[Misc] Team Bike or Team Van?

[Badger]

I'm team cyclist. Although he's not without blame for being a bit aggressive too.

If I'm cycling and come to a tight corner with double white lines, I'll often move out slightly towards the centre of the road. Firstly, I want to be seen by traffic coming up behind me. Secondly, I want to prevent the temptation for a car to try and overtake me. I always used to do this on the corner at bottom of Wickham Hill in Hurstpierpoint, after a couple of occasions when cars nearly knocked me off my bike.

 

[Stat Brother]

So that's a vote for Team Van then?

No because as frequently said irrespective as to what happened previously the drivers 'punishment' of the cyclist won't fit the 'crime'.


Rightly or wrongly on my part, when my ride takes onto the A272, 24, 27, 29 etc etc, I view myself as being on a 'car' road.
I do everything I can to not be a nuisance.

I'll ride in the gutter.
I wave drivers through.
I pull in, esp if I have a lorry up my arse.

My approach when riding the winding, quiet, 'shared' roads across Sussex is very different.

There's a time and a place to make a point, to me a road with traffic traveling 30-50 mph is neither.

Even with that attitude I (like the rest of us) have had more than our fair share of scrapes and near misses.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

There is something about getting on a bike that tends to turn most people into utter bellends.

 

[Fignon's Ponytail]

There is something about getting on a bike that tends to turn most people into utter bellends.

Oh ffs....

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

No because as frequently said irrespective as to what happened previously the drivers 'punishment' won't fit the 'crime'.


Rightly or wrongly on my part, when my ride takes onto the A272, 24, 27, 29 etc etc, I view myself as being on a 'car' road.
I do everything I can to not be a nuisance.

I'll ride in the gutter.
I wave drivers through.
I pull in, esp if I have a lorry up my arse.

My approach when riding the winding, quiet, 'shared' roads across Sussex is very different.

There's a time and a place to make a point, to me a road with traffic traveling 30-50 mph is neither.

Even with that attitude I (like the rest of us) have had more than our fair share of scrapes and near misses.

Sorry, but still sounds to me like an involuntary vote for Team Van, whether you like to admit it or not. I'm neither a bike driver nor a car driver, but as a sometime car passenger on a country lane stuck behind a tractor, I've shared in the car driver frustration often enough. Tho I can understand the tractor has nowhere to go. Cyclist on the other hand could easily just have veered over to the edge of the road. So limited levels of sympathy for the cyclist in this instance. Not that that excuses Van Man going psycho on him. Obviously.

 

[Stat Brother]

Sorry, but still sounds to me like an involuntary vote for Team Van, whether you like to admit it or not. I'm neither a bike driver nor a car driver, but as a sometime car passenger on a country lane stuck behind a tractor, I've shared in the car driver frustration often enough. Tho I can understand the tractor has nowhere to go. Cyclist on the other hand could easily just have veered over to the edge of the road. So limited levels of sympathy for the cyclist in this instance. Not that that excuses Van Man going psycho on him. Obviously.

We're saying the same thing.
I don't believe the cyclist did enough to protect himself.
But he shouldn't have to protect himself from that.


It's no shock that I'm less than 100% Team bike. I can't think of a single 'car v bike' thread where that has been the case.

The bottom line is we have to be responsible for ourselves, because we sure as hell can't guarantee anyone else doing it for us.

I take this sort of thing way way too personally, as it does nothing to relieve the pressure on the roads.
I can ride for 5 hours, get a waved at, thanked, beeped etc by loads of drivers for my considerate actions.

Yet this sort of thing goes viral and once again the vitriol gets ramped up and I feel like I'm riding with a target on my back.

 

[banjo]

There is something about getting on a bike that tends to turn most people into utter bellends.

 

[The Large One]

You've been referring to alot of text books.

Nobody said he was 'entitled' or that anything would warrant the life-threatening manouevre, just putting words in people's mouths which is predictable.

I've witnessed first hand cyclists goad and provoke responses in motorists, a couple of times with a mate filming behind from the getgo. It's some kind of weird sanctimonious victimisation thing which is undeniably prevalent amongst cyclists. On the basis that the cyclist seemed almost nonchalant and unabashed at what was an outrageous piece of road rage, people merely suggested that the video has probably cropped the aforementioned part out which makes the driver's actions understandable so much that if you did similar on the street, you would get smacked (also not ok, also a crime and potentially life threatening).

To suggest that without provocation the motorist acts like a total maniac is a little naive. Note that nowhere have I justified his actions or suggested that his/her punishment should be reduced, only that the danger may have been invited, as I have seen before with my own eyes as a driver.

You must have a guilty conscience if you think I'm rounding on you.

Just because danger may have been invited, it doesn't follow it's automatically allowed in. Nor should the actions of other cyclists be held up as any reason for the van driver's behaviour - so your point there is irrelevant.

The cyclist, incidentally, was well within his rights to cycle in the manner he did - as per the recommendations of the Highway Code. The problems were entirely with the van driver. There is nothing that cyclist did to warrant someone else trying to kill him.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

The cyclist bangs his hand on the side of the van to warn the driver that he's nearly run him over. Bikes don't have horns and a bell is next to useless in this situation.

You couldn't be a judge, because you have shown you've got no idea of the law.

The cyclist does actually bring his hand up BEFORE the van driver decides to nudge him.
LOOK at that GAP the side swipe was after the cyclist tried to slap his work van.





They are as bad as one another Judge Mouldy rules that:

1) The cyclists is a very naughty boy for inciting the van driver by hogging the road unnecessarily and slowing traffic needlessly and then striking out at the van while passing.

2) The Van driver is a very naughty boy for over use of his Horn and then guiding the cyclist to where he should have been on the road in an aggressive manor.

The court has ruled there should be a straight fist fight to resolve this issue.

Your right i could not be a Judge as i am NOT a MASON.

 

[Bob!]

There is something about getting on a bike that tends to turn most people into utter bellends.

typed from your bike?

 

[pb21]

The cyclist does actually bring his hand up BEFORE the van driver decides to nudge him.
LOOK at that GAP the side swipe was after the cyclist tried to slap his work van.

Crime: Attempting to slap a work van.

Punishment: 50/50 chance of death/serious injury.

Judge: Unhinged owner of work van.

 

[Trufflehound]

My 9-year-old niece is a cyclist, and she pays no taxes whatsoever.

I dunno. Shouldn't be allowed on the roads.

 

[The_Viper]

Surprising how many on here are so chilled out at potential attempted murder efforts. Van driver should have his license taken away from him, the next pedestrian or cyclist to annoy him might not be so lucky and may be dead.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

The cyclist does actually bring his hand up BEFORE the van driver decides to nudge him.
LOOK at that GAP the side swipe was after the cyclist tried to slap his work van.

View attachment 85170

Your still image shows NOTHING of the kind. The van is clearly already turned IN, rather than travelling directly past the cyclist, who instinctively raises his hand to protect himself. To suggest that the driver has turn in reaction to that moment is nonsense.

 

[nickbrighton]

Both are pair of tw**s on this occasion!

But I'm on the side of the motorist in general the times cyclists ride two a breast they take the p**s and its dangerous!

read the highway code, cyclists are recommended to ride two abreast in certain circumstances, it shortens the time taken to overtake, and means the overtaker has to give appropriate room for the manouver. Riding single file quite often means drivers try to overtake when there is not room to do so. You should give a similar amount of room to overtaking a car.

 

[brightn'ove]

This debate sure does remind you just how thick some people in this country are.

It's a damn shame that getting to the next set of red lights fifteen seconds quicker than a bicycle seems to be more important than somebody's life for some people.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Your still image shows NOTHING of the kind. The van is clearly already turned IN, rather than travelling directly past the cyclist, who instinctively raises his hand to protect himself. To suggest that the driver has turn in reaction to that moment is nonsense.

Watch it again, the arm is raised before he turns in, to say you could protect yourself with an outstretched arm from 1.5 Tonnes of van is what's nonsense, i would suggest it impossible.
The cyclist could have swerved with his hands on the handlebars and then arguably the van man may not have swerved at him.

Let's face it cycling on major roads is frigging dangerous why make it worse by trying to wind up the motorist behind you.

 

[Left Back]

So some here think that if someone delays you on your journey for a short time than you are entitled to try to kill them

Glad I don't dig up the road for a living!

Anyone who seriously voted for anything other than "bike" needs to take a long look in the mirror and ask themselves what sort of person they are.


.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Watch it again, the arm is raised before he turns in, to say you could protect yourself with an outstretched arm from 1.5 Tonnes of van is what's nonsense, i would suggest it impossible.
The cyclist could have swerved with his hands on the handlebars and then arguably the van man may not have swerved at him.

Let's face it cycling on major roads is frigging dangerous why make it worse by trying to wind up the motorist behind you.

I've watched it ten times. He raises his arm as the van passes too close / turns in - and yes, his raised arm would offer no protection at all, but that's why I typed 'instinctively'. The driver is a complete moron, anyone attempting to justify his actions not far behind.

 

[neilbard]

read the highway code, cyclists are recommended to ride two abreast in certain circumstances, it shortens the time taken to overtake, and means the overtaker has to give appropriate room for the manouver. Riding single file quite often means drivers try to overtake when there is not room to do so. You should give a similar amount of room to overtaking a car.

Yes Rule 66 of the Highway code but it also states that cyclists should ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding around bends. It is perfectly legal for cyclists to ride side by side on most roads. It may however be sensible to cycle in single file on narrow roads or where a car is attempting to overtake. It really should be common courtesy by all road users sadly it's rarely the case on both sides.