# Anyone ever thrown a full bottle at a car?



## Jonathan M (18 Sep 2009)

Got SMIDSY'd three times in a mile, and the last one really pissed me off, fat chavvy woman driving some Audi 4x4 talking on her mobile who saw me, paused, then pulled out right in front me. I shouted "stupid woman", got a response of "**** off", but carried on riding. For the rest of my trip into work I was fuming, and considering ways of revenge the next time someone SMIDSYs me, and the dark side took over with thoughts of hurling a full or nearly full bidon at the vehicle. 

Anyone done this, as it must make one hell of athump, and if so, what was the reaction (apart from being charged with criminal damage??!??)


----------



## palinurus (18 Sep 2009)

Not yet.


----------



## Bman (18 Sep 2009)

Probably a very hostile one! 

Especially if you hit someone/thing else


----------



## Crankarm (18 Sep 2009)

Bottle of what exactly and need it be full? Would be awful to waste a bottle of finest malt or a nice claret .


----------



## fossyant (18 Sep 2009)

Right then...... controversial or not............

Kid boy drivers are complete twits..............and deadly.....

Young (ish) women drivers (bigger age span) are dangerous..........

I personally get more issues with younger women driving anything at about rush hour than any BM rep boy........ (and my missus drives about at that time - she knows how to drive)........

It's the drop kid's off, go to work madness speed...FFS.......the fella you squish might just be the classroom's mate's dad..........


----------



## Joe24 (18 Sep 2009)

No, i just do the decent thing.
















I shoot the little ****ers


----------



## MacB (18 Sep 2009)

I'm sure I read on a forum, think it was a US one, that a rider, or riders, had taken to carrying a small hammer clipped to frame. When cut up would catch car and crack windscreen. 

I can't find this now, anyone know it or is it just an urban legend I've picked up?


----------



## cheadle hulme (18 Sep 2009)

Confession time - big spray from a 750ml bottle into an Audi A4 cab after the front seat passenger shouted "get a car you gay knobber" passing me (very closely) in Wilmslow.

As they turned right after she shouted it I sprayed! Worried for ages afterwards that they would double back and find me, so took a route back via the airport.

Not a clever or sensible thing to do (the juice had a high fruit content) but what the heck. If you're that peed off after waiting behind a cyclist for 30 secs (and approaching the lghts anyway) then you're fair game.

As I said, not big or clever, but boy that squeeze felt good!


----------



## nigelnorris (18 Sep 2009)

Wouldn't it just be handy to have a can of spraypaint handy. I said somewhere else I tried a telescopic police baton once in my pump bracket and it fitted perfectly, make a nice dent that would.


----------



## Trumpettom001 (18 Sep 2009)

I carry a solid Swiss army bottle with me... (I'm on a 20quid steel bike most days so I'm not worried about weight...)... I've tapped that thing gently against my head and it hurts,, so I imagine if I were to swing it against a Ferrari, it would make a nice swiss army dents... not that I'm plannin on trying it anytime soon...


----------



## Trumpettom001 (18 Sep 2009)

Also If I had a Ferrari myself I would just sell it anyway, and buy a fleet of bikes...


----------



## semislickstick (18 Sep 2009)

nigelnorris said:


> Wouldn't it just be handy to have a can of spraypaint handy. I said somewhere else I tried a telescopic police baton once in my pump bracket and it fitted perfectly, make a nice dent that would.



A good solid u-lock would too....and it wouldn't look out of sorts to carry it.(if you needed it for self defence purposes only, obviously)


----------



## Crankarm (18 Sep 2009)

semislickstick said:


> A good solid u-lock would too....and it wouldn't look out of sorts to carry it.(if you needed it for self defence purposes only, obviously)



It has been concluded here many times before that actually using a D-lock in a confrontation might end up with it being used on you as some drivers are nutters. Unless you are a trick boxer or genuine 4th Dan black belt who can handle themselves it is best to avoid escalating things to a serious life threatening confrontation. A serious nutter will probably try to run you down in their vehicle.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/ne...maging-wing-mirror-court-told-92746-23432533/

But even if you can handle yourself you can still be stabbed or shot as was the championship boxer (sorry can't remember his name nor the location) shot in a London restaurant after a disagreement with some one.


----------



## cheadle hulme (19 Sep 2009)

Crankarm said:


> It has been concluded here many times before that actually using a D-lock in a confrontation might end up with it being used on you as some drivers are nutters. Unless you are a trick boxer or genuine 4th Dan black belt who can handle themselves it is best to avoid escalating things to a serious life threatening confrontation. A serious nutter will probably try to run you down in their vehicle.
> 
> http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/ne...maging-wing-mirror-court-told-92746-23432533/
> 
> But even if you can handle yourself you can still be stabbed or shot as was the championship boxer (sorry can't remember his name nor the location) shot in a London restaurant after a disagreement with some one.



Very good advice Crankarm. If its a van load of brickies, I'll probably give it a miss. Some tosser in a Porsche though and I'll give as much as I get.

Make sure you're covered by CCTV if you do decide to exercise your right to a citizens arrest. And don't wear SPD SL either. They are rubbish in a ruck. They're no good in a general altercation either (don't ask how I know this).


----------



## billflat12 (19 Sep 2009)

*no bottle*

Knew of a female horserider who had a fishing weight attached to a whip for close encounters, also admitted that a good kick had worked once & insurance company ruled driver too close. maybe you should try an acting career, snap a mirror, take the dive then the reg.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

I am all for self defence, but I think we need to look at the wider problem - the fact we came into conflict with traffic in the first place.

We need good quality segregated cycling infrastructure, like the Dutch, to keep us away from cars.


----------



## Flying Dodo (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> I am all for self defence, but I think we need to look at the wider prblem - the fact we came into conflict with traffic in the first place.
> 
> We need good quality segregated cycling infrastructure, like the Dutch, to keep us away from cars.



What - for every road in the UK? How would that help cyclists?


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

Flying Dodo said:


> What - for every road in the UK? How would that help cyclists?




View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUmXPEB6TLQ


Yes, I can see your point. How will infrastructure like the above ever help British cyclists?


----------



## Flying Dodo (19 Sep 2009)

You're missing the point. 

1) On the majority of roads, they don't have wide edges of grass so you can't retro-fit layouts as shown in that YouTube video.

2) (and it's a big one) Who's going to pay for it?

3) If you do segregate cyclists so a large proportion only use those facilities, when cyclists end up using roads they will get abused far more than they are currently.

4) Why should one group of road users be forced off the road system? Do you advocate discrimination against other minorities?

Surely a far better solution all round is to enforce better education of drivers not to do stupid things like James Martin did. If drivers had better control of their vehicles and didn't use them as weapons, things would be far better.


----------



## Archie_tect (19 Sep 2009)

cheadle hulme said:


> Very good advice Crankarm. If its a van load of brickies, I'll probably give it a miss. Some tosser in a Porsche though and I'll give as much as I get...



Alarming how many of you youngsters are closet thugs... providing the person giving you grief is incapable or unprepared to retaliate with violence.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

I think I have got the point, and I don't wish to get into another online argument. 

We could all say, let's make do and mend. But, given the fact the Dutch road network was in as big a mess as our in the 1970's, with all the accompanying cycling fatalities, the Dutch people decided (all 15 million of them) that enough was enough, and they lobbied their government to change things. And it happened.

1) Who said follow roads? I wouldn't want to cycle anywhere near a CO2 belching vehicle if I could avoid it. The beauty of cycles is that they are very agile and cycle paths can wind their way almost anywhere.

2) With a combined population of 20m, and a land mass similar to the UK, the Danish and Dutch managed it with a third of the taxable population of the UK. In my reckoning, with today's incomes (compared to the 70's when the Dutch started) we are better placed to fund this. Maybe if we spent less on having people sat on their @rses, and made them do the work, and/or if we didn't feel the paranoia to have to buy a fleet of nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers etc,and fund large groups of people to occupy (and die in) lands far away for NO reason other than sucking up to zarking yanks there'd be a bit in the pot to make the paths?

3) Provision of cycling infrastructure will lead more people away from the car, and make car drivers aware of the vulnerability of cyclists. The courts should be made to act with more severity on cases of road-rage and injurious collisions, then the message might get through that driving tons of metal at high speed in CLOSE proximity to others carries a GREAT amount of responsibility.

4) I don't advocate forcing anyone off the roads system, I just believe our antiquated system is choking and needs a release. Provide facilities and they will be used. I am not talking about any two penny linemarking schemes, I am talking about real investment for the good of the whole country. 

Do you get off on making leading questions, hinting that someone might be racist, sexist, homophobic? I am not, so stop it.

A better solution would be to stop all the macho chest-beating bullshit that is fed to drivers by the media. Magazines, newspapers, TV programs and films all glamourise cars, and the 'Too fast, Too furious' and MaxPower lifestyles. 

Trouble is, a LOT of people make a LOT of money from this, and once they have the power that comes with it, they don't want to let it go. I see lemmings everyday in my local town, driving like complete cretins in cars that look like they've crashed into Halfords shop window. Where did they get the idea from? The media.

How much longer will it take for the UK populus to realise that they are being treated like idiots, and are missing out on real life, just so they can carry on with their image conscious (and profitable for 'the man') lives?


----------



## Flying Dodo (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> Do you get off on making leading questions, hinting that someone might be racist, sexist, homophobic? I am not, so stop it.



I wasn't in fact. However it's a slippery slope to say one group of people should be segregated from another, as if enough people start suggesting cyclists should be off on their own, then we'd lose the right to be on roads at any time.




ComedyPilot said:


> A better solution would be to stop all the macho chest-beating bullshit that is fed to drivers by the media. Magazines, newspapers, TV programs and films all glamourise cars, and the 'Too fast, Too furious' and MaxPower lifestyles.
> 
> Trouble is, a LOT of people make a LOT of money from this, and once they have the power that comes with it, they don't want to let it go. I see lemmings everyday in my local town, driving like complete cretins in cars that look like they've crashed into Halfords shop window. Where did they get the idea from? The media.
> 
> How much longer will it take for the UK populus to realise that they are being treated like idiots, and are missing out on real life, just so they can carry on with their image conscious (and profitable for 'the man') lives?




I agree entirely with what you'd put there, which is why I'd advocated better education of drivers to stop them seeing their vehicles as weapons.


----------



## Jonathan M (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> We need good quality segregated cycling infrastructure, like the Dutch, to keep us away from cars.



I disagree most strongly with this, I feel that there needs to be better education of road users & pedestrians to recognise that our roads are used by all manner of people. Or that if a segregated network is introduced it is to keep car drivers away from us - subtle difference, but your words would suggest the problem is cyclists, when we aren't. 

So as examples, campaigns aimed at all ages of pedestrians to recognise that they need to look both ways and that the attitude of "If I don't look, everyone will stop for me" doesn't work. Old bidies are best at this, usually 5 metres away from a ped crossing, shopping bags in each hand, and they'll put their heads down, and cross. They'll even have the cheek to tut if you ride past them, rather than stop.

BMW & Audi drivers to be re-educated that they are cocks, and attend compulsory lessons in manners & attitudes, at their own costs, that have to be completed before driving a Baudiw for the first time, plus the training below .

Other car drivers - what road markings are for, what traffic lights are for, what indicators are for, what mirrors are for. 

Clear "K" plates (to indicate Knob) for any owners aged under 25 of a Corsa/Saxo/Fiesta registered more than 10 years ago and for whom the idea of car servicing is a shag on the back seat on a friday night. 

Bus drivers & lorry drivers to go on anger management courses .

Cyclists to all attend appropriate training (is it Bikewise?) at least once. I'm sure that there is likely to be an equivalent training scheme for horse-riders. 

The Dutch system works for them, but other countries in europe, France for example, recognise cyclists as road users. Yes, for them it is far more acceptable to ride as a sport, of enjoyment, but they seem to manage quite well without much in the way of road user/cyclist segregation. If the UK went to as much segregation as possible, then within a short time those cyclists who have to ride on a none-segregated part of the road system would have other users assuming that the cyclist is automatically in the wrong for "not" using the cycle path network, even if it does not exist at that place.


----------



## sheddy (19 Sep 2009)

What we need is European road law - what is is called ?


----------



## Jonathan M (19 Sep 2009)

sheddy said:


> What we need is European road law - what is is called ?



I don't know, but certainly in France cyclists have the same road rights as motorised users. I think it is meant to be the same in the UK, but something has got lost over the years.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

I wrote this on another thread a few days ago:

A couple of paragraphs jumped out at me and summed up our car-obsessed country and this government's attitude to cyclists/peds:

"A 1947 book by J. S. Dean, former Chairman of the Pedestrians’ Association, is instructive here. In his ‘study of the road deaths problem’, _Murder Most Foul_, Dean's basic tenet is that, ‘*as roads are only “dangerous” by virtue of being filled with heavy fast moving motor vehicles, by far the greatest burden of responsibility for avoiding crashes, deaths and injury on the roads should lie with the motorist*’ (Peel n.d., 3)."

And 

"*Yet road safety education concentrates not on the drivers of vehicles, but on those who they have the capacity to kill. Dean saw how placing responsibility for road danger on those outside of motorised vehicles might lead, by stealth, to placing of culpability on those groups, and Murder Most Foul is a tirade against the placing of responsibility for road accidents on children*."

And this was written in 1947.


----------



## Joe24 (19 Sep 2009)

Comedy pilot, do you know how much the Dutch have to pay to put 'road tax' on their cars?
We had a Dutch guy next top us at a camp site, nice chap he was, had a big Volvo.
Anyway, dad commented on how you often see the Dutchies all over.
I can remember the exact amount, but to put road tax on a car is a huge amount. He had a Volvo V70, im sure he said it was over £1000 to tax it a year(but dont quote me on that, it was a while ago and i cant remember exactly!).
This could be a reason why some people use bikes instead.
Should do that over here.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

I will email my Dutch colleague at work and get the exact figure.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

The dutch pay about €100-€150 a quarter in road 'tax' depending on car size. They pay about €1.60 a litre for petrol, and insurance prices are comparable to the UK.

So we have millions more vehicles, paying less road 'tax' and similar fuel prices and insurance. In my reckoning we have a bigger pot to delve into to pay for the infrastructure?


----------



## Jonathan M (19 Sep 2009)

Lets not forget though, road tax is now more of an environmental tax, my understanding is most road & transport projects are funded laregly by general taxation??

I don't think Joe Public would go with the concept of funding a network for none motorised users for many reasons. Firslty, they'd see it as another "green" initiative by stealth. Secondly it would bring peds & cyclists into much closer contact. And the hierarchy in the UK seems to be 4 wheels>2 wheels with engine>pedestrian>cyclist.

Imagine the Daily Mail the first time bike vs granny happens, and the granny comes off worse?


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

Do you ride dangerously around peds?

No, neither do I, and the courts should do their job and punish anyone that does.

Anyone caught on the new cycle lanes riding dangerously around peds/other cyclists should be given on the spot fines of £100. Maybe the lesson might get through.

People just don't do it in Holland as they are more civilised than us 'Island Monkeys' (as I remember the Germans call us)


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

Jonathan M said:


> *Lets not forget though, road tax is now more of an environmental tax*, my understanding is most road & transport projects are funded laregly by general taxation??
> 
> I don't think Joe Public would go with the concept of funding a network for none motorised users for many reasons. Firslty, they'd see it as another "green" initiative by stealth. Secondly it would bring peds & cyclists into much closer contact. And the hierarchy in the UK seems to be 4 wheels>2 wheels with engine>pedestrian>cyclist.
> 
> Imagine the Daily Mail the first time bike vs granny happens, and the granny comes off worse?



And as cyclists and peds, that's money creamed off the motorist for the ENVIRONMENT'S benefit. Ergo as cyclists we benefit the environment, so that money should be spent on our infrastructure.


----------



## XmisterIS (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUmXPEB6TLQ




Fantastic idea; but can you imagine the indignant snorts of rage from the not insignificant section of society typified by the boorish Audi driver mentioned at the start of this thread?


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

They only act like that because of the way they perceive themselves to be in the heirarchy (sp?) of the road.


----------



## Joe24 (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> The dutch pay about €100-€150 a quarter in road 'tax' depending on car size. They pay about €1.60 a litre for petrol, and insurance prices are comparable to the UK.
> 
> *So we have millions more vehicles, paying less road 'tax' and similar fuel prices and insurance. In my reckoning we have a bigger pot to delve into to pay for the infrastructure?*



Except we dont, because alot of roads keep being repaired?
Although, some money is wasted.
Theres a large round which i go round when i go to my GFs. Its over Hucknal way. They coned it off so it was just one lane, had road works on it, and what have they done to this round about? Tarmacked a big strip all the way around
I asked my GF about it, she said that they just needed to use up some money.
Absolutly pointless, and whats the cycle facility there? Its just a normal path, but its a wide road.
What they should have done is put a proper cycle path, or a proper lane on the road.
Its not a dangerous road though, because its so wide you dont really get passed close, so there's no problem there.
I dont think England will turn into anything like Holland with bikes. For a start, we have hills, which make it hard for people, so they dont do it. Which non-fit cyclist fancies getting off their bikes and pushing them up a hill, after trying to get up most of it, and failing?
We also have the wrong bikes. Loads of BSO mountain bike things, which fall apart.
Over there, they have the town bikes, that wont fall apart, and if they do they dont care, still keep riding.
Its not on price either. A friend of mine has moved out to Holland, and those bikes new she says arent cheap. Yet most people over here dont want to spend over £100 on a bike. 
Its the British, or a large number of the British, i think, that means that English wont be able to become anywhere near what its like in Holland.
CP, you say about people in the Netherlands not riding dangerously around peds. Well, they dont, but they do ride crazy. BUT, peds WILL get out the way of cyclists. Its a fact. They will move well out of the way, and give them more then enough room to ride past.
Cars are shoot scared of cyclists aswell. Thats a FACT. I was on the road cycling, when there was a cobbled cycle lane, and i shoot up car drivers by just being on the road.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

I was the person getting off and walking up the hill. 

What changed me? 

Effort and a willingness to try. 

On my 18sp MTB Hybrid when I first commuted, I had to go down onto the granny ring 1st gear to get up a hill on the way to work. Now i approach on the big ring in 4th (out of 6) and just power up. 

Proof we can do it if we try. We just have to try, that's all.


----------



## aJohnson (19 Sep 2009)

No, I wouldn't waste a bottle on them. I would waste the contents if it's water though.


----------



## Jonathan M (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> *Do you ride dangerously around peds?*
> 
> No, neither do I, and the courts should do their job and punish anyone that does.
> 
> ...



No,I don't, but the issue would not be one of blame, those sections of middle britain media would brand the cyclist at fault "Cyclist runs down elderly grandmother", AFAIK cyclists in the Netherlands are pretty good at fitting & using bells on bikes, so it would require steps from the cycling community to take steps to ensure that using shared lanes wouldn't result in further demonising of cyclists in general, and an acceptance from peds that the route they are using is shared with wheeled users. 

As for fines, enforceable? Probably not, the current road laws go pretty much unfollowed & unenforced (like my Audi owner in post 1 of the thread, how long has the law required hands free kits, yet she can afford a car close to £40k and either does not have or will not use a hands free), and such fines would immediately be picked by the media as revenue generation by stealth, even if cyclists were paying.

Better use of the resources we have through education & re-training is they way forward.


----------



## nigelnorris (19 Sep 2009)

I think the boredom would drive me off my bike if I had to ride those Dutch paved paths. Can't get up any speed, and tbh although it sounds stupid I do actually enjoy the ride through traffic to work and back. A bit of adrenalin can't help but set you up for a day at the chalk face.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

I am all for education, but that would have us precisely where?

Still on the same congested, high-speed differential roads and streets that have (and will continue to) claim the lives of hudreds of cyclists/pedestrians and drivers.

Not good enough. 

We need a 'revolution' on the scale the Dutch and Danish did it in the 1970's and 1980's and demand a better solution to the safety issue. We have 40m more people to do it, we have the green tax revenue to fund it, we just need to get it done.

Sadly, what we are lumbered with, (like a big corporate mill stone round our necks), is a motor-crazy media (and general public) to win round.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

Another solution would be for me to piss off and live in Holland and stop pontificating on here?


----------



## Joe24 (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> I was the person getting off and walking up the hill.
> 
> What changed me?
> 
> ...



And that is what many British people lack. Its hard to do something, so we say bollocks to it.They have a car, they paid alot for, which can get them to work without them straining themself.
Or a bike, which they would actually have to ride and put effort in.

To be honest, if i had a car i might get lazy. I would probably drive over to see my GF, instead of ride.
I probably wouldnt drive to the shops, because you now have to pay to park there, but if it was crappy weather then i would drive, and park somewhere on a side street.
Its pure lazyness, and i know it.

CP, i was going to suggest you just piss off and live in the Netherlands(lets get the countries name right here) but i was being polite.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

Joe24 said:


> And that is what many British people lack. Its hard to do something, so we say bollocks to it.They have a car, they paid alot for, which can get them to work without them straining themself.
> Or a bike, which they would actually have to ride and put effort in.
> 
> To be honest, if i had a car i might get lazy. I would probably drive over to see my GF, instead of ride.
> ...



Funnily enough, that's what my Dutch colleague said on the phone, when I spoke to him about Dutch road 'tax' earlier today.


----------



## Jonathan M (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> We need a 'revolution' on the scale the Dutch and Danish did it in the 1970's and 1980's and demand a better solution to the safety issue. We have 40m more people to do it, we have the green tax revenue to fund it, we just need to get it done.



But is there enough of a critcal mass of concerned people to demand this revolution, and overcome the car culture? OK, those parents who argue it isn't safe for kids to walk, is it RTC that they stress about, or the random paedophile? Do peds actually consider themselves a distinct group, or are they using pavements to get somewhere or as a means to an end. I don't hear many people who actually walk to work saying "what a lousy/great/wet/windy walk to work today". The Ramblers with the right to roam mentality would probably boycott shared use lanes anyway, demanding them all to be footpaths .

Even from the replies in this thread (I can't believe what a discussion about bottle throwing could lead to) the opinion of cyclists here is split, and cyclings profile in this country is only improving off the back of competitive success, not a change in society or its attitude towards those who use cycling as a form of transport.

@Joe24, sadly if you do get a car you will probably slip into that habit of "just nipping out" in the car for something, or extending the area that is open to you/your GF/your mates by driving. I've done that for 20+ years, it has only been the surrender of my driving licence that means I now consider what I need to achieve and think "walk, bike, or public transport?". Option 2 normally wins though!


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/221412/221549/227755/328843/pedalcyclistfsheet07.pdf

I am sure if the government were lobbied, and the families of people seriously injured or killed in collision with vehicles were involved, there could be a turning point. After all, how many cyclists have been killed in london alone this year? Would these people still be here had there been infrastructure in place similar to the Netherlands? (sic joe24)


----------



## Crankarm (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> I think I have got the point, and I don't wish to get into another online argument.
> 
> We could all say, let's make do and mend. But, given the fact the Dutch road network was in as big a mess as our in the 1970's, with all the accompanying cycling fatalities, the Dutch people decided (all 15 million of them) that enough was enough, and they lobbied their government to change things. And it happened.
> 
> ...



Wow! CP something certainly got you stirred up this morning..........

In fact I nominate your post as "Post of the Year" and we still have just over three months to run.

You echo my thoughts entirely.

But alas I don't bother thinking about stuff like this any more as it so upsets me seeing how things can and are done in Holland, Germany, Denmark and France. I know Britain is a crap country for proper cycling, except in Centre Parcs brochures, it will ever be thus. We seem to have a whole political class of lardy arsed myopic cretins representing us whose only activities are to see how deep they can push their self obsessed interest snouts into the trough. The only one AFAIK that showed the remotest promise for cycling was Ken Livingstone who was replaced by a decidely disappointing Boris Johnson. So now we are back to a barren desert of indifference. All politicians should be provided with a bike as their means of transport and if they claim other travel expenses there would have to be a damned good reason. Kids should be forced to cycle/walk to schools and any other students. And the police and courts need to come down hard on motorists who injure/kill pedestrians and cyclists. See I've started. I was determined not to do this as it gets me so angry and upset. The car lobby in this country is just so strong and a lucrative source of taxation for any government. No government has the balls to change this or offer or put in place any constructive schemes to massively change travelling habits whilst still maintaining the Treasury's receipts through taxation.

I just cycle my bike and try to think about other things. Thinking about this sort of stuff too often and the behaviour in OP's original post can make one a very bitter and twisted angry individual.

CP you best move to Holland for your sanity. You know you're onto a losing battle arguing with closet thugs on here.


----------



## Crankarm (19 Sep 2009)

Where's Magnatom these days?


----------



## Glow worm (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> Another solution would be for me to piss off and live in Holland and stop pontificating on here?



No don't do that CP, and anyway, they also get the internet over there apparently I hear, so you'd be straight back on here reminding us how crap the UK is! (with fair justification).

I'd like to see perhaps a mix of the improved infrastructure you talk of as well as improved driver eduction. On infrastructure, I was in Hungary a few years back and I noticed in rural areas, all the major roads had little lanes next to them that were almost entirely used by folk on bikes. It looked fantastic. I'm sure that as infrastructure improves, more folk will cycle who also drive, and their treatment of cyclists will improve greatly on the roads. 

I think also the media has a lot to answer for. Not in the obvoius moronic Daily Wail nonsense about the menace of cyclists but in more subltle ways. For example, in soap operas, watched by millions, I'd like to see more of the characters using bicycles instead of their cages. Make cycling part of everyday behaviour in these progs. and you may get people sat on thier fat arses at home thinking- hey- I might give that a go.

Also, much as I think Sustrans are great- (and all the other cycle groups) we need a much stronger body to fight our corner- maybe a Cycle Agency or some such thing with teeth. someone referred to this on here recently and it's something I've thought for years. Cagers have the idiotic AA and RAC with that chinless wonder they wheel out whenever the put upon motorist is picked on again poor loves (I forget the gormless bastard's name), well we need a cycling equivalent. Though less gormless of course!

Most depressingly for me at least though, is the knowledge that the Government see motoring as a nice little cash cow through fuel duty and tax. It is simply not in the Governments interests to reduce car use. If we all started getting rid of our cars they'd lose a fortune. That my friends I believe is the real reason we will never see things improve (and why the UK is sh*t). 

Finally, I'm with CP in that I would do anything to avoid sharing space with cars, I don't consider it being forced off the road, just self preservation and wanting a more enjoyable ride away from peanut drivers.


----------



## Glow worm (19 Sep 2009)

Glow worm said:


> Cagers have the idiotic AA and RAC with that chinless wonder they wheel out whenever the put upon motorist is picked on again poor loves (I forget the gormless bastard's name),
> 
> I've remembered the tit's name now - it's Edmund King of the AA.


----------



## semislickstick (19 Sep 2009)

Glow worm said:


> Finally, I'm with CP in that I would do anything to avoid sharing space with cars, I don't consider it being forced off the road, just self preservation and wanting a more enjoyable ride away from peanut drivers.



I'm with you on that too, the roads aren't wide enough to 'share'. Someone will have to slow down and wait(must irritate the nicest of drivers sometimes) or squeeze past, especially scary on the rural roads where there is no alternative, I hate it when someone whizz's past me within inches at 60-70mph+. But fair enough if others want to cycle on the road, there are bad cycle paths, there really needs to be a group that plans them from a cycling point of view....and maybe even priority over the roads at crossing points.


----------



## betty swollocks (19 Sep 2009)

A couple of years ago in our local 'pedestrianised' high street - (I put it in inverted commas, as buses, post vans and assorted other vehicles are allowed in by some radio-controlled bollards) I was walking, carrying a couple of bottles of water in a carrier bag.
Anyway, a BMW (yes it was a BMW) roars round the bollards, scattering pedestrians and stops outside a cash machine. The driver gets out, does his transaction and on returning to his car, I confront him politely and advise that he's not allowed to drive here. I get told to **** off.
So, I stood in front of his car and advised him to go back the way he came. He didn't. Instead, he accelerated into me and took the skin off my shins with his front bumper as I skipped out of the way. At the same time, I saw red and swung my carrier bag at his windscreen. This was an instinctive reaction - a sudden flare up of anger on my part - but the bag with the weight of the bottles stoved in his windscreen. He then sped off.
I immediately reported the incident to the police. I was arrested, given a warning and had my DNA and photo taken.
I understood from the police that he later reported the incident too.
Retaliation, which results in damage to a car is not advised.


----------



## Crankarm (19 Sep 2009)

betty swollocks said:


> A couple of years ago in our local 'pedestrianised' high street - (I put it in inverted commas, as buses, post vans and assorted other vehicles are allowed in by some radio-controlled bollards) I was walking, carrying a couple of bottles of water in a carrier bag.
> Anyway, a BMW (yes it was a BMW) roars round the bollards, scattering pedestrians and stops outside a cash machine. The driver gets out, does his transaction and on returning to his car, I confront him politely and advise that he's not allowed to drive here. I get told to **** off.
> So, I stood in front of his car and advised him to go back the way he came. He didn't. Instead, he accelerated into me and took the skin off my shins with his front bumper as I skipped out of the way. At the same time, I saw red and swung my carrier bag at his windscreen. This was an instinctive reaction - a sudden flare up of anger on my part - but the bag with the weight of the bottles stoved in his windscreen. He then sped off.
> I immediately reported the incident to the police. I was arrested, given a warning and had my DNA and photo taken.
> ...



And what happened to the driver of the BMW?


----------



## betty swollocks (19 Sep 2009)

Crankarm said:


> And what happened to the driver of the BMW?



I don't know and don't care tbh.
Some hooligans wear business suits and ties.


----------



## XmisterIS (19 Sep 2009)

Joe24 said:


> CP, you say about people in the Netherlands not riding dangerously around peds. Well, they dont, but they do ride crazy.



Ah! Yes. I think they ride crazy and drive crazy in both Holand and Belgium!

Last time I was in Bruges we got a taxi from the Airport to the hotel. The driver said something in French that probably meant, "hang on to your bushy tail!". And then he just floored it all the way to the hotel - including the cobbles!


----------



## D4VOW (19 Sep 2009)

I carry my Fahgettaboudit Mini tucked into the back of my shorts/trousers. Have thought many times about pulling it out but never have. Would leave a decent sized dent/cracked window if used.


----------



## Jonathan M (19 Sep 2009)

betty swollocks said:


> I don't know and don't care tbh.
> Some hooligans wear business suits and ties.



Surely he must have been seen, as he'd caused you an injury - surprised in this CCTV obsessed nation that this event, or his transgression into the pedestrian area, hadn't been observed.


----------



## BentMikey (19 Sep 2009)

I want to tear my hair out in shame and horror every time I see people promoting cycle farcilities. Why the heck would anyone want to ride slower, experience more danger, and be segregated into a bantustan away from roads? The Netherlands is a good place to cycle in spite of the cycle lanes, not because of them.

We have beautiful public highways here, let's get rid of all the horrible stupid paint and other cycle lanes. They are not improving our lot in the slightest.

AAAAARrrrrrrgghhh!!!!!!


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

BM, fair play to people who want to ride round like their @rse is on fire, but the majority of people who do (and would) cycle would benefit from a Dutch-style infrastructure. Cycle promotion in this country is centred around buying the most expensive carbon road bike or tricked-up full suss MTB. This is narrow-sighted and for the benefit of one group only, the shops selling the bikes. Most people that would convert to some sort of cycle use instead of a car would use a utility-style bike for commuting/shopping errands - just like they use the car for now. It is wrong to market them with a twitchy lightweight roadie, or an all singing/dancing MTB just for a 3/4 mile run to the shop.


----------



## BentMikey (19 Sep 2009)

Yeah CP, sorry I had a bit of a rant. I know your heart is in the right place, it's just the methods I don't agree with.

I don't think cycle lanes are good for any type of cyclist. They add danger to us all, no matter what kind of rider we are, and they do nothing to reduce danger to us. What cycle lanes/paths/farcilities do is to increase the actual danger, whilst reducing the perception of that danger. That's just bad.


----------



## Flying Dodo (19 Sep 2009)

I remember reading through Auntie Helen's recent write-up of her German cycling tour that several times when they were on the road rather than the cycle path, they got shouted at by motorists to get off the road.

Sadly, that's the situation we'd end up with if we had a Dutch style infrastructure. 

By all means have some Sustrans paths meandering around if you want to pootle in the countryside, but I want to use the roads to get from A to B and I fail to see why I should be bullied off them by Audi or BMW drivers. 

To get the little old lady happy with going shopping on a bike, it would be far better if road rage in all forms were eliminated by better driver education, as well as other intiatives such as 20 mph zones, removing street furniture etc, to allow all bike users to be comfortable using the roads.


----------



## ComedyPilot (19 Sep 2009)

People are educated when they learn to traverse the roads, be that on foot, bike, car et al. 

Violent and abusive rage towards others on the road is not something that needs educating out of them, it needs punishment.


----------



## nigelnorris (19 Sep 2009)

Flying Dodo said:


> I remember reading through Auntie Helen's recent write-up of her German cycling tour that several times when they were on the road rather than the cycle path, they got shouted at by motorists to get off the road.
> 
> Sadly, that's the situation we'd end up with if we had a Dutch style infrastructure.
> 
> ...


Is pretty much word for word what I was about to post. One one hand I agree with CP that dutch style cycle lanes would benefit the most people, but they would make life intolerable for those of us who wish to continue to use the roads. So my vote would be against.


----------



## Flying Dodo (19 Sep 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> People are educated when they learn to traverse the roads, be that on foot, bike, car et al.
> 
> Violent and abusive rage towards others on the road is not something that needs educating out of them, it needs punishment.



Don't worry - I'm all in favour of proper punishment. None of this £120 fine and 6 points on your licence for killing a cyclist nonsense.


----------



## magnatom (19 Sep 2009)

Crankarm said:


> Where's Magnatom these days?




Very busy with life at the moment! Sorry...


----------



## Bollo (19 Sep 2009)

magnatom said:


> Very busy with life at the moment! Sorry...



Prioritise man, prioritise!


----------



## magnatom (19 Sep 2009)

Bollo said:


> Prioritise man, prioritise!




Aye, and selling the house is a priority!


----------



## Bollo (19 Sep 2009)

magnatom said:


> Aye, and selling the house is a priority!



I thought you just used eBay in Scotland?


----------



## yenrod (19 Sep 2009)

I went up the last incline today at VERY SLOW SPEED - and heard "cant you pedal faster" being screamed out of the window of a car behind...

So *IT* - an Audi, overtook and and seen a woman in a baseball cap & 2 girls in the backseat - it was the teenage girls who were doing the shouting...and the woman driving wasn't doing thing to shut them up, rather, laughing.


----------



## Eddy_Mc (21 Sep 2009)

I'm going to sit on the fence, where as I think we should have a greater infrastructure for Cycling, I do not believe that we should be moved too far away from normal roads. I do think there should be cycling roads at dangrous places, heavy traffic flow junctions and such.

I also believe that there should be set guidelines for cyclists for visibility and such, there should be a law for high visibility vests that is a stright fine if you are seen without one put helmets/lights etc in there also.

I do believe that all cyclists should have to go to some form of cycling proficiency course and pass to be allowed on main roads. There are some cyclists out there that are dangerous not only to themselves but to other cyclists/pedestrians.

As Cycling increases on the UK roads there should be a section for Cyclists in the car test(I have not done my test so there might already be), the government should make sure that ALL drivers know that cyclists have the same right of way as a person driving a car/van etc.

We should also have a tax and insurance if we used main roads often, we are using the roads some of us just as much as a Car driver. We should pay a tax that would allow the Government to help with the Cycling infrastructure, and remove some of the stigma that road users have in that they pay tax and we don't.


----------



## trsleigh (21 Sep 2009)

Flying Dodo said:


> I remember reading through Auntie Helen's recent write-up of her German cycling tour that several times when they were on the road rather than the cycle path, they got shouted at by motorists to get off the road.
> 
> Sadly, that's the situation we'd end up with if we had a Dutch style infrastructure.
> 
> ...



I worked for a week in Germany ( Munchen Gladbach ) and took my Brompton for the 10 mile daily commute. I was advised by all & sundry that cyclists must use the facilities provided and so as my German isn't up to having a frank discussion with the local plod, I used the facilites.
I did not enjoy it one bit. The facilities were as variable as the ones in the UK, some reasonable, some crap. For example, one cycle lane on a pavement was marked on the road side of the pavement, next to parked cars, with a little one to two inch ridge separating the cycle bit from the pedestrian bit. So to avoid any opened car doors you ran the risk of coming off when moving over to avoid the door. Another section was on a narrow pavement with house front doors opening straight onto the pavement with alleyways off to the side to garages, totally blind for anyone driving a car out onto the road. And turning left ( our right ), what a palaver, following the correct path the long way round the junction, with each arm light controlled.

The odd thing was there were very few cyclists, any there were all seemed to be confirmed trundlies.

What joy it was when I returned to Waterloo and could mix it with London traffic as a responsible adult, free to ignore all the nonsense.

So be careful what you wish for, not everything on the continent is wonderful. I too would like to see most cycle facilities done away with, spend the money saved on driver / cyclist training and far more 20mph zones properly enforced.


----------



## jonny jeez (21 Sep 2009)

MacB said:


> I'm sure I read on a forum, think it was a US one, that a rider, or riders, had taken to carrying a small hammer clipped to frame. When cut up would catch car and crack windscreen.
> 
> I can't find this now, anyone know it or is it just an urban legend I've picked up?



Urban legend.


I know someone how knows someone who's babysiteters hairdressers husband (etc)...used to carry a cog tool to scrape down the side of cars who offended him. he had it on a magnet under his crossbar.

If this were true, he'd be dead in a week..or in prison


----------



## GreenMambaGreen (4 Apr 2010)

I'm sure its only time.

I keep thinking of some really devious things to do, but that will just mess up my karma.


----------



## recumbentpanda (4 Apr 2010)

*Hammer or . . . Brompton!*

Not an urban legend: My mate (who is berserk) used to cycle through London traffic one handed, swinging a large builder's hammer in the other . . . 

. . . it's not something I would recommend.

I myself, who am a wuss, once smashed the back window of a nice lady's car, when she braked to a sudden halt in front of my still rolling Brompton. I bounced lightly off her (car's!) rear quarter into the gutter, but the mini bar-end on my handlebars gave the back window a delicate tap . . . I stood up somewhat shakily to survey a scene of dramatic wreckage, thinking 'goodness me, did I really do all that?'

I paid the bill. Like I said, I'm a wuss.

The Recumbent Panda


----------



## J4CKO (5 Apr 2010)

cheadle hulme said:


> Confession time - big spray from a 750ml bottle into an Audi A4 cab after the front seat passenger shouted "get a car you gay knobber" passing me (very closely) in Wilmslow.
> 
> As they turned right after she shouted it I sprayed! Worried for ages afterwards that they would double back and find me, so took a route back via the airport.
> 
> ...




Excellent, I live in Wilmslow and there are some right w4nkers, kind of ironic a man sat in an Audi Cabriolet should question your sexualty, it being one of the most girly cars you can get, as driven by Princess Diana.


----------



## hackbike 666 (5 Apr 2010)

....an Audi what?


----------



## Vikeonabike (5 Apr 2010)

nigelnorris said:


> Wouldn't it just be handy to have a can of spraypaint handy. I said somewhere else I* tried a telescopic police baton* once in my pump bracket and it fitted perfectly, make a nice dent that would.



You wouldn't even need to retaliate on a car to get yourself nicked...Duh!


----------



## hackbike 666 (5 Apr 2010)

How about a carrot up the exhaust pipe?


----------



## Brahan (5 Apr 2010)

hackbike 666 said:


> How about a carrot up the exhaust pipe?



'Fnarr fnarr'


----------



## snailracer (5 Apr 2010)

When cars annoy me, I vent by "hogging" the primary position and being more assertive than I otherwise would. It does not escape me that it's how I should be riding in the first place.

I think cyclists do themselves a disservice by gutter-riding, more assertive positioning & riding by all cyclists would educate motorists that they do not have the right to bully us out of their way.


----------



## hackbike 666 (5 Apr 2010)

Brahan said:


> 'Fnarr fnarr'



I don't think you can get nicked for possessing an offensive carrot.


----------



## Vikeonabike (5 Apr 2010)

hackbike 666 said:


> I don't think you can get nicked for possessing an offensive carrot.



Depends ...how offensive, mind you there are always the obscenity laws...


----------



## Norm (5 Apr 2010)

[baldrick]
... which is funny, as I have a thingy which is shaped just like a turnip...
[/baldrick]


----------



## Tinuts (5 Apr 2010)

GreenMambaGreen said:


> I keep thinking of some really devious things to do, but that will just mess up my karma.



What, like a bottle full of brake fluid perhaps? I hear it works wonders on the paintwork.......


----------



## Tinuts (5 Apr 2010)

Vikeonabike said:


> You wouldn't even need to retaliate on a car to get yourself nicked...Duh!



I think you'll find the Bill of Rights says otherwise (re our right to carry defensive weapons). If, however, you use that defensive weapon offensively you surely will lay yourself open to the possibility of getting nicked!


----------



## Vikeonabike (6 Apr 2010)

Tinuts said:


> I think you'll find the Bill of Rights says otherwise (re our right to carry defensive weapons)



I know we're becoming more Americanised day by day, hadn't realised we had adopted their Bill of Rights as yet (though it's only a matter of time), Unless of course you mean the Bill of Rights 1689, in which case:
_ "That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;_"
I think Ollie C's laws have been repealed. 



Tinuts said:


> If, however, you use that defensive weapon offensively you surely will lay yourself open to the possibility of getting nicked!



Sorry again, in British law a weapon is just that, it does not carry a label that says Offensive or Defensive.

An offensive weapon is defined as *"any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person or intended by the person having it with him for such use"*
Police officers are legislated to be able to carry a Baton whilst *ON* Duty, however if we take it home, then we come under the same law as everyone else.

The only defence to carrying an offensive weapon is "Immediate arming". This would mean that you were under immediate threat, and you grabbed the first thing that came to hand. In my case. I have a selection re-enactment weapons. If somebody came to my door and said "come outside I'm going to give you a good kicking", I could *not* justify, donning mail, shield, helm and sword, going outside and sorting Herbert out (Though it may be worth it just for the reaction). I would be said to be carrying an Offensive weapon. However if I was sat inside, polishing said weapon (ooer mrs) and somebody came into my house and threatened me, and I believed would do me harm then I could (possibly) use the defence of immediate arming, then of course I have to go through the rigmarole of showing that I used justifiable force (which is where a lot of self defence cases go wrong but that is another subject).


----------



## PBancroft (6 Apr 2010)

Good example Vike. IANAL.

One I was always given was the simple rolled up magazine. A rolled up magazine is nothing - just a rolled up mag, but in a pinch it makes a useful baton in self defence.

*However... * that all changes if you fix rubber bands around it, or sellotape it so its permanently rolled. Or if you carry that magazine every day threatening people with it.

A bottle of juice attached to the bike might be considered immediate arming when being threatened by a car being driven aggressively and a yoof yelling at you. A hammer attached to the frame would not.


----------



## mickle (6 Apr 2010)

I threw my bicycle at the windscreen of a bus once. Does this count?


----------



## g00se (6 Apr 2010)

Glow worm said:


> Also, much as I think Sustrans are great- (and all the other cycle groups) we need a much stronger body to fight our corner- maybe a Cycle Agency or some such thing with teeth. someone referred to this on here recently and it's something I've thought for years. Cagers have the idiotic AA and RAC with that chinless wonder they wheel out whenever the put upon motorist is picked on again poor loves (I forget the gormless bastard's name), well we need a cycling equivalent. Though less gormless of course!



There's currently a debate on the upcoming AGM vote at the CTC on the proposed change to make the organisation more akin to such a group - by merging the members arm with the charity arm - into one charity group.

If the proposed change goes ahead, it'll end up with a more lobbying role.

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5356

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5366


----------



## BentMikey (6 Apr 2010)

Dont' vote for that mate, IMO it's a bad idea. The members will have no more say over teh operation of the charity, and it'll no longer be a club.

*http://www.savethectc.org.uk/*


----------



## Bollo (6 Apr 2010)

Just to add to BMs bit, there is a danger that charity status could limit the CTC's ability to campaign if the campaigning is deamed openly political or is judged to conflict with the greater public good (not cyclists' good but the great motor-driving British public good).

The idea that the CTC can't campaign effectively unless it becomes a charity is a McGuffin. For reference, they effectively campaigned against changes to the HC as a club.

Follow the linky.......


----------



## Bollo (6 Apr 2010)

Vikeonabike said:


> ..........
> 
> Sorry again, in British law a weapon is just that, it does not carry a label that says Offensive or Defensive.
> 
> .....



Without getting myself into trouble, about a year ago I was on jury service for a case that centred on the definition of offensive weapon. Very very interesting and not as obvious as the man in the street (including me) would have believed.


----------



## g00se (6 Apr 2010)

Ta - will look into that a bit further....


----------



## Tinuts (6 Apr 2010)

Vikeonabike said:


> I know we're becoming more Americanised day by day, hadn't realised we had adopted their Bill of Rights as yet (though it's only a matter of time), Unless of course you mean the Bill of Rights 1689, in which case:
> _ "That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;_"
> I think Ollie C's laws have been repealed.



In that case, I'd be interested in reading your opinion of this:

http://www.criminalsolicitor.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=735&PN=1&TPN=4

third post from the bottom is the most detailed.

From this, it would appear that the law has not been repealed and that there is clearly a convincing case for carrying weapons for defence.


----------



## Vikeonabike (6 Apr 2010)

British law is a funny bugger, it would appear from reading this that article 7 allows a PROTESTANT to bear arms for self defence. The bill of rights is a Statute...However, that is then superseded because by carrying a weapon for self defence, you then have to get past the "offensive weapons act", which is where the "immediate arming" argument comes in. The law does state you can carry a weapon in self defence....however you have to be able to justify that before you use it not afterwards. Or I could walk around quite happily with a Dane Axe (yes I know I do, another story) for years before cleaving someone in half because I believed they were a threat to my safety. 
Confused? me too, I'm only here to enforce it...don't ask me to understand it as well!


----------



## XmisterIS (7 Apr 2010)

In reply to the OP of this thread,

I've never thrown an entire full bottle at a car, but I have used a water bottle to thoroughly soak the driver of a car by squirting it through his open window.


----------



## PaulB (7 Apr 2010)

XmisterIS said:


> In reply to the OP of this thread,
> 
> I've never thrown an entire full bottle at a car, but I have used a water bottle to thoroughly soak the driver of a car by squirting it through his open window.



Snap! I hurtled down a hill into Skipton in Yorkshire and got behind a car driven by an old woman of a blert of a cantankerous old man. He was driving slower than I was descending and once we reached a village on the outskirts of Skipton, he slowed down even more so he could impede me! I went to overtake him on the right and he veered out to prevent me from doing so. I went back to the left and so did he giving a poor kid of about 9 a scare as he was on the kerb right at that point waiting to cross the road. As we got to a crossroads, he could see I was going off to the right and he was going left so he wound his window down to shout at me. Mistake, as I made my feelings clear by squirting him with my sticky carb drink. Right in the face. The equaliser!


----------



## XmisterIS (7 Apr 2010)

PaulB said:


> Snap! I hurtled down a hill into Skipton in Yorkshire and got behind a car driven by an old woman of a blert of a cantankerous old man. He was driving slower than I was descending and once we reached a village on the outskirts of Skipton, he slowed down even more so he could impede me! I went to overtake him on the right and he veered out to prevent me from doing so. I went back to the left and so did he giving a poor kid of about 9 a scare as he was on the kerb right at that point waiting to cross the road. As we got to a crossroads, he could see I was going off to the right and he was going left so he wound his window down to shout at me. Mistake, as I made my feelings clear by squirting him with my sticky carb drink. Right in the face. The equaliser!



Ah! The stick carbs ... mine was a suited chap in a BMW who had just tried to run me off the road without provocation and when I confronted him he called me _"an f-ing hippie c*nt on a f-ing bicycle"_ and then he told me he _"f-ing hates all f-ing cyclists"_ - despite the fact that he knew nothing whatsoever about me except that I rode a bike! I found the "hippie" bit quite strange seeing as I have my hair cut to grade 1 all over ... And how did he know that I wasn't a member of the BNP??! (I'm not, but you get my point!).

Happily, that kind of driver is very rare!


----------



## Origamist (7 Apr 2010)

XmisterIS said:


> In reply to the OP of this thread,
> 
> I've never thrown an entire full bottle at a car, but I have used a water bottle to thoroughly soak the driver of a car by squirting it through his open window.



I saw this very thing, yesterday. Driver gives cyclist the finger, cyclist cathches up driver at the lights and gives him a dousing.


----------



## magnatom (7 Apr 2010)

Origamist said:


> I saw this very thing, yesterday. Driver gives cyclist the finger, cyclist cathches up driver at the lights and gives him a dousing.



Do you condone it though, Origamist....?


----------



## BentMikey (7 Apr 2010)

Ah, my egging post. Ahaaahaaahaaahaaaahaaaa! That is still the most satisfying piece of revenge ever, and all harmless since it was plain water and not SiS.


----------



## on the road (7 Apr 2010)

I've never thrown a bottle at a car, full or empty, I value my bottle higher than their sh1tty car.


----------



## sheddy (8 Apr 2010)

I wonder if anyone has ever thrown fruit at a car ? (taken out of the handy wicker basket)


----------



## Arch (8 Apr 2010)

sheddy said:


> I wonder if anyone has ever thrown fruit at a car ? (taken out of the handy wicker basket)



I suppose the efficacy would depend on the fruit. A large watermelon would be startling, but might require two hands. A handful of blackberries isn't going to do much damage.

Still, an adept recumbent rider could probably stick a banana up an exhaust pipe...


----------



## snailracer (8 Apr 2010)

Equivalent thread on US cycling forum would be:

"Anyone ever emptied a full mag into a SUV?"


----------



## sheddy (8 Apr 2010)

We need some sort of scoring system - tomato 3, potato 8, etc
Presumably this was better understood in the Middle Ages by punishment in the stocks ?


----------



## Arch (8 Apr 2010)

sheddy said:


> We need some sort of scoring system - tomato 3, potato 8, etc
> Presumably this was better understood in the Middle Ages by punishment in the stocks ?



But only in the later middle ages. In the early Medieval, they wouldn't have had tomatoes or potatoes...


----------



## Mark_Robson (8 Apr 2010)

This is going to make me look like a complete nerd but wasn't the potato imported from South America by the Spanish in the late 16th century?


----------



## sheddy (9 Apr 2010)

Never mind the history books, I was just looking for some information on the efficacy of vegetables as weapons


----------



## Arch (9 Apr 2010)

Mark_Robson said:


> This is going to make me look like a complete nerd but wasn't the potato imported from South America by the Spanish in the late 16th century?



yes, but 'Medieval' and 'Middle Ages' can mean anything after the Romans left, so for a lot of the Medieval there were no spuds.

Imagine it. No chips!


----------



## Mark_Robson (9 Apr 2010)

Arch said:


> yImagine it. No chips!


 Worse than that...no crisps


----------

