Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

[sore thumb]

When in court it will be a jury that almost all will probably drive, the police that will almost all drive, the judge that will probably drive and the lawyers that will also probably drive.

It's a culture in this country to dislike cyclists and motoring offences and offences against cyclists are not seen as real crime.

So can cyclists really see crime committed against them dealt with correctly and true punishment dealt.

No, not whilst it is a true motorist culture with a dislike against cyclists.

[Psamathe]

Because a cyclist was assaulted nothing will be done.

If a person is assaulted whilst not having a bike on their person then a different story.

The video was released by the police. Hardly going to do that if nothing is to be done, in fact they fact it was released by the police shows something is being done (trying to find the person in question)

Could have been released because it was "an open case" and they want it closed. So it might happen they will interview the bloke, decide he really does regret what he did and has "learnt his lesson" so will close the case with no further action (and then they can start the search for the guy next time it happens and we can only hope the outcome is not worse then). But then I'm a cynic.

Ian

[jqdsffjdsoge]

Would he have done it if it was a man on the bike!? I doubt it very much

[youtube]c8MiuH6ZvEE[/youtube]


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/an ... 20291.html

Not at all wishing to justify this animal's behaviour in the slightest, but...

My golden rule is that pedestrians are vulnerable and at common law, have right of way almost everywhere.

I never shout at them, never pass them too close, and on shared paths, slow down to a snail's pace as I pass them.

So far, I have never had any grief from them. If they cross at a stupid place, I have been known to tut quietly, but there's no reason to shout at them, or tell them to get off the road, or whatever.

[kwackers]

My golden rule is that pedestrians are vulnerable and at common law, have right of way almost everywhere.

I never shout at them, never pass them too close, and on shared paths, slow down to a snail's pace as I pass them.

So far, I have never had any grief from them. If they cross at a stupid place, I have been known to tut quietly, but there's no reason to shout at them, or tell them to get off the road, or whatever.

I was in my car in the middle lane of a 3 lane approach to a large island controlled by traffic lights on Saturday when an old guy started slowly crossing. He was about to step into the final lane when the lights started changing and the car in that lane decided not to wait and drove forward and at him causing him to step back into my lane.
From that point on he was stuck as the lanes to my left and right started moving and ignored him. All I could do (much to the chagrin of the folk behind me) was wait until the lane cleared and he could continue. He was fairly infirm and looked quite panicky when the traffic started moving - but then I guess no one wants to be stuck in the middle of the road at the entrance to a busy island.
It's not the first time I've witnessed folk being stranded in the middle of roads, in fact 'darn sooth' it seems to be fairly standard motoring behaviour and in that respect cyclists have little to shout about either.

I wonder what most of the drivers that decided the green light gave them "right of way" would have thought had they viewed what happened from the side with one of their own elderly relatives in his place?

Pedestrians are most definitely the lowest class of citizen on the roads. The whole thing is upside down and it really needs changing.

[jqdsffjdsoge]

My golden rule is that pedestrians are vulnerable and at common law, have right of way almost everywhere.

I never shout at them, never pass them too close, and on shared paths, slow down to a snail's pace as I pass them.

So far, I have never had any grief from them. If they cross at a stupid place, I have been known to tut quietly, but there's no reason to shout at them, or tell them to get off the road, or whatever.

I was in my car in the middle lane of a 3 lane approach to a large island controlled by traffic lights on Saturday when an old guy started slowly crossing. He was about to step into the final lane when the lights started changing and the car in that lane decided not to wait and drove forward and at him causing him to step back into my lane.
From that point on he was stuck as the lanes to my left and right started moving and ignored him. All I could do (much to the chagrin of the folk behind me) was wait until the lane cleared and he could continue. He was fairly infirm and looked quite panicky when the traffic started moving - but then I guess no one wants to be stuck in the middle of the road at the entrance to a busy island.
It's not the first time I've witnessed folk being stranded in the middle of roads, in fact 'darn sooth' it seems to be fairly standard motoring behaviour and in that respect cyclists have little to shout about either.

I wonder what most of the drivers that decided the green light gave them "right of way" would have thought had they viewed what happened from the side with one of their own elderly relatives in his place?

Pedestrians are most definitely the lowest class of citizen on the roads. The whole thing is upside down and it really needs changing.

Indeed, this must change. At the moment, cars get priority everywhere, and only have to stop periodically. We need a new system where pedestrians have absolute priority, and where cars only get to move, if there isn't a pedestrian in front. And we also need 'strict liability' for accidents, and I mean criminal, rather than civil. Establish a 'pyramid' with the most vulnerable users at the top. Any vehicle hitting a more vulnerable road user, the operator of that vehicle should be considered to have deliberately sought to inflict injury (cf ss. 18, 20 and 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861), unless they can prove otherwise.

[Flinders]

My golden rule is that pedestrians are vulnerable and at common law, have right of way almost everywhere.

I never shout at them, never pass them too close, and on shared paths, slow down to a snail's pace as I pass them.

So far, I have never had any grief from them. If they cross at a stupid place, I have been known to tut quietly, but there's no reason to shout at them, or tell them to get off the road, or whatever.

I was in my car in the middle lane of a 3 lane approach to a large island controlled by traffic lights on Saturday when an old guy started slowly crossing. He was about to step into the final lane when the lights started changing and the car in that lane decided not to wait and drove forward and at him causing him to step back into my lane.
From that point on he was stuck as the lanes to my left and right started moving and ignored him. All I could do (much to the chagrin of the folk behind me) was wait until the lane cleared and he could continue. He was fairly infirm and looked quite panicky when the traffic started moving - but then I guess no one wants to be stuck in the middle of the road at the entrance to a busy island.
It's not the first time I've witnessed folk being stranded in the middle of roads, in fact 'darn sooth' it seems to be fairly standard motoring behaviour and in that respect cyclists have little to shout about either.

I wonder what most of the drivers that decided the green light gave them "right of way" would have thought had they viewed what happened from the side with one of their own elderly relatives in his place?

Pedestrians are most definitely the lowest class of citizen on the roads. The whole thing is upside down and it really needs changing.

There is a bit of a difference between the scene you describe and the video though.
As a driver or cyclist, if someone starts crossing the road at lights when my light is red or amber or flashing amber, I would always regard them as having the right to cross, and that I should wait for them (and that includes not taking my brakes off or revving my engine as some drivers do).
But if people choose to cross at a crossing when the light is green for me instead of stopping, I expect them to give way to me, as I would give way in their place.
Otherwise, there is no point having lighted crossings, you should just have zebras (which I actually think would be better for the elderly etc., except unfortunately some drivers/cyclists are less likely to obey them than to obey lights).

If there is no crossing, and an elderly, infirm, or young person is waiting to cross at a junction, or a roundabout, I will generally try to give way to them if it is safe to do so (but if you do that you have to be very careful not to encourage someone to do something unsafe; you need to watch other traffic carefully in case it looks like it will over/undertake and put them in danger).

[LollyKat]

My golden rule is that pedestrians are vulnerable and at common law, have right of way almost everywhere.

I never shout at them, never pass them too close, and on shared paths, slow down to a snail's pace as I pass them.

I entirely agree with this, but............perhaps you don't appreciate how intimidating it can sometimes be for a lone woman on a bike in such circumstances. Many years ago I was once groped in a most unpleasant manner by three yobs while I was waiting at a red traffic light. I don't know why - I suppose they thought it funny. Although realistically I wasn't going to be gang raped in broad daylight in the middle of a busy junction, I nevertheless suffered from panic attacks for some time whenever I saw young men waiting to cross the road.

Yes, cars and bikes should give way to pedestrians, but at the same time is there not a certain 'etiquette' in jay walking, when pedestrians stop and start between lanes of traffic. In the video the man crosses against his red light, which the cyclist wouldn't necessarily have expected. He could easily have slowed slightly to let her passed, but he strides on towards her - she may well have perceived his confidence as aggression and been scared to stop. I know there was a time when I would have been, and I think I would have carried on just as she did. And, given her 'Please...' it seems to me more likely that she just put a hand out to ward him off.

Pedestrians may have the right of way but sometimes my sense of personal safety affects my reactions. What is your technique when groups of youths see you coming, deliberately spill off the pavement and try to bar your way? I have to say that mine is to ride as fast as I can straight at them - so far they have always jumped back. Do you really think I should stop???

[jqdsffjdsoge]

My golden rule is that pedestrians are vulnerable and at common law, have right of way almost everywhere.

I never shout at them, never pass them too close, and on shared paths, slow down to a snail's pace as I pass them.

I entirely agree with this, but............perhaps you don't appreciate how intimidating it can sometimes be for a lone woman on a bike in such circumstances. Many years ago I was once groped in a most unpleasant manner by three yobs while I was waiting at a red traffic light. I don't know why - I suppose they thought it funny. Although realistically I wasn't going to be gang raped in broad daylight in the middle of a busy junction, I nevertheless suffered from panic attacks for some time whenever I saw young men waiting to cross the road.

Yes, cars and bikes should give way to pedestrians, but at the same time is there not a certain 'etiquette' in jay walking, when pedestrians stop and start between lanes of traffic. In the video the man crosses against his red light, which the cyclist wouldn't necessarily have expected. He could easily have slowed slightly to let her passed, but he strides on towards her - she may well have perceived his confidence as aggression and been scared to stop. I know there was a time when I would have been, and I think I would have carried on just as she did. And, given her 'Please...' it seems to me more likely that she just put a hand out to ward him off.

Pedestrians may have the right of way but sometimes my sense of personal safety affects my reactions. What is your technique when groups of youths see you coming, deliberately spill off the pavement and try to bar your way? I have to say that mine is to ride as fast as I can straight at them - so far they have always jumped back. Do you really think I should stop???

I'm sorry that happened to you. There is no excuse for behaviour like that. None at all.

I've never had a group of youths behave in that manner, so don't know what the appropriate reaction would be. But then, I'm male and 6'4'', so obviously, you'd unfortunately be more of a target for them. My general rule is that I don't look for trouble, but that if a group came before me, I would go 'scorched earth' and either I would be seriously hurt, or the youths would be in hospital by the time the dust settled. There is no excuse for unprovoked violence. Always escalate, is my view.

[kwackers]

Pedestrians may have the right of way but sometimes my sense of personal safety affects my reactions. What is your technique when groups of youths see you coming, deliberately spill off the pavement and try to bar your way? I have to say that mine is to ride as fast as I can straight at them - so far they have always jumped back. Do you really think I should stop???

You wouldn't be the first cyclist to have done this and caused someones death.
The last guy got away with a £2,200 fine - would you be that lucky? You'd need to be pretty sure that you were in danger imo to risk a potential jail sentence.
(Then there's the possibility of simply being given a push as you go past and the faster you're going...)

Hope you're wearing a camera.

[kwackers]

There is a bit of a difference between the scene you describe and the video though.

Only in degrees.

But if people choose to cross at a crossing when the light is green for me instead of stopping, I expect them to give way to me, as I would give way in their place.

And if they don't? Your justification in court would be "well I could have stopped but decided I had right of way". Good luck with that.

I have to deal with pedestrians all the time and some are incredibly dozy - but then that's their right. There's no need for a pedestrian to be compos mentis, we just have to deal with it regardless of the justifications we like to think up.

The whole attitude of "I'm coming through and not stopping" frankly sucks and your average motorist (and cyclist) seems to think it applies to almost any section of tarmac they can drive on.
IMO it's time it stopped and time we started clamping down on the idiots with that mindset.

[jqdsffjdsoge]

I have to deal with pedestrians all the time and some are incredibly dozy - but then that's their right. There's no need for a pedestrian to be compos mentis, we just have to deal with it regardless of the justifications we like to think up.

... is the right answer.

[AlaninWales]

I have to deal with pedestrians all the time and some are incredibly dozy - but then that's their right. There's no need for a pedestrian to be compos mentis, we just have to deal with it regardless of the justifications we like to think up.

... is the right answer.

There's no requirement for them to be compos mentis, and that can (and does) mean that damaged individuals with anger management issues - or even outright sociopaths are amongst the pedestrian (and cycling and driving) population. Just because you haven't experienced it does not mean that Lollykat hasn't nor that the female involved in the video posted in the OP hasn't. Your interpretations of her statements have all assumed that she had no reason to believe this person was assaulting her when first seen on the released clip - an unwarranted assumption.
Even as a 6'6" male with martial arts training I too have had that sort of assault from pedestrians (on one occasion an overtaking car emptied of four men armed with metal bars, on another I was slapped by a female as I cycled past - completely unprovoked but elicited laughter from the mixed-sex gang with her). My own guess looking at the clip is that this very likely had a history, presumably someone having tried to knock her off in the past (perhaps the same person, or occurring in the same place).
Do you both really believe that Lollykat (and the female in the OP) should deal with such behaviour by stopping? I know I wouldn't (and didn't in the examples above).

[kwackers]

Do you both really believe that Lollykat (and the female in the OP) should deal with such behaviour by stopping? I know I wouldn't (and didn't in the examples above).

Every case is different. My interpretation of events is different to yours; for example my interpretation of the OP is that there was no reason for her not to slow down, she had both the reason to do so and the time.
Had she hit the pedestrian and I'd been on the jury then I'd have no problem finding in the pedestrians favour. Perhaps there is prior history - but can she prove it? If not then it doesn't matter.

No matter how right you feel you are every action has consequences and one's interpretation of events isn't necessarily the same as others.

[AlaninWales]

Do you both really believe that Lollykat (and the female in the OP) should deal with such behaviour by stopping? I know I wouldn't (and didn't in the examples above).

Every case is different. My interpretation of events is different to yours; for example my interpretation of the OP is that there was no reason for her not to slow down, she had both the reason to do so and the time.
Had she hit the pedestrian and I'd been on the jury then I'd have no problem finding in the pedestrians favour. Perhaps there is prior history - but can she prove it? If not then it doesn't matter.

No matter how right you feel you are every action has consequences and one's interpretation of events isn't necessarily the same as others.

She didn't hit the pedestrian though, she passed him further away than cyclists pass pedestrians in vids of that nirvana that is Holland and he was the one in control of that distance.

"my interpretation of the OP is that there was no reason for her not to slow down" As Lollykat has pointed out, there may well have been very good reason for her not to slow down. Can you really not understand that she may have justifiably felt threatened?

[661-Pete]

When in court it will be a jury that almost all will probably drive, the police that will almost all drive, the judge that will probably drive and the lawyers that will also probably drive.

I drive. Most of the contributors to this forum drive. I don't know whether you do. Is it your intention to stigmatise all drivers simply because they drive?