Vorpal wrote:I'll put it a different way. If the law protected vulnerable road users, it is likely that fewer incidents would escalate (even if they occurred). Motorists (even if a minority) wouldn't feel they were within their rights intimidating and harassing vulnerable people. And lack of support in the system for cyclists contributes to cyclists' anger. It is ever so much easier to reach boiling point when a bus squeezing past is the umpteenth bullying encounter on the day. And much easier to remain polite when it is the first.
Approved for peer review publication (but I can't find it anywhere) is the latest study by Ian Walker which shows that the visibility of the clothing you wear during daylight hours makes no difference to driver behaviour, 1 - 2% of them will perform close passes - it doesn't matter whether you wear black or a luminous banana suit. If you commute 3 hours a day on busy London roads 1 - 2% is an unacceptably high figure which accumulates on your psyche.
In one of Spike Milligan's books he reflects on his PTSD, and accusations of cowardice with a brilliant observation. "Why didn't you shoot me for cowardice before the war, I was a coward then too" He had a knack for illustrating the absurdity of social judgements, and he has a point. There's something wrong about judging a person who would not exhibit the judged behaviour if not repeatedly provoked, and I'm afraid I'm no Ghandi or Tutu. Everyone has their own thresholds. Perhaps society should just round those up with lower threshold and charge them now. Since the human condition is endemic in a percentage of the population, why wait?