Jeremy Vine meets a gangster

[srw]

That article is about injuries and death, not altercations.

People are concerned about altercations because they believe they lead to injuries and death.

 

[glenn forger]

That link doesn't have anything to do with Walker's piece. You said the article shows Walker's scare-mongering. The article has nothing to do with road rage. The article is about casualties. You're confused.

 

[srw]

That link doesn't have anything to do with Walker's piece. You said the article shows Walker's scare-mongering. The article has nothing to do with road rage. The article is about casualties. You're confused.

*puts on patient face*

I'm not confused. Peter Walker is scare-mongering because he doesn't understand the fear reaction. It's not a rational reaction but an irrational, primeval reaction to perceived challenge and is based on the flight-fight mechanism. The way to conquer it is to understand the risk (which is why the Wood article is relevant) and gently encourage the irrational mind to overcome and calm down the irrational mind.

It's the basic technique underlying a lot of psychological therapies - and it works.

 

[glenn forger]

You're still confused. Altercations are not the same as injuries and deaths. They're two different things, so the existence of one doesn't disprove the other. If someone is threatening you the situation isn't defused by remembering not many cyclists get hurt.

 

[srw]

You're still confused. Altercations are not the same as injuries and deaths. They're two different things, so the existence of one doesn't disprove the other. If someone is threatening you the situation isn't defused by remembering not many cyclists get hurt.

Oh how sweet. My very own stalker.

You're missing a key point. In the vast majority of the circumstances Walker is on about - including, from the transcripts I've read, the Vine incident - no-one is threatening anyone. Yes, there's the perception of threat, but it's only a perception, not a reality. Which is why @dellzeqq is (as he so often is) absolutely right. The best response to a perception of threat is to chill, and let the other bugger suffer.

 

[glenn forger]

Saying

"Get the fxxx out of the road, I will knock you out!"

isn't a threat, you reckon?

 

[srw]

Saying

"Get the fxxx out of the road, I will knock you out!"

isn't a threat, you reckon?

No, I don't.

The number of people who would actually follow through on that suggestion is miniscule. To be a real threat, the person delivering it would need to be willing to follow through on it.

 

[doog]

No, I don't.

The number of people who would actually follow through on that suggestion is miniscule. To be a real threat, the person delivering it would need to be willing to follow through on it.

By law the willingness to follow through is immaterial ..its the threat that counts. How can you prove a willingness to follow through ..unless they do ?

 

[srw]

By law the willingness to follow through is immaterial ..its the threat that counts. How can you prove a willingness to follow through ..unless they do ?

I don't actually give a toss about what the law says in this situation. I'm more concerned with my own psychological health. And I can tell you that when I learned to chill out when I'm cycling two things happened. First, I started enjoying riding a lot more. And second I stopped seeing a threat around every corner. I realised that most people aren't out to get me. Which is also good because, on the extremely rare occasions when someone really is out to get me (it happens maybe a couple of times a year) it means that I can respond appropriately.

 

[dellzeqq]

Oh how sweet. My very own stalker.

You're missing a key point. In the vast majority of the circumstances Walker is on about - including, from the transcripts I've read, the Vine incident - no-one is threatening anyone. Yes, there's the perception of threat, but it's only a perception, not a reality. Which is why @dellzeqq is (as he so often is) absolutely right. The best response to a perception of threat is to chill, and let the other bugger suffer.

sighs deeply.

 

[srw]

sighs deeply.

You're lucky I didn't pick you up on Corbyn's boots....

 

[doog]

I don't actually give a toss about what the law says in this situation. .

You should do. If you're happy to be threatened and just brush it off on the off chance someone wont follow throw you sound like the next victim.

 

[dellzeqq]

You're lucky I didn't pick you up on Corbyn's boots....

it was a riff, man. Chillax!

 

[glenn forger]

[QUOTE 4444162, member: 45"]That reminds me, what's your horse-beating, dodgy-bus-driving, cyclist-hating tour guide up to these days?[/QUOTE]

Still trundling around Norwich. see him now and again. He deleted his Tripadviser entry.

 

[dellzeqq]

You should do. If you're happy to be threatened and just brush it off on the off chance someone wont follow throw you sound like the next victim.

I'll give you a piece of advice. If, through lack of foresight, lack of attention or plain lack of intelligence you find yourself in a confrontation that you have not designedly brought about, the thing to do is to win. Vine lost.