Would you be done for assault?

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

RWright

Guru
Location
North Carolina
I'm suprised no one has mentioned this yet, but it would be far better to just get out of the situation rather than plan how you're going to knock him out.

In this example the man could be seen exiting his car and walking very purposefully towards the cyclist from a long way off. I'd have just turned around and cycled away - It's not worth getting in a fight over.

Better yet, stop, let him walk even farther away from his car, then pedal past him, get his keys out of his ignition and then cycle away. Let him explain to the police what was going on. :becool:

I think in reality I would have been off the bike and been ready for him before he got there. Someone would have got hurt if he put his hands on me with a fist up. Not sure who, but someone would not have liked it.

That being said, we might not of seen video footage of the past three miles with the bike riding 40 MPH under the speed limit, in primary, and not letting the car pass. Seems like there could have been a little more to that than met the eye. I think everyone might agree, it is all in the editing. ^_^
 

aces_up1504

Well-Known Member
IMO, the video of the "Droid"

The cyclist is the aggressor, Yes the van driver makes a poor driving choice. But it is then clear that the cylist has road rage and does all he can to antagonise the driver of the van. By all means nothing to stop having a quiet word, but he makes the choice to go after the van at every possible oportunity and confront him. To me he is aggressor in the situation and only by his continued harrassement of the van driver does it eventual spill over.

The cylist got what he wanted from situation, You Tube worthy footage of Cyclist V Motorist. But other than the poor driving judgment of the van in the first part of the clip, the cylist is the guy in the wrong.

On the other hand the guy approaching the guy on the bike, its pretty clear cut.
 

Vikeonabike

CC Neighbourhood Police Constable
Copper Cyclist is correct, the best option in all cases is to avoid confrontation if at all possible. There is always someone bigger and nastier out there.
However if the worse happens, defend your self. After all it is better to be tried by twelve than carried by six. Just remember you will need to be able to Justify your actions. Just because you weren't initially the aggressor doesn't mean you are not equally to blame!
 

Cyclopathic

Veteran
Location
Leicester.
If faced with the guy with the flat cap and white t-shirt I would almost certainly have felt justified in hitting him to prevent him hitting me. Having said that from my experience as a doorman I have learned that this sort of posturing is usually just that. Someone who genuinely intends to hit you will usually do it without warning because they don't want you to have a chance to defend yourself. Unfortunately though it is all to easy to assess these things with hindsight and when faced with an angry penis head waving his fists it is not easy to remain detatched and analytical.
The only advice I would give is to try and diffuse the situation the best way you can. If that means backing down, do that. If it means lamping him one so that you can make your getaway then do that.
 

T.M.H.N.E.T

Rainbows aren't just for world champions
Location
Northern Ireland
IMO, the video of the "Droid"

The cyclist is the aggressor, Yes the van driver makes a poor driving choice. But it is then clear that the cylist has road rage and does all he can to antagonise the driver of the van. By all means nothing to stop having a quiet word, but he makes the choice to go after the van at every possible oportunity and confront him. To me he is aggressor in the situation and only by his continued harrassement of the van driver does it eventual spill over.

The cylist got what he wanted from situation, You Tube worthy footage of Cyclist V Motorist. But other than the poor driving judgment of the van in the first part of the clip, the cylist is the guy in the wrong.

On the other hand the guy approaching the guy on the bike, its pretty clear cut.
If his road position wasn't terrible he wouldn't have been in the sandwich situation which was ultimately the catalyst for his persistent "check your number on youtube" "you're reported" blah blah

Driver error did play a small part too, but only because he invited it.
 

ComedyPilot

Secret Lemonade Drinker
Copper Cyclist is correct, the best option in all cases is to avoid confrontation if at all possible. There is always someone bigger and nastier out there.
However if the worse happens, defend your self. After all it is better to be tried by twelve than carried by six. Just remember you will need to be able to Justify your actions. Just because you weren't initially the aggressor doesn't mean you are not equally to blame!

Amen to that.
 

Melonfish

Evil Genius in training.
Location
Warrington, UK
in Aikido the idea is never to get into a situation where you may be attacked/assualted. this will work 99% of the time.
for that 1% however there are some seriously bone shattering moves you can perform on people, there are moves that simply disarm/control (and they teach these to the police etc) but there's the toss up between tiger by the tail or neutralization.
if the other party were drunk then i'd consider the latter.
 

hotfuzzrj

Veteran
Location
Hampshire
If you whack a guy with a bike you would probably lose the self defence argument. That's far too much to be honest.
One of my colleagues once was on his police issue pedal cycle when he got involved with a matter in the street. A man started on my colleague very aggressively who promptly threw the bike at him and then managed to detain and arrest him.

(Anyway it depends on the level of violence offered; if they were really coming at you and you had no other means of stopping them or getting away then I don't think anyone would consider it excessive force.)
 

Drago

Legendary Member
A pre emptive strike may be lawful if the force used is reasonable and proportionate and there is no reasonable alternative action that would have you in a safer position, such as running away.

However, if you willingly stop and make a conscious decision to partake with a confrontation in the street with a total stranger, then a court is going to want to know why you didn't forsee fisticuffs as a possible outcome and thus simply carry on your merry way. This is why I simply ignore tits like that and carry on up the road.

So the defence does technically exist, but every aspect will be pulled apart and scrutinised in court so you need to be sure there is absolutely nothing else whatsoever you could reasonably have done before trotting that one out. Saying "sorry mate" might be hard to stomach, especially if you've not done out wrong, but a bruised ego is better than 9 moths B&B with Bubba as a room mate.
 

fossyant

Ride It Like You Stole It!
Location
South Manchester
I wouldn't agree, depends how it's done, but using a bike to defend yourself is actually a good idea!

Modern!
dsc06347.jpg


And the ancient!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jimmy_fatwing/SelfProtection/cycle.htm

Ohh the damage my ice tyres would do if like that.
 
Top Bottom