Police are appealing for witnesses after a Cambridgeshire motorist claimed a cyclist left a ‘significant dent’ in a rear door panel in a road rage incident.
The Haverhill Echo reports that the incident took place near West Wratting on June 8.
A police spokesperson said: “It was reported that the victim, a man in his 70s, was driving along the B1052 when he approached a group of cyclists and sounded his horn to alert them that he was close by and about to overtake.
“At this point, it’s reported one cyclist pulled out into the road and stopped, bringing the driver to a halt. The cyclist then lifted his bike and began shouting verbal abuse towards the driver.
“As the victim attempted to drive off, damage was caused to the vehicle causing a dent to one of the rear passenger doors. No arrests have been made and the investigation is ongoing.”
Anyone with information can contact police on 101, quoting incident 210 of June 8.
“I think from the public’s perspective he needs to be caught,” said the anonymous motorist. “Can you imagine that someone can stop a car in the middle of the road and use his bike to bang the side of the car and then get off scot-free? I don’t think that is reasonable.”
The driver said that it was the first time he and his wife had been out for a drive in months as they had been shielding.
He said the incident had done “inestimable” damage to his wife.
“She is actually terrified of me actually talking to anyone about this. She has been destroyed by this. She was really distressed.”
74 thoughts on “Cambridgeshire police appeal for witnesses after beeping motorist says his car was damaged by cyclist”
I will withhold comment on
I will withhold comment on who is at fault in this case. I know people like this exist, but I highly doubt this is the full story.
You don’t honk to tell people you will overtake; you find an opportunity to do so safely, even if it means waiting for a clear stretch of road. honking startles cyclists and can cause accidents.
Dao wrote:
It is only one side of the story, and it’s quite possible that the car owner was not blameless. It’s hard to see what would justify deliberately physically damaging the car though, so unless it turns out that the dent was actually due to them driving in to the cyclist, it seems fairly clear that the cyclist was at fault.
I dont know, Ive often
I dont know, Ive often thought when people try to drive their car into me,and more so the deliberate ones than the plain not paying attention ones, Id happily lash out a foot to protect myself if I felt threatened of being imminently squished,an spd would make a nice mess of the paintwork. ymmv
I can’t say I wouldn’t do the
I can’t say I wouldn’t do the same myself. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be at fault if I did though.
another question is if the
another question is if the cyclist had any role in the dent to begin with. there are many ways to dent your car and most of them due to the drivers own carelessness. if its just a dent and no paint transfer from the bike it’s going to be a stretch to say either way.
a dent is just a bit of cosmetic damage and the issue the “anonymous” driver is pushing is the trauma of a cyclist getting angry at him.
as we won’t get the full story it is hard to say who over-reacted. for some, even just a little aggressiveness can seem like a really big problem, or conversely others are very aggressive themselves and like to inflate the issue beyond what it was and pass the blame while it is convenient to do so.
I want to see the story after the police have finished investigating and a verdict reached.
I have been having
I have been having counselling recently. One of the recurring themes that just popped up out of the blue is how, over the past 40 years, I have had to stifle feelings of rage, vulnerability, tearfulness, victimisation and horror, and tried to forget painful physical injury (several times). I have experienced total lack of interest or even hostility from the police when reporting, and sheer hopelessness that anything will ever change. I have had to endure this so that I can continue to do something I love, which is cycle.
This is not from being physically attacked, punched and knifed on the streets, (though I could tell you stories!). It’s from the 40 years of daily attacks from drivers, including close passes, indifference, darts out from side turnings, shouts, physical injury, bikes wrecked and hospitalisation etc. Those attacks from complete stranger drivers are so normalised that it took my discussions with the counsellor to realise that my daily cycling journeys have had traumatic effects on my mental health. Just because we don’t know if the driver sees us, means to maim us, means well… doesn’t mean their actions don’t have a huge effect on our mental health. And we are the ones who are trying to make this world a better, healthier place! Bah!
When I read of a cyclist lashing out, I feel instant sympathy with them. I am a pacifist and against aggression, and know I won’t carry through my wicked thoughts, when some f*&%^r driver cuts me up or knocks me off my bike yet again.
Anyway the counselling has been going great. I can’t believe I have held in 40 years of anger about the way I have been treated as a cyclist on our roads. It is very cathartic and I highly recommend it. Not sure my counsellor is going to get on a bike any time soon, though soz ….xxx
Dao wrote:
A fine example of a split infinitive there!
Spangly Shiny wrote:
err… no it’s not.
It’s not an infinitive, so it can’t be a split infinitive.
Just politely sayin’
Impossible to know what
Impossible to know what really happened but extremely unlikely the driver was not excessively close to the cyclists and trying to intimidate them using his horn to cause someone to react like that. I think a lot of cyclists have simply had enough.
i also suspect that “i have
i also suspect that “i have driven for 3 months” statement means that a 70 year old was probably driving at worse standards than usual, having forgotten the width of the their vehicle.
I also have to query “one cyclist pulled out into the road and stopped, bringing the driver to a halt.”.
1. they were clearly already “in the road” given his statement about letting them know he was about to overtake.
2. if the cyclist halting was enough to stop the car in a two lane road -that implies that maybe, just maybe, he wasn’t actually changing lanes to get past. instead just sounding his horn and trying to squeeze past in a vehicle whose width he’d forgotten
would love to see any video of the incident
Sounds to me like the driver
Sounds to me like the driver used his horn to intimidate the wrong cyclists. At least no-one got hurt.
Cars can’t be dented if you
Cars can’t be dented if you don’t close pass. The damage to his wife was ‘inestimable’? I’m sure with the passage of time she will make a full recovery.
I know drivers think they are helping by beeping to make their presence known but it really isn’t helpful. It just comes across as aggressive.
Waleskun wrote:
Not sure how you figure that. I’m pretty sure I could easily dent a car that was parked up going nowhere. According to the report (which, granted, is only the car owner’s story) the cyclist had blocked the road, forcing them to stop the car, before the damage was done.
A car can’t pass you closely
A car can’t pass you closely if it is parked up. I actually think it would be pretty hard for a rider to stop a driver that didn’t want to stop. Normally they pull up in front of you to ask what you remonstrating about which if a car beeped me for no apparent reason from behind I would probably do in some form.
Cars can be replaced/repaired. People not so much.
Waleskun wrote:
That’s kind of my point. I can easily dent a parked car. A parked car can’t close pass me. So the statement that you can’t dent a car unless it close passes you is clearly nonsense.
If they didn’t want to stop no matter what, no. But it’s fairly easy to stop someone who isn’t prepared to just run you down, especially on a narrow road, by just moving to a position where they can’t safely pass and slowing to a stop.
Not sure what any of that has to do with anything – it’s not relevant to what’s reported to have happened in this case.
Well it’s safe to say I’m not
Well it’s safe to say I’m not sure what is reported here quite adds up. I mean yes, I’m sure you can dent a car if you want to. Well done. But if the car is being driven and you are on the road, you’re not making contact with it unless they pass closely. Maybe they had a chat when they stopped and tempers flared. You would think a conversation would be reported though. If the ‘Victim’ just drove past the cyclist as they stopped he has close passed if his car was damaged as reported. Maybe the Police investigation will take this into account. I doubt it.
But according to the report,
But according to the report, the car was not being driven – it had been stopped due to the cyclist blocking its path, and the cyclist, who was supposedly irate, then attacked and dented the car. There may well have been more to the story (like an exchange of words that wound up the cyclist to the point of physical violence), but the account as it stands is not impossible. And even if there was more to it, it doesn’t excuse deliberately damaging the car.
Society would be greatly
Society would be greatly improved if all cars were fitted with fixed duration clown horns.
I wonder if anyone has done a study into horn perception? Tone, oscillation, duration, volume?
Much like we hear cases of peds on shared use paths complaining of aggressive cyclists ringing their bells the same is undoubtedly true for car horns.
My Volvo has an utterly pathetic horn sound, somewhat similar to an old rotary dial telephone ring. Impossible to intimidate anyone with it.
it reminds me of that the
it reminds me of that the episode from the Simpsons when Mr Burns hits Bart with his car… #beepbeepoutofmywayImamotorist
“He said the incident had
“He said the incident had done “inestimable” damage to his wife.
“She is actually terrified of me actually talking to anyone about this. She has been destroyed by this. She was really distressed.”
I saw a carrot last month. Been too terrified to go outside since and I get recurring nightmares all the time.
Far too terrified to allow
Far too terrified to allow the driver to talk to the local rag.
Hmmm…
Is the pcture in the article
Is the pcture in the article from the event? If so that appears to be a pair of cyclists and not a group although increasing the number embellishes the story and creates a greater sense of threat to life when retelling the story.
Also, in true cyclist v motorist contact surely the press should point the blame at the bicycle just as they blame the motorvehicle when a motorist hits a cyclist?
I assumed it was a stock
I assumed it was a stock photo, as if there was footage it would have been released for indentification.
Worse case cyclist loses rag under physical threat, but it wasn’t as if he lumped the pensioner. I can understand lashing out under flight or fight mode.
Photo is from the road
Photo is from the road described, and does state “The car approaches two cyclists just before they reach the village sign for West Wratting”. “The car” indicates it is the same one, though not clear if it was “the cyclists”. Whenever I’ve reported dangerous drivers to Cambridge police, they’ve refused to speak to me, let alone the local paper on my behalf……….
More like his wife is now
More like his wife is now terrified of his driving which has fallen below any acceptable standard after months of not going out.
“…sounded his horn to alert them that he was close by and about to overtake” is not a courtesy beep from some way back to notify of presence, which most cylists understand and appreciate. It is an aggressive “get out of my way I’m coming past, safe or not, whether you like it or not”.
If the picture in the newspaper article is of the “offender” then it is most likely a still from a video dash cam. Would be interesting to see the entire footage, though one suspects if the driver was totally out of order, that plod would not be pursuing it.
well I wouldnt read too much
well I wouldnt read too much into that,the owner of the car has raised a complaint to the police, it probably counts as criminal damage, same as if you’d keyed a car, rather than accident damage as the result of an unplanned collision, the police are obliged to pursue it to ascertain the facts without their opinions clouding it.
though if someone clonked you car hard enough to dent it, youd probably consider stopping perhaps to exchange some details at the time, saves you the bother of trying to locate them later ?
seems a bit of an over
seems a bit of an over-reaction, I suspect there’s more than just a bit of horn involved.
mind you, if the photo is the location of the incident, then it’s definately not an appropriate place to overtake.
Blind right hand bend…
Blind right hand bend…
And I have never appreciated a driver using their horn.
Even as a thanks when you pull over to let them pass, I still find it aggressive, a wave or a flick on the hazards or left right on the indicators, much nicer.
And when they rev their engine, might as well threaten to kill me…
Had the engibe revving here,
Had the engine revving here yesterday, when in L2 to go ahead, and getting closer all the time to then be undertaken as the porsche driver went straight on in L1.
hirsute wrote:
That’s based on what appears to be a common motorist belief: motorists going straight ahead go in the correct lane, so do ones turning left (based on your photo), and yet they expect cyclists to hug the left kerb until the very last moment no matter what…
Had a similar one a couple of
Had a similar one a couple of weeks ago which was a bit worse. Sent it off and it has come back with ‘Course or conditional offer’.
Hopefully the same for the porsche driver.
Well, right or wrong I guess
Well, right or wrong I guess he will think twice about using his horn to cyclists in the future. I must admit that a horn sounding from behind always makes my blood boil.
I’m pretty disappointed with
I’m pretty disappointed with some of the comments. Firstly, not all drivers who honk their horn are being impatient. Some genuinely think they’re being helpful (however misguided that may be).
But none of that justifies forcing the driver to stop the car and then hitting it hard enough to leave a dent. I’m not surprised that the occupants were shaken. Yes, nobody was hurt, but how did the driver and his wife know that it would stop there? How would you feel if it happened to your parents or grandparents?
was this you?
was this you?
the last pedestrian in that footage lashes out, possibly due to feeling threatened by the obnoxious and aggressive guy on a bike.
I don’t think anyone is condoning the actions of the cyclist. If this is an accurate account of the event, then it’s completely unacceptable. But there could be more to it.
Firstly, not all drivers who
Firstly, not all drivers who honk their horn are being impatient.
True but we don’t know whether that relates here as we’ve only heard one side.
But none of that justifies forcing the driver to stop the car and then hitting it hard enough to leave a dent.
Again we’ve only heard one side. Maybe the cyclist felt threatened by an impatient driver who used his horn aggressively and feared he would use his car as a weapon.
Yes, nobody was hurt, but how did the driver and his wife know that it would stop there?
Maybe, just maybe, the driver shouldn’t have started a confrontation, intentionally or otherwise. Again we don’t know the full events without hearing the other side.
How would you feel if it happened to your parents or grandparents?
Please, not a strawman.
So, we don’t know that the
So, we don’t know that the driver wasn’t honking his horn impatiently (although that’s what’s implied by the police statement), but we’re happy to speculate that the driver may have been using his car as a weapon?
At least one of the cyclists was very aggressive. We shouldn’t try to blame the victim. There are arseholes on bikes as well as arseholes in cars (and yes, I know, cars are more dangerous).
Lastly, can you please explain to me how I am making a straw man argument?
Are you saying none of the
Are you saying none of the cyclists was a victim?
As that requires you to take the drivers claims at face value, including the ‘inestimable’ claim and the very odd “one cyclist pulled out into the road and stopped, bringing the driver to a halt.”. Not sure how you pull out on to a road you are already on in a group of riders.
Cambridge Police refuse to
Cambridge Police refuse to treat cylists as victims, unless hospitalized. People reporting dangerous driving are treated by them as “witnesses” not victims (despite the Victims charter describing people endangered in road traffic accidents as victims). As such, they refuse to provide any information on the report, whether they took action, etc., citing “data privacy”. Purely coincidentally, Cambridge Police have an appalling record on failing to conduct investigations when such incidents are reported to them.
I completely get that not all
I completely get that not all drivers who honk their horns are being impatient. However, seeing as how I’m pretty sure that the horn should really be used only to warn of danger (I’m sure someone can supply the appropriate Highway Code reference), there really is absolutely no need for them to be used in the vast majority of cases they are. This particularly applies to motorists using them in interactions with cyclists. It’s pretty clear that the driver in this instance didn’t need to use his horn. I’ve had this thing happen to me multiple times, and all I can think is “If you’re using your horn to alert me of the danger involved in you passing me, then, um, you really shouldn’t be passing me”. But of course, most of the time it’s just misunderstanding why the horn should be used, or being intimidatory or aggressive. The amount of times that drivers use their horns at cyclists or pedestrians to simply say “get out of my way” is staggering. And the amount of the times that the driver simply could have wound down their window and politely asked the pedestrian if they could step aside is also staggering. I was once waiting on my bike at a red light for temporary road works on the Ullswater Road in the Lake District. The light changed but I could see there was a cyclist still coming through. I waited and the car behind me honked their horn at me. I understand why this might be appropraite to do to another car driver who you feel may have not noticed the lights changing, as they are cocooned in their vehicle. But why on earth couldn’t they have just wound down their window and said “The light’s changed mate” or something similar – then I could have explained why I was still waiting. As it was, because of the inherently aggressive nature of sounding their horn, I turned around, swore at them and gave them the finger, and pointed to the cyclist as they came through.
Oh, I agree, I hate being
Oh, I agree, I hate being honked at. It always comes across as aggressive. Most of the time it is meant as aggressive. But not every time – some people genuinely think they’re being helpful (however misguided that may be).
The patient will always wait
The patient will always wait until it is safe to overtake.
The use of the horn is a sign of some impatience.
And has been pointed out is somewhat contrary to the Highway code.
ktache wrote:
I’ve had drivers in the UK overtake me in sensible places, at sensible speeds, giving me a good amount of space, but honked their horn before they did so. They weren’t doing it out of impatience.
in all the years Ive been
in all the years Ive been riding on UK roads, which does infact include the last century,and the many miles Ive ridden since, thats never ever happened to me
I’ve experienced similar
I’ve experienced similar myself a couple of times – drivers honking before overtaking me safely with plenty of room. It seems some drivers do actually think they’re doing you a favour, and acting safely, by doing this. They’re wrong, obviously. Though I guess on balance Id rather take that scenario than a close pass.
Achtervolger wrote:
It’s only happened to me a handful of times in decades but I really like it when someone gives a gentle pip before passing. Whether it’s right or wrong, they think they’re being considerate and trying to do the right thing. How rare is that? There should be two horn settings, one for the 99.9999999% of times when an arsey person uses it (quite illegally) as some form of retribution and the other one for the handful of people who are trying to be nice, even if misguided.
That’s interesting, I don’t
That’s interesting, I don’t think I’ve ever experienced a driver ‘pipping’ me before passing, though I can understand , now that you’ve mentioned it, why that might not be a bad thing. I think you’re right on the need for two horn noises!
Are we forgetting about morse
Are we forgetting about morse code, if drivers wish to express a range of different emotions or messages with their horns 🙂
Or perhaps a mini keyboard with a range of preset tones
I like the straightforward use of the horn to make other road users aware of your presence. We all know when it is being used considerately in the very rare event of needing to alert ahead of the overtake ( can’t immediately think when this would be necessary).
And we all know that the vast majority of the time it is being used to intimidate other road users – both cyclists and motorists. Why does the respect for other people seem to disappear once certain people take to the roads.
Achtervolger wrote:
The buses in Paris have horns but also a melodious bell that they ding to let cyclists know they’re coming in the shared bus/cycle lanes, very civilised.
Achtervolger wrote:
So it doesn’t strictly need to involve danger. And if we believe the driver’s account in this case, their usage was within the rules – they were warning the cyclists of their presence prior to an overtake. Whether that’s true or not we don’t really know.
That’s interesting, thanks
That’s interesting, thanks for the clarification.
I suppose it opens up a whole
I suppose it opens up a whole cornucopia of interpretation. In my mind, there shouldn’t really ever need to be a time when a motorist would need to use their horn, to warn cyclists of their presence, whilst performing an overtake – if the overtake is safe. But it crosses my mind that some motorists have the strange idea (nurtured by tabloid media etc) that cyclists are utterly unpredictable, and thus need to be warned that you are overtaking them, so they don’t suddenly swerve out into your path.
In Spain, its common practice
In Spain, its common practice to give two tiny pips on the horn to make riders aware of the vehicle. Its quite noticeable when its aggressive. Looking at the road, age stereotype, I would assume the driver is an impatient type and deserved the dent. He may think twice before confronting a rider
Bullies make the world’s
Bullies make the world’s greatest victims. You’re all being very even-handed about this – I’m going to jump in and speculate. I hope the police are also even handed and I hope the cyclist(s) comes forward.
Bullies are not above hiding behind other people the moment trouble arises from their actions: partners and children not excepted. I think the bit about not speaking to anyone and then it somehow finding its way into the local paper is the most telling. Also “Inestimable”?
This is no innocent motorist, he knows fine he’s done wrong with an iffy overtake, someone has over-boiled and is now he is trying to minimise and distract from his actions.
surely “pensioner” ” grandfather” “war veteran” ” former GP” in the newspaper account?
I cannot only roll out the
I cannot only roll out the litany of very real wrongs that are perpetrated against cyclists, but at the same time stay silent if it is the motorist who has become the victim of a crime ( irrespective of the circumstances leading up to that point ).
If the cyclist has damaged the vehicle, he should come forward to the police and answer their enquiries. Just like motorists should do so, when the boot is on the other foot.
Anominity, one of the perks
Anominity, one of the perks of cycling……..
99% of the time, a driver
99% of the time, a driver carries out a dangerous manoeuvre then just drives off with no consequences.
I don’t buy this registration plate = accountability idea. It simply doesn’t work that way in pracitce. Think about it.
Interesting that the
Interesting that the Cambridgeshire police statement three times refers to the complainant as “the victim”, thought the police are supposed to investigate claims, not make judgements about them.
“The victim” also claims that the cyclist “use his bike to bang the side of the car”. Anyone know a cyclist who would use their pride and joy to hit a car, something that’s likely to do more damage to bike than car?
By law you can cycle 2
By law you can cycle 2 abreast, by law you can use your horn to warn other road users of your presence.
When I ride the motorcycle I couldn’t understand why people would use SMIDSEY, if you are an experienced rider you would expect the vehicle sitting at the junction to pull out, so you take appropriate action before, move out to the right of lane, other lane or lastly reduce speed.
Fair enough you are in the right by law, but as you are wheeling yourself around in a wheelchair saying “, well I was in the right”, this is something I want to avoid.
Cycling is the same, no cyclist can say that they do not know that it P!sses drivers off when we cycle 2 abreast or in a group. even though it is legal, What I try to get groups to do is the rear rider shouts car back, and acknowledges the car with an acknowledgement wave. Then wave them past if it is safe.
None of us know what happened here, I have a fair idea, “Fecking group of cyclists, Beeeeeeeeeeeeeppppp, fecking cycle in single file, Beeeeeeepppp, then thump on the side of the car as he passed, then stop to confront them, as he is right.” But as I said none of us know.
Anyway, stay within the law up to a point. That point is where your safety is at risk.
You ignore the fact that it
You ignore the fact that it is frequently safer to ride two abreast, firstly to prevent drivers trying to squeeze through without leaving the mandatory 1.5 gap and secondly because it means their overtake time will be shorter.
we know it is, but most
we know it is, but most drivers are not cyclists, so do not understand why two abreast is easier to pass. Hence they give a retarded beep in anger. I’d have attacked the guys car too if they beeped at me. I’d probably stand in front of it until they got out, then take the keys and cycle off. If they can’t operate the vehicle correctly, they should not be driving it, so the keys will come home with me.
LOL,
LOL,
When I was instructing on the M-bike, one of our instructors had a driver bump a pupil deliberately, the instructor stopped took the keys out of the car and threw them in a field then they drove off. LMAO
I get that dream sometimes
I get that dream sometimes too.
This is something most
This is something most drivers dont understand, you are correct
as you are wheeling yourself
as you are wheeling yourself around in a wheelchair saying
If you’re resorting to that, it means you’ve lost the argument.
A horn should only be used
A horn should only be used when warning someone of any danger due to another vehicle or any other kind of danger, and not to indicate your annoyance.
It is illegal to use a horn on a moving vehicle on a restricted road, basically a road that has street lights and a 30 mph limit, between the times of 11:30 p.m. and 07:00 a.m.
Does a legal, 1.5m clearance overtaking manoeuvre classify as “danger”?
Rule 112 states that you can
Rule 112 states that you can use the horn (restrictions aside) to warn of your presence, and does not mention danger at all in that part. Where is does mention danger is where you may use your horn in otherwise restricted situations.
According to the Highway Code
According to the Highway Code (my emphasis):
So in this case the motorist is saying he used his horn to warn other road users (the cyclists) of his presence, exactly per the highway code.
Sriracha wrote:
I think perhaps you should have emphasised the word ‘…need…’
If you’re passing safely, or keeping a safe distance from vehicles in front then there should be no ‘need’ to sound your horn.
If you’re sounding the horn to say ‘I’m coming through safe or not, so watch out’ then you shouldn’t be anywhere near the horn button, or indeed the steering wheel.
I don’t get this 1.5 m/5ft
I don’t get this 1.5 m/5ft overtake, just do it safely.
Avg lane is say 10ft, you cycle left of centre, say 4 ft, so the overtaking vehicle needs to be almost in the opposite lane? Police say vehicles should give the same room you give another vehicle, avg car is 6ft, add on the 5 ft overtake, thats 11ft, then the 2 ft you drive away from the kerb thats 13ft away from the kerb you are no 1ft away from the opposite kerb. It just does not work…….Bit padantic I know but it is just a crowd pleaser, as I said, drivers just overtake safely, problem is what is safe for me is not for you, etc
However,
Just to clarify.
Rule 112
The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn
while stationary on the road
when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am
except when another road user poses a danger.
I try to be legal 95% of the time, I have a very good understanding of the highway code, It is good to refresh yourself with the rules, as most drivers, even cyclists, can quote but dont fully understand.
Toorie wrote:
You seem to have added in the width of the car twice. If I’m* 4 ft from the kerb, you pass me 5 ft away, in your 6 ft wide car, your offside is 4+5+6 ft from the kerb = 15 ft. If there are two 10 ft lanes that gives you a good 5 ft clearance from the opposite kerb.
If I’m only 2 ft from the kerb you can give me 5 ft clearance and still be 7 ft from the opposite kerb.
I do agree, though that the overuse of the 1.5m thing tends to take away from using judgement about a safe passing distance. It should be 1.5m minimum, and more at faster speeds.
[* For the sake of argument, we’ll assume this is my offside shoulder.]
Doh,
Doh,
I do love these stories…
I do love these stories… its like they are created by anti-cyclists to bate us and allow us to present ourselves as vigilant, aggression fueled psychos.
On the face of it, the described actions of the cyclist are inexcusable, however, here we are, with our ifs, buts, and maybes. Anyone wanting to stoke up a bit of anti-cyclist fury can just show them this thread to prove that all spandex wearers are fine with the assualt of elderly and vulnerable citizens.
What we can all agree on, I hope, is that there is never any justifiable reason to physically attack and damage someone else’s property. As a take away, I hope this article will encourage us all to retain a semblance of decency in road rage incidents and not be the one committing a criminal offence.
Criminal damage is objective… the damage is there for all to see and as such, will be acted upon by our police forces. Hurt feelings and emotional damage is unseen, subjective, which is why episodes of aggression and intimdation are so often not investigated. Don’t do physical damage to other peoples property. Don’t let the aggressor benefit from being the victim should the shit goes down.
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
I’m quite happy to be described as vigilant, though maybe not an aggression fueled psycho.
It’s equally wrong to assign the actions of an angry cyclist to all cyclists as it is to describe all motorists by the actions of a minority. I do agree about assaulting anyone whether elderly or vulnerable, though I’ve often fantasised about damaging cars (e.g. those parked inconsiderately).
the assualt of elderly and
the assualt of elderly and vulnerable citizens
You would have more credibility if you didn’t make up the facts.