Near Misses Volume 2 (So close you can feel it)

That's the onus being on drivers to adjust to enhanced cycle lanes etc that were never there before

It is scary at the start but drivers have to start getting used to them and using/checking them properly

Like you I would have followed up with the driver, though I find once they are in their metal box they think they can do no wrong and hence no reasoning with them. How is your foot btw?

I would also be inclined to follow the driver and have it out with them, particularly in the heat of the moment and if they had scared the bejaysus out of me. I'm not sure what it achieves, maybe just feel like a walkover if ignored when someone does something that threatens your safety, very little to be achieved unless the driver is apologetic.

In a parallel universe I would love to take out some retribtion where the perpetrator is a d1ck, and go gangbusters on their car or something - maybe spray it with paint, or smash off a mirror, or break a few windows. But obviously not in reality. Because that would be bad.

Thing is: right after someone has been caught doing something stupid (mistake or deliberately) is the absolute worst time to teach them a lesson.

It's only ever likely to escalate.

Sometimes I've had luck (calmly) pointing stuff out after, but it's rare.

Better just to be the better road user. Anticipate more, allow for others. The attitude of feeling like "a walkover" is not going to serve you well in the long run.

"Following someone to where they were parking would fall into that category for me, because if I was followed by someone I didn't know, I'd be preparing myself for it to become physical."

This all day every day.

What he did was careless and ignorant; you'll be a busy road user if you spend your time trying to correct all of those that you will encounter.

Before you follow anyone in again it might be worth keeping in mind that there is a very small percentage of people who would have reacted very badly to you approaching them twice, shouting at them with a flashing light near eye height.

Swearing, shouting and following someone into a car park would be behaviours I'd avoid unless I was looking for an escalation; you never know who that other person is or what they are capable of.

I agree with a lot of your posts AJR - but (as we have found before!) we have to agree to disagree here.. because we always fundamentally disagree on these matters.

(Although reading between the lines I probably don't train dogs the same way as you do either.. :D)

You (any of us) are not responsible for policing. Two wrongs don't make a right. Arguing with people achieves little (often just makes things worse by enforcing us vs them stereotypes).

I mean - look at Seths example - who won there? No one. Seth got a sore foot for his troubles and the "driver" just doubled down on his attitude (and I would say very unlikely to change behaviour in a positive way. I would even assume that he will absolutely make sure to not respect the next cyclist he comes across).

yeah - and thats why I say we park it there - I take your point. There is a greater than zero chance they will reflect on their behaviour. I agree with this part, but I think more likely to behave worse in the future...

It's something Id love to be able to work out how to conduct a study on tbh as the question has came up before a good few times on these forums.

They're already thinking "dickhead cyclist for everyone they see on a bike" so there is little to lose.

Would you prefer to play the lottery of the quality of driving we regularly see on this thread, from drivers who presumably I haven't yet had the chance to enrage?

Are these drivers going be enraged with every other driver and every other pedestrian, given that I'm as just as likely to have words when in the car (like the taxi driver who was watching social media videos on his dash mounted phone) or when on foot (like the driver who gave me the finger this morning when I signalled that he was blocking the pedestrian crossing section of the junction, that an older lady and myself were about to use)?

Do you actually understand how blind spots work? It's not an excuse for not seeing someone. The driver needs to make sure there is no-one in their blind spot.

That's a really bad take. The driver is crossing a lane so (s)he is obliged to give way to traffic already in that lane. The person on the bike is already in control of that lane and the driver has to give way to them before entering the lane. Travelling straight ahead, in a lane that is intended for straight ahead travel, while moving at a speed faster than slower moving traffic to the right, is perfectly legitimate and is not 'undertaking'. It's possible the person on the bike passed through the driver's blind spot but they can't have been in their blind spot for the entirety of their approach from behind the second car. Either way, it is still the driver's responsibility to make sure the lane is clear before entering it.