Drivers Swerving at Cyclists

Chuchote

Danbo! wrote: »

Basically, this calm guy is my spirit animal (NSFW language)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rym5unx0ZCo

Any context?

Really interesting video, (eventually) showing that not reacting tires the aggressive guy out, though the bystanders also help.

magicbastarder

not a very palatable video, but clearly the guy in black, who has some self defence/martial arts training, is also trained not to escalate unnecessarily.
it only seems to enrage the chap in white at times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE2PxkSJW7M

TonyStark

mickdw wrote: »

Cyclists are in the happy position of being able to identify car drivers who endanger them.
Now when a cyclist filters through traffic and scratches a car, the car driver is left sitting like a fool with no recourse while the cyclist pedals off into the distance.

Is this not what insurance is for? Claim from the MBI.

TonyStark

Ray Palmer wrote: »

So on Friday I had two more incidents of swerving and blocking.
Huge tail back on Collins Avenue and a car just pulls into the the curb blocking me. The left turn was at least 200m ahead of her and there is no way she was going any where and all her movement meant was her tyre was now against the curb. She just did it to stop me.
Then on the way home in the pouring rain there was a cyclist was on the road while I was in the cycle lane. She had missed the ramp to the cycle lane so a taxi is tailgating her revving and then she gets another chance to get on the cycle lane. The taxi slowed to match her and then speeds into a puddle drench us both. Taxi and passenger laughing away. This was during very heavy rain.
I am getting a little freaked out by the continually aggression and threats.

I think the thing is not to overly focus on it. People will be arseholes whether they are in a car, on a bike or queuing in Tescos. I'd prefer to focus on the 99.9% of drivers where there is no malevolence to cyclists - That can be forgotten at times. I even heard that some cyclists drive...

cython

TonyStark wrote: »

Is this not what insurance is for? Claim from the MBI.

Cyclists are not covered by MIBI, I'm afraid. From the MIBI website (emphasis is mine):

MIBI wrote:

Vehicle/property claims are covered under the MIBI compensation scheme however the alleged offending vehicle must be identified by means of a valid registration plate. In instances where the alleged offending vehicle cannot be identified MIBI has no liability to pay compensation for vehicle/property damage unless there are significant personal injuries arising from the same accident. In certain circumstances an excess may apply to vehicle/property damage claims e.g. an excess of €220 applies to vehicle claims, where the offending vehicle was stolen at the time the incident occurred.

So let's not go down that road lest someone start recommending registration plates for cyclists again! :pac:

Fian

TonyStark wrote: »

Is this not what insurance is for? Claim from the MBI.

MIBI does not cover damage caused by cyclists. It covers damage done by unidentified drivers who are obliged to have a mandatory insurance policy - i.e. drivers of MPVs.

magicbastarder

and a scratch on a car is not something motorists would pursue if the excess is applied.

07Lapierre

magicbastarder wrote: »

and a scratch on a car is not something motorists would pursue if the excess is applied.

That depends on the severity of the "Scratch"!

check_six

Fian wrote: »

MIBI does not cover damage caused by cyclists. It covers damage done by unidentified drivers who are obliged to have a mandatory insurance policy - i.e. drivers of MPVs.

Sure most cyclists are also drivers, you've just got to find out where they keep their car!

Is there an epidemic of rogue cyclists smashing up motor vehicles, causing hundreds of thousands of euros damage and then taking off? Or is it just something that potentially *could* happen in someone's fevered imagination?

Like the way I *could* be bitten by a radioactive spider and gain superpowers and then start tacking supervillains, but this, in all likelihood, will not happen, and I'd be better off investing less time in stitching that lycra onesie together, as I may not even get a chance to use it (outdoors, anyway).

ThisRegard

Chuchote wrote: »

Any context?

Really interesting video, (eventually) showing that not reacting tires the aggressive guy out, though the bystanders also help.

Apparently the rager was brake testing the guys in the truck, the passenger filming is a disabled former marine or soldier, passenger is her brother and carer. Eventually he cut them off in which a rear ending was inevitable. Some are claiming PTSD.

Chuchote

ThisRegard wrote: »

Apparently the rager was brake testing the guys in the truck, the passenger filming is a disabled former marine or soldier, passenger is her bother and carer. Eventually he cut them off in which a rear ending was inevitable. Some are claiming PTSD.

Thanks. What's brake testing, though?

TonyStark

Chuchote wrote: »

Thanks. What's brake testing, though?

You drive in front of someone and slam on the brakes. Because the liability is with the car behind to stop in time if they hit you from behind.

Morons and men with small penises engage in this behaviour.

magicbastarder

check_six wrote: »

Is there an epidemic of rogue cyclists smashing up motor vehicles, causing hundreds of thousands of euros damage and then taking off? Or is it just something that potentially *could* happen in someone's fevered imagination?

i keep hearing about the scourge of cyclists hitting pedestrians at pedestrian crossings and cycling off, but i've no idea how prevalent that is; i don't know of anyone it has happened to, certainly not that they told me.
i suspect such figures, if they exist, are very much finger in the air figures.

TonyStark

magicbastarder wrote: »

i keep hearing about the scourge of cyclists hitting pedestrians at pedestrian crossings and cycling off, but i've no idea how prevalent that is; i don't know of anyone it has happened to, certainly not that they told me.
i suspect such figures, if they exist, are very much finger in the air figures.

Usually they include in the anecdotal evidence that there was a lady crossing with a buggy or a pram as well at the time... just to juice it up.

0% of pedestrians that have been killed on the roads have been killed by cyclists - that's the stat.

DanDublin1982

check_six wrote: »

Like the way I *could* be bitten by a radioactive spider and gain superpowers and then start tacking supervillains, but this, in all likelihood, will not happen, and I'd be better off investing less time in stitching that lycra onesie together, as I may not even get a chance to use it (outdoors, anyway).

Having that power in Dublin/Ireland would be really disappointing. You'd pretty much have to just hang around liberty hall all day and it's not as if there's even anywhere else that tall to swing to from there.

Chuchote

Danger to cyclists may be snobbery, and may fade away as richer people cycle (quite apart from the fact that rich people cycling is liable to mean protected cycle lanes to protect their precious pink bottoms). Maybe, currently, drivers don't see us because we're not deemed worthy of their attention:

http://www.newser.com/story/232849/rich-people-more-likely-to-ignore-you-on-street.html

Rich People More Likely to Ignore You on Street
Study says the lower classes hold little 'motivational relevance' for the wealthy

By Linda Hervieux, Newser Staff
Posted Oct 23, 2016 10:28 AM CDT
No, you're not imagining it. Rich people really aren't interested in you. A new study found the wealthy spend less time looking at other people, probably because the lower classes hold less "motivational relevance" for them, meaning the hoi polloi aren't worthy of their attention, Live Science reports.
The study used Google Glass to track the gaze of 61 New Yorkers who were told to look at whatever caught their attention on the street. Glass' video camera near the right eye recorded the findings. Writing in the journal Psychological Science, researchers at New York University found a correlation between social class and interest in others. While class did not account for the number of times a participant looked at others, the upper classes spent less time looking at others compared with those in lower classes. The "findings make a compelling case that social classes differ in their judgments of other people's significance," the researchers wrote, per Live Science.

Edit: Perhaps the solution is to cycle only when attired in one's mink and diamonds.

GreenFolder2

Sadly, there are a tiny minority of completely deranged road users out there.
I was driving through Stonybatter recently and had to pass a parked car. The guy on the opposite side of the road flashed and beckoned me on. So, I pulled out. He then drove at me and started shouting abuse at me!

It's bad enough in a car when someone does that, but at least the worst they can usually do will result in bodyshop work rather than hospitalisation and possible loss of life!

OP: definitely report him. I say this as a driver, not a cyclist. That driver is using his car as a weapon basically.

tomasrojo

check_six wrote: »

Is there an epidemic of rogue cyclists smashing up motor vehicles, causing hundreds of thousands of euros damage and then taking off? Or is it just something that potentially *could* happen in someone's fevered imagination?

Well, not quite the same thing, but:

check_six wrote: »

Like the way I *could* be bitten by a radioactive spider and gain superpowers and then start tacking supervillains, but this, in all likelihood, will not happen, and I'd be better off investing less time in stitching that lycra onesie together, as I may not even get a chance to use it (outdoors, anyway).

My sister-in-law, when she was very little, announced one day that she wished she could be bitten by a radioactive spider. Her mother, in all sincerity, cautioned her to be careful of what she wished for.

NUTLEY BOY

I use all modes of transport including bicycle in Dublin. I still believe that motorists who do not cycle can be astonishingly ignorant of cyclists when at close quarters.

I once had a car swerve and try to intimidate me in the classical right turn for the motorist but straight ahead for me scenario. He was simply in an obviously wild rage even though I was well in possession of the junction. I decided to yield and let him go as otherwise there was only going to be one result.

I find that the right turn by the motorist across you as you cycle ahead is a fruitful source of conflict and the very one in which you are most likely to have a car driven at you.

The more petulant motorists now creep across the junction with a view to passing around your stern with a coat of paint for clearance. I always slow down because a motorist with poor judgment might just have that rush of blood and think they can clear the junction by passing in front of you. I find it unacceptable to be expected to take the risks of the motorists' poor judgment. Ironically, slowing down for self preservation in this scenario seems to annoy motorists even more as it makes their transit through the junction even slower.:rolleyes:

zurbfoundation

what about cyclists swerving at pedestrians?

TonyStark

zurbfoundation wrote: »

what about cyclists swerving at pedestrians?

CycleDub has history for being a clown with a camera.

07Lapierre

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

I find that the right turn by the motorist across you as you cycle ahead is a fruitful source of conflict and the very one in which you are most likely to have a car driven at you.

A Little trick ....as you slow down, keep padelling..this confuses the driver, they're more likely to stop (as opposed to "creeping" towards you in the expectation that you will stop and allow them to turn).Also, keep eye contact with the driver and hold your line as you cycle through the junction.

ThisRegard

He moved out on purpose to make the point, I did laugh at the other cyclist shouting at him that he's on the wrong side.

check_six

DanDublin1982 wrote: »

Having that power in Dublin/Ireland would be really disappointing. You'd pretty much have to just hang around liberty hall all day and it's not as if there's even anywhere else that tall to swing to from there.

I'd be happy enough with the four extra limbs and six extra eyes for 360 degree vision really. Useful for getting a round of drinks in, or making lots of sandwiches in a hurry.

CramCycle

zurbfoundation wrote: »

what about cyclists swerving at pedestrians?

ThisRegard wrote: »

He moved out on purpose to make the point, I did laugh at the other cyclist shouting at him that he's on the wrong side.

I did laugh quite heartily at the "your on the wrong side". It is the pinnacle of "do gooders" everywhere. So right and full of duty that they often break the rules themselves and in a far more dangerous fashion.

The fact that it was a DB putting him in his place, comic genius.

mrcheez

The jogger is admittedly a moron for being in a busy tight traffic lane like that. Asking for trouble.

seamus

God, that guy is such a bellend.

TonyStark

seamus wrote: »

God, that guy is such a bellend.

Smart enough to avoid the shams with all of his cycling.