# Holding onto people's cars - do you do it?



## snapper_37 (27 Mar 2012)

I've just come back from over the offices where one of the women was ranting about a 'f*cking cyclist'. I came in towards the end of the coversation and wondered what on earth said cyclist had done to earn the top notch rant. So I asked..... and wished I hadn't tbh. I've never heard such a whine littered with every swear word she could muster. His crime...... holding onto the top of her precious little Micra (which must be an extention of herself to cause such a fuss) whilst in stationary traffic (at lights). Apparently, she told him 'take your hand off my car before I f*cking break it'.  Now, I'm not 100% sure that she did actually say this - more like bravado and willy waving in front of the other staff.

I can't say I have ever done this - I prefer lamp posts and railings myself as I like a breather at lights. The only time I have done it was when filtering and a car edged in front of me so I had no choice but to put hand on bonnet. Do you 'man-handle' cars and if so, what type of reactions do you get??


----------



## ianrauk (27 Mar 2012)

Shouldn't touch peoples cars.
Cars are precious things to a lot of drivers as are our bikes to us.

Time to dig out this advert.


----------



## I like Skol (27 Mar 2012)

Absolutely not and if a cyclist leaned on my car I would go nuts! Think how you would feel if someone came and leant a cluncky old BSO against your +£1k roadbike then consider that most cars cost around £15k or more. If you need to stop just put a foot down or lean on street furniture if you need to. Touching or leaning on someone elses car is just asking for trouble and shows no respect at all.


----------



## sabian92 (27 Mar 2012)

Be honest with you, I think that's out of order. You shouldn't use cars as leaning posts, especially with their owners inside!

Maybe she didn't threaten to break his hand but she was right in her complaint.


----------



## Beebo (27 Mar 2012)

I see a few cyclists lean on the back of buses and lorries at the lights but never cars.


----------



## BSRU (27 Mar 2012)

I would never hold onto a car, then again I would not put myself in the situation of being on the inside of a car at lights.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Mar 2012)

I thought this was going to be a much more interesting topic - as in have you ever skitched?


----------



## Paul J (27 Mar 2012)

shame she didn't carry out her threat. The cyclist may have learned from their mistake of having little or no respect for other peoples property.


----------



## akb (27 Mar 2012)

I've never understood why some cyclists 'man-handle' cars at lights, RAB etc. I would be pretty pissed if _any_ random stranger leaned on my car even if it is a 4 wheeled tank. All about respecting other road users if you ask me.


----------



## Jezston (27 Mar 2012)

I wouldn't lean on someone's car as it does seem rather rude, but the way some people in this country are so precious about a piece of machinery is deeply tragic.

Fair enough if someone was at risk of scratching the paintwork or something because that kind of thing costs silly money to fix, but for someone to get violently enraged by someone else so much as _touching_ their 'pride and joy' (I mean really) is just embarassing.


----------



## Andrew_P (27 Mar 2012)

[QUOTE 1783097, member: 45"]I once tapped on the window of a car which had just brushed past me. The driver chased me up the outside of a line of queueing traffic and threatened to kill me.

I'll not be doing that again.[/quote]


----------



## fossyant (27 Mar 2012)

Not a good thing to do, but total over reaction from the woman. The cyclist is stupid for doing it as it really winds folk up, and folk do over react.

Skol hit it on the head. I'd go nuts if some oik leant his £99 BSO up against my bikes.


----------



## Jezston (27 Mar 2012)

I like Skol said:


> Think how you would feel if someone came and leant a cluncky old BSO against your +£1k roadbike


 


fossyant said:


> I'd go nuts if some oik leant his £99 BSO up against my bikes.


 
Seriously, guys?

Fair enough if they just chucked it on top but if people took that attitude on the train on my way to work no one would get anywhere. That guy's BSO is worth as much to him as my custom build is to me and as long as he's careful he can put his bike where he damn well likes.

There was a guy who often took my train last summer, classic MAMIL in team kit with an italian carbon road bike. Used to go nuts if anyone put their bike anywhere near his. Conductor gave him short shrift when he witnessed him harassing some poor girl who dared to put her CX bike next to it.


----------



## fossyant (27 Mar 2012)

Jezston said:


> Seriously, guys?
> 
> Fair enough if they just chucked it on top but if people took that attitude on the train on my way to work no one would get anywhere. That guy's BSO is worth as much to him as my custom build is to me and as long as he's careful he can put his bike where he damn well likes.
> 
> There was a guy who often took my train last summer, classic MAMIL in team kit with an italian carbon road bike. Used to go nuts if anyone put their bike anywhere near his. Conductor gave him short shrift when he witnessed him harassing some poor girl who dared to put her CX bike next to it.


 
Ah, well he's stupid enough to take an expensive bike on a train - should be riding it.

I'd not be happy with a numpty leaning their bike on my Herety - custom build (made to measure), one off paint scheme, DA throughout ! My work bike, I accept it may get scratched, but I'm careful where I leave it, and respect others bikes. Even that's by far the most expensive bike in the stands 3 or more times the value of even some of the decent stuff.


----------



## Moodyman (27 Mar 2012)

This love of the car - must be a British thing. I recall reading that in Paris it's a common sight seeing cars with bumps and scrapes. Something to do with drivers leaving their handbrake down which allows others to nudge them in tight spaces to squeeze theirs in.


----------



## thefollen (27 Mar 2012)

If the cyclist is having a clipless moment and they have to put a hand on my car to prevent themselves falling over or the bike potentially scratching it, no problem providing no damage is done.

If they do it simply because they're too lazy to clip out I'd tell 'em politlely to buzz off. Wouldn't go nuts at them however...


----------



## snapper_37 (27 Mar 2012)

Uncle Mort said:


> I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't go nuts if someone did it to my car but I'd feel a little - erm, violated.


 
This. I've never had anyone lean on my car but I don't think I'd have a right fizzer if they did. Unless they were sprawled all over it. If he was say, right by her or the passenger window, I can understand feeling uncomfortable but not threatening to bost their hands.


----------



## ColinJ (27 Mar 2012)

It's pretty sad really. Touching a car with a hand is _not_ the same thing as leaning a bike against it. Okay, you shouldn't be doing it and I can see why drivers don't like it, but irritation would be an appropriate response rather than rage. If merely _touching_ a car induces rage, then is that driver really capable of coping with all the crap that goes on on UK roads?

If somebody moved my bike at a cafe stop because it was in their way, I'd be okay with that if they treated it with respect and were careful not to damage it. If I saw them just throw it to one side, then they'd better watch out!

Many people see their cars as extensions of their bodies so touching the car would be like 'copping a quick feel' in a crowded lift!


----------



## benb (27 Mar 2012)

It's one thing getting angry because someone actually leans their bike against your car - that could leave proper damage - but this woman massively overreacted to someone merely touching it. Not exactly likely to scratch it.

I wouldn't do it, and I think it's a bit rude of the cyclist to do it, but the woman's response is utterly disproportionate.


----------



## Moodyman (27 Mar 2012)

ColinJ said:


> Many people see their cars as extensions of their bodies so touching the car would be like *'copping a quick feel' in a crowded lift!*


 
Are you speaking from experience here Colin?


----------



## snapper_37 (27 Mar 2012)

I'm off to shoot stir. I was thinking of something along the lines of 'if you cycled to work once in a while you might not get so stressed out at someone fingering your Micra'.


----------



## Linford (27 Mar 2012)

[QUOTE 1783097, member: 45"]I once tapped on the window of a car which had just brushed past me. The driver chased me up the outside of a line of queueing traffic and threatened to kill me.

I'll not be doing that again.[/quote]

They wouldn't do that to a motorcyclist. I've had one or two in the past on mine, and they may not like it, but are usually a bit stunned that someone is doing this, but by and large, they know that they couldn't outrun a biker on an open road, but would have little difficulty doing this with a cyclist. I've had bottles of drink poured over me on my old MTB before now when I've been cycling along, and kids throwing stuff at me from above when I've been riding through underpasses (legally). Cyclists get little respect on the road.


----------



## Hip Priest (27 Mar 2012)

I'd never do it because I'd fear the reactions oulined above. But cyclists are welcome to put a hand on my car. I couldn't care less.


----------



## ColinJ (27 Mar 2012)

Moodyman said:


> Are you speaking from experience here Colin?


I always use the stairs!  (Waits for comments about crowded stairwells ...) 

I used to work on the top floor of large building and would race the lift. My colleagues would be getting in on the ground floor as I walked past the open lift door to the stairs. I'd run up 3 double flights and beat them to the office every time. My heart would be pounding like a drum, but I didn't let on that I'd been running. They always looked at me as if they were thinking _"How did you do that!"  _


----------



## Boris Bajic (27 Mar 2012)

I wouldn't do it when cycling and would consider it very rude if a cyclist did it to my car. It's never happened to me. One hears about it, but I've never seen it done.

I can well understand the woman in the OP 'venting' while on a break in the office. If she really did shout at the cyclist, she might want to have a little think about responding rather than reacting; but she is not wrong to have found it rude. It is rude.

Confession: I used to use the pole at the rear of a Routemaster for a sly tow in the 70s and 80s. On a bicycle and on a skateboard. Best done when the conductor was at the front or upstairs. I wouldn't do it now, but I was immortal and thoughtless in my teens.

On the matter of a £50 BSO being leant against a carbon superfandango: That can appear thoughtless too, although it does make me giggle how some riders come across as slightly precious about their steed. Sometimes there is simply nowhere else to lean a bike (bike park at the Emirates on match day). Sometimes there is. 

I suspect that the person most likely to be precious about a perceived danger of scratching was not a cyclist five or ten years ago, rides a full-carbon whizzbang and fascinates about bar-tape colour, heart rate, wattage and energy drinks. 

The nice thing about how cycling across the decades has panned out is that most of those won't be riding in a decade or so.


----------



## SquareDaff (27 Mar 2012)

Would never put my mitts on a car. Having seen the state of some of the cars I'd get my hands dirty!! 

Seriously, I just wouldn't. It's just not polite and shows a complete lack of respect for someone elses property.


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (27 Mar 2012)

Some people have an irrational obsession about their cars.

However, why would I hold onto a moveable object that is under the control of someone else and may move or do something unexpected at any time?


----------



## Bigsharn (27 Mar 2012)

Only with people I know, which in York includes most bus drivers, as I lean up against their cab window and idly chat to them waiting for the light change


----------



## Jezston (27 Mar 2012)

Moodyman said:


> This love of the car - must be a British thing. I recall reading that in Paris it's a common sight seeing cars with bumps and scrapes. Something to do with drivers leaving their handbrake down which allows others to nudge them in tight spaces to squeeze theirs in.


 
I think people in Paris tend to take an approach similar to what we do with our 'pub bikes' or 'winter bikes' or 'beaters' - the rich Parisians may have their fancy Merc parked in their underground car park to drive out to the countryside at weekends, but for their general getting about the city they have their old Renault that's covered in dents and scratches and fully expect it to get bumped and shoved about as part what it is to drive (and park) in Paris.

This sense of "I don't really care about this car, let alone yours" contributes to the generally _laissez-faire _approach to road use in Paris, but also seems to result in a great deal more respect towards more vulnerable road users as perhaps they are thinking less of the tin box they are in and more of the people themselves.

That and you REALLY don't want to mess with Paris traffic cops.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (27 Mar 2012)

SquareDaff said:


> Would never put my mitts on a car. Having seen the state of some of the cars I'd get my hands dirty!!
> 
> Seriously, I just wouldn't. It's just not polite and shows a complete lack of respect for someone elses property.


 
Good decision, my car is filthy at the moment


----------



## smutchin (27 Mar 2012)

Moodyman said:


> This love of the car - must be a British thing. I recall reading that in Paris it's a common sight seeing cars with bumps and scrapes. Something to do with drivers leaving their handbrake down which allows others to nudge them in tight spaces to squeeze theirs in.


 
As a French friend once told me in response to my horrified reaction when he _shunted_ his Renault 5 into a tight space while I was his passenger, "What's the point in having bumpers on your car if you're not going to use them?"

d.


----------



## smutchin (27 Mar 2012)

akb said:


> I've never understood why some cyclists 'man-handle' cars at lights, RAB etc. I would be pretty pissed if _any_ random stranger leaned on my car even if it is a 4 wheeled tank. All about respecting other road users if you ask me.


 
I agree that it's a bit rude, and that's a good enough reason not to do it, but tbh, the more important reason I wouldn't do it is because I wouldn't feel safe. Being close enough to lean against a car is _too_ close if you don't know when it's going to start moving or in what direction.

But reacting like the OP's colleague to someone touching your car _with their hand!_ sounds like they have potentially dangerous anger-management problems and shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel on public roads.

d.


----------



## green1 (27 Mar 2012)

If you were close enough to put your hand on the roof of my car you'd probably be close enough to have your pedal extremely close to the door of it as well. I would also flip out as the paint is soft enough on my car that it's very easy to scratch.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (27 Mar 2012)

I occasionally touch people's cars with my hands. I find a decent thump on the roof or window often gives the fcuktard within some indication that they are way too close.

But, as I wouldn't lean on a pedestrian, or another cyclist, or an equestrian, in a queue or at lights without asking their permission, so I would not lean on a car unless invited.


----------



## endoman (27 Mar 2012)

no never, wouldn't dream of it, and would be pissed if some one did it to me,


----------



## benb (27 Mar 2012)

ColinJ said:


> I always use the stairs!  (Waits for comments about crowded stairwells ...)
> 
> I used to work on the top floor of large building and would race the lift. My colleagues would be getting in on the ground floor as I walked past the open lift door to the stairs. I'd run up 3 double flights and beat them to the office every time. My heart would be pounding like a drum, but I didn't let on that I'd been running. They always looked at me as if they were thinking _"How did you do that!"  _


 
You should have pressed the lift button on each floor on the way up!
I work on the 4th floor, and unless the lift is right there, it's always quicker to walk up, even slowly.


----------



## Bman (27 Mar 2012)

No, I wouldnt like random people touching my bike, so I wouldnt touch their car. 

That said, if a driver reacted saying 'take your hand off my car before I f*cking break it', I'm sure it would make me see red!


----------



## Andrew_P (27 Mar 2012)

The car extends the personal space, I would feel uncomfortable with someone resting their hands on my car, although it is irrational. The same applies with people who stand too close when you are having a conversation.


----------



## lejogger (27 Mar 2012)

Interesting that none of us have admitted to it.
I can't recall ever doing it... I don't think I'd feel safe, especially when most drivers sit with their foot on the brake, there would most likely be some sort of backwards before forwards movement.

I'll admit to having rested briefly against a parked car once a couple of months ago, but it was very circumstantial as traffic was heavy and had come to a quick stop, and it was only for a couple of seconds before it got moving again. It's certainly not something I'd ever look to do if I could help it (although on that occassion I probably could have helped it). I am generally a bit of a clinger to street furniture though. Probably because I'm too tight to buy more than one pair of shoes, I use racing pedals for both weekend and commuting bikes.


----------



## benb (27 Mar 2012)

Of course, it's slightly ironic that many drivers will react quite furiously to any hint of damage (or even a fingerprint) inflicted on their car, yet many of them drive in such a cavalier way that they practically invite a collision!


----------



## snapper_37 (27 Mar 2012)

I just reckon she can be a bit of a mardy cow. We once had a conversation about reclycling (we were getting a new bin in our area) and she said she couldn't be arsed separating anything out as it was 'the bin men's job and it's about time they earnt their pay'. We rarely leave the same time, but I may make an exception today and play a bit of tag on the way home.


----------



## Boris Bajic (27 Mar 2012)

benb said:


> Of course, it's slightly ironic that many drivers will react quite furiously to any hint of damage (or even a fingerprint) inflicted on their car, yet many of them drive in such a cavalier way that they practically invite a collision!


 
Yes, the behaviour of some drivers is quite funny and can be inconsistent. I used to be a little touchy about damage to my car, but age and other priorities have knocked those corners off me. 

However, I think we should be careful how we word our sweeping generalisations. I know very many drivers, but few (if any) would react furiously to a fingerprint on their car. Few drive in such a cavalier way that the practically invite a collision. 

Cyclists, on the other hand.... Don't get me started. Few would doubt for a moment that many of them are all the same! Of course, many cyclists are just the sort of people who would go around leaning on cars just to provoke a furious reaction from a driver - which is slightly beyond irony. 

There! Every lazy generalisation causes an equal and opposite lazy generalisation, whether in the presence of irony or not.

All road users should be lovely to one another.


----------



## gaz (27 Mar 2012)

Holding onto peoples cars? So last century, it's all about putting your foot on them.


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2-oXSd2Id0#t=1m12s


----------



## jonny jeez (27 Mar 2012)

Beebo said:


> I see a few cyclists lean on the back of buses and lorries at the lights but never cars.


I do lorries and busses but never cars...its far too personal and I would go nuts (sorry jez) if someone i didn't know did that to me. Its not just the touching its also the fear that this stranger doesnt have enough common sense or respect to ensure they do no damage.

Lorries and buses are not as personal and lorries in particular are built to take beating so a cyclists hand will likely not scuff any cherished paintwork.

its all about invasion of personal space and property


----------



## ColinJ (27 Mar 2012)

Paul J said:


> Maybe she should have tried this technique



She already tried it in ianrauk's post, the second post on page 1 of this thread!


----------



## Paul J (27 Mar 2012)

So he did post removed


----------



## MacB (27 Mar 2012)

Is it just the presence of the driver though? I mean I wouldn't do it but I also wouldn't think twice about resting a hand on a parked car.

By the way though I wouldn't do it in traffic it wouldn't bother me if a cyclist rested against my car....it is cheap, old and never washed though...when I say never I mean never


----------



## Bman (27 Mar 2012)

Surely being able to rest against a parked car puts you in the door zone?


----------



## smokeysmoo (27 Mar 2012)

Nope. I've been known to lean on the odd bus from time to time but never on a car or van etc.


----------



## MacB (27 Mar 2012)

Bongman said:


> Surely being able to rest against a parked car puts you in the door zone?


 
 I wasn't actually thinking of cycling I was thinking of as a pedestrian...let's bring the children into it 

I'm sure many parents have done similar things, out with the kids, need to sort something like a shoe, so get them to balance with one hand on a parked car while you do up a lace, remove a stone, etc.


----------



## Crackedheadset (27 Mar 2012)

BentMikey said:


> I thought this was going to be a much more interesting topic - as in have you ever skitched?


 
Me too.

There ain't no better feeling in thw world then the anticipation of putting your right leg out onto the bumper of a car behind wondering if they will:

a) Run you over

b) Rapidly accelerate to over 30mph.

Skitching - Raising the anti all the time is the ultimate high.

As for the OP, no I would never and never would do. It's taking the mick and should not be done. Quite what people think is a good idea to touch another persons property without thier permission I don't really know.


----------



## akb (27 Mar 2012)

LOCO said:


> The car extends the personal space, I would feel uncomfortable with someone resting their hands on my car, although it is irrational. The same applies with people who stand too close when you are having a conversation.


 
Or a wee in a public toilet...


----------



## Moodyman (27 Mar 2012)

MacB said:


> Is it just the presence of the driver though? *I mean I wouldn't do it but I also wouldn't think twice about resting a hand on a parked car*.


 
Me too. I've often fastened my laces by resting a foot on top of some geezer's tyre.


----------



## theclaud (27 Mar 2012)

Moodyman said:


> Me too. I've often fastened my laces by resting a foot on top of some geezer's tyre.



It's the perfect height.

The property fetishism thing on this thread is a bit weird. So what if cars are someone else's property- touching them won't hurt, and it isn't stealing. If drivers are so fussy about people going near their cars, they can do us all a favour and leave them in the garage.


----------



## green1 (27 Mar 2012)

Proterty fetchism? Do me favour. It's called having respect for other people and their property. I've had 3 door mirrors kicked off my car in the last 2 years @ 300 quid a pop, is trying to look after MY property still a fetish?


----------



## VamP (27 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> The property fetishism thing on this thread is a bit weird. So what if cars are someone else's property- touching them won't hurt, and it isn't stealing. If drivers are so fussy about people going near their cars, they can do us all a favour and leave them in the garage.


 
I suspect it's a more of a territorial thing. 

Nevertheless, I am a big believer that pushing people outside their comfort zones is good for their long term spiritual development, so I shall make a point of touching people's cars more frequently in the future.


----------



## VamP (27 Mar 2012)

green1 said:


> Proterty fetchism? Do me favour. It's called having respect for other people and their property. I've had 3 door mirrors kicked off my car in the last 2 years @ 300 quid a pop, is trying to look after MY property still a fetish?


 
Chill.

Nobody's talking about your door mirrors. We're talking about touching cars without causing any damage. Sort of take only pictures, leave only footprints approach to car touching.

Without the footprints.

Or pictures. That would just be weird.


----------



## Paul J (27 Mar 2012)

VamP said:


> Chill.
> 
> Nobody's talking about your door mirrors. We're talking about touching cars without causing any damage. Sort of take only pictures, leave only footprints approach to car touching.
> 
> ...


 
Thats fine as long as you feel that a stranger can put their foot on your bike tyre then thats fine.


----------



## VamP (27 Mar 2012)

Paul J said:


> Thats fine as long as you feel that a stranger can put their foot on your bike tyre then thats fine.


 
Sure. So long as they don't do it while I'm riding along. We might both be disappointed with the outcome then.


----------



## Paul J (27 Mar 2012)

Yeah that would be interesting someone elses foot in your wheel


----------



## 400bhp (27 Mar 2012)

I like Skol said:


> Absolutely not and if a cyclist leaned on my car I would go nuts! Think how you would feel if someone came and leant a cluncky old BSO against your +£1k roadbike then consider that most cars cost around £15k or more. If you need to stop just put a foot down or lean on street furniture if you need to. Touching or leaning on someone elses car is just asking for trouble and shows no respect at all.


 
Or twatstand


----------



## TonyEnjoyD (27 Mar 2012)

Never - I always unclip as I feel safer and steadier on take off


----------



## green1 (27 Mar 2012)

1783998 said:


> If someone insists on cluttering our road space with their semi mobile obstacle why not? Especially in a situation where, were they not in the way, I'd be able to ride on uninconvenienced.


So i suppose if a queue of car is behind you its ok for them to give you a push to speed you up as you are slowing down the flow of traffic?


----------



## Belfastox (27 Mar 2012)

I don't do it often but I do do it sometimes with lorries and buses.


----------



## Boris Bajic (27 Mar 2012)

lejogger said:


> Interesting that none of us have admitted to it.


 
I think that may be because most would consider it rude and slightly presumptive behaviour.

I've never seen it done; I imagine most people haven't. Cyclists tend to be a civilised bunch.

I'm quite pleased that no-one's admitted to it and I find that quite pleasing. For all the comedy posturing about material fetishism in slightly jokey earlier posts, the fact that I've never seen it done suggests that most cyclists think it rude.


----------



## Gary E (27 Mar 2012)

I'd ask them very politely to kindly remove their hand from my car....

...but only once!


----------



## RedRider (27 Mar 2012)

Ewww. I wouldn't put me hand on a dirty car.


----------



## lulubel (27 Mar 2012)

GregCollins said:


> I occasionally touch people's cars with my hands. I find a decent thump on the roof or window often gives the fcuktard within some indication that they are way too close.


 
Same here. If it's close enough that I can thump it, it's too close.


----------



## Primal Scream (27 Mar 2012)

It depends who as got to close to whom, if someone thumps my roof then they can expect a thump in the mouth in return and the sex of the roof thumper wont matter a jot, sexual equality and all that.

That said you are welcome to lean on my motor as i dont give a tossd.


----------



## BentMikey (27 Mar 2012)

Is that tit for twat, or is it unwarranted escalation?


----------



## al78 (28 Mar 2012)

1784122 said:


> If you want me to respect your artificially extended personal space, be that at your car's surface or some notional position beyond, try affording me a similar space first.


 
You regularly get drivers touching your bike then?


----------



## theclaud (28 Mar 2012)

al78 said:


> You regularly get drivers touching your bike then?


Well, the verdigris finish is famously alluring...


----------



## slowmotion (28 Mar 2012)

A couple of years ago I was at the stop line with a red traffic light. To my left was a big red double-decker bus. I was turning right, he was going straight ahead. It was December, cold, and pouring with rain in London. An ambulance, with siren blaring came round the corner so I shuffled the bike over to my left to make more road space for it. I came close to losing my balance during my lateral shuffle and reached out to steady myself against the bus.....and met air. My hand went straight in through the open driver's window and hit his arm.

Profuse apologies followed, but he took my assault in good humour.

"It must be miserable to be on a bike in this weather"
"No, it's great fun actually, but I would have said the same thing eighteen months ago."
He have gave me a big grin and wished me well as the lights changed.
It was a rather wonderful "ships in the night" exchange.


----------



## Jezston (28 Mar 2012)

If someone put rollers on their front bumper and gently pushed me up a difficult hill I probably wouldn't mind too much.


----------



## al78 (28 Mar 2012)

1784624 said:


> is that what I wrote?


 
Yes.

You said "If you want me to respect your artificially extended personal space, be that at your car's surface or some notional position beyond, try affording me a similar space first" as a justification for holding on to other peoples cars.

That is a "you do it to me therefore I'll do it to you" argument, so the implication is that if you are using that sort of argument to justify touching a drivers car, then drivers must be touching your bike.


----------



## slowmotion (28 Mar 2012)

green1 said:


> Proterty fetchism? Do me favour. It's called having respect for other people and their property. I've had 3 door mirrors kicked off my car in the last 2 years @ 300 quid a pop, is trying to look after MY property still a fetish?


 OK, suppose you were dragging a wheeled suitcase down the pavement and somebody touched it or knocked it. Would you go apeshit?? Cars are similarly out there in the public arena. What makes them so different, apart from their perceived financial value?


----------



## hennbell (28 Mar 2012)

There is a strange double standard, people will go off if you touch their car but think nothing of moving parked bicycle if it is in their way.


----------



## ComedyPilot (28 Mar 2012)

I apply the same rule to cars that I apply to men - Look but don't touch.

Women are a different matter altogether.....


----------



## GrumpyGregry (29 Mar 2012)

Primal Scream said:


> It depends who as got to close to whom, if someone thumps my roof then they can expect a thump in the mouth in return and the sex of the roof thumper wont matter a jot, sexual equality and all that.


Spoken like a true motorist.


----------



## Bman (29 Mar 2012)

slowmotion said:


> OK, suppose you were dragging a wheeled suitcase down the pavement and somebody touched it or knocked it. Would you go apeshit?? Cars are similarly out there in the public arena. What makes them so different, apart from their perceived financial value?


 
No. but there is only so many times I can shrugg off one of these running over my foot 

One day.........


----------



## Vikeonabike (29 Mar 2012)

It's quite simple, if it bleongs to somebody else and you don't have permission don't TOUCH it. If you have absoleutly no other option but to touch it and you could justify touching it in acourt of law, then be prepared to either get out of the way fast and avoid any physical confrontation. Or be totally confident in your own ability to handle that confrontation and it's consequences!


----------



## 400bhp (30 Mar 2012)

I did it yesterday 

Some pleb taxi driver pulled out from a side street on the opposite side of the road going in my direction. He'd clearly seen me and DGAF. Cue the inevitable catch up at a set of lights 1/2 a mile down the road. His DGAF attitude and the fact he was in the ASL meant I had no choice but to balance using the roof of his car. 

I blame this thread for my actions - if it wasn't for this thread I would never have thought of doing it.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (30 Mar 2012)

400bhp said:


> I did it yesterday
> 
> Some pleb taxi driver pulled out from a side street on the opposite side of the road going in my direction. He'd clearly seen me and DGAF. Cue the inevitable catch up at a set of lights 1/2 a mile down the road. His DGAF attitude and the fact he was in the ASL meant I had no choice but to balance using the roof of his car.
> 
> I blame this thread for my actions - if it wasn't for this thread I would never have thought of doing it.


Never forget you have a choice


----------



## scouserinlondon (30 Mar 2012)

In response to the question in the OP, short answer is 'no farking way' I live and cycle in South London, you get stabbed in the face for less in these parts. If you were to lean on a rudebwoys car you'd be asking for a shanking.


----------



## Fat B'stard (30 Mar 2012)

Jezston said:


> Seriously, guys?
> 
> Fair enough if they just chucked it on top but if people took that attitude on the train on my way to work no one would get anywhere. That guy's BSO is worth as much to him as my custom build is to me and as long as he's careful he can put his bike where he damn well likes.
> 
> There was a guy who often took my train last summer, classic MAMIL in team kit with an italian carbon road bike. Used to go nuts if anyone put their bike anywhere near his. Conductor gave him short shrift when he witnessed him harassing some poor girl who dared to put her CX bike next to it.


 
MAMIL ??????


----------



## MacB (30 Mar 2012)

Fat B'stard said:


> MAMIL ??????


 
middle aged man in lycra


----------



## theclaud (30 Mar 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> It's quite simple, if it bleongs to somebody else and you don't have permission don't TOUCH it. If you have absoleutly no other option but to touch it and you could justify touching it in acourt of law, then be prepared to either get out of the way fast and avoid any physical confrontation. Or be totally confident in your own ability to handle that confrontation and it's consequences!



What a load of cobblers!


----------



## Vikeonabike (30 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> What a load of cobblers!


All of it, a bit of it? C'mon Claude explain!


----------



## Crackedheadset (30 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> What a load of cobblers!


 
Not in the context of the OP and this thread it ain't. Seriously, why would there be any need to touch another road users vehicle at a red light?


----------



## theclaud (30 Mar 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> All of it, a bit of it? C'mon Claude explain!



It's obviously nonsense to suggest that you need permission merely to touch anything that belongs to someone else. Whether it's intrusive or ill-mannered or not depends entirely on context. I regularly move other people's luggage on trains, for example, if it's thoughtlessly placed/causing an obstruction. Should I be expecting to be punched or arrested?


----------



## Gary E (30 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> Should I be expecting to be punched or arrested?


 
In these days of zero-tolerance policing - possibly both!


----------



## martint235 (30 Mar 2012)

1788010 said:


> Leave orf, its civilised down here.


But...but....but... you keep telling me I won't like Croydon!!!


----------



## theclaud (30 Mar 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> Not in the context of the OP and this thread it ain't. Seriously, why would there be any need to touch another road users vehicle at a red light?



I didn't suggest there's an awful lot of need for it. In fact I'm not sure it indicates very sensible positioning. But it's entirely harmless to the car and its occupants and no reason for them to get all twisty-knickered.


----------



## Globalti (30 Mar 2012)

Late as usual to the discussion.... touching someone's car only proves that you are fundamentally insensitive to the fact that a car is a very powerful symbol of a driver's presence on the road and a very personal little piece of their territory. As someone wrote on page 1, you might as well walk up and touch them in person. Actually it's worse because the car is their defence zone.


----------



## Miquel In De Rain (30 Mar 2012)

No,never do it,even when I was in Thailand cycling up one steep hill with one of their lorries doing about 10mph I didn't hang on to it,although the German guy did.


----------



## Vikeonabike (30 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> It's obviously nonsense to suggest that you need permission merely to touch anything that belongs to someone else. Whether it's intrusive or ill-mannered or not depends entirely on context. I regularly move other people's luggage on trains, for example, if it's thoughtlessly placed/causing an obstruction. Should I be expecting to be punched or arrested?


Ok, you took the reply in the wider context. And I agree, normal people would not punch you for moving their luggage on a train, if, as you suggest it is thoughtlessly placed (Remember what I said about justifying your actions), however someone may take umbridge, escalating the scenario to a point at which it may end up with police /court action. So what happens if someone puts thier laptop/briefcase in the aisle and it's in your way. You pick it up to move it, the owner sudenly sees you pick it up to move it. THUMP. He decides you're attempting to steal his laptop/briefcase! Has he punched you for no reason or just attempted to detain a thief (possibly with a little too much force given the location and situation)?
The main point of my original post was in the context of a vehicle. The only reason I can think of for touching somebodies vehicle is as a last resort warning to the driver that they are about to endanger your own safety! Certainly not after the incident, never a stationary vehicle and not if you could take avoiding action in the first place!


----------



## theclaud (30 Mar 2012)

Globalti said:


> Late as usual to the discussion.... touching someone's car only proves that you are fundamentally insensitive to the fact that a car is a very powerful symbol of a driver's presence on the road and a very personal little piece of their territory. As someone wrote on page 1, you might as well walk up and touch them in person. Actually it's worse because the car is their defence zone.



I'm not insensitive to it - in fact I'm very well aware of it. But I don't acquiesce in their symbolic power and I have no intention of deferring to their territorial claims. Someone wrote above that the car is an extension of personal space. Which is true, but you might as well say that it is an appropriation of public space. A mobile land-grab, as it were.


----------



## VamP (30 Mar 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> Not in the context of the OP and this thread it ain't. Seriously, why would there be any need to touch another road users vehicle at a red light?


 
To give his windscreen a bit of a clean is one that springs to mind...


----------



## VamP (30 Mar 2012)

Globalti said:


> Late as usual to the discussion.... touching someone's car only proves that you are fundamentally insensitive to the fact that a car is a very powerful symbol of a driver's presence on the road and a very personal little piece of their territory. As someone wrote on page 1, you might as well walk up and touch them in person. Actually it's worse because the car is their defence zone.


 

Actually, I think not. What it does show is a willingness to cross that perceived boundary, but it gives no indication as to your motives.

As a number of people have posted - sometimes you need to touch the car to get the driver's attention. Often this is in extremis. Sometimes you do it out of anger at previous events. Sometimes you touch a car accidentally.

Ultimately, the question you should be asking yourself is: if another person touches something belonging to you, clearly without intention to steal or damage, what rational justification do you then have to resort to violence? Actually, I would extend that to touching you in person too.


----------



## theclaud (30 Mar 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> Ok, you took the reply in the wider context. And I agree, normal people would not punch you for moving their luggage on a train, if, as you suggest it is thoughtlessly placed (Remember what I said about justifying your actions), however someone may take umbridge, escalating the scenario to a point at which it may end up with police /court action. So what happens if someone puts thier laptop/briefcase in the aisle and it's in your way. You pick it up to move it, the owner sudenly sees you pick it up to move it. THUMP. He decides you're attempting to steal his laptop/briefcase! Has he punched you for no reason or just attempted to detain a thief (possibly with a little too much force given the location and situation)?
> The main point of my original post was in the context of a vehicle. The only reason I can think of for touching somebodies vehicle is as a last resort warning to the driver that they are about to endanger your own safety! Certainly not after the incident, never a stationary vehicle and not if you could take avoiding action in the first place!



I've rarely had to justify moving luggage, because it's blindingly obvious what I'm doing. Occasionally people take umbrage anyway - that's their problem. Likewise it's obvious what a cyclist resting idly on a car is doing, and if people get shirty about it, that is their problem. It doesn't look like a threat because it isn't one. If I wanted to do something that could be easily misconstrued as an attempt to steal or damage something, then obviously I'd take more care to reassure or seek permission.


----------



## Bman (30 Mar 2012)

What law could you be put in court over, after touching someones car?

Its not Theft
its not Criminal Damage. 

Invading someones personal space is not illegal (just rude).


----------



## Boris Bajic (30 Mar 2012)

I agree completely with Claud on the issue of touching or moving the property of others. There will always be times when it is the right thing to do.

But I think that for a cyclist to lean on a car for convenience at a junction or in heavy traffic (as in the OP) is rude.

I do not understand for a moment why a motorist would go ape about something like that - it seems to take all sorts - but it is rude nonetheless. 

As already noted, it is warming that no-one on the thread seems to have done it or had it done to them. We must be a nice bunch, unlikely as that seems sometimes.


----------



## snapper_37 (30 Mar 2012)

I did have the idea of trying out using a car as a lean post this week, to see what reactions I got. But every time I had the opportunity I felt really uncomfortable for some reason and chickened out. My personal view is that it is entirely harmless, although I've never had the experience either way, but just seems irrationally rude.


----------



## snapper_37 (30 Mar 2012)

Do the people who get so worked up about having their cars touched ever go to a hand car wash I wonder. They must be on pins when the windcreen wipers are whipped up in the air.


----------



## VamP (30 Mar 2012)

1788302 said:


> I thought I had made it clear that I have no problem with touching people's cars if I feel it warranted.


 

I think Bicycle... erm I mean Boris was referring to the narrow description as per the OP's story. Which to be fair does not seem to be a warranted case of car touching.


----------



## Boris Bajic (30 Mar 2012)

1788303 said:


> I thought I had made it clear that I have no problem with touching people's cars if I feel it warranted.


 
Umm... I just write without thinking. I like the sound of my own fingers on a keyboard. Yes, you'd put something I failed to spot about folding mirrors out. And why not? That isn't like using cars to rest on in traffic. I don't find it rude at all. 

The joke there (if it is a joke) is that someone driving around with their door mirrors folded is someone who doesn't use their door mirrors. 

Left as they are, folded out or snapped off; it will make no difference if they haven't noticed they're folded in the first place. 

Motorists... Pffff.... What are they like?


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (30 Mar 2012)

Perhaps to settle this we should all go around this weekend leaning on other people's property and seeing what the reaction is. Try fences, walls, cars, trucks, trains, buses, dogs, busty ladies, the neighbour's front door, maybe a police car or two (which will satisfy the legal position).
Then we'll all compare our experiences (if able) on Monday.
How's that for an amicable solution?


----------



## Boris Bajic (30 Mar 2012)

VamP said:


> I think Bicycle... erm I mean Boris was referring to the narrow description as per the OP's story. Which to be fair does not seem to be a warranted case of car touching.


 
Yes, I (he) was.

He (I) got himself (myself) de-registered because of some fairly offensive comments (not made to him/me) but then missed the forum and had to come back on in another guise.

Boris Bajic was one of the names under which I reserved hotel rooms and internal flights in the old Jugoslavia, when foreigners payed double for these things by law. I remain attached to the name. Sorry, was that a digression?

I agree with whatever the last poster said. Probably.


----------



## VamP (30 Mar 2012)

Boris Bajic said:


> ...He (I) got himself (myself) de-registered because of some fairly offensive comments (not made to him/me) but then missed the forum and had to come back on in another guise...


 

Gee, hope it wasn't anything I said. Welcome back.


----------



## hennbell (30 Mar 2012)

Primal Scream said:


> It depends who as got to close to whom, if someone thumps my roof then they can expect a thump in the mouth in return and the sex of the roof thumper wont matter a jot, sexual equality and all that.
> 
> That said you are welcome to lean on my motor as i dont give a tossd.


 
Sounds like an internet warrior. Would you really hit a woman for thumping your roof? I don't think so.


----------



## VamP (30 Mar 2012)

hennbell said:


> Sounds like an internet warrior. Would you really hit a woman for thumping your roof? I don't think so.


 
He's got himself boxed into a lose-lose space 

If he's exaggerating, he's an internet warrior. If he's being truthful then he's a lowlife.

Tosser. Sorry tossd.


----------



## Crackedheadset (31 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> I didn't suggest there's an awful lot of need for it. In fact I'm not sure it indicates very sensible positioning. But it's entirely harmless to the car and its occupants and no reason for them to get all twisty-knickered.


 
You're right it is entirely harmless however there is no need at all to touch another persons car when stationary at a red light as described in the OP. So simply don't do it in the first place!


----------



## theclaud (31 Mar 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> You're right it is entirely harmless however there is no need at all to touch another persons car when stationary at a red light as described in the OP. So simply don't do it in the first place!



There's no need to get all bossy about it. _I_ don't feel any need to hang onto cars at lights, but if other people do, that seems OK to me. As Adrian says, there are all sorts of reason one might touch a car, and silly prohibitions about it only reinforce drivers' sense of entitlement to what is, after all, not actually _their_ territory. Maybe we should do it a bit more, just so they learn to relax about it...


----------



## Boris Bajic (31 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> There's no need to get all bossy about it. _I_ don't feel any need to hang onto cars at lights, but if other people do, that seems OK to me. As Adrian says, there are all sorts of reason one might touch a car, and silly prohibitions about it only reinforce drivers' sense of entitlement to what is, after all, not actually _their_ territory. Maybe we should do it a bit more, just so they learn to relax about it...


 
Yes. Quite right. Up to a point. None of us seems to have seen it done, but the topic does seem to have heated up the inside of quite a few collars.

One might as well have a heated row about the right of penguins to roast marshmallow in the Sahara. For the record, I would be against them having that right.

I do see in some responses a willingness to blur the distinction between territory, space and property.... but as Claud says, it is not a matter to get heated about.

Just don't get me started on penguins roasting culturally inappropriate foodstuffs in an environment in whose climate they are ill-equipped to prosper.


----------



## theclaud (31 Mar 2012)

Boris Bajic said:


> Yes. Quite right. Up to a point. *None of us seems to have seen it done*, but the topic does seem to have heated up the inside of quite a few collars.
> 
> One might as well have a heated row about the right of penguins to roast marshmallow in the Sahara. For the record, I would be against them having that right.
> 
> ...



I've seen it done. I've probably tried it, and not found it sufficiently useful or satisfying to try again. I scarcely remember, on account of it being of no importance to anyone except property fetishists and especially uptight motorists.


----------



## Jezston (31 Mar 2012)

theclaud said:


> I've seen it done. I've probably tried it, and not found it sufficiently useful or satisfying to try again.


 
Toasting marshmallows with penguins in the sahara?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (31 Mar 2012)

I can now confess I have done it. 

The lovely Helen was driving her car when she passed me on the outskirts of town last night, excellent overtake btw, and then got caught at some temporary lights. She then ran a rolling road block behind me through the road works while I "mashed it in the big ring, fcuk yeah!". 

Wonderful woman.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (31 Mar 2012)

1789786 said:


> A few minutes ago a small boy walking past my bike on the platform at Southampton station had a play with the back lights, saddle, and brakes. I guess I could have beaten him for it.


drop kicking onto the live rail was too good for him.

some kind soul turned the lights off on my bike y'day evening and then came into the bar and told me. Should have chinned the mofo but I wasn't wearing a helmet. He said he thought it odd I'd have my lights on in broad daylight too.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (31 Mar 2012)

1789806 said:


> No helmet and no hi-viz. Asking for it some might say.


Gagging.


----------



## Crackedheadset (2 Apr 2012)

I ain't being bossy and if people want to draw up non comparable scenarios to the OP that detract away from the original point being made and then whopee doo, another thread ruined.

The key thing here is necessity, and when to interfere with someone elses property. And at a red light there really should be no need.


----------



## Crackedheadset (2 Apr 2012)

1791800 said:


> Agreed, as in if someone chooses to clutter up the road with their car without any clear necessity I might lean on it if I feel like it.


 
haha, if this is the mentality of people on here then woo betide this site is shite.


----------



## Crackedheadset (2 Apr 2012)

1791813 said:


> It seems a bit disproportionate to condemn Cycle Chat in its entirety because you don't agree with my opinion. Especially where this thread shows that to be very much a minority viewpoint. Still your choice.


 
Try again, how you can condemn anything by asking a rhetorical question I'm not quite sure.

What I am sure of though is that viewing other road users as ''clutter'' is simply daft beyond belief.

As for the minority viewpoint, I doubt it. However fell free with your little clique to come up with some more dead pan scenarios that have no bearing on the OP what so ever, therefore have no relevence.


----------



## Jezston (2 Apr 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> Try again, how you can condemn anything by asking a rhetorical question I'm not quite sure.
> 
> What I am sure of though is that viewing other road users as ''clutter'' is simply daft beyond belief.
> 
> As for the minority viewpoint, I doubt it. However fell free with your little clique to come up with some more dead pan scenarios that have no bearing on the OP what so ever, therefore have no relevence.


 
what


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> What I am sure of though is that viewing other road users as ''clutter'' is simply daft beyond belief.


In the 60's the roads of my home town, a new town designed post war with extensive cycle use in mind, were largely free of cars and a cyclist's paradise, attested to the 1000's who cycled everyday to the local industrial estate.

Today the roads of my home town are completely clogged at peak time by cars and it is a cyclists vision of hell, attested by the tiny numbers of people who ride anywhere. It is also a car drivers vision of hell attested by the 1000's of cars, the vast majority in single occupancy, trying to get into the same industrial estate.

Same roads. Same journeys. Same destinations. Only thing that has changed is the clutter on the roads aka 'traffic'.


----------



## Crackedheadset (2 Apr 2012)

GregCollins said:


> In the 60's the roads of my home town, a new town designed post war with extensive cycle use in mind, were largely free of cars and a cyclist's paradise, attested to the 1000's who cycled everyday to the local industrial estate.
> 
> Today the roads of my home town are completely clogged at peak time by cars and it is a cyclists vision of hell, attested by the tiny numbers of people who ride anywhere. It is also a car drivers vision of hell attested by the 1000's of cars, the vast majority in single occupancy, trying to get into the same industrial estate.
> 
> Same roads. Same journeys. Same destinations. Only thing that has changed is the clutter on the roads aka 'traffic'.


 
What's your point? Apart from being stuck in the past.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> What I am sure of though is that viewing other road users as ''clutter'' is simply daft beyond belief.





Crackedheadset said:


> What's your point? Apart from being stuck in the past.


 
Traffic, aka private motor vehicles, clutter up our roads and many of us would like to see the clutter reduced. It's the future.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (2 Apr 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> Try again, how you can condemn anything by asking a rhetorical question I'm not quite sure.
> 
> What I am sure of though is that viewing other road users as ''clutter'' is simply daft beyond belief.
> 
> As for the minority viewpoint, I doubt it. However fell free with your little clique to come up with some more dead pan scenarios that have no bearing on the OP what so ever, therefore have no relevence.


 
I notice that my post from Friday was not seized upon as a means of settling the question 

In these forums there are viewpoints that are extremes apart. Some people really cannot understand any justification for someone living the way they do.
The challenge is for us to have the debate, and just try not to be too insulted by what others say.

For my part, I don't want anyone leaning on my car, but having watched family die from cancer, suffer alzheimers, and myself live through suicidal depression, I know there's worse things in this world than a little finger juice on a wing.
The fact that some on here would rather see me dead or debilitated for owning a BMW is by the by. It's their life. It's their prejudice. I'm happy with who I am and bear them no malice.
Lean on it if it makes you feel better.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> The fact that some on here would rather see me dead or debilitated for owning a BMW is by the by.


 
Splendid rhetoric. Terrific hyperbole. Any evidence to support your assertion?

Out of interest how many folk ended up dead or debilitated as a result of road traffic 'accidents' last year?


----------



## Crackle (2 Apr 2012)

Look what you started Snapper.


----------



## Crackedheadset (2 Apr 2012)

GregCollins said:


> Traffic, aka private motor vehicles, clutter up our roads and many of us would like to see the clutter reduced. It's the future.


 
Right.....ok.....agreed. But how and why does this give me an excuse to lean on a car at a red light when there is no reason or need to?


----------



## Crackedheadset (2 Apr 2012)

GregCollins said:


> Splendid rhetoric. Terrific hyperbole. Any evidence to support your assertion?
> 
> Out of interest how many folk ended up dead or debilitated as a result of road traffic 'accidents' last year?


 
Pot, kettle, black. I don't think you, Adrian or Claude can ''back up'' any of your assertions. Or can you? That is your exercise for today Greg. I'll be back on tom at 1200hrs to check.


----------



## MacB (2 Apr 2012)

User3094 said:


> If someone leaned on my car I'd rip their heads off and shit in their necks.
> 
> [Probably]


 
potty training must have been interesting in your house


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> Pot, kettle, black. I don't think you, Adrian or Claude can ''back up'' any of your assertions. Or can you? That is your exercise for today Greg. I'll be back on tom at 1200hrs to check.


 
So many assertions, so little time. All can be 'backed up', but that rather misses the point. But then you've a habit of doing that.


----------



## Bman (2 Apr 2012)

User3094 said:


> If someone leaned on my car I'd rip their heads off and shit in their necks.
> 
> [Probably]



"Nobody seals our Chicks, and lives!"


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (2 Apr 2012)

GregCollins said:


> Splendid rhetoric. Terrific hyperbole. Any evidence to support your assertion?
> 
> Out of interest how many folk ended up dead or debilitated as a result of road traffic 'accidents' last year?


 

This is a forum. It's an opinion.

As for question 2. I've never hit anyone, and I don't work for a statistical agency.

Bye


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> This is a forum. It's an baseless opinion.


ftfy


----------



## BentMikey (2 Apr 2012)

Moderators, get in here please. This topic has been turned into a cesspit.


----------



## Ashtrayhead (2 Apr 2012)

1789786 said:


> A few minutes ago a small boy walking past my bike on the platform at Southampton station had a play with the back lights, saddle, and brakes. I guess I could have beaten him for it.


 
Being in Southampton is punishment enough!


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> Moderators, get in here please. This topic has been turned into a cesspit.


somewhat late in the day to point that out...


----------



## BentMikey (2 Apr 2012)

TBF I'd just like them to come down harder and sooner on the sort of misbehaviour we've seen on here. No wonder people think communting is such a nasty place.


----------



## Jezston (2 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> TBF I'd just like them to come down harder and sooner on the sort of misbehaviour we've seen on here. No wonder people think communting is such a nasty place.


 

While there were certainly some strong opinions from the off, things certainly took a turn for the worse today. 

If there were only a a handful of rules on this site, for me they'd be:

Saying something controversial, or disagreeing with something etc, done in a reasonably polite, genuine (i.e. not trolling) and at least backed up with something resembling evidence: OK
Just flat out insulting people: NOT OK


----------



## Boris Bajic (2 Apr 2012)

User3094 said:


> If someone leaned on my car I'd rip their heads off and shit in their necks.
> 
> [Probably]


 
I take it we're talking about two-headed people here.... probably.


----------



## Scilly Suffolk (2 Apr 2012)

At times of crisis or self-doubt, I often find myself asking "What would Samantha Fox do?".

Her opinion is clear, property is theft:
"(this is the night)
*Touch me, touch me*
I want to feel your body
Your heart beat next to mine
(this is the night)
*Touch me, touch me now*".


----------



## Boris Bajic (2 Apr 2012)

Jimmy The Whiskers said:


> At times of crisis or self-doubt, I often find myself asking "What would Samantha Fox do?".
> 
> Her opinion is clear, *property is theft*:
> "(this is the night)
> ...


 
These days I drink only peppermint or cammomile tea - and that is the reason why.

When it comes to hot drinks, I'm with Proudhon.


----------



## Scilly Suffolk (2 Apr 2012)

Rooibos?


----------



## Boris Bajic (2 Apr 2012)

Jimmy The Whiskers said:


> Rooibos?


 
Apart from the absence of caffeine, that still counts as proper tea.

Proper tea is theft, so no rooibus!

There is a clear moral line to be drawn here.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

BentMikey said:


> TBF I'd just like them to come down harder and sooner on the sort of misbehaviour we've seen on here. No wonder people think communting is such a nasty place.


What specific posts, or parts thereof, do you regard as misbehaviour? (serious question)


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

Boris Bajic said:


> Apart from the absence of caffeine, that still counts as proper tea.
> 
> Proper tea is theft, so no rooibus!
> 
> There is a clear moral line to be drawn here.


Moderators, get in here please. This topic has been turned into a tea thread.


----------



## clarion (2 Apr 2012)

Tea? Now you're talking my language! A mug of steaming tea. Black, mind.

Oh - and if you touch my mug of tea, I'll punch you!


----------



## Boris Bajic (2 Apr 2012)

GregCollins said:


> Moderators, get in here please. This topic has been turned into a tea thread.


 
This is not fair... it's not as if I suggested using the rooves of cars as rests for tea cups.

Wait a moment.... Is that the germ of a novel concept?

I think I just found a use for car rooves in traffic jams!

Not my car of course. Anyone who puts their tea down on my roof can expect....

Oops! I think my car just ran over my dogma. Or something.


----------



## MacB (2 Apr 2012)

GregCollins said:


> What specific posts, or parts thereof, do you regard as misbehaviour? (serious question)


 
I was wondering that, the thread seems to have progressed exactly as expected with the responses to the 'touch my car and you're dead' brigade seemingly in keeping with that concept.

The script is familiar, justify over reaction with some victim blaming. I have to keep reminding myself that we're talking touching here not damaging.

By the way anyone is free to lean on my car any time they feel like it, though you may have to clean up the bit you want to lean on first.


----------



## Scilly Suffolk (2 Apr 2012)

Boris Bajic said:


> Apart from the absence of caffeine, that still counts as proper tea.
> 
> Proper tea is theft, so no rooibus!
> 
> There is a clear moral line to be drawn here.


Nonesense!

Rooibos: Aspalathus linearis.
"proper" tea: Camelia Sinensis.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

Boris Bajic said:


> This is not fair... it's not as if I suggested using the rooves of cars as rests for tea cups.
> 
> Wait a moment.... Is that the germ of a novel concept?
> 
> ...


Does your car not have cup holders then?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

MacB said:


> I was wondering that, the thread seems to have progressed exactly as expected with the responses to the 'touch my car and you're dead' brigade seemingly in keeping with that concept.
> 
> The script is familiar, justify over reaction with some victim blaming. I have to keep reminding myself that we're talking touching here not damaging.
> 
> By the way anyone is free to lean on my car any time they feel like it, though you may have to clean up the bit you want to lean on first.


Lean on my car any time boys and girls. It is in three pieces on the back lot of East Grinstead Fire Station.


----------



## clarion (2 Apr 2012)

Feel free to lean on my car if you like, btw.

I sold it fourteen months ago and counting.


----------



## clarion (2 Apr 2012)

Fair point. Just I had a car so long, I got into the habit of owning one. Now, every time I remember the tin box has gone, I smile.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (2 Apr 2012)

clarion said:


> Feel free to lean on my car if you like, btw.
> 
> I sold it fourteen months ago and counting.


Best advise the new owner that they might be getting leant on.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (3 Apr 2012)

Well now we're onto a serious subject!

It's Earl Grey sometimes in the day and Camomile in the evenings for me. But not forgetting some nice PG to wake up to in the mornings.

As with anything in newsgroups, no-one can hear the tone of your voice or see the expression on your face. How many think of a person stood in front of them when they post?
It's easy to fall into a flame war.

As for my old car - be careful if you lean on it, another bit may fall off.


----------



## Crackle (3 Apr 2012)

You can lean on my car. Just be aware of my warped humour and don't go to lean on the window because it goes down pretty quick when I press the button 

You can't lean on my wife's car though: The panels are made of some kind of hardened Edam.


----------



## Boris Bajic (3 Apr 2012)

Crackle said:


> You can lean on my car. Just be aware of my warped humour and don't go to lean on the window because it goes down pretty quick when I press the button
> 
> You can't lean on my wife's car though: The panels are made of some kind of hardened Edam.


 
The only cars made of Edam are Dafs and (after the takeover) the Volvo 340/360 series. I have this on good authority.

OT: I was once told that Edam is made backwards. Curious about how this might be possible, I went to Amsterdam to investigate. Apparently it was a joke. The production process differs very little from that used for most hard, European cheeses. It was not a very funny joke and my expenses on the investigative trip were considerable.


----------



## TheLondonCyclist (30 Jul 2014)

I only lean on buses (which we pay for through taxes), trucks, lorries... I do sometimes lean on those little taxi bikes in London and we have a laugh about them pulling me along. I would never chill on a person's car, though. People in London are so hostile about touching one's car, even though they have bird shoot and all sorts on it. lol


----------



## Shut Up Legs (30 Jul 2014)

Boris Bajic said:


> The only cars made of Edam are Dafs and (after the takeover) the Volvo 340/360 series. I have this on good authority.
> 
> OT: I was once told that Edam is made backwards. Curious about how this might be possible, I went to Amsterdam to investigate. Apparently it was a joke. The production process differs very little from that used for most hard, European cheeses. It was not a very funny joke and my expenses on the investigative trip were considerable.


So you were pretty cheesed off, I take it?


----------



## TheJDog (30 Jul 2014)

I always lean on cars that stop in the ASZ


----------



## Mugshot (30 Jul 2014)

I've said it before and I'll say it again, bloody cyclists!!!


----------

