Jump to content

A clown takes a pratfall - Should have been wearing a helmet....


GaryvdM

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

From the video uploader:

 

The driver was arrested by Thames Valley Police today. He admitted a public order offence, threats to commit criminal damage, and assault. He received a caution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, was a bit cringe worthy in the middle but then COMEUPPANCE was dealt.

 

I'm always to scared to approach bad drivers here, never know what they'll whip out from the under seat..  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fantastic.....which we could evidence like that here. But our cops response will be "we will look into it"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brilliant! Great command of the English language! "Are you tank? no, Are you  a car? no; You a little bicycle!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree but in my book this was a huge overreaction by the cyclist, I have much MUCH worse happening to me every day....................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree but in my book this was a huge overreaction by the cyclist, I have much MUCH worse happening to me every day....................

 

I do agree. The cyclist pursuing the motorist, and poking him to get a reaction is not necessary. 

 

But it's still flipping funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The driver did make a valid point of riding in the middle of the road and the cyclist probably did over react a little.

 

But to start off with. The cyclist should not have gone chasing after the car

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The driver did make a valid point of riding in the middle of the road and the cyclist probably did over react a little.

 

But to start off with. The cyclist should not have gone chasing after the car

The bicyle is defined as a vehicle - and the whole lane belongs to the bike.... keeping to the left of the lane is just courtesy - and if you have ever commuted you will stay away from car doors - as did the cyclist in the video.

 

If the cyclist over reacted, then consider this - what would have happened if:

 

The motorist had just said  "Sorry mate - didn't mean to surprise you - are you ok?"

 

It's all about tolerance and responsible road habits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bicyle is defined as a vehicle - and the whole lane belongs to the bike.... keeping to the left of the lane is just courtesy - and if you have ever commuted you will stay away from car doors - as did the cyclist in the video.

 

If the cyclist over reacted, then consider this - what would have happened if:

 

The motorist had just said  "Sorry mate - didn't mean to surprise you - are you ok?"

 

It's all about tolerance and responsible road habits.

Well said...and in SA there is a LAW that cyclist must stay 1m away from parked cars. I am sure there will be something like that in the UK

 

Funny how the cyclists here will always tell what the cyclist "SHOULD" do and then use words like ..... why is t\he all self-righteous....irony 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This video takes me from one side to the other and back again, repeatedly.

 

Maybe it was scarier to the cyclist at the time but when the car passed the bike, which was going down a one-way street at the time, it was while the bike was passing empty parking spaces. Whether by design or by luck, the fact remains that there was no dangerous "door zone" that the cyclist was forced to ride in, because there were no cars, with no doors.

 

The car passed quite quickly, either because the driver was a dick speeding in a built up area or because, considerately, he wanted to pass the bike before the bike got to the next set of parked cars and things became "tight". We will never know.

 

When the cyclist started chasing the car he swung out left-turn onto a busier road than the one he had been on and nearly hit a pedestrian crossing the road. Maybe he thought that it was acceptable because "he was on a mission". Maybe the car driver was "on a mission" to start with? Is one mans mission, if it then puts another person at risk, more relevant than anothers?

 

Once he caught the driver and the drivers "red mist" descended, well then all bets are off. What followed from that was just a mess and could, in a country where people carry guns for instance, have ended in a much worse way.

 

You can see from this comment:

 

Quote

 

The driver was arrested by Thames Valley Police today. He admitted a public order offence, threats to commit criminal damage, and assault. He received a caution.

 

that the original "offence" is not even mentioned. All the charges mentioned here arise from the altercation that started when the bike caught the car. A Police Caution was the  predictable outcome.

 

Shame it had to come to all this really. Would be so much better if people could just co-exist. Trouble is, everyone feels they have the right to do what they want to do, when they want to do it - and woe betide anyone that tries to take that human right of theirs away. Two people on the same piece of road at the same time - someone has to "give".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The driver did make a valid point of riding in the middle of the road and the cyclist probably did over react a little.

UK highway code is different SA road laws, in that in the UK there is no law saying that a cyclist must keep left like in SA, and many UK transport organisations make the recommendation that cyclist take the primary position in the lane when it would be unsafe for a motorist to overtake.

 

But to start off with. The cyclist should not have gone chasing after the car

Agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout