# An object lesson in keeping your mouth shut...



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

I realise this is gonna make me look very bad and that's fair enough but hopefully the nasty incident from my commute this morning will teach me to keep my mouth shut...

Cycling along Albert Embankment, a girl cycles alongside me as we get nearer to a set of red lights, I stop and she kind of pauses at the line, then cycles through, I mutter 'they're still red', she continues on, and then I mutter 'b***h'. Totally wrong of me, I really shouldn't have said that but it slipped out and she 100% didn't even hear my statement let alone the b word.

Anyway, Mr 'hi-viz, fancy racing bike', cycles past and is just about to RLJ himself but as he's passing, he caught my insult, stops, turns around and gets right in my face [I'm paraphrasing here, I'll add the vid later for more accuracy]

Him: 'What's your problem etc etc.?'
Me: 'She's going through a red light'
Him: 'So?'
Me: 'It's illegal'
Him: 'There are a lot of things that are illegal, we don't have to all follow the rules'
Bit more back and forth including him saying 'you're gonna end up with a smack in the face', then he clocks my camera so starts on about that, and he's still going on as the light turns green (he's got his back to it) so I have to tell him it's green and can we go, he eventually lets me go.

I'm behind him all the way now and then over Lambeth Bridge, round the roundabout then he starts on again as we cycle up Millbank, going on about my camera, how angry I am (I WAS actually in a very good mood funnily enough) etc etc, I'm trying to ignore him but then I say 'you're the one carrying this on, let it go now'. Him: 'you can't go round calling young ladies b****hes', Me: 'let it go' etc., then I turn left and he wishes me a nice day and I say 'you too'.

Anyway, lesson learned, keep mouth shut, if others want to end up with a bus or lorry parked on their face (and she really could have on that junction) that's their business - not to mention all those road users who see bad cycling and think 'typical cyclist'.

It seems that muttering a name at someone that they can't hear is a capital offence but breaking an actual law (or any law really) is absolutely fine. Trouble is, when you resort to bad language, you instantly lose any moral high ground...


----------



## downfader (10 Feb 2014)

You were right about the red light jumper... 

If we were to subscribe to the inevitability myth that some do on here perhaps the next time he states "we don't have to all follow the rules" someone will say "THANKS!" and punch him square in the jaw...?


----------



## sazzaa (10 Feb 2014)

I seem to have got into the habit of calling everyone "dude" when I'm on a bike, no idea why because I barely use the word otherwise! But if someone pulls a dodgy manoeuvre I hear myself shouting "DUUUUUUUDE, WATCH WHERE YOU'RE GOING!!!!"


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

sazzaa said:


> I seem to have got into the habit of calling everyone "dude" when I'm on a bike, no idea why because I barely use the word otherwise! But if someone pulls a dodgy manoeuvre I hear myself shouting "DUUUUUUUDE, WATCH WHERE YOU'RE GOING!!!!"



I id get into the habit of counting any idiots out loud, so I'd go 'Three!' and leave it at that, they'd look at me quizzically for a second then carry on. Can't be offended by a number, maybe I'll try and train myself to get back into that.

Or actually even 'berk' is preferable, if I really can't keep schtum...


----------



## BSRU (10 Feb 2014)

Ironic being told how angry you are by Mr Angry himself, he obviously has a chip on his shoulder about RLJ'ing.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

BSRU said:


> Ironic being told how angry you are by Mr Angry himself, he obviously has a chip on his shoulder about RLJ'ing.



Really did seem disproportionate and as I say, I was in a good mood this morning, especially for a monday. But it was the camera that prompted that, he couldn't understand why anyone would wear one and I wasn't about to start to explain...

What I said was a bit misogynistic so maybe that's the one thing he reacts to? Or maybe it was just the noose to hang me by as he took more offence at the red light comment? Hard to say.


----------



## BSRU (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Really did seem disproportionate and as I say, I was in a good mood this morning, especially for a monday. But it was the camera that prompted that, he couldn't understand why anyone would wear one and I wasn't about to start to explain...
> 
> What I said was a bit misogynistic so maybe that's the one thing he reacts to? Or maybe it was just the noose to hang me by as he took more offence at the red light comment? Hard to say.


Just say "Bee Hatch" next time


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Really did seem disproportionate and as I say, I was in a good mood this morning, especially for a monday. But it was the camera that prompted that, he couldn't understand why anyone would wear one and I wasn't about to start to explain...
> 
> What I said was a bit misogynistic so maybe that's the one thing he reacts to? Or maybe it was just the noose to hang me by as he took more offence at the red light comment? Hard to say.




Probably more that he behaves like a cock all the time, and his conscience got the better of him...he couldn't handle the power of reason!


----------



## gambatte (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Or actually even 'berk' is preferable, if I really can't keep schtum...



You sure?
Although seen as a low level insult, I believe Berk is actually rhyming slang. See below.....
link


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

gambatte said:


> You sure?
> Although seen as a low level insult, I believe Berk is actually rhyming slang. See below.....
> link



Damn, I forgot that. Yes, you're right. I thought it was a very teatime sitcom kind of thing to say.

Though saying that, you'd have to have some kind of education to know the etymology of things...

No, I'm going back to counting


----------



## I like Skol (10 Feb 2014)

It'z London innit?

We're far more chilled up here in Mancunia. I nearly wiped out a 10-12yr old kid on the commute last week when a family of 4 ran across a main road in front of/into me in the dark and rain . Luckily I was on the brakes sharpish and yelled 'whoa, whoa, whoa, WATCH where you're going!' No bad language or remonstrations needed but I was doing 20mph at the time so would have been nasty for us both if I had hit him.

I did wonder if my bright front light was working as it was an otherwise clear road so they should easily have seen me approaching? About a mile later I was then nearly taken out by 3 kids on BMXs emerging from between queuing cars without looking. Again no profanity, it was just one of those nights when I seemed to be invisible  (and I double checked again to make sure my lights were on!).


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

.


I like Skol said:


> It'z London innit?
> 
> We're far more chilled up here in Mancunia. I nearly wiped out a 10-12yr old kid on the commute last week when a family of 4 ran across a main road in front of/into me in the dark and rain . Luckily I was on the brakes sharpish and yelled 'whoa, whoa, whoa, WATCH where you're going!' No bad language or remonstrations needed but I was doing 20mph at the time so would have been nasty for us both if I had hit him.
> 
> I did wonder if my bright front light was working as it was an otherwise clear road so they should easily have seen me approaching? About a mile later I was then nearly taken out by 3 kids on BMXs emerging from between queuing cars without looking. Again no profanity, it was just one of those nights when I seemed to be invisible  (and I double checked again to make sure my lights were on!).



Ironically, he had a strong accent which might have even been from Manchester...


----------



## Roadrider48 (10 Feb 2014)

gambatte said:


> You sure?
> Although seen as a low level insult, I believe Berk is actually rhyming slang. See below.....
> link


I don't think many people will link the word "berk" to that.
It's really an inoffensive insult.


----------



## jack smith (10 Feb 2014)

get the video up! i fancy a good chuckle


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

As I say, the lesson is, keep your mouth shut. The law of probabilty would indicate that continual bad cycling will eventually lead to an accident so they'll either amend their behaviour through being hurt or be taken out of the equation entirely...


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> get the video up! i fancy a good chuckle



I hope to see the funny side eventually, I'm struggling right now though.

I'm also aware that I see the same people on my route and being very identifiable, I'm pretty sure this ain't the last I've heard of this...


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Him: 'What's your problem etc etc.?'
Me: 'Go away'
Him: 'So?'
Me: 'Go away nowl'
Him: 'There are a lot of things that are illegal, we don't have to all follow the rules'
Me: 'Go away and die now!'
Him: 'Yadda, yadda, the thing, the thing, the thing.'
Me: 'Bye' rides off. Makes like a deaf person for the next few miles.

But he makes a good point later on in your tale about your use of sexist language to describe your RLJ-er. Yes. Really.

First one to mention Political Correctness gets a prize.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> But he makes a good point later on in your tale about your use of sexist language to describe your RLJ-er. Yes. Really.
> First one to mention Political Correctness gets a prize.



That was kind of the gist of my post, I lost the moral high ground as soon as I said that... Although I'm an equal opportunities insulter, I was just about to call him a 'b*****d' as he was about to RLJ...

I don't think telling someone to die would help matters but yes, ignoring people is the best way to go.


----------



## jack smith (10 Feb 2014)

i think your over thinking it mate, seems like the guy is just a stuck up t*sser thinking he is god's gift, obviously uneducated to human standards. if he does anything again just ride off or report it to the police, remember you will always have video evidence and he has threatened you with assault


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> i think your over thinking it mate, seems like the guy is just a stuck up t*sser thinking he is god's gift, obviously uneducated to human standards. if he does anything again just ride off or report it to the police, remember you will always have video evidence and he has threatened you with assault



I do have a tendency to dwell on things.

But thanks Jack, I think you're right. I mean, I really don't want to get hit but I'm kind of covered if it did happen and any further engagement from him would verge on harrassment (not that he's worried about the law, apparently...)


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> That was kind of the gist of my post, I lost the moral high ground as soon as I said that... Although I'm an equal opportunities insulter, I was just about to call him a 'b*****d' as he was about to RLJ...
> 
> I don't think telling someone to die would help matters but yes, ignoring people is the best way to go.


'Nobber' and 'Dick' and, in Lahndhan, 'You tragic hipster cockwomble' are my insults of choice on the road.

In my script 'go away' is merely a euphemism 

I find if you cultivate a certain silent menacing stare they shut up pretty quickly.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921667, member: 30090"]Who cares.[/quote]
The OP?


----------



## Beebo (10 Feb 2014)

When I'm in my car I swear at almost everyone I see.
I have tried to calm this down a bit on the bike, as people can actually hear you, unlike in a car.


----------



## fossyant (10 Feb 2014)

Beebo said:


> When I'm in my car I swear at almost everyone I see.
> I have tried to calm this down a bit on the bike, as people can actually hear you, unlike in a car.


 
I don't think you should be driving then


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921674, member: 30090"]About a rljer - big deal.[/quote]

As I say, it just slipped out. But you're right, as long as I obey the law, what someone else does is their business and hopefully one day they'll come a cropper for it.


----------



## fossyant (10 Feb 2014)

You can't argue with an idiot. Best option is to mumble quietly, and leave them to it. Can we see the video of Mr Angry ?


----------



## fossyant (10 Feb 2014)

Mr 'hi-viz fancy road bike' was probablt hissed off that you were keeping up with him !!


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

fossyant said:


> You can't argue with an idiot. Best option is to mumble quietly, and leave them to it. Can we see the video of Mr Angry ?



Yeh, I'll need to clip it and post it when I get home.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

fossyant said:


> Mr 'hi-viz fancy road bike' was probablt hissed off that you were keeping up with him !!



People hate being passed by a brompton, it's true, especially people on expensive bikes. I don't think it was that though.


----------



## Tim Hall (10 Feb 2014)

Put it behind you, don't let him take up space in your head.

Re. the letting things slip out, a couple of years ago a bloke on a bike shot out from a junction across my bows without a sideways glance. Reactions from me were to (a) apply brakes sharpish and (b) say "twat". He then applied his brakes, stopped and thumped me, before riding off into the sunset. It was all over very quickly. I was a bit shaken but then thought WTF and filled my head with pleasant thoughts.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921689, member: 30090"]Really? What a nice person you are.[/quote]

So, there should be no consequences for breaking the law and we should all do what we like? Hah.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921674, member: 30090"]About a rljer - big deal.[/quote]
Perhaps RLJ'ing isn't any sort of deal for you. 
For others it clearly is.
Do we really need to cover that ground again.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921703, member: 30090"]What are you on about?[/quote]

Sorry, I thought the comment 'Really? What a nice person you are', was sarcastic... Apologies for my cynicism.


----------



## gaz (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921689, member: 30090"]Really? What a nice person you are.[/quote]
Nice to see you contributing to threads in a productive manner again. Keep it up.


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921689, member: 30090"]Really? What a nice person you are.[/quote]

Natural selection will catch even the most arrogant eventually...those who rely on the intelligence and discipline of others on the roads to keep them safe will sooner or later come across someone else with the same attitude, but with a much bigger vehicle....and SPLAT!


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

User3094 said:


> Shouldn't it be an "_abject _lesson"?
> 
> Just sayin.



I was thinking that but then I Googled it and it said 'object lesson' was ok...

http://greekgeek.hubpages.com/hub/abject-lesson-vs-object-lesson


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Sorry, I thought the comment 'Really? What a nice person you are', was sarcastic... Apologies for my cynicism.



It was...User30090 is an unapologetic RLJer


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

Linford said:


> It was...User30090 is an unapologetic RLJer



Ah ok.

Without getting into a huge RLJ debate, I just don't see the point of it. You don't get anywhere more quickly or more safely (in fact, it's arguably a lot unsafer) and you're breaking the law and you look stupid - so you lose any way you look at it.

Also, just to add, I saw a very close call last week at this very same junction when a cyclist chose to jump the light and ended up between a huge tipper truck and a bus going through on the green. It was only the good judgement of both drivers that prevented him being squashed between the two.


----------



## Mugshot (10 Feb 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> I find if you cultivate a certain silent menacing stare they shut up pretty quickly.


Like this?

I know he's not everyones cup of tea but I do like this one.


----------



## downfader (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2921689, member: 30090"]Really? What a nice person you are.[/quote]
Again with the trolling...


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Mugshot said:


> Like this?
> 
> I know he's not everyones cup of tea but I do like this one.



He blew it by speaking before the cabbie set off.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

Wouldn't life be so much more pleasant if we all gave each other a damn break once in a while. I count myself in this, but if we all did the right thing, we'd all be happier and safer.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Wouldn't life be so much more pleasant if we all gave each other a damn break once in a while. I count myself in this, but if we all did the right thing, we'd all be happier and safer.


But, as cyclists, we'd have very little to complain talk about.


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

downfader said:


> Again with the trolling...



Yer, but it is everybody elses fault for also being on the road at the same time...if there were no cars , then the lights would be irrelevant...apart from the fact that for every multiple occupancy vehicle taken off the road, you would have a cyclist doing their own thing...which is fine providing they aren't all doing User30090's thing at the same time.

Road laws are for mugs innit......


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> But, as cyclists, we'd have very little to complain talk about.



Could talk about how lovely and sunny it is right now or the amazing view you get when cycling over Lambeth Bridge, the fresh air.... yeh, you're right, it's boring


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Could talk about how lovely and sunny it is right now or the amazing view you get when cycling over Lambeth Bridge, the fresh air.... yeh, you're right, it's boring


Chelsea Bridge just after midnight. Glorious.

but where's the fun in that!


----------



## jefmcg (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> I realise this is gonna make me look very bad [..]
> 
> Cycling along Albert Embankment, a girl cycles alongside me as we get nearer to a set of red lights, I stop and she kind of pauses at the line, then cycles through, I mutter 'they're still red', she continues on, and then I mutter 'b***h'.
> [..]
> ...



I'm still mystified by this: you call a random stranger a bitch (loud enough for others to hear) when she does something that does not affect you in anyway. And this is when you are in a good mood. This is

Deeply rude
Troublingly sexist
a disturbing misuse of the word. Wikipedia, bless, has a pretty good definition "belligerent, unreasonable, malicious, rudely intrusive, and/or aggressive" which conforms to my understanding. Her transgression does not involve anything like maliciousness.


----------



## Leodis (10 Feb 2014)

The slut shouldnt have RLJ'd, it was probs his wife or cleaner.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

jefmcg said:


> I'm still mystified by this: you call a random stranger a bitch (loud enough for others to hear) when she does something that does not affect you in anyway. And this is when you are in a good mood. This is
> 
> Deeply rude
> Troublingly sexist
> a disturbing misuse of the word. Wikipedia, bless, has a pretty good definition "belligerent, unreasonable, malicious, rudely intrusive, and/or aggressive" which conforms to my understanding. Her transgression does not involve anything like maliciousness.




You're preaching to the converted here, I've stated several times that it was wrong and inappropriate of me to use this word (maybe you missed that?).

I have to correct you on one point (and maybe you missed this also), she was 100% unaware of any of this and the only person that did hear was someone that happened to pass me at the very second I 'muttered' the expletive, someone unrelated to this woman who went on to state that he had no regard for the law and then kept on having a go whilst cycling for the next mile of our journeys.

Also a bit selective of you to cite the 'malicious' aspect of Wiki's definition which also has 'unreasonable' in it's definitive terms; I personally regard breaking the law in such a casual manner as being without reason (it's also rudely intrustive) and so by definition there's no 'disturbing misuse' there.

I've also stated that I would refer to others as berks or b*****d's so it's not like I pick on one gender's behaviour over another's and thus it's hardly 'troublingly sexist', it's merely the puerile manner in which my frustration sometimes manifests itself.

I don't imagine you've ever let an expletive slip from your lips at any time and you're the most reasonable and unflappable person there is so congratulations on that and apologies once again for my failings.


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

jefmcg said:


> I'm still mystified by this: you call a random stranger a bitch (loud enough for others to hear) when she does something that does not affect you in anyway. And this is when you are in a good mood. This is
> 
> Deeply rude
> Troublingly sexist
> a disturbing misuse of the word. Wikipedia, bless, has a pretty good definition "belligerent, unreasonable, malicious, rudely intrusive, and/or aggressive" which conforms to my understanding. Her transgression does not involve anything like maliciousness.



If someone had done that next to me, I'd have probably called her a knob....in the pursuit of equality of course


----------



## Sara_H (10 Feb 2014)

Do you think they were together? In the olden days if my now ex-husband had heard you call me a bitch he'd have twatted you before you knew what was happening. The current incumbent is a bit more laid back, but would certainly defend my honour with a few strong words.

Don't go around calling ladies nasty names is the moral of the story


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Do you think they were together? In the olden days if my now ex-husband had heard you call me a bitch he'd have twatted you before you knew what was happening. The current incumbent is a bit more laid back, but would certainly defend my honour with a few strong words.
> 
> Don't go around calling ladies nasty names is the moral of the story



The moral is, don't go around calling anyone nasty names, ladies or otherwise.


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Do you think they were together? In the olden days if my now ex-husband had heard you call me a bitch he'd have twatted you before you knew what was happening. The current incumbent is a bit more laid back, but would certainly defend my honour with a few strong words.
> 
> Don't go around calling ladies nasty names is the moral of the story




Emmeline Pankhurst made it her lifes struggle to bring about soem form of equality for the women of Britain, and you go and blow all that out of the water with this ! ...


----------



## Leodis (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> The moral is, don't go around calling anyone nasty names, ladies or otherwise.



What about nob drivers?

I had a nob cyclist today, I always see him pushing 25mph between cars, buses and other cyclists in rush hour, I once spotted him fit in a 2 foot gap at speed between a moving car and bus. Today he passed me in town as he overtakes a bus at a ped crossing doing 20 or more, that guy is a twat, he might look like a courier cyclist but he is a twat.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

Leodis said:


> What about nob drivers?
> 
> I had a nob cyclist today, I always see him pushing 25mph between cars, buses and other cyclists in rush hour, I once spotted him fit in a 2 foot gap at speed between a moving car and bus. Today he passed me in town as he overtakes a bus at a ped crossing doing 20 or more, that guy is a twat, he might look like a courier cyclist but he is a twat.



Not even them, by all means think it if you must but saying it out loud a) doesn't alter their behaviour one iota and b) could get you in to bother.


----------



## Leodis (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Not even them, by all means think it if you must but saying it out loud a) doesn't alter their behaviour one iota and b) could get you in to bother.



Fair point...


----------



## Sara_H (10 Feb 2014)

Linford said:


> Emmeline Pankhurst made it her lifes struggle to bring about soem form of equality for the women of Britain, and you go and blow all that out of the water with this ! ...


Really? Which bit? The protective men bit? Nothing sexist about that. I get protective too, though I demonstrate it differently to the way my ex-husband would.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Really? Which bit? The protective men bit? Nothing sexist about that. I get protective too, though I demonstrate it differently to the way my ex-husband would.



If he had been her partner (he wasn't), I think being protective would focus on the fact that she was endangering her safety and breaking the law rather than on some pillock on a Brommie muttering something out of her earshot.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Do you think they were together? In the olden days if my now ex-husband had heard you call me a bitch he'd have twatted you before you knew what was happening. The current incumbent is a bit more laid back, but would certainly defend my honour with a few strong words.
> 
> Don't go around calling ladies nasty names is the moral of the story


How are we to know if they are ladies?

Don't go around calling women nasty names...


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Really? Which bit? The protective men bit? Nothing sexist about that. I get protective too, though I demonstrate it differently to the way my ex-husband would.



If it were my O/H or daughters, I'd be more worried about them running the red and getting flattened by a passing vehicle, than somebody showing concern when they put their life at risk.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> If he had been her partner (he wasn't), I think being protective would focus on the fact that she was endangering her safety and breaking the law rather than on some pillock on a *Brommie* muttering something out of her earshot.


You did not read the manual that came with it did you?

Riders of Brommies are not entitled to hold any opinions about _real_ cycling and _real_ cyclists, let alone express them. 

They may however declaim their views on riders of Boris bikes and BSOs but only when their B is folded and safely stowed away.


----------



## jefmcg (10 Feb 2014)

How dangerous is running red lights? A lot of London cyclists do it, yet every time I read a report/inquest/description of a London fatality, running red lights never seems to come into it. Is it really that dangerous, or does it just look it?

(no, I'm not one of them though I might occasionally sneak through on a pedestrian cycle if there are no pedestrians and I'm starting to be concerned about the taxi starting to rev his engine or move beside me into the ASL)


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> You did not read the manual that came with it did you?
> 
> Riders of Brommies are not entitled to hold any opinions about _real_ cycling and _real_ cyclists, let alone express them.
> 
> They may however declaim their views on riders of Boris bikes and BSOs but only when their B is folded and safely stowed away.



Lol, in berating me for having a helmet cam, I think he may have made reference to my silly fold-up bike. Then there's him with his fancy bike which he seemed happy to get squashed under a car so I must assume it was one fancy bike of many.

The lady in question had a very sturdy looking traditional bike replete with front basket.

And then there's me...


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

jefmcg said:


> How dangerous is running red lights? A lot of London cyclists do it, yet every time I read a report/inquest/description of a London fatality, running red lights never seems to come into it. Is it really that dangerous, or does it just look it?
> 
> (no, I'm not one of them though I might occasionally sneak through on a pedestrian cycle if there are no pedestrians and I'm starting to be concerned about the taxi starting to rev his engine or move beside me into the ASL)



Trouble is the stats only record serious injuries and deaths, they don't record minor collisions and certainly not the many of those that go un-reported.

Suffice to say, running a red light is 'usually' a lot more dangerous than not running one. It's also illegal and I don't know about everyone else but I don't tend to disobey a law just because it suits me to do so.

It really isn't rocket science, as I said before, it's pointless and I've lost count of the RLJ'ers I've caught up with later on down the road so it's not even a speed or time-saving option. My feeling is that half the time, people do it because they can get away with it - maybe a petty 'up yours society'? Dunno.


----------



## BSRU (10 Feb 2014)

jefmcg said:


> How dangerous is running red lights? A lot of London cyclists do it, yet every time I read a report/inquest/description of a London fatality, running red lights never seems to come into it. Is it really that dangerous, or does it just look it?
> 
> (no, I'm not one of them though I might occasionally sneak through on a pedestrian cycle if there are no pedestrians and I'm starting to be concerned about the taxi starting to rev his engine or move beside me into the ASL)


Only a couple of weeks ago a cyclist who decided to ignore a red light almost died in a collision with a HGV.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Feb 2014)

A cyclist is more likely to be killed by a motor vehicle jumping a red light than die by jumping a red themselves.


----------



## downfader (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Do you think they were together? In the olden days if my now ex-husband had heard you call me a bitch he'd have twatted you before you knew what was happening. The current incumbent is a bit more laid back, but would certainly defend my honour with a few strong words.
> 
> Don't go around calling ladies nasty names is the moral of the story


I dont think gender comes into it... plenty of women will look at males jumping a light and say "b#stard". I dont think they're lumping all men together


----------



## Sara_H (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Trouble is the stats only record serious injuries and deaths, they don't record minor collisions and certainly not the many of those that go un-reported.
> 
> Suffice to say, running a red light is 'usually' a lot more dangerous than not running one. It's also illegal and I don't know about everyone else but I don't tend to disobey a law just because it suits me to do so.
> 
> It really isn't rocket science, as I said before, it's pointless and I've lost count of the RLJ'ers I've caught up with later on down the road so it's not even a speed or time-saving option. My feeling is that half the time, people do it because they can get away with it - maybe a petty 'up yours society'? Dunno.


 Most cyclist red light jumpers do it not to save time, but because it's often safer. So, they may often go through red after noting that the sequence on the other side has gone to amber. This gives an opportunity to get away from accelerating vehicles behind, sometimes avoiding left hooks or other danger.

One red light that I go through is a cross roads that has an all red phase with pedestrian crossings across all four roads. Having usually filtered past as many as fifty cars to, when it turns green the drivers are impatient to get away, I end up sitting in the middle of the junction waiting to turn right which feels feels very precarious. I usually don't get chance to turn until the light until late amber or red (due to oncoming traffic continuing to flow through on amber), which then puts me in danger of collision with the traffic coming the oppisite way. I also note that if I've had to wait to turn red that I'm often subject to some very close passes, in fact one driver recently tried to overtake me as we turned through the junction and almost knocked me off. I'm guessing that having to wait behind a cyclist has wound them up.
If there aren't any pedestrians crossing at the all red (for road traffic) phase, I go through. Much safer and no one has been put at risk or inconvenienced.

I'm not disobeying the law just because it suits me to, but bcause it's far safer for me to do so. 

Does that make me a bitch?


----------



## MarkF (10 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> A cyclist is more likely to be killed by a motor vehicle jumping a red light than die by jumping a red themselves.



All the more reason for a cyclist not to encourage motor vehicle drivers to see red's as "optional".


----------



## glenn forger (10 Feb 2014)

You think drivers jump reds because of cyclists? Do drivers speed because of milk floats?


----------



## jefmcg (10 Feb 2014)

MarkF said:


> All the more reason for a cyclist not to encourage motor vehicle drivers to see red's as "optional".


So now we are not only responsible for what other cyclists do, but drivers behaviours as well????


----------



## ComedyPilot (10 Feb 2014)

A simple, "Oi RED LIGHT" would have sufficed.

The 'b*tch' comment was uncalled for.

Matey-boy in the shiny armour on the white charger is likely to get his come-uppance one day too.


----------



## vickster (10 Feb 2014)

Linford said:


> Emmeline Pankhurst made it her lifes struggle to bring about soem form of equality for the women of Britain, and you go and blow all that out of the water with this ! ...


She jumped in front of a horse...much more of a statement than RLJing on a bus route say

I am personally astonished by the number of colour blind cyclists ...women included...I mean it's pretty rare in the superior sex (0.5-1% apparently)


----------



## ComedyPilot (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Most cyclist red light jumpers ...............blah blah.....................*Does that make me a bitch?*



No.


----------



## Twelve Spokes (10 Feb 2014)

Im suffering for the general poor behavior out on the roads by cyclists.I had a run in with two motorist cycling hating workmates today.It's not unusual now and they bring up the rljing all the time.Oh and about my collision.Apparently I was too close.Really p1553d me off and making me look like a bad cyclist.

Not the actual fact that when I put the brakes on,nothing happened.

Oil on the rims? I didn't check at the time (I should have) but no way was I going too fast.If I had been I would have ended up in hospital.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Feb 2014)

Nobody is suffering because of the bad behaviour by cyclists, that's absurd, if a car is driven aggressively or recklessly it's the DRIVER'S fault, nobody else's.


----------



## Twelve Spokes (10 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Nobody is suffering because of the bad behaviour by cyclists, that's absurd, if a car is driven aggressively or recklessly it's the DRIVER'S fault, nobody else's.



Well they make it an excuse then.Actually I said today I think sometimes in London the attitude is poor out on the roads.People in too much of a hurry?

IMHO.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Feb 2014)

Exactly.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Most cyclist red light jumpers do it not to save time, but because it's often safer. So, they may often go through red after noting that the sequence on the other side has gone to amber. This gives an opportunity to get away from accelerating vehicles behind, sometimes avoiding left hooks or other danger.



I think you're given them too much credit there Sara. Most of the incidents of RLJ'ing I see are nothing to do with safety at all, in fact, it looks downright dangerous. And bear in mind that they're jumping a light that I've also stopped at and I'm the least likely person to sit in any kind of dangerous position.

As I said before, the bitch comment was out of order.


----------



## Milzy (10 Feb 2014)

Show us the footage or it didn't happen. I've never fallen out with a fellow cyclist.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2922134, member: 30090"]Wow, I mention about a relatively minor event (which RLJing is compared to other road stats) only for the OP to wish that said cyclist 'comes a cropper' which I took to being getting hit, hence why ''the not very nice comment'' and I've been labelled a troll - the mind boggles.[/quote]

Could have meant getting hit, could've meant getting fined, could've meant having some oik in a cab tearing them off a strip, infer what you will...

These people make a conscious decision to disobey the law and have obviously concluded that they either a) cannot get hit, or b) don't care if they do get hit - so, whatever ultimately happens as a result of their actions is of their own making, nothing to do with what I think or feel.


----------



## ufkacbln (10 Feb 2014)

UMBRELLAS!

I HATE UMBRELLAS!!!!!!!!!

It is my own fault as I am the wrong height and every umbrella I meet on a wet day has spikes just at eye level

In Portsmouth one day and there were a group coming along with no cares in the world and three umbrellas forming an impenetrable shield of spiked weaponry advancing towards me............... and straight into my face

So I screamed... just one loud manic scream of pent up frustration.

Then smiled at the three and said "Sorry - I just promised myself that the next time I was poked in the eye with an umbrella I would scream.... I'm fine now"


----------



## glenn forger (10 Feb 2014)

I don't think any cyclist is unbothered if they get hit. On the contrary, some cyclists' lives would have been saved if they had jumped a red.


----------



## ufkacbln (10 Feb 2014)

Twelve Spokes said:


> Im suffering for the general poor behavior out on the roads by cyclists.I had a run in with two motorist cycling hating workmates today.It's not unusual now and they bring up the rljing all the time.Oh and about my collision.Apparently I was too close.Really p1553d me off and making me look like a bad cyclist.
> 
> Not the actual fact that when I put the brakes on,nothing happened.
> 
> Oil on the rims? I didn't check at the time (I should have) but no way was I going too fast.If I had been I would have ended up in hospital.




I solved this with one guy at work who I showed on video performing a left hook speeding through a red light...... he hasn't complained about cyclists in my hearing since


----------



## Twelve Spokes (10 Feb 2014)

Milzy said:


> Show us the footage or it didn't happen. I've never fallen out with a fellow cyclist.



Think I have but I just don't bother anymore.Can't say I was right all the time either.


----------



## Twelve Spokes (10 Feb 2014)

Cunobelin said:


> I solved this with one guy at work who I showed on video performing a left hook speeding through a red light...... he hasn't complained about cyclists in my hearing since



I asked one of them if he had had a collision.He didn't answer that one straight away then he said no.He's a WUM anyway.


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

[QUOTE 2922341, member: 30090"]It'll be A - always is. It's the other muppets out there who make something out of nothing that are a pain in the arse.[/quote]

A) is delusional, B) is masochistic/suicidal - neither sound like a good option to me, but as I say, their decision, not mine.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Milzy said:


> Show us the footage or it didn't happen. I've never fallen out with a fellow cyclist.


I say @Tim Hall could you repeat your anecdote please.


----------



## MarkF (10 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> You think drivers jump reds because of cyclists? Do drivers speed because of milk floats?



No, did I say that? Even for you, that is a pretty good effort (from my one small sentence) in twisting, assuming, replacing and misinterpreting, words.


----------



## Tim Hall (10 Feb 2014)

(Emmeline Pankhurst)



vickster said:


> She jumped in front of a horse...much more of a statement than RLJing on a bus route say


No she didn't, Emily Davison did.


----------



## vickster (10 Feb 2014)

Darn, always get my suffragettes muddled!


----------



## Tim Hall (10 Feb 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> I say @Tim Hall could you repeat your anecdote please.


But of course:

Re. the letting things slip out, a couple of years ago a bloke on a bike shot out from a junction across my bows without a sideways glance. Reactions from me were to (a) apply brakes sharpish and (b) say "twat". He then applied his brakes, stopped and thumped me, before riding off into the sunset. It was all over very quickly. I was a bit shaken but then thought WTF and filled my head with pleasant thoughts.

(Shock news: mode of transport isn't a fail safe guide to personality traits)


----------



## glenn forger (10 Feb 2014)

MarkF said:


> All the more reason for a cyclist not to encourage motor vehicle drivers to see red's as "optional".



Explain how on earth you think cyclists "encourage" anything.


----------



## MarkF (10 Feb 2014)

I should not have to explain, go back to it, it was only a v.e.r.y small sentence.


----------



## Linford (10 Feb 2014)

Tim Hall said:


> But of course:
> 
> Re. the letting things slip out, a couple of years ago a bloke on a bike shot out from a junction across my bows without a sideways glance. Reactions from me were to (a) apply brakes sharpish and (b) say "twat". He then applied his brakes, stopped and thumped me, before riding off into the sunset. It was all over very quickly. I was a bit shaken but then thought WTF and filled my head with pleasant thoughts.
> 
> (Shock news: mode of transport isn't a fail safe guide to personality traits)



was his name Glenn ?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

Tim Hall said:


> (Shock news: mode of transport isn't a fail safe guide to personality traits)


Indeed. 

Awheel I'm often mistaken for some sort of gay, devil-may-care, carefree sort of a fellow. The type who might enjoy a hearty slap on the back (from a door mirror).

But no.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Explain how on earth you think cyclists "encourage" anything.


some of 'em encourage squeeze passes.

IGMC


----------



## lip03 (10 Feb 2014)

Scrolled through 6 pages and still no footage! Lol


----------



## Davidsw8 (10 Feb 2014)

lip03 said:


> Scrolled through 6 pages and still no footage! Lol



I didn't have the heart to even look at it tonight, kind of affected my day a bit and I wanted an evening not thinking about it.


----------



## Kookas (10 Feb 2014)

Should've called her a b*****d instead. I'm surprised feminists don't get upset that you didn't use they instead of she.


----------



## lip03 (10 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> I didn't have the heart to even look at it tonight, kind of affected my day a bit and I wanted an evening not thinking about it.



Well thats understandable, seem to have opened a can of worms though ay!?....aint that a bitch  sorry had to get that one in


----------



## jack smith (10 Feb 2014)

i dont see why people are bitching about you tbh mate, you just showed concern, if she got wiped out by a car and killed it would have been totally different, and everyone would be whining at you about not stopping her. ( people just like to moan) anyone who puts other lives at risk for no reason is an arse and should be called whatever you can summon up at the time. 
i for one openly admit when some idiot nearly knocks me off in a vehicle, or most commonly pulls out right infront of me so i need to slam on my breaks and swerve i give them a gob full so they can hear it and plenty of hand signals, if people want to endanger my life so they can get to their destination a fraction quicker ( never the case due to traffic and lights ect) then they can face the consequences of being called a tosser. ( not unreasonable) and if anyone ever physically threatened me like the case you have here i would act in self defence. reasonable force, eye for an eye all that rubbish.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Feb 2014)

MarkF said:


> I should not have to explain, go back to it, it was only a v.e.r.y small sentence.



You post a confusing thought, criticise me for misinterpreting it, I politely ask for clarification, you refuse.


----------



## Twelve Spokes (11 Feb 2014)

I really don't give a t055 anymore if they jump the lights or have no lights fitted.It's just it seems to give motorists a licence to drive like total cretins and then I come up against the messroom wind up merchants who bring up the RLJing and all the other things cyclists get up to all the time.Has the mobile phone been invented yet?


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> i dont see why people are bitching about you tbh mate, you just showed concern, if she got wiped out by a car and killed it would have been totally different, and everyone would be whining at you about not stopping her. ( people just like to moan) anyone who puts other lives at risk for no reason is an arse and should be called whatever you can summon up at the time.
> i for one openly admit when some idiot nearly knocks me off in a vehicle, or most commonly pulls out right infront of me so i need to slam on my breaks and swerve i give them a gob full so they can hear it and plenty of hand signals, if people want to endanger my life so they can get to their destination a fraction quicker ( never the case due to traffic and lights ect) then they can face the consequences of being called a tosser. ( not unreasonable) and if anyone ever physically threatened me like the case you have here i would act in self defence. reasonable force, eye for an eye all that rubbish.



Are they b'ing about me (can't even use that word now! ) ?

I don't mind though, that's half of what the contributors to forums do, it's like going cycling and expecting everyone to comply with the law, it just ain't ever gonna happen.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Had a much better cycle in this morning, my ploy of counting them out loud rather than say anything else worked well, kept me totally calm and totally out of bother.

Counted out 20 various a'holes between Albert Embankment and Piccadilly (that's cyclists, peds and motorists...) and all they heard, if they heard anything, was a number.


----------



## glenn forger (11 Feb 2014)

Ear worms help. You can be mildly baffled at a driver's numptiness then get straight back to humming.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Ear worms help. You can be mildly baffled at a driver's numptiness then get straight back to humming.



ear worms??


----------



## glenn forger (11 Feb 2014)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c18441Eh_WE


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c18441Eh_WE




Who doesnt love a bit of Kylie :-)


----------



## glenn forger (11 Feb 2014)

I fit the tune to my cadence, I find it helps, I'm sort of in the zone.


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> i dont see why people are bitching about you tbh mate, you just showed concern, if she got wiped out by a car and killed it would have been totally different, and everyone would be whining at you about not stopping her. ( people just like to moan) anyone who puts other lives at risk for no reason is an arse and should be called whatever you can summon up at the time.
> i for one openly admit when some idiot nearly knocks me off in a vehicle, or most commonly pulls out right infront of me so i need to slam on my breaks and swerve i give them a gob full so they can hear it and plenty of hand signals, if people want to endanger my life so they can get to their destination a fraction quicker ( never the case due to traffic and lights ect) then they can face the consequences of being called a tosser. ( not unreasonable) and if anyone ever physically threatened me like the case you have here i would act in self defence. reasonable force, eye for an eye all that rubbish.


When I'm oncerned about someone I tend to say things like "Be carefull" or "watch out!" not, "Bitch", "Knob" "Cant" etc


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> When I'm oncerned about someone I tend to say things like "Be carefull" or "watch out!" not, "Bitch", "Knob" "Cant" etc



In my experience, you get abuse from ringing your bell, saying 'watch out' or simply stating 'it's a red light'. People don't like being told anything even if it ends up saving them some grief and my remark yesterday albeit inaudible to the person in question was just one step too far in being frustrated by people's wilful stupidity.

I'm not asking for thanks but I don't need the abuse either so I'm saying nothing more than a number now and they can all look out for themselves


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Case in point, I was cycling down a side street behind someone I know from the gym a few weeks ago, 2 young men and 1 woman walking 3 abreast in the road on our side, a van coming in the opposite direction. So, the guy in front dings his bell to alert them he's there and needs to pass, as he cycles by the girl on the end flings her arm out in disgust (nearly slapping me in the face) and starts effing and berating him 'how dare he ding his bell!' etc. etc. Her male friends just laugh.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> When I'm oncerned about someone I tend to say things like "Be carefull" or "watch out!" not, "Bitch", "Knob" "Cant" etc


he said its still on red..... showing his concers then when she didnt listen to his advice he called her something...big deal you wouldnt be complaining if she died or even worse got someone who hit her killed.


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> he said its still on red..... showing his concers then when she didnt listen to his advice he called her something...big deal you wouldnt be complaining if she died or even worse got someone who hit her killed.


Calling someone a bitch isn't going to prevent their death or anyone elses for that matter.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Apparently, I'm the only person that's ever muttered a mild insult in frustration 

Bit of a wonky world we live in when people can routinely do what they heck they like regardless of the law and the safety of themselves and others but woe betide someone says something mildly offensive out of earshot and they're suddenly public enemy no. 1


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Apparently, I'm the only person that's ever muttered a mild insult in frustration
> 
> Bit of a wonky world we live in when people can routinely do what they heck they like regardless of the law and the safety of themselves and others but woe betide someone says something mildly offensive out of earshot and they're suddenly public enemy no. 1


As you said at the start, this was hardly likely to make you look good. Yes we all have a grumble about others for a variety of different reasons. I think it's the choice of insult that is particulary unpleasant, than the fact that you said something at all.

I speak as a woman who was recently called a farking slag for the offense of riding in primary on a narrow double parked street. Abuse is bad enough. Mysogonitic abuse feels even worse.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> As you said at the start, this was hardly likely to make you look good. Yes we all have a grumble about others for a variety of different reasons. I think it's the choice of insult that is particulary unpleasant, than the fact that you said something at all.
> 
> I speak as a woman who was recently called a f***ing slag for the offense of riding in primary on a narrow double parked street. Abuse is bad enough. Mysogonitic abuse feels even worse.



That's interesting that something gender specific is more offensive than a general insult. I don't think it's nice at all to call a woman a b**** or even a cow, but is it really worse than a'hole, c*word or m'fer?

I remember a girl shoved me out of the way while walking through a shopping centre and as it was clearly my fault for just being there she screams 'f'ing c!' at me as she walks by. Women aren't entitled to more respect simply by virtue of their gender, that's reverse discrimination, everyone should be afforded respect until they prove unworthy of it.

As I say, it slipped out AND she couldn't possibly have heard it AND bear in mind that she wasn't just being awkward, silly or inconsiderate she was doing something illegal.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

And I'm sorry that someone called you an effing s**g just for doing what cyclists are told to do in that situation. That's unpleasant and unwarranted.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

here comes the gender war....just cause you call a woman a bitch dosent make it any different from calling a man a dick, i physically can not stand people who use their, sex/religion/race as a reason the make something sound worse than it is. it's a word. if he went and beat her to a pulp yeah show some concern....


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> here comes the gender war....just cause you call a woman a bitch dosent make it any different from calling a man a dick, i physically can not stand people who use their, sex/religion/race as a reason the make something sound worse than it is. it's a word. if he went and beat her to a pulp yeah show some concern....


 bollocks


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

in what way? is calling a woman a bitch worse than calling a man a bitch? really?


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> in what way? is calling a woman a bitch worse than calling a man a bitch? really?



Strange you should say that cos I was just about to call him a bitch when he turned round and started his rant :-)


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

Speaking as a woman I can only tell you how it feels. Being on the end of gender specific insults feels more threatenening. I think thats because there's an underlying misogyny that goes with being called a bitch, whore, slut, slag etc.
If the fella the other week had called me an idiot, for example, it would not have felt half so bad. 

Personally, I feel it's very unpleasant that anyone would choose to speak to a woman using these terms. What I've said maybe babble, but thats how it feels from my perspective.
TBF, I've never heard a man being called or heard of a man being called a bitch, whore, slag, slut etc except in the arena of homophobic abuse, which is obviously also similarly unpleasant.


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> in what way? is calling a woman a bitch worse than calling a man a bitch? really?


 The word is misogynistic.
I've used it myself and it was wrong without qualification.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Speaking as a woman I can only tell you how it feels. Being on the end of gender specific insults feels more threatenening. I think thats because there's an underlying misogyny that goes with being called a bitch, whore, slut, slag etc.
> If the fella the other week had called me an idiot, for example, it would not have felt half so bad.
> 
> Personally, I feel it's very unpleasant that anyone would choose to speak to a woman using these terms. What I've said maybe babble, but thats how it feels from my perspective.
> TBF, I've never heard a man being called or heard of a man being called a bitch, whore, slag, slut etc except in the arena of homophobic abuse, which is obviously also similarly unpleasant.



Being a gay man, I've heard everything you can think of and worse. I wouldn't label a person a homophobe based on the utterance of one so-called homophobic slur, I'd label them based on their attitudes and actions.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

i think you all need to stop taking stuff so personally, someone calls you a name? so what? we arent in primary school.
ive personally been abroad and called stupid things like milk bottle ( by black men) brit scumbag, posh effing tea drinker( cause im from england) but what difference does it make being called those words, to say being called a generic swear word...none, why? cause im not going to come on here an moan about it. gender has nothing to do with it, if you truly believe in equality  which is why i dont get feminists that go off it for similar things...if they truly want to be equal, accept the same abuse men get being told all we care about is a sh*gg.


^^ actions being she couldnt care less about the safety of others around her, personally i couldnt care less if she was hurt or not it his her own ignorant fault, she knows the law and hose not to follow it, its the person that could of hit her and been killed them self or mentally scarred for life for killing her that i worry about.


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

What about 'thick'? Anyone called you that?


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

RedRider said:


> What about 'thick'? Anyone called you that?



Not so much


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Not so much


 I was asking Jack. David, you seem a reasonable bloke, why defend your language. Also, an RLJ by a cyclist is not that dangerous for anyone.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

lol, considering things i have achieved academically...no. not to mention actually studying equality and diversity  however the forces is where my heart has always been and that's not something for thicko's either no matter what you think.


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> lol, considering things i have achieved academically...no. not to mention actually studying equality and diversity  however the forces is where my heart has always been and that's not something for thicko's either no matter what you think.


 No need to get so defensive.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

RedRider said:


> I was asking Jack. David, you seem a reasonable bloke, why defend your language. Also, an RLJ by a cyclist is not that dangerous for anyone.


 motorcyclist hits or swerves to avoids, comes off and dies, car driver swerves to avoids, hit an oncoming car or lamppost ect, multiple fatalities, mental scarring of killing the cyclist... PTSD for example.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

RedRider said:


> No need to get so defensive.


no need to call me thick


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

RedRider said:


> I was asking Jack. David, you seem a reasonable bloke, why defend your language. Also, an RLJ by a cyclist is not that dangerous for anyone.



Ah ok.

I dunno about RLJ'ing not being dangerous though:

http://road.cc/content/news/103569-...ng-cyclist-who-left-9-year-old-girl-fractured

Took 5 seconds to find that one...


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> no need to call me thick


 So, it's alright for you to get defensive about name-calling? Hopefully, you get my point.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

it was gender being no excuse my main point, i couldnt care less if you call me thick..who are you? someone tapping away behind their computer or whatever you are using...dosent bother me buddy


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> it was gender being no excuse my main point, i couldnt care less if you call me thick..who are you? someone tapping away behind their computer or whatever you are using...dosent bother me buddy


 Seem touchy to me.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

why should i care if you call me thick? do you know me? no you dont... do i know you? no i dont. for all i know you could be someone with no achievements to your name. atleast i am putting an actual input into this thread instead of just trying to slagg off me


----------



## GrumpyGregry (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> here comes the gender war....just cause you call a woman a bitch dosent make it any different from calling a man a dick, *i physically can not stand people* who use their, sex/religion/race as a reason the make something sound worse than it is. it's a word. if he went and beat her to a pulp yeah show some concern....


Do you like, literally, fall over then?


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

honestly mate i hit the floor haha


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> why should i care if you call me thick? do you know me? no you dont... do i know you? no i dont. for all i know you could be someone with no achievements to your name. atleast i am putting an actual input into this thread instead of just trying to slagg off me


 Stop going on about it then.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

you replied, i simply responded


----------



## RedRider (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> you replied, i simply responded


'Responded simply.'


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

still going are you  big man.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (11 Feb 2014)

You hang up
No, you hang up
No, YOU hang up...


GC


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

glasgowcyclist said:


> You hang up
> No, you hang up
> No, YOU hang up...
> 
> ...


its love really.... <3


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

2924216 said:


> Few and far between though



Just responding to the RLJ'ing not being dangerous comment, it's hardly an epidemic but it happens often enough and it's illegal anyway:

One from today:
http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/1...ping_red_light____hits_brain_surgery_student/


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

2924229 said:


> Red light jumping happens more than enough and, like you, I wish people didn't do it. In terms of the negative consequences of the criminality though, it is pretty harmless when compared to the huge amount of RLJing by car drivers that seems to be invisible.



Agreed, every time I approach a light that's just gone red, at least one person (cyclist, van, cabby, whatever) zooms through, every... single... time...

Bear in mind you're meant to stop on amber.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

similar sort of situation last night with a police car, on my usual route there is a single file bridge that is on a blind bend with lights wither end to let one side through hat a time, a police car came flying through when their side was on red, no lights or anything and the police driver actually had the cheek to beep his horn at me and the car infront in anger. and i know for a fact the can only rlj if it is urgent enough, they have permission from HQ, they know it is clear, and have the lights and sirens on, any rlj'ing can be fatal


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

The RLJ by the woman in question did not put you in danger. I understand how some lose their rag with those who've put them at risk, but this woman didn't put you at risk. 
And you keep labouring the point that it was illegal, but I don't really get how that justifies you calling someone a bitch. 
When I'm driving, more or less every driver on the road is breaking the law in some way or other, but I don't go aound calling them names.
I find it all a bit bizarre, and this you say, is how you behave when you're in a good mood.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

you've never called someone a name sara?


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> you've never called someone a name sara?


Of course. As I've already said, I understand an outburst when someone has done something that has put you personally at risk, but this woman didn't. I find it a quite shocking response to a situation that had no impact on the OP. 

Perhaps I just don't have enough testosterone to understand this behavior.


----------



## jack smith (11 Feb 2014)

she put others at risk on the road or even pedestrians crossing id there was any


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Perhaps I just don't have enough testosterone to understand this behavior.



Bit of a sexist comment there Sara...


----------



## MarkF (11 Feb 2014)

I learned to keep my mouth shut a few years back.

I'd see the same big, fat guy every day, he'd be wheezing and panting along, the seat was so low he was nearly kneeing himself in the chops. One day we were side by side at some lights and I thought I'd mention it before he did himself an injury, I said "Excuse me, I hope you don''t mind me saying but................." and he replied "What the fooks it got to do with you"?


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> The RLJ by the woman in question did not put you in danger. I understand how some lose their rag with those who've put them at risk, but this woman didn't put you at risk.
> And you keep labouring the point that it was illegal, but I don't really get how that justifies you calling someone a bitch.
> When I'm driving, more or less every driver on the road is breaking the law in some way or other, but I don't go aound calling them names.
> I find it all a bit bizarre, and this you say, is how you behave when you're in a good mood.



Sara, at risk of repeating myself ad nauseum, I have said multiple times that I was wrong to call her a b***h, did you miss those many times or do you simply choose to ignore them? I in no way believe her illegal activities 'justifies' my name-calling. I would say though that an inaudible (to her) name-calling ranks way way down on the list of bad behaviour underneath breaking a law that demonstrably injures people.

[Can I also reiterate (again) that she didn't hear me?, maybe we'll now be dragged over the coals for even thinking bad things about people?]

As for not putting me in danger, do you only ever say something if it affects you personally? Like I also said previously, I saw a chap run a light at the very same spot last week and nearly get crushed between a bus and a truck - I assume we should all stand back and let awful things happen to stupid people? I realise in this instance, the path was clear but the principle stands. Yep, the principle.

I see you did pick up on the 'good mood' bit, that was up till the point where I saw someone broke the law - moods change do they not?


----------



## Twelve Spokes (11 Feb 2014)

I see the point here.I don't think i've said anything like that.The land rover one where it almost wiped me out.The shouting went wtf are you ferking doing? AFAICR.I don't think I have ever called a RLJer a "bitch" or four letter word.

Generally if it's a bad thing with cars I have been known to lose it on the odd occasion.


----------



## DooDah (11 Feb 2014)

jefmcg said:


> I'm still mystified by this: you call a random stranger a bitch (loud enough for others to hear) when she does something that does not affect you in anyway. And this is when you are in a good mood. This is
> 
> Deeply rude
> Troublingly sexist
> a disturbing misuse of the word. Wikipedia, bless, has a pretty good definition "belligerent, unreasonable, malicious, rudely intrusive, and/or aggressive" which conforms to my understanding. Her transgression does not involve anything like maliciousness.





Sara_H said:


> Most cyclist red light jumpers do it not to save time, but because it's often safer. So, they may often go through red after noting that the sequence on the other side has gone to amber. This gives an opportunity to get away from accelerating vehicles behind, sometimes avoiding left hooks or other danger.
> 
> One red light that I go through is a cross roads that has an all red phase with pedestrian crossings across all four roads. Having usually filtered past as many as fifty cars to, when it turns green the drivers are impatient to get away, I end up sitting in the middle of the junction waiting to turn right which feels feels very precarious. I usually don't get chance to turn until the light until late amber or red (due to oncoming traffic continuing to flow through on amber), which then puts me in danger of collision with the traffic coming the oppisite way. I also note that if I've had to wait to turn red that I'm often subject to some very close passes, in fact one driver recently tried to overtake me as we turned through the junction and almost knocked me off. I'm guessing that having to wait behind a cyclist has wound them up.
> If there aren't any pedestrians crossing at the all red (for road traffic) phase, I go through. Much safer and no one has been put at risk or inconvenienced.
> ...


That just means that you break the law. In the seventies, I guess you would have broken the law "bitch". Seriously though, this whole discussion is not about sexism at all, and anyone who thinks it is, is a bitch, bastard or whatever.


----------



## DooDah (11 Feb 2014)

I would imagine if you had have said "stupid bitch" the reaction on here would have not been the same. If it was a bloke and you had said "stupid bastard", I would think you would have had no sexist replies. To me the two different words mean that they are different sexes. So perhaps differentiating sexes makes you sexist


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Sara, at risk of repeating myself ad nauseum, I have said multiple times that I was wrong to call her a b***h, did you miss those many times or do you simply choose to ignore them? I in no way believe her illegal activities 'justifies' my name-calling. I would say though that an inaudible (to her) name-calling ranks way way down on the list of bad behaviour underneath breaking a law that demonstrably injures people.
> 
> [Can I also reiterate (again) that she didn't hear me?, maybe we'll now be dragged over the coals for even thinking bad things about people?]
> 
> ...


Yes I would probably only swear or use unpleasant words if something had happened to me personally, it's the adrenalin you see. I can't see me getting that excited about something that caused no harm to me or to anyone else, legal or not. I may pass comment anout something illegal, but not in the way you did. If someone was about to cause danger I'd issue a warning, but i wouldnt throw an insult in at the same time. I just don't understand that part.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Yes I would probably only swear or use unpleasant words if something had happened to me personally, it's the adrenalin you see. I can't see me getting that excited about something that caused no harm to me or to anyone else, legal or not. I may pass comment anout something illegal, but not in the way you did. If someone was about to cause danger I'd issue a warning, but i wouldnt throw an insult in at the same time. I just don't understand that part.



She didn't hear me...


----------



## DooDah (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Yes I would probably only swear or use unpleasant words if something had happened to me personally, it's the adrenalin you see. I can't see me getting that excited about something that caused no harm to me or to anyone else, legal or not. I may pass comment anout something illegal, but not in the way you did. If someone was about to cause danger I'd issue a warning, but i wouldnt throw an insult in at the same time. I just don't understand that part.


So how would you pass comment to something illegal or something that was about to cause danger? In my mind it is only an insult if the person in question found it insulting, which she did not as she did not hear it.


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> She didn't hear me...


Good!


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

Maybe time to agree to disagree. You asked for thoughts on the incident as a whole. I think yours was a strange reaction to the incident that happened. It wouldn't have occurred to me to react in the same way that you did. You learnt from it, I've learnt from it, so I guess thats something.


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> Good!



hah, don't tell me that was new information?


----------



## Sara_H (11 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> hah, don't tell me that was new information?



No!


----------



## Davidsw8 (11 Feb 2014)

Sara_H said:


> No!



Phew!


----------



## DooDah (11 Feb 2014)

DooDah said:


> So how would you pass comment to something illegal or something that was about to cause danger? In my mind it is only an insult if the person in question found it insulting, which she did not as she did not hear it.


Perhaps it would be: oh silly you, or my,my that is dangerous


----------



## sazzaa (11 Feb 2014)

Bitch to me isn't even an insult. Mostly because I'm quite a bitch.


----------



## glenn forger (11 Feb 2014)

I imagine you respond to being called a racist with indistinguishable equanimity.


----------



## DooDah (11 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> I imagine you respond to being called a racist with indistinguishable equanimity.


Who was that aimed at?


----------



## Mugshot (11 Feb 2014)

DooDah said:


> Who was that aimed at?


sazzaa, glenn is stalking her at the moment.


----------



## Kookas (11 Feb 2014)

Rather than basically say you're only allowed to insult men, why not argue against insulting anyone?


----------



## glenn forger (11 Feb 2014)

i debated whether to call out RLJers but it's never worth it. I'd never use that word to a woman but now I never shout at cyclists, it's really not what I want to spend time doing.


----------



## Davidsw8 (12 Feb 2014)

Leaving the bad language aside (hard as that appears to be), it seems a shame that people are too focussed on having an easy life or are too scared of potential reprisals to now say anything about bad behavoiur these days. It's not just supposedly minor offences like RLJ'ing, people turn away all the time. I feel like I've gone this way myself now... 

And sometimes then it swings in the opposite direction and people's selfishness and self-entitlement blind them to the needs of a fellow human being. I went on a first aid course in the middle of January and one lady told of someone who'd collapsed on the tube, she went to help and had the tube stopped at the next station and she got a barrage of grief from other passengers for delaying their journeys. None of us were especially shocked at this story...


----------



## RedRider (12 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Leaving the bad language aside (hard as that appears to be), it seems a shame that people are too focussed on having an easy life or are too scared of potential reprisals to now say anything about bad behavoiur these days. It's not just supposedly minor offences like RLJ'ing, people turn away all the time. I feel like I've gone this way myself now...
> .


 
I spend much of my life supporting people through crises and working with challenging behaviour (including, sorry to say) verbal and physical violence towards women. It's what I choose to do and I enjoy it in a funny way, I like to think I'm good at it. Outside of work I have and do occasionally intervene in situations but in the grand scheme, minor infractions by cyclists are way down the list of things worth bothering with. Life is too short.



Davidsw8 said:


> And sometimes then it swings in the opposite direction and people's selfishness and self-entitlement blind them to the needs of a fellow human being. I went on a first aid course in the middle of January and one lady told of someone who'd collapsed on the tube, she went to help and had the tube stopped at the next station and she got a barrage of grief from other passengers for delaying their journeys. None of us were especially shocked at this story...


IMO People become more selfish underground at rush hour, pushing old ladies out the way etc. Getting on a bike isn't a complete cure - as you say RLJ-ing can be a bit selfish - but aside from walking it's pretty much the most humane (whatever that means) way to travel. It's helped keep me sane in this metropolis anyway.


----------



## Davidsw8 (12 Feb 2014)

RedRider said:


> I spend much of my life supporting people through crises and working with challenging behaviour (including, sorry to say) verbal and physical violence towards women. It's what I choose to do and I enjoy it in a funny way, I like to think I'm good at it. Outside of work I have and do occasionally intervene in situations but in the grand scheme, minor infractions by cyclists are way down the list of things worth bothering with. Life is too short.
> 
> 
> IMO People become more selfish underground at rush hour, pushing old ladies out the way etc. Getting on a bike isn't a complete cure - as you say RLJ-ing can be a bit selfish - but aside from walking it's pretty much the most humane (whatever that means) way to travel. It's helped keep me sane in this metropolis anyway.


 

After every tube or bus journey, I say 'Slap me if I ever complain about cycling again!'


----------



## Davidsw8 (12 Feb 2014)

With regards to the RLJ issue, I was thinking about the excuse for RLJ'ing that some people come out with about how they RLJ because it's 'too dangerous not to'. If you feel so endangered, there are a number of solutions that don't involve breaking the law:

Get off and walk it past the dangerous bit
Pull over and let the dangerous traffic pass
Find an alternate, safer route

I cycle through some of the busiest parts of London in rush hour every day and I have not once felt in danger stopped at a red light. There are a couple of occasions that I'll pull over and let heavy traffic pass or walk it round a dangerous bit, adds an extra minute or so to my journey, big deal.


----------



## Dan B (12 Feb 2014)

Ten pages of discussion about the wisdom of keeping ones mouth shut? There's something a bit meta about that


----------



## jack smith (12 Feb 2014)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfdvIfT8H5c


this is a good example of keeping it shut..from waht i can see unprovoked abuse towards the driver, and cyclist gets it. by the way, do alot of people commute in suits?


----------



## glenn forger (12 Feb 2014)

We've dealt with this, it was not unprovoked, the driver broke the law, jumped the lights, committed an offence and may have run over the cyclist's foot.


----------



## jack smith (12 Feb 2014)

the lights are green, the cyclists even pull away before the driver, the car clearley dosent run over his foot as you can see ( and you would hear the bloke scream) and i doubt he would be pedalling that fast after with a squashed foot, the cyclist then went along side and started yelling abuse (assault) just cause a driver enters the cycle box dosent mean you need to yell abuse like that.


----------



## glenn forger (12 Feb 2014)

It was the rear wheel, the view is blocked by the other cyclist.
The driver commits a TS10 offence, the same as running a red light, I would brush up on your driver training if I were you, you really should be aware of road traffic law.


----------



## downfader (12 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfdvIfT8H5c
> 
> 
> this is a good example of keeping it shut..from waht i can see unprovoked abuse towards the driver, and cyclist gets it. by the way, do alot of people commute in suits?



FFS not that again. Cyclist was an arse but there was no need for driving like that. We've been through this before - exonerating the driver/passenger does little to help our cause.

In fact - if someone drove at me like that I'd be pretty pissed off too.


----------



## jack smith (12 Feb 2014)

the same as? he didnt run a red light. he entered the cycle box if you watch the slip even in slow mo you see no reaction from "getting his foot ran over" if you also look at the clip and where his feet are they are not in the path of the car. this bloke truly did get what he deserved unlike the op.


----------



## glenn forger (12 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> the same as? .



Yes. 

Seriously, get some refresher driving training.


----------



## jack smith (12 Feb 2014)

unless he actually went through the red light and across the junction its not the same running a red light is running a red light, entering a cycle box is a totally different offence


----------



## glenn forger (12 Feb 2014)

No, it is not.

For the love of God get some driver training.


----------



## downfader (12 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> unless he actually went through the red light and across the junction its not the same running a red light is running a red light, entering a cycle box is a totally different offence



Crossing the first white line on red is contravention of the traffic signal. There was no reason for the driver to edge in and it makes it look as if he's out to cause a ruckus. 

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Advanced-Stop-Lines/1400018009433/1400018009433


----------



## jack smith (12 Feb 2014)

however it is still not the same as runnign red until he crosses the second line, by law he can not be prosecuted for being in the cycle box unless an officer sees him cross without reason, for example you can enter the box if it is not safe to stop before the box if the light is just changing for example. its when you cross the second line it becomes running a red light

to be fair the driver seems clueless at first but it think he is just manoeuvring so that he is out of the path of the cyclists for when he sets off, wrong by law but seems like a fair intention in the drivers mind.


----------



## glenn forger (12 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> however it is still not the same as runnign red until he crosses the second line



I give up.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Feb 2014)

give up.


jack smith said:


> however it is still not the same as runnign red until he crosses the second line, by law he can not be prosecuted for being in the cycle box unless an officer sees him cross without reason, for example you can enter the box if it is not safe to stop before the box if the light is just changing for example. its when you cross the second line it becomes running a red light


When folk are trying to help you it pays to read the links they offer rather than just confidently repeat your own assertions as to your correctness in the matter....

*Motorists*
Do not enter the ASL box when the light is red – this space is reserved for the safety of cyclists.

Crossing the first or second ASL line when the light is red makes you liable for a £100 fixed penalty, three points on your licence, and endangers vulnerable road users.

*Myth:* Entering an ASL is a specific offence. *Not true. *Entering an ASL when the light is red is an offence under section 36(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, regulation 10 of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. *The offence is jumping a red light and could result in a £100 fixed penalty and three points on your licence.*


----------



## jack smith (12 Feb 2014)

i did read the link, ive read it before also, but he did not run the red light in question provoking the cyclist as the guy said he entered the cycle box which isnt provoking the cyclist to do what he did it was pretty uncalled for o nthe cyclist's behalf, yeah you dont creep up into the box as the lights to get a better position to pull away as the driver did but there was no need for the cyclist to do what he did


----------



## glenn forger (12 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> he did not run the red light in question



Good grief.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> i did read the link, ive read it before also, but he did not run the red light in question....


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Feb 2014)

Eight and counting.


----------



## clockman (12 Feb 2014)

glenn forger said:


> I give up.


Giving up is probably the best thing. J.S. obviously thinks that crossing the first white line of an ASL box is acceptable as a motorist, so let him get a fixed penalty notice from plod, when plod witnesses it. Although, I must admit that the chance of this will be very slight, but we can live in hope. Ignorance like this needs some sort of financial punishment, not just the derision of his fellow cyclist! 

As the saying goes 'a little knowledge, is a dangerous thing'. Arrogantly, sticking to an ignorant opinion, when being informed that you are wrong is brave. Foolhardy even. But like so many things in life, I feel we should let Darwinian principles come into play.


----------



## clockman (13 Feb 2014)

Am I mistaken or have we gone away from the point of the original post?

Davidsw8, originally said used an inappropriate name to describe a female cyclist, (not notice by said cyclist). A third party cyclist took offence. It doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. If the female cyclist wants to get herself squashed, let her. It's her life. Why was the third party so offended, davidsw8, was only expressing verbal amazement at a fellow cyclists stupidity.

Life is far too short to worry about the stupidity of others. It's in the past, look forward and take it as a warning or a lesson learnt.

But, how the hell have we got onto crossing the first white line of an ASL box. We all know, there are people that don't know how to properly interpret the Highway Code, so why don't we just let them carry on in blissful ignorance, in the knowledge that they will, one day come un-stuck.


----------



## jack smith (13 Feb 2014)

Considering I've said the driver was in the wrong by going into the box...  my point stands it may be the same fixed penalty notice as running a red but the driver did not physically pass the red light as the OP is on about with the female cyclist, you can call me what you wish, your entitled to an opinion, as am I


----------



## downfader (13 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> Considering I've said the driver was in the wrong by going into the box...  my point stands it may be the same fixed penalty notice as running a red but the driver did not physically pass the red light as the OP is on about with the female cyclist, you can call me what you wish, your entitled to an opinion, as am I



Idiot. Do it in your car and use that argument with a copper waiting in the ASL on his bike. See how far it gets you.


----------



## Davidsw8 (13 Feb 2014)

clockman said:


> Am I mistaken or have we gone away from the point of the original post?
> 
> Davidsw8, originally said used an inappropriate name to describe a female cyclist, (not notice by said cyclist). A third party cyclist took offence. It doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. If the female cyclist wants to get herself squashed, let her. It's her life. Why was the third party so offended, davidsw8, was only expressing verbal amazement at a fellow cyclists stupidity.
> 
> ...



Thanks clockman. My tactic of counting is really helping, I highly recommend it if anyone feels they must exclaim something at the DumbA's out there.

Counted 14 this morning. It's funny when I get to 'Nine' though, people must think I'm German. Or when I say 'Number 2!', no I didn't mean it THAT way!


----------



## glasgowcyclist (13 Feb 2014)

jack smith said:


> Considering I've said the driver was in the wrong by going into the box...  my point stands it may be the same fixed penalty notice as running a red but the driver did not physically pass the red light as the OP is on about with the female cyclist, you can call me what you wish, your entitled to an opinion, as am I


 
The offence specified under 36(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is not a matter of opinion but one of fact. 

GC


----------



## glasgowcyclist (13 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Thanks clockman. My tactic of counting is really helping, I highly recommend it if anyone feels they must exclaim something at the DumbA's out there.
> 
> Counted 14 this morning. It's funny when I get to 'Nine' though, people must think I'm German. Or when I say 'Number 2!', no I didn't mean it THAT way!


 
Will you jump straight to 70 from 68?

GC


----------



## downfader (13 Feb 2014)

glasgowcyclist said:


> The offence specified under 36(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is not a matter of opinion but one of fact.
> 
> GC


Exactly. As I so often find myself saying, you're entitled to an opinion: but if that is proven wrong you're no longer entitled to it and have to concede.


----------



## Davidsw8 (13 Feb 2014)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Will you jump straight to 70 from 68?
> 
> GC



Jeez, if I get to 68 in a 20 min cycle ride, I'm packing up and going home!

Nothing wrong with 69 though, I won't have a word said against it


----------



## glasgowcyclist (13 Feb 2014)

Davidsw8 said:


> Jeez, if I get to 68 in a 20 min cycle ride, I'm packing up and going home!
> 
> Nothing wrong with 69 though, I won't have a word said against it


 
I was just worried someone might mistake it as an offer...

GC


----------

