Cyclist abuses woman after he rode two abreast.

[wajc]

Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence we can only comment on what we can see - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.

That's the problem, we haven't seen the whole picture. We can neither say his behaviour is excusable or not.

 

[Blue Hills]

Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence we can only comment on what we can see - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.

Meanwhile, back on earth.

 

[mudsticks]

Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence we can only comment on what we can see - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.

But it gets excused by saying stuff like

"The red mist came down"

We can all get annoyed or can even feel aggreived by other people's actions, and what we perceive as 'stupidity'
(cos of course we are always right)
But actively pursuing someone, and then behaving like this is pretty inexcusable.

That's not 'fight or flight' because the threat (if there was one) is no longer active - its 'retribution'.

It's not 'self defence' it's offence.

I Don't know, when fight or flight adrenaline kicks in, just about anything can happen

But its after the fact, he's not still being threatened.

Some people need to learn some anger management.

As @Saluki says we are ultimately responsible for our own actions, as adults, we shouldn't be out unsupervised if not able to behave ourselves.

Retaliating in direct self defence, when being threatened is one thing.

Giving someone a very aggressive 'piece of your mind' and being abusive like that after chasing them down is quite another.

 

[wajc]

But it gets excused by saying stuff like

"The red mist came down"

We can all get annoyed or can even feel aggreived by other people's actions, and what we perceive as 'stupidity'
(cos of course we are always right)
But actively pursuing someone, and then behaving like this is pretty inexcusable.

That's not 'fight or flight' because the threat (if there was one) is no longer active - its 'retribution'.

It's not 'self defence' it's offence.

But its after the fact, he's not still being threatened.

Some people need to learn some anger management.

As @Saluki says we are ultimately responsible for our own actions, as adults, we shouldn't be out unsupervised if not able to behave ourselves.

Retaliating in direct self defence, when being threatened is one thing.

Giving someone a very aggressive 'piece of your mind' and being abusive like that after chasing them down is quite another.

Grimsby Telegraph

Quote from the above article.

The cyclist reportedly “followed the car” into Cleethorpes Country Park

Your description of his actions are very different from that in the report.

We're told that the incident happened in Cleethorpes Country Park - the road up to the park is wide enough for a car to pass cyclists riding 2 abreast as you can see from Google Maps

Park Lane Cleethorpes

You can also see that at the park entrance the road narrows to a point where riding 2 abreast might indeed make it difficult for a following car to pass.

Now I'm going to suggest it's highly likely (not definite I know but this part of the road is shown in the photo in the report) that it was along this narrowed part of the road that she became annoyed and decided to use her 'horn'.

A few days later we hear how she nearly knocked him and his wife off their bikes

Cyclists Reply

The distance between the park entrance and where the car is parked up (a dead end for cars but a way through in to the park for cyclists) is approx 200m. Therefore she would have been held up for a maximum of 200m or a few seconds.

Far from him 'actively persuing' or 'chasing them down' or even indeed following the car as suggested in the report, I put it that the car driver has literally just passed him and his wife causing them to fear being knocked off their bikes and then literally stopped and parked up in front of them.

I'm not defending his subsequent rant - as you say the immediate danger was over but you give an impression of the incident that may not have occurred.

 

[mudsticks]

Grimsby Telegraph

Quote from the above article.

The cyclist reportedly “followed the car” into Cleethorpes Country Park

Your description of his actions are very different from that in the report.

We're told that the incident happened in Cleethorpes Country Park - the road up to the park is wide enough for a car to pass cyclists riding 2 abreast as you can see from Google Maps

Park Lane Cleethorpes

You can also see that at the park entrance the road narrows to a point where riding 2 abreast might indeed make it difficult for a following car to pass.

Now I'm going to suggest it's highly likely (not definite I know but this part of the road is shown in the photo in the report) that it was along this narrowed part of the road that she became annoyed and decided to use her 'horn'.

A few days later we hear how she nearly knocked him and his wife off their bikes

Cyclists Reply

The distance between the park entrance and where the car is parked up (a dead end for cars but a way through in to the park for cyclists) is approx 200m. Therefore she would have been held up for a maximum of 200m or a few seconds.

Far from him 'actively persuing' or 'chasing them down' or even indeed following the car as suggested in the report, I put it that the car driver has literally just passed him and his wife causing them to fear being knocked off their bikes and then literally stopped and parked up in front of them.

I'm not defending his subsequent rant - as you say the immediate danger was over but you give an impression of the incident that may not have occurred.

I wasn't disputing the incident - I didn't have the whole story of it - I was taking issue with his abuse, of the driver who was in the wrong to do what she did if the above story is correct.

I've been in the cyclists position many times, crowded off the road by belligerent or thoughtless drivers.

Or had obscenities shouted at me.

But I've never behaved like he did to anyone else, however annoyed.

And I don't think it's justified even now.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

But actively pursuing someone,

Isn’t it quite likely the man and his wife were heading for the same park?

 

[mudsticks]

Isn’t it quite likely the man and his wife were heading for the same park?

Maybe they were, but that's a technicality.

If the guy had approached the driver calmly, and explained why he had issue with her behaviour, then a far better outcome would have been achieved.

I do get the annoyance and anger in the heat of the moment thing.

I get angry several times a day, about all sorts of stuff.

But I own it, and process it, and work out how best to deal with it.

It's called being an adult, in charge of oneself.

There's way too much justification given for violent speech and action ime.

It doesn't help anything, it makes many people too scared to go out by themselves, or without some kind of 'weaponary' or 'protection' everything just escalates .

I don't think saying it's OK on here is helping anything, either.

 

[wajc]

I wasn't disputing the incident - I didn't have the whole story of it - I was taking issue with his abuse, of the driver who was in the wrong to do what she did if the above story is correct.

I've been in the cyclists position many times, crowded off the road by belligerent or thoughtless drivers.

Or had obscenities shouted at me.

But I've never behaved like he did to anyone else, however annoyed.

And I don't think it's justified even now.

I wasn't saying you were disputing the incident - as you say you didn't have the whole story. Your use of the phrases 'actively persuing' and 'chased down' though can not be determined as fact but give a slant to the story that will see the cyclist in an even worse light - this is what I was calling out.

I'm not defending his subsequent rant - as you say the immediate danger was over but you give an impression of the incident that may not have occurred.

And I don't think it's justified even now.

Indeed like yourself I'd also have far more respect for him if he calmly stopped and explained why he thought her actions were wrong.

 

[lane]

Probably best accept if your a cyclist you are the bottom of the pile, subject to close passes and other life threatening acts by drivers on every trip and if you react back you are going to be castigated even by other cyclists.

 

[Drago]

Who cares? Nodder of a car driver + fat man with a Napoleon complex = 2 fools each getting no more than they deserve.

 

[Blue Hills]

Not being a saint as some appear to be, I'll continue as I am.

Sometimes let it go. Sometimes give a mouthful/a piece of my mind.

And always thank/acknowledge nice drivers - there are lots of them.

This incident in truth appears to be as much about the frequent toxicity of social media if anything.

If that driver was not as innocent as she would like to portray herself, making that initial posting was an act of extreme aggression in itself. Albeit playing the victim - a longstanding tactic by some that has unfortunately become all too rampant.

share the road folks

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Maybe they were, but that's a technicality.

It’s more than a technicality. Your description puts a completely different complexion on the incident, not to mention being an assumption that, as far as I have seen, is unsupported. It‘s like me saying the driver deliberately close passed him.

I don’t know how justified his outburst was because we haven’t seen what caused it. He might have been making a mountain out of a molehill or he might have been genuinely apprehensive of severe injury.

 

[lane]

Not being a saint as some appear to be, I'll continue as I am.

Sometimes let it go. Sometimes give a mouthful/a piece of my mind.

And always thank/acknowledge nice drivers - there are lots of them.

This incident in truth appears to be as much about the frequent toxicity of social media if anything.

If that driver was not as innocent as she would like to portray herself, making that initial posting was an act of extreme aggression in itself. Albeit playing the victim - a longstanding tactic by some that has unfortunately become all too rampant.

share the road folks

Spot on

 

[RoadRider400]

Aside from the shouting and bickering over who was in the wrong, I have never understood why cyclists go two abreast to have a chit chat. Its just inconsiderate to drivers who will need to overtake on the wrong side of the road. On country lanes this can lead to some very dangerous overtakes. Fine if you are out at silly oclock in the morning go ahead but its very inconsiderate at other times.

 

[DaveReading]

Aside from the shouting and bickering over who was in the wrong, I have never understood why cyclists go two abreast to have a chit chat. Its just inconsiderate to drivers who will need to overtake on the wrong side of the road.

As opposed to dangerously overtaking singled-out cyclists while unnecessarily aiming to stay on the same side of the road, you mean ?