Shocking CCTV of a cyclist being pushed

[Hip Priest]

To me, it sounds like you're saying that people who are unemployed are more likely to commit such violent acts, which of course would be complete nonsense.

That's obviously not what Drago meant, but seeing as you brought it up, the unemployed *are* stastically more likely to commit criminal offences (both violent and non-violent) than the employed. So not complete nonsense after all.

 

[Pale Rider]

To me, it sounds like you're saying that people who are unemployed are more likely to commit such violent acts, which of course would be complete nonsense.

Get yourself to your local magistrates' court.

You will find 90 per cent of the defendants are unemployed young men aged between 19 and about 25.

In terms of deciding guilt or innocence, the defendant's work status is largely irrelevant.

But we are not talking about that, we are talking about mitigation - what can properly be said on behalf of the defendant after guilt has been decided.

 

[Drago]

To me, it sounds like you're saying that people who are unemployed are more likely to commit such violent acts, which of course would be complete nonsense.

Then you need your bumps feeling. Everyone else is interpreting it as intended.

 

[Hip Priest]

The minor issue here was being spoken to in a certain tone of voice. The punishment for using an unacceptable tone of voice was to be pursued, shouted at, and pushed over into the traffic. It's beyond me how anyone can apportion any blame at all to the woman here.

Me neither. Good job nobody is.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Get yourself to your local magistrates' court.

You will find 90 per cent of the defendants are unemployed young men aged between 19 and about 25.

In my young and stupid days, I got done in a magistrates court at 18 to 19 years old. Pled not guilty 3 times and case got delayed, so 4 times in 12 months in a magistrates court. From having nothing else to do other than listen to other peoples conversations, at the most, there was me and maybe 1 or 2 others in employment, the other 20 or so certainly weren't

 

[Hip Priest]

Oh come off it. I'm not alone in finding your line of argument here unacceptable. You might think she was a 'snooty woman' who contributed to her fate here and should have just scuttled off quietly, but many of us would disagree. If I had time I'd look out @User10119's excellent link about angry women, but I can't be arsed to argue with you at the moment.

If you want to argue with people who think she deserved to be assaulted then go to Twitter or the comments section of the Daily Mail. No such people appear on this thread.

 

[Pale Rider]

Oh come off it. I'm not alone in finding your line of argument here unacceptable. You might think she was a 'snooty woman' who contributed to her fate here and should have just scuttled off quietly, but many of us would disagree. If I had time I'd look out @User10119's excellent link about angry women, but I can't be arsed to argue with you at the moment.

Gender has nothing to do with it.

If one road user criticises another, he or she ought to be aware of what might follow.

As has been observed, many people - like the bloke in the video - seem to operate on a knife edge of civility.

Ignoring such people usually keeps you safe from harm.

It really is best not to offer road use tuition to strangers, although I have done it a couple of times with, thankfully, no nasty consequences.

 

[Tin Pot]

It's threads like these that actually make me glad there are twelve people in a jury. Ten people to cut through the crap and two to argue the toss.

As for liking trial by Internet. I, I just don't think that needs a response.

 

[Andrew_P]

The minor issue here was being spoken to in a certain tone of voice. The punishment for using an unacceptable tone of voice was to be pursued, shouted at, and pushed over into the traffic. It's beyond me how anyone can apportion any blame at all to the woman here.

He responded in a completely irrational and thug like way to getting the finger not to her request not to be knocked over (which I thought was a strange request all be it accurate later on!), one has to assume it was the middle finger. I cannot figure why she was feeling threatened with being knocked over in first place if I am honest, I have watched the beginning a few times and it is not clear. It look likes a temporary pedestrian crossing set up for roadwork's it also looks like he is crossing in-between moving cars and hasn't allowed for the cyclist and is caught between waiting for the cyclist to pass and making the silver car stop or walking in front of the cyclist. He doesn't look like he is about to push the cyclist at the point of crossing more like there is a dual going on over who will give way.

And for the record I don't think she sounds snooty at all.

 

[jonny jeez]

Someone who knows who he is has probably told someone, it probably spread around where he lives especially with all the media attention.

And yet...not one of them felt it appropriate to identify him to the police.

 

[Tin Pot]

BTW, can we cut out the patronising crap in this thread? There is no evidence that he only attacked her because she was a woman, and I don't think the crime is worse because she is female.

Absolutely not, the crime is worthy of greater repulsion because it is male on female violence. A man is far more likely to attack someone if they are female, than male.

The level of male on female violence in human society is absurd, virtually any opportunity to reiterate that men should not attack women is worth taking in my view.

Peer pressure is a cost free useful control to apply.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Absolutely not, the crime is worthy of greater repulsion because it is male on female violence. A man is far more likely to attack someone if they are female, than male.

The level of male on female violence in human society is absurd, virtually any opportunity to reiterate that men should not attack women is worth taking in my view.

I see why people believe this, but it does appear a little sexist. And don't see why gender should be relevant. From years of combat sports, I know from personal experience that females can hit just as hard, and harder than some males.

It's rare you see an attack on a person that can defend themselves, whether they are male or female. I know as many males as females who would be unable to defend themselves in a physical confrontation.

It shouldn't be down to their gender that makes this worse, but the fact it was an assault on a person who is unable to defend themselves.

 

[Pale Rider]

Leaving gender out of it, I despise the attacker for going after a person who he knows is almost certainly physically weaker.

Or to coin the old phrase: "Pick on someone your own size."

 

[Andrew_P]

Absolutely not, the crime is worthy of greater repulsion because it is male on female violence. A man is far more likely to attack someone if they are female, than male.

The level of male on female violence in human society is absurd, virtually any opportunity to reiterate that men should not attack women is worth taking in my view.

Peer pressure is a cost free useful control to apply.

I would actually say that this sort of person has carried out an internal risk assessment of them getting hurt in a confrontation and came back as low. I have believed for some while that this plays a large part in cyclist confrontations in that the other party has a perception of cyclists being skinny, weak and nerdy and a soft target. I also believe that it is socially acceptable to hate cyclist/cycling and this follows though on their actions as well

 

[Tin Pot]

I see why people believe this, but it does appear a little sexist. And don't see why gender should be relevant. From years of combat sports, I know from personal experience that females can hit just as hard, and harder than some males.

It's rare you see an attack on a person that can defend themselves, whether they are male or female. I know as many males as females who would be unable to defend themselves in a physical confrontation.

It shouldn't be down to their gender that makes this worse, but the fact it was an assault on a person who is unable to defend themselves.

I dont mind my view appearing to be sexist, because it isn't. Unless of course we are talking about the aggressor. Given two potential victims of the same size and weight a female is more likely to be attacked.

People have often confused themselves over equality, meaning, of the same value not, the same thing. Men and women are different. It is not sexist to say so, it is sexist to make value judgements and inflict prejudice because of someone's sex.

It shouldn't be relevant to gender, but until male on female violence even approaches male on male, it is.