Jeremny Vine a road rage victim

[reohn2]

I don't understand how the right thing was to get the **** out of the way.

Usually IME a feeling for the situation as it unfolds.

I agree that was probably the sensible thing to do, and likely what I would do,

but I'm glad that there are people in the world who will confront agressive and abusive drivers.

TBH I've done my fair share of confronting such morons,it only ever spoils my ride/day,though occasionally it works out for the best,and sometimes it's unavoidable.But generally morons are usually determined to be morons,it's where their head is,for whatever reason,no one else is in their minds but there own pigheaded selfishness agenda and some are capable of lunacy which must be borne in mind.
I still think JV could've defused that situation before it got to where it got,there's some pleasure gained by taking the wind out of such people's sails,even if they do think they've 'won'

[MikeF]

A lot of replies seem to be forgetting this woman was driving an untaxed vehicle (from when the car changed owners 2 months ago as Meic noted), possibly without insurance as you need insurance to tax a vehicle, and was driving and behaving in an abnormally aggressive manner (drugs?). Whatever your opinions of Mr Vine, this woman should not be driving with that behaviour.

[Flinders]

I don't (at present) wear a camera. I get incidents regularly when driving or cycling, though.
I think if I had a camera, I'd remember more of them, so it might seem worse.

E.g., cycling on quiet country roads yesterday. I was approaching a roundabout, going straight on. An idiot driver overtook me and then turned left across me just as I got to the line - the driver didn't even signal, so even my wing mirrors gave me no warning. That sort of driving is just par for the course. If I'd had a camera, I might have done something about it, I didn't, so there was nothing I could do.

[reohn2]

A lot of replies seem to be forgetting this woman was driving an untaxed vehicle (from when the car changed owners 2 months ago as Meic noted), possibly without insurance as you need insurance to tax a vehicle, and was driving and behaving in an abnormally aggressive manner (drugs?). Whatever your opinions of Mr Vine, this woman should not be driving with that behaviour.

I've no doubt we're dealing with an idiotic selfish git,but given that JV or anyone else FTM can't tell the difference between a sane person and mad one(temporarily or otherwise)until they begin their tirade of abuse,or if the vehicle they're driving at the time is legal or not the best bet is to play save.
The government when the reduced police numbers reduced effective policing and morale of the remaining police.
When they announced there to be no need for a visible VED disc,they also made it far easier for such people to evade tax as the figures have proved since the new law.

Yes,I agree she shouldn't have been driving,the problem was that she was,like so many others,and traffic policing is so ineffective it's obvious she and many others like her can do so with impunity,and they know it.
Indeed they're so emboldened they feel they also have the right to abuse people on the street as and when they see fit the law is so ineffective.
As TC's sig says gang warily and may I add,for you don't know when the next person with a tonne of powerful metal at their disposal will be an unstable lunatic.

[reohn2]

I don't (at present) wear a camera. I get incidents regularly when driving or cycling, though.
I think if I had a camera, I'd remember more of them, so it might seem worse.

E.g., cycling on quiet country roads yesterday. I was approaching a roundabout, going straight on. An idiot driver overtook me and then turned left across me just as I got to the line - the driver didn't even signal, so even my wing mirrors gave me no warning. That sort of driving is just par for the course. If I'd had a camera, I might have done something about it, I didn't, so there was nothing I could do.

What would that something be?
If it were to report it to the police there's an odds on bet nothing would have happened,because unless such driving caused injury or worse,the police due to being completely overwhelmed with such cases would've filed it,possibly in the round one under the desk.

The standard of driving by a significant element of road users is low to say the least,illegal driven cars is on the rise as police numbers decline,traffic policing is practically non existent.

[Bonefishblues]

A lot of replies seem to be forgetting this woman was driving an untaxed vehicle (from when the car changed owners 2 months ago as Meic noted), possibly without insurance as you need insurance to tax a vehicle, and was driving and behaving in an abnormally aggressive manner (drugs?). Whatever your opinions of Mr Vine, this woman should not be driving with that behaviour.

I've no doubt we're dealing with an idiotic selfish git,but given that JV or anyone else FTM can't tell the difference between a sane person and mad one(temporarily or otherwise)until they begin their tirade of abuse,or if the vehicle they're driving at the time is legal or not the best bet is to play save.
The government when the reduced police numbers reduced effective policing and morale of the remaining police.
When they announced there to be no need for a visible VED disc,they also made it far easier for such people to evade tax as the figures have proved since the new law.

Yes,I agree she shouldn't have been driving,the problem was that she was,like so many others,and traffic policing is so ineffective it's obvious she and many others like her can do so with impunity,and they know it.
Indeed they're so emboldened they feel they also have the right to abuse people on the street as and when they see fit the law is so ineffective.
As TC's sig says gang warily and may I add,for you don't know when the next person with a tonne of powerful metal at their disposal will be an unstable lunatic.

In the shell of a nut.

[The utility cyclist]

I've watched the video a few times now and IMO JV had two opportunities to to give way to the Corsa and didn't.
At the very beginning of the video (camera forward facing)there's a red car on either side of the road,when viewed behind(rear camera)there's enough room for him to pull over without hardly slowing to let the Corsa through.
At the point where he stops,with the Corsa behind him(rear camera)there's again room for him to move over as there's no cars parked on either side of the road where he's stopped(see the front camera view after the altercation) but he doesn't pull over,he IMO deliberately blocks the Corsa's overtake and progress to make what's already a bad situation worse.

The Corsa driver is on a short fuse and I have no truck with her extremely aggressive driving attitude,language or manner when out of the car,she escalates the incident out of all reason but JV milks it IMHO.

IMHO,when this goes 'viral' he'll have done cycling no favours in the eyes of the more aggressive driver types.

My 2d's worth

Why should JV pull over, he was neither hindering nor riding illegally?
I'm sure on your daily route there are chances for you to pull over to the side of the road to let 'traffic' past, I expect you don't and hold secondary/primary right thus you are deliberately blocking other road users progress. I'm sure if I catch you on the road whilst cycling and you don't pull over I'll use intimidatory tactics to try to force you to pull over so I can bully my way past, I'm sure you'd be happy for that to happen right?

Just so we are all clear how often should one pull over in built up areas for other road users coming from behind and please justify why you feel this is fair and appropriate?

[reohn2]

Why should JV pull over, he was neither hindering nor riding illegally?
I'm sure on your daily route there are chances for you to pull over to the side of the road to let 'traffic' past, I expect you don't and hold secondary/primary right thus you are deliberately blocking other road users progress. I'm sure if I catch you on the road whilst cycling and you don't pull over I'll use intimidatory tactics to try to force you to pull over so I can bully my way past, I'm sure you'd be happy for that to happen right?

Just so we are all clear how often should one pull over in built up areas for other road users coming from behind and please justify why you feel this is fair and appropriate?

Please read my other posts on the subject.

There are times when I'll deliberately block an overtake by riding primary,when it's for my safety,that's the important bit.
There are other times when I'll deliberately pull over to allow a car or other traffic to pass,I won't go into detail of as and when because feel sure most forks will understand such situations.
Suffice to say that IMO with his own video evidence to back it up that he had ample room and time in two places to let the goonatic pass.
In this case if it were me,without JV's access to the media and his possible reasons for not doing as a result,letting the loonie get ahead would've been the right decision,as preventing her passage would've just spoiled my day at best and possibly worse.

Should you think I'm some gutter hugging fearful cyclist who shy's away from confrontation,think again,I don't and won't take the crap handed out by idiotic 'might is right' scaremongers,but equally I won't hold up traffic for my own entertainment.
YVMV,mine won't

[awavey]

Do people with cameras have more incidents or do people with more incidents get cameras? I suppose we also should know how many miles and where and when people ride, some people's YouTube channels seem to have loads of incidents, maybe it's them, maybe it's where and when they ride and how often.

I doubt the rate of incidents, unless you are traffic droid, changes, the difference is with a camera you get to review those incidents, relive it a few times, get annoyed about it all over again, and then post it to the interweb.

whereas if you dont have a camera, by the time you get home youve mostly calmed down about it, and youve realised you cant really do anything about it...except maybe grumble in an internet forum.

I probably had 4 incidents last week of close passes/punishment passes/impatient motorists, that had I had video of Id have probably posted online, but since I dont they dont even get counted, its just a normal week (well last week did seem a bit extreme - 1st week back to work after holidays for some folk I guess) of riding to work.

[horizon]

Can anyone say how fast JV was going, how fast the driver wanted to go (I assume she was going at his speed) and how fast she should have been driving in that street? *

My own estimated figures are:

12 mph
20 - 30 mph
12 mph

* Before he stopped in her way

[reohn2]

Can anyone say how fast JV was going, how fast the driver wanted to go (I assume she was going at his speed) and how fast she should have been driving in that street? *

My own estimated figures are:

12 mph
20 - 30 mph
12 mph

* Before he stopped in her way

He doesn't seem to be going very quick to me 10/12mph maybe,but is it relevant?
If there's room to let the car pass,let it get out of the way,we've seen the alternative to not doing so why bother holding it up unless it's a safer option,let the goon go.

[horizon]

He doesn't seem to be going very quick to me 10/12mph maybe,but is it relevant?
If there's room to let the car pass,let it get out of the way,we've seen the alternative to not doing so why bother holding it up unless it's a safer option,let the goon go.

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

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. The fact is that she was driving too fast for the road and his speed was quite adequate for the conditions. And in fact, she couldn't overtake. Except to avoid aggression, JV did the right thing by everyone.

[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.

[horizon]

JV was already going at the maximum speed (for all vehicles but particularly cars) for that stretch of street. Even if he wasn't, it would be polite at least to let him finish. And I would expect JV to do the decent thing and uphold the values of our country - protect the weak, challenge the overbearing and aggressive. Must we all leave our moral standards at home when we go out on a bike?

I'd draw a parallel.

I suppose the parallel for me would be that very English sense of politeness that prompts one to move out of the way of a mugger robbing an old lady -as you say, let people be accountable for their own actions.

[Bonefishblues]

JV was already going at the maximum speed (for all vehicles but particularly cars) for that stretch of street. Even if he wasn't, it would be polite at least to let him finish. And I would expect JV to do the decent thing and uphold the values of our country - protect the weak, challenge the overbearing and aggressive. Must we all leave our moral standards at home when we go out on a bike?

I'd draw a parallel.

I suppose the parallel for me would be that very English sense of politeness that prompts one to move out of the way of a mugger robbing an old lady -as you say, let people be accountable for their own actions.

JV is not policing the roads nor is he accountable for managing or controlling others, especially from a position of consummate vulnerability.

Your "parallel"