Ramming Critical Mass.
Doug
deliberately ram cyclists during a Critical Mass ride. Here are a few
reports from last Friday's ride and these are just the ones who have
reported back so far.
"First the Oxford St incident it was a friend of mine who got caught
initially in that incident a driver coming from the North tried to ram
through the ride then when my friend corked hime he got out of his car
and physically lifted him out of the way both he and his wife were
totally hyped out and punched various riders then ironically called
the police."
"I got into one confrontation with a cab driver determined to push
through the mass on Shaftsbury Avenue/Charring Cross - he was not
going to stop and kept edging cab more and more into me and my bike -
I had to pull back and have some strong words, etc with him while he
pushed through everyone else looking more and more like he was going
to blow his top."
" Thanks to the cyclists who helped me by doing a magnificent job of
straighting my mangled back wheel that a kindly cabbie not so lovingly
rammed. I had a nice chilled out ride and felt very calm and
relaxed,unlike aforementioned cabbie,stressed,high blood pressure.
Once again thanks guys, I appreciate your show of unity."
--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Who's streets? Our streets".
mileburner
"Doug" <jag...@riseup.net> wrote in message
news:57fe241b-9b17-4782...@y34g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> "First the Oxford St incident it was a friend of mine who got caught
> initially in that incident a driver coming from the North tried to ram
> through the ride then when my friend corked hime he got out of his car
> and physically lifted him out of the way both he and his wife were
> totally hyped out and punched various riders then ironically called
> the police."
What is this Doug? Are the CM riders a bunch of wusses? The guy gets out of
the car, lifts somone out of the way, isn't that the point where the CM
riders steam in, kick the shit out of him while one of the CMers call the
police?
> "I got into one confrontation with a cab driver determined to push
> through the mass on Shaftsbury Avenue/Charring Cross - he was not
> going to stop and kept edging cab more and more into me and my bike -
> I had to pull back and have some strong words, etc with him while he
> pushed through everyone else looking more and more like he was going
> to blow his top."
Sound like a good excuse to pull his door open and have those strong words
while holding him by the neck.
> " Thanks to the cyclists who helped me by doing a magnificent job of
> straighting my mangled back wheel that a kindly cabbie not so lovingly
> rammed. I had a nice chilled out ride and felt very calm and
> relaxed,unlike aforementioned cabbie,stressed,high blood pressure.
> Once again thanks guys, I appreciate your show of unity."
I think I am beginning to get it now. Because the CM riders are the ones who
go out of their way to piss off the motoring public (bless them) they don't
feel that it is actually right to deal with the aggression which they
encounter.
If anyone did this shit to me, and I was to get hold of them, they would get
what was coming. But then I do not go out of my way looking for the shit in
the first place and so rarely does it come my way.
Ho Bleeding Hum
francis
> "Who's streets? Our streets".
Unfortunately this is what happens when you deliberately piss other
people off.
Francis
Happi Monday
Eddie
Doug
> "Doug" <jag...@riseup.net> wrote in message
>
> news:57fe241b-9b17-4782...@y34g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > "First the Oxford St incident it was a friend of mine who got caught
> > initially in that incident a driver coming from the North tried to ram
> > through the ride then when my friend corked hime he got out of his car
> > and physically lifted him out of the way both he and his wife were
> > totally hyped out and punched various riders then ironically called
> > the police."
>
> What is this Doug? Are the CM riders a bunch of wusses? The guy gets out of
> the car, lifts somone out of the way, isn't that the point where the CM
> riders steam in, kick the shit out of him while one of the CMers call the
> police?
>
criticising CM, are the wussies.
>
> > "I got into one confrontation with a cab driver determined to push
> > through the mass on Shaftsbury Avenue/Charring Cross - he was not
> > going to stop and kept edging cab more and more into me and my bike -
> > I had to pull back and have some strong words, etc with him while he
> > pushed through everyone else looking more and more like he was going
> > to blow his top."
>
> Sound like a good excuse to pull his door open and have those strong words
> while holding him by the neck.
>
> > " Thanks to the cyclists who helped me by doing a magnificent job of
> > straighting my mangled back wheel that a kindly cabbie not so lovingly
> > rammed. I had a nice chilled out ride and felt very calm and
> > relaxed,unlike aforementioned cabbie,stressed,high blood pressure.
> > Once again thanks guys, I appreciate your show of unity."
>
> I think I am beginning to get it now. Because the CM riders are the ones who
> go out of their way to piss off the motoring public (bless them) they don't
> feel that it is actually right to deal with the aggression which they
> encounter.
>
> If anyone did this shit to me, and I was to get hold of them, they would get
> what was coming. But then I do not go out of my way looking for the shit in
> the first place and so rarely does it come my way.
>
takes on a cab full of hyped-up, angry people, all on your todsome.
>
> Ho Bleeding Hum
>
You are wrong, I just omitted to mention for legal reasons any
reprisals by CM riders. Some of them are surprisingly fit.
--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"More bikes, fewer cars!".
Doug
> On 29 June, 07:16, Doug <jag...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Doubt was cast in a previous thread as to whether several drivers
> > deliberately ram cyclists during a Critical Mass ride. Here are a few
> > reports from last Friday's ride and these are just the ones who have
> > reported back so far.
>
> > "First the Oxford St incident it was a friend of mine who got caught
> > initially in that incident a driver coming from the North tried to ram
> > through the ride then when my friend corked hime he got out of his car
> > and physically lifted him out of the way both he and his wife were
> > totally hyped out and punched various riders then ironically called
> > the police."
>
> > "I got into one confrontation with a cab driver determined to push
> > through the mass on Shaftsbury Avenue/Charring Cross - he was not
> > going to stop and kept edging cab more and more into me and my bike -
> > I had to pull back and have some strong words, etc with him while he
> > pushed through everyone else looking more and more like he was going
> > to blow his top."
>
> > " Thanks to the cyclists who helped me by doing a magnificent job of
> > straighting my mangled back wheel that a kindly cabbie not so lovingly
> > rammed. I had a nice chilled out ride and felt very calm and
> > relaxed,unlike aforementioned cabbie,stressed,high blood pressure.
> > Once again thanks guys, I appreciate your show of unity."
>
>
> people off.
>
deliberately ramming cyclists, who they treat with mutter contempt.
--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
francis
> "More bikes, fewer cars!".- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Most drivers do not treat most cyclists with utter contempt.
Most drivers are reasonable people.
Most cyclists are reasonable people.
There is a percentage of both who are not.
Sometimes they meet.
Francis
mileburner
> No the lone cyclists who take shit from motorists everyday, while
> criticising CM, are the wussies.
Ha Ha Ha! I am a lone cyclist, (at least most of the time). I ride primary
when I need to block the traffic, I allow them to pass and wave them on when
I think it is safe to do so. Occasionally I get some verbal abuse and horn
blowing but I just smile and wave. You see Doug, it's the nature of the
beast, drivers can only see things from their POV from behind the wheel, and
they are very selfish too. If you piss them off it just makes them worse.
Your choice.
satu...@no.thanks
wrote:
Sounds like your demented nutter 'mates' (who coincidentally ALSO
despise you) are the ones with the anger management problem, by your
own words...
>and break the law
Ooooh, lawbreaking! Like, for example, CM cyclists going through red
lights, riding on pavements, going the wrong way on one way streets,
failing to notify in advance of procesion, and countless other laws?
THAT sort of lawbreaking? LMFAO you hypocritical old berk.
>deliberately ramming cyclists, who they treat with mutter contempt.
Yep, which is just the manner in which they SHOULD treat CM riders.
<Clue> CM = Scum </Clue>
Doug
>
> Most drivers do not treat most cyclists with utter contempt.
>
> Most drivers are reasonable people.
>
> Most cyclists are reasonable people.
>
> There is a percentage of both who are not.
>
> Sometimes they meet.
>
Now that CM is regarded legally as a procession what possible excuse
can motorists have for ramming it? Surely that should be treated as a
very serious offence, like using a car as an offensive weapon?
--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
Doug
they are first class road users, unlike you.
--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
Marc
>
> Now that CM is regarded legally as a procession what possible excuse
> can motorists have for ramming it?
Do the drivers ram the "procession" or cyclists that are stopping them?
mileburner
>>
> Oh dear! Heaven forbid that you might piss motorists off. After all
> they are first class road users, unlike you.
I just treat others how I expect to be treated myself.
Perhaps I should mention that while out today, I had slowed down in a
traffic queue at some lights and this numpty decided to drive alongside me
and squeeze past. He had to stop anyway so while he was well over to the
right leaving a 2m gap on the left, I overtook on the left (just this one
car) and made a point of pulling in front of him. I then made a point of
cycling just-a-wee-bit slower than the traffic flow.
He would have been quite welcome to ram me, hurl abuse, or jump out of his
car and thump me, but he didn't, and the reason for that I guess was it
might have dawned on him that it was *he* who was being the tosser.
You see Doug, one side antagonises, and the other responds. That's how life
is, but from where I sit, it is CM that is doing the antagonising and
getting what is due.
Tony Dragon
Don't forget, according to Doug. CM is traffic.
--
Tony Dragon
Mike P
No, he thinks it's a procession now, as mentioned earlier in the thread.
He'll decide CM is traffic when he wants it to be traffic for his cause.
Mike P
Tom Crispin
In this matter the Law Lords agree with Doug.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/lawreports/joshuarozenberg/3525046/Critical-mass-can-carry-on-cycling.html
Brimstone
Which version of Doug's view do you think agrees with their Lordships? The
DougView which says that CM is traffic or that it is a procession. My
reading of the news report merely says that there is no need or requirement
for the police to be advised of route or destination.
BIG_ONE
>Unfortunately this is what happens when you deliberately piss other
>people off.
when you deliberately piss other folk off - everyone thinks you are a
bellend, which is why the fukwits who try to ruin CM are bellends as
well as fuckwits... but when you deliberately and pointlessly endanger
the lives of others name calling isn't relevant. The participants of
CM _are_ by and large celebrating and have a legal right to do so,
those who viscously obstruct aren't and don't.
Marc
Would it be OK if they fluidly obstruct, is this what is meant by
"corking"?
Tony Dragon
And nowhere does it say that they could flout laws & ignore police
instructions.
--
Tony Dragon
Tom Crispin
When was the last time you saw a funeral, or any other procession,
split up by traffic signals or by order of a police constable?
Note that I do not condone the yobbish behaviour of a large minority
of CM cyclists, but as a procession they are not required to split the
procession at red traffic signals.
Keitht
> when you deliberately piss other folk off - everyone thinks you are a
> bellend, which is why the fukwits who try to ruin CM are bellends as
> well as fuckwits... but when you deliberately and pointlessly endanger
> the lives of others name calling isn't relevant. The participants of
> CM _are_ by and large celebrating and have a legal right to do so,
> those who viscously obstruct aren't and don't.
Personally, I'm appalled at this.
'bellend' should be hyphenated, it's the end of the bell.
Fuckwits can be either but not bell-end.
I'm not complaining about 'viscous obstructors' as they do tend to stick
around.
'arsehole' has a better ring to it (get's coat)
--
"She dooesn't mind the language, it's the beatings she don't need"
Cool For Cats
Doug
stop them doing it.
Doug
> BIG_ONE wrote:
penetrating the Mass, to the endangerment of its riders. When London
CM used to have cycle police they performed the corking and no driver
dare ram them. I shall always remember one amusing incident when an
enraged cab passenger got out and physically attacked a cycle cop by
mistake for a CMer. You can imagine the result when the other the cops
piled on top of him. LOL!
--
Critical Mass London
Eddie
>
> "Who's streets? Our streets".
Okay, one more time:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=whose+who%27s
--
Eddie ed...@deguello.org
BIG_ONE
>BIG_ONE wrote:
>> The participants of
>> CM _are_ by and large celebrating and have a legal right to do so,
>> those who viscously obstruct aren't and don't.
>
>
> Would it be OK if they fluidly obstruct, is this what is meant by
>"corking"?
<lol> got me there
Bumble Bee
> "Doug" <jag...@riseup.net> wrote in message
> news:8af89b13-5207-4298...@b9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>> Oh dear! Heaven forbid that you might piss motorists off. After all
>> they are first class road users, unlike you.
>
> I just treat others how I expect to be treated myself.
Here here.
francis
Perhaps there is a case for treating other road users the way they
treat you.
Francis
mileburner
"francis" <francis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:99da4794-1abe-498b...@t13g2000yqt.googlegroups.com...
I don't agree.
If I were to ride past cars waving my arms indicating that they should move
into the gutter, or overtake a car and then slam on my brakes, or just pull
out in front of moving traffic, it would be stupid and dangerous. But it
seems this is perfectly acceptable behaviour amongst car drivers.
Another strange behaviour is shouting abuse.
Roger Thorpe
We've got an expert on feedback loops somewhere around here. I'm sure
he'll be able to tell you why that's a Bad Idea.
--
Roger Thorpe
...you had the whole damn thing all wrong/
He's not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays...
Mr Benn
> Now that CM is regarded legally as a procession what possible excuse
> can motorists have for ramming it? Surely that should be treated as a
> very serious offence, like using a car as an offensive weapon?
Napalm dropped on CM from a helicopter would be much more satisfying.
Brimstone
Is the helicopter compulsory? Air Traffic Control would have a view.
francis
No,no, no, you would have to repair the road surface.
Francis
Doug
to me.
--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Whose streets? Our streets".
Brimstone
> On 30 June, 11:37, Bumble Bee <Bumble....@the-h.ive.org> wrote:
>> * mileburner wrote:
>>> "Doug" <jag...@riseup.net> wrote in message
>>> news:8af89b13-5207-4298...@b9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Oh dear! Heaven forbid that you might piss motorists off. After all
>>>> they are first class road users, unlike you.
>>
>>> I just treat others how I expect to be treated myself.
>>
>> Here here.
>>
> So you always give way and never get in their way? Seems like a wussie
> to me.
Unlike you who seems to enjoy being hit by cars.
Bod
Bumble Bee
> Perhaps there is a case for treating other road users the way they
> treat you.
Treating other people how they treat you is a vengeful, spiteful
attitude that will ultimately lead to hermitage or misanthropy. Live and
let live, even if others would sooner live and let die. Life's too short.
Tony Dragon
No that is not what he said, but why not try to twist things around as
you always do.
--
Tony Dragon
Marc
> On 29 June, 20:42, Marc <initial.surn...@btintenret.com> wrote:
>> BIG_ONE wrote:
>>> francis <francis.mall...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Unfortunately this is what happens when you deliberately piss other
>>>> people off.
>>> when you deliberately piss other folk off - everyone thinks you are a
>>> bellend, which is why the fukwits who try to ruin CM are bellends as
>>> well as fuckwits... but when you deliberately and pointlessly endanger
>>> the lives of others name calling isn't relevant. The participants of
>>> CM _are_ by and large celebrating and have a legal right to do so,
>>> those who viscously obstruct aren't and don't.
>> Would it be OK if they fluidly obstruct, is this what is meant by
>> "corking"?
>>
> Corking is blocking drivers from coming in from side roads and
> penetrating the Mass,
Whoosh!
Brimstone
Why would anyone be unpleasant to someone who has shown them consideration
and courtesy?
BIG_ONE
>Another strange behaviour is shouting abuse.
I gave that up a while ago ... now I just follow them home & eat their
babies or spray brake fluid at the offending vehicle ( roof works well
BTW) when passing
BIG_ONE
>Mr Benn dropped on CM from a helicopter would be much more satisfying.
are you sure ... up to you
BIG_ONE
>On 30 June, 14:00, "Mr Benn" <%%%@%.%%> wrote:
>> Mr Benn dropped on CM from a helicopter would be much more satisfying.
>
>No,no, no, you would have to repair the road surface.
is he a fat kunt then?
francis
BIG_ONE
Doug
competition for road space and where the fastest usually win? Instead
of trying to do something about this nasty state of affairs we are
told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
others.
mileburner
>>
> Why does no one here acknowledge the fact that there is serious
> competition for road space and where the fastest usually win?
Because it is not true. When it comes to competing for road space, the one
who wins is the one who got there first and claims the road as theirs. To
give an example (which happens to me a lot). I am riding along a single
carraigeway and a car is heading toward me. As it comes closer I check
behind to make sure I am not about to be overtaken. I see a car roaring up
behind me so I move to the centre of the lane and the car behind slows down.
waits untill it is safe to overtake and them passes.
And another one, I am just about to pass a junction but there is traffic
behind that looks as if it is going to overtake. I move to the centre of the
lane and the car waits until I have passed the junction before overtaking,
I am coming off a roundabout and I do not wish to be overtaken on the bend
where the road narrows, I move to centre of lane and the traffic behind
waits until we are past the bend.
I am coming to a pinch point <guess the rest>
It's acually the slowest that usually win...
Brimstone
> On 30 June, 18:43, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Bumble Bee wrote:
>>> * francis wrote:
>>>> Perhaps there is a case for treating other road users the way they
>>>> treat you.
>>
>>> Treating other people how they treat you is a vengeful, spiteful
>>> attitude that will ultimately lead to hermitage or misanthropy. Live
>>> and let live, even if others would sooner live and let die. Life's
>>> too short.
>>
>> Why would anyone be unpleasant to someone who has shown them
>> consideration and courtesy?
>>
> Why does no one here acknowledge the fact that there is serious
> competition for road space and where the fastest usually win?
I agree that road space is limited but in what sense do the fastest usually
win? Not everyone competes in the traffic lights grand prix Doug.
> Instead
> of trying to do something about this nasty state of affairs
Any suggestions Doug?
> we are
> told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
> responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
> others.
We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and sometimes
that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake. Such a situation
might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to cross one's path where
the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better to slow up slightly then end
up in hospital with injuries and a damaged bike?
Eddie
>
> "Whose streets? Our streets".
:-)
--
Eddie ed...@deguello.org
His: SL Mille, Elefant 900
Hers: Monster S4R (deceased) http://www.last.fm/group/ukrm
Roger Merriman
possibly because they cope fine, i live out in the very edge of london,
but come in and though central from time to time, once into inner london
cars really arn't a issue they are stuck tight a fair amount of the
time, i'm smaller quicker and can see and hear further, at some points
as in life there may be points that they get held up behind me, do they
shout and bawel? no it's very clear that i'm not making any point i'm
just there, and very shorty i'll pull away or they'll get room to
overtake.
I ride the bike mostly in the middle of the lane pulling over when
needed or purdent around central a bike is faster than a car more often
than not and being a fast rider i can match or close enought down the
open bits if i'm feeling game.
roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com
Capital to Coast
www.justgiving.com/rogermerriman
Daniel Barlow
> Doug wrote:
>> Why does no one here acknowledge the fact that there is serious
>> competition for road space and where the fastest usually win?
>
> I agree that road space is limited but in what sense do the fastest usually
> win?
Actually, and much as it pains me to admit it, Doug has a point here.
The road space we "allow" to an oncoming road user is that physically
occupied by their vehicle plus whatever we judge they need in front of
them as headway, and this is directly proportional to the speed they are
travelling at.
Ballantine talks about "negotiated conflicts" (I think that's the
phrase, can't actually remember) as being the basis for riding/driving
in urban traffic: two road users want the same bit of space, and by
positioning, speed changes, indications and other cues they negotiate
with each other as to who gets it first. This works fine if both
parties are actually prepared to negotiate, but when one is twice as
fast as the other and displays no sign of slowing it basically reduces
to a game of "chicken". More speed is one of the clearest signals a
road user can give that they are unwilling to compromise.
-dan
mileburner
> We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and
> sometimes that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake.
> Such a situation might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to
> cross one's path where the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better
> to slow up slightly then end up in hospital with injuries and a
> damaged bike?
This is basic road skill. Yesterday I had a lorry about to pull in front of
me from a turning on the right. He waited, but I waved him to go. If I
hadn't the same lorry would have been on my tail a bit further on trying to
get past. Sometimes it is in your own interestes to let others go even if
you have the ROW.
And if somone *has* made a serious error of judgment (drivers do it with
regularity because standards of driving are utterly shit), then it is better
to give way, get out of the way, than otherwise be victim of said drivers
crappy road craft.
Sounds to me like Doug is going out of his way to be a victim.
mileburner
It happens a lot when there is only room for one but the driver of the
oncoming vehicle thinks there is room for them and a bike. I always stop
pedaling to signify slowing down, I also appear to be looking away to
signify to the driver that I have not seen them. If they still persist at
coming at me at speed I will casually get out of the way as otherwise I
might be dead. Realistically, what usually happens is the oncoming driver
slows down and we pass carefully.
Keitht
> Why does no one here acknowledge the fact that there is serious
> competition for road space and where the fastest usually win? Instead
> of trying to do something about this nasty state of affairs we are
> told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
> responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
> others.
>
Not 'the fastest' that wins.
The fastest usually buggers things up by rushing around.
Whether cycling or driving I find a laid-back attitude often gets me
there almost as quick as the speedmerchants but I don't arrive in a pool
of sweat or with my body oscillating with a surfiet of Red
Bull/Monster/Relentless etc.
Cohen The Barbarian summed it up when the Horde was faced with a bunch
of Ninjas -- 'all that rushing around counts for nothing, it's the
timing that counts - epecially at my age'
(would search book for accurate quote but can't be arsed)
The reason no-one falls for the 'everybody is doing it' blather is that
everyone isn't.
It's easier to spot those who are always in a rush, have to get to the
front, think everyone else on the road is twat for not behaving like Mr
Toad.
They are the minority -- and it's the same for ALL forms of transport,
not the sole pastime of drivers.
'turning the other cheek' is done by ALL transport users.
queue jumpers,
train or coach seat grabbers,
cyclists,
drivers,
walkers.
All show the same symptoms of being unable to pause or chill a bit.
While the majority just watch and go 'pillock' and carry on with thier
lives.
--
Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.
Keitht
>
>
> We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and sometimes
> that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake. Such a situation
> might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to cross one's path where
> the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better to slow up slightly then end
> up in hospital with injuries and a damaged bike?
>
As cyclists - with apparently better vision of the traffic ahead - I'm
sure we are well aware of spotting potential hazards ahead and easing
back a bit to see what develops and how we can make the most of the
situation that others get themelves in to.
I'm not sure we can survive a few minutes out on the street if we didn't
do that.
Even really, really simple stuff seems to be beyond some:
Pelican crossings (until that pillock Boris the non-cyclist decided to
have another effing 'great idea' (wizard jape, awfully good plan) )
Have a ten second red phase for road traffic.
I have come to realise that many cyclists are unable to count to ten and
either rush from one set of lights to the next or just ignore them
completely (only to come up against a line of pedestrians who refuse to
part the seas).
Lights go red, start counting elephants and you'll soon get the hang of
not having to brake at Pelicans and to overtake all those who do the
'point-to-point race' everyday, same commute, pool of sweat.
Slowing up also allows a bit of theatricals when a car pulls across your
path and stops. The driver was going to do it anyway, you knew it by car
position, body language etc. A controlled skid or (even better) sideways
slide right up to the drivers door brings attention to the fact that
someone - and not you- has got it wrong. A blat of the Air-Zounds
through an open window (better if driver also on phone) frequently gets
approval from other drivers as the impatient one is also blocking thier
path. It's what they would have done if they were on the bike, too.
"You gotta have a little ----- patience"
Keitht
>
> This is basic road skill. Yesterday I had a lorry about to pull in front of
> me from a turning on the right. He waited, but I waved him to go. If I
> hadn't the same lorry would have been on my tail a bit further on trying to
> get past.
Confuses them at first but happy to see cyclists aknowledging that not
all truck drivers are murderers of prostitutes.
Even better when you are aware they need space to pull out but none of
the car drivers recognise the need for more space. The drivers often
grin and wave back as the only person who can see what's required to
keep traffic moving is the cyclist.
And later down the road, same truck driver may well wait a second or two
to let you pass as there is room for you but not the cars.
Played 'swap the lead' with many bus drivers and cabbies on Tottenham
Court Road. Once they realise you are more or less at the same speed as
them then it's really and truly sharing the road with each other.
Bumble Bee
Indeed. Which is why being courteous to the discourteous is a better
course of action (treating others how you would like to be treated
yourself), than the dog eat dog style of treating others how they treat you.
Bumble Bee
> No that is not what he said, but why not try to twist things around as
> you always do.
He seems to be a fan of the Straw Man argument.
Marc
> On 30 June, 18:43, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Bumble Bee wrote:
>>> * francis wrote:
>>>> Perhaps there is a case for treating other road users the way they
>>>> treat you.
>>> Treating other people how they treat you is a vengeful, spiteful
>>> attitude that will ultimately lead to hermitage or misanthropy. Live
>>> and let live, even if others would sooner live and let die. Life's
>>> too short.
>> Why would anyone be unpleasant to someone who has shown them consideration
>> and courtesy?
>>
> Why does no one here acknowledge the fact that there is serious
> competition for road space and where the fastest usually win?
Possibly, becuase it's not a fact?
Marc
hitting tarmac with a sudden need to find their bag and stand up in the
aisle.
Marc
> mileburner wrote:
>>
>> This is basic road skill. Yesterday I had a lorry about to pull in
>> front of me from a turning on the right. He waited, but I waved him to
>> go. If I hadn't the same lorry would have been on my tail a bit
>> further on trying to get past.
>
>
> Confuses them at first but happy to see cyclists aknowledging that not
> all truck drivers are murderers of prostitutes.
True, some are murders who are then "treated for shock" when they
realise they have been caught.
> Even better when you are aware they need space to pull out but none of
> the car drivers recognise the need for more space.
if they need more space to pull out than the lane allows then maybe they
shoudn't be on that road?
The drivers often
> grin and wave back as the only person who can see what's required to
> keep traffic moving is the cyclist.
> And later down the road, same truck driver may well wait a second or two
> to let you pass as there is room for you but not the cars.
or might just sweep past you again afterwards and then turn left.... and
then "get treated for shock"
Tom Anderson
> Confuses them at first but happy to see cyclists aknowledging that not
> all truck drivers are murderers of prostitutes.
My dad got a taxi today. In conversation, it came up that the cabbie's
planning to do the Dunwich Dynamo on saturday.
You know that Star Trek episode where Kirk asks the computer to define
love or something and it explodes? That was largely how my brain reacted.
tom
--
How's it going to end?
Roger Thorpe
(except one of them stole my girlfriend).
--
Roger Thorpe
...you had the whole damn thing all wrong/
He's not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays...
ne...@chthonic.f9.co.uk
I once had a great conversation at some particularly slow lights
with
a cabbie about how he'd done The Knowledge on his bike and really
missed
the amount of riding that that entailed.
Also - everyone I meet seems to be doing the Dynamo for the first
time
this year. I'm almost persuaded to give it another go...
Roger Merriman
> Tom Anderson wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Keitht wrote:
> >
> >> Confuses them at first but happy to see cyclists aknowledging that not
> >> all truck drivers are murderers of prostitutes.
> >
> > My dad got a taxi today. In conversation, it came up that the cabbie's
> > planning to do the Dunwich Dynamo on saturday.
> >
> > You know that Star Trek episode where Kirk asks the computer to define
> > love or something and it explodes? That was largely how my brain reacted.
> >
> > tom
> I've known two club cyclists who were black cab drivers. Nice blokes too
> (except one of them stole my girlfriend).
there is a least one black cab driver in my local club may be more.
Doug
> Doug wrote:
> > On 30 June, 18:43, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Bumble Bee wrote:
> >>> * francis wrote:
> >>>> Perhaps there is a case for treating other road users the way they
> >>>> treat you.
>
> >>> Treating other people how they treat you is a vengeful, spiteful
> >>> attitude that will ultimately lead to hermitage or misanthropy. Live
> >>> and let live, even if others would sooner live and let die. Life's
> >>> too short.
>
> >> Why would anyone be unpleasant to someone who has shown them
> >> consideration and courtesy?
>
> > Why does no one here acknowledge the fact that there is serious
> > competition for road space and where the fastest usually win?
>
> I agree that road space is limited but in what sense do the fastest usually
> win? Not everyone competes in the traffic lights grand prix Doug.
>
> > Instead
> > of trying to do something about this nasty state of affairs
>
> Any suggestions Doug?
>
with a vehicle-weapon. An end to victim blaming. All speed limits to
be reduced. Pedestrians and cyclists to be treated as equals on our
public roads but with special laws which take account of their
relative lack of danger to other road users, aka lower momentum than
motorised vehicles.
>
> > we are
> > told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
> > responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
> > others.
>
> We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and sometimes
> that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake. Such a situation
> might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to cross one's path where
> the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better to slow up slightly then end
> up in hospital with injuries and a damaged bike?
>
a mistake? It would mean giving way to everyone about to cross one's
path and hardly moving at all. Even then you are not safe from being
rammed while waiting. Every road user takes a calculated risk with the
most vulnerable being most at risk. Instead of always trying to blame
the victim those who dangerously ram them with their vehicle-weapon
should always be blamed instead.
Bod
Bod
Brimstone
What has any of that got todo with resolving the lack of road space Doug?
>>> we are
>>> told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
>>> responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
>>> others.
>>
>> We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and
>> sometimes that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake.
>> Such a situation might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to
>> cross one's path where the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better
>> to slow up slightly then end up in hospital with injuries and a
>> damaged bike?
>>
> But how do you know that a driver hasn't seen you or is about to make
> a mistake?
You claim to have been a car driver, did you not learn to watch other people
and see if they're liable to cause you a problem?
> It would mean giving way to everyone about to cross one's
> path and hardly moving at all. Even then you are not safe from being
> rammed while waiting. Every road user takes a calculated risk with the
> most vulnerable being most at risk. Instead of always trying to blame
> the victim those who dangerously ram them with their vehicle-weapon
> should always be blamed instead.
You said in a different thread that you are not stupid since giving up
driving. Except for the third sentence that little rant shows otherwise.
francis
> On 1 July, 07:40, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Doug wrote:
> > > On 30 June, 18:43, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >> Bumble Bee wrote:
> > >>> * francis wrote:
> > >>>> Perhaps there is a case for treating other road users the way they
> > >>>> treat you.
>
> > >>> Treating other people how they treat you is a vengeful, spiteful
> > >>> attitude that will ultimately lead to hermitage or misanthropy. Live
> > >>> and let live, even if others would sooner live and let die. Life's
> > >>> too short.
>
> > >> Why would anyone be unpleasant to someone who has shown them
> > >> consideration and courtesy?
>
> > > Why does no one here acknowledge the fact that there is serious
> > > competition for road space and where the fastest usually win?
>
> > I agree that road space is limited but in what sense do the fastest usually
> > win? Not everyone competes in the traffic lights grand prix Doug.
>
> > > Instead
> > > of trying to do something about this nasty state of affairs
>
> > Any suggestions Doug?
>
> Where to begin? Stiffer penalties for causing death or serious injury
> with a vehicle-weapon.
You of course mean if they are to blame don't you.
> An end to victim blaming.
If they are blameless.
> All speed limits to
> be reduced. Pedestrians and cyclists to be treated as equals on our
> public roads but with special laws which take account of their
> relative lack of danger to other road users, aka lower momentum than
> motorised vehicles.
If they are to be treated as equals, surely there should be no special
laws?
>
> > > we are
> > > told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
> > > responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
> > > others.
>
> > We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and sometimes
> > that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake. Such a situation
> > might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to cross one's path where
> > the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better to slow up slightly then end
> > up in hospital with injuries and a damaged bike?
>
> But how do you know that a driver hasn't seen you or is about to make
> a mistake?
How would you know that about any road user?
> It would mean giving way to everyone about to cross one's
> path and hardly moving at all.
Glad you have got that message.
> Even then you are not safe from being
> rammed while waiting.
I have been a road user for many years, & have been a driver for over
40 years, I have only ever seen one delibrate ramming & that was by a
car trying to escape the police.
> Every road user takes a calculated risk with the
> most vulnerable being most at risk. Instead of always trying to blame
> the victim
Nobody on theses NGs has blamed a blameless victim.
> those who dangerously ram them with their vehicle-weapon
> should always be blamed instead.
Intentional ramming shuld indeed atract blame (but maybe not all the
blame)
>
> --
> Critical Mass Londonhttp://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Whose streets? Our streets".- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Francis
Doug
blame, subsequently subject to the discretion of an unbiased court.
>
> > An end to victim blaming.
>
> If they are blameless.
>
>
> > All speed limits to
> > be reduced. Pedestrians and cyclists to be treated as equals on our
> > public roads but with special laws which take account of their
> > relative lack of danger to other road users, aka lower momentum than
> > motorised vehicles.
>
> If they are to be treated as equals, surely there should be no special
> laws?
>
the momentum of the vehicle at the time of the crash. The law is there
to decrease danger so naturally it should mostly apply to the most
dangerous.
>
>
> > > > we are
> > > > told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
> > > > responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
> > > > others.
>
> > > We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and sometimes
> > > that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake. Such a situation
> > > might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to cross one's path where
> > > the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better to slow up slightly then end
> > > up in hospital with injuries and a damaged bike?
>
> > But how do you know that a driver hasn't seen you or is about to make
> > a mistake?
>
> How would you know that about any road user?
>
so vulnerable to the vicissitudes of drivers.
>
> > It would mean giving way to everyone about to cross one's
> > path and hardly moving at all.
>
> Glad you have got that message.
>
give way regardless of the law and from fear?
>
> > Even then you are not safe from being
> > rammed while waiting.
>
> I have been a road user for many years, & have been a driver for over
> 40 years, I have only ever seen one delibrate ramming & that was by a
> car trying to escape the police.
>
mine? I witness rammings nearly every month I go on a Critical Mass.
>
> > Every road user takes a calculated risk with the
> > most vulnerable being most at risk. Instead of always trying to blame
> > the victim
>
> Nobody on theses NGs has blamed a blameless victim.
>
killer by blaming the victim, or at the very least by discussing the
apportioning of blame in such circumstances.
>
> > those who dangerously ram them with their vehicle-weapon
> > should always be blamed instead.
>
> Intentional ramming shuld indeed atract blame (but maybe not all the
> blame)
>
for putting someone's life at risk or even merely damaging their
bicycle.
--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.
aard...@the.zoo
wrote:
<SNIP> Will you PLEASE learn to sodding snip you demented old fart!
>>
>> > An end to victim blaming.
>>
>> If they are blameless.
>>
>Victims should always be blameless, by definition.
How? A man cleans a shotgun, carelessly omitting to check its not
loaded, and blows his foot off. He is definitely a 'victim' of a
gunshot wound, so is he 'blameless'? Who IS to blame, then? The bloke
who sold him the cartridge?
You hypocrital old muppet - you're ALWAYS using anecdotal evidence and
misrepresenting it as common! And perhaps you see a lot of rammings at
CM meets because CM meets are full of confrontational fuckwits who
provoke incidents with motorists?
>> > Every road user takes a calculated risk with the
>> > most vulnerable being most at risk. Instead of always trying to blame
>> > the victim
>>
>> Nobody on theses NGs has blamed a blameless victim.
>>
>I disagree. The motorists here seem routinely to try to excuse the
>killer by blaming the victim, or at the very least by discussing the
>apportioning of blame in such circumstances.
>>
>> > those who dangerously ram them with their vehicle-weapon
>> > should always be blamed instead.
>>
>> Intentional ramming shuld indeed atract blame (but maybe not all the
>> blame)
>>
>All the blame. impatience to continue a journey is no justification
>for putting someone's life at risk or even merely damaging their
>bicycle.
So, if you're out on your bike and I and a group of friends surround
you on the road as pedestrians, deliberately preventing you from
moving, shout at you a lot about what a selfish cretin you are, wave a
few banners over your head, chant and spit at you, you'll be okay with
that and simply stand and wait for us to go away, right? Please do
answer this one, as I'm sure I could rustle up sufficient people in
this group to test the theory :)
Roger Merriman
> On 1 July, 07:40, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
big snips
> >
> > > we are
> > > told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
> > > responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
> > > others.
> >
> > We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and sometimes
> > that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake. Such a situation
> > might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to cross one's path where
> > the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better to slow up slightly then end
> > up in hospital with injuries and a damaged bike?
> >
> But how do you know that a driver hasn't seen you or is about to make
> a mistake? It would mean giving way to everyone about to cross one's
> path and hardly moving at all. Even then you are not safe from being
> rammed while waiting. Every road user takes a calculated risk with the
> most vulnerable being most at risk. Instead of always trying to blame
> the victim those who dangerously ram them with their vehicle-weapon
> should always be blamed instead.
>
you look at them and antispate, no point being right and dead, this said
looking at them and yes I can see you and i'll be past in no time you'll
just have to wait a sec *look* rather than the ooh thats a nasty
junction to cross, i'll slow/wait you go *look*
ride with confidence and you'll not go far wrong, i do and very rarely
get any thing other than the normal london habbits of people pulling out
etc.
roger
> --
> Critical Mass London
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Whose streets? Our streets".
robert hancy
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
You've never been on Critical Mass, have you?
The last time I went we were applauded, even the cops were interested
in the leaflets being handed out about Emma Foa's death (look it up)
Tony Dragon
For an unbiased enquiry to take place everybody should be considered
blameless until proved otherwise.
But as you are a bigot you must be biased.
>>> An end to victim blaming.
>> If they are blameless.
>>
> Victims should always be blameless, by definition.
There is no definition that says that, unless you want authors of their
own misfortune not to be considered victims
>>> All speed limits to
>>> be reduced. Pedestrians and cyclists to be treated as equals on our
>>> public roads but with special laws which take account of their
>>> relative lack of danger to other road users, aka lower momentum than
>>> motorised vehicles.
>> If they are to be treated as equals, surely there should be no special
>> laws?
>>
> It might seem so but the laws should be related to the danger posed by
> the momentum of the vehicle at the time of the crash. The law is there
> to decrease danger so naturally it should mostly apply to the most
> dangerous.
So you admit to being a hypocrite.
>>
>>>>> we are
>>>>> told to always 'turn the other cheek' and assume personal
>>>>> responsibility and sometimes blame for being put at serious risk by
>>>>> others.
>>>> We all have to take responsibility for our own safety Doug, and sometimes
>>>> that means giving way to someone who has made a mistake. Such a situation
>>>> might include slowing up slightly to allow a car to cross one's path where
>>>> the driver hasn't seen us. Surely it's better to slow up slightly then end
>>>> up in hospital with injuries and a damaged bike?
>>> But how do you know that a driver hasn't seen you or is about to make
>>> a mistake?
>> How would you know that about any road user?
>>
> Indeed. It has to be taken on trust and that is why the vulnerable are
> so vulnerable to the vicissitudes of drivers.
So you agree.
>>> It would mean giving way to everyone about to cross one's
>>> path and hardly moving at all.
>> Glad you have got that message.
>>
> What message? You surely don't imagine that cyclists should always
> give way regardless of the law and from fear?
You know what was meant, you are now saying that cyclist should not do
what you demand of motorists.
>>> Even then you are not safe from being
>>> rammed while waiting.
>> I have been a road user for many years, & have been a driver for over
>> 40 years, I have only ever seen one delibrate ramming & that was by a
>> car trying to escape the police.
>>
> <Yawn/> Spare me the anecdotal. Its averages that count.
You use anecdotal all the time, why is it not ok for somebody else to do
the same
> How about
> mine? I witness rammings nearly every month I go on a Critical Mass.
Anecdotal
>>> Every road user takes a calculated risk with the
>>> most vulnerable being most at risk. Instead of always trying to blame
>>> the victim
?
>> Nobody on theses NGs has blamed a blameless victim.
>>
> I disagree. The motorists here seem routinely to try to excuse the
> killer by blaming the victim, or at the very least by discussing the
> apportioning of blame in such circumstances.
So you are against free discussion.
And by the way not only motorist on this NG enter into these discussions.
>>> those who dangerously ram them with their vehicle-weapon
>>> should always be blamed instead.
>> Intentional ramming shuld indeed atract blame (but maybe not all the
>> blame)
>>
> All the blame. impatience to continue a journey is no justification
> for putting someone's life at risk or even merely damaging their
> bicycle.
Again you know what was meant, everything is not always black & white.
>
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns
> www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>
>
>
Well Doug you have again shown yourself to be a hypocrit.
--
Tony Dragon
BIG_ONE
>in 43 yrs,I haven't "rammed" anyone.
still got plenty of time ... & it is just a matter of time
aard...@the.zoo
No I haven't. Because I try not to associate with unwashed, jobless,
anti-everything they can't afford, save the planet, save the lesbian,
save the whale, lentil-scoffing, sandal wearing tossers.
Tony Dragon
I wish you would say outright what you mean, & don't beat around the bush.
--
Tony Dragon
John Kane
I've been rammed one but in about 48 years. The car was stopped
behind me at a stop sign (T junction) and gently started to push me
into traffic. Blind driver I guess.
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada
Doug
motorists in this cycling NG, which is why I am presently responding
to this post only in this thread.
As for giving way. Should a corking cyclist always give way to a
ramming motorist on CM, and allow the car to nose in amid the Mass? On
the other hand, while riding alone in heavy traffic a cyclist would be
wise to give way, wherever possible, to an immediate, perceived
threat. It is the unperceived threat from dangerous drivers that is
the problem.
Riding with confidence is all very well provided that impatient
drivers are prepared to give way to you at the last second, for fear
of getting even more points on their licence and an increased
insurance premium. It is the crazed drivers you have to fear, of which
there seem to be many. I am convinced that the mere act of driving in
heavy traffic is enough to tip many drivers temporarily over the edge.
A pity there are no psychological tests to getting a driving licence.
Brimstone
No response Doug?
Marc
If what you call Critical Mass ( a once a month procession) was actaully
a critical mass in the way that Bliss described then there would be no
need for "corking"
francis
A pity there are no psychological tests for posting to usenet.
Francis
Roger Merriman
corking is not something a cyclist is ever likely to need to do, it's
something critial mass do but they are not one and the same.
I ride a fair bit, and sometimes i pull in to let a car though sometimes
i don't all depends on what seems the right choice, in heavy traffic
mostly i wouldn't unless bar me there way is clear and it is something
that i'm happy to do ie i don't have to brake heavly or any other
significate movments if i can with out endangering or significatly slow
one's progress i will, by same token i get let out and waved though.
>
> Riding with confidence is all very well provided that impatient
> drivers are prepared to give way to you at the last second, for fear
> of getting even more points on their licence and an increased
> insurance premium. It is the crazed drivers you have to fear, of which
> there seem to be many. I am convinced that the mere act of driving in
> heavy traffic is enough to tip many drivers temporarily over the edge.
> A pity there are no psychological tests to getting a driving licence.
>
in heavy traffic there is no advatage in forcing past as there is
another car/van/bus ahead any way. in heavy traffic cars etc average
10/11mph or so. i don't know about you but i'm a fair bit faster than
that on bike
roger
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns
> www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.
Tim Hall
<tony....@btinternet.com> wrote:
<many many quoted and requoted lines>
>I wish you would say outright what you mean, & don't beat around the bush.
I wish you would learn to snip.
--
Tim
Tony Dragon
To snip, or not to snip?
Beg pardon, you are of course correct.
--
Tony Dragon
Doug
Doug
minimised in the absence of police? Obviously CM alone does provide a
certain safety in numbers and is sufficient to deter threats from many
drivers but not all.
Tony Dragon
If the members of CM are acting in a lawful way you should not need to
deter threats.
--
Tony Dragon
Marc
>>> As for giving way. Should a corking cyclist always give way to a
>>> ramming motorist on CM, and allow the car to nose in amid the Mass?
>> If what you call Critical Mass ( a once a month procession) was actaully
>> a critical mass in the way that Bliss described then there would be no
>> need for "corking"
>>
> Explain how drivers criminally ramming into the Mass can otherwise be
> minimised in the absence of police?
You really have no idea what the term means or the history behind it ,
do you? I have the suspicion that all of your eco credentials are just
as flimsily based on monkeeseemonkeedo internal gossip of your peer
group. The really hilarious part of that is that I have encountered this
behaviour before, amongst competitors of 4x4 Hillrallys, you have more
in commone with them than you know.
Marc
threatened.
Tony Dragon
Doug has a peer group?
--
Tony Dragon
Brimstone
So you admit that you can't give a simple straightforward answer to a couple
of simple straightforward question which you have cause to be raised.
Just zis Guy, you know?
<initial...@btintenret.com> wrote:
>monkeeseemonkeedo
Nice :-)
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc | http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/
"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken
Newsgroup may contain nuts.
aard...@the.zoo
wrote:
>On 4 July, 10:36, Marc <initial.surn...@btintenret.com> wrote:
Wouldn't deter me, as I've said before. Slow down to a walking pace,
give a pip on the horn to warn them of your prescence, and just move
forward regardless. Anyone assaulting my vehicle or its occupants get
physically detained until the police arrive. Tell ya what, Duhg, lets
have a challenge. I've got some friends with Landys - let us know in
advance and I'll bring a fleet round to meet your colleagues, and
we'll see which of us ends up intimidating the other :)
Doug
angry cyclists can be pretty intimidating but what it ignores are
certain individuals who are crazed drivers who have totally lost it.
Doug
BIG_ONE
surely your case isn't simply getting post on a cycling usenet group
illustrating that some folk on usenet write toss
aard...@the.zoo
wrote:
What 'case' would that be, Doug? The case that you are extremely happy
that CM riders attempt to intimidate motorists, but that you think
motorists must be bastards for ignoring their tactics and being happy
to intimidate them back? Plus ca change, you're a hypocrite.