# Driver confrontation question



## al78 (13 Nov 2011)

I appreciate this is a controversial topic, so bear in mind this is posted purely for information, not to start an argument.

I was watching Magnaton's recent video and the responses to it and it got me thinking of a (fairly) recent incident I had on my way home from work. I was approaching a roundabout at which I wanted to turn right, when I got to roughly this point and with a queue behind* I did a shoulder check in preparation to move across to the right. As there was a gap I moved across but then the driver behind blasted his horn at me and then proceeded to floor it past (much too close for comfort) less than 200 yards from the roundabout; it is impossible to see anything coming the other way that would be turning left at that roundabout so if something had come round at that point there would have been a serious accident. As soon as I had reached the roundabout and turned right I could see the driver had got caught up in a traffic jam that tends to form at that time of the evening and is due to the second roundabout at the Broadbridge Heath bypass. It did cross my mind at this point to go and have a word with the driver but I didn't have the courage for it and would not be sure how to handle the situation if it escalated. The thing is, in your opinion should I have gone and said something?

*the reason I didn't pull into the layby to let the queue past is because once I am past the roundabout there is sufficient road space for vehicles behind to overtake safely. Having said that I have tended to pull in now as it is probably safer to let drivers past if they have been stuck behind me for more than 20-30 seconds and then take the lane whilst the road is quiet.


----------



## gaz (13 Nov 2011)

There is zero point in remonstrating with drivers. In most cases it will end in a pointless argument, in some it will end with assault.
For example:

[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNZVj29jDOA[/media]


----------



## Norm (14 Nov 2011)

It's a tough call, and it depends on local knowledge and specific conditions, but I wouldn't usually be looking to take a position that far (200 yards) in advance of the roundabout, but then I wouldn't usually pull into a lay-by to let them past either. 

That particular roundabout is right turn other than the entry to the trading estate, but how much traffic actually goes straight over? There's a bit of an island just before the roundabout, I think I'd be looking to move over about 10 yards before that.


----------



## slowmotion (14 Nov 2011)

Just.....let......it.....go....

It really isn't worth it. IMVVHO.


----------



## Norm (14 Nov 2011)

What a dreadful piece of cycling that is, Gaz. Never out of the door zone, only one shoulder check in 5 minutes, even when swinging across the road in front of someone who he knows has a poor driving standard, and then stopping in the middle of the road to ask "Did you see that", again without a shoulder check.

Ironic that the video says "Review yourself, Buddy! You might learn something".


----------



## Crankarm (14 Nov 2011)

gaz said:


> There is zero point in remonstrating with drivers. In most cases it will end in a pointless argument, in some it will end with assault.
> For example:
> 
> [media]
> ]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNZVj29jDOA[/media]




Where's there an assault Gaz?

The driving was frankly dangerous especially at the start when the driver sped over the pedestrian crossing when people were crossing. But Traffic Droid clearly has issues himself. He should just get on with his own life rather than ranting and railing to people who will think he is a care in the community patient. You don't argue with drivers of big cars like that or any car that clearly could cause you a lot of harm. Having antagonsied him by pulling his tail too many times he still rides off in front of him!!! What a bell end. He will take on / annoy some one who WILL run him down. One is a long time dead. And what for? It's not worth it. Traffic Droid clearly has issues.


----------



## daSmirnov (14 Nov 2011)

Obviously it's safer just to pass by. But then with the adrenalin flowing it can be hard to resist.

If you are going to do it, don't go overboard chasing people down like some individuals who won't be named, and don't lose your cool. Speak calmly and don't go flapping your arms around either.

Oh and keep in mind the incident last month where a cyclist was deliberately run over for asking 3 chaps to move their car off a footpath. And that was only around the corner from there. You never know what sort of nut might be in a car.

My way of dealing with things is usually complaining under my breath safe in the knowledge that they'll end up on YouTube.


----------



## mr_hippo (14 Nov 2011)

If there is no point in remonstrating with drivers, why did you? The pedestrian at the crossing was, as we were all taught to do, waiting and making sure it was safe to cross. 

At about 2 mins 37 secs you sais "Where is he? I want to gove hin a self analysis ticket" That is not wanting to avoid confrontation but to start it.

Around 4 mins 20 secs, you start playing to the gallery with your "Did you see that?" outburst - wow!

So you have prosecuted people before, have you? I never knew you were a member of the legal profession. 

What happened at 5 minutes 15 seconds? Man and woman window shopping, man with two kiddies and a buggy, plenty of space to your right and yet you go between them almost hitting the window shopper and one kiddie - isn;t that a "close overtake"?

Gaz, if this is not your video, comments are directed at 'traffic droid'


----------



## Jonno Boy (14 Nov 2011)

Make them wait; it's their problem. You have every right to be there; stand up for yourself! I would.


----------



## ManiaMuse (14 Nov 2011)

If someone passes me like a dick and I manage to catch up just down the road I will make a point of sitting in front of them and scratching my ass. 

If the pass was really bad I might even show them a bit of ass crack.


----------



## BentMikey (14 Nov 2011)

It's much better not to confront drivers, and that's made easier by having both cameras and Roadsafe to do it via a letter days afterwards. OTOH sometimes it can be almost irresistable to talk to them.


----------



## John the Monkey (14 Nov 2011)

I find it wearying & dispiriting, tbh.

Sometimes it's unavoidable, as the driver will accost you, but I don't bother in most cases.

I've written to companies to praise good driving, and complain about poor driving - in general, little changes after the latter, ime, although occasionally I get a nice leaflet.


----------



## 400bhp (14 Nov 2011)

Sitting here in a nice warm comfy office, it's very easy for me to say just ignore it.

On the road, and given the particular circumstances it's very hard to just ignore.

You did the right thing walking away. There's usually very little to be gained by remonstraing with drivers. The odd one will apologise, but this is seldom.


----------



## Hip Priest (14 Nov 2011)

I'd say it's always best to avoid confrontation, if possible. I had my first argument with a motorist last week and it made me feel bad for the whole day. I resolved to treat similar incidents of bad driving with a few quiet words under my breath. 

Re: Traffic Droid - as someone above said, he doesn't just get involved in confrontations, he goes looking for them. Nearly getting himself hurt over incidents that didn't even involve him.


----------



## fossyant (14 Nov 2011)

Classic this morning.<BR><BR>Following a transit in primary, traffic is going slow - it's busy and I'm doing about 20 mph and on the brakes as it's down hill. I'm about 10-15 feet from the back of the van, in primary.<BR><BR>Next thing I hear a car whizzing up to overtake, the bonet comes level, then procedes to cut me off. By now I'm hevel with the passenger window, and make pushing signals. Driver backs off and I turn and "say what are you doing".<BR><BR>Traffic is still slow, so I'm still in primary now, can see headlights of car reflecting off the van and it's close, and keeps edging out over the white line.<BR><BR>We're now coming up to a junction, traffic is slowing, she goes for it again. This time I showt 'back off where are you going'.<BR><BR>It's getting dangerous now, so I switch left and filter through the traffic. I was now gone. Never saw the car again.<BR><BR>A pure case of 'must get past cyclist'. Stupid. <BR><BR>It's really not worth stopping and having a conversation - just get's you wound up about their stupidity, and you never know when one is a knuckle head, or is stupid enough to think bumping you with the car is fun.


----------



## ohnovino (14 Nov 2011)

I made a New Years Resolution to stop confronting drivers, and I'm far happier for it. I'd never get a satisfactory response (it's not as if they're going to say "Oh, you're completely right, I'm so sorry, I've learnt my lesson now") and the confrontation would leave me angrier than the original incident. Now I find if I let it go then it's forgotten in a matter of minutes.


----------



## rich p (14 Nov 2011)

gaz said:


> There is zero point in remonstrating with drivers. In most cases it will end in a pointless argument, in some it will end with assault.
> For example:
> 
> [media]
> ]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNZVj29jDOA[/media]





That's hilarious! Cheers Gaz! 

I wanted to give that cyclist the finger too


----------



## Bicycle (14 Nov 2011)

I find things generally pan out better for everyone if I just let them go. This can appear spineless to some, but it's a big, strange old world and it can be full of surprises.

The Traffic Roid video was alarming in a way. Certainly, the driver was showing poor awareness and a selfish desire to make progress at the initial pedestrian crossing. There's no doubt it was poor driving. One sees that all the time; worse that, he drove on after another road user (Traffic Roid) had already stopped.

Worth noting, though, that the pedestrian was aware the car wasn't yielding and had not stepped out. 

But... Roid then goes on a sort of verbal-vendetta crusade and embarrasses himself. I don't find his roadcraft great and he may have an issue or two. Engaging the patrons of a pavement cafe like a street preacher (and being ignored by all) is a worrying sign.
It's clear that it isn't Gaz in the vid; for all my wariness of HelmCammery, I find Gaz's clips are usually well presented, well argued and often very helpful. He is one of the excellent Helmet Cam brigade who wreck many of my prejudices..

Getting back to the original question, I still think it's often better to let it go. The shouter gets crosser, the original offender gets crosser... much adrealin is produced and either there's a fight or all that adrenalin just goes straight through the throttle pedal...

(Slightly OT digression: I spent a lot of time some years ago in S E Europe where at that time a culture of _Gjakemarrje _was still common. It's a strict social code of blood revenge. Very horrid, but it has some plus points. Nobody gets into silly, heated arguments in the street. It's not worth it; if you offend a man he has the right to swear blood against you and if it's agreed that you've offended him, that's it for you. There are strict rules to the matter, laid out hundreds of tears ago in a solemn text, but the end resiult is often a bloody death. It's a bit extreme and I couldn't live under it, but down where I was living there were no petty traffic disputes, probably because of that social code.)

I think everyone has their own red line. In my experience of many years in traffic and many years of having to talk to very cross people in fairly bloody ethnic conflicts, the more sang-froid you can muster, the better your chances of coming out smiling.

Also, it's worth noting that for many motorists a 'self-gratification artist' hand signal or a wave that looks a little like one is seen as provocation. I have no idea why some people have such thin skins, but they do. It's not just motorists...


----------



## dellzeqq (14 Nov 2011)

mr_hippo said:


> If there is no point in remonstrating with drivers, why did you? The pedestrian at the crossing was, as we were all taught to do, waiting and making sure it was safe to cross.
> 
> At about 2 mins 37 secs you sais "Where is he? I want to gove hin a self analysis ticket" That is not wanting to avoid confrontation but to start it.
> 
> ...


er, yes...............as in no.............as in whatever.........


----------



## dellzeqq (14 Nov 2011)

Norm's point about treating each case on its merits is clearly right. It's only worth making a point if it has an effect - and, in that respect, the OP threading his way by a stationary car 200 metres after the hooting episode is making a point. A cheery wave would make the point to greater effect.

I think as a general rule we have to bear in mind that ours is a nobler calling and we are, by definition, happier, healthier, sexier and all round beautiliciouser than they are. If we seek to convey this (in a kindly way, because one should always be nice to those less advantaged than ourselves) then that's all good.


----------



## 400bhp (14 Nov 2011)

Forgot about this but I had a right t1t on Friday night.

An guy in an Audi TT was in the wrong side of this road (when there were no parked cars), not going particularly fast (perhaps 10mph). I was behind and tentively started to look to go past on the left, when he started to veer left.

I went past him on the right and he was texting away. I just shouted hello, he looked up and I waved.

I think he got the point-he pulled over and must have stopped.

I could have reacted angrily but that's not doing anyone any afvours


----------



## PK99 (14 Nov 2011)

Crankarm said:


> at the start when the driver sped over the pedestrian crossing when people were crossing.



Not wishing to defend the driver but: he did not do that. The pedestrian was still on the pavement and from the highway code: 


> Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing.


 - one foot on the crossing obliges the driver to stop, standing waiting on the pavement does not. The pedestrian stopped and looked while the car was within the zig-zags, should he have been going slower, probably, but to stop would have required sharp braking


Later in the video, the cyclist drops the card through the car window while undertaking at speed (the video is slowed) on the zig-zags of a pedestrian crossing, and actually posts the card while undrtaking on the crossing


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (14 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> I find things generally pan out better for everyone if I just let them go.


How do you know that? Do you do a follow-up questionaire or something?


----------



## Norm (14 Nov 2011)

One memorable one which I think might have had an influence on the driver was a woman in a Mini who pulled alongside and said "I've had to overtake you six times."

She did actually look as if it meant something when I replied "That's ok, I've fine past you six times as well."


----------



## Scilly Suffolk (14 Nov 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> I think as a general rule we have to bear in mind that ours is a nobler calling and we are, by definition, happier, healthier, sexier and all round beautiliciouser than they are. If we seek to convey this (in a kindly way, because one should always be nice to those less advantaged than ourselves) then that's all good.



Spot on Dellzeqq! You'll catch more flies with sugar, than shoot...

PS Shouldn't it be "more beautlicious"?


----------



## John the Monkey (14 Nov 2011)

400bhp said:


> I went past him on the right and he was texting away. I just shouted hello, he looked up and I waved.



Best thing about the winter is the way their phone screens light up their faces.

Watch out for it, and make sure they're nowhere near you.


----------



## Bicycle (14 Nov 2011)

MrHappyCyclist said:


> How do you know that? Do you do a follow-up questionaire or something?



Tee Hee... Yes, I drop them through open car windows as I ride past the offender...

No... Not really. Just kidding. I see people in spats on the road and rarely see anyone 'win'.

I try not to encourage spats, either by my riding/driving or by my reaction to the way others ride/drive.

I find I enjoy road use much more than many people who like to point out the faults or weakenesses in the riding or driving of others.

Maybe I'm just very lucky. Or maybe it's better not to poke venomous snales with a stick...


----------



## BSRU (14 Nov 2011)

I think there is no point confronting drivers, since there stuck in a metal cage there probably stressed and in a bad mood already.

Most people do not appreciate being told they did something wrong by a complete stranger.


----------



## martint235 (14 Nov 2011)

Sometimes I just can't help myself, I've even been known to chase after errant car drivers at speed. If I do catch them, 80% won't even talk to me and the other 20% just swear and rant about road tax. Offers to discuss the issue calmly at the side of the road are always refused.

I'm really trying to give it up particularly after doing it on two rides for food, the first time I screwed my achilles tendon by launching into a full on sprint with muscles tight from over 100 miles and the second I went haring after a taxi in the middle of nowhere expecting traffic lights to stop him some time soon (they didn't, they don't have them on straight country lanes apparently) and missed the turning for the route. Felt a bit of a numpty!


----------



## fossyant (14 Nov 2011)

BSRU said:


> I think there is no point confronting drivers, since there stuck in a metal cage there probably stressed and in a bad mood already.
> 
> Most people do not appreciate being told they did something wrong by a complete stranger.



This lady this morning was like that, hence no stopping to engage them in conversation. She must have been ranting with all the bad traffic.  

Me, on the other hand had a brief chat with a guy on a flash looking CX bike a couple of miles later.


----------



## gaz (14 Nov 2011)

Crankarm said:


> Where's there an assault Gaz?


I should have made it clear that the example was not in relation to my last comment but the topic as a whole.


----------



## Crankarm (14 Nov 2011)

PK99 said:


> *Not wishing to defend the driver but: he did not do that.* The pedestrian was still on the pavement and from the highway code: - one foot on the crossing obliges the driver to stop, standing waiting on the pavement does not. The pedestrian stopped and looked while the car was within the zig-zags, should he have been going slower, probably, but to stop would have required sharp braking
> 
> 
> Later in the video, the cyclist drops the card through the car window while undertaking at speed (the video is slowed) on the zig-zags of a pedestrian crossing, and actually posts the card while undrtaking on the crossing




HWC states for drivers of vehicles:


*



195

Click to expand...

*


> Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing
> 
> 
> look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
> ...



IMO the pedestrian was in such a position that he had begun to cross. The driver of the vehicle should have stopped. Period. 

Also:


*



191
You MUST NOT park on a crossing or in the area covered by the zig-zag lines. You MUST NOT overtake the moving vehicle nearest the crossing or the vehicle nearest the crossing which has stopped to give way to pedestrians.


[Laws ZPPPCRGD regs 18, 20 & 24, RTRA sect 25(5) & TSRGD regs 10, 27 & 28]


Click to expand...

**
*The car driver overtook cyclist Traffic Zoid who was in the zigzag area prior to the crossing and slowing down to stop. The road was narrow. There were two amber flashing beacons either side of the road. I would class this as potentially dangerous driving. What if the man crossing was partially sighted or hard of hearing/deaf? 


The driver of the car is a menace. I still wouldn't have pursued it as did Traffic Zoid. He is asking for trouble.


----------



## Crankarm (14 Nov 2011)

gaz said:


> I should have made it clear that the example was not in relation to my last comment but the topic as a whole.



An assault on the minds of reasonable rational people  .


----------



## sabian92 (14 Nov 2011)

I'll usually only row with professional drivers (taxi etc) because it's their job on the line if they get too mouthy or hit me (So they won't do it), or women. Sounds bad but generally women tend not to get so physically abusive, and if they do they're smaller than me. You all know you do it even subconsciously - you don't pick a fight with a big fella if you don't have to.

I know it's a waste of time but it makes me feel better that because they've done something to piss somebody off so I've done the same back.


----------



## Hip Priest (14 Nov 2011)

sabian92 said:


> I'll usually only row with professional drivers (taxi etc) because it's their job on the line if they get too mouthy or hit me (So they won't do it), or women. Sounds bad but generally women tend not to get so physically abusive, and if they do they're smaller than me. You all know you do it even subconsciously - you don't pick a fight with a big fella if you don't have to.
> 
> I know it's a waste of time but it makes me feel better that because they've annoyed me I've done the same back.



I think it is human nature to choose weaker targets. But next time you're about to shout at a woman, just ask yourself 'Would I be doing this if she was a bloke?'. If the answer is no, then rein it in.


----------



## Moodyman (14 Nov 2011)

sabian92 said:


> I'll usually only row with professional drivers (taxi etc) because it's their job on the line if they get too mouthy or hit me (So they won't do it), *or women*. Sounds bad but *generally women tend not to get so physically abusive, and if they do they're smaller than me*. You all know you do it even subconsciously - you don't pick a fight with a big fella if you don't have to.
> 
> I know it's a waste of time but it makes me feel better that because they've annoyed me I've done the same back.




Dishing abuse to the weaker gender is acceptable because they can't hit you back?

Jeez, you're a tough guy ain't you?


----------



## Hip Priest (14 Nov 2011)

Moodyman said:


> Dishing abuse to the weaker gender is acceptable because they can't hit you back?
> 
> Jeez, you're a tough guy ain't you?




I think it's very honest of him. I think most of us are similar - for example, would Magnatom have confronted that woman if she had three bodybuilders in the car? Probably not. However, it isn't a very attractive characteristic, so I'd advise Sabian (and anyone else) to keep the tendency to pick weaker targets under control.


----------



## Crankarm (14 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I think it is human nature to choose weaker targets. But next time you're about to shout at a woman, just ask yourself 'Would I be doing this if she was a bloke?'. If the answer is no, then rein it in.




Or put another way, would you be happy that some bloke spoke to your daughter, Mum, sister, gf or SWMBO like that?


----------



## Moodyman (14 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I think it's very honest of him. I think most of us are similar - for example, *would Magnatom have confronted that woman if she had three bodybuilders in the car?* Probably not. However, it isn't a very attractive characteristic, so I'd advise Sabian (and anyone else) to keep the tendency to pick weaker targets under control.



Yes, I've seen videos of him screaming (Yes, he does that) at big blokes to pull over so he could give them a verbal shake down.


----------



## sabian92 (14 Nov 2011)

Moodyman said:


> Dishing abuse to the weaker gender is acceptable because they can't hit you back?
> 
> Jeez, you're a tough guy ain't you?



I never said I'd hit a woman. I said I'd argue with one and seeing how most women argue, they give better than most men.



Hip Priest said:


> I think it's very honest of him. I think most of us are similar - for example, would Magnatom have confronted that woman if she had three bodybuilders in the car? Probably not. However, it isn't a very attractive characteristic, so I'd advise Sabian (and anyone else) to keep the tendency to pick weaker targets under control.



Which I do. I don't solely pick people to pick on because they're smaller or weaker than me, male or female.



Crankarm said:


> Or put another way, would you be happy that some bloke spoke to your daughter, Mum, sister, gf or SWMBO like that?



Would you be happy if some mouthy woman gobbed off at your son or husband?


----------



## Crankarm (14 Nov 2011)

Moodyman said:


> Yes, I've seen videos of him screaming (Yes, he does that) at big blokes to pull over so he could give them a verbal shake down.




That's just Magnatomic ....... .


----------



## Moodyman (14 Nov 2011)

sabian92 said:


> I never said I'd hit a woman. I said I'd argue with one and seeing how most women argue, they give better than most men.



Don't do it. It's not nice and besides, you'll never win.


----------



## Dan B (14 Nov 2011)

Crankarm said:


> The car driver overtook cyclist Traffic Zoid who was in the zigzag area prior to the crossing


IIRC the actual law (not the HC summary) says _motor vehicle_ here, not just _vehicle_

https://www.cyclechat.net/


----------



## PK99 (14 Nov 2011)

Crankarm said:


> HWC states for drivers of vehicles:
> 
> 
> *
> ...


*



highway code:
you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing


attached still shows that your opinion is at variance with the facts*


----------



## chillyuk (14 Nov 2011)

al78 said:


> It did cross my mind at this point to go and have a word with the driver but I didn't have the courage for it and would not be sure how to handle the situation if it escalated. The thing is, in your opinion should I have gone and said something?



You answered your own question, and if that is your feeling then the sensible way to deal with it. No point being in the right but with a split lip or worse.


----------



## martint235 (14 Nov 2011)

sabian92 said:


> I'll usually only row with professional drivers (taxi etc) because it's their job on the line if they get too mouthy or hit me (So they won't do it), or women. Sounds bad but generally women tend not to get so physically abusive, and if they do they're smaller than me. You all know you do it even subconsciously -* you don't pick a fight with a big fella if you don't have to*.
> 
> I know it's a waste of time but it makes me feel better that because they've done something to piss somebody off so I've done the same back.



I don't meet very many and I've certainly not strayed into a row on the road with one yet!!


----------



## pshore (14 Nov 2011)

BSRU said:


> I think there is no point confronting drivers, since there stuck in a metal cage there probably stressed and in a bad mood already.
> 
> Most people do not appreciate being told they did something wrong by a complete stranger.



+1

I do have a tendency to tap on the windows when I feel like my life was in danger. Thankfully this does not happen very often. In 6 years of cycle commuting I have spoken with some 20 drivers. Here is my limited experience.

The almost exclusively male drivers look like they expecting a fight when I approach, you can see the red mist on their faces. Trying to remonstrate with raised voices or hand gestures is never going to persuade them of your point of view. Even calmly, if you tell a male their driving is poor, they will take is badly. If [edit: you are] angry, cycle past.

If you are going to say anything at all, tell them you are trying to make it home to your children, and tell them how scared you felt. Males don't deal with emotion well and it really puts them on the back foot and melts the hearts of all but the most hardened.


----------



## GfromHull (14 Nov 2011)

O.K I read about 90% of that, So what would you guys do if a policeman gave you a close pass and you both meet at the next roundabout. Would you say anything or just ride on?
I think most of boils down to the situation. Someone getting a little too close ..... Think I would let it go. A policeman who is there in enforce law giving you a close pass... I would goto town on his ass.


----------



## Buddfox (14 Nov 2011)

It's the hardest thing I've had to learn since beginning commuting in London - not primary or secondary positioning, many more life savers etc. but not over-reacting to bad driving. When I first started I was getting angry at a lot, but really now try and chill out.

I find one method which helps is to ask myself what I'd do if I was in a car, and usually that results in me saying 'Let it go'. Of course it's more annoying for cyclists if you have to brake and re-accelerate given the physical effort involved, and also there's a lot more adrenalin pumping from the exercise, but most of the incidents which I see and am involved in I soon realise are not that major. Whenever I get angry, I always regret it within about a minute and start chastising myself for over-reacting. But I don't find it easy at all, first instinct is always to start hollering or hand gesturing (my usual choice being an Italian hand shake, rather than anything ruder).

In response to other posts above, I never, ever shout at a woman. Just not the done thing.


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (14 Nov 2011)

GfromHull said:


> O.K I read about 90% of that, So what would you guys do if a policeman gave you a close pass and you both meet at the next roundabout. Would you say anything or just ride on?
> I think most of boils down to the situation. Someone getting a little too close ..... Think I would let it go. A policeman who is there in enforce law giving you a close pass... I would goto town on his ass.



Really? I wouldn't do anything to annoy a policeman. They won't admit to doing anything wrong, then they'll find something wrong with you or your bike and suddenly it's your problem, not theirs.


----------



## gambatte (14 Nov 2011)

It would have been that I'd have agreed with you, however.....

After recently complaining to police about parking on our street junction, which in 30 yards included:

1. Parking on the brow of a hill, which is also a sweeping left hand bend 

2. parking opposite a junction, 

3. parking in the mouth of a junction (18 inch from the give ways) 

4. Parking virtually opposite a vehicle on the opposite side of the road*



The first two meant you had to approach the junction of the wrong side of the road, passing parked cars, when you couldn't see if anything was coming.

The third meant you couldn't enter the RH junction in the left hand lane.

The 4th meant that as soon as you entered the junction you had to lose all speed and edge forward crossing from the rh to the lh side of the road. I drive a C5 (citroen, not sinclair) anything bigger wouldn't have passed.

Oh yeah, both vehicles were partially on the pavement.

I actually got a knock on the door for Mrs Plod to say that it was awkward, but nothing illegal.... and her colleague concurred.

Similar line to what I got when I complained about parking at the local school. Strange when a 2 year old got hospitalised 18 months later they could turn out ticketing every day for a fortnight?

Would I call 'em on it now? Damn right. But I'd try to discuss it, rather than be confrontational straight away.


----------



## Arjimlad (14 Nov 2011)

It's not worth it really, in my view, ... if someone has put me in danger then I will try to say something but otherwise, it's not worth the bother. If they are on a mobile phone then they are unlikely to respond kindly to a stranger telling them they are in the wrong. 

When I'm driving, if another driver on a mobile phone passes close enough, I usually give them a blast on the horn (which might make the person they are calling ask a question !). Passing queues of traffic I reckon about one in four will be sending a text, surfing the web or using the phone. We'd never get anywhere if we officiously took it upon ourselves to remonstrate with them all. 

Once, a woman pulled out from a side road, when I had right of way, then braked hard, which made me swerve out into the path of an oncoming truck to avoid hitting the back of her car. The truck driver managed to stop in time thankfully. She sailed on in blissful ignorance.

I caught her up at the lights, but she ignored me, so I reported it to the Police who went to see her & her husband for some strong words of advice. That satisfied me !


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

Crankarm said:


> Where's there an assault Gaz?
> 
> The driving was frankly dangerous especially at the start when the driver sped over the pedestrian crossing when people were crossing. But Traffic Droid clearly has issues himself. He should just get on with his own life rather than ranting and railing to people who will think he is a care in the community patient. You don't argue with drivers of big cars like that or any car that clearly could cause you a lot of harm. Having antagonsied him by pulling his tail too many times he still rides off in front of him!!! What a bell end. He will take on / annoy some one who WILL run him down. One is a long time dead. And what for? It's not worth it. Traffic Droid clearly has issues.



No one was crossing, they waited for the fast car to pass before stepping on to the crossing. That cyclist is a kicking waiting to happen


----------



## HLaB (14 Nov 2011)

I think one of my worse driver interactions was when, I didn't react. I got a close pass on a wide residential street after the peak hour (other traffic was non existent) but no worse than other close passes. He then slammed on the brakes repeatedly shouting, '****,*****,***** try that again hard man and I'll ******** kill you'. He kept that up for a while throwing his car into reverse, etc but tbh I didn't know what I was supposed to have done and I think my non reaction wound him up more. He then drove off, but a few moments later he came back repeating the garbage. My route, however next took me right by the Police College, so not surprisingly he finally took the hint that I wasn't going to react and disappeared


----------



## fimm (14 Nov 2011)

I am also trying to get less stressed by other people's driving. I think I picked the habit up from my parents, both of whom _when driving_ tend to mutter comments about what other people are doing... 

Being female I really don't want to get into a confrontation. However I slightly regret not speaking to a driver the other evening. I'd tapped on the side of his car because I felt he was drifting into me (we were both slowing for a red light). There was an ASL so I ended up in front of him. It is possible that if I'd started the conversation with something like "I'm sorry about that, but I wasn't sure if you knew I was there" I might have got a not-too-annoyed response from him. (He pointed at the side of the road as if he thought I should have been cycling on the pavement.) I could have taken the lane a bit more, which might have discouraged him from attempting to pass me in the 1st place.


----------



## Cyclopathic (14 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I think it is human nature to choose weaker targets. But next time you're about to shout at a woman, just ask yourself 'Would I be doing this if she was a bloke?'. If the answer is no, then rein it in.




Quite a while ago I noticed I'd only say something to someone who at a glance I thought probably couldn't beat me up. It wasn't exactly a concious decision but having noticed it I now try to be fairer and more even handed, if indeed I say anything at all. If it shakes me up badly enough and I get the opportunity I try to be as polite to everyone as I would be to a vicious looking ape.


----------



## Dan_h (14 Nov 2011)

Just a thought, I have seen a couple of videos where the car driver gets out of the car to have a go at the cyclist (traffic droid has a couple of examples). This seems to be thought of as being really bad, but how is it worse than the cyclist yelling at the driver? Seems like double standards to me


----------



## ferret fur (14 Nov 2011)

> In response to other posts above, I never, ever shout at a woman. Just not the done thing.



On the other hand, they sometimes have to reap what they sow. I occasionally find myself wondering in what circumstances a middle-class, middle-aged woman would hurl abuse at a unknown male stranger. Would they do it if we bumped into each other in the street while we were on foot? Do they tend to do it if both of us are in cars? Not in my experience. They do it because they get a sense of invulnerability from being in a car while the man is on a bike. I don't think it does any harm sometimes to remind them not to abuse the situation.


----------



## gaz (14 Nov 2011)

Dan_h said:


> Just a thought, I have seen a couple of videos where the car driver gets out of the car to have a go at the cyclist (traffic droid has a couple of examples). This seems to be thought of as being really bad, but how is it worse than the cyclist yelling at the driver? Seems like double standards to me



People only get out of their car for 2 reasons, A. because they have completed their journey and are moving off else where B. to shout at or assault someone.
A driver getting out in traffic is most definitely a sign of aggression. Nothing much can happen to a driver if he stays in his protected tin shell.


----------



## Bicycle (14 Nov 2011)

gaz said:


> People only get out of their car for 2 reasons, A. because they have completed their journey and are moving off else where B. to shout at or assault someone.




I lived in Belgrade in 1991 and their civic society was in flux for a number of reasons. An acquaintance of mine was a businessman and one day he gave me a lift through the big tunnel out of town.

Someone cut him up and he tooted. The guy leapt from his car (traffic was crawling) and made for us. My acquaintance pulled a HUUUUGE knife from his door pocket and held it up through the open driver's window.

The other chap stopped quickly, made apologetic noises and went back to his car.

I asked my acquaintance why he had a knife in his door.

"It can be useful" he said. As a confirmed member of the Cowardy-Custard Society, I was jolly glad he thought me a friend.

I really, really don't like to engage with other road users in debates about the quality of their (or my) driving or riding.


----------



## 400bhp (14 Nov 2011)

ferret fur said:


> On the other hand, they sometimes have to reap what they sow. I occasionally find myself wondering in what circumstances a middle-class, middle-aged woman would hurl abuse at a unknown male stranger. Would they do it if we bumped into each other in the street while we were on foot? Do they tend to do it if both of us are in cars? Not in my experience. They do it because they get a sense of invulnerability from being in a car while the man is on a bike. I don't think it does any harm sometimes to remind them not to abuse the situation.



Interesting point that. I guess the mindset of some women has changed over the years, after all they are often dealing and "competing" with blokes in work situations.

I have never consciously changed my "abuse" of a driver, based on gender, size etc. Most times I haven't been able to tell the make-up of the driver.


----------



## 400bhp (14 Nov 2011)

I CBA to watch his other vids, but based on the vid Gaz posted and the one Mikey posted I completely agree.

He needs neutering  An utter arse on a bike.

WTF was he doing throwing something in the BMW drivers car. I think I would have flipped if I was the driver.

Please do have words.


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

Dan_h said:


> Just a thought, I have seen a couple of videos where the car driver gets out of the car to have a go at the cyclist (traffic droid has a couple of examples). This seems to be thought of as being really bad, but how is it worse than the cyclist yelling at the driver? Seems like double standards to me



It is, it normally spells dangerous situation, and you have to stop them before they stop you. Also because they made the move to approach, they are the agressors.

To show I am fair for both sides of the coin, if a cyclist tried to shout at me while driving and tapping on the window complaining I didnt pass far enough away, or whatever some would feel gives them the right to moan and hit my vehicle. Id only ask politely once for them to leave me alone.
And if they even tried to throw something in my window, they would get what ever it was stuffed somewhere it would probably hurt a bit.


----------



## d87heaven (14 Nov 2011)

col said:


> .......... Id only ask politely once for them to leave me alone.
> And if they even tried to throw something in my window, they would get what ever it was stuffed somewhere it would probably hurt a bit.



So you are saying it's ok to disagree with someones actions and visit violence upon them?


----------



## Dan B (14 Nov 2011)

col said:


> if a cyclist tried to shout at me while driving and tapping on the window complaining I didnt pass far enough away, or whatever some would feel gives them the right to moan and hit my vehicle.




When people knock on your front door at home do you also complain that they're "hitting your house"?


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> When people knock on your front door at home do you also complain that they're "hitting your house"?





Its a bit pathetic for an example dont you think


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

d87heaven said:


> So you are saying it's ok to disagree with someones actions and visit violence upon them?
> [/quo
> 
> What makes you think Im saying that?


----------



## Dan B (14 Nov 2011)

col said:


> Its a bit pathetic for an example dont you think



It's a pretty good example, I'd have said. Describing someone tapping on your side window to attract your attention as "hitting your vehicle" is unbelievably precious. Is your car made of sugar?


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> It's a pretty good example, I'd have said. Describing someone tapping on your side window to attract your attention as "hitting your vehicle" is unbelievably precious. Is your car made of sugar?



I didnt know you could get cars made of sugar?  
Anyone thinking they can tap anything of mine will be asked once to stop


----------



## Dan B (14 Nov 2011)

col said:


> I didnt know you could get cars made of sugar?



Well if it's _not_ going to dissolve in the rain, then, maybe you should get over yourself and stop blowing a gasket when someone leaves a fingerprint on it


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> Well if it's _not_ going to dissolve in the rain, then, maybe you should get over yourself and stop blowing a gasket when someone leaves a fingerprint on it



Ok will do, as long as whoever it was that wouldnt stop when I asked nicely would get over my fingerprints on them


----------



## d87heaven (14 Nov 2011)

col said:


> d87heaven said:
> 
> 
> > So you are saying it's ok to disagree with someones actions and visit violence upon them?
> ...





> Id only ask politely once for them to leave me alone.
> And if they even tried to throw something in my window, they would get what ever it was stuffed somewhere it would probably hurt a bit.



Just wondered what you menat by this bit. Perhaps you meant you would threaten them with some canderel?


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

d87heaven said:


> Just wondered what you menat by this bit. Perhaps you meant you would threaten them with some canderel?



If thats how you read it thats fine


----------



## d87heaven (14 Nov 2011)

col said:


> If thats how you read it thats fine




Great non answer.


----------



## col (14 Nov 2011)

d87heaven said:


> Great non answer.



To a great none anything really


----------



## BentMikey (15 Nov 2011)

d87heaven said:


> Great non answer.



Well, that is typical col behaviour. Don't expect too much quality debate.


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> When people knock on your front door at home do you also complain that they're "hitting your house"?



An aside: Although not a Christian, for many years I dropped off the little red envelopes for Christian Aid and then went round collecting them a few days later.

From some of the responses I got, you really would think people thought I was hitting their house. We seem to be becoming a more insular society than the one I remember from my youth.

Another aside: I used to be a volunteer Meals on Wheel driver for the Christmas period when the usual volunteers were at home. More than once I failed to get a response, so I went next door and asked if they knew where there neighbour was. "Oh, that old bloke; nah... don't see much of him". This despite a house festooned with decorations and presents. Very odd. Further suggestion that we are more insular. The world stops at my garden fence and my ageing neighbour is not my concern. That's not universal, but it's more common than it ought to be. 


As a comment: It can be quite intimidating to have a road user approach you in traffic and tap on a window. It hasn't happened to me, but women I know have been quite freaked out by it. That may sound silly, but in the first two seconds you have no clue as to the motive of the 'tapper'.

Before now I've flashed people who had a flat rear (hard to detect from inside some cars) and they gave me the finger when they saw me pointing at their wheel. I do sometimes think that are initial responses (motorist and cyclist) are now set far more on 'defence' mode than 'dialogue' mode.

Personally, I'd have no problem with someone tapping on my car window - but I can see how some might take it as somehow intrusive or threatening.


----------



## Hip Priest (15 Nov 2011)

I was out running last winter in the dark and saw a car coming past without lights on. I gestured to inform the driver and he pulled up shouting 'What's your ****ing problem?'


----------



## Dan_h (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> It is, it normally spells dangerous situation, and you have to stop them before they stop you. Also because they made the move to approach, they are the agressors.
> 
> To show I am fair for both sides of the coin, if a cyclist tried to shout at me while driving and tapping on the window complaining I didnt pass far enough away, or whatever some would feel gives them the right to moan and hit my vehicle. Id only ask politely once for them to leave me alone.
> And if they even tried to throw something in my window, they would get what ever it was stuffed somewhere it would probably hurt a bit.



Tapping on the window and having a word politely is one thing (although in my experience generally pointless, few drivers are interested in hearing about any mistakes). Sometimes though the cyclists are simply aggressive, in the case of Traffic Driod his actions with the BMW for example were pretty aggressive, even without the use of swear words the intention seems to be the same.

In many cases I would say that if the cyclist is shouting at the driver for something the cyclist believes they have done wrong then it is not as easy as saying "the driver got out so they are the agressors", why would we (as cyclists) expect them to just sit in their car and suck up the abuse that is hurled their way?


----------



## the reluctant cyclist (15 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I was out running last winter in the dark and saw a car coming past without lights on. I gestured to inform the driver and he pulled up shouting 'What's your ****ing problem?'



Yeah - I learned my lesson on that sort of thing - I was out in my car one day and a bloke in a big american day van thing kept on pulling out without indicating - it's hard to explain - so I tapped (just a little tap) on my horn - you know - to "let him know I was there" - hard to tell if it was right/left hand drive...


....bloody maniac ended up pulling completely accross both lanes to block me and shouting and screaming at me - calling me a "f**king stupid b*tch" amongst other things - I wasn't on a bike but was in a convertible with the top down - absolutely crapped myself I can tell you!


----------



## 400bhp (15 Nov 2011)

Had 2 "incidents" over the last 24 hours.

2 "must pass the cyclist" moments. Bith passed then joined a back of a queue of traffic not 30 yds ahead.

I just road past and said "well, that got you far" as I filtered off into the distance.

That's about as far as I [like to] go these days.


----------



## Mugshot (15 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I was out running last winter in the dark and saw a car coming past without lights on. I gestured to inform the driver and he pulled up shouting 'What's your ****ing problem?'



Not related to the original post but on the subject of misinterpreted communications, I read about a chap that having seen a policeman gesticulate at him responded in kind and flashed the Vs, (both were driving) not unexpectedly the policeman took exception to this and pulled the guy over, the driver explained that he thought it was unacceptable that the copper should call him a wan*er, to which the policeman explained "Actually sir I was telling you to put your seat belt on!"


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> It can be quite intimidating to have a road user approach you in traffic and tap on a window. It hasn't happened to me, but women I know have been quite freaked out by it. That may sound silly, but in the first two seconds you have no clue as to the motive of the 'tapper'.



If you'd paid a little more attention when driving, you might guess what the motive of the tapper was, knowing full well you'd cut him up a few moments ago...


----------



## dellzeqq (15 Nov 2011)

thread migration alert!

I offer this as an idea knowing that it will not be for all of you, and not for all occasions....

it is better to deter than to complain afterwards. FNRttCers joke about the 'eyebrow of disapproval' but I can tell you that it works. 

These last few years I've been cycling with Susie, and, when we ride singly, she rides behind me. I'd prefer it if she rode in front (and not simply because I enjoy the view) but she doesn't want to. So......I've been working on creating a kind of forcefield that goes back behind me, and I've found that looking over my shoulder at drivers and giving them a bit of a hard stare really does do the trick. I often get a resentful pout back, but I'll live with that. It's obviously not much good on the Girona to Figueres highway (and not much needed, given the consideration afforded to us by Spanish drivers) but in city, suburb and what passes for countryside in these parts, on all kinds of roads it really does make a difference. So I commend it to you..........


----------



## Jezston (15 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> When people knock on your front door at home do you also complain that they're "hitting your house"?




Haha that's perfect!

Why is it some drivers are so precious about their cars - like they get really angry, and understand others anger at the idea of someone so much as _touching _their cars?

I can understand feeling like that about a spouse or child, but an inanimate metal box?!?


----------



## Dan B (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> As a comment: It can be quite intimidating to have a road user approach you in traffic and tap on a window. It hasn't happened to me, but women I know have been quite freaked out by it. That may sound silly, but in the first two seconds you have no clue as to the motive of the 'tapper'.


Fair point, but this is not what col is concerned about. He is worrying that someone is "hitting his vehicle".


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> If you'd paid a little more attention when driving, you might guess what the motive of the tapper was, knowing full well you'd cut him up a few moments ago...



Ummm.... When I wrote _'it hasn't happened to me'_, in the phrase you quote, that meant it hasn't happened to me. That's how language works.

Also... The two instances that come to mind were for a fuel cap left off and someone asking to be given a Pay & Display window ticket. I didn't make any mention of these women cutting cyclists up.

Not all tapping on windows is related to cutting cyclists up. The point was a broader one, mitigating an initially defensive response from some people to a tap on the window.

You have to read my whole post for that, which can get very dull as I am a verbose old bastard. Worth doing though, if you're going to quote me with a response that doesn't fit the point I was making.


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> Fair point, but this is not what col is concerned about. He is worrying that someone is "hitting his vehicle".




Yes, I saw that Dan. You're right. I cannot answer for Col. Some people do react badly to that sort of thing.


----------



## Dan B (15 Nov 2011)

Jezston said:


> I can understand feeling like that about a spouse or child, but an inanimate metal box?!?



At this point a motor apologist would reply "it is a very valuable metal box which I have worked hard to afford and of which I take great care: is it any surprise that I feel some degree of identification with it". To which the answer is "no, but why then are you taking risks with it by driving it too close to other road users". Don't expect me to take more care of it than you do.


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

Jezston said:


> I can understand feeling like that about a spouse or child, but an inanimate metal box?!?



Inanimate metal box?

No! I read all the brochures and marketing documents.

It has a soul hewn from the rocks of the mighty Dolomites that tower above the factory where life was first breathed into its motor!

It has a heartbeat bestowed upon it by the genius of its Magnetti Marelli fuel system!

It breathes the very fire and flame of passion for motorsport! 

Its unblinking headlights see all before it as it crouches to pounce at another stretch of Autostrada!

It yearns for the late-apex, tightening, 3rd-gear corner where its fully-independent rear suspension will allow it to flow harmoniously over the...

Eh? What do you mean, *not literally*?


----------



## Hip Priest (15 Nov 2011)

I remember watching a programme about road rage. One of the drivers featured was a malevolent young git with a bright yellow Punto. He was so attached to his vehicle that he said he'd kill anyone who touched it, and he wasn't joking.


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> Ummm.... When I wrote _'it hasn't happened to me'_, in the phrase you quote, that meant it hasn't happened to me. That's how language works.
> 
> Also... The two instances that come to mind were for a fuel cap left off and someone asking to be given a Pay & Display window ticket. I didn't make any mention of these women cutting cyclists up.
> 
> ...



If you weren't so pedantic about language (don't lecture me on how it works - you're way out of your depth) you'd realise that it's a generic 'you' in my example, and by implication a female one. It doesn't matter what the particular misdemeanour is - the idea that women should be excused from having to answer for driving that endangers (male) cyclists because it's scary when the nasty man in lycra taps on the window is patronizing and idiotic.


----------



## 400bhp (15 Nov 2011)

Claud - you strike me as reasonably intelligent; bicycle too. Are we playing with semantics here?

The world isn't black and white. In some instances we can understand why someone would interpret a "knock" on a window as being agressive. I don't need to give examples as you appear intelligent enough to work them out.

Come on people-we're all in the same boat here aren't we? Cyclists who like to debate.

It's depressing reading many threads on here in the last few months. Why all the petty digs?


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

400bhp said:


> Claud - you strike me as reasonably intelligent;



Such extravagant compliments are wasted on me, I'm afraid. You're missing the point, which is about whether one should confront drivers about dangerous or thoughtless behaviour. Petrol caps and pay-n-display tickets are a distraction.


----------



## 400bhp (15 Nov 2011)

I wasn't an extravagant compliment-it's what I have observed.

There's a smallish bunch of people on this forum who are clearly good at communicating. That implies a certain level of intelligence.

Perhaps I am missing the point, but my understanding (I CBA to look at previous conversations but this waswhat i remember) was that bicycle was picking up on the wider point .


----------



## Dan_h (15 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I remember watching a programme about road rage. One of the drivers featured was a malevolent young git with a bright yellow Punto. He was so attached to his vehicle that he said he'd kill anyone who touched it, and he wasn't joking.



That is just ridiculous, it is only a car!

If anyone even looks at my bike the wrong way though...


----------



## Norm (15 Nov 2011)

400bhp said:


> Are we playing with semantics here?




I wonder if someone who sets out their stall with...


theclaud said:


> (don't lecture me on how it works - you're way out of your depth)


... and follows with... 


theclaud said:


> you'd realise that it's a generic 'you' in my example


 ...rather than, for instance, "Yes, you could read it that way but that was not my intention" would be very quiet were it not for the, ahem, "pleasures" of playing with semantics.


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> If you weren't so pedantic about language (don't lecture me on how it works - you're way out of your depth) you'd realise that it's a generic 'you' in my example, and by implication a female one. It doesn't matter what the particular misdemeanour is - the idea that women should be excused from having to answer for driving that endangers (male) cyclists because it's scary when the nasty man in lycra taps on the window is patronizing and idiotic.




TheClaud,


I have upset you. I apologise.

I'm afraid I am pedantic. Be thankful you're not one of my adoring children who get a stern look just for saying "If I was in his shoes".

I wasn't lecturing you. I was being inappropriately cheeky, feeling that my point may have been taken out of context. I'm happy that it wasn't and I'm sorry.

I am a bit of a soft target on car/bicycle threads on this forum, so perhaps I study the radar screen too carefully for incoming threats. Apologies once again.

As to being out of my depths lecturing on language - I hope I wasn't lecturing and I apologise if I was.

Nonetheless, languages have been my life for many years: philology, linguistics, language acquisition in childhood and as an adult and all sorts of other associated bollocks.

I write on the effect of conflict on language and trained people for many years in identifying a speaker's (or writer's) age, gender, region, social status etc on the basis of the spoken or written word. This was across a number of languages and dialects.

Some of the style guides for working into English used in some pretty hefty NGOs and IGOs are largely my work. Lots of interpreters milling around international entities have received training from me in liaison, consecutive and simultaneous interpreting. I know **** all about most things, but I know what I know.

I really wouldn't presume to lecture anyone on language (unless being paid to do so) and apologise for any slight, but it's one of the few fields where I haven't been out of my depths for quite a few decades. I was just being cheeky. 

I hope you will forgive the implied slight.

Meanwhile, 400 horses, thanks for sticking up for me - and not for the first time.


----------



## Dan B (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> I'm afraid I am pedantic.



I don't believe that for a moment. You don't look at all afraid


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> TheClaud,
> 
> 
> *I have upset you.* I apologise.
> ...



No you haven't. And do stop apologising. My point was simple - it isn't intimidating for cyclists to tap on drivers' windows, any more than it is intimidating to knock on someone's front door. People who feel intimidated by it probably shouldn't drive.


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

Norm said:


> I wonder if someone who sets out their stall with...... and follows with...
> ...rather than, for instance, "Yes, you could read it that way but that was not my intention" would be very quiet were it not for the, ahem, "pleasures" of playing with semantics.



I'm not "setting out my stall". I'm responding to someone who is talking nonsense. If he wishes to get drawn into pseudo-correctness arguments about using "you" instead of "one", then I'm not interested. There are times when one does not wish to talk like The Queen.


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

400bhp said:


> *I wasn't an extravagant compliment*-it's what I have observed.
> 
> There's a smallish bunch of people on this forum who are clearly good at communicating. That implies a certain level of intelligence.
> 
> Perhaps I am missing the point, but my understanding (I CBA to look at previous conversations but this waswhat i remember) was that bicycle was picking up on the wider point .


]

That's the thing. Compliments, like apologies, should be unqualified. Don't bother with them otherwise.


----------



## d87heaven (15 Nov 2011)

Tap on the window or knock on the door, first thought is to wonder what they want. From a safety point of veiw most people only wind down a window an inch or two whilst in a car.
Same as people keep a chain on the door/foot behind when a stranger knocks. 
Perhaps intimidation is the wrong/too strong a word?


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> People who feel intimidated by it probably shouldn't drive.




My wife feels intimidated by it.

I shall put on body armour before advising her that she shouldn't drive.

She has a nicer car than me, so I should do well out of this...

If she hasn't made herself a widow within eight seconds of the suggestion.


----------



## 400bhp (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> ]
> 
> That's the thing. Compliments, like apologies, should be unqualified. Don't bother with them otherwise.



Should.

Not must


----------



## 400bhp (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> No you haven't. And do stop apologising. My point was simple - it isn't intimidating for cyclists to tap on drivers' windows, any more than it is intimidating to knock on someone's front door. People who feel intimidated by it probably shouldn't drive.



That's a little bit strong.

You're assuming that, a) the cyclist "taps" on the window in a non-threatening manner, and b) the cyclists will behave rationally.

Perhaps it's the thought of what might happen that is the intimidation, rather than the act in itself of banging the window?

Who are we to say/judge if people do/don't feel threatened in certain situations? We could apply the same logic to cycling and some situations out on the road.


----------



## Hip Priest (15 Nov 2011)

I answer my door to people a few times a week. I've never had anyone tap on my car window. Therefore, the former is commonplace and doesn't alarm me. Whereas the latter, being extremely unusual, would put me on my guard.


----------



## PK99 (15 Nov 2011)

400bhp said:


> *You're assuming that*, a) the cyclist "taps" on the window in a non-threatening manner, and b) the cyclists will behave rationally.




.... and from some of the videos posted on line, that is not a valid assumption to make


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

400bhp said:


> That's a little bit strong.
> 
> *You're assuming that, a) the cyclist "taps" on the window in a non-threatening manner, and b) the cyclists will behave rationally.
> 
> ...



It's a bit like Tony Blair not grasping the difference between begging and mugging. One _might _behave in any number of ways, but the possibility doesn't make the act of tapping on the window intimidating in itself. That motorists sometimes _react _as if the act of tapping on a window is some kind of shocking intrusion, impertinence or threat is their problem.


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> It's a bit like Tony Blair not grasping the difference between begging and mugging. One _might _behave in any number of ways, but the possibility doesn't make the act of tapping on the window intimidating in itself. That motorists sometimes _react _as if the act of tapping on a window is some kind of shocking intrusion, impertinence or threat is their problem.




I paste, below, the passage (entry #78) that seems to have been the cause this recent discussion on window tapping:

_As a comment: It can be quite intimidating to have a road user approach you in traffic and tap on a window. It hasn't happened to me, but women I know have been quite freaked out by it. That may sound silly, but in the first two seconds you have no clue as to the motive of the 'tapper'.

Before now I've flashed people who had a flat rear (hard to detect from inside some cars) and they gave me the finger when they saw me pointing at their wheel. I do sometimes think that are initial responses (motorist and cyclist) are now set far more on 'defence' mode than 'dialogue' mode.

Personally, I'd have no problem with someone tapping on my car window - but I can see how some might take it as somehow intrusive or threatening."
_
I'm not sure anyone currently in this discussion is suggesting that the act of tapping on a window is intimidating in itself. I certainly didn't say that.

What is being said here (as quoted above) is that some road users might take it as somehow intrusive or threatening. 

That is not 'their problem' as you suggest it is.

I've been to weddings in Montenegro where the male party surround the bride's father's house and fire into the air until he emerges with his daughter (the bride). It's spectacular, it's traditional and it's expected. It is somehow magnificent to behold. I've even been mocked for showing up at a wedding without a weapon. Once the bride has emerged, magazines are emptied in celebration. It is very noisy.

However, had anyone happy-fired into the air in celebration at my wedding in London, I might have felt slightly threatened. A person's reponse in these situations is not a function of the intent of the happy-shooter or the window-tapper. Both could be perfectly benign and usually are. 

The issue is that some road users find the action of tapping on their window disquieting.  I don't. Some do. It's just worth bearing in mind.

It's not 'their problem' and it doesn't mean they probably shouldn't be driving.


----------



## dellzeqq (15 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I answer my door to people a few times a week. I've never had anyone tap on my car window. Therefore, the former is commonplace and doesn't alarm me. Whereas the latter, being extremely unusual, would put me on my guard.


then you must be one of the goldfish folk who don't respond when I seek to point out, in an entirely helpful way that one of their rear lights isn't working.


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (15 Nov 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> then you must be one of the goldfish folk who don't respond when I seek to point out, in an entirely helpful way that one of their rear lights isn't working.


A few weeks ago, I waved to the driver of the car in front at the lights and pointed to the nearside rear of his car. He jumped out of the car and starting shouting at me "you shouldn't be f*****g going up there". Strangely, he didn't thank me when I asked him whether he had finished, and then told him calmly that his nearside brake light wasn't working, but he did get back in his car.


----------



## snapper_37 (15 Nov 2011)

Last week I passed a car edging out at a junction with no lights on. I gestured and shouted 'no lights' as best I could. A couple of minutes later he came hurtling up beside me at some lights and asked me quite aggressively what my problem was. I said 'Nothing but you've got no lights on'. He apologised profusely and said he thought I was having a go at him for edging out. Bless.

Sometimes, with gestures, translation is completely lost.


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

Back when i was a courier, I was enjoying a slightly competative urban race-type thing with a Cavalier. I was on a Guzzi.

It was raining stair-rods and the road was like a rink. Not the night for enthusiastic riding, but I was young.

After some passing to and fro I threw my nike across the tarmac at Old Street roundabout.

Mr cavalier man stopped and opened his door... I was prepared for the worst as I sat up and looked for my bike.

"I say, that looked terribly painful. Are you alright old boy?" 

I was so happy, I forgot all about the pain and the broken indicators.

Some drivers who intervene are not entirely horrid.


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> I've been to weddings in Montenegro where the male party surround the bride's father's house and fire into the air until he emerges with his daughter (the bride). It's spectacular, it's traditional and it's expected. It is somehow magnificent to behold. I've even been mocked for showing up at a wedding without a weapon. Once the bride has emerged, magazines are emptied in celebration. it is very noisy.
> 
> However, had anyone happy-fired into the air in celebration at my wedding in London, I might have felt slightly threatened.



You're caught in a furious spiral of irrelevance. None of this is interesting.


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> then you must be one of the goldfish folk who don't respond when I seek to point out, in an entirely helpful way that one of their rear lights isn't working.



Personally Id just mind my own business


----------



## BentMikey (15 Nov 2011)

Simon is minding his own business, and being socially responsible too. He's helping the driver, helping himself, and helping other people who will encounter that driver and their working/not working lights in the future.


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> No you haven't. And do stop apologising. My point was simple - it isn't intimidating for cyclists to tap on drivers' windows, any more than it is intimidating to knock on someone's front door. People who feel intimidated by it probably shouldn't drive.



Thats where the inteligence ends in my opinion, what makes you think you know whats going through a drivers mind, when an angry person who might have been unintentially cut up( add any of a large number of reasons here) is knocking on a cars window? If I find myself in this position, the first thing Il say is stop and back off, if they dont then to me they are being aggressive and threatening, and Ill act accordingly.
If someone is knocking on my door, Ill answer it. Unless of course my house has cut up a cyclist and its an angry cyclist knocking


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

BentMikey said:


> Well, that is typical col behaviour. Don't expect too much quality debate.



hahahahaha great to see you bent. Im guessing quality to you means agreement from everyone.
Dont agree and its bad quality


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> *Thats where the inteligence ends in my opinion*, what makes you think you know whats going through a drivers mind, when an angry person who might have been unintentially cut up( add any of a large number of reasons here) is knocking on a cars window? If I find myself in this position, the first thing Il say is stop and back off, if they dont then to me they are being aggressive and threatening, and Ill act accordingly.
> If someone is knocking on my door, Ill answer it. Unless of course my house has cut up a cyclist and its an angry cyclist knocking



If I meet anyone who expresses an interest in your opinion, I'll be sure to let them know...


----------



## Mugshot (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> You're caught in a furious spiral of irrelevance. None of this is interesting.



You're right, it does seem totally irrelevant, I however find it interesting


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

Mugshot said:


> You're right, it does seem totally irrelevant, I however find it interesting



Fair enough! It takes all sorts...


----------



## d87heaven (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> Personally Id just mind my own business



If only we could be so lucky............


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> You're caught in a furious spiral of irrelevance. None of this is interesting.



Sir/Madam,

My whole life is a furious spiral of irrelevance.

Everyone else finds it tedious, but I am the one who has to live with it every day from the moment I awake.

Your Tony Blair analogy, on the other hand, gripped from the first word. That's the difference between us.

You fascinate, whilst I repel. I shall struggle on regardless and try to keep my spirits up. 

I've upset you.

I apologise.


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> Fair point, but this is not what col is concerned about. He is worrying that someone is "hitting his vehicle".



How do you define tapping and hitting, when does one become the other, or are you just being pedantic and clever


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> If I meet anyone who expresses an interest in your opinion, I'll be sure to let them know...



Please dont, if theyre anything like you ..........


----------



## Origamist (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> Thats where the inteligence ends in my opinion, what makes you think you know whats going through a drivers mind, when an angry person who might have been unintentially cut up( add any of a large number of reasons here) is knocking on a cars window? If I find myself in this position, the first thing Il say is stop and back off, if they dont then to me they are being aggressive and threatening, and Ill act accordingly.
> If someone is knocking on my door, Ill answer it. Unless of course my house has cut up a cyclist and its an angry cyclist knocking



Brilliant!

If you put Col's post into Yodaspeak, it becomes both more intelligible and rational. Try it for yourself: 

http://www.yodaspeak.co.uk/index.php




yodacol said:


> "My opinion thats where the inteligence ends in, you think you know whats going through a drivers mind what makes, when been unintentially cut up( add any of a large number of reasons here) is knocking on a cars window might an angry person who have, hmm? If this position I find myself in, stop and back off, the first thing il say is, if they dont then to me, being aggressive and threatening, are they, and ill act accordingly.
> If knocking on my door, someone is, ill answer it. Cut up a cyclist and its an angry cyclist knocking, unless of course my house has. Hmmmmmm."



From now on, I'll be using the yodaspeak generator on all Col's posts.


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

d87heaven said:


> If only we could be so lucky............



No its easy, you just have to stop thinking your superior and accept that other people can normally think for themselves, and then just keep your mouth shut when you feel the urge to advise others.


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

Origamist said:


> Brilliant!
> 
> If you put Col's post into Yodaspeak, it becomes both more intelligible and rational. Try it for yourself:
> 
> ...




Thats brill


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> How do you define tapping and hitting, when does one become the other, or are you just being pedantic and clever




I was once speaking to a Mile End landlord, sometime Costa del Sol resident and 'import specialist'.

He was telling me about a disagreement with a German tourist in Spain.


_"He wouldn't shut up, so I've reached into my car, I've got hold of a tyre lever and I've tapped him on the head with it,"_ he said.

He did the 'tapping' action too, although I could imagine it well enough.

I thought better of asking him for the definition of 'tapped' as he saw it.


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> No its easy, you just have to stop thinking your superior and accept that *other people can normally think for themselves*, and then just keep your mouth shut when you feel the urge to advise others.



Indeed they can. But they can't see their own rear lights too well from the driver's seat...


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> Indeed they can. But they can't see their own rear lights too well from the driver's seat...



Good point, so why havent most vehicles got rear lights out? Im guessing because they are checked and fixed by most. But then I know what your going to say, what if the bulb goes while on their journey, you were wont you


----------



## dellzeqq (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> I was once speaking to a Mile End landlord, sometime Costa del Sol resident and 'import specialist'.
> 
> He was telling me about a disagreement with a German tourist in Spain.
> 
> ...


I personally think this post is completely riveting. My only concern is that some more cynical folk will latch on to your contributions and develop a variant of a game called 'M***** Bingo'. In your case it would be 'Bicycle Bingo' and involve an estimate of the combined distance (by air, sea or road, and as computed by Google Maps) between all the places you mention in one thread. It could run to ten thousand miles or more........


----------



## dellzeqq (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> Good point, so why havent most vehicles got rear lights out? Im guessing because they are checked and fixed by most. But then I know what your going to say, what if the bulb goes while on their journey, you were wont you


Col, my dear chap. Stop speculating. The light either works or it doesn't. If it doesn't it's only polite to tell people, and it just so happens that cyclists are the people best placed to do the telling - we're usually quicker through traffic, and able to come up on the drivers's side.


----------



## Hip Priest (15 Nov 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> then you must be one of the goldfish folk who don't respond when I seek to point out, in an entirely helpful way that one of their rear lights isn't working.



I have been alerted to problems with my lights in the past. By pedestrians or other drivers. Though not by a cyclist, yet. On no occasion has this necessitated a tap on my window. I maintain, that having never had someone tap on my window before in 12 years of driving, it would surprise me. I am unsure why you find this admission so threatening and worthy of ridicule.


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> Col, my dear chap. Stop speculating. The light either works or it doesn't. If it doesn't it's only polite to tell people, and it just so happens that cyclists are the people best placed to do the telling - we're usually quicker through traffic, and able to come up on the drivers's side.



Im your dear chap? Now come on, stick with your own please


----------



## dellzeqq (15 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I have been alerted to problems with my lights in the past. By pedestrians or other drivers. Though not by a cyclist, yet. On no occasion has this necessitated a tap on my window. I maintain, that having never had someone tap on my window before in 12 years of driving, it would surprise me. I am unsure why you find this admission so threatening and worthy of ridicule.


I don't find it threatening at all, but I do think it's ridiculous. What do they think I'm going to do - eat them all up?


----------



## Hip Priest (15 Nov 2011)

I'm unsure whether you're criticising me or criticising these people you encounter. If you tapped on my window, I'd be initially alarmed, but I'd converse with you, and if you were informing me of a dead bulb, I'd thank you. The whole point of my post was to answer the suggestion that someone tapping on the window is as normal as someone knocking on your front door - it isn't.


----------



## dellzeqq (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> Im your dear chap? Now come on, stick with your own please


(checks for distinguishing marks....)


----------



## dellzeqq (15 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I'm unsure whether you're criticising me or criticising these people you encounter. If you tapped on my window, I'd be initially alarmed, but I'd converse with you, and if you were informing me of a dead bulb, I'd thank you. The whole point of my post was to answer the suggestion that someone tapping on the window is as normal as someone knocking on your front door - it isn't.


I'm not criticising anybody!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (except for that Keith Oates fellow)


----------



## Dan B (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> How do you define tapping and hitting, when does one become the other, or are you just being pedantic and clever



I would suggest that (Bicycle's charming anecdotes notwithstanding), "tapping" is usually done with the minimum force necessary to attract attention whereas "hitting" is a violent act which has damage as its objective. 

If the kind of "hitting" you had in mind is _not_ such as to be likely to occasion damage to you or your vehicle, why exactly are you afraid of it?


----------



## Dan B (15 Nov 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> The whole point of my post was to answer the suggestion that someone tapping on the window is as normal as someone knocking on your front door - it isn't.


I think you've misinterpreted my post if you thought that was the suggestion - but that's always a danger when employing the blunt rusty saw of analogy. The suggestion was that tapping on the window is about as (un)likely to result in damage to your property as knocking on your door, and thus that describing it (as Col did) as "hitting your vehicle" is stretching the definition of "hit" more than a little.


----------



## PK99 (15 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> I would suggest that (Bicycle's charming anecdotes notwithstanding), "tapping" is usually done with the minimum force necessary to attract attention whereas "hitting" is a violent act which has damage as its objective.



in that case we need three categories: Tapping, banging, and hitting.


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

Dan B said:


> I would suggest that (Bicycle's charming anecdotes notwithstanding), "tapping" is usually done with the minimum force necessary to attract attention whereas "hitting" is a violent act which has damage as its objective.
> 
> If the kind of "hitting" you had in mind is _not_ such as to be likely to occasion damage to you or your vehicle, why exactly are you afraid of it?



The fear is in the possibilities, and I wont let anything happen if all it needs is me to react first and decisively to an angry person approaching me. Todays ways include not knowing what a stranger has under their jacket or in their pocket, and Im not willing to let someone who thinks they have a reason to approach me in that manner get too close. Just in case it becomes that one time this idiot pulls a weapon and feels like using it. Iv seen and heard of things happening, that your probably ignorant to. So what you might see as an overreaction on my part, I see as the normal way to keep myself safe. So the next time you feel angered by a motorists actions, think twice about approaching angrily, I certainly feel there are a lot more out there who feel the same way I do, and wont hesitate to stop you before you pull a possible weapon, weather you think it unreasonable to believe that possibility exists or not. I for one am not willing to gamble that you wont pull a weapon, or would just attack unexpectedly.


----------



## theclaud (15 Nov 2011)

col said:


> The fear is in the possibilities, and I wont let anything happen if all it needs is me to react first and decisively to an angry person approaching me. Todays ways include not knowing what a stranger has under their jacket or in their pocket, and Im not willing to let someone who thinks they have a reason to approach me in that manner get too close. Just in case it becomes that one time this idiot pulls a weapon and feels like using it. Iv seen and heard of things happening, that your probably ignorant to. So what you might see as an overreaction on my part, I see as the normal way to keep myself safe. So the next time you feel angered by a motorists actions, think twice about approaching angrily, I certainly feel there are a lot more out there who feel the same way I do, and wont hesitate to stop you before you pull a possible weapon, weather you think it unreasonable to believe that possibility exists or not. I for one am not willing to gamble that you wont pull a weapon, or would just attack unexpectedly.



Is it me, or does the winking smiley just make this look even more bonkers?


----------



## 400bhp (15 Nov 2011)

[QUOTE 1612471"]
A fitting end to a bit of a mad thread. Started off well, O was on fire with his way of words, everyone agreed with me as per usual. 

Then the whole thing went a bit South with petty sniping and point scoring. People CAD is that way --->.
[/quote]

Good post 

I don't get why the need for the sniping and one-upmanship.


----------



## stowie (15 Nov 2011)

Driver confrontation is usually somewhat pointless. It may be a cliche to say that "an idiot drags you down to their level and wins on experience" but it is true. My methods for dealing with difficult drivers are

1) Ignore it. They are a minor irritation that will bugger off out of my life as quickly as they made their unwelcome appearance. I tend to use this with drivers not acting dangerously around me, but doing the pointing at the gutter / waving of hands thing. Most of this can be safely ignored.

2) Wave and smile. Acknowledge their presence with a nice gesture and smile - maybe a thumbs up or a regal wave. A good move if one catches up with the miscreant at the next traffic jam and can sail serenely off into the sunset whilst they are trapped by queues.

3) The finger wag. Treat them like a naughty school child. Wag your finger, tut and shake your head slowly and sadly as you would with a small child who had just wet themselves. I think the key here is to be as utterly patronising as possible in the short period of time one has interaction. I did this once with a cabbie who had close passed me to get stuck 100 yards down the road. As I went past slowly he started to shout at me and I simply did the finger wag, and said he was a very rude cabbie. He went a red colour and jumped up and down in his seat as if he was being electrocuted. In certain circumstances the finger wag can be very therapeutic.

4) The "sir" technique. I haven't tried this myself, but have it on good authority (a mate) that if one has to engage with an irate driver, using "sir" to punctuate the sentence is pretty effective - as in "Was that an acceptable pass in your opinion, sir?". His theory is that only policemen use "sir" to address the public and using it allows you to assume an air of authority. He swears it works and drivers end up looking a little confused as you patronise them politely.

5) Buy yourself a sword and go after the miscreant whirling it above your head like a Visigoth into battle. I must confess I haven't used this technique, so cannot verify the effectiveness or otherwise. I have fantasised about doing it a few times though....


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

This was a fun and engaging thread to read, ponder and add to.

The claws did come out occasionally, but no scars.

Sometimes these things can somehow (and with subtlety) massage our thinking on a topic for the better.

If this thread were a car, it would be a 2.8 litre 1971 Series I Daimler Sovereign; not the most sought after in its day, but maturing into a coveted thing of beauty. BRG with tan leather, manual windows and no headrests.

The Daimler would have no MOT, so the thread would instead be an early, steel, rigid Kona MTB from the very start of the off-road arms race. No suspension, canti brakes, quill stem and simply perfect geometry from a time before fat alloy tubing and squishy bits took the beauty out of off-road. 

Needless to say, the Kona would be in perfect working order...


----------



## Glow worm (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> If this thread were a car, it would be a 2.8 litre 1971 Series I Daimler Sovereign; not the most sought after in its day, but maturing into a coveted thing of beauty. BRG with tan leather, manual windows and no headrests. yet another snotbucket.


There FTFY


----------



## col (15 Nov 2011)

theclaud said:


> Is it me, or does the winking smiley just make this look even more bonkers?



Trying to show im being light hearted, its so easy for some to take the tone wrong. but bad choice of smiley though  

Why bonkers though?


----------



## Norm (15 Nov 2011)

Bicycle said:


> If this thread were a car, it would be a 2.8 litre 1971 Series I Daimler Sovereign; not the most sought after in its day, but maturing into a coveted thing of beauty. BRG with tan leather, manual windows and no headrests.


 Haa haa! Brillig! 

Although I think claret would be a better colour.


----------



## al78 (15 Nov 2011)

Wow I didn't expect this to explode into 11 pages. It is evidently one of those delicate subjects which a lot of people have strong opinions on. Thanks for your input.

I guess I'll carry on with my usual plan of avoiding confrontation, based on the fact that a) cognitive biases rule over reason and b) I have no authority on the road.


----------



## 400bhp (16 Nov 2011)

Yes.

The solution is to avoid confrontation whilst out on the roads and bring it here.


----------

