Video

@experimentalcyborg - Thanks for the comment, I don't thnk that Ryan missed the point so much as tied to prove the one about the armour not being as protective as he would like while not paying attention to the reduction rather than elimination of injury.

@MartinFiltenborg - Thanks for the comment, did you do two -up with luggage at high speed? The CB will do these individually in my experience but maybe two out of three and not all three. As for the clock, we can get small bolt-on ones from Oxford in the UK, these fit to one of the switchgear bolts, or the tried and trusted 'cheap digital watch around the bars' is always an option. Good to hear from a fellow CB-er, they are beginning to die out a bit now, so it's up to us to keep them on the roads.

@Spoonboy79 - Thanks for the comment. One thing I didn't like about Ryan's film is the lack of links to the quoted sources, as someone who studied physics he knows better than to not quote data sources. I'm a bit ambivalent about the film, if it wasn't from FortNine I would have dismissed it as clickbait, but even a good channel can have a bad day. If you have a link or source of the author's statement that Ryan's interpretation was incorrect can you post it here? Overall I like the FortNine channel, the film I am replying to may be a little misjudged, especially by the comments section. I hope it will continue to be entertaining, high quality and honest. Ryan's film is his take on the armour protection value, as is mine.

@MastaBlasterHank - Thanks for the comment, do you mean that in the armour test the armour is shown to fold upwards? Unfortunately without having it in a jacket this will happen as there isn't a picket to restrain it from moving. I may repeat the test at some point with comments raised here but I don't have a jacket that I can drop weights onto, then it would also need to be 'worn' to stop it flexing.

@briholt100 Thanks for the comment, as mentioned elsewhere in my 'big' accident my arm broke between the two sets of armour protecting my elbow and shoulder. The 3 m test would be a moderate highside onto the ground,

@@TheRantyRider well, yeah. Any high side will put you in the air head first. I'm thinking of all the ways one can fall, many would be cushioned by armor. Not all.

@briholt100 - Indeed so, there are freak accidents that defeat all sorts of safety features.

@pnwdrifter5680 Thanks for the comment. I would have to search out all the figures and run the calcuations to see what sort of speed the impact tests are based on. With regard to the 'where', 'how' and 'what questions in my case it is: Where: On road and off, high speed roads, low speed roads, towns [under duress rather than my choice]. How: I would say appropriate for the conditions, but then everyone does. I am advanced trained though. What: There are always the unforseen risks. An empty country road can have deer run across it [ czcams.com/video/m1ssl3XawBs/video.html ]. I commented earlier about Ryan's choice of airbag without knee or elbow protection and the mitigation of impact by armour [even a leather jacket witout armour will absorb a little energy] and it is personal choice as to what is worn. If you rode with my mate Jim behind you a suit af armour is a good idea with his proclivity for running me over if I come off on a track.

@@TheRantyRider proclivity. Awesome! haha. Keep the rubber on the road. Yeah, off road is a totally different beast. For. me, that's lots of hard armour, and a neck brace.

Some time ago I went with a couple of mates to motocross school - big boots, helmet and thin kit. as road riders we were pitifuly slow until we saw some clamshell chest and back armour, the psychological effect of wearing something that is designed for stone protection meant that we rode faster.

@@TheRantyRider risk homeostasis - more kit we wear, the crazier we ride.

@pnwdrifter5680 - There is truth in that. While I don't ride any differently in one piece leathers, two piece leathers, textiles or 'lower half in overalls 200 yard post ride check' being without anthing that felt protective was a very strange feeling. Even with the kit I was pitifully slow and fell off a lot!

@vinylattic6901 - Thanks for the comment and the like.

@waterspark - Thanks for the comment and calculations, I take it the figures are for the 2 kg / 3 m drop? As mentioned the test is for a comparison and not a massively scientific endevour. Unfortunately I experienced a real life impact at appx 25 mph / 40 kph / 11 ms-1 which saw me break a few bones on unarmoured parts and due to a shear effect one that was armoured. I have also had a couple of minor dinks where my armoured elbow, shoulder, hip and knee hit the deck and I wasn't even bruised [apart from one time where a 'friend' then ran over my leg]. I don't have either the facilities for a 5 m drop or the budget for a set of ballistic gel dummies at £300+ a pop for torsos, it would be nice if I had to redo the testing. The 'Beaker' to my 'Professor Bunsen Honeydew' was unwilling for me to drop the 2 kg weight onto his arm from 3 m for some reason so the tests were done as described.

@@TheRantyRider Armor isn't "does nothing". It does absorb SOME energy. Issue is that it doesn't even remotely absorbe enough, to ASSUREDLY keep people safe if they land badly. It will still reduce the damage somwhat. Keep in mind that energy of moving body is propoeritonal to velcity squared.

@martonlerant5672 - Thanks for the comment. No armour that could be reasonably incorporated into riding kit could prevent injury in any circumstance, my accident [see other comments] could only have less injuries if I had left home a minute later. I doubt that every motorcycle accident will need armour that will stop a bone being broken, but any reduction in the energy transfer can reduce or eliminate injury. I'm aware that kinetic energy is ½mv² but the film is a qualitive rather than a quantitive comparison. Given the option of nothing except a couple [at best] mm of leather vs leather and armour that will absorb some, if not all of the impact I will go for mitigation any time. As per my closing comments it is up to the rider to decide, as it is in warm weather for them to decide that trainers, shorts and a T-shirt paired with a multi-hundred pound helmet is a good form of protection rather than full body covering riding kit.

​@martonlerant5672 yeah a few youtubers have got their knickers in a twist over f9s comments like this youtuber in their blind ignorance have completely missed the point of the video and done a reply that's not a representation of anything other then dropping a 3k weight on the floor.

@anti-cheaterchannels2153 - Thanks for taking the time to comment. I took a while to film this as a reply to Ryan, and rather than going off on a 'you must wear body armour' rant I tried to show that it will mitigate an impact. The weights I used were 2 kg and 10 kg rather than the 3 kg you mention and as per the film and other comments are not a scientific study and qualitive rather than quantative. Ryan's comments that the manufacturers base their armour on the minimum requirements are appropriate, as is the fact that car manufacuturers will meet the minimum safety standards for thier products to comply with legislative requirements. I hope that you don't think that I have made this in 'blind ignorance', I was showing that an impact is mitigated by armour rather than completely eliminated. I have had the unfortunate experience of an impact where I ended up having metal implants and the armour saved my joints in the most part. I will continue to wear armour as it will reduce the impact energy if I have another dink, I will also wear a helmet, gloves and boots as all of these will help in the event of an 'off'. I could not show truly high energy impacts on realistic ballistic gel and simulated bone items due to cost and needing a lab to do it in. Having walked away from high speed track crashes, one of which I was also run over by a following bike I would wear the best protection there is. As I mention, the choice of armour or not is down to the individual, in the UK we have to wear an approved helmet only, anything else is optinal. Having to give first aid to skinned hands to a rider that had a slow speed dink while not wearing gloves because 'it is a warm day' makes me even more certain that protection is best.

@jacobc6482 - Thanks for the comment. The packing foam was used purely to see if there was any difference as it's a control, as was the wood under the foam and both are more flexible than the drive I did the tests on. I was thinking of getting a leg of lamb or similar to show the damage, but the problem is being sure when it is that the bone breaks. I also considered just a bone from the local butcher but again, I would need a few to avoid fatigue failure of the bone through repeated testing. The test is qualative rather than quantitive, there is a difference that can be seen but there is so much more that can be done in a lab by people that have the right kit. To be honest I thought that there would be some damage to the foam even with the armour, and if I could get a more stable platform I would have dropped the 10 kg weight from greater heights as well. The damage to the wood showed that considerable force was passed through the foam in the 'no armour' tests. I can report through experience that level 1 armour protected my shoulder and elbow joints in an accident in 2017, my humerous broke between the armour. Due to the nature of the accident my femur fractured at the neck, but due to the shear forces involved no amount of armour would have prevented this. The mid femur and tibia breaks were also rotational and unarmoured.

@@TheRantyRider Thanks for the responce! I definatly agree armour helps alot, I find it really bulky most of the time which is anoying. From what I've seen the best thing available (other than a good helmet) is an airbag backpack that has armour built into the backpack and an airbag that protects the neck.

@jacobc6482 - thanks for the commnet. I'm not completely convinced by airbag backpacks as they may get less effective if not worn properly. Integrated into jackets they are less likely to move as they can't be worn too loosely. Of course in the event of a multi vehicle collision the best thing would be the driver or rider paying attention, I speak from experience!

@yusriyahbagheri8843 - Thanks for the suggestion, I should have thought of that. The foam did spring back in the same way that flesh would and the wood underneath showed signs of damage in the unarmoured test. The foam was also pierced in the unarmoured tests. I may redo the tests in future but my new neighbour already doubts my sanity after seeing me up a ladder dropping lead weights onto a bit of foam.

@yveslegrand9826 - Thanks for the comment. Indeed Ryan did not advise anyone to give up armour, I perhaps could have been clearer in the film about that. Manufacturers can make the armour more protective, but this would be make kit far bulkier and less flexible than it is with the current armour installed, you mention that the current armour is uncomfortable, so imagine wearing a race spec armour not just on your back but on all your joints as well. I did find it a bit odd that Ryan showed what looked like elbow or shoulder armour and said he wouldn't wear it but wears an inflatable backpack. In a rolling/tumbling accident the elbows and knees can wallop the ground with some force and I would rather these be protected, if only a bit.

​​@@TheRantyRider why is it odd that he said he wouldn't wear one thing and then goes on to not wear that thing and instead wear something else

@arpytrooper2604 - if you look at FortNine's airbag film, Ryan is wearing a torso and pelvis set, but then in the body armour film says that he wouldn't wear something that would protect his elbows and knees. It's a bit like wearing a helmet but no gloves and trainers instead of boots, you are emphasising protection for one area but neglecting others. In the film 'Faster' the head medic for MotoGP is interviewed and says that the injuries have migrated from the body and head to the hands and feet as protection has improved. Given the choice between a broken hand or a broken arm I would go for the hand - and this is from expirience. No amount of protection will eliminate injuries, but reduction of harm is a benefit in the majority of incidents. I wear armour in my jacket and trousers, boots, gloves and a flip-up helmet year round, all of which have helped protect me in an accident a number of years ago.

@sandwaves5642 - Thanks for the comment but your emojis are wrong as there was only one bang! If there is a 'brown trousers' emoji I would use that as I was expecting my usual bed at Coventry Hospital and was really lucky.

@@TheRantyRider ....I see in the future 😆

Thanks for that, I look forwards to the next one. Please unsubsribe! 😃

@sandwaves5642 - Thanks for the comment - two for one film! I agree about the front valve, the rear is easy enough to get to though. The GT+ has a one piece TFT screen, I think the GT and 'bog standard' ones like mine will have the split screen for now, perhaps next year will see the 'filter down' change. Until a bit of an accident where I wrote off a car [I was on a bike!] I used to dive a lot and I never noticed that the split screen looked like a diving mask! Although you saying 'ugly SCUBA clown' means you may have seen me underwater at some point 😝 Personally I'm not bothered by the look of the instruments apart from I would prefer 'proper' clocks.

@iangrimshaw1 - Thanks for the comment and coming along on the ride. Keep an eye on the Cooperb website and 'board behind the counter' for other rides. If the weather is kind in September I'm looking at a 2-3 day 'Peakenders' trip to the Peak District, it will be the weekend either side of One Ride day.

@icandsc - I know, I know, I know, it was a slip of the tongue and I didn't notice until after uploading. At least I didn't say it was carbed like my carbs v injected comment on the CBF part of the CB500 review.

@MrWibbleman Thanks for the comment, I tried all ways round on the panniers. I was speaking to a chap from Yamaha at the ABR festival and he said that the panniers were designed for 'solid' helmets rather than flips so they are a bit narrower.

@@TheRantyRider sorry did not notice the flip helmet. Yes it’s a very tight squeeze for a full face helmet so anything wider/deeper would not fit. I use my top box just for my helmet and tank bag when off the bike as even though my helmet fits in the side panniers I have clothes etc in them (I just keep the top box empty when touring). Thanks again for the video. Just completed a 4000km in 14 days (Spain/portugal) and the bike was great have another 4000 km on a Norway trip later this month.. just a great all round bike.

@MrWibbleman - No worries, it as easy to miss as I talk quite quickly. It sounds like you are getting a great deal of use out of your Tracer.

@RRRRefuelRideRace Thanks for the comment. I have just got back from leading a 4-day Royal Enfield trip around Wales and an MOT on one of my bikes today so I will have a watch and look at linking to your film in my description.

@@TheRantyRider Oh, great. I see. Thanks a lot. Appreciate it. Which RE did you ride?

@RRRRefuelRideRaceI was on my 411 Himalayan, we had two of us on them , two Meteors and a few others including a 'mix and match' from older RE bikes.

@Tonyx.yt. Thanks for the comment. Most bike tyre manufacurers advise against puncture repairs, even in the middle of the tread. I doubt there is a lot of difference between a car and bike tyre mushroom plug but I'm lucky enough to be able to afford a replacement tyre so would rather not take the risk.

@@TheRantyRider past year i puncture a brand new tire, like 2 days after installed but tire shop (a good, not a sketchy one) didnt say anything about replacing the whole tire

@Tonyx.yt. I think a lot depends on the manufacturer, Bridgestone are a 'no repair' brand but I think that Michelin allow repairs to be undertaken.

@StoicriderX They only get better the more you ride them. Have fun!

@erniethecat198 - Thanks for the comment, can you reply with a link so that I can watch it and put it in the film description?

@@TheRantyRider I will try, not that savvy with tech.....

@@TheRantyRider czcams.com/video/Yv-FdEixf34/video.htmlsi=wUtaN-5ZiyGkqxv2

@erniethecat198 - Thanks

@kenlee7954 - Thanks for the comment, I can't find a new bike that is as good for me as the Hornet and there are plenty around with under 30 000 miles on the clock still.

@StoicriderX - Thanks for the comment and you have made a good choice.

@mikerider58 - Thanks for the comment. Some of the design is questionable, such as the numberplate light access and the original headlight. Most riders these days aren't year-round, high milage, all weather so a lot of the longevity issues won't affest them.

@kitten3ful - Thanks for the comment, most have said 'insane' or 'warped'!

@v8gtr - You're welcome, it's a shame we had to find out the hard way.

@brockett - As always, thanks for the comment. A slightly longer version will be out on Friday. I was surprised when I looked at the difference that the copy is almost designed to fail compared to the genuine one.

@kevindarkstar - Thanks for the comment, the boxes [well, the right-hand one] have so far survived one drop on the drive and two trail riding with no ill effects so they seem tough enough so far. The bike is built for the Indian market so is basic and possibly to a price. If I need to protect anything in the boxes then I'll use a bag, I keep a couple of tote bags in them for when I get my shopping.

@kevindarkstar - Thanks for the comment, the box of goodies is part of the purchase price so you probably couldn't negotiate down much more than a tenner. Some dealers have a placcy document folder with their name on that comes with a bike, I don't think you could negotiate much off the bike price if you didn't want to take it. I don't know what the T-shirts cost to have printed by the dealer but they are a nice touch.

@kevindarkstar - Thanks for the comment, the brightness isn't the only issue. As you can see from the comparison there is no sideways spread or infill between the spot on the road and the headlights, the spots correct this. The effect is most noticable when slow speed cornering when there is no illumination to the sides.

@StoicriderX - Thanks for the comment and good luck with the test. Just make sure you lock the bike up well as a lot of CB500 riders regret selling it on, a mate of mine had the seller contact him to buy his back!

@Ironbuket - Thanks for the comment, what is up with the one of the chap crossing near the pedestrian crossing? It looks OK but I am having a problem with approving a comment on it at the moment.

@Ironbuket - Thanks for the comment, in this particular car park, and most supermarkets in nearby towns, even Daventry and it's a proper rat race in that big city, there aren't the lines painted. The issue is that the pedestrian walks behind the car which is already reversing, then stops with their trolley behind the car. I have quoted bits of the HC in the 'most contentious film this week on CZcams' and also replied in the comments here, but it is an example of someone doing something that puts them at risk. No-one in their right mind walks closely behind a car that has it's engine running and reversing lights showing, even if it has not yet moved, particulary as they have a lot of car park and hence potentially moving vehicles to their left which the driver will need to look out for. I'll amend the description to make this clearer. Have you seen the suicidal jogger film as well? czcams.com/video/90aKEUtXsG8/video.html

@@TheRantyRider With the near silent electric cars these days and trolleys often making a lot of noise if the road is rough, you can easily have a vehicle come up behind you and not realise it. Sticking close the parking spaces is definitely the best place to push your trolley. I totally get the argument that the pedestrian should have spotted the car was reversing and waited, but the driver should also be looking around for pedestrians and not reversing if any were headed their way. I suspect they left their trolley there on purpose for the car to run into as a punishment for the car not seeing them. In the video they seemed to appear out of nowhere so maybe the driver couldn’t have seen them coming - hard to know without other camera angles

@Ironbuket - Thanks for the comment. Bar mounted cameras do tend to move when I'm backing the bike in, I thought the commentary covered it though. The car may have been a hybrid but there was definately an engine starting as I was reversing. The shop door is opening as I pull into the car park which is when it appeas the pedestrian is emerging, they then walked to the left of the Seat on my left, by which time the car was moving. As the car was reversing I stopped moving so as not to distract them and you can just see that I start to move forwards to square up in the space before the end of the clip. Electric cars seem to have reversing beepers these days, which should help. As for the driver's actions, he was looking around as I could see his head moving, but the greater risk would be to the rear and his left - on the opposite side of the car park is a 4x4 with it's lights on, is it about to pull off? To his left the view is blocked by another 4x4 so there may be a car coming up from there. I've seen two reversing cars collide in this carpark, neither driver loaded their boots with shopping before setting off, just got in their cars and crunch. Now to reverse the situation, if someone was pulling a trolley backwards and a car drove into them despite being able to see them would the pedestrian be to blame for not looking out for the car coming from their left that wasn't there when they began to move? Like you I believe the pedestrian tried to damage the vehicle deliberately. Notice how he didn't step behind the car himself or try to move the trolley out of the way? He wasn't even shouting stop, just saying it.

@@TheRantyRider This is like wading through treacle LOL I replied specifically in relation to your comment implying that pedestrians should not be pushing their trolleys near to cars, because I thought that was wrong. I think I’ve already covered this well enough, but your replies seem to keep trying to push this back onto who was at fault and that me discussing if people can push trolleys near to cars is somehow linked. I don’t think it is and I’m not trying to say it is. Ill just give up trying to make my point I guess - life’s not worth it. NB: I never meant the parked car was electric

@Ironbuket - Thanks for the reply, my apologies as we [ok, me] seem to have been on slightly crossed lines. I agree about keeping out of the centre of the road in car parks, point understood this time. Perhaps you can use a bigger hammer to bang your point through my skull? 😃 I was misreading the post as it was late and my fingers were bleeding from the other replies.

@abt833 - Thanks for the comment. Do you mean my attitude? I explained in the desciption, which I edited after posting, that the pedestrian stepped out in front of a bus. There was no real issue for me apart from slowing. There wouldn't be issues on the road if people simply obeyed the rules and weren't in so much of a hurry. A pedestrian would lose any battle with a bus. Confession time, when I was a kid of about 7 I did the classic run out from behind an ice cream van and got knocked over breaking a shoulder blade. Was the car driver to blame for my actions? No. I should have known better but ignored the rules. Was the car driver prosecuted? No. They did nothing wrong. Did my parents have a slot on a TV programme saying 'look at my poor innocent child'? No. I was solely at fault and even at that tender age could accept I was in the wrong.

@user-cr2yf1uy1r - Thanks for the comment, he seemed sharp enough, just not sensible enough.

@weatherstationlytovchenko4794 - Thanks for the comment, there were already people at the crossing who had pressed it!

@@TheRantyRider Likewise re: commenting. I meant in general 😉

​@@weatherstationlytovchenko4794 Cheers for the clarification.

@user-wq1cf7ms5r - Thanks for the comment.

@bestbehave - Thanks for the comment, in reverse order - I don't ride around pedestrians i slow as that way I can keep an eye on them. - It was the bus he stepped out in front of from behind a parked car as I have explained in other replies. - Pedestrians have a responsibility to consider their own safety as well, I'm soft, squishy and breakable, a bus is big and hard, so the bus will hurt me. He should think like that as well.

@@TheRantyRider so no problem to you at all, no problem to the bus driver, What exactly are you whining about?

Whining? Nope, just posting an incident film, the bus driver had to brake, and in the past UK bus drivers have been prosecuted for causing injuries, the first of which I have heard of is in the 80's where a person fell as the bus moved off. If someone, elderly or infirm had stood in preperation to get off at the next stop and fell do you think anything would have been said to the pedestrian?

@@TheRantyRider no incident, so yep, whining.

​@@bestbehave As per many previous comments the incident was for the bus driver and not me. I'm pointing out the actions of someone irresponsible, not whining.

@Ironbuket - Thanks for the reply, I am going to change the description so people look at the bus rather than where I was! Pedestrians also have duties to themselves and need to understand this.

@@TheRantyRider Why should they look at the bus, it’s miles away when he started across? I get he wasn’t looking at you when should have been. I get he was too slow across the road. I get your point about using only crossings. But people don’t use only crossings, this is not the US where it is illegal not to. We don’t know if the old guy had bad eyesight or was deaf or soft in the head. These are not excuses why we should give him a pass, but my opinion is: Coming across an elderly person, a young kid or dog in the road is not the same as having someone in their 20s walk out into a traffic whilst their head is buried into a phone. Maybe he genuinely just didn’t see you coming and thought that way was clear, people make mistakes. Looks like at the end of the clip some twat has blocked the entire road, but actually was it their fault or should the van have waited? Things aren’t always as straight forward as they seem

@Ironbuket - "Why should they look at the bus..." Because he should have been! A vehicle moving towards you will only get closer. Also note that the camera lens magnifies the distance between objects so the bus is closer to the camera than it appears, as is the pedestrian [the effect is less the closer to the lens]. If the man had bad eyesight or was deaf shouldn't he have been more inclined to use the crossing? The car at the end was performing a turn in the road, this can be seen earlier on, personally I would have driven away from the parked cars a bit and swung it around in an entrance way a bit further up the road.

@Craig-wp3pz - Thanks for the comment, but I think you meant Berks not Mercs.

@@TheRantyRider Berks in Mercs

@@TheRantyRider wankers in WARWICKSHIRE?

@Craig-wp3pz It's berks in beemers and jerks in Mercs!

@@TheRantyRider ahhh, so, does that make me a bus wanker? Or a Pain on a Train??

@pauldavies4870 - Thanks for the comment.

@michaelstevens3479 - Thanks for the comment, nice to see people as heartless as I am.

@Cornz38 - Thanks for the comment, but if you notice it is the bus that he walked out in front of from behind a parked car, if I was driving the bus I would have called him worse. I was far from triggered, and too old to suffer from that youngsters issue, I was using the film to show someone being stupid.

@@TheRantyRider It is plausible the bus driver waved him out. The new rules are ill conceived but i know from my past job, if a motorist wipes a cyclist/ipodestrin out, irrespective of the cyclist/ipodestrian being 100% at fault, the motorist will face the full force of the law..

@Cornz38 - Thanks for the comment, I have had a frame by frame look at the original on a high zoom and I can't see any gesture from the driver so it's a bit of a conjecture. A friend of mine has put it well "it's the insured party that will be found at fault", but the HC clearly states that everyone has responsibilities, It may just be that my copy has pages that are missing from other people's that cover pedestrians and cyclists.

@leylandlad - Thanks for the comment, perhaps someone from the US can share thoughts about their jaywaling offence.

I have always hated the idea of the American jaywalking. Drivers just need to stop with their entitlement. You don't own the road

@abt833 - My reply from earlier seems to have disappeared, so sorry if you get this twice. The King actually owns the road, we just get to use it. I can't see in which way I appear 'entitled' posting a film of someone doing something stupid, which I have pointed out repeatedly is not walking in front of me, but the bus. Is the bus driver following the rules of the road 'entitled'? They are doing their job and have to put up with someone wandering out in front of them. As per the amended film description all I had to do was slow, I'm surprised that I have had to point out to a lot of commenters that the bus was there. From what I understand of jaywalking it is a bit of an odd one, but how many crossings have you seen with lengths of railing either side to prevent this occurance?

@SteveAngel-ns3qp - Thanks for the comment, as I have replied to others, it wasn't me he caused a problem for but the bus he walked out in front of.

@legrandmaitre7112 - Thanks for the comment, my HC is the expanded verstion and features these points: pp 9 rule 1 pp 10-11 rule 7 precis and parts A-E pp13 rule 14. Yours may only have the last point of rule 146 on pp 57 in it. The 4th paragraph of rule/advice H1 on pp6 is also worth noting.

@Penny-mk7fv - Especially the bank robberies by fluffy puppies.

Wait until you find there was no crime committed!

@bestbehave - Just to clarify, I didn't say or imply a crime had been committed.

@remm952 - Thanks for the comment. Hmm, as the prefrontal cortex deals with things such as risk taking, I think you should be questioning the pedestrian's cognitive ability as he walked out in front of a bus from behind a parked car.

@5wheels178 - Thanks for the comment, it wasn't half an hour later into the ride, it came down so hard I had to shake the goldfish out of the helmet when I stopped!

@laetiziacoronet243 - Thanks for the comment, you will see from the film that I was travelling slower than the speed limit and could slow enough to let the pedestrian complete the crossing without using my brakes. A lot of blame is placed on drivers/riders of powered vheicles these days in the event of an accident. It shouldn't be the driver of the bus who has to take into account the pedestrian walking out, but the pedestrian should look after their own safety. For example using the crossing, not crossing behind a parked vehicle and not walking out into traffic.

@Pyrothekilla - Thanks for the comment, to be fair he did walk away from the crossing rather than towards it. I have crossed adjacent to pelican/puffin crossings when the traffic lights are on red and there is noting travelling towards them and I can cross before the lights turn green, but I wouldn't have done this.