Jeremny Vine a road rage victim

[horizon]

JV is not policing the roads nor is he accountable for managing or controlling others,

Isn't? Shouldn't? Mustn't? Needn't?

especially from a position of consummate vulnerability.

Hence my admiration for his public spiritedness. We need more people like Jermey Vine on the road and, ironically, fewer people like Jeremy Vine on the TV.

[Bonefishblues]

I don't understand your first point.

Re your second. Really? JV was being public-spirited? Then we have very different definitions.

[horizon]

I don't understand your first point.

JV held his position in the road and thus prevented the driver from going faster than would be safe for other vulnerable road users. He then confronted the errant driver by stopping in her path.

You said that he "isn't" policing (or whatever) the road but I don't know whether you mean that he shouldn't, couldn't etc (I presume we both agree that he "was" doing it).

[Bonefishblues]

I don't understand your first point.

JV held his position in the road and thus prevented the driver from going faster than would be safe for other vulnerable road users. He then confronted the errant driver by stopping in her path.

You said that he "isn't" policing (or whatever) the road but I don't know whether you mean that he shouldn't, couldn't etc (I presume we both agree that he "was" doing it).

Who says that was the case? On what authority did he do that? I'm all for public-spirited action but that's not it. That's vigilantism.

[horizon]

Who says that was the case? On what authority did he do that? I'm all for public-spirited action but that's not it. That's vigilantism.

So I take it that's a shouldn't.

[The utility cyclist]

If I'm doing 55-60 on a NSL road and someone comes up behind me and assumes a position which indicates that they want to overtake then I will do my best to facilitate this.

The individual doesn't need to go faster, they may well exceed the speed limit but that's not my concern on either count.

Let people accountable for their own actions. In any event Id rather that they were ahead than behind, and in particular that I have some influence over their overtaking manoeuvre.

I'd draw a parallel.

Sorry but you misunderstand the scenarios you are comparing and indeed are making an error in your driving.

Firstly, there is no room for the following vehicle behind JV to overtake and the speed he was going at was appropriate for the conditions unlike the following vehicle. On the NSL road one presumes the vehicle behind waits until there is a safe time/location pass. Asking JV to pull over is like asking you to pull into a gateway/layby, come to a stop and then get back into the highway IF you are able to depending on traffic flow. You simply would not do this and nor should you.

You 'facilitating' this pass is actually the wrong thing to do, you create a situation where others are then going to expect this on subsequent occasions, indeed without direct communication this can be mis-read and construed differently and thus crashes occur. You also validate speeding/dangerous driving with your deference. Simply this is dangerous practice and should not be done.

In special circumstances such as long uphill sections and when passing safely cannot be done for miles on end it is polite and expected one would pull over to allow any build up of much faster moving vehicles to pass, these circumstances are infrequent as there is usually somewhere to pass not far up the road. I don't think 30 seconds or even a minute is too long a time, after all one is 'held up' daily by others in life for far far longer especially when out on the bike and yet is it right that I be agressive and threatening to other road users for not moving out of my way because I am faster?
An urban road with parked vehicles tightly packed and parked up is not one of those situations in any case, the speed travelled at especially one with potentially a lot of kinetic energy should be much lower than the posted maximum for very obvious reasons. Isn't it right that you think about your and others safety in this situation? Really there is no 'delay' here if any and there is simply no safe place to pass. There is no obligation on the part of JV to pull over into a gap and absolutely a legal requirement on the part of the following party not to intimdate and drive dangerously close behind.

Your concern is YOUR safety and your future safety, you will learn hopefully that trying to facilitate others passing instead of the passer to wait patiently for the correct time and place to pass without you ceding all the time is by far the safest way to go about things for that instant and for future situations not just for yourself but for others.

[horizon]

FWIW:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 24986.html

And this:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/j ... 35931.html

Predictable stuff from JC but what is really worrying is that JC proposes that someone may need to be driving fast along narrow streets such as these - to visit their injured child. Run over perhaps by a speeding driver? You couldn't make it up.

[Bonefishblues]

Who says that was the case? On what authority did he do that? I'm all for public-spirited action but that's not it. That's vigilantism.

So I take it that's a shouldn't.

That is a shouldn't.

[Bonefishblues]

If I'm doing 55-60 on a NSL road and someone comes up behind me and assumes a position which indicates that they want to overtake then I will do my best to facilitate this.

The individual doesn't need to go faster, they may well exceed the speed limit but that's not my concern on either count.

Let people accountable for their own actions. In any event Id rather that they were ahead than behind, and in particular that I have some influence over their overtaking manoeuvre.

I'd draw a parallel.

Sorry but you misunderstand the scenarios you are comparing and indeed are making an error in your driving.

Firstly, there is no room for the following vehicle behind JV to overtake and the speed he was going at was appropriate for the conditions unlike the following vehicle. On the NSL road one presumes the vehicle behind waits until there is a safe time/location pass. Asking JV to pull over is like asking you to pull into a gateway/layby, come to a stop and then get back into the highway IF you are able to depending on traffic flow. You simply would not do this and nor should you.

You 'facilitating' this pass is actually the wrong thing to do, you create a situation where others are then going to expect this on subsequent occasions, indeed without direct communication this can be mis-read and construed differently and thus crashes occur. You also validate speeding/dangerous driving with your deference. Simply this is dangerous practice and should not be done.

In special circumstances such as long uphill sections and when passing safely cannot be done for miles on end it is polite and expected one would pull over to allow any build up of much faster moving vehicles to pass, these circumstances are infrequent as there is usually somewhere to pass not far up the road. I don't think 30 seconds or even a minute is too long a time, after all one is 'held up' daily by others in life for far far longer especially when out on the bike and yet is it right that I be agressive and threatening to other road users for not moving out of my way because I am faster?
An urban road with parked vehicles tightly packed and parked up is not one of those situations in any case, the speed travelled at especially one with potentially a lot of kinetic energy should be much lower than the posted maximum for very obvious reasons. Isn't it right that you think about your and others safety in this situation? Really there is no 'delay' here if any and there is simply no safe place to pass. There is no obligation on the part of JV to pull over into a gap and absolutely a legal requirement on the part of the following party not to intimdate and drive dangerously close behind.

Your concern is YOUR safety and your future safety, you will learn hopefully that trying to facilitate others passing instead of the passer to wait patiently for the correct time and place to pass without you ceding all the time is by far the safest way to go about things for that instant and for future situations not just for yourself but for others.

You are making multiple assumptions about my driving. I do not pull over. I do not cede. I do not validate speeding by my action. Any comment about dangerous driving is based on your assumptions and yours alone. You will gather also that I do not accept that I have made an error in my driving. I find your tone mildly patronising tbh.

JV had the opportunity to let the driver past and chose not to. I think he should.

[Postboxer]

I want to see the full videos of both front and rear now, to check her story that he was on the pavement and pulled out in front of her forcing her to make an emergency stop. From the posted video it appears she pulls out from a side road behind JV who is already travelling along that road but I could be wrong. She's been on that road for all of 11 seconds before beeping at him. It's hard to see the state of the road up ahead to see if there were any bigger, longer or wider gaps where she could have passed safely, I don't think the gaps he does pass are big enough for him to let her past in without pretty much stopping, which looking at her driving, may invite a close pass once you were half out of the way.

[reohn2]

Yes it is relevant. The driver wanted to overtake but couldn't (in the section of road leading up to the altercation).

But she could if he'd let her.
Where he stopped he deliberately blocked her car just before a big enough gap on both sides of the road,which made an already fraught situation worse.

She tailgated him and it was this that led him to confront the driver. But she didn't need to overtake and should not have wished to go faster than his speed.

No she didn't need to overtake,and her driving was intimidating,so I agree in principle
However,as it turned out JV ended up goading an already unstable person who as it turned out was on a short fuse.Who,though he'd no way of knowing at the time,was driving an illegal car.
It's a possible recipe for disaster for him,in what could have been a very physical manner.
And it's not his place to stop the progress of anyone unless his or someone else is immediately in danger.

What I am saying is that the whole politeness/overtaking/letting-her-past/avoiding-confrontation/being-nice-to-each-other thing is a complete red herring.

But that wasn't my point,my point was one of letting a loonie get of my face with the least obstruction to them and least disruption to me because it would've been the best thing under the circumstances.
I tried and thought I'd make that clear in previous posts,sorry if there was any confusion.

The fact is that she was driving too fast for the road and his speed was quite adequate for the conditions.

I agree(again)but he's not a policeman(though it could be argued we all should be),why would you put yourself in possible jeopardy by purposely and deliberately stopping a car that was already being driven aggressively behind you,when you could with little or no cost to yourself,simply allow it to pass?

And in fact, she couldn't overtake.

Because as I posted above,JV blocked her path,which probably made this loonie worse.

Except to avoid aggression, JV did the right thing by everyone.

No,IMHO he made matters worse.

IMO,if the UK police were reliable in responding to this sort of incident,instead of sweeping it under the carpet,due to being completely overwhelmed and undermanned and if the judicial system were serious about vehicle crime,such loonies would be removed from our roads.
As it is they're not and are aggressive because they know it's an odds on bet they won't get caught.

It's already been mentioned up thread that the vehicle has no VED,and that the owner may not have registered it in their name,if that's the case then who's to say if it's insured or not?
On the face of it all things being equal and all people being genuine and upright,there'd be no problem,however this is the state of the UK today where people can quite literally get away with murder,where cyclists and pedestrians are run over and the perpaetrator simply drives off.
Here's a scenario that if I were a dishonest man I could get away with quite easily:-
In a visit to a town or city in another part of the country I note a small hatchback,or even a couple of them in different areas,and make a note of their reg numbers.
I then go and buy a similar car,it could be a nice little black Corsa.
I give the previous owner a false name and address,and fail to notify the DVLA of change of ownership.I then illicitly buy a pair of number plates to match the ones I've made a note of and fit them to my 'new' car.
If I drive sensibly I can drive around in it and no one knows any difference.
If I'm devious enough I'll change the plates now and again for other reg numbers,but because I'm a git I'll probably bully people who I think deserve it,ie;possibly cyclists,because they're fair game and can't catch me.
It's that simple.
I've reported three cars in as many years for aggression toward me when cycling,which according to the police didn't even check out to a similar vehicle .
I'll repeat TC's sig again:- "gang warily",because you never know who you might 'bump' into.

[Vorpal]

JV had the opportunity to let the driver past and chose not to. I think he should.

If I pulled over every time a situation like that occurred, I might as well walk everywhere, because I couldn't get anywhere on my bike; this would be worse in London.

There are certainly circumstances in which I will pull over to let other vehicles past. In the particular circumstances in Jeremy Vine's video, I probably would have pulled over where the street opened up, just a few metres in front of where he stopped to confront the driver. I don't think I would have pulled over before that, and I onlt would have done so because she was following too closely. If she had behaved herself, I would have carried on to the junction.

I don't think that Jeremy Vine did anything wrong, though. Just different from what I would have done.

[BakfietsUK]

Having experienced many times what Jeremy experienced here, I guess I may have made some different "choices" too, if indeed choice is the correct idiom.

With a ton and a half of metal behind, in the charge of someone who is clearly demonstrating extreme behaviour, I would feel very intimidated. Rational thought is extremely hard to access when it feels like someone is trying to kill you (me). So anything Jeremy may have done or had the opportunity to do, in the heat of the moment, to me is of questionable relevance. Think about your own responses to mortal danger like fight, flight or freeze, because that's the only pathway available when it feels like your life is on the line.

Lets not blame the victim here, especially from within our own community, please. Nothing Jeremy did justifies the rage, abuse and trauma he had to endure from this individual. One might as well say a victim of bullying had it coming because they appeared weak or were somehow asking for it because they were different. The blame, responsibility and fault goes totally with the individual who thinks it is acceptable to abuse and harm other people, whatever the circumstances.

Had a rational conversation been justified and possible with this person, Jeremy could have explained his actions. When someone chooses to abuse, then it goes to a different level and the so called "provocation" factor falls into less relevance.

The driver appeared to detain Jeremy unlawfully as he was going about his business in the best way he could. I don't think anyone is justified to stop someone in this way, especially if one's intent is to abuse. She appeared to use her vehicle to force the issue to Jeremy by her close following which may have forced Jeremy to stop (fight, flight or freeze, remember). He may not have intended to and probably would have preferred not to stop as the driver was behaving like some sort of crazed and deluded vigilante.

To me, a clear case that would justify psychological assessment of driving test candidates.

[meic]

You are basing much of that post around a premise that there is actually something wrong or illegal about driving very close behind a cyclist beeping your horn.
This is very much a minority view, certainly not supported by the media, Police, CPS, magistrates, vast majority of the British driving public and a section of this forum too.

[reohn2]

FWIW:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 24986.html

From the article:-

The driver has now said it was Vine’s “dangerous” driving which prompted her to make an “emergency stop”.

“He made me look impatient but he was riding on the pavement and came out on to the road in front of me, with no hand signals,” Shayna, a 22-year-old student from Brixton in South London who did give her full surname, told The Sun.

“The road had parking on either side. He was dangerous. He pulled out in front of me, making me have to make an emergency stop. Then he had the arrogance and cheek to block me in the middle of the road, that’s what set me off.”

And this:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/j ... 35931.html

Predictable stuff from JC but what is really worrying is that JC proposes that someone may need to be driving fast along narrow streets such as these - to visit their injured child. Run over perhaps by a speeding driver? You couldn't make it up.

Could anyone ever take Clarkson seriously?