TdF Beefeaters win UCI Fans’ Award with THAT video; Hope in Lotus tie-up; British Cycling slams e-car 'green' number plate plans; 6 Day London – how to watch on BBC; Lookalike trophies; 'Auction for Kennaugh's Dogma F1 + more on live blog

brooksby wrote:

Isn't the aim that within a few years no new ICE vehicles will be sold, and after that the ultimate aim is for there to be no ICE vehicles on the roads at all?

So, more and more vehicles will be 'green' vehicles attracting all these extra perks.

So, at what point will the Govt have to turn around and say, "You know all those perks?  Sorry, but you can't have them any more"?

(Allowing them to use bus lanes?  Why?  Isn't the point of bus lanes so that the buses aren't held up by all the other traffic?).

What's the quote that comes to mind here? Aah yes "You're not stuck in traffic, you are the traffic"

It all seems like a bit of an ego self-massaging excercise to me, like people who just have to tell you they're vegan, or do crossfit, or ride a fixie.

"Look, my car's got a green plate so I'm better than you"

Urgh! By all means do what you can to not kill the planet, but don't be a dick about it. I won't pat the backs of people who buy brand new electric cars, junking their 3-5 y/o motor in the process, untill they can tell me where the waste battery sludge is going. Hell, even nuclear power has a more thought-out end of life process (not a good one, but it's been considered at least)

Simon E wrote:

"Can this kind of violence ever be condoned? "

Do you mean by the driver or the cyclist?

For the former - absolutely not.

For the latter, well... the extent of that cyclist's reaction would not be what I'd advise my kids to do; however, I wouldn't be critical of them if they reacted strongly. I'd be glad that they showed that they would not tolerate that kind of bullying and aggressive behaviour.

I'd say that the cyclist was acting in self-defence. The driver was attempting to use their vehicle to hurt the cyclist and the cyclist had a choice to either try to cycle/run away from the quicker vehicle or to decapacitate the driver to prevent another attempt.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Simon E wrote:

"Can this kind of violence ever be condoned? "

Do you mean by the driver or the cyclist?

For the former - absolutely not.

For the latter, well... the extent of that cyclist's reaction would not be what I'd advise my kids to do; however, I wouldn't be critical of them if they reacted strongly. I'd be glad that they showed that they would not tolerate that kind of bullying and aggressive behaviour.

I'd say that the cyclist was acting in self-defence. The driver was attempting to use their vehicle to hurt the cyclist and the cyclist had a choice to either try to cycle/run away from the quicker vehicle or to decapacitate the driver to prevent another attempt.

"It's the only way to be sure"

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'd say that the cyclist was acting in self-defence.

I disagree. I'd say that even the kick to the rear wing was not really self-defence - there was no immediate risk of assault or that the vehicle was about to drive over him.

I can't see a justification for the subsequent use of the car door, it was just anger. I'd suggest that it is not a good way to educate the driver about the importance of respecting other road users (though a part of me feels he deserved it).

Simon E wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'd say that the cyclist was acting in self-defence.

I disagree. I'd say that even the kick to the rear wing was not really self-defence - there was no immediate risk of assault or that the vehicle was about to drive over him.

I can't see a justification for the subsequent use of the car door, it was just anger. I'd suggest that it is not a good way to educate the driver about the importance of respecting other road users (though a part of me feels he deserved it).

Yeah, kicking the car is definitely not self-defence, but I'd argue that if the cyclist was fearful for his own safety, then it's entirely reasonable to remove the weapon from the attacker (or in this case, the attacker from being able to use the weapon).

However, if the cyclist wasn't in fear of his own safety, then the subsequent attack cannot be condoned.

alansmurphy wrote:

brooksby, on the whole you'd have to argue that 99.9% of things a rider does shouldn't provoke hitting them with a car!

I totally agree, alan: I was just curious what it was this time.

burtthebike wrote:

Surely the American cyclist should be given some sort of award.  When you attack somenone with a deadly weapon, don't be surprised if they get upset.  Would anyone be criticising him if his attacker had used a knife or a gun?

No, but I think I would have liked to see footage of a few minutes prior to that incident (did the cyclist do something that particularly rattled the motorist's cage or was it 'just' unprovoked and/or incompetence?)

Unfortunately, much as I agree with you, Burt, you have to remember that all the outside parties can only see the cyclist assaulting a blameless hard-pressed motorist; bad driving behaviour toward cyclists is so normalised that they probably wouldn't notice anything 'triggering' the cyclist even if you put it up on a projection screen and used a laser pointer.

brooksby wrote:

Did the cyclist do something that particularly rattled the motorist's cage or was it 'just' unprovoked and/or incompetence?

Well, evidently. They were cycling. Along a road.

Quote:

We think this may have done the rounds before, but it's once again making people question their moral compass on social media.

Can this kind of violence ever be condoned? 

Which bit of violence are you referring to?