Headphones Megathread

whiskeyman

Trond wrote: »

One of my major pet hates. I find it incredible how people think this is acceptable. Your ears are a lifeline whilst cycling in Dublin.

Only yesterday I saw some absolute fool on Pearse St. flying along wearing a set of beats. He looked like he was late for the Darwin Awards!

I've seen many car drivers wear headphones (probably for handsfree calls) but I have also recevently seens them wear Beats style headphones too!

tbh, I think we could do with banning ear/headphones in cars and cyclists like the French.

NiallBoo

I think the effects of headphones are exaggerated.

IMO, you should be looking around enough to see anything before you hear it.

I reckon if you can't cycle safely with headphones, then you can't cycle safely without then either.

07Lapierre

whiskeyman wrote: »

I've seen many car drivers wear headphones (probably for handsfree calls) but I have also recevently seens them wear Beats style headphones too!

QUOTE]

So what? Maybe there Sub woofer and amplifier (hooked up to their 700w stereo)in the boot was broken?

doozerie

An idiot did something idiotic, almost suicidal even. He also happened to be wearing headphones. I’m failing, yet again, to see any justification in that to ban the headphones. Let’s just ban idiocy and be done with it, that’ll be at least as effective, of that I’m sure…

magicbastarder

any time i've seen anyone doing something stupid on a bike, the one thing which is 100% consistent is that they are on a bike. logical next step...

check_six

Checking behind you before manoeuvering is critical to safe cycling. I spend a lot of time on the school run reminding my young fellas to check over their shoulder to look behind them before doing anything. On the road I'm very focused on situational awareness. (...and now you know where I got my user name from!).

Cienciano

I wouldn't blame the headphones. I commute in car, motorcycle and bike. Car and motorcycle you can't hear anything either. Whatever mode of transport, you need to look before you change lanes.
While having your ears makes things a little easier, you have to look no matter what you hear.

Jawgap

jon1981 wrote: »

.....

In the event of an accident of this nature, surely the cyclist is at fault here? I think earphones need to be included in the ban, your hearing is as important as your sight. Pointless rant but this sort of crap really fuels the negative feelings towards cyclists!

Idiotic maneuver to be sure, but I'd suspect the cyclist in question would still pull off such stunts even if they didn't have their ear phones in.

I wouldn't cycle with ear phones in, but I think they're not the impairment they are made out to be and if they are they're comparable to driving with the radio at volume or a motorbike helmet.

And anyway, what's the point in introducing an enforceable ban?

jack presley

jon1981 wrote: »

No, Dublin bike cyclist rarely do, though surely you'd be extra vigilant knowing you're not protected around the head!

They were doing a bit on the difficulties and dangers cyclists face on the Sean O'Rourke radio show last week and they spent a few hours with a cyclist from Cork as he went around the city.

He made some good points but at the end SO'R asked the reporter was yer man wearing a helmet and he said that he didn't because he felt safer without one. His logic was that if cars see you with a helmet they think it'll be alright if they hit you whereas by not wearing one, cars will give him more space and be more careful around you.

I couldn't take anything he said seriously after hearing that.

jack presley

Zillah wrote: »

My favourites are the ones who don't look but do signal, as though they think sticking their arm out reserves their spot in a different lane or something

That annoys me too but to be fair, motorists do the same with their indicators.

jon1981

jack presley wrote: »

He made some good points but at the end SO'R asked the reporter was yer man wearing a helmet and he said that he didn't because he felt safer without one. His logic was that if cars see you with a helmet they think it'll be alright if they hit you whereas by not wearing one, cars will give him more space and be more careful around you.

Yes because all cyclists are fair game if they have a helmet...ludicrous. Also if I don't wear a helmet , I'll be super careful right?... wrong!! Actually i best not get into the ran about wearing or not wearing a helmet, there's a thread for that.

NiallBoo

jack presley wrote: »

His logic was that if cars see you with a helmet they think it'll be alright if they hit you whereas by not wearing one, cars will give him more space and be more careful around you.

I couldn't take anything he said seriously after hearing that.

To be fair, there's at least one study that says motorists trend to give more room to cyclist not wearing helmets - though it may not be such a conscious decision from the motorist.

Probably best left to the helmets thread anyway...

Kaisr Sose

Zillah wrote: »

I am frequently astounded at the number of people who will happily turn across a lane on their bike without taking a glance first. My favourites are the ones who don't look but do signal, as though they think sticking their arm out reserves their spot in a different lane or something.

Anyway, swerving between lanes without looking or indicating is the problem here, not the headphones.

It's true. A major problem (and dangerous behaviour). Before we forget, there are lots of motorists that signal & manoeuvre (no mirror) and those that just manoeuvre ( no signal, no mirror). Pedestrians that step out without looking or just cross anyway.

Fools, dangerous and inconsiderate people are found on all forms of transport.

Fuzzytrooper

I personally find I rely on my hearing a lot when cycling. Less so now that I'm living im Dublin but back home in Waterford there are a lot of side streets I would go down with very little visibility down other streets they crossed.

jon1981

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

I personally find I rely on my hearing a lot when cycling. Less so now that I'm living im Dublin but back home in Waterford there are a lot of side streets I would go down with very little visibility down other streets they crossed.

Hearing is equally as important as seeing when i cycling IMO

check_six

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Before we forget, there are lots of motorists that signal & manoeuvre (no mirror) and those that just manoeuvre ( no signal, no mirror).

I was told by a co-worker that the thing you do while driving where you check your mirrors regularly, look over your shoulder, etc. was only for the driving test and could be safely kicked to the kerb once you've got your licence. :eek:

Chips Lovell

I'd never rely on my ears. You always have to look.

Jawgap

jack presley wrote: »

They were doing a bit on the difficulties and dangers cyclists face on the Sean O'Rourke radio show last week and they spent a few hours with a cyclist from Cork as he went around the city.

He made some good points but at the end SO'R asked the reporter was yer man wearing a helmet and he said that he didn't because he felt safer without one. His logic was that if cars see you with a helmet they think it'll be alright if they hit you whereas by not wearing one, cars will give him more space and be more careful around you.

I couldn't take anything he said seriously after hearing that.

I wouldn't either. Ridiculous statement.

Everyone knows you need a blonde wig to be truly safe

Cyclists wearing helmets at greater risk: car drivers keep their distance from bare-headed cyclists, especially if they're women

New research from the UK suggests that drivers give cyclists without helmets a wider berth compared to their helmeted counterparts. The closer a driver is to the cyclist, the greater chance of a collision. Dr Ian Walker, a traffic psychologist from the University of Bath, cycled around the cities of Salisbury and Bristol, his bicycle fitted with an ultrasonic sensor to record data from overtaking motorists. He wore a helmet only half of the time. He was hit twice - both times while wearing a helmet.

Drivers, at least in the UK, were up to twice as likely to drive too close to Dr Walker when he wore his helmet. Thanks to his ultrasonic device, Dr Walker found that drivers passed 8.5 cm closer to him when he wore the helmet.

The effect of appearance was found to be even more important when Dr Walker donned a blonde wig. Drivers gave him an additional 14 cm when they thought he was female, which helps if you are a woman cyclist, but the reasons for this will keep Dr Walker occupied for some time to come.

Fuzzytrooper

Agreed. I am very aware of my surroundings but I don't trust other road users whether they are cyclists or motorists, so it's really anything that will give me an edge or an early warning.

jon1981

arrgggh we are straying into helmet/non helmet talk... stop it !

Fuzzytrooper

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

I'd never rely on my ears. You always have to look.

I tend not to rely on either sense 100% It's very easy to shoot a quick glance behind you and miss something in a blind spot or for someone to pull out just after you turn back. So I always look but also keep an ear out.

07Lapierre

jon1981 wrote: »

arrgggh we are straying into helmet/non helmet talk... stop it !

Sorry...my fault for mentioning the "H" word!

Fuzzytrooper

jon1981 wrote: »

arrgggh we are straying into helmet/non helmet talk... stop it !

What if the helmets have integrated beats? Ugh, that makes my cyclist and sound engineering senses burn!

NiallBoo

Jawgap wrote: »

Drivers gave him an additional 14 cm when they thought he was female

There's a joke in there somewhere...

07Lapierre

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

What if the helmets have integrated beats? Ugh, that makes my cyclist and sound engineering senses burn!

http://www.gizmag.com/otus-mini-speakers-bike-helmets/22172/

Agent Smyth

I love the way these discussions always seem to end up about helmets and headphones when the real issue is the cyclist didn't signal their intentions or bother to look where they were going. A helmet or headphones don't make an unsafe cyclist its the cyclist that makes the cycling unsafe.

jon1981

Damn I hate cyclists sometimes! :mad:


(as a cyclist myself that does about 200km a week)

Fuzzytrooper

07Lapierre wrote: »

http://www.gizmag.com/otus-mini-speakers-bike-helmets/22172/

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

Fuzzytrooper

Agent Smyth wrote: »

I love the way these discussions always seem to end up about helmets and headphones when the real issue is the cyclist didn't signal their intentions or bother to look where they were going. A helmet or headphones don't make an unsafe cyclist its the cyclist that makes the cycling unsafe.

It's down to a combination of lack of awareness and lack of courtesy. People cycling around in their own little bubble. I'm not saying that headphones by themselves make someone safe/unsafe but a lot of people that wear them seem to fit into this group that sit in their little bubble.

Roadhawk

doozerie wrote: »

An idiot did something idiotic, almost suicidal even. He also happened to be wearing headphones. I’m failing, yet again, to see any justification in that to ban the headphones. Let’s just ban idiocy and be done with it, that’ll be at least as effective, of that I’m sure…

Banning them would only reduce the number of cyclists dramatically. The aim is to increase the numbers. I think that those found cycling without due care should be sent on a road safety course of some sort instead of paying a fine.