Jeremy Vine tweet tonight (cycling related)

Support Your Local Team said:
I just put that idiot cyclist meets idiot driver. Idiocy happens. Both deserve what is coming to them.

The driver of the car is by far the most dangerous of the two and deserves the greater punishment here. No question. But the cyclist is 100% wanting to provoke and when you do that you cannot complain at how the other person reacts when they snap.

In education I always tell the young people I teach....."if you want to provoke people, that is up to you. But don't complain when they react in a way you don't like. You do not get to control that part of the interaction".
Click to expand...

You are lovely. The cyclist deserved to get run over. Nice.
 
MolteniArcore said:
It’s the old hierarchy of responsibility isn’t it? If you are driving a 1 ton metal death box you need to make sure you can see vulnerable road users even if they don’t have high vis or lights. That’s what you sign up to when you drive on on the roads.
Click to expand...
I hate that hysterical hyperbole of the cyclist. Its so divisive. You could have said "1 tonne vehicle"
 
So we punish the car driver, 3/6/9 points for due care and attention. How do you punish the prat on the bike.
 
Tryasize10 said:
On that basis, if you saw a car driving along at night with no lights on, it's fair game to drive and smash into that car with your own?

It doesn't matter at all what the idiot cyclist was doing. The driver is not the judge, jury and executioner. Anyone who thinks the driver is not in the wrong here, then basically you're promoting a vigilantly state.
Click to expand...
You seem to be saying the driver hit the cyclist on purpose
 
1finny said:
the lad was showing off, doing no harm, having a laugh - like millions and millions of young une before him
And the answer is ….. punish him

What have we become
Click to expand...
Yep, just like the young lads having a jolly jape on peds without helmets pulling wheelies in Berwick Hills last week. But that's another thread. Salt of the earth these lads.
 
MolteniArcore said:
It’s the old hierarchy of responsibility isn’t it? If you are driving a 1 ton metal death box you need to make sure you can see vulnerable road users even if they don’t have high vis or lights. That’s what you sign up to when you drive on on the roads.
Click to expand...
But cyclists with no lights on and wearing dark clothing are incredibly difficult to see sometimes, how on earth are you supposed to see someone in the dark on a poorly lit road when it’s raining onto your windscreen for example. I can’t see why anyone on a bike would think yeah I’ll make myself as difficult to see as possible by wearing dark clothing and I’ll make sure there’s no lights on my bike - it’s just asking for trouble isn’t it.
 
MolteniArcore said:
You are lovely. The cyclist deserved to get run over. Nice.
Click to expand...

I didn't say he deserved to get run over. He purposely provoked drivers that he knew he was holding up and deserved to get a reaction from from someone. As that was what he wanting - to annoy them and get a reaction.

And like I said, he cannot then dictate what reactions and consequences he receives. He deserved a reaction and got one.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
Does it genuinely matter if he did or not? As I said above, he either can't control his vehicle or his temper so shouldn't be allowed to drive.
Click to expand...
Well no it does matter because if he’s done it on purpose that’s dangerous driving, if he genuinely hasn’t seen him because the cyclist has no lights and is wearing dark clothing in the dark then he has at least some excuse as to why a collision occurred. It always amazes me how many people don’t know that riding a bicycle between sunset and sunrise (i.e. in the dark) without a white light fitted to the front of the bike and a red light fitted to the rear is against the law. Of course car drivers should be super careful and make allowances for all the idiot cyclists flaunting the law, and ultimately even if you do hit someone on bike who has no lights on in the dark the car driver will nearly always be assumed as at least partly to blame. It’s every driver or cyclists responsibility to make themselves seen and to drive or ride with other road users safety as a priority.
 
The Disciple said:
Well no it does matter because if he’s done it on purpose that’s dangerous driving, if he genuinely hasn’t seen him because the cyclist has no lights and is wearing dark clothing in the dark then he has at least some excuse as to why a collision occurred. It always amazes me how many people don’t know that riding a bicycle between sunset and sunrise (i.e. in the dark) without a white light fitted to the front of the bike and a red light fitted to the rear is against the law. Of course car drivers should be super careful and make allowances for all the idiot cyclists flaunting the law, and ultimately even if you do hit someone on bike who has no lights on in the dark the car driver will nearly always be assumed as at least partly to blame. It’s every driver or cyclists responsibility to make themselves seen and to drive or ride with other road users safety as a priority.
Click to expand...
This is a very long argument that is easily disproven by the fact that you and I can easily see the cyclist in the video and therefore so can the motorist.

The cyclist isn't wearing the correct gear, the motorist almost kills him it. It isn't comparable.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
This is a very long argument that is easily disproven by the fact that you and I can easily see the cyclist in the video and therefore so can the motorist.

The cyclist isn't wearing the correct gear, the motorist almost kills him it. It isn't comparable.
Click to expand...
Well you don’t know the circumstances prior to that collision, you don’t know where the car came from or what happened leading up to that incident
 
The Disciple said:
Well you don’t know the circumstances prior to that collision, you don’t know where the car came from or what happened leading up to that incident
Click to expand...
No, I don't. And neither do you. But based on the evidence available, the driver was out of control.

I could just as easily say something as facile about the cyclist, who was engaged in some elaborate semaphore to signal to cars ahead of the psychopath behind him.

I won't though, as it's stupid and makes my argument look desperate.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
No, I don't. And neither do you. But based on the evidence available, the driver was out of control.

I could just as easily say something as facile about the cyclist, who was engaged in some elaborate semaphore to signal to cars ahead of the psychopath behind him.

I won't though, as it's stupid and makes my argument look desperate.
Click to expand...
Well the law says you’re innocent until proven guilty - you seem to have already found the driver guilty without knowing the full facts. I’m just saying this video clip proves nothing other than that the cyclist was riding wrecklessly whilst cycling on a public highway with no lights visible on his bike, which is most definitely against the law
 
The Disciple said:
Well the law says you’re innocent until proven guilty - you seem to have already found the driver guilty without knowing the full facts. I’m just saying this video clip proves nothing other than that the cyclist was riding wrecklessly whilst cycling on a public highway with no lights visible on his bike, which is most definitely against the law
Click to expand...

The clip shows a driver doing an illegal manoeuvre and almost killing someone. That is a fact. Context may provide some mitigation, but the clip is damning.

And as I said, this cuts both ways. There may be an equally 'valid' reason for the cyclist to have been riding in the way that he has done. You're ignoring that, as for some reason you want to side with the person who almost killed someone.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
Can cyclists do any wrong these days?
Click to expand...
Behave CtC - I think there is unanimity on this one that the cyclist did wrong.

The contentious bit is some seem to think he deserved to be driven at by a car for doing so.

I’m glad FMTTM wasn’t around when I was a young un playing knock and run.
They’d have had me hung drawn and quartered
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top