Is a driver getting out of their car an act of potential aggression?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Origamist

Legendary Member
It often amazes me how people impute intention from drivers so easily and without any real evidence. It's happened quite a few times on just this topic already.

I make no conclusions about the driver's second overtake, but if I were to guess, I would say he "carefully" [1] squeezed past that cyclist in much the same way he squeezed past the lady cyclist from the first overtake. The two overtakes are reasonably consistent wrt passing distance, and the second was slightly less reckless than the first which is unsurprising given the telling off and encounter with three other cyclists and a video camera. I suspect he probably has an incorrect idea of how much room a cyclist should be given, and doesn't understand why we'd want more space than he gave.

[1] i.e. in his own mind.

The second incident is different to the first as the driver has chosen to overtake when he could see the offside lane that he has moved into is blocked by traffic up ahead, and yet, he still decides to overtake an accelerating cyclist (who he had also had words with) and then squeezes the cyclists to the kerb (look how close he gets to the stationary car too) instead of waiting and indicating - this was an aggressive manoeuvre forcing the cyclist to take evasive action and palm off the car.

Was his judgment clouded by anger or was it just a another mistake...Who knows, but considering what had just taken place, I'd go with the former.
 

BentMikey

Rider of Seolferwulf
Location
South London
Except that like the others, you're leaping to conclusions without any evidence for it. It's noticeable that he gives the queueing cars less space than he gives the cyclist, and is not particularly aggressive with the manoeuvre. Bad driving all the same, but it's consistent with his earlier bad driving.
 

Origamist

Legendary Member
Except that like the others, you're leaping to conclusions without any evidence for it. It's noticeable that he gives the queueing cars less space than he gives the cyclist, and is not particularly aggressive with the manoeuvre. Bad driving all the same, but it's consistent with his earlier bad driving.

I'm not leaping to conclusions, I'm expressing an opinion that the driver was "driving angry" in the second incident. That's my view (and that of others) given the preceding events.

So what if he passed the cars closely - he still endangered the cyclist. It can only take a tap from a car to send you into the road. Forcing a cyclist (who had been involved in the "animated discussion" secs earlier) towards the kerb (and another cyclist) at speed is both aggressive and dangerous driving in my book.
 

Sheffield_Tiger

Legendary Member
....her reflective panels are being lit up by my flasher. and the street lights at this part are adequate enough that even though she is wearing darkish clothes, you can still see her.


Got to hand it to you, your vids are always action-packed. Though I was too busy looking at the car driver to notice the flasher
 

barongreenback

Über Member
Location
Warwickshire
I'm new to commuting so forgive me if this is a daft point but...Did the cyclist need to overtake? Losing momentum is annoying but I'm sure many of us would be critical of a driver who overtakes just to travel an extra couple of mph faster.
 

ianrauk

Tattooed Beat Messiah
Location
Rides Ti2
I'm new to commuting so forgive me if this is a daft point but...Did the cyclist need to overtake? Losing momentum is annoying but I'm sure many of us would be critical of a driver who overtakes just to travel an extra couple of mph faster.



Not a daft point at all. No she did not need to overtake.
 
She didn't need to overtake. But she did so legally.
 

Lighthorse

New Member
She didn't need to overtake. But she did so legally.

5) Cycling without due care and attention.

Source: Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 29

Offence: It is an offence for a person to ride a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road.
 

Lighthorse

New Member
Lighthorse, was the driver's driving better,the same, or worse than the cyclist's cycling?

If there had been a collision, the motorist would have been totally to blame. He overtook a vehicle which was in process of overtaking another vehicle.
Cyclists can ride two-a-breast. The HC suggests not to do this on busy town streets.

The motorist would have claimed the lady cyclist did not check before her manouver ( and therefore committed the offence ), which would have been true, but not justification for squeezing past.

The lady cyclist, and a court of law, would have found the motorist to be driving Dangerously, which is also an offence. The motorist would have been penalised.

Cyclists are not obliged to use the cycle lane.
It is in their best interests to look around before moving sideways or change lane. The Lifesaver.
 

MacB

Lover of things that come in 3's
Not sure on this one, certainly not clear cut all the way:-

both cyclist and driver seemed to proceed from lights with a must pass mentality
looked like she was doing the cyclist version of the slow lorry overtake on a motorway, she didn't exactly zip by
not a lot of looking about from her either, gave the impression of someone that was target orientated and impatient
I'd guess the driver was also target orientated and I didn't think the overtake was that close, not for heavy traffic and the cyclist did wobble out a bit at the overtake point
Personally I wouldn't have overtaken at that point, had I been the driver, but I may have muttered to myself about the level of cycling
The afters were just that, unpredictable and potentially dangerous, I thought Gaz handled that pretty well

If I'd been the cyclist, after calming down, I might have been wondering to myself why I felt such a need to get by at that point. Whether driving or cycling I've never regretted a decision to sit back behind someone. In both cases I've had reason to regret a decision to pass, thankfully never with serious consequences.
 

WJHall

Über Member
Not sure on this one, certainly not clear cut all the way:-

both cyclist and driver seemed to proceed from lights with a must pass mentality
looked like she was doing the cyclist version of the slow lorry overtake on a motorway, she didn't exactly zip by
not a lot of looking about from her either, gave the impression of someone that was target orientated and impatient
I'd guess the driver was also target orientated and I didn't think the overtake was that close, not for heavy traffic and the cyclist did wobble out a bit at the overtake point
Personally I wouldn't have overtaken at that point, had I been the driver, but I may have muttered to myself about the level of cycling
The afters were just that, unpredictable and potentially dangerous, I thought Gaz handled that pretty well

If I'd been the cyclist, after calming down, I might have been wondering to myself why I felt such a need to get by at that point. Whether driving or cycling I've never regretted a decision to sit back behind someone. In both cases I've had reason to regret a decision to pass, thankfully never with serious consequences.

Agreed, I have the distinct impression that we have been watching not very careful cyclist meets somewhat less careful motorist, with latent aggressive streak in at least one of them.

This seems to be some sort of cycle race track with lots of "roadies" including the overtaken cyclist, so I guess that the overtaken cyclist did not mind the rather close overtake, but in his place I find it unnerving to have other cyclists come past so close. As cyclist's often tell motorists, a certain amount of wobble room is desirable, and if he had wobbled right there could have been a collision, which would have been the overtakers fault, but could have brought both of them down in front of a car.

One of the unfortunate things about cycle lanes, is that they are lanes, and you should signal and observe before changing lane, and in this case do the job properly by allowing proper clearance on the overtaken vehicle. There is no point telling motorists to give 1.5 m clearance if we are going to cut each other up.

Just as bad are the cyclists who will overtake on the left just as you reach a point where the road widens on the left, at the end of a row of parked cars for example, and are obviously going to move left, without it even being necessary to change lane. In this country overtaking is done on the right. (Left filtering in slow moving traffic is another matter, and cannot apply here since both bicycle vehicles were obviously moving at their full speed.)


Nevertheless the guilty cyclist does seem to have been in that position for long enough for the driver to have no basis to claim that she wobbled out in front of him, so he should not have passed that close, although traffic in general seems to be passing fairly close, in fact the general lesson from the whole thing seems to be what ghastly environments cycle commuting takes you into.

WJH
 

Bollo

Failed Tech Bro
Location
Winch
This seems to be some sort of cycle race track with lots of "roadies" including the overtaken cyclist, so I guess that the overtaken cyclist did not mind the rather close overtake, but in his place I find it unnerving to have other cyclists come past so close. As cyclist's often tell motorists, a certain amount of wobble room is desirable, and if he had wobbled right there could have been a collision, which would have been the overtakers fault, but could have brought both of them down in front of a car.
Just an observation, but I've found the expectations of what constitutes a close cyclist-cyclist overtake depends a lot on the local cycling culture. For example, I was surprised how close other cyclists would pass (or how little room I was given to pass) on Dutch feitpads. I think London is going the same way; as numbers increase there's less room per cyclist, but also a greater expectation and acceptance of closer riding.
 
Top Bottom