Re: Is listening to a radio while cycling illegal?

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

"Lee" > wrote in message
...

> Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to
listen
> to the radio whilst cycling.
> Is this legal?

Yes, legal but not very sensible.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com

[Dave]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
...
> "Lee" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to
> listen
> > to the radio whilst cycling.
> > Is this legal?
>
> Yes, legal but not very sensible.
>
> --
> Guy
> ===
>
> WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
> http://www.chapmancentral.com
>
>

Agree with Guy.....I reckon at least 30% of my personal protection system is
subconciously listening to what's going on out of view, i.e. behind me,
round the corner etcetc. As much as I love music and listen to the
radio/tape in the mdgh, I would never listen to anything whilst on my bike.
Dave.

[wafflyDIRTYcatLITTERhcsBOX]

>Yes, legal but not very sensible.

I completely agree. Whilst cycling my ears are used to detect traffic -
especially stuff coming up behind me (ooher missus...) or stuff at junctions
where the junction has poor visibility.

Cheers, helen s


~~~~~~~~~~
This is sent from a redundant email
Mail sent to it is dumped
My correct one can be gleaned from
h$**$*$el$**e$n$**$d$**$o$*$t**$$s$**$im$mo$ns*@a$ **o$l.c$$*o$*m*$
by getting rid of the overdependence on money and fame
~~~~~~~~~~

[Lee]

"Dave" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Lee" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >

>
> Agree with Guy.....I reckon at least 30% of my personal protection system
is
> subconciously listening to what's going on out of view, i.e. behind me,
> round the corner etcetc. As much as I love music and listen to the
> radio/tape in the mdgh, I would never listen to anything whilst on my
bike.
> Dave.
>
>

Yeah i guess u are right, the path i will be taking into work is all cycle
paths tho so we shall see how i get on.

Thanks for the swift response guys.

[Lee]

LOL (ooher missus)

"wafflyDIRTYcatLITTERhcsBOX" > wrote in message
...
> >Yes, legal but not very sensible.
>
> I completely agree. Whilst cycling my ears are used to detect traffic -
> especially stuff coming up behind me (ooher missus...) or stuff at
junctions
> where the junction has poor visibility.
>
> Cheers, helen s
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> This is sent from a redundant email
> Mail sent to it is dumped
> My correct one can be gleaned from
> h$**$*$el$**e$n$**$d$**$o$*$t**$$s$**$im$mo$ns*@a$ **o$l.c$$*o$*m*$
> by getting rid of the overdependence on money and fame
> ~~~~~~~~~~

[Adrian Boliston]

"wafflyDIRTYcatLITTERhcsBOX" > wrote in message
...

> I completely agree. Whilst cycling my ears are used to detect traffic -
> especially stuff coming up behind me..

That's why i hate those long busses with the engine at the rear, when the loom up
next to your right shoulder with no audible warning at all.

[Simon Mason]

"Lee" > wrote in message
...
> Hi there,
>
> Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to
listen
> to the radio whilst cycling.
>
> Is this legal? I have a little pocket radio and headphones - provided it
is
> secure surely there is no problem?

I have mine on every time I go out - if I didn't, I would never commute to
work at all -it would be too boring. I prefer not to put too much emphasis
on aural clues anyway, I rely mainly on sight.

In fact, if you look at the antics of pavement lemmings, you can easily see
where relying too much on sound leads you. Dozens of peds, who since they
can't hear a motor, will walk out into the road directly in front of you
without looking.

--
Simon Mason
Anlaby
East Yorkshire.
53°44'N 0°26'W
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

[Lee]

"Simon Mason" > wrote in message
...
>
> I have mine on every time I go out - if I didn't, I would never commute
to
> work at all -it would be too boring. I prefer not to put too much emphasis
> on aural clues anyway, I rely mainly on sight.
>
> In fact, if you look at the antics of pavement lemmings, you can easily
see
> where relying too much on sound leads you. Dozens of peds, who since they
> can't hear a motor, will walk out into the road directly in front of you
> without looking.
>
> --
> Simon Mason
> Anlaby
> East Yorkshire.
> 53°44'N 0°26'W
> http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
>
>

my concern is that ill get bored too - just have to see how it goes i guess!

[Simon Mason]

"Lee" > wrote in message
...

> my concern is that ill get bored too - just have to see how it goes i
guess!

My commute is nearly all off road anyway, so having a radio on is not much
of a hazard there and riding for nearly 2 hours, day in day out with no
radio, especially at 0530 and 2230 would be unthinkable. I find strong
headwinds much more of a detriment to my hearing than quiet speech radio
anyway.

The only times I take them out fully is when I have to cross dock lock
gates when I have to listen for the siren to tell you if they're about to
open, but since I can hear a police car's siren from half a mile way, it's
not really necessary.

If you've any doubts about your safety with earpieces in though, then don't
use them.

--
Simon Mason
Anlaby
East Yorkshire.
53°44'N 0°26'W
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

[Stephen \(aka steford\)]

Lee wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to
> listen to the radio whilst cycling.
>
> Is this legal? I have a little pocket radio and headphones - provided
> it is secure surely there is no problem?
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks
>
Get a single earpiece - best of both worlds. That's what I do - no problem
hearing the radio or traffic. I too get very bored if I forget it or the
batteries go or something.

[Lee]

"Stephen (aka steford)" >
wrote in message ...
> >
> Get a single earpiece - best of both worlds. That's what I do - no problem
> hearing the radio or traffic. I too get very bored if I forget it or the
> batteries go or something.
>
>


Thats a plan - my fave station is on AM anyway so i wont miss anything is
super stereo.

Thanks

[Dave]

"Simon Mason" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Lee" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to
> listen
> > to the radio whilst cycling.
> >
> > Is this legal? I have a little pocket radio and headphones - provided it
> is
> > secure surely there is no problem?
>
> I have mine on every time I go out - if I didn't, I would never commute
to
> work at all -it would be too boring. I prefer not to put too much emphasis
> on aural clues anyway, I rely mainly on sight.
>
> In fact, if you look at the antics of pavement lemmings, you can easily
see
> where relying too much on sound leads you. Dozens of peds, who since they
> can't hear a motor, will walk out into the road directly in front of you
> without looking.
>
> --
> Simon Mason
> Anlaby
> East Yorkshire.

Funnily enough Simon, I wasn't thinking of subconsciously listening to the
pavement lemings ahead, silly!!...I'd use my eyes for that.....No, I was
thinking more of mdgs, 40 tonners, busses etc. I think I'd find headphones
similar to a chiffon blindfold to the eyes. Can see through it, but not
quite clear enough to feel comfortable. Funny how I'm happy enough to drive
the mdg with music loud enough to make yer ears bleed (I wish!!)......guess
I haven't quite sorted it all out in me head yet ;-)
Dave.
p.s. - OP said all commuting being done off-road, so wouldn't imagine it'd
be too dangerous, except as another contributer said, if someone comes up
from behind and attempts to overtake, just as he's getting another swoosh to
the right, across the path, to the next rousing piece in his ear.

[Simon Mason]

"Dave" > wrote in message
...

> Funnily enough Simon, I wasn't thinking of subconsciously listening to the
> pavement lemings ahead, silly!!...I'd use my eyes for that.....No, I was
> thinking more of mdgs, 40 tonners, busses etc. I think I'd find headphones
> similar to a chiffon blindfold to the eyes.

That's another advantage - it helps to drown out the din of the HGVs I
sometimes have to contend with :-)
Simon

[Simonb]

Lee wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to
> listen to the radio whilst cycling.
>
> Is this legal? I have a little pocket radio and headphones - provided
> it is secure surely there is no problem?
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks
>
> Lee

I find it preetty useful to hear the noises a bike makes. Rubbing, rattling,
etc. Quite often this is a forewarning of bad things to come.

simonb

[James Hodson]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:43:54 +0100, "Simon Mason"
> wrote:

> I have mine on every time I go out - if I didn't, I would never commute to
>work at all -it would be too boring. I prefer not to put too much emphasis
>on aural clues anyway, I rely mainly on sight.
>

Hi Simon

Didn't we have a similar thread in this NG about 18 months ago?

AFAIR, you stated the above whereas I (and others) preferred Helen's
point of view: the more senses available to locate dangers the better.

James

--
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/c.butty/Larrau.jpg

[Peter Connolly]

> Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to
listen
> to the radio whilst cycling.
>
> Is this legal? I have a little pocket radio and headphones - provided it
is
> secure surely there is no problem?
>

I do believe that if you're in the area of BBC Radio Norfolk on Monday at
9:30am-ish, it's actually a requirement!

Regards,

Pete.

[Trevor Barton]

James Hodson > wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:43:54 +0100, "Simon Mason"
> wrote:
>
>> I have mine on every time I go out - if I didn't, I would never commute to
>>work at all -it would be too boring. I prefer not to put too much emphasis
>>on aural clues anyway, I rely mainly on sight.
>>
>
> Hi Simon
>
> Didn't we have a similar thread in this NG about 18 months ago?
>
> AFAIR, you stated the above whereas I (and others) preferred Helen's
> point of view: the more senses available to locate dangers the better.

Dunno, I'd rather not know the Elmsley Crane Hire crane with the 8
wheels each about 5' high in a continuous chain down the side was
about to squash me into a thin-film deposit on the roadside.
*******, passes me regularly on his way to jobs in the morning I guess,
and is one of the closest calls on the A658 through Huby here...

Actually, I lie. I can't believe people wear headphones on bikes,
but then I guess I can't believe a lot of the stupid things people
do. Well, when there's Paul Sm**h as a baseline, most things seems
eminently sensible, even drilling your head with a Black and Decker!

Trev

[Rory]

"Lee" > wrote in message >...

> Im just about to get kitted up so i can cycle to work but I wanted to listen
> to the radio whilst cycling.
>
> Is this legal? I have a little pocket radio and headphones - provided it is
> secure surely there is no problem?

I was thinking about getting one of these:
http://www.bicyclestereo.com/parts.html -- anyone seen a supplier for
these in the UK or Yurp?

This should be OK, as you can hear whats happening around you better
than a Golf driver with 5000W of sub-woofter on his back seat. On
family runs, I often stick a portable cassette player in the trailer
for a bit of entertainment (after much reasearch, I've concluded that
Ska is the best cycling music)

[Clifford Griffiths]

"Lee" > wrote in message
...
> Hi there,
>
> I wanted to listen
> to the radio whilst cycling.
>
> Is this legal? I have a little pocket radio and headphones - provided it
is
> secure surely there is no problem?
>
> I am always amazed at people wanting to listen to anything while cycling.
Maybe I am just old but I have never been bored riding a bike on road or
track ( a turbo is another matter).

There is always something to see or hear. Much of the advantage of bike
over car is that you do see and hear much more. Every trip is different even
over the same route - the changing weather. vegetation time of year. I wouid
also echo the safety concerns. Switching off one of your senses seems silly
to me when you really need all your wits about you.

Cliff

[Simon Mason]

"James Hodson" > wrote in message
...

> AFAIR, you stated the above whereas I (and others) preferred Helen's
> point of view: the more senses available to locate dangers the better.

Fair enough, but I had a great 45 mile ride out into the countryside
yesterday on an old railway track listening to Hawksbee and Jacobs, followed
by music for three hours and then Sport on Five.

It was much better than 5 hours of hearing nothing and I can't see what
possible safety advantage I would gain from hearing a bird from 500 yards
away rather than 600 :-)
Simon

[Colin Blackburn]

In article >,
says...
>
> "James Hodson" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > AFAIR, you stated the above whereas I (and others) preferred Helen's
> > point of view: the more senses available to locate dangers the better.
>
> Fair enough, but I had a great 45 mile ride out into the countryside
> yesterday on an old railway track listening to Hawksbee and Jacobs, followed
> by music for three hours and then Sport on Five.
>
> It was much better than 5 hours of hearing nothing and I can't see what
> possible safety advantage I would gain from hearing a bird from 500 yards
> away rather than 600 :-)

Enjoyment. I enjoy cycling, I enjoy how close my senses are to the
surrounding---sometimes a bit too close! A 45 minute ride would be a
chance to *not* listen to the radio or music but to enjoy 45 minutes of
riding.

Colin

[Mike K Smith]

Paul Kelly wrote:

> Cycling round Richmond park some time ago I came up behind two kids of
> around 16, part of a school part, walking around the path. I dinged my bell.
> I got closer and said "Excuse me". I got to within inches of their heels and
> bellowed "Excuse me please" - no movement at all from them.
>
> Eventually one of their mates ran back to them, gestured for them to take
> out their personal stereo earphones and turn around.

Reminds me of a time when I was cycling along a river towpath near Exeter
when I caught a large school party walking along.

None of them seemed to hear my calls of "excuse me" etc. I managed to pass
the first group at a wider part of the path and then realised that they
were signing to each other.

A local school for deaf children was holding a sponsored walk along that
path!

I decided take it philosophically. The safest and easiest thing for me to
do was to just dismount and walk the bike until I reached an alternative
route.

[Simon Mason]

"Colin Blackburn" > wrote in message
news:MPG.198affc4fb41c618989b50@localhost...

>
> Enjoyment. I enjoy cycling, I enjoy how close my senses are to the
> surrounding---sometimes a bit too close! A 45 minute ride would be a
> chance to *not* listen to the radio or music but to enjoy 45 minutes of
> riding.

Agreed, but commuting for two hours every day along the same road soon
palls. Then again, it might just be me - I sleep with my earpieces in as
well - I always have done since I was 14 and used to listen to the BBC WS
all night. That was when Alistair Cooke was 65 and he's now 95 and still
sending his Letter From America. What an inspiration.
Simon

[Lee]

"Chris Malcolm" > wrote in message
...
> "Clifford Griffiths" > writes:

>
> To switch off your hearing you'd have to wear noise cancellation
> headphone's or listen at such volume you'd disturb nearby
> wildlife. This is not necessary. Wearing simple earbud earphones and
> with the volume turned up enough to hear what's going on only reduces
> ear sensitivity by about the same amount as having a conversation
> while walking. I find vehicular traffic to be so noisy that this is no
> problem. What is much more of a problem is congested traffic, when the
> combined volume of so many tyres and engines brings the ambient noise
> level close to the threshold of hearing damage, and renders it
> impossible to hear a quiet vehicle approaching you in the middle of
> all this racket, even with the best ears.
>
> On a windy day the excess wind noise produced by a stupidly designed
> cycle helmet reduces one's hearing to a much larger extent than
> listening to open earphones at an appropriate level, yet I've seen
> nobody complaining about that.
>
> I've seen no safety conscious car drivers suggesting that it's
> dangerous to drive with the windows closed in case you miss some
> important auditory clue to an impending hazard.
>
> If you're not one of those demented youngsters who requires to listen
> to things at deafening levels, I think this radio problem is a problem
> which only afflicts those without common sense.
> --
> Chris Malcolm +44 (0)131 650 3085 DoD #205
> School of Informatics, Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill,
> Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK. [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/ ]


Sounds like a very good and well structured argument to me - ill try both
ways (earphones in and out) and see what suits me.

Thanks

[Trevor Barton]

Lee > wrote:
>
> "Chris Malcolm" > wrote in message
> ...
>> To switch off your hearing you'd have to wear noise cancellation
>> headphone's or listen at such volume you'd disturb nearby
>> wildlife. This is not necessary. Wearing simple earbud earphones and
>> with the volume turned up enough to hear what's going on only reduces
>> ear sensitivity by about the same amount as having a conversation
>> while walking. I find vehicular traffic to be so noisy that this is no
>> problem. What is much more of a problem is congested traffic, when the
>> combined volume of so many tyres and engines brings the ambient noise
>> level close to the threshold of hearing damage, and renders it
>> impossible to hear a quiet vehicle approaching you in the middle of
>> all this racket, even with the best ears.
>>
>> On a windy day the excess wind noise produced by a stupidly designed
>> cycle helmet reduces one's hearing to a much larger extent than
>> listening to open earphones at an appropriate level, yet I've seen
>> nobody complaining about that.

But that's a tradeoff between wearing a helmet and hearing traffic.
There are arguments that both things increase safety (although you
may or may not subscribe to them). There is, however, *no* argument
that wearing headphones *increases* safety. It is either neutral
or negative. I verge on "negative".

>> I've seen no safety conscious car drivers suggesting that it's
>> dangerous to drive with the windows closed in case you miss some
>> important auditory clue to an impending hazard.

No, but then as we all acknowledge, car drivers are far less vulnerable
than us cyclists. I know that when I'm in a car that if a truck comes
up behind me it's (a) visible, because I have a rear-view mirror, (b)
not likely to overtake me in a stupid manner, and (c) not likely to
suck me under its wheels with the slipstream. On a bike, I have no
rear-view mirror, so can only hear it coming with my ears, it is likely
to overtake me in a stupid manner and I'd rather be ready to avoid being
sucked under the wheels by the slipstream.

And the point about a rear-view mirror is important. In a car there
is pretty much full visibility all around with just a glance in the
various seeing-aids - mirrors and all. On a bike, it's hard
to see anything not within 90 degrees of straight ahead. In my car
I use my mirrors every few seconds, and I am aware (I hope and presume)
of everything around me. On my bike, the only indication of things not
immediately in front of me is usually only hearing. Of course, things
can sneak up on me unheard, but it's not often. Similarly, of course,
things can sneak up on me unseen in my car, but again it's not often.

>> If you're not one of those demented youngsters who requires to listen
>> to things at deafening levels, I think this radio problem is a problem
>> which only afflicts those without common sense.
>> --
>> Chris Malcolm +44 (0)131 650 3085 DoD #205
>> School of Informatics, Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill,
>> Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK. [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/ ]
>
>
> Sounds like a very good and well structured argument to me - ill try both
> ways (earphones in and out) and see what suits me.

Hmmm, seems like I've screwed up the attributions here by "reply"ing to
the wrong message. There should be an audible beep ... ;->

Most of it was to Chris, I guess, and to Lee: Don't do it!!

Trev

[James Hodson]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 09:36:30 +0100, "Simon Mason"
> wrote:

>"James Hodson" > wrote in message
...
>
>> AFAIR, you stated the above whereas I (and others) preferred Helen's
>> point of view: the more senses available to locate dangers the better.
>
> Fair enough, but I had a great 45 mile ride out into the countryside
>yesterday on an old railway track listening to Hawksbee and Jacobs, followed
>by music for three hours and then Sport on Five.
>

Hiyya Simon

Is the quality of the music or the standard of any other intellectual
material relevant here?

AFAIK, a lot of your commute is done on non-road paths. I'm prepared
to give you the benefit of the doubt if this is true, which is nice of
me.

James

--
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/c.butty/Larrau.jpg

[Trevor Barton]

Chris Malcolm > wrote:
>
> You've made a very good case for not listening to the radio if you
> haven't got mirrors. I think I'm safer with mirrors and radio than
> without mirrors and radio. If you think radio is a significant extra
> hazard on a bike, and you think the lack of mirros on a bike is so
> important a risk factor, why don't you get mirrors?

'Cause I don't listen to a radio while I'm riding? I have tried
mirrors on a bike, but they don't compare with mirrors in a car.
Mirrors in a car can be glanced at easily because they're a mere
eye-flick away from the main area of view, the front windscreen.
This I find lets me almost without noticing it be aware of every
important point of the compass, and that even when looking at them
the road ahead is well within the my peripheral vision.

Mirrors on a bike are relatively small, relatively far outside your
field of view and require a head-turn and a consequent loss of the
picture in front of you, and they tend to shake around a lot and
be fairly small in angular dimension so don't show a lot of the
rear view compared with car mirrors. This means you have to
look relatively long and hard at a bike mirror to amke sense of the
scene behind you, and also you don't get much sense of things
on either side. I'm sure they are some benifit, though, but I
think they're far less of a benifit than using your ears.

I'm aware that the passenger-side mirror on a car is more than an eye-flick
away, but it tends to be less important than the other two, except for
checking for left-side undertaking cyclists. That's only a problem at
relatively low speeds where the act of looking into it, and the consequent
loss of direct attention to the road ahead, is perhaps less of an issue.

Sill, c'est la vie and what you do with yours is entirely up to you!

Trev

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

"Chris Malcolm" > wrote in message
...

> I've seen no safety conscious car drivers suggesting that it's
> dangerous to drive with the windows closed in case you miss some
> important auditory clue to an impending hazard.

I quite often open the window when emerging at junctions. My in-laws live
here <http://www.streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=466355&y=182925&z=3> and we
also open the window when emerging from their drive.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com

[marc]

Chris Malcolm > wrote:

> I've seen no safety conscious car drivers suggesting that it's
> dangerous to drive with the windows closed in case you miss some
> important auditory clue to an impending hazard.

Errr...
it's more dangerous to drive with the windows closed in case you miss
some important auditory clue to an impending hazard, hence why on narrow
country roads I have th drivers window open a crack.

--
Marc
Stickers,decals,membership,cards, T shirts, signs etc
for clubs and associations of all types.
http://www.jaceeprint.demon.co.uk/

[Gary Knighton]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:38:16 +0100, contributor Adrian Boliston had scribed:
> That's why i hate those long busses with the engine at the rear, when the loom up
> next to your right shoulder with no audible warning at all.
>

The weirdest sensation I have to overcome is bendybuses, they are 18m long (59 ft
in old money!). One doesn't realise they are extra long until the concertina is
noticed in peripheral vision.

Gary

--

The email address is for newsgroups purposes
only and therefore unlikely to be read.

For contact via email use my real name with an
underscore separator at the domain of CompuServe.

[John Clayton]

>That's why i hate those long busses with the engine at the rear, when the loom
>up
>next to your right shoulder with no audible warning at all.

AAH! Trolley buses, don't get me started on trolleybuses!

Now they were really quiet, and their acceleration, and their
astonishing braking performance!


dehyphenate address to reply
John Clayton