Madness: Driver almost hits oncoming vehicle while overtaking cyclist

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 12:42:55 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 12:21 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:11:18 AM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young girl
for anything that happened there.

Indeed. One wonders why the chavvy thug felt the need to kick her bike
and then tell her to her face that he quote "Couldn't give a f***"?"

What a shining example of adult behaviour he must be.

The fellow probably told the father that he "Couldn't give
a ****" probably because he couldn't give a ****.


Says all you need to know about the thug, doesn't it?

On 13:06 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 12:42:55 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 12:21 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:11:18 AM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young girl
for anything that happened there.

Indeed. One wonders why the chavvy thug felt the need to kick her bike
and then tell her to her face that he quote "Couldn't give a f***"?"

What a shining example of adult behaviour he must be.

The fellow probably told the father that he "Couldn't give
a ****" probably because he couldn't give a ****.


Says all you need to know about the thug, doesn't it?

He's clearly a decent man pushed beyond the limits of endurance by the gobby
chav who thinks his daughter has a right to ride her bike into people.

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 1:34:29 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 13:06 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 12:42:55 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 12:21 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:11:18 AM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young girl
for anything that happened there.

Indeed. One wonders why the chavvy thug felt the need to kick her bike
and then tell her to her face that he quote "Couldn't give a f***"?"

What a shining example of adult behaviour he must be.

The fellow probably told the father that he "Couldn't give
a ****" probably because he couldn't give a ****.


Says all you need to know about the thug, doesn't it?

He's clearly a man pushed beyond the limits of endurance by a six year old girl.

Really?

On 13:38 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 1:34:29 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 13:06 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 12:42:55 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 12:21 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:11:18 AM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young
girl for anything that happened there.

Indeed. One wonders why the chavvy thug felt the need to kick her
bike and then tell her to her face that he quote "Couldn't give a
f***"?"

What a shining example of adult behaviour he must be.

The fellow probably told the father that he "Couldn't give a ****"
probably because he couldn't give a ****.


Says all you need to know about the thug, doesn't it?

He's clearly a decent man pushed beyond the limits of endurance by the
gobby chav

Really?

Yes.

On 14/05/2020 11:57, Kelly wrote:
JNugent wrote:

On 14/05/2020 11:11, Kelly wrote:
TMS320 wrote:

On 14/05/2020 09:19, Kelly wrote:

I can't help feeling this is a minor issue, in more ways than one.
Even so, I agree with you that current emergency regulations have
been broken. I think the police should at least remind the father of
his responsibility towards ensuring his daughter maintains social
distancing rules. Ironically, the police can see where the father
failed in that regard from the father's own video, something that he
and his wife brought to the attention of the police themselves.

Looking at the video, we see the child slowing down and holding station
well behind the couple. The gap between her head and the feet of the
couple showed a period of 6 or 7 seconds where the distance didn't
reduce - with the gap clearly more than 2m.

I suspect that she had noticed on other occasions that when her father
called out, people had reacted and she could proceed. She just didn't
know what to do if a gap didn't open.

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young girl
for anything that happened there.

She isn't to blame. Her parent or parents were.

Has anyone here suggested otherwise?

In effect, you did. I appreciate that you might not have meant to. It's
best to be positive about who *is* to blame (the camera-wielding parent)
rather than negative about who isn't (the two innocent victims and the
child on a bike). I'm sure you agree.

With the benefit of 20:20 hindsight vision, perhaps it would have been
better had the father waited until the path was widened out a bit. But
it's necessary to wonder how the moaners do better in matters of the moment.

That is it, really, in a nutshell. And hopefully, with the help of
that 20:20 hindsight vision, all those involved in the 'incident' will
be that little bit wiser in future.

How can wisdom (or even increased amounts of it) help protect you
against a cyclist running into you from behind on a footpath?

First of all, a cyclist with enough wisdom would not run into you from
behind.

But no matter how wise *you* are, you cannot prevent a cyclist running
into you from behind.

The only room there is here for a relevant gaining of wisdom pertains to
that parent with the camera. And that doesn't look hopeful, given his
reaction.

Also, if you as a pedestrian were 'run into from behind' by a
toddler of her little bike travelling at barely walking 'speed', with
enough wisdom you would react with a little bit of understanding
instead of unnecessarily going off the deep end in a highly aggressive
manner.

In normal circumstances, that is true.

We are NOT in normal circumstances, which seems to be in danger of being
forgotten.

On 14/05/2020 12:10, Kelly wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 14/05/2020 09:23, Kelly wrote:
JNugent wrote:

On 13/05/2020 17:57, Simon Mason wrote:
A copy of the Highway Code has been sent to the motorist
QUOTE:
This photograph shows the moment a car almost crashed into an oncoming vehicle while overtaking a cyclist.

Police issued the dramatic picture today (May 12) to warn other motorists against overtaking cyclists on double white lines, especially when they have no view of traffic ahead. The driver was also criticised for not leaving the required 1.5 metres between a bike and car.

A spokesperson for Avon and Somerset Police road safety team posted on Twitter : "Don't be this guy! Luckily everyone OK.

"No view: No overtake. "Give cyclists room: At least 1.5m

"Don't overtake on double whites unless bike 10mph or less!

"Motorist will be receiving a reminder of the Highway Code in the post."

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/l...coming-4127743

Is there any evidence (let alone proof) that the cyclist was doing as
much as 10mph?

I would hope the answer is no, and that is why "a copy of the Highway
Code has been sent to the motorist" rather than a Notice of Intended
Prosecution. Of course, a driver may cross a double white line "in
order to pass a pedal cycle moving at a speed not exceeding 10 mph"
but only "if it is safe to do so and if necessary to do so".

Not only bicycles, but any vehicle moving as slowly as that.

It's a while since the issue was discussed here, but 10mph is a
difficult speed to measure accurately on ordinary instrumentation. The
cyclist is unlikely to have any immediately accessible way of measuring
speed at all and motor vehicle speedometers are only approximate at that
sort of speed (many have no gradated visual calibration below 20). The
speed may have to be estimated.

Okay, but that's a problem for the driver.

It isn't much of a problem.

Why should the cyclist have
to determine what speed they are travelling at?

He doesn't. But the cyclist would the only possible other person to have
any standing, no matter how slight, in the matter of whether he was
doing 10mph, less than 10mph or more than 10mph.

If he isn't weighing in with a speed measurement of his own (and he
won't be), the only person whose view matters on the 10mph issue is the
overtaking driver. And if there is no credible alternative view and
measurement, his view is the only one that matters.

Imagine you are out on a motorbike with a so-so accurate speedo. You
come up behind a tractor towing a hay-wagon on a road with double white
centre lines. You check your speedo and it says - as near as you can
read it by the needle's position between 0 and 20 - 9mph when following
the tractor. Does it *matter* what speed the tractor driver thinks he's
going at? Does it *matter* what view a third party takes? What if the
tractor driver reports you and swears blind that he was doing 11mph?

They are not the ones
wondering whether it is safe or not to cross a double white line.

Quite so. Buit the cyclist, as explained above *is* the only other
person who could conceivably have a view on what speed he himself was
doing. In other words...

Other than (maybe) his own unsupported and self-asserted opinion, I mean.

There is no indication in that link that a cyclist has given an
opinion such as that or, indeed, any other.

Indeed. I was just covering that potential base in case it was given as
an answer.

On 14/05/2020 13:38, Simon Mason wrote:
On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 1:34:29 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 13:06 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 12:42:55 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 12:21 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:11:18 AM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young girl
for anything that happened there.

Indeed. One wonders why the chavvy thug felt the need to kick her bike
and then tell her to her face that he quote "Couldn't give a f***"?"

What a shining example of adult behaviour he must be.

The fellow probably told the father that he "Couldn't give
a ****" probably because he couldn't give a ****.


Says all you need to know about the thug, doesn't it?

He's clearly a man pushed beyond the limits of endurance by a six year old girl.

Really?

Covid 19.

Idiot (you and that kid's father).

On 14/05/2020 12:54, Kelly wrote:
Pamela wrote:

On 11:57 14 May 2020, Kelly said:

JNugent wrote:

On 14/05/2020 11:11, Kelly wrote:
TMS320 wrote:

On 14/05/2020 09:19, Kelly wrote:

I can't help feeling this is a minor issue, in more ways than one.
Even so, I agree with you that current emergency regulations have
been broken. I think the police should at least remind the father of
his responsibility towards ensuring his daughter maintains social
distancing rules. Ironically, the police can see where the father
failed in that regard from the father's own video, something that he
and his wife brought to the attention of the police themselves.

Looking at the video, we see the child slowing down and holding
station well behind the couple. The gap between her head and the feet
of the couple showed a period of 6 or 7 seconds where the distance
didn't reduce - with the gap clearly more than 2m.

I suspect that she had noticed on other occasions that when her
father called out, people had reacted and she could proceed. She just
didn't know what to do if a gap didn't open.

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young girl
for anything that happened there.

She isn't to blame. Her parent or parents were.

Has anyone here suggested otherwise?

With the benefit of 20:20 hindsight vision, perhaps it would have
been better had the father waited until the path was widened out a
bit. But it's necessary to wonder how the moaners do better in
matters of the moment.

That is it, really, in a nutshell. And hopefully, with the help of
that 20:20 hindsight vision, all those involved in the 'incident' will
be that little bit wiser in future.

How can wisdom (or even increased amounts of it) help protect you
against a cyclist running into you from behind on a footpath?

First of all, a cyclist with enough wisdom would not run into you from
behind. Also, if you as a pedestrian were 'run into from behind' by a
toddler of her little bike travelling at barely walking 'speed', with
enough wisdom you would react with a little bit of understanding
instead of unnecessarily going off the deep end in a highly aggressive
manner.

"Barely walking speed"? The couple are going at walking speed...

The average human walking speed is about 5.0 kilometres per hour
(km/h) or about 3.1 miles per hour (mph).

I don't think the couple were travelling at that speed.

There are a range of normal walking speeds.

The average of them is about 3mph.

The victim couple and their dog* were walking at a normal walking speed.


[* I hold no brief for dogs, by the way. I'm almost neutral on that issue.]

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 2:01:04 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 13:38 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 1:34:29 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 13:06 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 12:42:55 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 12:21 14 May 2020, Simon Mason said:

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:11:18 AM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young
girl for anything that happened there.

Indeed. One wonders why the chavvy thug felt the need to kick her
bike and then tell her to her face that he quote "Couldn't give a
f***"?"

What a shining example of adult behaviour he must be.

The fellow probably told the father that he "Couldn't give a ****"
probably because he couldn't give a ****.


Says all you need to know about the thug, doesn't it?

He's clearly a decent man pushed beyond the limits of endurance by the
six year old girl.

Really?

Yes.

Maybe he should man up and stop feeling "harassed" by a 6 year old girl?

On 12:54 14 May 2020, Kelly said:

Pamela wrote:

On 11:57 14 May 2020, Kelly said:

JNugent wrote:

On 14/05/2020 11:11, Kelly wrote:
TMS320 wrote:

On 14/05/2020 09:19, Kelly wrote:

I can't help feeling this is a minor issue, in more ways than one.
Even so, I agree with you that current emergency regulations have
been broken. I think the police should at least remind the father
of his responsibility towards ensuring his daughter maintains
social distancing rules. Ironically, the police can see where the
father failed in that regard from the father's own video,
something that he
and his wife brought to the attention of the police themselves.

Looking at the video, we see the child slowing down and holding
station well behind the couple. The gap between her head and the
feet of the couple showed a period of 6 or 7 seconds where the
distance didn't reduce - with the gap clearly more than 2m.

I suspect that she had noticed on other occasions that when her
father called out, people had reacted and she could proceed. She
just didn't know what to do if a gap didn't open.

Yes, that sounds more than feasible. I wouldn't blame that young
girl for anything that happened there.

She isn't to blame. Her parent or parents were.

Has anyone here suggested otherwise?

With the benefit of 20:20 hindsight vision, perhaps it would have
been better had the father waited until the path was widened out a
bit. But it's necessary to wonder how the moaners do better in
matters of the moment.

That is it, really, in a nutshell. And hopefully, with the help of
that 20:20 hindsight vision, all those involved in the 'incident'
will be that little bit wiser in future.

How can wisdom (or even increased amounts of it) help protect you
against a cyclist running into you from behind on a footpath?

First of all, a cyclist with enough wisdom would not run into you from
behind. Also, if you as a pedestrian were 'run into from behind' by a
toddler of her little bike travelling at barely walking 'speed', with
enough wisdom you would react with a little bit of understanding
instead of unnecessarily going off the deep end in a highly aggressive
manner.

"Barely walking speed"? The couple are going at walking speed...

The average human walking speed is about 5.0 kilometres per hour (km/h)
or about 3.1 miles per hour (mph).

I don't think the couple were travelling at that speed.

Whatever your time & motion studies say about walking, this couple were
walking at walking speed. It's self defining.