# Road rage



## Biker man (7 Dec 2021)

I just being watching clips of road rage against cyclist ,there is so much angry out there ,people getting violent over the slightest thing what is wrong with them.


----------



## fossyant (7 Dec 2021)

What is wrong with them....

Lots !


----------



## ColinJ (7 Dec 2021)

It's a _Dog-eat-dog_ world, and they don't want to be the ones getting eaten!


----------



## bladesman73 (7 Dec 2021)

Too many fckwits on the snort, they go around all hyper thinking they're Tyson.


----------



## I like Skol (7 Dec 2021)

It's not just driver v cyclist, it is everything, even sometimes here on the forum. I think it is a societal thing where we are now programmed that losing (whatever winning or losing is?) just isn't acceptable and rather than just being part of life's give and take, losing or failure is not an option, whereas in the obvious reality, everyone can't have it their way all the time.
Once you realise that and accept it, life is much less fraught. There is nothing more therapeutic and relaxing than being able to shrug your shoulders, say to yourself 'Oh well, nevermind' and understanding that shoot happens.
I think it possibly started when the school's began to stop competition and sports days etc, because they didn't want 'losers' to be upset. Now people can't handle it when things don't go in their favour.


----------



## winjim (7 Dec 2021)

Performing a highly technical task requiring a level of skill and competence, as well as cooperation, leads to conflict when that skill and competence is called into question.


----------



## Johnno260 (7 Dec 2021)

It’s not just against cyclists, I’m seeing people getting triggered about the slightest thing.

I’m seeing on rural roads people cutting corners to the point where they’re on the wrong side of the road, people overtaking on brows of hills and blind corners, it’s just ridiculous.


----------



## Slick (7 Dec 2021)

Must admit, I do get the feeling there are more and more screwballs behind the wheel of a car nowadays.


----------



## Brandane (7 Dec 2021)

Slick said:


> Must admit, I do get the feeling there are more and more screwballs behind the wheel of a car nowadays.


It's not just a feeling, there ARE. And they're not just behind the wheel of a car. I'm not sure what has happened in the last 20 years or so, but there are far more angry people about, everywhere. 
I think it's a general attitude of "It's my right to do what I like and no-one has any right to stop me. ME, ME, ME."
They've been brought up in the belief that they cannot be punished for their actions. From school onwards. Parents can't use physical punishment, Police have their hands tied. There are no consequences for bad behaviour, so what did all those do gooders think was going to happen?


----------



## Biker man (7 Dec 2021)

I like Skol said:


> It's not just driver v cyclist, it is everything, even sometimes here on the forum. I think it is a societal thing where we are now programmed that losing (whatever winning or losing is?) just isn't acceptable and rather than just being part of life's give and take, losing or failure is not an option, whereas in the obvious reality, everyone can't have it their way all the time.
> Once you realise that and accept it, life is much less fraught. There is nothing more therapeutic and relaxing than being able to shrug your shoulders, say to yourself 'Oh well, nevermind' and understanding that shoot happens.
> I think it possibly started when the school's began to stop competition and sports days etc, because they didn't want 'losers' to be upset. Now people can't handle it when things don't go in their favour.


Think you are on to something there.


----------



## raleighnut (7 Dec 2021)

@Brandane makes a valid point but i'm not so sure it has got any worse, i think it has always been there just nowadays it is more reported on with the rise of instant communications


----------



## cyberknight (7 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> It's not just a feeling, there ARE. And they're not just behind the wheel of a car. I'm not sure what has happened in the last 20 years or so, but there are far more angry people about, everywhere.
> I think it's a general attitude of "It's my right to do what I like and no-one has any right to stop me. ME, ME, ME."
> They've been brought up in the belief that they cannot be punished for their actions. From school onwards. Parents can't use physical punishment, Police have their hands tied. There are no consequences for bad behaviour, so what did all those do gooders think was going to happen?


nailed it there .


----------



## presta (7 Dec 2021)

It's not about cyclists, there was a road works company on BBC Look East last night who have just issued their staff with body cams because so many of them are getting assaulted by motorists. Another similar case here from a couple of years ago.


----------



## Chief Broom (8 Dec 2021)

IMHO road rage is the visible symptom of the underlying disease effecting society at large or the whole human race come to that. Dangerous individuals running round trying to fill the bottomless well of ego and full time adherents to the cult of self. Not surprising these animated puppets are prone to losing it 
Could feel sorry for them but most of the time i wish i had a cattle prod


----------



## Biker man (8 Dec 2021)

Chief Broom said:


> IMHO road rage is the visible symptom of the underlying disease effecting society at large or the whole human race come to that. Dangerous individuals running round trying to fill the bottomless well of ego and full time adherents to the cult of self. Not surprising these animated puppets are prone to losing it
> Could feel sorry for them but most of the time i wish i had a cattle prod


I have been on the receiving end of it my self a couple of times cattle prod sounds good to me 🤠


----------



## Arjimlad (8 Dec 2021)

I tapped on a car which was closing in on me from the side a while ago, and the driver stopped got out & started threatening me with violence. Folks on here may remember it, he was later convicted of using threatening behaviour and fined a lot of money. He would have been charged with driving w/o due care if the Police officer had read the file properly as well. I was glad that I had the camera that day. It made for an interesting day in court when he fought it to trial. 

Touching the precious paintwork seems to evoke a huge overreaction in some people. 

On the flipside I have had many lovely chats with drivers, HGV or private cars when I've been able to greet them politely and ask for more space on the road, or just pass the time of day as we wait at lights. It's been said by @Drago that you can't always tell who is going to be the next Kenneth Noye or whether they're just normal people trying to get about. 

It may seem people are completely intolerant of sharing the road with cyclists, horses, pedestrians you name it, but that impression comes chiefly if I read too much social media where the loudest idiots sound off. 

Most people drive carefully & patiently, there's always the 1% spoiling it though.


----------



## Johnno260 (8 Dec 2021)

I would say, it's best to try to not interact with these people, if possible you don't know what level of crazy you're dealing with.

A few years back, I was reversing onto my driveway with the flow of traffic, some idiot came along going way too fast, the crash investigator confirmed he was carrying too much speed as well, he swerved to avoid me, went onto the wrong side of the road, went over a pathway and hit a hedge and damaged a telegraph pole.

His first reaction when getting out the car was to pick up a spanner from his boot and threaten me, it was his fault but no he threatened me, now I can look after myself, decades living on a horrible council estate and just as long doing martial arts, but I'm not messing with someone with a lump of steel in their hands, I just raised my hands and said I have kids in the car back off, I went in the house and let the insurance know.

I have had a few issues on the bike, a can of some beer thrown at me by kids, when I shouted back they pulled over and 3 kids got out 17-18yr olds, I didn't back down here and I should have but they got in the car when they realized Mr Cyclist had a crazy look in his eye, stupid move on my part.

Issue is you don't know if they're carrying a knife or if they're totally nuts, also they're in 1ton plus metal box just try and be safe and let you head rule and not your heart when tempers flare, also it's the time of year when some people decide to have a drink and drive, people in my village moan about the police doing stops and breath tests, I welcome it as it's a deterrent.


----------



## Biker man (8 Dec 2021)

Arjimlad said:


> I tapped on a car which was closing in on me from the side a while ago, and the driver stopped got out & started threatening me with violence. Folks on here may remember it, he was later convicted of using threatening behaviour and fined a lot of money. He would have been charged with driving w/o due care if the Police officer had read the file properly as well. I was glad that I had the camera that day. It made for an interesting day in court when he fought it to trial.
> 
> Touching the precious paintwork seems to evoke a huge overreaction in some people.
> 
> ...


----------



## Biker man (8 Dec 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> I would say, it's best to try to not interact with these people, if possible you don't know what level of crazy you're dealing with.
> 
> A few years back, I was reversing onto my driveway with the flow of traffic, some idiot came along going way too fast, the crash investigator confirmed he was carrying too much speed as well, he swerved to avoid me, went onto the wrong side of the road, went over a pathway and hit a hedge and damaged a telegraph pole.
> 
> ...


Its difficult what to do for the best,I am to old at 76 for fights and I walk away once ,I did stand my ground and he backed off thank goodness .


----------



## CanucksTraveller (8 Dec 2021)

I think as well as the rage in people now, what gets me is the refusal to take responsibility for a mistake, a stupid act, whatever, it's never their fault. The amount of times I see a boneheaded, aggressive manouvre and yet the wronged party gets shouted and gesticulated at. I think that's another symptom of something wrong in society. 

I was on my street (a narrow housing estate road), driving at about 10mph which is about the most you'd sensibly want to be doing given the parking chaos. Came upon a line of parked cars to my left as the road bent sharply to the right. It gives you no option but to ease off even further to about 5mph or walking pace go past carefully up the right of the road, and just try to be ready to stop if you meet someone. 
A taxi then came blowing around the corner doing more like 30, he clearly panicked, mounted the pavement on his side and came to a halt 20 yards past me screaming at me that I was "on the wrong side of the road". Well yes mate, that's what a car has to do when his own side of the road is blocked. What would you have me do, levitate? Or alternatively go as carefully around the hazard as I can and be ready to stop? I managed to stop instantly, he didn't. But he kept screaming that I was on the wrong side of the road. 

It was pure excess speed on his part, not a remotely appropriate speed for a narrow estate, and an inability to stop in the distance that was visible to him. But it's _always someone else's_ fault. I have no doubt that to this day he goes around thinking everyone he nearly runs into is at fault, whereas his excess speed is getting him into all sorts of bother, he just won't see it.


----------



## Amanda P (8 Dec 2021)

CanucksTraveller said:


> whereas his excess speed is getting him into all sorts of bother, he just won't see it.



If you get sucked into the rabbit hole of watching dashcam videos on YouTube (as I have) you see this quite a lot: dashcam owners driving too fast and getting themselves into foreseeable conflicts that they could easily have avoided by just easing off a bit. Sometimes deliberately driving into a conflict because 'it's my right of way!'

I'm reminded that when this forum was new and young, someone had a signature that read 'There are people you wouldn't trust to do your photocopying who have got driving licences'. This has stuck with me.


----------



## Amanda P (8 Dec 2021)

Amanda P said:


> Sometimes deliberately driving into a conflict because 'it's my right of way!'


It's sobering, too: someone (who's gone to the trouble of uploading their dashcam footage to show how badly someone _else_ drove) fairly obviously deliberately fails to avoid a potential collision, then shouts a lot of furious abuse, usually accompanied by horn-honking. These folk are driving around in a permanent state of barely-controlled rage, and don't see anything wrong with that.

You don't want to mess with these people.


----------



## Johnno260 (8 Dec 2021)

Amanda P said:


> If you get sucked into the rabbit hole of watching dashcam videos on YouTube (as I have) you see this quite a lot: dashcam owners driving too fast and getting themselves into foreseeable conflicts that they could easily have avoided by just easing off a bit. Sometimes deliberately driving into a conflict because 'it's my right of way!'
> 
> I'm reminded that when this forum was new and young, someone had a signature that read 'There are people you wouldn't trust to do your photocopying who have got driving licences'. This has stuck with me.



I went through a stage of watching dash cam footage, and you're right in many instances the dash cam owner would be in the wrong, even sometimes accelerating to create an issue.

@CanucksTraveller stated it well, there seems to be an inability to accept accountability anymore, people treat the roads as if they're the sole user, I have seen fender benders where someone said but I was indicating why didn't you get out my way, it's like they shift the blame onto someone else as using an indicator is a get out of my way signal.


----------



## Biker man (8 Dec 2021)

CanucksTraveller said:


> I think as well as the rage in people now, what gets me is the refusal to take responsibility for a mistake, a stupid act, whatever, it's never their fault. The amount of times I see a boneheaded, aggressive manouvre and yet the wronged party gets shouted and gesticulated at. I think that's another symptom of something wrong in society.
> 
> I was on my street (a narrow housing estate road), driving at about 10mph which is about the most you'd sensibly want to be doing given the parking chaos. Came upon a line of parked cars to my left as the road bent sharply to the right. It gives you no option but to ease off even further to about 5mph or walking pace go past carefully up the right of the road, and just try to be ready to stop if you meet someone.
> A taxi then came blowing around the corner doing more like 30, he clearly panicked, mounted the pavement on his side and came to a halt 20 yards past me screaming at me that I was "on the wrong side of the road". Well yes mate, that's what a car has to do when his own side of the road is blocked. What would you have me do, levitate? Or alternatively go as carefully around the hazard as I can and be ready to stop? I managed to stop instantly, he didn't. But he kept screaming that I was on the wrong side of the road.
> ...


Maybe he will drive into a brick wall and blame that next.


CanucksTraveller said:


> I think as well as the rage in people now, what gets me is the refusal to take responsibility for a mistake, a stupid act, whatever, it's never their fault. The amount of times I see a boneheaded, aggressive manouvre and yet the wronged party gets shouted and gesticulated at. I think that's another symptom of something wrong in society.
> 
> I was on my street (a narrow housing estate road), driving at about 10mph which is about the most you'd sensibly want to be doing given the parking chaos. Came upon a line of parked cars to my left as the road bent sharply to the right. It gives you no option but to ease off even further to about 5mph or walking pace go past carefully up the right of the road, and just try to be ready to stop if you meet someone.
> A taxi then came blowing around the corner doing more like 30, he clearly panicked, mounted the pavement on his side and came to a halt 20 yards past me screaming at me that I was "on the wrong side of the road". Well yes mate, that's what a car has to do when his own side of the road is blocked. What would you have me do, levitate? Or alternatively go as carefully around the hazard as I can and be ready to stop? I managed to stop instantly, he didn't. But he kept screaming that I was on the wrong side of the road.
> ...


----------



## oldwheels (8 Dec 2021)

raleighnut said:


> @Brandane makes a valid point but i'm not so sure it has got any worse, i think it has always been there just nowadays it is more reported on with the rise of instant communications


It may not have got worse in percentage terms but the increase in traffic volume means there are more of them now than even 20 or 30 years ago.


----------



## All uphill (8 Dec 2021)

My subjective take on this is that the vast majority of people are pleasant most of the time; put them in a pressured situation and they are likely to react badly.

Drivers running late, trying to squeeze in school runs, work and supermarkets; trying to make ends meet, deal with the pandemic, coping with kids. All of these can tip someone into behaviour they wouldn't normally do. That doesn't make it okay, but I do try not to take it personally on the rare occasions when someone flips.


----------



## bladesman73 (8 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> It's not just a feeling, there ARE. And they're not just behind the wheel of a car. I'm not sure what has happened in the last 20 years or so, but there are far more angry people about, everywhere.
> I think it's a general attitude of "It's my right to do what I like and no-one has any right to stop me. ME, ME, ME."
> They've been brought up in the belief that they cannot be punished for their actions. From school onwards. Parents can't use physical punishment, Police have their hands tied. There are no consequences for bad behaviour, so what did all those do gooders think was going to happen?


Agree about ME Me ME but to equate people being rsoles to parental violence is utter clap trap. Parents who are violent still do beat their kids, but the intelligent ones realise that other forms of chastisement are much more effective. Beating your kids just teaches them that violence is a way to control others. Plus i have noticed many people over 40 are increasingly violent, they were brought up before your dreamed up period where so called do gooders control each and every parent.
Society simply reflects the mantra of those in power. For the last 40 years we have had govt after govt enforcing neo-lib dog eat dog ideology which has infested society. Life has become one big stress, increasing and unavoidable debt, piss poor wages where working people are needing benefits and the use of food banks to support themselves, currently life in the UK is far from healthy in terms of the mental trauma these and other pressures are creating. people with mental illnesses are not supported well enough and the general message we are given is to trample over others to get what you want. It started with thatcher and the current govt have just raised this utterley depraved ideology to gas mark 9.
If govts listened to 'do gooders' more we would have a more caring and supportive society which would lead to less stress, more happiness and less selfish scrotes riding roughshod over others.


----------



## steveindenmark (8 Dec 2021)

Cyclists do not get an exemption pass either.


----------



## Brandane (8 Dec 2021)

bladesman73 said:


> Agree about ME Me ME but to equate people being rsoles to parental violence is utter clap trap. Parents who are violent still do beat their kids, but the intelligent ones realise that other forms of chastisement are much more effective. Beating your kids just teaches them that violence is a way to control others. Plus i have noticed many people over 40 are increasingly violent, they were brought up before your dreamed up period where so called do gooders control each and every parent.
> Society simply reflects the mantra of those in power. For the last 40 years we have had govt after govt enforcing neo-lib dog eat dog ideology which has infested society. Life has become one big stress, increasing and unavoidable debt, piss poor wages where working people are needing benefits and the use of food banks to support themselves, currently life in the UK is far from healthy in terms of the mental trauma these and other pressures are creating. people with mental illnesses are not supported well enough and the general message we are given is to trample over others to get what you want. It started with thatcher and the current govt have just raised this utterley depraved ideology to gas mark 9.
> If govts listened to 'do gooders' more we would have a more caring and supportive society which would lead to less stress, more happiness and less selfish scrotes riding roughshod over others.



No-one is saying it's ok to beat a child senseless, but as you say, violent parents will do that anyway regardless of the law. Banning the smacking of children as a small reminder of the difference between right and wrong was a classic case of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and now we are seeing the results. You reap what you sow...


----------



## bladesman73 (8 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> No-one is saying it's ok to beat a child senseless, but as you say, violent parents will do that anyway regardless of the law. Banning the smacking of children as a small reminder of the difference between right and wrong was a classic case of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and now we are seeing the results. You reap what you sow...


As I said, rubbish. Smacking kids is hitting them. Would you want an adult to give you a slap if they were unhappy with you? It shows a lack of control and lack of intelligence in that an adult should be able to communicate with children verbally to chastise them whilst setting a clear example that using violence against others is wrong.


----------



## derrick (8 Dec 2021)

raleighnut said:


> @Brandane makes a valid point but i'm not so sure it has got any worse, i think it has always been there just nowadays it is more reported on with the rise of instant communications


I have noticed a big rise over the last ten years, probably due to more cyclist's on the road, But as said by someone earlier on the thread not just on the roads,


----------



## Brandane (8 Dec 2021)

bladesman73 said:


> As I said, rubbish. Smacking kids is hitting them. Would you want an adult to give you a slap if they were unhappy with you? It shows a lack of control and lack of intelligence in that an adult should be able to communicate with children verbally to chastise them whilst setting a clear example that using violence against others is wrong.


Whatever. We'll just need to agree to disagree, particularly on what constitutes "violence". Otherwise we'll end up getting the thread locked.


----------



## bladesman73 (8 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> Whatever. We'll just need to agree to disagree, particularly on what constitutes "violence". Otherwise we'll end up getting the thread locked.


Ok. However we are on the same page about where we are with societal attitudes at present.


----------



## Biker man (9 Dec 2021)

bladesman73 said:


> As I said, rubbish. Smacking kids is hitting them. Would you want an adult to give you a slap if they were unhappy with you? It shows a lack of control and lack of intelligence in that an adult should be able to communicate with children verbally to chastise them whilst setting a clear example that using violence against others is wrong.


I think people using the F word all the time is aggressive and makes people more aggressive,When I was young it was used but only between males in work, you would never use it in front of women or children, twice recently I have had to tell louts to stop because I had female company it's just plain wrong


bladesman73 said:


> As I said, rubbish. Smacking kids is hitting them. Would you want an adult to give you a slap if they were unhappy with you? It shows a lack of control and lack of intelligence in that an adult should be able to communicate with children verbally to chastise them whilst setting a clear example that using violence against others is wrong.


----------



## si_c (9 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> I think people using the F word all the time is aggressive and makes people more aggressive,When I was young it was used but only between males in work, you would never use it in front of women or children, twice recently I have had to tell louts to stop because I had female company it's just plain wrong



It's just a word. Mrs C uses it endlessly, as do I.


----------



## I like Skol (9 Dec 2021)

si_c said:


> It's just a word. Mrs C uses it endlessly, as do I.


Food! There, I said it too


----------



## Biker man (9 Dec 2021)

si_c said:


> It's just a word. Mrs C uses it endlessly, as do I.


I know.its aggressive tho if I dropped a brick on my toe I would shout it ,but not out in public it's going down in the gutter.


----------



## Arjimlad (9 Dec 2021)

I'm afraid I uttered F*** Off at a driver who foolishly attempted a fast overtake on a bend when I could see an oncoming vehicle this morning, it is not a word I use lightly but the danger was pressing. He aborted the overtake but nearly swiped my back wheel in the process. 

When he managed to overtake me safely ten seconds later I think he reciprocated, certainly his hand gestures were consistent with such a message. I expect he will repeat the phrase when he reads the letter which the Police will send him in a few days.


----------



## CanucksTraveller (9 Dec 2021)

Unmodulated bad language is getting worse I think. I swear with the best of them but there's a time and place for it and I'll modulate its use to the situation, so I won't swear around children or out in public. 
Hang around any town centre now though and you'll hear whole sentences liberally peppered with F's and C's, like they're punctuation marks. No thought given to who else is around.


----------



## NorthernSky (9 Dec 2021)

yeah as said it's not just on the roads, it's everywhere
we are told you need to be confident, stand up for yourself, be a go getter, basically trample everyone else until you get to the top 
i'm all for being confident and assertiveness but patience and humility should be practiced in equal measure 🙏
let's try and be a little nicer to each other out there, especially on the crazy roads


----------



## Johnno260 (9 Dec 2021)

CanucksTraveller said:


> Unmodulated bad language is getting worse I think. I swear with the best of them but there's a time and place for it and I'll modulate its use to the situation, so I won't swear around children or out in public.
> Hang around any town centre now though and you'll hear whole sentences liberally peppered with F's and C's, like they're punctuation marks. No thought given to who else is around.



Also no point trying to ask people to stop, I was in a cafe with the kids and some teenagers were swearing with every other word, I politely said do you mind I have a 7 and 5 year old with me, and all I got back was a tirade of abuse, and they ramped it up afterwards, there was no where else to sit so I asked the owner if I could have the stuff to takeaway.


----------



## Alex321 (9 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> I think people using the F word all the time is aggressive and makes people more aggressive,When I was young it was used but only between males in work, you would never use it in front of women or children, twice recently I have had to tell louts to stop because I had female company it's just plain wrong


Times change.

Yes, when I was young, many years ago, you would never swear in front of children or women.

But your recent female company is just as likely to have been swearing herself unless she is over about 75. I know very few women who swear significantly less than the men I know (and I am 62, my wife is 71, so hardly representative of "yoof").


----------



## All uphill (9 Dec 2021)

CanucksTraveller said:


> Unmodulated bad language is getting worse I think. I swear with the best of them but there's a time and place for it and I'll modulate its use to the situation, so I won't swear around children or out in public.
> Hang around any town centre now though and you'll hear whole sentences liberally peppered with F's and C's, like they're punctuation marks. No thought given to who else is around.





Biker man said:


> I know.its aggressive tho if I dropped a brick on my toe I would shout it ,but not out in public it's going down in the gutter.


What is defined as a swear word is just a social convention, and social conventions change from place to place and over time.

You may not like certain words, but I'd suggest they do no actual harm to you, are not necessarily racist or sensitive (though some are).

I'm much more bothered by the intent behind whatever words are used. Casual swearing - no problem; aggressive body language - scary.

Last time I objected to what I found an offensive word I was called a snowflake.


----------



## Biker man (9 Dec 2021)

All uphill said:


> What is defined as a swear word is just a social convention, and social conventions change from place to place and over time.
> 
> You may not like certain words, but I'd suggest they do no actual harm to you, are not necessarily racist or sensitive (though some are).
> 
> ...


Don't know what a snowflake means lost me.


----------



## Biker man (9 Dec 2021)

Arjimlad said:


> I'm afraid I uttered F*** Off at a driver who foolishly attempted a fast overtake on a bend when I could see an oncoming vehicle this morning, it is not a word I use lightly but the danger was pressing. He aborted the overtake but nearly swiped my back wheel in the process.
> 
> When he managed to overtake me safely ten seconds later I think he reciprocated, certainly his hand gestures were consistent with such a message. I expect he will repeat the phrase when he reads the letter which the Police will send him in a few days.


Thats understandable it's just using it casually I find pathetic people who can't string a sentence together without using it.


----------



## Biker man (9 Dec 2021)

I like Skol said:


> Food! There, I said it too


Don't mind that at all you speak my language 😉


----------



## HobbesOnTour (9 Dec 2021)

bladesman73 said:


> Society simply reflects the mantra of those in power. For the last 40 years we have had govt after govt enforcing neo-lib dog eat dog ideology which has infested society. Life has become one big stress, increasing and unavoidable debt, piss poor wages where working people are needing benefits and the use of food banks to support themselves, currently life in the UK is far from healthy in terms of the mental trauma these and other pressures are creating. people with mental illnesses are not supported well enough and the general message we are given is to trample over others to get what you want. It started with thatcher and the current govt have just raised this utterley depraved ideology to gas mark 9.
> If govts listened to 'do gooders' more we would have a more caring and supportive society which would lead to less stress, more happiness and less selfish scrotes riding roughshod over others.



I think the general thrust of this is that "Society" is the issue and I'd tend to strongly agree. 

The problem is that it is a very complicated thing, this "Society". 

Anger can often be used as a "masking" emotion for others that are less comfortable such as shame or fear. It's instinctive and people probably aren't even aware of what they are doing or why. And who in this day and age has time to stop and figure it out?

As to what can be done about it I don't really know. But I do know that there are other places where road rage and the like are far less common. Looking to these places would be a good start.

And getting offline helps too!


----------



## bladesman73 (9 Dec 2021)

HobbesOnTour said:


> I think the general thrust of this is that "Society" is the issue and I'd tend to strongly agree.
> 
> The problem is that it is a very complicated thing, this "Society".
> 
> ...


Agree. We in the UK have walked into being a society where destructive things have been normalised, such as debt and gambling. You cannot even get a decent education these days without ending up thousands of pounds in debt unless you are from a wealthy family...and these simple examples are merely the tip of the iceberg. I really don't have the energy or will to go on about this in detail, have been there and done that before and it changes nothing. But the fundamental message is that the public are easily manipulated by the power brokers who use them for their own material gain. They do not care a jot about the impact their greed has on society so long as it fills their pockets, whilst a complicit MSM ensures misinformation muddys the waters and diverts the blame for society's demise on everyone but the culprits...see refugees, the poor, the disabled for recent examples.


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (9 Dec 2021)

As far as dumb and aggressive driving is concerned I generally find that the worst place around here is the expressway leading to my wife's son's house
the expressway stsrats here
basically you come off a roundabout (I am turning rigth on the roundabout) and there is also a segregated lane for people coming in from the other direction
the segregated lane merges after a 100 yards or so
problem is that there are 2 lanes - and in a few miles there is a junction where you have to be in the right lane to carry onto the M57 - and in the left lane to take the busy road to local towns and the M62
Hence after about 1 mile people are starting to have to get into the lane they need at the juntion
and people want to travel at different speeds
I generally try to do 65-70 - but if the person in the outside lane is doing 55-60 then fine

but there is nearly always someone who NEEDS to do 80
and people who see a gap in the inside lane and use this to undertake - then demand to be let back into the outside lane

it can be a dangerous chaos

all to save slowing down a few miles an hour for about 1 mile

how I have not seen a serious crash there is beyond me 

I think the people causing this are the same people who will cause problems if a cyclist slows them down on a busy street
probably the same ones I have seen start off at temporary lights even though they can see a cyclist (i.e. me) has not yet reached the end of the roadworks


----------



## Biker man (9 Dec 2021)

All uphill said:


> What is defined as a swear word is just a social convention, and social conventions change from place to place and over time.
> 
> You may not like certain words, but I'd suggest they do no actual harm to you, are not necessarily racist or sensitive (though some are).
> 
> ...





bladesman73 said:


> Agree. We in the UK have walked into being a society where destructive things have been normalised, such as debt and gambling. You cannot even get a decent education these days without ending up thousands of pounds in debt unless you are from a wealthy family...and these simple examples are merely the tip of the iceberg. I really don't have the energy or will to go on about this in detail, have been there and done that before and it changes nothing. But the fundamental message is that the public are easily manipulated by the power brokers who use them for their own material gain. They do not care a jot about the impact their greed has on society so long as it fills their pockets, whilst a complicit MSM ensures misinformation muddys the waters and diverts the blame for society's demise on everyone but the culprits...see refugees, the poor, the disabled for recent examples.


There is some truth in what you say,but it's personal choice nobody puts a gun to your head to get to university , and some of the courses are Mickey mouse ones .There had always been poverty in the thirty's there was real poverty soup kitchens ect no shoes on some folks feet, today's poor have expensive tattoos latest IPhone etc all about personal choice .


----------



## bladesman73 (9 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> There is some truth in what you say,but it's personal choice nobody puts a gun to your head to get to university , and some of the courses are Mickey mouse ones .There had always been poverty in the thirty's there was real poverty soup kitchens ect no shoes on some folks feet, today's poor have expensive tattoos latest IPhone etc all about personal choice .


It isnt a race to the bottom. Poverty is relative. Also whilst yep, nobody forces people into higher education, it is a way of bettering yourself which was free to access for all until recently. The stories about tattoos and latest iphones are mostly govt led propaganda to turn people's ire away from them and lay the blame for society's ills on the poor. My friend works at a food bank and he says the majority of users are living in real poverty...no sky tv, no flash phone, in real debt just to pay rent and bills, many work. Also you need a phone and data or wifi access to apply for jobs nowadays, without one good luck with finding work. Society has changed since the 1930s yet we still like to demonise the poor, as we did back then. That at least will never change in the UK.


----------



## Biker man (9 Dec 2021)

bladesman73 said:


> It isnt a race to the bottom. Poverty is relative. Also whilst yep, nobody forces people into higher education, it is a way of bettering yourself which was free to access for all until recently. The stories about tattoos and latest iphones are mostly govt led propaganda to turn people's ire away from them and lay the blame for society's ills on the poor. My friend works at a food bank and he says the majority of users are living in real poverty...no sky tv, no flash phone, in real debt just to pay rent and bills, many work. Also you need a phone and data or wifi access to apply for jobs nowadays, without one good luck with finding work. Society has changed since the 1930s yet we still like to demonise the poor, as we did back then. That at least will never change in the UK.


AI dont demonise anyone I have been poor all my life ,there are genuine cases that need help but a lot just don't manage there income ,one thing I think would help would be to scrap the TV licence fee with immediate effect this my last word on this thread it's getting political.


----------



## Stephenite (9 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> I'm not sure what has happened in the last 20 years or so


I moved out.

20 years ago I moved from the UK to Norway. It wasn’t the plan. It just happened that way. I didn’t realise I would be missed so much.


----------



## the snail (9 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> No-one is saying it's ok to beat a child senseless, but as you say, violent parents will do that anyway regardless of the law. Banning the smacking of children as a small reminder of the difference between right and wrong was a classic case of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and now we are seeing the results. You reap what you sow...


Yeah, cos teaching your kids that violence is the answer when someone annoys you will definitely not cause road rage.


----------



## Brandane (10 Dec 2021)

the snail said:


> Yeah, cos teaching your kids that violence is the answer when someone annoys you will definitely not cause road rage.


If you can't tell the difference between "violence" towards children, and a mild physical punishment (i.e. smacking) for bad behaviour, then we are in a worse mess than I thought we were. However, as per usual on CC - there is no middle ground. You support smacking and you are a violent, child abusing psychopath. You don't and you are a mamby-pamby, lily livered, lefty social worker. Which is why I can no longer be arsed getting involved in any such "discussions". See post #32.


----------



## the snail (10 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> ..You support smacking and you are a violent, child abusing psychopath...


Well that's not what I said. I just think that it is rather lazy thinking to attribute road rage to a lack of physical punishment. First you have to accept that people are more likely to indulge in this behaviour, and I'm not convinced, I think it's just human nature. Road rage has been a thing as long as there has been traffic - think of Mr. Toad. If you put someone in a situation where they are focussed on making progress from A to B, where other drivers get in their way, people get stressed and some are poor at dealing with it. Then there is no proper interaction because they are all isolated in their metal boxes - you don't tend to see 'pedestrian rage' when others get in the way. I think the answer is to reduce stress levels, or teach people to deal with it. Or maybe more corporal punishment, lashes of the whip instead of points on the licence?


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> If you can't tell the difference between "violence" towards children, and a mild physical punishment (i.e. smacking) for bad behaviour, then we are in a worse mess than I thought we were. However, as per usual on CC - there is no middle ground. You support smacking and you are a violent, child abusing psychopath. You don't and you are a mamby-pamby, lily livered, lefty social worker. Which is why I can no longer be arsed getting involved in any such "discussions". See post #32.


Hitting a child is a violent act. Not 'violent'. Violent. You may argue whether it's right or necessary, but it is violent.


----------



## Brandane (10 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> but it is violent.


Really? Clearly my mother didn't put enough effort into the act, as she never caused me injury or illness (but I still got the message), according to the Cambridge dictionary.....
So can we please stop watering down words such as "violent" for the sake of dramatic effect?




> *violent adjective (CAUSING HURT)
> using force to hurt or attack:*






> hurt
> to feel pain in a part of your body, or to injure someone or cause them pain:






> pain
> a feeling of physical suffering caused by injury or illness:


----------



## Biker man (10 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> Really? Clearly my mother didn't put enough effort into the act, as she never caused me injury or illness (but I still got the message), according to the Cambridge dictionary.....
> So can we please stop watering down words such as "violent" for the sake of dramatic effect?


Most kids of my generation got a clip around the ear ,I was caned in school it was a punishment if you did wrong,some of this generation don't know the difference between right and wrong just me me.


----------



## Alex321 (10 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> Really? Clearly my mother didn't put enough effort into the act, as she never caused me injury or illness (but I still got the message), according to the Cambridge dictionary.....
> So can we please stop watering down words such as "violent" for the sake of dramatic effect?



Your quoted definitions show absolutely that he was correct.


----------



## Brandane (10 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> Your quoted definitions show absolutely that he was correct.


?????? 
Well yes, I suppose it is possible to smack a child to the extent that they suffer "injury or illness" - but that was always against the law. 
As you well know (at least I _hope_ you know the difference) that is not what we are talking about here.


----------



## Alex321 (10 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> ??????
> Well yes, I suppose it is possible to smack a child to the extent that they suffer "injury or illness" - but that was always against the law.
> As you well know (at least I _hope_ you know the difference) that is not what we are talking about here.


Perhaps you didn't actually read the content of what you quoted.

It certainly did NOT say that you have inflict "injury or illness" for it to be violent. Though of course that depends somewhat on what is classed as "injury".

And yes, I fully understand the difference between minor violence for chastisement and excessive violence from anger or a misplaced idea of what is acceptable chastisement.

But what was acceptable when some of us older members here were children, and that we believe never did us any harm is no longer acceptable in today's environment.

I do not, however, believe for one moment that the prevalence of smacking in older generations has contributed one iota to road rage, as some seem to be suggesting in this thread.


----------



## simongt (10 Dec 2021)

I've not 'enjoyed' driving for some years now. I do it simply as a function to get from A to B as needed. I much prefer cycling, but obviously, weather, load or distance sometimes preclude using a bike. 
The main reason about driving is that pretty much everyone appears to be in such a tearing hurry to get to their destination, wherever that might be; speeding especially in inappropriate condtions, failing to indicate, tailgating etc., etc.. 
And don't get me started on SUVs - !


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> Most kids of my generation got a clip around the ear ,I was caned in school it was a punishment if you did wrong,some of this generation don't know the difference between right and wrong just me me.


I know that it's wrong to hit a child.


----------



## Biker man (10 Dec 2021)

Ne


winjim said:


> I know that it's wrong to hit a child.


Never done me or my friends any harm .


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> Ne
> Never done me or my friends any harm .


I just knew you'd come back with that. How do you know it's done no harm, have you seen a psychotherapist?

You seem to think you know right from wrong, but your perception of right and wrong runs antithetical to mine, at least as it pertains to corporal punishment.

Hitting children is wrong and, I believe, harmful.


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (10 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> I just knew you'd come back with that. How do you know it's done no harm, have you seen a psychotherapist?
> 
> You seem to think you know right from wrong, but your perception of right and wrong runs antithetical to mine, at least as it pertains to corporal punishment.
> 
> *Hitting children is wrong and, I believe, harmful.*



I agree completely.


----------



## Biker man (10 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> I just knew you'd come back with that. How do you know it's done no harm, have you seen a psychotherapist?
> 
> You seem to think you know right from wrong, but your perception of right and wrong runs antithetical to mine, at least as it pertains to corporal punishment.
> 
> Hitting children is wrong and, I believe, harmful.


I think it is you who needs a psychologist end of.


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> I think it is you who needs a psychologist end of.


Another predictable response I'm afraid. But yeah, I think psychotherapy is something we could all potentially benefit from and there's no shame in that. It might even help us understand the root of things like road rage.


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> Really? Clearly my mother didn't put enough effort into the act, as she never caused me injury or illness (but I still got the message), according to the Cambridge dictionary.....
> So can we please stop watering down words such as "violent" for the sake of dramatic effect?


Mate. Think about what you're writing.

Hitting children.

Seriously.


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2021)

Dragging this rather tortuous thread back vaguely on topic, I do wonder if there is any correlation between childhood trauma, including that suffered as a result of corporal punishment, and violent behaviour later in life, including road rage incidents. There seems to be a hypothesis among some members of our community that childhood corporal punishment should correlate inversely with violent behaviour later in life, but I instinctively feel the opposite should be true. Anybody know of any studies into this?


----------



## All uphill (10 Dec 2021)

I've always thought that resorting to violence was a clear sign of failure to deal with one's own emotions in a safe way..

We were brought up in the sixties without any violence, and have done the same with our children. Not surprising that our children don't use violence, is it?


----------



## Alex321 (10 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> Mate. Think about what you're writing.
> 
> Hitting children.
> 
> Seriously.


Think about the fact that many on here are 50+ in age.

Which means we were brought up in an age when physical chastisement was absolutely the norm. It would be a very unusual parent who *didn't* smack their child any time up to the 1980s and beyond. And most schools also. I still remember as a primary school child (age 10) getting a strap across the fingers when I misbehaved in class.

Nowadays, this is not acceptable, but it doesn't help the arguments to present all situations as the same, and reduce it to always being "violence" or "hitting children" whether it is what was then considered reasonable chastisement, or whether it is serious child abuse.


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> Think about the fact that many on here are 50+ in age.
> 
> Which means we were brought up in an age when physical chastisement was absolutely the norm. It would be a very unusual parent who *didn't* smack their child any time up to the 1980s and beyond. And most schools also. I still remember as a primary school child (age 10) getting a strap across the fingers when I misbehaved in class.
> 
> Nowadays, this is not acceptable, but it doesn't help the arguments to present all situations as the same, and reduce it to always being "violence" or "hitting children" whether it is what was then considered reasonable chastisement, or whether it is serious child abuse.


You make good points and I don't want to be too reductive about it. I am having two very similar conversations on this thread and trying to keep them separate. In this one, I'm attempting to not get into the rights and wrongs, or whether striking a child is necessary or appropriate, or even the degree of physicality involved. That's an interesting topic but I don't think you can even begin to discuss it without first at least acknowledging that smacking a child is absolutely an act of violence.


----------



## lazybloke (10 Dec 2021)

To hurt a child is to commit an act of violence. The dinosaurs will argue about the degree of violence, but it is still violence.
And it's unnecessary; a child doesn't need pain to learn right from wrong. You can instill discipline in a child, and earn respect, without smacking them.

Any dinosaur that says "smacking was the only option left" is only confirming that the smack was the last of a long string of parenting failures. Get some support.


----------



## All uphill (10 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> Think about the fact that many on here are 50+ in age.
> 
> Which means we were brought up in an age when physical chastisement was absolutely the norm. It would be a very unusual parent who *didn't* smack their child any time up to the 1980s and beyond. And most schools also. I still remember as a primary school child (age 10) getting a strap across the fingers when I misbehaved in class.
> 
> Nowadays, this is not acceptable, but it doesn't help the arguments to present all situations as the same, and reduce it to always being "violence" or "hitting children" whether it is what was then considered reasonable chastisement, or whether it is serious child abuse.


I wonder how much it was the norm.

It's always risky, I know, to extrapolate from our own experience to the general. I grew up in the fifties/sixties in a rural area where I saw and experienced almost no violence. I do remember two classmates saying their dads would take the belt to them and being shocked.

I guess there's no way of knowing at this distance, but my experience leads me to doubt how common it was generally.


----------



## Hover Fly (10 Dec 2021)

60+ here, my parents never so much as slapped my leg. Any teacher who thought violence was an effective teaching method got shown the error of his ways.


----------



## boydj (10 Dec 2021)

Brandane said:


> If you can't tell the difference between "violence" towards children, and a mild physical punishment (i.e. smacking) for bad behaviour, then we are in a worse mess than I thought we were. However, as per usual on CC - there is no middle ground. You support smacking and you are a violent, child abusing psychopath. You don't and you are a mamby-pamby, lily livered, lefty social worker. Which is why I can no longer be arsed getting involved in any such "discussions". See post #32.



Unfortunately a lot of people can't, and that's why smacking is illegal in Scotland - as I'm sure you know. Smacking is a failure in parenting.


----------



## simongt (12 Dec 2021)

On the school physical punishment theme. Caning by the Head was still in effect, mid sixties, for serious misdemeanours, but class teachers would still mete out physical punishment for some things. The worse was a student teacher who would give us fifty pages of 'Kidnapped' to read for homework followed by a twenty question test the following day. Anyone with less than a score of fifteen would get a plimsoll across the backside in front of the class for each question wrong under the magic number.


----------



## fossyant (12 Dec 2021)

simongt said:


> On the school physical punishment theme. Caning by the Head was still in effect, mid sixties, for serious misdemeanours.


Still went on in the Mid 80's.


----------



## winjim (12 Dec 2021)

simongt said:


> On the school physical punishment theme. Caning by the Head was still in effect, mid sixties, for serious misdemeanours, but class teachers would still mete out physical punishment for some things. The worse was a student teacher who would give us fifty pages of 'Kidnapped' to read for homework followed by a twenty question test the following day. Anyone with less than a score of fifteen would get a plimsoll across the backside in front of the class for each question wrong under the magic number.


Can we safely say that amongst your cohort there's never been so much as a hint of frustration at other peoples driving?


----------



## DRM (12 Dec 2021)

fossyant said:


> Still went on in the Mid 80's.


Yes it did DAMHIK


----------



## Biker man (12 Dec 2021)

Happy days


simongt said:


> On the school physical punishment theme. Caning by the Head was still in effect, mid sixties, for serious misdemeanours, but class teachers would still mete out physical punishment for some things. The worse was a student teacher who would give us fifty pages of 'Kidnapped' to read for homework followed by a twenty question test the following day. Anyone with less than a score of fifteen would get a plimsoll across the backside in front of the class for each question wrong under the magic number.


😉


----------



## Stephenite (13 Dec 2021)

@Moderators 

Can we not permanently ban people who propose violence against children.


----------



## Alex321 (13 Dec 2021)

Stephenite said:


> @Moderators
> 
> Can we not permanently ban people who propose violence against children.



Well I haven't actually seen anybody proposing it.

But even if they were, why should that be reason to ban them, rather than trying to change their views?


----------



## Stephenite (13 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> Well I haven't actually seen anybody proposing it.
> 
> But even if they were, why should that be reason to ban them, rather than trying to change their views?


Put my comment down to late night intemperance.


----------



## winjim (13 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> Well I haven't actually seen anybody proposing it.
> 
> But even if they were, why should that be reason to ban them, rather than trying to change their views?


It's my prejudiced view, somewhat reinforced by this thread, that someone who would endorse the use or violence against children would probably not have their mind changed in a discussion on a cycling forum. However, that doesn't mean that those views shouldn't be robustly challenged, even if the response to such challenge, or lack of it, is rather predictable.


----------



## Brandane (13 Dec 2021)

Stephenite said:


> @Moderators
> 
> Can we not permanently ban people who propose violence against children.


As previously posted, no-one is proposing such a thing. 
Can we not permanently ban people who twist words to suit their own agenda? 
While we are at it, can we also ban those who are so intolerant of other people's views that they want them banned? 
After all, we only share a hobby/sport/mode of transport in that we all (mostly) cycle. It's highly unlikely that CC is ever going to be one big love-in for those of a particular political persuasion that we're not allowed to mention any more, and I for one certainly wouldn't want it to be that way.


----------



## Brandane (13 Dec 2021)

I don't think the "intemperance" has worn off yet!


----------



## Biker man (13 Dec 2021)

Stephenite said:


> @Moderators
> 
> Can we not permanently ban people who propose violence against children.


Typically can't discuss just ban people s view if you don't agree with them pathetic.


----------



## winjim (13 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> Typically can't discuss just ban people s view if you don't agree with them pathetic.


It's extremely difficult to have a discussion with someone who is so unwilling to justify their arguments that they suffix their statements with the phrase 'end of'.

I'm willing to discuss this topic and I'd like to know what is your evidence for stating that corporal punishment in children does no harm, and what is your evidence that corporal punishment in children leads to decreased incidence of violence, specifically road rage, later in life?

Discuss away.


----------



## fossyant (13 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> It's extremely difficult to have a discussion with someone who is so unwilling to justify their arguments that they suffix their statements with the phrase 'end of'.
> 
> I'm willing to discuss this topic and I'd like to know what is your evidence for stating that corporal punishment in children does no harm, and what is your evidence that corporal punishment in children leads to decreased incidence of violence, specifically road rage, later in life?
> 
> Discuss away.



You wont  - I'm surprised the thread title actually had something to do with the thread content for a change.  I'll be told to "jog on" in a moment.


----------



## winjim (13 Dec 2021)

fossyant said:


> You wont  - I'm surprised the thread title actually had something to do with the thread content for a change.  I'll be told to "jog on" in a moment.


I like to think I'm making a robust but fair challenge over something I have strong opinions about. As I alluded to upthread, the responses, or lack of, to such a challenge can be informative in themselves. Maybe less so about the subject and more so about the poster...


----------



## Profpointy (13 Dec 2021)

Stephenite said:


> @Moderators
> 
> Can we not permanently ban people who propose violence against children.



Better to give them a good hiding


----------



## Brandane (13 Dec 2021)

Profpointy said:


> Better to give them a good hiding


No, no; NO!! 
Far better to let them do whatever they like. To do anything else might adversely affect their personal development, and they might grow up believing that there are restrictions on their behaviour, and consequences (other than having their Playstation taken off them for an hour) to be faced if they cross the line in the sand.


----------



## Biker man (13 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> It's extremely difficult to have a discussion with someone who is so unwilling to justify their arguments that they suffix their statements with the phrase 'end of'.
> 
> I'm willing to discuss this topic and I'd like to know what is your evidence for stating that corporal punishment in children does no harm, and what is your evidence that corporal punishment in children leads to decreased incidence of violence, specifically road rage, later in life?
> 
> Discuss away.


I am the proof I never get road rage or any other kind of rage I know right from wrong , because I was taught right from wrong , My Dad ruled the house and you were taught respect sadly that doesn't happen today .


----------



## All uphill (13 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> I am the proof I never get road rage or any other kind of rage I know right from wrong , because I was taught right from wrong , My Dad ruled the house and you were taught respect sadly that doesn't happen today .


Was it respect or fear? 

Was your mother less than an equal? 

I'm genuinely interested having grown up in a household where the adults kept us children safe with clear boundaries and no hitting.


----------



## si_c (13 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> I am the proof I never get road rage or any other kind of rage I know right from wrong , because I was taught right from wrong , My Dad ruled the house and you were taught respect sadly that doesn't happen today .


Anecdote is not evidence.


----------



## si_c (13 Dec 2021)

All uphill said:


> I'm genuinely interested having grown up in a household where the adults kept us children safe with clear boundaries and no hitting.


My Dad never hit me, not once. He never had to, he found other ways to teach us how to behave and make the right choices without resorting to violence.


----------



## winjim (13 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> I am the proof I never get road rage or any other kind of rage I know right from wrong , because I was taught right from wrong , My Dad ruled the house and you were taught respect sadly that doesn't happen today .


We've already established that your ideas of right and wrong are different to mine, so we're not going to agree on that point and it can be disregarded. As for your personal experience regarding road rage, I'm happy that you manage to go through life in a permanent state of zen-like calm, but that is just your personal experience. I'd rather see some actual evidence.


----------



## Fat Lars (13 Dec 2021)

It's impossible to avoid criticism of any public utterance that smacks of racism, homphobicism, and any other ....ism you can think of these days. So biker even though you know in your heart that the way you were brought up made you respect others and behave in a civilised manner as an upright member of society, there are folk who will always challenge you successfully about the apparently harsh methods your parents used.
You cannot win the argument. But it doesn't matter. Winning the argument on here doesn't make them right. It may be right for them but not for you. 
I was given the cane at school for talking in class on the first day of term. The Headmaster wanted to make an example of me. He was a magistrate and was used to dealing out punishment to all and sundry. I'm sure he thought he was teaching me a lesson of respect and was fully justified but it turned me from an extrovert to an introvert. I was very very upset by it.


----------



## Biker man (13 Dec 2021)

si_c said:


> Anecdote is not evidence.


Y


Fat Lars said:


> It's impossible to avoid criticism of any public utterance that smacks of racism, homphobicism, and any other ....ism you can think of these days. So biker even though you know in your heart that the way you were brought up made you respect others and behave in a civilised manner as an upright member of society, there are folk who will always challenge you successfully about the apparently harsh methods your parents used.
> You cannot win the argument. But it doesn't matter. Winning the argument on here doesn't make them right. It may be right for them but not for you.
> I was given the cane at school for talking in class on the first day of term. The Headmaster wanted to make an example of me. He was a magistrate and was used to dealing out punishment to all and sundry. I'm sure he thought he was teaching me a lesson of respect and was fully justified but it turned me from an extrovert to an introvert. I was very very upset by it.


I was often caned sometimes in front of the whole school assembly three of us was called up for smoking didn't do use any harm character building I would say .


----------



## Biker man (13 Dec 2021)

Fat Lars said:


> It's impossible to avoid criticism of any public utterance that smacks of racism, homphobicism, and any other ....ism you can think of these days. So biker even though you know in your heart that the way you were brought up made you respect others and behave in a civilised manner as an upright member of society, there are folk who will always challenge you successfully about the apparently harsh methods your parents used.
> You cannot win the argument. But it doesn't matter. Winning the argument on here doesn't make them right. It may be right for them but not for you.
> I was given the cane at school for talking in class on the first day of term. The Headmaster wanted to make an example of me. He was a magistrate and was used to dealing out punishment to all and sundry. I'm sure he thought he was teaching me a lesson of respect and was fully justified but it turned me from an extrovert to an introvert. I was very very upset by it.


Sorry to hear that it's the way it was in those days,Some were worst than others try and forget and make the best of things.


----------



## Alex321 (13 Dec 2021)

Biker man said:


> I am the proof I never get road rage or any other kind of rage I know right from wrong , because I was taught right from wrong , My Dad ruled the house and you were taught respect sadly that doesn't happen today .


You are not proof of anything, and cannot be. Nor are any of us as individuals.

One example proves nothing.


----------



## winjim (14 Dec 2021)

Here we go, 74 years old so of an age that probably would have experienced corporal punishment in school if not at home. Deliberately drives over a cyclist, breaking their pelvis and ribs.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...running-over-cyclist-who-spat-on-his-car?s=09

Next anecdote please.


----------



## Biker man (14 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> Here we go, 74 years old so of an age that probably would have experienced corporal punishment in school if not at home. Deliberately drives over a cyclist, breaking their pelvis and ribs.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...running-over-cyclist-who-spat-on-his-car?s=09
> 
> Next anecdote please.


Who.knows maybe he did maybe he is like today's generation that think they are untouchable sad case .


----------



## Profpointy (14 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> Here we go, 74 years old so of an age that probably would have experienced corporal punishment in school if not at home. Deliberately drives over a cyclist, breaking their pelvis and ribs.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...running-over-cyclist-who-spat-on-his-car?s=09
> 
> Next anecdote please.



Clearly he wasn't beaten enough. 

As an aside, I was once a guest at a pistol shooting club not long after the Hungerford incident and I heard someone saying, in all seriousness, that "liberals" were to blame as Ryan obviously hadn't been disciplined enough. The guy saying this had up to then seemed one of the more sensible ones as he'd not been whispering about holing up in a farm and shooting anyone who tried to take their land (after society collapsed, which they were evidently looking forward to)


----------



## Slick (14 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> Here we go, 74 years old so of an age that probably would have experienced corporal punishment in school if not at home. Deliberately drives over a cyclist, breaking their pelvis and ribs.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...running-over-cyclist-who-spat-on-his-car?s=09
> 
> Next anecdote please.


Seems a bit light that sentence.


----------



## winjim (14 Dec 2021)

Slick said:


> Seems a bit light that sentence.


I think they must be accepting the broken mirror and the spitting as provocation. Personally I think the clear intent warrants more than a 'dangerous driving' charge but here we are.


----------



## Profpointy (14 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> I think they must be accepting the broken mirror and the spitting as provocation. Personally I think the clear intent warrants more than a 'dangerous driving' charge but here we are.



To be fair it was a mere cyclist he assaulted


----------



## Slick (14 Dec 2021)

winjim said:


> I think they must be accepting the broken mirror and the spitting as provocation. Personally I think the clear intent warrants more than a 'dangerous driving' charge but here we are.


I suppose we must have to assume so, but I can't help but be surprised by the overall leniency of deliberately driving over someone. Bizarre


----------



## DRM (14 Dec 2021)

Slick said:


> I suppose we must have to assume so, but I can't help but be surprised by the overall leniency of deliberately driving over someone. Bizarre


You and me both, that sentence absolutely beggars belief, he should be inside longer and have to pay huge compensation to the victim, would be a good lesson to other motorists too


----------



## Alex321 (14 Dec 2021)

Slick said:


> I suppose we must have to assume so, but I can't help but be surprised by the overall leniency of deliberately driving over someone. Bizarre





DRM said:


> You and me both, that sentence absolutely beggars belief, he should be inside longer and have to pay huge compensation to the victim, would be a good lesson to other motorists too



IMO, this should have been prosecuted as Assault causing GBH.

Which for the degree of harm caused and high culpability, would have been a starting point of 4-7 years. That would be reduced by a third for an early guilty plea, and there may have been some mitigating factors, but I would still have thought it should end up more than 2 years.


----------



## Slick (14 Dec 2021)

Alex321 said:


> IMO, this should have been prosecuted as Assault causing GBH.
> 
> Which for the degree of harm caused and high culpability, would have been a starting point of 4-7 years. That would be reduced by a third for an early guilty plea, and there may have been some mitigating factors, but I would still have thought it should end up more than 2 years.


Seems the safest way to cause someone serious harm with minimum risk of being held to account is to use a vehicle.


----------

