[Closed] Road rage assault on cyclist - victim sought

There is no [i]maximum[/i] number of cyclists allowed abreast. The Highway Code says you [i]should not[/i] ride more than two abreast. As it does not say [i]must/must not[/i] then it is advisory not compulsory.
It may not be best practise to fill the ASL but its not illegal.

If bikes aren't meant to be more than two abreast in the ASL, why is it painted across the whole breadth of the lane?

If bikes aren't meant to be more than two abreast in the ASL, why is it painted across the whole breadth of the lane?

Maybe so that a cyclist who is turning right can assume the correct road position?

Even when there is no right turn?

Try harder.

and then sits waaaay out in to 'other guys lane' and is going to slow him from getting away from the lights

I'm pretty sure that lining up in front of other road users is not what an ASL is intended for. That would be deliberately put different road user in conflict.

Just how is the guy not going to be riding three abreast when the lights change? He's decided that that particular 'rule of the road' doesn't apply him. Just like matey boy in the Audi... But wait, he doesn't like that does he?

None of this helps us coexist on the road.

Just how is the guy not going to be riding three abreast when the lights change? He's decided that that particular 'rule of the road' doesn't apply him. Just like matey boy in the Audi... But wait, he doesn't like that does he?

Even when there is no right turn?

Try harder.

Looks like there is a right turn about 20 yards ahead of the lights - isn't there?

You're also assuming that someone has thought the design/layout of these things through with regard to the highway code. I wouldn't be so confident.

scotroutes - Member
Even when there is no right turn?

Irrelevant as he's going straight ahead.

What's that number again?

Imnotverygood - this also applies to the guy three abreast. He could just have waited a couple of seconds too... Also he's not adhering to the Highway Code...

Lining up in front of other road users is [i]exactly[/i] what an ASL is for.

I'm coming round to the idea that compulsory bike training might not be such a bad idea.

I'm pretty sure that lining up in front of other road users is not what an ASL is intended for. That would be deliberately put different road user in conflict.

The ignorance in this thread is staggering.

So.... How many should we be lining up for, along the entire ASL?

I reckon you could get at least 6 along there. That's fine is it, that's what it's designed for?

There is no [u]law[/u] which bans 3 abreast. The HC is a recommendation only ('should'). In any case there is no evidence that our boy is going to continue cycling off down the road 3 abreast. They will all single up very shortly.

So.... How many should we be lining up for, along the entire ASL?
I reckon you could get at least 6 along there. That's fine is it, that's what it's designed for?

Yes

I'm just embarrassed that yet again cyclist comes off second best in a game of fisticuffs.

Wow. After all these years I thought I got my head kicked in by bullies at school because they were nasty, vicious thugs. Turns out it's my fault. Thanks for clearing that up.

Head kicked in or slapped and called names ?
Not trying to be smart but the bit about the big car being a bully in your eyes was quite pathetic IMO.

Why is someone reacting to somebody snarling and shouting at them being a bully ?
So if your wife was driving and you were in the back with blacked out windows you would sit there and let her take the abuse?

My son would be terrified if he had to witness the angry cyclist at the window ? The cyclist look angry rather than terrified of the 2 ton bully he chased along the street after.

Is this still going on?

At this point is anyone, on either side of the argument, genuinely thinking, "Right, this next post will change all their minds."?

I was about to post something about how this thread arrived at the simple answer on page one which was "both of them", and then gone on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on with over one hundred people joining in to say out of the two (or three) idiots, which one of them was the biggest idiot.

But there's been at least of them per page already.

Time to put this thread in to a tailspin.

This incident is on the front page of the Daily Mail website.......

Or maybe I'm reading it wrong, and it's not "who's the idiot?", but "who's the victim?", and people are taking the thread title very seriously indeed, and won't stop posting until a concensus has been reached and the victim decided upon.

In which case, carry on, you might be a while. Keep hydrated, keep eating.

Sub-forum, mods? Just for this thread?

Is this still going on?
At this point is anyone, on either side of the argument, genuinely thinking, "Right, this next post will change all their minds."?

Education, my friend. I just posted to correct the individual who thinks that cyclists must keep left in an ASL. But yes, it is probably futile.

I missed your post CFH. I'm not going to check though.

I'd imagine the DM have an argu-bot controversy crawler, that scours the web looking for items being discussed at length with emotive language so they leave no stone unturned in their search for clickbait.

Education, my friend. I just posted to correct the individual who thinks that cyclists must keep left in an ASL. But yes, it is probably futile

6 abreast now, don't forget 😉

Cyclist vs motorist stories offer the best click bait because they pit libertarians (who tend to favour justice for the out group) against authoritarians who instinctively identify with the most powerful group, even when to do so is irrational, unjust or against their best interest.

All to do with whether you were spanked by your father, or something.

Who's to say the driver of the car wasn't the fella in the back of the car's granny or wife? If someone shouted that at my granny I'd probably do something similar 🙂 LOL

I have a very strong opinion about this (insert thread name here) topic. I have no doubt that (insert random forum name here) is talking out their bumhole, and I am really quite upset about it. How dare they mention my (insert random relative here) like that!???!?

I am now going to go to (the pub / YouTube / a soapbox) and shout my opinion at everyone within earshot, as that will surely be more effective than wishy washy, plinky plody, dibby dabby, flippy flappy so called 'judicial process' and 'right sir, you are coming with us'.

Pffff.

Threads getting close to the bottom of page one so I just thought I would boost him up again 😆

TJ would be proud...

Metalheart I assume you don't actually ride a bike in cities as you do not have a clue. The asl is for cyclists to fill to avoid being in a long and dangerous cue when the lights change. You or rather cyclists then gravitate left or turn right. You as in you and the rest of the car drivers then can pass the cyclists as this happens not before.
So we have a driver in an Audi who has no clue that a solid white line and a red light mean stop. A load of posters who ride bikes but have no idea what a cycle box and asl are for. A cyclist who needs to chill out or carry a u lock infuture, a rear seat passenger who was protecting an invisible child/woman or is a cowardly thug and aracer who can tirelessly keep a thread going ad infenitum.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with your interpretation of ASL's and that it's for cyclist to [i]fill[/i]. To me it's incompatible with the highway codes rules for cyclists (namely never ride more than two abreast and single file on busy roads..).

But this is all a straw man anyway. My original point was that I thought the cyclist was being selfish and inconsiderate to [i]other road users[/i]. Audi man clearly understands the ASL as he has plainly stopped behind it in the first instance.

It's prime example of the the laws of dynamics, i.e. for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The driver was obviously [i]re[/i]-active.

And in case you think I'm defending the driver I'm not. And I don't understand why people are defending the cyclist. After all the Highway Code states you let any infringement of traffic laws/rules go, not chase 'em and escalate. He results in proving the case why. He should have let it drop...

Carry a u-lock, seriously? Just what would have happened if he'd started on passenger with that? The other guys in the car would have got out and kicked the shit out of him! He clearly needs a Glock...

We need to coexist people, that means we have give respect as well.

But what do I know, I'm clearly a teuchter that's never ridden a bike in town, hell I don't think we've even got electricity this far north... 🙄

metalheart - Member
I'm sorry but I don't agree with your interpretation of ASL's and that it's for cyclist to fill. To me it's incompatible with the highway codes rules for cyclists (namely never ride more than two abreast and single file on busy roads..).

None of that matters because you're completely wrong.

While ASLs alone can’t make a dangerous junction safe, there’s substantial evidence that giving cyclists space at the front of junctions reduces risk by making them more visible to motorists and giving extra time for them to pull away.

[img] ?1372783519[/img]

[url] http://lcc.org.uk/articles/police-and-transport-for-london-prepare-to-increase-enforcement-against-motorists-who-ignore-advanced-stop-lines [/url]

[img] [/img]

metalheart - Member
I'm sorry but I don't agree with your interpretation of ASL's and that it's for cyclist to fill. To me it's incompatible with the highway codes rules for cyclists (namely never ride more than two abreast and single file on busy roads..).

please think and check the real situation before writing such incorrect and misleading nonsense

[i]a rear seat passenger who was protecting an invisible child/woman or is a cowardly thug[/i]

It's better than that. We have people on STW who if they had a child, granny or wife in the car with them (one of whom might have been driving dangerously), THEY'D GET OUT AND HAVE A FIGHT!!

How is that better than having a shouty man outside the car?

This thread really has highlighted the incredibly high levels of ****tery amongst STW forum members,

[i]And I don't understand why people are defending the cyclist./i]
I'm not going to bother looking but I can't remember anywhere anyone is defending the cyclist. I think pretty much everyone agrees he behaved like a cock. The disagreement is that some people think that's a good reason to smack him in the face. Going round smacking everyone who is a cock, in the face is going to keep you very busy indeed.

As I said above, most grown ups have figured this out already.

[img][URL= http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff215/sputnik_photos/ScreenShot2014-01-28at085819_zpsa1d545a8.pn g" target="_blank">http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff215/sputnik_photos/ScreenShot2014-01-28at085819_zpsa1d545a8.pn g"/> [/IMG][/URL][/img]

Sputnik - that's brilliant, I want that as a poster !

LOL its right outside our office!

It's better than that. We have people on STW who if they had a child, granny or wife in the car with them (one of whom might have been driving dangerously), THEY'D GET OUT AND HAVE A FIGHT!!

How is that better than having a shouty man outside the car?

In parts of America you'd probably be able to legally shoot the shouty cyclist from the comfort of your car. 😉

Sputnik, that is possibly the greatest ever Godwin! 😀

Lazarus 😆

lol cyclist is a stupid **** for saying something to driver in the first place and then for racing after him and saying something again. no need for violence though from the person in the car.

Now it has comments disabled and says "Filmed on a Sony Action Cam during a review for Sports Performance & Tech Magazine"

and it has nearly 800,000 views.... IT WAS ALL A VIRAL MARKETING CAMPAIGN!

Given his other videos and the poster above who knows the victim and the suggestion of two arrests I'd guess not a viral marketing campaign .
U locks have more uses than pure self defence .