I will knock you out ! BBCs Jeremy Vine films woman driver`s shocking road rage

RichardD1970

Kim_kim wrote: »

Also he seemed to be shouting he had to stay a cars width away from parked cars! Really! London would grind to a halt if drivers & riders left a gap of a car to their left, there wouldn't be many roads left that could accommodate two way traffic!

Should be a doors width, which is what is taught to new motorcyclists from the very start on a CBT. A cars width is for overtaking (so she shouldn't have trie to overtake regardless of his road position).

Kim_kim wrote: »

I accept he's wrong for using the cycle path, but aren't the cyclists wrong for not using their path!

No, no, no. If you had bothered to read (and comprehend) the thread then this and all the other points have been addressed and explained.

RichardD1970

IS it even a cycle path? Looking again I can see no signs or makings on it to indicate it is?

[Deleted User]

hugheskevi wrote: »

there are articles such as this one

And this one:

“What you see in discourses about cycling is the absolute classic 1960s and 1970s social psychology of prejudice,” he explains. “It’s exactly those things that used to be done about minority ethnic groups and so on – the overgeneralisation of negative traits, under-representation of negative behaviours by one’s own group, that kind of thing. It’s just textbook prejudiced behaviour.”

It says all you need to know about society's priorities and attitudes that threads like this run to hundreds of posts, whilst a thread about a driver who kills a cyclist after eight convictions for using a phone attracts just four replies.

Norman_Castle

Kim_kim wrote: »

I totally agree, she was very aggressive & should be prosecuted for her threatening behaviour it's also quite clear he was very much on a wind up mission & delebratly road in the middle of the road rather than to the left (as all drivers/riders should).

Also he seemed to be shouting he had to stay a cars width away from parked cars!

The only available space was the middle of the road because of parked cars. Its also a one way street where if there had been more than one available lane the keep left rule wouldn't apply. I suspect he meant he was keeping a doors width rather a cars width from the parked cars. However close he had cycled to the parked cars there wouldn't have been room to overtake.

Johno100

jack_pott wrote: »

And this one:

“What you see in discourses about cycling is the absolute classic 1960s and 1970s social psychology of prejudice,” he explains. “It’s exactly those things that used to be done about minority ethnic groups and so on – the overgeneralisation of negative traits, under-representation of negative behaviours by one’s own group, that kind of thing. It’s just textbook prejudiced behaviour.”

Yawn...that's the view of Ian walker a pro-cycling academic with an obvious chip on his shoulder. A white, middle aged, middle class professional talking about prejudice.:rotfl:

[Deleted User]

Johno100 wrote: »

Yawn...that's the view of Ian walker a pro-cycling academic with an obvious chip on his shoulder. A white, middle aged, middle class professional talking about prejudice.:rotfl:

Motive fallacy. You refute an argument with a counter argument, not by impugning the motives of the advocate.

If you tell me that people will die if they don't get enough to eat, and I reply by saying "You're just saying that because you want some of my dinner", I haven't made a rational argument because proving that you want my dinner doesn't prove that people can survive with out food.

If you want to learn how to argue rationally, try reading this short manual by a Cambridge philosopher.

Kim_kim

Norman_Castle wrote: »

The only available space was the middle of the road because of parked cars. Its also a one way street where if there had been more than one available lane the keep left rule wouldn't apply. I suspect he meant he was keeping a doors width rather a cars width from the parked cars. However close he had cycled to the parked cars there wouldn't have been room to overtake.

No there was no room to overtake where he was cycling & she was an aggressive thug for bipping. But there were stretches of wider road where he stopped twice & i believe he deliberately stopped there to stop her overtaking at that point. She (the fool got out) & by the time she got back in her car again & moving, he was past the wide point & so she couldn't overtake.

I drive down country lanes to work & there is a point where it's going uphill. I can imagine any cyclists breathing hard going uphill there & my car is pretty quite, so I always give the shortest beep I can as I approach, to warn them of my presence (which is what the horn is for), just in case going uphill they start weaving.

I've had the odd rude hand signal, but it's better to be safe than sorry.

custardy

BJV wrote: »

Bikes on the road frighten me. They always have done. ( Think I have fallen off so many times ha ha ) Always have so I always give them possibly too much room. I am always worried that they will fall just as I am over taking and well ????

I also give loads of room for motorbikes. What gets me is when I am stuck in traffic and a motorbike swerves ( normally very close ) to over take me and then falls into the safe space I have left for the car in front meaning that I have to brake sharply.


I am in no way siding with the anti bike lobby far from it we should all get on our bikes. Health and environmental impact etc.

But I think that it would be a good idea to make sure that all bike users just like car / van drivers are tested to make sure that they understand the rules of the road. From what I have seen some clearly have no idea. ( P.s I have no idea how it could be enforced)

That said god I hope this mad woman is dealt with.

The woman in question had (I assume) passed a test

Johno100

Kim_kim wrote: »

I drive down country lanes to work & there is a point where it's going uphill. I can imagine any cyclists breathing hard going uphill there & my car is pretty quite, so I always give the shortest beep I can as I approach, to warn them of my presence (which is what the horn is for), just in case going uphill they start weaving..

And that is perfectly permissible under the Highway Code. Unfortunately the lycra elite are likely to interpret that as an attempt to intimidate a vulnerable road user and more evidence of prejudice against their 'out group'.

brat

Johno100 wrote: »

And that is perfectly permissible under the Highway Code. Unfortunately the lycra elite are likely to interpret that as an attempt to intimidate a vulnerable road user and more evidence of prejudice against their 'out group'.

Why should you presume that? Remember the vast majority of 'lycra elite' also drive.