the other day at Camberwell Green this car rolled past me up to lights,
'passed'
[/Platini, BringMeMyFix]
it was driven by a mid 20s Asian guy, and from the way it rolled and his head position I could tell he was texting.
sure enough when I drew alongside him (he filled the ASL) his head was down with his hands on phone. still oblivious to me I rapped on his window and shouted 'stop fucking texting while youre driving', he wound down and angrily said 'fuck you cunt', the lights went to green and I said 'and youre in the cyclists box now fuck off' as he drove off. I was charged, he was charged- now im guessing from having read youre posts here for a while that’s the sort of energy that you rate as useful.?
Yes, these kinds of confrontations have their rightful place, he saw that his actions angered other people.
Everywhere in nature we should expect to find fear and anger when a something has it's life threatened, it serves a role for both the threat (if the threat is sentient) and the threatened.
. . . .a vast number of cyclists ride terribly, all over, pavements, rljing, no awareness signalling or position, and until that changes are drivers going to stop abusing us as well?
They (the 'pavement' cyclists) would need to be dealt with on their own merits. I am not part of some cycling whole, a single homogenous entity deserving of some kind of collective punishment.
We seem to be setting up a 'drivers' (all drivers as a collective) versus 'cyclists' (all cyclists as a collective).
If a driver uses his car against cyclist N° 2857 because cyclist N°349 rode on the pavement - then the driver is guilty of applying a form of collective punishment as well as being an aggressive and dangerous prick - and this certainly offers no additional reason to treat him with respect of any kind.
until the law courts start punishing drivers with long sentances for fatalities are drivers going to stop abusing us?
With the current law and the idea that the most you risk is a calm "talking to" from a cyclist (who you can pretty much tell to 'fuck off' as they aren't going to do anything), I doubt it.
'passed'
[/Platini, BringMeMyFix]
Yes, these kinds of confrontations have their rightful place, he saw that his actions angered other people.
Everywhere in nature we should expect to find fear and anger when a something has it's life threatened, it serves a role for both the threat (if the threat is sentient) and the threatened.
They (the 'pavement' cyclists) would need to be dealt with on their own merits. I am not part of some cycling whole, a single homogenous entity deserving of some kind of collective punishment.
We seem to be setting up a 'drivers' (all drivers as a collective) versus 'cyclists' (all cyclists as a collective).
If a driver uses his car against cyclist N° 2857 because cyclist N°349 rode on the pavement - then the driver is guilty of applying a form of collective punishment as well as being an aggressive and dangerous prick - and this certainly offers no additional reason to treat him with respect of any kind.
With the current law and the idea that the most you risk is a calm "talking to" from a cyclist (who you can pretty much tell to 'fuck off' as they aren't going to do anything), I doubt it.