rammed from behind, cops say your fault.

[MontyVeda]

Are they really to blame? Yes they are.

Is that the same logic that says women shouldn't get drunk or go out on their own after dark in case they get attacked?

FFS that is pathetic.

 

[MontyVeda]

Going out at night and getting drunk is not 'asking for it'.

 

[cd365]

I agree with MV, the cyclist was trying to wind up the bus driver and because of his actions there was a consequence to face for being an idiot, an out of order consequence but it was still a direct consequence to his deliberate action of trying to cause friction.

This cyclist did no more than cycle properly and happened to meet an idiot.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I agree with MV, the cyclist was trying to wind up the bus driver and because of his actions there was a consequence to face for being an idiot, an out of order consequence but it was still a direct consequence to his deliberate action of trying to cause friction.

This cyclist did no more than cycle properly and happened to meet an idiot.

So if you wind me up I can punch you and that's your fault? I see.

But you're not serious. You can't be. No amount of winding up is EVER justification for physical assault, with or without the use of a vehicle. If any driver can't understand that then they should not be operating a vehicle.

 

[smutchin]

Secondly, I'm sure that a whole 20-30seconds wouldn't have meant they missed the funeral.

It's always the ones who are in a hurry to get somewhere who have the time to stop and have a go at you.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

It's always the ones who are in a hurry to get somewhere who have the time to stop and have a go at you.

ain't that the truth thobut.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

A good point is always worth repeating

Well, a simple +1 lacked punch.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I fear it still might not be enough.

If I get wound up I'm allowed to kick the lesson in. Surely?

 

[MontyVeda]

The key difference is that you have viewed it as "an out of order consequence".

that's a key difference how? ... and before you reply, re-read post #91

 

[Sara_H]

Like others here I take umbrage at the police officer's comments, but the comments about emergency vehicles also get my goat.

When I did my initial pursuit and response driving course I was taught that even if we have all bells and whistles going it is OUR responsibility if we hit another road user, as they shouldn't be expected to see or hear us. The suggestion was joe public is not to expect a blue light vehicle hairing along the wrong side of the road, so we have to anticipate their not seeing hearing us and drive accordingly - i.e. be ready to stop - and further to that, if we did have a crash, we would be investigated.

That sounded reasonable to me, but it also seems poles apart from this police officer's opinion.

There was a case in Sheffield a few years ago of a woman being killed when a fire engine going through a red light hit her car.

I can't remember the outcome of the investigation, but I remember there being speculation about whether the fir engine driver would be prosecuted.

http://metro.co.uk/2008/06/30/mum-killed-in-fire-engine-crash-after-hoax-call-226891/

 

[MontyVeda]

i don't see any mention of the bus driver... but you've clearly read very deeply into that omission.

 

[MontyVeda]

Well if you're resorting to mud slinging, there's little else to be said.

 

[Shaun]

Please take the other discussions over to their respective threads; stop making personal remarks; and re-focus back on the incident being discussed in the OP.

Thanks,
Shaun

 

[classic33]

Please take the other discussions over to their respective threads; stop making personal remarks; and re-focus back on the incident being discussed in the OP.

Thanks,
Shaun

Can't say I see that happening though.

 

[stowie]

I see it as my own responsibility not to wind other people up... if I do wind somebody up, and the result is them getting wound up... are they really to blame? Or did my own actions merely have a consequence?

I'm not claiming that what the bus driver did was the right thing to do... I'm trying to point out that the cyclist (in the other thread) did in fact bring it upon himself... He could have averted the incident by not being a d!ck in the first place. Surely you understand the logic?

The problem with your logic is that someone (usually the motorist) is making a judgement that it is acceptable to use a vehicle in this way providing the actions are "justified". Ask some motorists whether this would be acceptable if a cyclist is taking primary for instance and the answer would come back as yes because they do not understand the reason why the cyclist is "in the way". The acceptability of using a vehicle on a more vulnerable road user should be the same even if the vulnerable road user is being a complete d!ck or not. The answer should be that it is totally unacceptable.

I still maintain that if the bus driver had simply stopped the cyclist would have very quickly got bored and gone away. As it stands, I doubt a bus driver in the UK doing what was shown on the video would have much chance of retaining his or her job. Because driving a bus at someone no matter how much of an idiot they are doesn't really show a great attitude to driving a very large machine among the general public (a significant proportion of whom are d!cks if my daily interaction is anything to go by).