This one takes the biscuit!

[workhard]

However, if someone in the street started slapping you in the face, what would you do? Nothing, on the basis that they already know slapping you is wrong?

A very good question, happy to explain what I'd hope I'd do elsewhere, but not what we are talking about. The example doesn't work, for me, in this context, because the slapping person didn't almost very nearly but not quite slap me in the face. The slap has landed, the deed was done, I'm being assaulted, I'm not just feeling threatened I'm actually being attacked. Different situation.

My example. You're on foot, in a hurry, trying to get to work, on a crowded busy pavement, someone squeezes/dodges past you, doesn't make contact but you have to take avoiding action, shortly after they stop to look in a shoe shop window. Are you going to say something to them? If you are what do you want the outcome to be? If it is me, 6 2, big, skin head, or my daughter 19 and tiny, or my nephew 11, do you deal with it differently. If so why, the offence is the same?

In retrospect I should have let him forward after the first altercation because the traffic wasn't heavy enough to get me far ahead, our average speeds were too close. But as you observe, when the adrenaline is searing through your veins, it's hard to roll over and be someone's b___h when you could be up at the ASL!

better someone's biatch than than someone's victim - how do you know the next driver might not have a "falling down" moment. Escalation rarely ends well as countless road rage incidents show. We shouldn't let ignorant impolite aggressive bullying drivers drag us down to their level.

Has anyone ever tried running a pole out horizontally from their rack with something on the end (LED maybe?). If drivers thought they might ruin their paint, they might leave sensible space! (I guess everyone would have one if they worked though!)

years ago, in London I'd just kick the flippin' car as it passed. Stupid immature behaviour on my part but I reasoned that I'm a big guy and I can probably handle the situation if push were to come to came to inevitable shove. Now I count slowly up to 100 pedal revolutions.

apologies for playing devil's advocate with your real life......

[workhard]

It had passed through my mind to do the same with a rechargeable angle grinder on a short pole

opposite side to one's single pannier for symmetry and balance?

[EdinburghFixed]

However, if someone in the street started slapping you in the face, what would you do? Nothing, on the basis that they already know slapping you is wrong?

A very good question, happy to explain what I'd hope I'd do elsewhere, but not what we are talking about. The example doesn't work, for me, in this context, because the slapping person didn't almost very nearly but not quite slap me in the face. The slap has landed, the deed was done, I'm being assaulted, I'm not just feeling threatened I'm actually being attacked. Different situation.

I agree it's different - it's hard to find a good analogy.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that I find it hard to differentiate between actual harmful behaviour (i.e. if someone slammed a door on you or whatever) and behaviour which only isn't harmful because I have enough control or luck on the bike to avoid the consequences.

I.e. if the same guy drove past you recklessly each day, and you reckon that ultimately you will be in an accident (because you only have so much luck) do you just keep grinning and bearing it, or do something?

The real trick perhaps is to "allow" them the first offence, and only pick them up on the second occasion. But what if on their way to work this morning they are going to put 50 cyclists in danger, or 100? Or if due to traffic lights and queues you will be repeatedly passed by the same driver (you could just sit in the traffic jam like a car, but that defeats the point of riding the bike!)

Add a bit of adrenaline to the mix...

[James1822]

I was discussing the road tax issue with someone and they pointed out, rightly it seems to me, that cars do pay more 'road tax' or vehicle excise duty through paying for the tax disc that you display in your front window.

[workhard]

Basically what I'm trying to say is that I find it hard to differentiate between actual harmful behaviour (i.e. if someone slammed a door on you or whatever) and behaviour which only isn't harmful because I have enough control or luck on the bike to avoid the consequences.

I.e. if the same guy drove past you recklessly each day, and you reckon that ultimately you will be in an accident (because you only have so much luck) do you just keep grinning and bearing it, or do something?

I guess I'm saying do something but the question is "what is that something to be" to get the outcome that you want given that ALL car drivers (me included) fall short, and make mistakes, take risks, etc..

Urban city commutes are tough I know. Different route for a few days to give yourself a break from them? Change the time you commute a bit? Sit in the queue and see it from their point of view for a few minutes? Stop, let them go, arrive at work late but alive and sane? Force yourself "I am not going to respond" to ignore them no matter what, short of actual contact? Take their number and report them to Inspector Knacker with chapter and verse? (some forces do act on this sort of thing)

None of them easy to do (I've tried them all and more) but all de-escalate the immediate situation and reduce your risk (and that of others but that isn't my point) of harm.

Why all this avoidance? Bitter experience! I carelessly cut up another driver years back in Brighton, he followed me back to the car park at work and attacked me while I was on my way into the office. He's a short fat bloke five nothing bloke attacking a six two county rugby player. He came second in a very short ruck but it made me think "How mental is he? How off kilter must his judgement have been?" He could see the size of me walking through the car park but he still got out of the car, ranted and raved incoherently and then tried to head butt me (wasn't tall enough!) punched me and it was all over very quickly after that. Years later in London whilst cycling I knocked a female pedestrian over and out and white van man decided to attack me whilst I was trying to help her. Finally I once had an adrenaline fuelled and entirely justified "go" at a driver and he reached out of his car, grabbed my fleece and pulled away, dragging me off the bike and into the road.

Bottom line is we don't know who we're mixing it with when we chastise drivers and we don't know what level of threat they will perceive our chastisement to be. They are in a tin box and fairly invulnerable we aren't.

[workhard]

Well thats true enough, except for the very old or incredibly green ones.
However, and its a point that has been made here before, this money is NOT ringfenced or reserved for road construction/repair. Its just received and treated as a minor contribution to general tax revenue.
Roads are funded from that general kitty, and two of the biggest contributors are income tax and Vat...

and community charge for roads maintained by local authorities.... no?

[DaveP]

I was discussing the road tax issue with someone and they pointed out, rightly it seems to me, that cars do pay more 'road tax' or vehicle excise duty through paying for the tax disc that you display in your front window.

Well they certainly pay this tax, except, that is, for the very old or incredibly green ones.
However, and its a point that has been made here before, this money is NOT ringfenced or reserved for road construction/repair. Its just received and treated as a minor contribution to general tax revenue.
Roads are funded from that general kitty, and two of the biggest contributors are income tax and Vat...

Ok, Ok Workhard - you can type faster than me

[James1822]

I don't really get it. The money gets put in a kitty, but then presumably gets transferred back out again for infrastructure maintenance. And the fact is that car drivers have to pay this large tax before they can use ther vehicle. Rightly so, since they are far more damaging to roads and environment.

[workhard]

I don't really get it. The money gets put in a kitty, but then presumably gets transferred back out again for infrastructure maintenance. And the fact is that car drivers have to pay this large tax before they can use ther vehicle. Rightly so, since they are far more damaging to roads and environment.

Rightly so because the damage they did to the existing roads when motor vehicles were introduced, and the improvements they demanded so as to exploit their vehicles' performance when they achieved widespread adoption was not a burden that all other tax payers should have had to shoulder.

[DaveP]

Ok, try it this way.
You have to pay an extra tax before you can use a motor vehicle on the road, thats true. But its just a tax, not a permit to drive.
Historically, the amount demanded has been determined by the chancellors need to balance his budget without upsetting anyone too much, and not by any calculations of environmental impact or wear and tear on the highways.
For most people the amounts involved, to date, are a fairly small contribution to the annual tax bill. IMO the reason it is so resented is that if you're on paye it could well be the biggest single tax payment that you have to unpocket. So when motorists get hot under the collar about the extra tax they have to pay they are not only making false assumptions about what they are paying for, they are also making a big fuss about a small event.

I'm not banging a drum here I just rose to the challenge of trying to explain something. This has probably been my best shot...

[workhard]

Ok, Ok Workhard - you can type faster than me

Sorry Dave, didn't mean to be a smart alec

My response to the road tax dullards is to point out that I DO PAY for the road I am actually on when they are kicking off at me. (as it always happens on a road maintained by the LA as I hardly ever cycle on trunk roads and never on motorways)

[Phil_Lee]

I was discussing the road tax issue with someone and they pointed out, rightly it seems to me, that cars do pay more 'road tax' or vehicle excise duty through paying for the tax disc that you display in your front window.

Yes "vehicle excise duty" is the correct name, and the level is determined by emissions, NOT on road use.
So on a bicycle you pay exactly what you are supposed to - if anyone gets a free ride it's the so called "low emission" cars (how do they think that electricity is generated?), who also pay nothing.

VED doesn't pay for the roads anyway, they are paid for out of council tax and general taxation (both of which cyclists contribute to as much as car drivers).

[Big John]

I think Workhard makes a valid point - its all very well dealing with confrontation on a subjective basis (I can handle what comes to me being my default reaction) - but that doesn't take account of the next cyclist up the road who will bear the brunt of "mr Psycho"'s reaction to his altercation with you.

I tend to avoid confrontation on the basis that it stores up future trouble for me (Gateshead is not a big place, I'm quite recognisable and there is already at least one motorist - ironically a Halfords cycle mechanic who decided the bonnet of his car would look good with a fat rugby player shaped dent in it) who doesn't exactly love me) - but more importantly for other cyclists - if I cause a confrontation and successfully intimidate whoever is behind the wheel, they are more likely to take it out on the next cyclist they see.

I love driving, and am saddened that there has to be a "them and us" mentality - but if it has to be that way I don't want to make life any harder for another cyclist.

[kwackers]

I think Workhard makes a valid point - its all very well dealing with confrontation on a subjective basis (I can handle what comes to me being my default reaction) - but that doesn't take account of the next cyclist up the road who will bear the brunt of "mr Psycho"'s reaction to his altercation with you.

I tend to avoid confrontation on the basis that it stores up future trouble for me (Gateshead is not a big place, I'm quite recognisable and there is already at least one motorist - ironically a Halfords cycle mechanic who decided the bonnet of his car would look good with a fat rugby player shaped dent in it) who doesn't exactly love me) - but more importantly for other cyclists - if I cause a confrontation and successfully intimidate whoever is behind the wheel, they are more likely to take it out on the next cyclist they see.

I love driving, and am saddened that there has to be a "them and us" mentality - but if it has to be that way I don't want to make life any harder for another cyclist.

But then there is a balance - 'behave like a doormat' as the saying goes...

There's no point escalating a situation, but you should at least say something. Otherwise it's quite likely people will assume it's OK to treat cyclists as if they don't matter.

[AlanD]

It is very difficult to be objective and pursue a sound reasoned point, adding reference to chapter & verse of The Highway Code, when you are high on adrenalin and out of breath; whilst the other person is comfortable, safe and entrenched in the view that they can do no wrong and it's your fault for being there.
However....
My latest encounter involved a nearmiss with a builders van for a large established and local business. So I rang up the company and asked to speak with one of the senior management. I was passed onto a lady who said that she was one of the Directors. I calmly explained what happened and quoted a couple of references from the HC about overtaking. As promised, she rang me back later that day. She had spoken with the man concerned and he was most apologetic. No doubt he told all his mates so they will all know better that to take liberties with me.
Dinners on the table, bye...