[Closed] Richmond Park road rage nutjob..

Wow Bomberman and LHS are even bigger trolls/car-lovers/cyclist-haterz/idiots than I imagined.

*adds to list*

EDIT: Sorry to stoop to lower levels.

Ah, another reasoned and impersonal response!

Well done!

🙄

LOL to the trolls on here. You know who you are

Apparently not

[img] [/img]

I'd like to point out that a car (whatever its exact weight) is not a lethal weapon. It's a form of transport - just like a bicycle.

Yes you can kill with a car, but you can also kill with a loaf of bread. An example of a lethal weapon would be something like a gun, or a hand grenade.

[img] ?resize=530%2C295[/img]

Looks back up thread for suitable response...

oh yes,

oh the ironing

Ok, well we are all adults (i think) so maybe lets stop the cyber hardman big-hitter routine and move on.

Yes you can kill with a car, but you can also kill with a loaf of bread.

How many people are killed every year by a loaf of bread? Come to that, how many people are killed every year by a gun or a hand grenade?

cynic-al - Member

Wow Bomberman and LHS are even bigger trolls/car-lovers/cyclist-haterz/idiots than I imagined.
*adds to list*

Why cynic-al? Just because we aren't jumping on the "look what a dickhead the range rover driver is" bandwagon?

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and mine is that this whole thing has been blown out of proportion and both the driver and the cyclist overreacted. They are both dickheads, but based on the Hakka performance I would say that the driver is the bigger dickhead out of the two.

Now if you've a problem with me expressing my opinion on this forum then you better take it up with the mods hadn't you?

Well that had gotten all interesting since I last read it!

How long before we are wearing headcams when posting on here so we can post all the clips of the abuse we receive.....?

based on the Hakka performance I would say that the driver is the bigger dickhead out of the two.

Just that, and not because he actually endangered the cyclist and then threatened him with more harm. Neither of which things the cyclist did to the driver?

Unlike some on here, I don't believe you at least are trolling - you're just failing to comprehend the asymmetry.

I don't have a problem with you expressing your opinion Bomberman, in fact it's helpful, so I know to ignore you in future.

The problem is the irrelevant shite you also spout to try and back it up. Well, also the fact it's a pile of crap (your opinion that is).

This makes you as bad as Daily Mail anti-bike commenters.

Cynic-al and aracer are wearing them right now. They have six pointing in all different directions at the different computer screens.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and mine is that this whole thing has been blown out of proportion and both the driver and the cyclist overreacted.

We are all free to call each other trolls but I dont see how you can express your views as forthrightly as you do [ or LHS] and not expect that people will be as forthright back to you [ the same applies to me to be clear].

EDIT: i wrote that before reading the camera rant FFS aracer was actually polite to you and about your opinion
If you are not actually trying to just piss people off and be as abrasive as possible whilst still within the STW rules then I dont want to witness what happens when you set out to just abuse posters #pigeonchess with insults

How many people are killed every year by a loaf of bread?

Don't know the exact worldwide figures, but i've killed 17 so far (and the year is only half way done) with a loaf. If i extrapolate the data then it just over 400 billion.

Come to that, how many people are killed every year by a gun or a hand grenade?

Just the three i think.

🙄

You're just here for the arguments, right?

I said back there <--- you should walk away JY 🙂

Aracer, junkyard and cynic-al, you've all been on here a long time haven't you?

I did for a bit whilst I was the object of the abuse and trolling insults....like a moth to the flame or a fly to shit more like

Ok this time i am really leaving as it is just silly now and not really a debate or a discussion

STW is great, grown men and women arguing the toss about what happened.
The guy in the car has issues, drove too close to a bike, cyclist shouted, driver lost his rag (possibly had an underlying problem that we are not aware of), cyclist shouts back, bit of funny dancing, drives off, all this due to shit cycling infrastructure and idiot driver.
Driver is a tosser, cyclist could have spoken better back (but was quite shook up). The end.
Why the f@@k are you guys arguing? Put down the computer, speak to an actual person using actual speech.
Threads like tis are great for bringing the idiots out of the woodwork mind.
Go out and get some fresh air. Love thy neighbour etc etc etc

Cynic-al and aracer are wearing them right now. They have six pointing in all different directions at the different computer screens.

Wow, and with that response to my polite post (I was going to post more trying to explain to you why you're getting the angry responses) you've completely changed my opinion. I now tend to agree with al.

bomberman - Member

Aracer, junkyard and cynic-al, you've all been on here a long time haven't you?

You've been here 6.5 years, so?

You're just here for the arguments, right?

Some of the time, but not in this case. The point is that vehicles do kill a lot more people than any of the other things you mentioned, and it only takes a little twitch of the wheel to use one as a weapon. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest that it's likely that if all the evidence was available, more people are guilty of murder within the definition of the law (which is if somebody dies as a result of a deliberate act of aggression towards them) using a car than with any other weapon.

You've been here 6.5 years, so?

Interestingly, longer than me and you according to that.

Interestingly, longer than me and you according to that.

>400 posts and 13 pages!!! it's like TJ never left 😀

Of course I wasn't implying anything by that, merely making an observation. No need to go on the defensive. I mean it's not like anyone is implying anything about the fact you're always on here.

This thread is still open then?

"look what a dickhead the range rover driver is"

It is a Land Rover Discovery. Get it right! Lord Clarkson will have you struck off!

iolo - Member

STW is great, grown men and women arguing the toss about what happened.
The guy in the car has issues, drove too close to a bike, cyclist shouted, driver lost his rag (possibly had an underlying problem that we are not aware of), cyclist shouts back, bit of funny dancing, drives off, all this due to shit cycling infrastructure and idiot driver.
Driver is a tosser, cyclist could have spoken better back (but was quite shook up). The end.
Why the f@@k are you guys arguing? Put down the computer, speak to an actual person using actual speech.
Threads like tis are great for bringing the [b]idiots[/b] out of the woodwork mind.
Go out and get some fresh air. Love thy neighbour etc etc etc

[url= http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/cyclist-fined-after-being-clocked-riding-41mph-in-richmond-park-161628 ]No respect for the law[/url]

🙂

This thread:

[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/for-you-ze-drivink-lesson-is-over?replies=11 ]Linky[/url]

Illustrates the imbalance perfectly.

One wrong move from a car and a cyclist is pizza. That's why most cyclists react like the one in the video. He just saw the hem of the cloak of the Grim Reaper as the wing mirror hit him. The link above illustrates how cyclists feel when sharing the roads with massive metal meat-grinders.

Someone crashing into a tank illustrates the point of a guy in a 4x4 driving a bit close to a somewhat highly strung and sweary cyclist, then winning the 'who can be the biggest bellend' contest???

It is simple bullying. Drivers do it because the consequences for them and/or their precious cars is usually zero. You don't see them trying to bully a horse do you? They don't get so close to half a tonne of unpredictable horse meat do they? Too much risk.

It's just another way of being antisocial. ****ers.

Someone crashing into a tank illustrates the point of a guy in a 4x4...

Nice attempt to belittle the victim too.

Why the f@@k are you guys arguing?

Good question. Even I haven't got involved, that should tell you something.

philfive - Member

just seen this video and i know the 4x4 driver was a prick but did the cyclist really spit at him?

Posted 17 hours ago # Report-Post

LHS - Member

Well i will be carrying on going to Brew in Putney most weekends as there food and coffee is fricking awesome. Don't care if the owner is a dick, i am sure their are owners of many restaurants who are dicks, shouldn't really impact your decision making.

Posted 8 hours ago # Report-Post

The thread was quite well behaved until this point. When LHS steamed in to defend the 4x4 driver. Then bomberman accused the cyclist of bringing misfortune on himself.
Several people leapt in to refute their assertions. Then it got ugly.

Them's the facts guv.

Anyway, what's happened to the 4x4 driver? any more winkie pics or revelations of a Yew tree nature?

Twitter rumours have him as a homophobe as well now. Also, this rage explosion has happened previously. All allegedly of course!

molgrips - Member

Even I haven't got involved, that should tell you something.

But it's about overtaking. I'd have thought you'd be on it like a tramp on chips?

( 😉 )

He's just waiting his turn. (-:

Shall I close this thread now, or are you all going to be nice to each other for a bit?

I think that the humane thing would be to kill it off...

Skillz cougar

they already have, it was deleted.

His ringpiece is very shiny isn't it.

That should get it closed !!

It looks like a penis, only smaller.

He should be more proud of his weightloss. Priapic even.

they already have, it was deleted.

Several times now.

Seriously guys, if you want to look at willies, there's a big old Internet out there full of them. STW isn't the place for "last chicken in Sainsbury's" photos.

Oh dear. Made the mistake of showing it to my non cycling wife and her response was that the cyclist started it and the 4x4 was no closer than the yellow car. Needless to say the atmosphere in the kitchen is now somewhat tense.

Oh dear. Made the mistake of showing it to my non cycling wife and her response was that the cyclist started it and the 4x4 was no closer than the yellow car.

I agree with her

But it's about overtaking. I'd have thought you'd be on it like a tramp on chips?

Good work.

Straw man DUDE

I agree with her

The fact we need to debate this on a cycling forum with cyclists shows just how ****ed we are on the road.

Apparently the cyclists need to get off and push until they get to the park and then they can play round the park as long as they avoid the dog walkers.

[quote=simondbarnes ]I agree with her

trolling, or just needing to watch again? As JY says the issue was the pulling in before completing the pass (which was when the cyclist shouted out his torrent of abuse "oh come on")

He was trolling you....and won.

He did not say what part of what she said he agreed with.

It will be that the yellow car passed equally close.

This is what he agrees with 'her' about.

😀

Following a further 30 mins of tense discussion we have reached a point where I think I understand where she is coming from. Basically the infrastructure in the UK is not safe for cyclists so cyclists for their own self preservation should not ride on roads.

Nothing against cyclists, just that a cyclist will never win against a car so why take the risk.

The infrastructure is absolutely fine
Remove every car from the road and is functions beautifully and safely fopr every cyclist
the issue is the large metal boxes that use the infrastructure with us who do not give us enough respect or space or patience and endanger us to shave a few seconds of their time [ or in a busy city no time at all as they just get to the next trafic jam a few seconds earlier
What risk did the cyclist take there apart from being there?
Did you tell her women should no go out dressed like that at night alone as the infrastructure is just not safe?Why take the risk ? and that they should all stay at home for their own safety?
Its victim blaming basically rather than blaming the cause

I will guess that John won't rise to your pedantic interpretation of what he said in order to get a rise.

We will see.

Im sorry, but the belm is suddenly strong in this thread.

The Land Rover and the yellow Ka attempted to pass the cyclist on a mini-roundabout.

The Land Rover pulled over to the left as if to force the cyclist off the road. That's a classic punishment pass, right there. The yellow Ka simply drove off.

The gentleman driving the Land Rover got out of his car, made numerous threats toward the cyclist and saw fit to attempt to escalate the dispute, using threatening behavior and repeated threats of violence, lamenting the fact that there were witnesses.

The cyclist didn't handle himself well, but neither would I if I had two tonnes of ****-Panzer driven by a screaming, self-entitled chimpanzee attempting to use it as a weapon to intimidate. I'd like to think I'd remain calm, but I suspect I'd be screaming right back at him. And so would most of the sanctimonious posters on here.

Anyway, said chimpanzee was then subject numerous allegations of violent/threatening behavior towards staff from an ex-employee and thanks to his own evidence posted on twitter has been proven to possess a little tinkie.

I think the mods should close this thread down, there's nothing more to see here.

Actually Junkyard, I think you make a very valid point there - i see no reason why in commuter hotspots like London whole streets running parallel to main traffic routes could not be set aside as cycle superhighways (with junctions etc arranged accordingly to ease the flow of bikes in and out of town)

@john2000 unless she has some very redeeming features, I prescribe a new wife. There's nothing else to be done I'm afraid.

Absolutely agree with you junkyard, as does my placid wife. Take the cars off the road and the freaks off the street and everyone is safe.

I will guess that John won't rise to your pedantic interpretation of what he said in order to get a rise.

Both are victim blaming but the latter will be accused of hyperbole or some such, while the former is just common sense.

(Just in case it needed to be explained)

She has a number of redeeming features Boblo, she is a keeper.

<applause> for JY

No one spotted the edit did they? ......phew!

Closure to traffic in Richmond Park at weekends is something that definitely needs to be pushed. Any hint of a warm sunny day and the place is just back to back cars and cyclists trying to get past each other. As a minimum a one way system should be implemented which would enable a nice separate car and bike-lane system. The issue then would be the weekend warriors shouting at slower leisure cyclists and their kids for going to slowly.

That wouldn't solve the problem with this stretch of road though as it connects to other thoroughfares as well as to Richmond Park.

There needs to be a much greater acceptance on both sides that the roads are shared and consideration needs to be given to that to ensure incidents like this one don't become the norm.

Amen to many of you. The problem is not the roads, it's the vehicles, or more specifically the behaviours and expectations of a large subset of the people that drive them.

Closure to traffic in Richmond Park at weekends is something that definitely needs to be pushed. Any hint of a warm sunny day and the place is just back to back cars and cyclists trying to get past each other. As a minimum a one way system should be implemented which would enable a nice separate car and bike-lane system. The issue then would be the weekend warriors shouting at slower leisure cyclists and their kids for going to slowly.

Really? Why on earth would they want to close the park to traffic on the weekends? Just to appease cyclists? I ride in the park once a week and I would hate to see the roads closed. You have to remember it's a huge, accessible park on the edge of a city populated by over 6 million people, it's not a velodrome filled with deer. Of course it gets busy, but it's there to be used by everyone, walkers, runners, cyclists, horse riders, families etc. How would all the non-cyclist get to anywhere within the park and enjoy it without being able to drive in and use the car parks and support the rest of the facilities there?

There needs to be a much greater acceptance on both sides that the roads are shared and consideration needs to be given to that to ensure incidents like this one don't become the norm.

^^This is the only sensible and practical solution, unfortunately there are idiot motorists, idiot cyclist, idiot walkers, idiot runners, idiot dog walkers all using the same space.

[EDIT: and lots of nice normal people too! 😀 ]

I think you could do it such that the roads to the car parks were open only, although not most practical. I think the better option is for a big one-way system. This would really benefit and stop the cars that use the park as a short-cut.

Roads open to car parks, Boris Bike stands and 10mph mobility scooter/golf buggy hire in the car parks, sorted.

LHS - I still think you are missing the point, you are looking at this from a cyclists point of view when it is a multi-use park.

I sometimes use the park as a "shortcut". Why? Because it's a really nice place to drive through. And why shouldn't I use it as a shortcut, I don't abuse or intimidate cyclists and I have every right to use it in that way.

If anything the park is already biased in favour of cyclists at some times of the year, the opening times for traffic are loosely based on dusk and dawn, so you can go through the cycle-friendly gates when the place is shut to cars and enjoy a traffic free ride?

unfortunately there are idiot motorists, idiot cyclist, idiot walkers, idiot runners, idiot dog walkers all using the same space.

Yet if only one of those groups was removed, most of the problems would disappear - only one of those groups kills thousands of people every year. It's not a symmetrical issue.

I'd like to point out that a car (whatever its exact weight) is not a lethal weapon. It's a form of transport - just like a bicycle.

My kitchen knife is a device for preparing my dinner. It is a food-preparation implement, just like spatula.

Yet if only one of those groups was removed, most of the problems would disappear - only one of those groups kills thousands of people every year. It's not a symmetrical issue.

So how would all the roadies who drive into the car parks on the weekend to enjoy the park on their bikes get there? I'm sure you're going to say they should ride there but the fact is the car parks are full of bikes being unloaded from cars.

It is a multi use park, but i think it can be multi use without having the streams of traffic going through it. As long as those people travelling by car can reach it and park up then that should be it. During the week it should be open to traffic as it would cause insane congestion in other areas if it didn't. People going for nice drives through the park at weekends shouldn't be encouraged in my personal point of view.

I also don't think as a contrary point of view that London Dynamo weekend warriors should be treating it as their own personal velodrome and shouting at everyone who dares to impede their progress.

You appear to be completely missing the point. I'm hoping that the roadies driving into the park aren't part of the idiot motorists group. I'm not suggesting banning all cars from the roads, simply that resources should be concentrated on addressing idiot drivers rather than wasted on the rest.

warns74 - Member

How would all the non-cyclist get to anywhere within the park and enjoy it without being able to drive in and use the car parks and support the rest of the facilities there?

i know **** all about London, but even i know that Richmond Park is a leisurely 20min dawdle from the station.

edit: i'm wrong, my apologies.

it's a leisurely 20min dawdle from about 10 different stations.

shouting at everyone who dares to impede their progress.

Out of interest, what are they shouting?

I ride c100 miles a week, commuting and club and I've never experienced shouting in terms of abuse - but all the time in terms of warnings and safety - frequently me when pedestrians walk into the road without looking.

If you're coming up fast behind a slow-moving group, shouting 'coming through/on your right' is common practice for safety reasons... if the faster riders kept their mouths shut and one of the slower riders didn't look behind them before moving out for some reason, you'd have riders all over the floor... and in Richmond Park that means potentially under the wheels of a car.

Richmond Park is frequently used for training because it's safer than main roads and has some tidy hills in it, so forcing everyone to ride slowly would be unhelpful unless we want UK to no longer be the pre-eminent country at pro-level by cutting off the grass roots.

Fast riders shouting a warning seems to be the best way to manage the problem of riders moving at different speeds.

I'm not suggesting banning all cars from the roads, simply that resources should be concentrated on addressing idiot drivers rather than wasted on the rest.

From what I've seen, the Park Police deal with idiot drivers and idiot cyclists alike.

i know **** all about London, but even i know that Richmond Park is a leisurely 20min dawdle from the station.

edit: i'm wrong, my apologies.

it's a leisurely 20min dawdle from about 10 different stations.

Good luck with dictating how people should get to places.

I am interested to see how this brouhaha (or should it be Brewhaha?*) with the videoed angry driver will affect the business in reality. Both in the short and longer term. An interesting test of the effects of online exposure of this sort of thing and effects of social media campaigns.

Also as a regular user of Richmond Park I agree with Warns74. There is no need for any of the changes suggested. The park is for the recreational use of everyone and should not be changed for what appears to be the benefit of cyclists only when it disadvantages many of other user groups. It's should be about considerate shared use. They already have a ban on commmercial vehicles driving through the Park by the way, which at the very least restricts the width of vehicles that can drive through the park, and I've seen it enforced by the police who patrol within the park.

*I'll fetch my coat

Fast riders shouting a warning seems to be the best way to manage the problem of riders moving at different speeds.

Richmond park is a 20mph zone. A lot of club cyclists often go in excess of this and with so many different park users crossing trails, crossing roads etc there is absolutely no place for this in the park environment. At many path crossings you regularly see the weekend warriors approaching at over 20mph shouting at pedestrians crossing the road. Pedestrians have the right of way.

I am not saying this is the norm, but from someone who is in the park everyday whether it is cycling, running or walking the dog, the anti-social behavior of a minority of cyclists is growing.

warns74 - Member

Good luck with dictating how people should get to places.

i'm not dictating anything.

you asked how people would travel to a park that's already surrounded by train stations, if they didn't want to cycle and driving was further discouraged.

i subtly suggested that they might consider using a train.

my opinion in this counts not one jot. My idle ramblings can hardly be considered dictatorial.

I am not saying this is the norm, but from someone who is in the park everyday whether it is cycling, running or walking the dog, the anti-social behavior of a minority of cyclists is growing.

That's a shame. I guess it's a result of new riders carrying on behaviours they exhibit in other parts of their lives - ie: poor risk management and a sense of entitlement. I find though that the more people get into cycling, the more they adapt to the unspoken codes of riding with skill and consideration...

Re pedestrians crossing the road - are you saying drivers and cyclists all have to stop - as in at a zebra crossing but without any of the usual lights and markings - because that's daft - changing the rules as you pass from the public highway to the park is bound to lead to confusion ie: how will anyone know the priorities have changed? I haven't ridden in RP for a while but I never knew that and never saw any notices about it either - so if I saw a pedestrian stepping into the road, I'd be shouting out a warning - from the point of view of believing I had right of way and was preventing a collision, not from the point of view of any sense of entitlement...