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

Driver Cyclist arguement with a brilliant ending NSFW or kids

Options
123578

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    desertcircus wrote: »
    Nope, not true. Cyclists have been killed in exactly this way.

    Plenty of people have been killed by truck tyres blowing.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEeuvka_tQk


  • Options
    #123
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Do you know what would happen if a truck tyre blew out and you were standing beside it? You would die. I see cyclists all the time passing stationary trucks on the inside at traffic lights. That risk doesn't seem to bother them.
    Certainly not a risk that I've ever considered, but I'm interested to hear more. I had a look at part of your video, most seemed to involve incidents at a fair speed. And the risk would equally apply to pedestrians on a footpath, close to stopped trucks, right? Has there ever been a case anywhere in the world where a cyclist was killed as a result of a truck tyre blowout? Some kind of report on such a case would be helpful in evaluating the risk?

    TBH, it's never a great idea to undertake trucks, due to the risk of being caught by a truck turning left, but that's for another day.
    pablo128 wrote: »
    As is the chance of a cyclist swerving a foot either side of him as a car is passing.
    So the UK Highway Code requirement for 3' passing space and the RSA advice for 1.5m passing space is just fussing then? Did you stop to think why these recommendations exist?

    colossus-x wrote: »
    If he broke a law the cyclist should report it to the police, it's not up to the cyclists to enforce the law.
    Choosing to speak to another adult about something they've done is not 'enforcing the law'. It's just speaking to another adult.


  • Options
    #124
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    RainyDay wrote: »
    So the UK Highway Code requirement for 3' passing space and the RSA advice for 1.5m passing space is just fussing then? Did you stop to think why these recommendations exist?
    .

    They are just that. Recommendations. They don't hold any legal weight.


  • Options
    #125
    Shane Fitz
    Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭Shane Fitz


    RainyDay wrote:
    Choosing to speak to another adult about something they've done is not 'enforcing the law'. It's just speaking to another adult.


    Oh please!!
    You talk a lot of sense and are prepared and able to back it up.
    But when you gloss over and become an apologist for this cyclist in this particular video it takes from you case of general driver and cyclist behaviour.

    Adult conversation. Seriously?
    How about we imagine that both were pedestrians and one followed the other for some considerable distance to "converse" on the others behaviour on the pavement.
    No one here would condone it so please tell me why you feel it's appropriate in this instance.

    And "the police won't do anything so he had to himself" is the weakest of weak arguments.


  • Options
    #126
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    pablo128 wrote: »
    They are just that. Recommendations. They don't hold any legal weight.
    I'm not an expert on UK traffic law. Are you? Are you telling me that Rule 163 is 'just a recommendation'?
    http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/163
    Shane Fitz wrote: »
    Adult conversation. Seriously?
    How about we imagine that both were pedestrians and one followed the other for some considerable distance to "converse" on the others behaviour on the pavement.
    It's a fairly unlikely scenario. The reason why 'considerable distance' was involved was because of the difference in acceleration of the two parties, which wouldn't normally be the case for two pedestrians.
    Shane Fitz wrote: »
    No one here would condone it so please tell me why you feel it's appropriate in this instance.

    And "the police won't do anything so he had to himself" is the weakest of weak arguments.
    Perhaps you'd like to explain why it is inappropriate? What is so wrong with one adult speaking politely to another adult (which is how the cyclist started out) about the impact of the other adult's behaviour on them?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Shane Fitz
    Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭Shane Fitz


    RainyDay wrote:
    Perhaps you'd like to explain why it is inappropriate? What is so wrong with one adult speaking politely to another adult (which is how the cyclist started out) about the impact of the other adult's behaviour on them?


    You need that explained? Really?

    Ok. If the driver had stopped to engage in said conversation then ok. The fact that the cyclist pursued him is the issue.
    I freely acknowledge the driver is a tool, and even allowing for the distorted perspective of the cameras, drove too close to the cyclist.
    But any moral high ground he is claiming, or you, is ruined by his subsequent behaviour.
    You and I and everyone on this thread know full well he didn't pursue him to have an adult conversation. To claim otherwise is disingenuous!!


  • Options
    #128
    Stealthfins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭Stealthfins


    It looks to me as if this guy is cycling around looking for trouble.

    Wasn't there some Irish guy on YouTube at the same ****e.

    Cycling around Dublin annoying driver's.


  • Options
    #129
    JONJO THE MISER
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 12,333 ✭✭✭✭JONJO THE MISER


    Nearly knocked a person crossing the road when chasing the car, a good thumping is what he would want, knock the smart Alec out of him.


  • Options
    #130
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    Shane Fitz wrote: »
    You and I and everyone on this thread know full well he didn't pursue him to have an adult conversation. To claim otherwise is disingenuous!!
    The cyclist started out with an adult conversation. The driver dragged it down into abuse and then violence.
    Shane Fitz wrote: »
    You need that explained? Really?
    Yes please. Still waiting to hear why an adult can't have a civil discussion with another adult.


  • Options
    #131
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    RainyDay wrote: »
    The cyclist started out with an adult conversation. The driver dragged it down into abuse and then violence.

    Maybe some ol' fashioned lovin' called for here......



    ....though whether the GoPro camera would be the right shape for the kind of lovin' needed is a whole other question. :eek:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    Stealthfins wrote: »

    Cycling around Dublin annoying drivers who threaten his safety so they can get to the back of the next queue of cars a few seconds early

    FYP


  • Options
    #133
    QuinDixie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 843 ✭✭✭QuinDixie


    RainyDay wrote: »
    The cyclist started out with an adult conversation. The driver dragged it down into abuse and then violence.

    Yes please. Still waiting to hear why an adult can't have a civil discussion with another adult.

    I was on the motorway about 5 months ago and saw a local cyclist turn onto the motorway and proceed past the signs saying no bicycles allowed.
    And then to make matters worse a cop car passed by and did nothing.
    Why?


  • Options
    #134
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    QuinDixie wrote: »
    I was on the motorway about 5 months ago and saw a local cyclist turn onto the motorway and proceed past the signs saying no bicycles allowed.
    And then to make matters worse a cop car passed by and did nothing.
    Why?

    Perhaps you should be asking the cop, or asking the local Supt instead of asking me. Am I now responsible for every cyclist in the country?


  • Options
    #135
    QuinDixie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 843 ✭✭✭QuinDixie


    RainyDay wrote: »
    Perhaps you should be asking the cop, or asking the local Supt instead of asking me. Am I now responsible for every cyclist in the country?

    No need, he was driving a car at the time. I never said he was on a bicycle.:pac:
    I thought since you were posting in riddles, so would I.


  • Options
    #136
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    QuinDixie wrote: »
    No need, he was driving a car at the time. I never said he was on a bicycle.:pac:
    I thought since you were posting in riddles, so would I.
    OK then


  • Options
    #137
    Wright
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭Wright


    RainyDay wrote: »
    What has the 'narrow road' got to do with it? If there isn't room to overtake safely, you wait until there is room.

    Yes, and that's the issue. Driver in the video drove right past him giving him no room because he had an attitude towards cyclists. Forced the cyclist right up on the parked car.
    Had I been driving I would have just bloody waited while the cyclist went on ahead.


  • Options
    #138
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    RainyDay wrote: »
    The cyclist started out with an adult conversation. The driver dragged it down into abuse and then violence.

    Yes please. Still waiting to hear why an adult can't have a civil discussion with another adult.
    The cyclist started off by roaring at the car as it was passing and shouting out the reg number.
    Wright wrote: »
    Yes, and that's the issue. Driver in the video drove right past him giving him no room because he had an attitude towards cyclists. Forced the cyclist right up on the parked car.
    Had I been driving I would have just bloody waited while the cyclist went on ahead.
    Now that's just a blatant lie. The cyclist never changed his course as he was being passed.


  • Options
    #139
    WillyFXP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 833 ✭✭✭WillyFXP


    RainyDay wrote: »


    Originally Posted by WillyFXP View Post
    How can you say the driver drove within a couple of inches of the handlebars? At no point do you see the handlebars in the video. There would have been no incident "brought about or initiated" if the cyclist hadn't purposely followed him to confront him.




    Have a look at the photo. There would have been no incident 'brought about or initiated' if the driver had given him a decent 1.5m passing space, or held back until such a space was available.

    How does this relate in any way to my statement? There is no evidence whatsoever in that photo giving any reference to distance of the car from the bicycle.


  • Options
    #140
    roverrules
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 331 ✭✭roverrules


    RainyDay wrote: »
    Certainly not a risk that I've ever considered, but I'm interested to hear more. I had a look at part of your video, most seemed to involve incidents at a fair speed. And the risk would equally apply to pedestrians on a footpath, close to stopped trucks, right? Has there ever been a case anywhere in the world where a cyclist was killed as a result of a truck tyre blowout? Some kind of report on such a case would be helpful in evaluating the risk?

    TBH, it's never a great idea to undertake trucks, due to the risk of being caught by a truck turning left, but that's for another day.


    So the UK Highway Code requirement for 3' passing space and the RSA advice for 1.5m passing space is just fussing then? Did you stop to think why these recommendations exist?



    Choosing to speak to another adult about something they've done is not 'enforcing the law'. It's just speaking to another adult.

    No it wasnt, it was a classic example of two people exhibiting road rage


  • Options
    #141
    Shane Fitz
    Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭Shane Fitz


    RainyDay wrote:
    Yes please. Still waiting to hear why an adult can't have a civil discussion with another adult.


    Get off your cross and stop playing the persecuted cyclist!

    There was no intent for the cyclist to have a civilised discussion.
    If you were perused for several streets to have a discussion on your behaviour as a motorist, cyclist or pedestrian you nor I would be very receptive to that conversation and well you know it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Casey78
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 873 ✭✭✭Casey78


    The cyclist in this video was being a dick.


  • Options
    #143
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    WillyFXP wrote: »
    How does this relate in any way to my statement? There is no evidence whatsoever in that photo giving any reference to distance of the car from the bicycle.
    Are you seriously suggesting that you can't see the difference between that photo and this one?

    hc_rule_163_give_vulnerable_road_users_at_least_as_much_space_as_you_would_a_car.jpg

    The photo clearly shows that the car was way too close to the bike.
    pablo128 wrote: »
    The cyclist started off by roaring at the car as it was passing and shouting out the reg number.
    It was a fairly natural human reaction to having your life put at risk by another road user. And the car was well out of earshot before he got to the reg number.
    Shane Fitz wrote: »
    Get off your cross and stop playing the persecuted cyclist!

    There was no intent for the cyclist to have a civilised discussion.
    If you were perused for several streets to have a discussion on your behaviour as a motorist, cyclist or pedestrian you nor I would be very receptive to that conversation and well you know it.

    So you've backed off explaining why any adult can't have a civilised conversation with another adult. And btw, why are you so certain that he was 'pursued' - perhaps the cyclist was just heading that way anyway?


  • Options
    #144
    Wright
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭Wright


    pablo128 wrote: »
    The cyclist started off by roaring at the car as it was passing and shouting out the reg number.

    Now that's just a blatant lie. The cyclist never changed his course as he was being passed.

    He was almost clipped by the cars wing mirror have you not watched the video?

    Or is it you've just got something against cyclists?


  • Options
    #145
    Wright
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭Wright


    Casey78 wrote: »
    The cyclist in this video was being a dick.

    Undoubtedly.

    But the driver clearly had a negative attitude towards cyclists. His own words prove that. Had he not, he would have been far more courteous coming up behind the cyclist.


  • Options
    #146
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Wright wrote: »
    He was almost clipped by the cars wing mirror have you not watched the video?

    Or is it you've just got something against cyclists?

    I have just watched the video again. There isn't even a car beside him when he was passed. Please don't come on here, blatantly lie, and then accuse me of having something against cyclists.


  • Options
    #147
    Shane Fitz
    Registered Users Posts: 426 ✭✭Shane Fitz


    How about stop selectively quoting me and read all I posted again.
    There is no reason why 2 civilised adults behaving civilly toward each other can't have an adult discussion..... You really need that spelled out for you? ?
    We aren't discussing any adult, we're discussing this particular video
    In the instance of the video, neither were behaving civilly.
    I'm pretty sure, as are you, that the cyclist did pursue the motorist for the sole purpose of expressing himself.
    2 idiots behaving idiotically!


  • Options
    #148
    Wright
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭Wright


    pablo128 wrote: »
    I have just watched the video again. There isn't even a car beside him when he was passed. Please don't come on here, blatantly lie, and then accuse me of having something against cyclists.

    The wing mirror that almost clipped him as he drove past?

    Oh! You're willfully blind. Got ya.


  • Options
    #149
    WillyFXP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 833 ✭✭✭WillyFXP


    RainyDay wrote: »
    357201.png


    Are you seriously suggesting that you can't see the difference between that photo and this one?

    hc_rule_163_give_vulnerable_road_users_at_least_as_much_space_as_you_would_a_car.jpg

    The photo clearly shows that the car was way too close to the bike.



    Of course I can see the difference between the two photos, one clearly shows the cyclist in relation to the car, one shows the side of a car giving no reference to it's position in relation to the cyclist, simples.
    How does it clearly show that the car was way too close to the bike? Please explain in detail, giving reference points and distances, and also the formula you used to calculate those distances.


  • Options
    #150
    Wright
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭Wright


    WillyFXP wrote: »
    Of course I can see the difference between the two photos, one clearly shows the cyclist in relation to the car, one shows the side of a car giving no reference to it's position in relation to the cyclist, simples.
    How does it clearly show that the car was way too close to the bike? Please explain in detail, giving reference points and distances, and also the formula you used to calculate those distances.

    Look at the wing mirror and stop being willfully thick.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Tenzor07
    Registered Users Posts: 8,624 ✭✭✭Tenzor07


    Getting wayy too serious in here so:


    14o2lq1.jpg


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement