LCpl Boiled Egg
Three word soundbite
In the video you can see a couple of large spaces between the parked cars which the cyclist could have used.
One space, a car's length, at six seconds. Watch it again.
In the video you can see a couple of large spaces between the parked cars which the cyclist could have used.
Why is it that the cyclist needs to display "common courtesy" and not the driver and when does it stop becoming "common courtesy" and start to be getting out of the way because might is right?No. I just happen to believe that as cyclists we share the road. We have no greater rights to it than anybody else. And let me be absolutely clear for you: I believe the driver behaved disgracefully. But that doesn't mean that the entire situation couldn't have been avoided had the cyclist not demonstrated a little bit of common courtesy. I have no agenda or axe to grind, I just comment as I find.
This can cause issues of it's own although I am not above pulling in between parked cars if the situation is appropriate, I do not believe it was in this instance. What can happen is that the motorist does not know what you are doing, so they don't overtake you anyway because they think you may be about to pull back out, so you end up with a stand off, they're holding back because they don't know what you're doing and you're holding back because you don't know what they're doing until someone has to come to a dead stop and wave the other on, you both end up more delayed than if you'd both just got on with it.In the video you can see a couple of large spaces between the parked cars which the cyclist could have used.
Why is it that the cyclist needs to display "common courtesy" and not the driver and when does it stop becoming "common courtesy" and start to be getting out of the way because might is right?
This is where you are losing me, to me the driver is absolute certain of his greater right to be on the section of road which the cyclist was occupying, he believes whole heartedly that might is right and he is creating the them and us. Had the cyclist pulled over, whilst I do not know this of course, I suspect that the motorist would have believed that he pulled over because he was on a bicycle and should get out of the way of cars, not because he was being polite and sharing the road.I agree with you. The cyclist could have given way. The driver could have waited. Neither did.
I think where we start to part ways is when you talk about "might is right". I just don't buy into this "them and us" argument.
As I have said before, the cyclist could easily have given way to the driver, and the entire situation would have been avoided. I'm not saying that's because the driver is a more important road user. I'm just saying it would have been a courteous thing to do.
In the video you can see a couple of large spaces between the parked cars which the cyclist could have used.
In the video you can see a couple of large spaces between the parked cars which the cyclist could have used.
Damn you and your factsI can only see one possible but uninviting gap (after the Porsche) that could have been used and at the speed the cyclist was going you'd have to brake hard to squeeze into that space. You'd also have to have planned the move considerably earlier, when the car was a way back and had not been delayed by even a second! If you adopt that stop/start, snake-like approach in residential situations you're likely to have more problems, not less as surely you'd have to employ it all the time?
This is where you are losing me, to me the driver is absolute certain of his greater right to be on the section of road which the cyclist was occupying, he believes whole heartedly that might is right and he is creating the them and us. Had the cyclist pulled over, whilst I do not know this of course, I suspect that the motorist would have believed that he pulled over because he was on a bicycle and should get out of the way of cars, not because he was being polite and sharing the road.
A horrible and frightening experience no doubt, but there are many situations where you could say with confidence that not keeping your trap shut could result in you getting a good hiding, the vast majority don't involve cycling. That doesn't mean that you should never call somebody out on their bullying or agressive behaviour though.It would be interesting how many of those who confronted a driver believe it turned out to be a positive experience for all involved? How many of you think the driver will change their action in future? Or how many now have an even worse view on cyclists. How many has it got to physical aggression
My worst confrontation having been nailed in to the kerb by a van overtaking and apexing the bend going in to a roundabout, the driver gave the normal didn't see you, then started f'ing and blinding as we were going along, refused to pull over and back up his threats the traffic came to a stop he wound his window up and locked door when I got off my bike. I gave up and went on my way 300 yard up the road he drove in to my bike from behind backed off did it again and sped off hurling abuse. 45 cycling miles later my rear tyre bead rips mid corner and I am in hospital with dislocated and fractured shoulder. Benefit of hindsight I should have changed or checked the tyre more closely and never ever get in front of a confrontation again. I still have done it but I can assure everyone there are loons out there..
I'll bet you anything you like that he wouldn't have passed that closely to anything which would have caused him greater damage than he could have caused it. It is also precisely due to the drivers outburst that I am drawing my conclusions, how it is possible to read the transcript of what the driver said and not come to the conclusion that he believes the cyclist was in his way is absolutely beyond me.And this is where you lose me. Despite the driver's outburst later in the video, you can't possible state with any certainty what his beliefs and opinions were at the moment of the pass. Maybe he just thought "I can get through there". Maybe greater right or sense of entitlement had nothing to do with it.
Maybe he thought he was a fish, I agree. However, it is not at all implausible that someone who's first reaction to being challenged by a cyclist is 'the highway code says run you daffodils over' has thoughts of running cyclists over not far from the top of his mind.And this is where you lose me. Despite the driver's outburst later in the video, you can't possible state with any certainty what his beliefs and opinions were at the moment of the pass. Maybe he just thought "I can get through there". Maybe greater right or sense of entitlement had nothing to do with it.