Nuxx:%FLAl.155732$q45.81534@newsfe07.ams2

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!cyclone03.ams2.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!npeersf01.ams.highwinds-media.com!newsfe07.ams2.POSTED!7564ea0f!not-for-mail Message-ID: <%FLAl.155732$q45.81534@newsfe07.ams2> From: _  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Road rage incident this morning - advice? Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:23:35 +0100 References: <77cd082e-0c07-463a-a8cf-bc379d412437@j8g2000yql.googlegroups.com> 	  <89a4f3ff-cefd-4330-9e57-f82356852c29@q16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>   Lines: 35 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To:  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.12.82.202 X-Complaints-To: http://netreport.virginmedia.com X-Trace: newsfe07.ams2 1238599419 86.12.82.202 (Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:23:39 UTC) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:23:39 UTC Organization: virginmedia.com Bytes: 3037 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:692545

Martin wrote: > _ wrote: >> Simon Brooke wrote: >>> On 31 Mar, 23:03, TheMgt  wrote: >>>> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: >>>> >>>>> The thing is, though, that those guys are probably cowards and >>>>> almost certainly >>>>> well aware that you've reported them to plod. >>>> Well no, that's tabloid journo reasoning that is. They obviously have a >>>> horrible temper and poor impulse control though, and are of course >>>> desperately in need of being charged with assault and having their >>>> driving license taken away. >>> Sadly, he wasn't the driver, so even if the police do find him I doubt >>> his license is in danger. I do think he's the perfect exemplar of >>> people who should not be allowed to hold one. >> Based on a single side of the story, and a patently implausible one at >> that? Personally, I'd rather people like him were allowed licences (even >> if the account WAS accurate) than people like you were allowed to >> prevent him.

> Implausible? > > Having been assaulted twice in the past six months or so, I quite > believe it. Both times with me were passing parked cars, and the second > time I was too close too the cars anyway.

I suggested it was implausible that the car occupant waited for a mile before pulling over - I quite believe that car drivers/passengers get angry with bikes seemingly deliberately impeding them, but I'd imagine that this flash of anger would have dissipated over the couple of minutes it took the car to travel a mile and the further few minutes before the bike caught up. It does to be fair seem more likely that the driver pulled over for unrelated reasons and that the CYCLIST reinstated the confrontation once he'd caught up.