Anyone ever thrown a full bottle at a car?

[Vikeonabike]

Wouldn't it just be handy to have a can of spraypaint handy. I said somewhere else I tried a telescopic police baton once in my pump bracket and it fitted perfectly, make a nice dent that would.

You wouldn't even need to retaliate on a car to get yourself nicked...Duh!

 

[hackbike 666]

How about a carrot up the exhaust pipe?

 

[Brahan]

How about a carrot up the exhaust pipe?

'Fnarr fnarr'

 

[snailracer]

When cars annoy me, I vent by "hogging" the primary position and being more assertive than I otherwise would. It does not escape me that it's how I should be riding in the first place.

I think cyclists do themselves a disservice by gutter-riding, more assertive positioning & riding by all cyclists would educate motorists that they do not have the right to bully us out of their way.

 

[hackbike 666]

'Fnarr fnarr'

I don't think you can get nicked for possessing an offensive carrot.

 

[Vikeonabike]

I don't think you can get nicked for possessing an offensive carrot.

Depends ...how offensive, mind you there are always the obscenity laws...

 

[Norm]

[baldrick]
... which is funny, as I have a thingy which is shaped just like a turnip...
[/baldrick]

 

[Tinuts]

I keep thinking of some really devious things to do, but that will just mess up my karma.

What, like a bottle full of brake fluid perhaps? I hear it works wonders on the paintwork.......

 

[Tinuts]

You wouldn't even need to retaliate on a car to get yourself nicked...Duh!

I think you'll find the Bill of Rights says otherwise (re our right to carry defensive weapons). If, however, you use that defensive weapon offensively you surely will lay yourself open to the possibility of getting nicked!

 

[Vikeonabike]

I think you'll find the Bill of Rights says otherwise (re our right to carry defensive weapons)

I know we're becoming more Americanised day by day, hadn't realised we had adopted their Bill of Rights as yet (though it's only a matter of time), Unless of course you mean the Bill of Rights 1689, in which case:
"That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;"
I think Ollie C's laws have been repealed.

If, however, you use that defensive weapon offensively you surely will lay yourself open to the possibility of getting nicked!

Sorry again, in British law a weapon is just that, it does not carry a label that says Offensive or Defensive.

An offensive weapon is defined as "any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person or intended by the person having it with him for such use"
Police officers are legislated to be able to carry a Baton whilst ON Duty, however if we take it home, then we come under the same law as everyone else.

The only defence to carrying an offensive weapon is "Immediate arming". This would mean that you were under immediate threat, and you grabbed the first thing that came to hand. In my case. I have a selection re-enactment weapons. If somebody came to my door and said "come outside I'm going to give you a good kicking", I could not justify, donning mail, shield, helm and sword, going outside and sorting Herbert out (Though it may be worth it just for the reaction). I would be said to be carrying an Offensive weapon. However if I was sat inside, polishing said weapon (ooer mrs) and somebody came into my house and threatened me, and I believed would do me harm then I could (possibly) use the defence of immediate arming, then of course I have to go through the rigmarole of showing that I used justifiable force (which is where a lot of self defence cases go wrong but that is another subject).

 

[PBancroft]

Good example Vike. IANAL.

One I was always given was the simple rolled up magazine. A rolled up magazine is nothing - just a rolled up mag, but in a pinch it makes a useful baton in self defence.

However... that all changes if you fix rubber bands around it, or sellotape it so its permanently rolled. Or if you carry that magazine every day threatening people with it.

A bottle of juice attached to the bike might be considered immediate arming when being threatened by a car being driven aggressively and a yoof yelling at you. A hammer attached to the frame would not.

 

[mickle]

I threw my bicycle at the windscreen of a bus once. Does this count?

 

[g00se]

Also, much as I think Sustrans are great- (and all the other cycle groups) we need a much stronger body to fight our corner- maybe a Cycle Agency or some such thing with teeth. someone referred to this on here recently and it's something I've thought for years. Cagers have the idiotic AA and RAC with that chinless wonder they wheel out whenever the put upon motorist is picked on again poor loves (I forget the gormless bastard's name), well we need a cycling equivalent. Though less gormless of course!

There's currently a debate on the upcoming AGM vote at the CTC on the proposed change to make the organisation more akin to such a group - by merging the members arm with the charity arm - into one charity group.

If the proposed change goes ahead, it'll end up with a more lobbying role.

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5356

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5366

 

[BentMikey]

Dont' vote for that mate, IMO it's a bad idea. The members will have no more say over teh operation of the charity, and it'll no longer be a club.

http://www.savethectc.org.uk/

 

[Bollo]

Just to add to BMs bit, there is a danger that charity status could limit the CTC's ability to campaign if the campaigning is deamed openly political or is judged to conflict with the greater public good (not cyclists' good but the great motor-driving British public good).

The idea that the CTC can't campaign effectively unless it becomes a charity is a McGuffin. For reference, they effectively campaigned against changes to the HC as a club.

Follow the linky.......