd have heard the shout anyway.

 

As for going between the cars, that is twofold:

1/. He could have been setting up to filter anyway, which is perfectly legal and perfectly safe when done within the Highway Code. He was already in tight against the inside of the turn, suggesting he knew the road and where he needed to be.

2/. This is the core of the Roadcraft and Advanced Riding systems, although it's also taught on basic training: Information-Position-Speed-Gear-Acceleration. Position comes before speed (in this case braking) and in this instance it was better for him to alter position that try to brake in such a limited space.

 

The ONLY criticism I can find for the rider is trusting to the shout and not taking more evasive action sooner, although he did a pretty fine job as is.

 

As for her having as much right to the road, that is NOT at the expense of traffic moving faster with no chance to stop, never mind crossing the road at a dangerous point and especially when there's a pedestrian crossing put in for her very safety a quarter-spitting distance right from where she's crossing. If it were the case, we'd have the same Pedestrian Right-Of-Way Law that they have/had in Los Angeles.... but that also means she'd have likely been arrested for Jaywalking instead.

If you want to bring the Highway Code into this, she would have right of way IF she'd started to cross before the vehicle had started the turn. She did not, instead presenting a hazard to perfectly fine traffic.

Lastly, as you say, she has a right to the road having looked and judged when safe to do so - She judged VERY incorrectly and is as liable as if she had pulled out in a car when it wasn't safe.

 

 

2 hours ago, RainbowFire said:

Conversely: what's the point of removing the brakes? Are they not a safety device? Does removing them increase the bike's performance in any measurable way, or make it safer in any way at all?

 

To quote Alex Kersten: "Weight reduction, Bro...!!!"

This being sarcasm, of course. The kid was an idiot.

 

Edited 18 August, 2017 by Ttaskmaster

[Rooted]

Did you see the Pulling on hard bit since you quoted it, obvious progressive braking is what is safe braking on a surface that has good grip,

and not Pulling on Hard the front brake of a bike with a fixed wheel rear and no brake.

 

CBT.?? (Compulsory Basic Training)  No Compulsory Basic Bicycle Training in the UK is there?

 

We are talking 'Cycling Proficiency' and Primary Age Children are we not, then on with push bikes.  But then we know thing change over the years, brakes and efficiency.   (The Accused was not anything other than some youth with no gears and thoughts of being some smart cookie.)

But while brakes have improved, then Fixed Gear bikes really never changed.

 

I loved when i was young and an American moved to where i lived and a bike with a Coaster Brake which made back wheel lock ups and skids just so easy and predictable.

 

The guy was doing about 27kmh and needed to react a bit as he crosses the boxed section, 

& i do about 27kmh per hour as well because the pedal assist cuts out at that speed but sometimes i might be a bit faster,

and i can assure you i can do 'Stoppie' and other moves at a bit of a slower speed than that, not at 27kmh though,

& i can do a stoppie on a Motor Cycle as well, illegal move though as we know on the public highway, two wheels on the road minimum the police will say to be in control except on a Uni-Cycle,  but then i got my licence pre CBT days.  

 

Its not like we all do not have the T-Shirt, & know that if you do the crime be prepared to do the time.

You need prosecuted first though, then maybe still soap on a rope will not be required.   We will see soon enough.

 

As to Filtering, then that is a whole other subject as you hit it into crossing into an oncoming lane crossing a solid white line or riding the line at 27kmh...

even if they are stationary.

 

PS

?

Next pedestrian crossing at the next lights, which lane is he now in, is that a filter / overtaking lane?

Edited 18 August, 2017 by Awayoffski

[CWARD]

3 hours ago, Awayoffski said:

Not posting in defence of him but someone has made it in defence.

 

In this past week it is unreal how many times people have crossed in front of me when i was at around 15 mph in town doing about the same speed as motor vehicles. Thank goodness i have a 200 mm front disc brake and a good rear and can then do a track stand.

Front brakes pulled on hard is rather risky on a bike as most learn early when riding bikes.

 

Personally i think this guy is riding like a Twa-t and have no idea why he thinks he should not keep to the lanes and stop behind the stopped cars.  The lady crossing has as much right to the public highway as him, and to cross a road having looked and judged when safe to do so.

He could stop if riding safely and giving due care and attention.

'Full working brakes but not a full working brain IMO.'

 

 

I didn't have chance to view this video earlier but now I have. Whilst he tries to make a defence fro Charlie Alliston this guy is another accident waiting to happen.  He make a sweeping right hand turn into another road that he cannot see into only to find cars waiting at a cross roads. He doesn't make any attempt to slow down even though is only options are to stop behind the silver Corsa or filter through between the opposing lines of traffic that are separated by a solid white line, which are fairly common near bus stops.  Despite this he increases his speed. Only after the woman steps into the road probably assuming with queued traffic in both directions and a narrow gap between with a solid white line that cyclist would stop behind the Corsa or she hadn't seen him when she first looked in his direction. Again she is stood at the kerb edge so my alarm bells would have been ringing but obviously not this guys.

Even though he points out in his notes that there is a crossing further down the road he crosses the white line and starts to accelerate again although there are red lights at the crossing and a group of three lads were approaching from the crossing from the right. The lights seem to skip the  red and amber and jump straight to green (maybe an Irish thing) leaving the jogger coming from the left to pick up his pace to get across the road before he becomes road kill. Looking at his other videos he likes to state the rules whilst barely observing them himself.  This is the kind of idiot I was describing earlier.

 

Quote

'Full working brakes but not a full working brain IMO.'

 

Absolutely!!

Edited 18 August, 2017 by CWARD

[Rooted]

Must watch some more Bike Bandit while he is still fit to produce his vids.

 

Edited 18 August, 2017 by Awayoffski

[matt_theforce]

2 hours ago, FurryFriend said:

Whilst being tolerant to most driving these days, I don't have any time at all for the outright Lycra louts who get away with appalling and frankly, very dangerous riding for which car drivers would get heavily fined. 

 

I'm afraid I disagree with this & I'm sure my mate would also disagree if he was still alive today, sadly he was killed by a motorist who didn't see the car in front of him waiting to turn right so made an emergency manoeuvre left into the cycle lane knocking my mate from his bike & killing him.  The driver pleaded not guilty to causing death by dangerous driving & wasn't prosecuted, didn't loose his license & didn't have to serve any form of prison sentence as he needed his license for his job as a professional driver & without it he couldn't provide for his family, the judge put it down to being an accident as the driver didn't set out to cause any harm.  His friends & family have to live with this decision knowing full well that this 'professional driver' is still allowed to drive on the roads.

 

I can't speak for Mr Alliston in this case but I'm sure he didn't set out to intentionally hurt or kill someone but he will have to take some accountability for what has happened & his actions around the bike that he chose to ride on the road.

 

As part of my Sustrans/Bikeability & Go Ride leader training, we will not allow anyone to attend our sessions without 2 working brakes, bike shops also must comply with certain selling regulations when selling a bicycle that has brakes fitted, I don't know if this is a legal requirement for the road or just an insurance consideration/liability consideration but personally I think any bike should have 2 working brakes when on the public highway.  

 

I spent 14 years working in London, some of them spent cycling & driving through but most as a pedestrian, even then a lot of pedestrians/cyclists/motorists ignored the rules of the road and took risks that were cringe worthy & some which resulted in hospital treatment, I doubt this has changed in the last 8 years since I've been away from London so all details need to be looked into.

 

Until all of the facts come to light it is difficult to know how the situation arose resulting in this tragic incident & I hope that Mrs Briggs Family & Friends get the closure that they need.

 

Edited 18 August, 2017 by DarkPeakCycles