On 18/11/2020 18:15, Mike Collins wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 11:40:16 UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/11/2020 20:44, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/11/2020 17:03, JNugent wrote:
On 17/11/2020 15:25, TMS320 wrote:

Yes, it's amusing that you think that if something suddenly blocks
the way ahead "stopping" doesn't make the event a near collision.

No-one - not even a cyclist - is justified in ploughing on and
colliding with a vehicle - or a human - who has moved into their
path, irrespective of whether that third party is in the wrong.

You haven't looked at the video and you keep flip flopping between near
collision and collision. The cyclist calmly avoided a collision.
He made the situation less safe than it could have been by ploughing on
in an obvious fit of pique. He could have stayed further away from the
other vehicle (and yes, the actions of the driver *were* annoying) by
slowing or better still, stopping.

I would have done so. So, I suggest, would most people. You insist,
though, that you would not have sought to minimise the danger by slowing
or stopping. I'm still not sure whether to believe you on that last bit;
it could be that you are just posturing.

When you are in a hole stop digging.
The 'untrained' non 'road tax' paying cyclist handled the situation perfectly.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The cyclist could have slowed and or stopped well short of any potential
collision point.

I would class this as an everyday occurrence not a near miss,

I'll agree with that. People make mistakes all the time. The best way to
react to mistakes by others is to minimise the danger which then
presents itself. The best way to do that is to STOP and not to plough on
as a mistaken "point of honour".

not that it excuses the dangerous driving from the 'highly trained' subsidised road user.

Indeed not.

But making the situation either worse than it needs to be, or less safe
than it can be made, is stupid.

But perhaps the bike had no brakes. There's apparently a lot of it about.