Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Bristol bus driver 'used vehicle as a weapon' to ram cyclist off road.

1356

Comments

  • #62
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    monument wrote: »
    If a cyclist gets annoyed with a motorist and then pulls the motorist out of their car or bus or whatever and beats the living daylights out of them
    What's this hypothetical stuff got to do with reality?

    If you want hypothetical: if you picked a fight with a man holding a baseball bat, would you be surprised if you got a clatter of it?


  • #63
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    n97 mini wrote: »
    It's also reported that Mead was pulling one of the wipers on the bus.

    If that's not acting the maggot, what is.

    If they had a previous then why did the bus driver pull up behind the cyclist in the video unless he was trying to escalate the situation? There is no soundtrack on the video. Did the bus driver pull up behind the cyclist and start laying on the horn?


  • #64
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Sometimes you can't avoid trouble it comes looking for you anyway.
    Here's one for you. A friend of mine parked his car up, at night and in the dark, in a parking area in Dublin. A few seconds after he got out of it a cyclist with no lights cycled into it and damaged the wing. She also wrecked her bicycle. According to her it's entirely his fault and she has even gotten the gardaí involved. This is despite the fact that his car was stationary and she hit it.


  • #65
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    If they had a previous
    There's no 'if'... they had a previous and it's widely reported. The video only shows the final moments of the argument.


  • #66
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Here's one for you. A friend of mine parked his car up, at night and in the dark, in a parking area in Dublin. A few seconds after he got out of it a cyclist with no lights cycled into it and damaged the wing. She also wrecked her bicycle. According to her it's entirely his fault and she has even gotten the gardaí involved. This is despite the fact that his car was stationary and she hit it.

    And your point is?


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    And your point is?

    Since we're having story time about roundabouts and white vans and blue vans, and so on, I decided I'd throw out a story too.


  • #68
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Since we're having story time about roundabouts and white vans and blue vans, and so on, I decided I'd throw out a story too.

    So tell us do you drive a car yourself? Or is this all theoretical for you?


  • #69
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,429 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    n97 mini wrote: »
    If you want hypothetical: if you picked a fight with a man holding a baseball bat, would you be surprised if you got a clatter of it?

    And if the person with the baseball bat beat you too death, would he still get done for murder? Yup.

    Sorry that is stupid. NOTHING, deserves that response.

    It doesn't matter if they had previous, anything short of the cyclist shooting at or carrying a bomb would justify that response.

    So what if there had been a previous altercation? The bus driver went way to far, a million times over.

    And even if there was a previous altercation, we don't know that the bus driver wasn't the one who started it in the first place. Not that it would be relevant anyway.


  • #70
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    No-one is saying the bus driver was right. He got jailed for his part.


  • #71
    overshoot
    Registered Users Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭overshoot


    Dowee wrote: »
    So what if he was trying to stop him passing? Maybe I missed the class where it was explained that stopping a bus passing results in being ok to be hit by said bus.

    Last I knew, tangoing didn't involve being side swiped by a bus, I guess I'm out of touch these days, I must be getting old.
    last time i checked you are supposed to give way to things overtaking from behind... and keep left, both on multiple lanes and in your own lane!
    now dont think for a second that im condoning the bus driver but the cyclist will clearly hear the bus accelerating behind him, if he was changing lane (which he didnt indicate), what if the bus acted as he should have, swerved out of his way and hit a pedestrian or crossed the centre divide and hit a car head on? the bus was going to be forced to react to him and a third party could easily have gotton injured.
    the cyclist showed disregard for his and others safety also and should be banned from cycling and driving for dangerous behaviour. to me the roads are a safer place without either of them. bus driver got what he deserved and the cyclist will escape his proper punishment because of the buses actions
    (and yes i do cycle)


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    overshoot wrote: »
    last time i checked you are supposed to give way to things overtaking from behind... and keep left, both on multiple lanes and in your own lane!

    Uh no the central principle of Irish and UK traffic law is that traffic in possession of the road has priority over following and entering traffic. There is no requirement in law to allow somebody else to overtake simply because they want to.


  • #73
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    overshoot wrote: »
    the bus was going to be forced to react to him and a third party could easily have gotton injured.

    The bus is an inanimate object. Are you telling us that there was a third party on the bus forcing the drivers foot down onto the accellerator? This is a new fact that has not been introduced previously.


  • #74
    overshoot
    Registered Users Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭overshoot


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Uh no the central principle of Irish and UK traffic law is that traffic in possession of the road has priority over following and entering traffic. There is no requirement in law to allow somebody else to overtake simply because they want to.
    Give way to faster traffic already overtaking from behind.
    http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-driving/good-driving-practice/overtaking.html
    the bus had moved to another lane, and became "faster traffic overtaking from behind" while the cyclist didnt change lane, he went right to the edge of it as if he was going to. i would have assumed he was changing lane if i was the bus driver also. (again not saying what followed was correct either)
    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    The bus is an inanimate object. Are you telling us that there was a third party on the bus forcing the drivers foot down onto the accellerator? This is a new fact that has not been introduced previously.
    if the bus (was acting properly) swerved to avoid the cyclist and he hit another car and/or a passenger got injured, slammed on the brakes and got rear ended, standing passenger goes flying.... thats a third party!:rolleyes:
    where in gods name did you get someone taking over from the bus driver from that line?!

    i have been saying both are guilty of dangerous or at least careless actions. the actions of one does not negate that of another


  • #75
    Dowee
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭Dowee


    overshoot wrote: »
    last time i checked you are supposed to give way to things overtaking from behind... and keep left, both on multiple lanes and in your own lane!
    now dont think for a second that im condoning the bus driver but the cyclist will clearly hear the bus accelerating behind him, if he was changing lane (which he didnt indicate), what if the bus acted as he should have, swerved out of his way and hit a pedestrian or crossed the centre divide and hit a car head on? the bus was going to be forced to react to him and a third party could easily have gotton injured.
    the cyclist showed disregard for his and others safety also and should be banned from cycling and driving for dangerous behaviour. to me the roads are a safer place without either of them. bus driver got what he deserved and the cyclist will escape his proper punishment because of the buses actions
    (and yes i do cycle)

    Hilarious, thanks for brightening my day. However I do hope for your sake that you don't actually believe any of what you said.

    I love how people expressing anti cyclist opinions like to add "and I cycle" or something similar like it gives them some sort of higher right to spout complete tripe!

    And yes I do drive! :)


  • #76
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    overshoot wrote: »
    http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-driving/good-driving-practice/overtaking.html
    the bus had moved to another lane, and became "faster traffic overtaking from behind" while the cyclist didnt change lane, he went right to the edge of it as if he was going to. i would have assumed he was changing lane if i was the bus driver also. (again not saying what followed was correct either)


    if the bus (was acting properly) swerved to avoid the cyclist and he hit another car and/or a passenger got injured, slammed on the brakes and got rear ended, standing passenger goes flying.... thats a third party!:rolleyes:
    where in gods name did you get someone taking over from the bus driver from that line?!

    From the link you provided:
    How to overtake safely
    • Make sure the road ahead is clear so you have enough distance to allow you to overtake and get back to your own side of the road without forcing any other road user to move to avoid you.
    • Never directly follow another overtaking vehicle.
    • Give way to faster traffic already overtaking from behind.
    • Before overtaking check that the way is clear, check in your mirror and blind spots to ensure another vehicle is not approaching from behind. Give your signal in good time, move out when it is safe to do so, accelerate and overtake with the minimum of delay.
    • When you are well past, check the mirror, signal and gradually move in again making sure not to cut across the vehicle you have passed.
    • Take extra care when overtaking a vehicle displaying a "LONG VEHICLE" sign. This means that the vehicle is at least 13 metres long and you will need extra road length to pass it and safely return to the left-hand side of the road.

    If they were both going in the same direction, then we have already established that the bus driver cannot have had enough time or space to complete the manouevre safely without frivolously impeding the driver he was trying to overtake.

    The two of them both began from a standing start. The bus was not a faster vehicle coming up from behind on an otherwise clear road. The driver of the bus was engaged in a race from a standing start to get to a traffic light that would be red when he got there. The bus driver would not have needed to "swerve" avoid anything unless he was engaged in a race or unless there was some external force simultaneously acting on the throttle while disabling his brakes.

    If the leading driver was attempting to change lane, then he still had priority unless notwithstanding that the bus driver was may have been attempting to "race" the leading driver to get into the right hand lane.


  • #77
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    I bet Sandra Bullock would have known what to do


  • #78
    overshoot
    Registered Users Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭overshoot


    Dowee wrote: »
    Hilarious, thanks for brightening my day. However I do hope for your sake that you don't actually believe any of what you said.

    I love how people expressing anti cyclist opinions like to add "and I cycle" or something similar like it gives them some sort of higher right to spout complete tripe!

    And yes I do drive! :)
    i actually was going to leave out the end line but then i though i would have got car loving yada yada (i love both;))
    i will admit though, i had thought the bus would have been entitled to stay in the right lane rather than return to the left... only just realising it was right turn only. i had watched it a few times, kept overlooking it, had been focusing on the bus & cyclist not the road markings.:o
    i was never questioning the cyclists entitlement to hold the lane, i had percieved it as pulling out to block an overtaking move on what i thought was 2 straight ahead lanes


  • #79
    Stark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,876 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    I bet Sandra Bullock would have known what to do

    Kill the woman with the pram.


  • #80
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    I have reviewed the video again and if you look at the pedestrian crossing in the foreground the lights have already gone green for the pedestrians at the moment the bus strikes the leading driver. This suggests that at the moment he pulled out to make this manouevre, the bus driver was already facing a red light.


  • #81
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    n97 mini wrote: »
    No-one is saying the bus driver was right. He got jailed for his part.

    Yes, indirectly you are.

    Pulling wipers and "getting in the way" is irrelevant to the overreaction of using a bus as a weapon and massing swinging it in the direction of a person.

    Just as beeping at a cyclist is irrelevant to the overreaction of damaging a bus and assaulting a driver. Just as punching somebody once is irrelevant to the overreaction of stabbing or shooting them... etc etc etc

    corktina wrote: »
    i think id better stop feeding them
    n97 mini wrote: »
    What's this hypothetical stuff got to do with reality?

    If you want hypothetical: if you picked a fight with a man holding a baseball bat, would you be surprised if you got a clatter of it?

    How hard is it for the two of you to answer a question?

    Hypothetical?
    Bus driver bashed by road rage cyclist

    Police are investigating an incident at Seven Hills on Friday in which a cyclist allegedly banged on a bus window, broke the driver's mirror, then got on the bus and assaulted the driver when it stopped.

    The 64-year-old bus driver had sounded his horn at the cyclist.

    Darcy Waller from the TWU says he is seeking a meeting with the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) because cyclists are illegally using the T-way lane, endangering themselves and bus users.

    Actually that was hard to find even thought I searched "cyclist assaults driver" most of the results in the first two pages were for the other way around.

    n97 mini wrote: »
    If you want hypothetical: if you picked a fight with a man holding a baseball bat, would you be surprised if you got a clatter of it?

    I suspect that the poster who talked about moral compass being broken is only half right -- it seems the real problem is you lot have blinkers on because it's a cyclist. You don't see a human who got assaulted by a multi-ton bus, you only see a cyclist.

    LordSutch wrote: »
    If he did intend to move into the right hand lane (to turn right), then surely he should have signaled his intention? he must have known the bus was right behind him, so I still stand by my comment in post#5. Maybe they had 'previous' before the video picked tmem up?

    Bus driver deserves to go to jail, but I think there might also be a questionmark overt the cyclists behaviour?

    People tend to make mistakes when there's a bus aggressively driving up their hole while they are cycling. In any case the only reason to mention the cyclist's mistakes are to justify the unreal overreaction of the bus driver. The cyclists errors are almost or are irrelevant when faced with what the driver did.

    n97 mini wrote: »
    Here's one for you. A friend of mine parked his car up, at night and in the dark, in a parking area in Dublin. A few seconds after he got out of it a cyclist with no lights cycled into it and damaged the wing. She also wrecked her bicycle. According to her it's entirely his fault and she has even gotten the gardaí involved. This is despite the fact that his car was stationary and she hit it.

    The way you are describing it, even in the Netherlands where they have strict liability for motorist, the cyclist would be in wrong because the car was not moving.

    What did the gardai say and do?


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    doozerie
    Registered Users Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭doozerie


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Jeez everyone on this thread has problems with their eyesight, except you.

    The cyclist decided to tango with a bus and came out the worse off for it. Seriously, I'd have sympathy for him if he wasn't acting the bolix, but he was.

    Throughout this thread you appear to be advocating that annoying or offending someone, the bus driver in this specific case, justifies an extremely malevolent and violent response. Yet your reaction to written responses which challenge your annoying and offensive posts is to get upset as presumably you consider such responses unjustified. That's quite a contradiction. If you are not able to convince yourself of your own argument how do you expect to convince others?


  • #83
    SerialComplaint
    Registered Users Posts: 2,644 ✭✭✭SerialComplaint


    I guess many drivers would conclude from this video that the cyclist is 'acting the maggot'.

    So have a look at the detailed analysis;

    http://youtu.be/v1y41At_m9o


  • #84
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    no I wouldn't say that at all, not unless he then proceded to try and block the taxis progress, or retaliated to the cab drivers road rage in some other way.


  • #85
    rich.d.berry
    Registered Users Posts: 517 ✭✭✭rich.d.berry


    corktina wrote: »
    no I wouldn't say that at all, not unless he then proceded to try and block the taxis progress, or retaliated to the cab drivers road rage in some other way.

    Why not? Your previous posts indicate that you think the cyclist hit by the bus driver got his just desserts and had it coming. Surely the cab driver deserves a knuckle sandwich or a kick in the bollox. Why the sudden rule change?


  • #86
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    think you are trolling.
    I did say that I hadn't much sympathy for his broken legs, but that was because he didn't have to put himself in the position of being in front of a bus driven by an irate madman. The guy with the taxi was much more sensible. He had several opportunities to escalte the incident but chose to stay calm and out of the guys way.


  • #87
    Vic_08
    Registered Users Posts: 3,040 ✭✭✭Vic_08


    monument wrote: »
    Yes, indirectly you are.

    Pulling wipers and "getting in the way" is irrelevant to the overreaction of using a bus as a weapon and massing swinging it in the direction of a person.

    Just as beeping at a cyclist is irrelevant to the overreaction of damaging a bus and assaulting a driver. Just as punching somebody once is irrelevant to the overreaction of stabbing or shooting them... etc etc etc

    What utter stupid rubbish. If you go around acting agressively and violently to others then you are instigating a confrontation, if that confrontation ends up in you being badly assaulted then you are far from blameless.

    Up until the point where he was knocked off the bicycle it was the cyclist who was in the wrong, he had clearly been abusive and antagonistic for a protracted period of time which is in itself illegal. He was purposely blocking the bus as part of a road rage incident in order to antagonise the bus driver, he succeded in antagonising him but got a reaction he was obviously not expecting.

    Was the bus driver wrong; yes. Was it right that he got a custodial sentence for it; yes.
    Was the cyclist's actions a contributory factor; yes. Was it right that he got away without having to answer for his irresponsible and criminal behaviour leading up to the assault; No.





    I suspect that the poster who talked about moral compass being broken is only half right -- it seems the real problem is you lot have blinkers on because it's a cyclist. You don't see a human who got assaulted by a multi-ton bus, you only see a cyclist.


    monument wrote: »
    People tend to make mistakes when there's a bus aggressively driving up their hole while they are cycling. In any case the only reason to mention the cyclist's mistakes are to justify the unreal overreaction of the bus driver. The cyclists errors are almost or are irrelevant when faced with what the driver did.

    The cyclist did not make mistakes or errors, his actions were deliberate and calculated. He was not only in the wrong but incredibly stupid. If you go around provoking people you will eventually get someone who will bite back in a big way. In this case he provoked someone who was able to kill him with a flick of his wrist and he was relying on the bus driver not reacting to his provocation.

    The fact that he ended up getting assaulted does not absolve him of his actions which were clearly wrong up to that point.


  • #88
    Vic_08
    Registered Users Posts: 3,040 ✭✭✭Vic_08


    SerialComplaint wrote: »
    I guess many drivers would conclude from this video that the cyclist is 'acting the maggot'.

    So have a look at the detailed analysis;

    http://youtu.be/v1y41At_m9o[/QUOTE]


    In that instance the taxi driver was 100% wrong. He drove badly and purposely pulled in on the cyclist who only put his hand on the taxi when it was causing an immediate danger to him.

    The taxi driver then used this as a reason to deliberately cut the cyclist up, get out of his cab and verbally assault him. Criminal behaviour.


  • #89
    rich.d.berry
    Registered Users Posts: 517 ✭✭✭rich.d.berry


    Vic_08 wrote: »
    Up until the point where he was knocked off the bicycle it was the cyclist who was in the wrong, he had clearly been abusive and antagonistic for a protracted period of time which is in itself illegal. He was purposely blocking the bus as part of a road rage incident in order to antagonise the bus driver, he succeded in antagonising him but got a reaction he was obviously not expecting.

    The fact that you can state that the bus driver's aggressive tailgating is all the cyclists fault indicates to me that you have lost your grip on reality.


  • #90
    doozerie
    Registered Users Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭doozerie


    Vic_08 wrote:
    I suspect that the poster who talked about moral compass being broken is only half right -- it seems the real problem is you lot have blinkers on because it's a cyclist. You don't see a human who got assaulted by a multi-ton bus, you only see a cyclist.

    By "you lot" you are presumably including me as I have taken issue with several of the posts in this thread. I am indeed a cyclist but I am also a motorist. I see people do stupid, and sometimes aggressive, things every day and this is not unique to any group of road user. The particular aspect of this discussion that has clearly perplexed many of the posters, me included, is the attitude that the victim (the cyclist) got what he deserved, as if his reactions to a nasty situation (media reports mention that the bus driver drove too close to him prior to what we see on the video) warranted a violent response. Nothing warrants a response like that.

    Your argument that "[we] lot" have blinkers on because the victim is a cyclist is completely undermined by your own categorisation of "us" by our mode of transport. You apparently have blinkers on too. Take your own blinkers off and you'll see that no-one is saying that what the cyclist did was right, but that the response it elicited was on a scale that no rational person would have expected.

    The only relevance in this discussion to the respective modes of transport of both the assailant and the victim is the fact that one was a very serious weapon in this situation. Take the bus and bicycle out of the picture, replace them with a shotgun and a pea-shooter respectively and the outcome would have been just as extreme and unwarranted but might well have generated a different response in some of those that say the cyclist deserved it, and that is a disturbing reflection on the mindset of those people.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    droidus
    Registered Users Posts: 1,545 ✭✭✭droidus


    Lets look at the sequence of events here as there's some very selective accounts going on here.

    1/ Bus driver passes too close and cuts of cyclist (this can be extremely frightening for a cyclist).
    2/ Cyclist confronts bus driver and acts aggressively/abusively. Bus driver was presumably also abusive and aggressive, or may even have shouted abuse at cyclist first, we simply dont know.
    3/ Cyclist takes the lane. May be interpreted or intended as being an aggressive act, was also the only safe option when faced with an aggressive driver who has already cut you off once.
    4/ Bus driver attempts to 'overtake' cyclist in right turn only lane a short distance from a red light. Cyclist may or may not be moving into lane to turn right
    5/ Bus driver assaults cyclist with a deadly weapon.

    The fact is that the cyclist did not instigate the conflict, he reacted as most people would react to being almost squashed by a bus and we also dont know what happened and what was said during the 'altercation' between the driver and cyclist.

    Imagine you were crossing the road in slow traffic, a car accelerates towards you, then moves to the left, pinning you with inches to spare against a railing. How would you react if you confronted the driver who then laughed at you, gave you the finger and told you to 'f*ck yourself, you shouldnt even be on the road''?


Advertisement