Nutter

yorkshiregoth

Master of all he surveys
Location
Heathrow
Normally I would keep quiet but cycling home this afternoon, I had the misfortune to see some guy RLJ every red light and almost hit some woman with her baby so I turned on my camera as I overtook him for the umpteenth and then I had to stop at the next set of lights. In his haste to RLJ he just missed me. I soon caught up with him and VERY politely informed him that traffic signals apply to ALL road users. He then started shouting at me in Polish and he then tried to knock me off my bike, tried to spit at me (luckily he missed) or I would have been tempted to shove me cleats up his rear. He then started swearing at me in English and threatened to stab me. At this point I politely informed him that he was being filmed and the footage would be passed on to the police (not that they would be interested) which may have encouraged him to make the next turning.

 

yenrod

Guest
I would have just let him get on with it...

Not worth the risk ! ! !
 

col

Veteran
Its a sad sign of the times,we have nutters in vehicles as we do on bikes,and it seems everywhere else,i mean just look at the towns on weekends.All we can do,is hopefully show by example and be as safe as we can,but approaching people like this, to point out to them what they probably already know and dont give a toss about,can be in todays climate a bit risky,as in you dont know what they might pull out. im with Yenrod,dont put yourself at more risk,they wont take any notice anyway,and you could end up in a bad situation.
 
Hmmm. I disagree with Yenners and Col (although I can understand why they would think that). Well done for standing up to this twat. It's a bit like bailing out a bath with a teaspoon, but well done for trying.
There probably won't be much plod can do, given the lack of face on the vid, but you could always contact them and have a word. They may have a friendly copper who will keep an eye out. From my experience the plod round here are pretty bike friendly if you can give them a good clear statement.
 

col

Veteran
Well done for standing up to this twat.


I didnt see it as this,i saw it as he pointed out the errors of his ways,now if he had been trying to target YG in some way,now that would be standing up to him,but iv seen and had enough incidents in the passed where i feel its better to let them go,ease back till they are out of the way,or just pull away from them,why make possible hassle for yourself?After YG said what he said,he then targeted him.And if some thing had gone wrong,i suppose we could visit him in hospital and say ,"well done for standing up to him",but the worst part of it all is,it probably wouldnt have made any difference,so being pointless really.;)
 

Keith Oates

Janner
Location
Penarth, Wales
Although there was no face shot, his riding style is quite distinctive so he could be recognised again. However I doubt the Police would be overly interested unless he actually hit you or worse!!!!!!!!!
 
You had every right to stand up to him as he endangered you and others. I can understand why some say not to confront, but I think in these situations (broad daylight plenty of witnesses, helmet camera etc) the actual risk is lot smaller than the perceived risk.
Often threats are just bravado and will very rarely be followed through. Of course there are exceptions but IMHO very rare.

It really is a shame you didn't catch his face as I would have gone straight to the police in that situation. As Keith says his riding style is very distinctive ;)

I wouldn't want any spit to hit you, but it is also a shame that his spit didn't land somewhere that could have been swabbed by the police. I think police take this act very seriously (assault I believe).

Well done for standing up to him!
 
Spit landing on a person is taken very seriously indeed, as well it should. If they spit at you and are carrying disease - it could hit your eyes, go in your mouth, or any skin abrasions you might have.

What if they have aids etc? I would push for that to be assault with a deadley weapon.
 

col

Veteran
magnatom said:
You had every right to stand up to him as he endangered you and others. I can understand why some say not to confront, but I think in these situations (broad daylight plenty of witnesses, helmet camera etc) the actual risk is lot smaller than the perceived risk.
Often threats are just bravado and will very rarely be followed through. Of course there are exceptions but IMHO very rare.

It really is a shame you didn't catch his face as I would have gone straight to the police in that situation. As Keith says his riding style is very distinctive ;)

I wouldn't want any spit to hit you, but it is also a shame that his spit didn't land somewhere that could have been swabbed by the police. I think police take this act very seriously (assault I believe).

Well done for standing up to him!



Dont get me wrong,i believe in standing up for ourselves when needed,but iv seen the "we have the right " thing taken all too regularly,and used as a reason to push a situation that could become risky,which some of the time doesnt help matters,but makes them worse.If we were to advise every idiot that we see driving or cycling dangerously,i dont think it would be very enjoyable getting out on the bike.:sad:
 
OP
yorkshiregoth

yorkshiregoth

Master of all he surveys
Location
Heathrow
If his spit had landed on me, I would have gone back to my station where we store DNA swab kits for such a purpose. Alas, it has become part of our station equipment, it occurs so often.
 
I should be careful, next week he may have cleaned enough cars to buy one!!

Polish Licence(won in a raffle) No insurance and a 10yr old Mondeo coming your way:ohmy::ohmy:
 

purpleR

Veteran
Location
Edinburgh
Jacomus-rides-Gen said:
What if they have aids etc? I would push for that to be assault with a deadley weapon.
Slightly OT, but I feel I should challenge this misconception. HIV has never been shown to be transmitted via saliva. Other infections might be passed on, but HIV is not one of them.
 
purpleR
Slightly OT, but I feel I should challenge this misconception. HIV has never been shown to be transmitted via saliva. Other infections might be passed on, but HIV is not one of them.
Thank you for that challenge purpleR, its always a bugger to find out that I was wrong about something, but its all about the learning I say! (Thats my excuse anyway, and I'm sticking to it! ;) )

It seems that there is still a chance of infection, albeit significantly lower than I previously thought. As you point out there are many diseases that can be passed via saliva, so in a way I feel that spitting at someone (provided that the spitter(?!?) knows that they have an infection of somehthing is assaulting with a weapon.

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/hivinf.htm
Saliva

Although researchers have found HIV in the saliva of infected people, there is no evidence that the virus is spread by contact with saliva. Laboratory studies reveal that saliva has natural properties that limit the power of HIV to infect, and the amount of virus in saliva appears to be very low. Research studies of people infected with HIV have found no evidence that the virus is spread to others through saliva by kissing. The lining of the mouth, however, can be infected by HIV, and instances of HIV transmission through oral intercourse have been reported.

Scientists have found no evidence that HIV is spread through sweat, tears, urine, or feces.
http://www.thebody.com/content/art40621.html
Jeffrey Laurence, M.D.
Biology and Virology.

Dr. Jeffrey Laurence explained that studies have shown that a reliable laboratory can isolate HIV in the saliva samples of about 25% of HIV-positive people. The same labs can isolate HIV in 100% of blood samples from the same people. In those saliva samples in which virus can be found, the concentration of virus is much lower than in blood, semen, or the already low concentrations found in vaginal or cervical secretions. The low concentration of virus in saliva may mean that saliva is less likely to cause infection than blood or other body fluids. This is certainly supported by test tube and animal studies of infectivity.

Why is saliva less infectious than other fluids?
It is believed that there is a substance in saliva that inhibits HIV. The inhibition observed may be due to large sugar-protein molecules in the saliva called glycoproteins. These glycoproteins apparently cause HIV to form giant clumps which are not capable of causing infection.

Animal studies also suggest that saliva is an unlikely source of HIV transmission. In studies, concentrated SIV (simian immunodeficiency virus; a virus similar to HIV) was rubbed on the vagina, rectums, and gums of monkeys. Infection occurred in monkeys that had been exposed via the rectum or vagina, but not those exposed via the gums.

In a test tube study, chimp saliva blocked the ability of HIV to infect T4 cells. Experiments with human saliva showed that it was less effective than chimp saliva at inhibiting the virus but still quite effective. In one study, 10-60% of the saliva samples could inhibit the virus, not completely, but by a fair amount. (Patricia Fultz, et al., CDC). At least ten studies have shown that saliva can inhibit HIV. HIV is present in ejaculate, pre-ejaculatory fluid, vaginal secretions, and cells in cervical fluid. None of these fluids contain the glycoproteins that inhibit HIV in saliva and all are more infectious than saliva.
 
Top Bottom