Sad B*str*ds

googlehead

Was out cycling last night when this twat, drove up in behind me and then braked hard trying to throw me off my bike, Then he looked over at his mate laughing, I swear If I caught up with him I would have put my foot in the side of his car.:mad:

Caroline_ie

It's not their fault, they probably caught their parents having sex on when they were little.

In all seriousness, this is mindless and stupid, and they would have ended up in jail if anything had happenned to you.

googlehead

Caroline_ie wrote: »

It's not their fault, they probably caught their parents having sex on when they were little.

In all seriousness, this is mindless and stupid, and they would have ended up in jail if anything had happenned to you.

I know it would have been stupid to kick the car, but I was soo angry that something would have went down. but what can you do the world is full of prats

Liamo08

Absolute idiots, no thought of how much damage they could do to you if they actually hit you. Had a similar experience on coming to the top of Howth Hill recently when some muppet drove past me close enough so his mate in the passenger seat could lean out and slap me on the back, the car must have only been a foot away from me as it passed. The shock nearly knocked me off the bike which would have been seriously dangerous as there were 2 or 3 cars driving up behind the clowns.

pickarooney

I occasionally get the ones who lean out the window and say "ha-ha you have a bike!"...

daymobrew

googlehead wrote: »

but what can you do the world is full of prats

For dangerous situations like you experiences I suggest reporting them to the Gardai. TrafficWatch is 1890-205-805. Put it in your mobile.

Raam

Liamo08 wrote: »

Absolute idiots, no thought of how much damage they could do to you if they actually hit you. Had a similar experience on coming to the top of Howth Hill recently when some muppet drove past me close enough so his mate in the passenger seat could lean out and slap me on the back, the car must have only been a foot away from me as it passed. The shock nearly knocked me off the bike which would have been seriously dangerous as there were 2 or 3 cars driving up behind the clowns.

That happened to me a few months ago, although not in Howth. Incredibly dangerous.

tunney

Caroline_ie wrote: »

It's not their fault, they probably caught their parents having sex on when they were little.

In all seriousness, this is mindless and stupid, and they would have ended up in jail if anything had happenned to you.

Amazingly not true.

DJsail

Caroline_ie wrote: »

It's not their fault, they probably caught their parents having sex on when they were little.

In all seriousness, this is mindless and stupid, and they would have ended up in jail if anything had happenned to you.

Caroline as these are Irish nackers I sincerely doubt they have seen their parents probably due to not knowing who they are!

Caroline_ie

tunney wrote: »

Amazingly not true.

No? if you get killed as they are deliberately trying to hurt you, they don't end up in jail? is it not cyclist slaughter? ... that's a bit $hit ...

Raam

Caroline_ie wrote: »

No? if you get killed as they are deliberately trying to hurt you, they don't end up in jail? is it not cyclist slaughter? ... that's a bit $hit ...

I think trying to proove it is the problem, unfortunately.

davej

pickarooney wrote: »

I occasionally get the ones who lean out the window and say "ha-ha you have a bike!"...

Got this 2 days ago cycling up near Northside Shopping Centre in Coolock.

And idiot in the passenger seat shouted something incomprehensible which basically amounted to "Ha Ha you're cycling a bike" ..

davej

tunney

Caroline_ie wrote: »

No? if you get killed as they are deliberately trying to hurt you, they don't end up in jail? is it not cyclist slaughter? ... that's a bit $hit ...

Hands up if you've been overtaken by a vehicle who slammed on the breaks and cleaned you out of it?

Keep your hand up if the police said "tough titty"

oh......... just me then?

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

Hands up if you've been overtaken by a vehicle who slammed on the breaks and cleaned you out of it?

Keep your hand up if the police said "tough titty"

oh......... just me then?

Whilst I have the greatest sympathy for your injuries, if you'd been in a car it would have almost certainly been your fault. Why is it different on a bike? Because your brakes are worse than a bus?

tunney

Lumen wrote: »

Whilst I have the greatest sympathy for your injuries, if you'd been in a car it would have almost certainly been your fault. Why is it different on a bike? Because your brakes are worse than a bus?

You can overtake a stream of vehicles, say two, do so at a point when you cannot complete the manuvere because of on coming traffic and pull in between the vehicles and slam on the breaks, and its not your fault?

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

You can overtake a stream of vehicles, say two, do so at a point when you cannot complete the manuvere because of on coming traffic and pull in between the vehicles and slam on the breaks, and its not your fault?

In that specific situation you describe, the vehicle just overtaken would likely be following too close.

There are very, very few cases in which you can rear end someone and escape liability. Possibly an example would be if a sports car overtakes a juggernaut and slams on the brakes, and the juggernaut ploughs into the back due to having unavoidably lower braking capacity. I'm not sure whether this applies to a bus overtaking a cyclist - should the bus assume your brakes are worse?

IANAL, obviously.

tunney

Lumen wrote: »

In that specific situation you describe, the vehicle just overtaken would likely be following too close.

There are very, very few cases in which you can rear end someone and escape liability. Possibly an example would be if a sports car overtakes a juggernaut and slams on the brakes, and the juggernaut ploughs into the back due to having unavoidably lower braking capacity. I'm not sure whether this applies to a bus overtaking a cyclist - should the bus assume your brakes are worse?

IANAL, obviously.

so the next time I've driving on country roads I can overtake cars and just pull in *right* front of them and slow up and they have to slow down? and if they hit my car its their fault? class, I could do with a new car.

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

so the next time I've driving on country roads I can overtake cars and just pull in *right* front of them and slow up and they have to slow down?

I believe this to be the legal position, yes.

edit: I think that the burden of proof is on the rear ender to prove that the rear-endee was at fault. This is difficult when the rear-ender has amnesia induced by head trauma.

TimAllen

Lumen wrote: »

In that specific situation you describe, the vehicle just overtaken would likely be following too close.

There are very, very few cases in which you can rear end someone and escape liability. Possibly an example would be if a sports car overtakes a juggernaut and slams on the brakes, and the juggernaut ploughs into the back due to having unavoidably lower braking capacity. I'm not sure whether this applies to a bus overtaking a cyclist - should the bus assume your brakes are worse?

IANAL, obviously.

Lumen is right - the second vehicle would be deemed to be following too close - happens with cars all the time, you get overtaken and some guys pulls in "on top of you" - safe distance from vehicle in front will allow the overtaking vehicle pull in safely in front of you - as long as the "safe distance" you have left in front of you is actually safe by reference to your braking capacity and speed. The law for cyclists is no different than that for motorists in this regard - probably safer for you to use the cycle lane if there is one - it will keep you safe from such everyday dangers.

Raam

Thank fcuk it's Friday

Billy Whizz

But sure it is not possible for the car being overtaken to regulate the distance that the overtaking car leaves between the two cars after pulling in.

Lumen

Billy Whizz wrote: »

But sure it is not possible for the car being overtaken to regulate the distance that the overtaking car leaves between the two cars after pulling in.

Yes, the standard approach in a car is: restore your safe distance by lifting off and covering the brake. If the overtaker then brakes you can react instantly.

I still don't know whether this applies to buses and bikes, but you'd have a hard time arguing that a bus has better brakes than you.

TimAllen

Billy Whizz wrote: »

But sure it is not possible for the car being overtaken to regulate the distance that the overtaking car leaves between the two cars after pulling in.

If you are in such a situation you will/should have a reasonable expectation to be overtaken. In any case you should only be travelling at a speed that allows you to stop should the unexpected happen (or in the case of being overtaken whilst behind other vehicle, I would say that its not unexpected at all).

tunney

Lumen wrote: »

Yes, the standard approach in a car is: restore your safe distance by lifting off and covering the brake. If the overtaker then brakes you can react instantly.

I still don't know whether this applies to buses and bikes, but you'd have a hard time arguing that a bus has better brakes than you.

lets ignore the bus and bike. lets stick to cars.

Say the overtaker pulls in and brakes simultaneously?

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

lets ignore the bus and bike. lets stick to cars.

Say the overtaker pulls in and brakes simultaneously?

As the overtaker starts the overtake (which you have seen since you're using your rear view mirror) you lift off and cover the brake.

You therefore have no problem avoiding the rear-ending. In a car.

TimAllen

tunney wrote: »

lets ignore the bus and bike. lets stick to cars.

Say the overtaker pulls in and brakes simultaneously?

Physics would suggest that the overtaker would have to be travelling faster than you to get in front in the first place, (s)he would then only reduce speed after pulling in or (s)he would impact into the side of you. Once in front of you, (s)he may brake to adjust to the speed of the car in front of him/her (which was in front of you) - you will be more than aware of whats happening as the manovere is happening and have reduced your speed accordingly in anticipation. Thats what experienced road users do anyways

Billy Whizz

TimAllen wrote: »

In any case you should only be travelling at a speed that allows you to stop should the unexpected happen

In my experience the only speed which allows this is 0km/h!

TimAllen

Billy Whizz wrote: »

In my experience the only speed which allows this is 0km/h!

you dont get out much then I guess:pac::pac::pac:

Billy Whizz

TimAllen wrote: »

you dont get out much then I guess:pac::pac::pac:

That's my cue to leave. Enjoy your day.

TimAllen

Billy Whizz wrote: »

That's my cue to leave. Enjoy your day.

just a joke Billy - not to be taken to heart. Enjoy your day, hope your not stuck in the office like me

Acoustic

happened to me tuesday night with my friend and we were up at kilshane road approaching the ratoath road when this white skyline came up behind us constantly beeping and reving his car , he frightened the life out of me as we didnt even hear him comming and all u hear then is a beep

so i was pissed off , and about 500m away from a cross road and would have loved it if he was at it waiting to cross , i would have put my foot through the window no joke

so look out for a clapped out white skyline in kilbride

TimAllen

Acoustic wrote: »

happened to me tuesday night with my friend and we were up at kilshane road approaching the ratoath road when this white skyline came up behind us constantly beeping and reving his car , he frightened the life out of me as we didnt even hear him comming and all u hear then is a beep

so i was pissed off , and about 500m away from a cross road and would have loved it if he was at it waiting to cross , i would have put my foot through the window no joke

so look out for a clapped out white skyline in kilbride

Ok, what exactly did he do that warrants a broken window? ... He beeped and revved his car - ok thats not cool but why was he doing this? Were you cycling in a manner which impeded his use of the road? If you were and had no choice in the matter then he was in the wrong BUT, most people, even boyracers, are not completely unreasonable. It was probably his perception that you could have moved in to let him pass (i.e. from two abreast to single file as required by the ROTR), as someone in charge of a slow moving vehicle you are obliged to pull in and let faster traffic progress.
Whilst not condoning what the driver did, it certainly does not warrant criminal damage to property which you seem to be quite "serious" about. And I would seriously question your own road behaviour as this may have been the genesis of the drivers anger with you.

Does it make you feel better to rant on here about your willingness to be a complete scanger and break a car window?

el tel

Was out for a spin with my old man at the weekend (at 68 he's still a monster on the bike) when a Transit Van passed us at a roundabout and the passenger chucked a bottle cap at him. Along the subsequent stretch of 30mph limit carriageway I led him out so that we were in touching distance at the next roundabout but they cut someone up and made off. About 5 mins later we met them stuck at roadworks, we pulled up along side and cue much panic in the van with various apologies and lame excuses from the two young fellas and my old man threatening to knock their proverbials in (dad, you are embarassing me! ). It was left a that, very sorry etc. , they departed and gave us the cursory middle finger when about 100 yards away :rolleyes: You just can't win really.

TimAllen

el tel wrote: »

Was out for a spin with my old man at the weekend (at 68 he's still a monster on the bike) when a Transit Van passed us at a roundabout and the passenger chucked a bottle cap at him. Along the subsequent stretch of 30mph limit carriageway I led him out so that we were in touching distance at the next roundabout but they cut someone up and made off. About 5 mins later we met them stuck at roadworks, we pulled up along side and cue much panic in the van with various apologies and lame excuses from the two young fellas and my old man threatening to knock their proverbials in (dad, you are embarassing me! ). It was left a that, very sorry etc. , they departed and gave us the cursory middle finger when about 100 yards away :rolleyes: You just can't win really.

why would you even attempt to engage with people like that? Just get the reg of the van and report to the gardai. I'm sure they would take more notice of it when the victim was your dad i.e. a 68 year old - not that its "supposed" to make a difference but my perception is that the gardai treat the matter more seriously when a "golden oldie" is involved.
Threatening them brings you and your dad (or maybe just your dad) down to their level and is not to be recommended - you should count yourselves lucky that it wasnt two Mike Tyson types in the van who decided to knock your and your dads proverbials in

Raam

When exactly did this forum appoint a moral guardian?

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

When exactly did this forum appoint a moral guardian?

Friday.

lukester

Lumen wrote: »

In that specific situation you describe, the vehicle just overtaken would likely be following too close.

There are very, very few cases in which you can rear end someone and escape liability. Possibly an example would be if a sports car overtakes a juggernaut and slams on the brakes, and the juggernaut ploughs into the back due to having unavoidably lower braking capacity. I

This very situation occurred to an acquaintance of mine. He was driving a van, and a taxi swerved into the space in front of him in a last minute lane change approaching traffic lights in the city centre, resulting in him hitting the taxi.

It went to court, he argued that the taxi had effectively removed his safe braking zone, and the taxi was found liable.

el tel

TimAllen wrote: »

why would you even attempt to engage with people like that? Just get the reg of the van and report to the gardai. I'm sure they would take more notice of it when the victim was your dad i.e. a 68 year old - not that its "supposed" to make a difference but my perception is that the gardai treat the matter more seriously when a "golden oldie" is involved.
Threatening them brings you and your dad (or maybe just your dad) down to their level and is not to be recommended - you should count yourselves lucky that it wasnt two Mike Tyson types in the van who decided to knock your and your dads proverbials in

Should have added that this was in N.Ireland. I hear what you are saying but my old man finds it cathartic to confront twats like this. It dosen't happen often but he dosen't give a **** about this 'going down to their level' doormat pussy crap. Obviously the threats are literal however you only make them to someone who you know you can intimidate or who you can follow through against should they take their chances. Let's just say he's seen and done a lot of the years and has dealt with plenty of ****wits. I guess ultimately he wanted to show show these would-be tough guys that they are cowards and even though their bravado kicks in as they scury away they might think twice about doing it again.

TimAllen

lukester wrote: »

This very situation occurred to an acquaintance of mine. He was driving a van, and a taxi swerved into the space in front of him in a last minute lane change approaching traffic lights in the city centre, resulting in him hitting the taxi.

It went to court, he argued that the taxi had effectively removed his safe braking zone, and the taxi was found liable.

extremely rare situation. Any chance you might share the case reference, since such a rare judgement is a matter of public record?

TimAllen

Raam wrote: »

When exactly did this forum appoint a moral guardian?

Oh no, here comes the thought police

lukester

TimAllen wrote: »

extremely rare situation. Any chance you might share the case reference, since such a rare judgement is a matter of public record?

Agree, extremely rare, his brief said it would be tough to argue. I have no idea of the case reference, I said it was of an acquaintance of mine, if anyone is genuinely interested in tracking down the case they can PM me for further info to identify it.

TimAllen

el tel wrote: »

Should have added that this was in N.Ireland. I hear what you are saying but my old man finds it cathartic to confront twats like this. It dosen't happen often but he dosen't give a **** about this 'going down to their level' doormat pussy crap. Obviously the threats are literal however you only make them to someone who you know you can intimidate or who you can follow through against should they take their chances. Let's just say he's seen and done a lot of the years and has dealt with plenty of ****wits. I guess ultimately he wanted to show show these would-be tough guys that they are cowards and even though their bravado kicks in as they scury away they might think twice about doing it again.

the flaw in your logic is that you could be dealing with someone who is quite willing to get out of the van and give you a right going over. In NI especially you could be dealing a with tribal undertones - my point is why would you react to lawlessness with lawlessness? It brings you down to their level, leaves you open to criminal prosecution and risks meeting the wrong person at the wrong place at the wrong time. In a civilised society there is no place for such vigilanti behaviour

unionman

*groan*

blorg

googlehead wrote: »

Was out cycling last night when this twat, drove up in behind me and then braked hard trying to throw me off my bike, Then he looked over at his mate laughing, I swear If I caught up with him I would have put my foot in the side of his car.:mad:

@Tim- the OP describes a situation where the overtaking car pulled in and braked DELIBERATELY. A fact you conveniently don't address...

Chips Lovell

TimAllen wrote: »

Oh no, here comes the thought police

In fairness Tim, your usual contributions to this forum are always in the same vein. Cyclist cites some misdemenour by motorist, says they wished they'd knocked his block off/broken their wing mirror/smashed their window, then you come on all outraged about this statement, despite the fact that its people simply venting by saying they wished they'd done these things rather than actually doing them. Given that you usually completely ignore the actual misdemenour, its understandable that it gets peoples backs up, since it comes across as a bit trollish.

el tel

TimAllen wrote: »

the flaw in your logic is that you could be dealing with someone who is quite willing to get out of the van and give you a right going over. In NI especially you could be dealing a with tribal undertones - my point is why would you react to lawlessness with lawlessness? It brings you down to their level, leaves you open to criminal prosecution and risks meeting the wrong person at the wrong place at the wrong time. In a civilised society there is no place for such vigilanti behaviour

Well I'm afraid I have to diddly-darn-doodly-disagree with you there Flanders.

Lumen

Sometimes it's tough to find the righteous path.

Homer Simpson wrote:

Vengeful God, loving God, vengeful God, loving God.

DirkVoodoo

Given that our only recourse seems to be a bit of vigilantism Tim, can you blame most people that when they are nearly "murdered"/"assaulted" with something that when not being used as a form of transport has the capacity to end your life quite quickly, the Gardai take little interest (in a perfect world there would be a total crackdown, any report would be taken seriously, but I guess for now you need to cycle with a witness), so your only comfort is thinking that next time you see that smarmy git and he doesn't have his car to hide in, you will take great satisfaction out of smacking him square in the jaw?????

Lumen

I think Jesus said it best.

Luke 6:27-31. NIV wrote:

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone consistently posts completely arsetarded views in an online forum, add them to your Ignore list.

turbine?

Have just been looking through the Irish rules of the road website:

www.rulesoftheroad.ie

and I can not find anything in the "Rules for Cyclists" section : http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html

That states that cyclists should cycle in single file or are obliged to let faster traffic pass.

I do see this:

"Never put a cyclist or motorcyclist at risk and know your duty to be aware of them. They are especially vulnerable if there is a crash."

and this:

"Overtaking

Never cut in front of cyclists or motorcyclists when overtaking them. Give them plenty of space, especially:

* in wet or windy weather,
* when road conditions are icy,
* when they are starting off. Cyclists tend to wobble until they build up their speed, and
* when the road surface is poor. Cyclists and motorcyclists may need to avoid potholes."

in the respecting other road users section:

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/respecting-other-road-users/respecting_cyclists-motorcyclists.html

TimAllen

turbine? wrote: »

Have just been looking through the Irish rules of the road website:

www.rulesoftheroad.ie

and I can not find anything in the "Rules for Cyclists" section : http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html

That states that cyclists should cycle in single file or are obliged to let faster traffic pass.

I do see this:

"Never put a cyclist or motorcyclist at risk and know your duty to be aware of them. They are especially vulnerable if there is a crash."

and this:

"Overtaking

Never cut in front of cyclists or motorcyclists when overtaking them. Give them plenty of space, especially:

* in wet or windy weather,
* when road conditions are icy,
* when they are starting off. Cyclists tend to wobble until they build up their speed, and
* when the road surface is poor. Cyclists and motorcyclists may need to avoid potholes."

in the respecting other road users section:

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/respecting-other-road-users/respecting_cyclists-motorcyclists.html

You should take the blinkers off - some people only see what they want to see .. check out page 161 which sets out a list of Do's and Don't which cyclists must obey:

"Do cycle in single file if cycling
beside another person would
endanger, inconvenience or block
other traffic or pedestrians."

and

"Do cycle in single file in heavy
traffic."