Inconsidererate, aggressive, but not necessarily dangerous. Report?

esuhl

Babbawah wrote: »

I'm not. I have this 'thing' about healthy young girls in jodhpurs, especially Janet !

This, I think is where our moaning and whinging psyclists are going wrong.

Most psyclists are into the lycra because of a sexual fantasy, and there is a good reason why there isn't many wimmin invited on these rides !

So... you're an ogling perv and a homophobe. Congratulations. :T

Tilt

Can't see the front wheel of the cycle to gauge the distance out in the road you are cycling but it appears you are quite a bit away from the kerb. Also there appears to be a 'hard shoulder' (or possibly a cycle path?) running alongside the carriageway which appears to be in a rural area.

Correct me if i'm wrong but would it of been possible that you were unnecessarily riding too far out into the road which provoked the BMW driver to sound his horn?

armyknife

Oh, I thought the thread was going to be a inferior quality of trolling the sub-forum is attracting at the moment, as evidenced above.

brat

Tilt wrote: »

Can't see the front wheel of the cycle to gauge the distance out in the road you are cycling but it appears you are quite a bit away from the kerb. Also there appears to be a 'hard shoulder' (or possibly a cycle path?) running alongside the carriageway which appears to be in a rural area.

Correct me if i'm wrong but would it of been possible that you were unnecessarily riding too far out into the road which provoked the BMW driver to sound his horn?

We looked at most of this already Tilt. Tobster's distance is about 1 metre from the kerb, which is the best distance out to avoid kerbside crap and to allow a little nearside wiggle room. There is no cycle path or shared path, and Tobster's speed would be above that recommended for a shared path anyway.

There is debate about who sounded the horn. I'm moving towards Norman's assessment that it was the approaching driver.

Tilt wrote: »

Correct me if i'm wrong but would it of been possible

You asked for corrections Tilt. The expression you're looking for is is "would it have been possible".

Norman_Castle

If the oncoming car had filmed this and instead of a cyclist and it had been roadworks that the bmw was passing, no one would dispute the bmw driver was wrong to force the oncoming car toward the kerb. As there is a cyclist involved there is the usual attempt to find fault with them. No mirrors, too far from the kerb, should have used a cycle path, they're a whinging "psycilst" wearing lycra. All nonsense.

Forget the vehicles involved. The bmw driver overtook by forcing their way past. It was careless driving.

Norman_Castle

Babbawah wrote: »

But . . . I am a cyclist you fool.

A whinging cyclist, you fool.

MacMickster

modsandmockers wrote: »

You are a cyclist, right? So therefore it is wrong for a car to overtake a bike on a clear stretch of road. Right?


The car passed the bike with roughly the same clearance as it would have passed another car - there is no need to be on the wrong side of the road in order to pass a cyclist.

The video gives no information about speed.

The horn is intended to warn other road users of your presence or approach - especially if you have reasonable grounds to believe that they are otherwise unaware.

Exactly! I initially watched this with the sound off. Do so, and stop the video when the car first comes into view. It has probably given the cyclist far more room than it would give a car (given that the cyclist is not the width of a car unless he is unusually broad in the beam).

The horn is clearly sounded as a warning of his presence. I suspect that something in the cyclists riding style as he approached (wobbling a bit, reacting aggressively to something else - and I suspect possibly wearing headphones) meant that the driver was uncertain that the cyclist was paying due attention to his surroundings.

At this point switch on the sound and continue playing the video. There is no sound of any horn after passing the cyclist nor any gesticulating from the driver. Again this points to no anger from the driver. The horn was merely a warning on approach - exactly what the horn is intended to be used for.

The cyclist on the other hand responds with an aggressive foul-mouthed hissy fit, and then has the stupidity to post the video of his bad behaviour on the internet for all to see.

I do think that he should take this video to the police as I consider that it probably provides sufficient evidence of the offence of cycling furiously.

frisbeej

So what sort of jobs are available to people who are convicted of death by dangerous driving?


What sort of transport would they use while still banned? A bicycle? How much do you think their car insurance will be?


How do they live with themselves for ending the life of another human being?

Retrogamer

When ever i'm out a cycle i'd say about 25% of motorists pass me the same way (far too close and when other vehicles approaching)

boliston

Tilt wrote: »

Can't see the front wheel of the cycle to gauge the distance out in the road you are cycling but it appears you are quite a bit away from the kerb. Also there appears to be a 'hard shoulder' (or possibly a cycle path?) running alongside the carriageway which appears to be in a rural area.

Correct me if i'm wrong but would it of been possible that you were unnecessarily riding too far out into the road which provoked the BMW driver to sound his horn?

It was obvious the cyclist was in the "secondary position" which is where the left hand wheel of most vehicles would normally run - the road is smoother here and it's the safest place to cycle most of the time.

The other cycling position is known as "primary position" which is in the middle of a traffic lane. The time to use this position would be on a multi lane road with narrow lanes where it would be unsafe for a car to overtake while sharing the nearside lane with a cyclist. Another time to "take primary" would be the approach to a roundabout as this is not the time to be sharing a lane with other turning vehicles!