Cyclone Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 In my local cop shop, a large sign says "We won't accept complaints about dangerous driving without a witness". Cops have previously discounted witness reports from other cyclists as " not impartial". I'd ask the IPCC about that, they don't get an option about who they 'accept' complaints from, only on how they treat them and how much credence they give them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Why? Why is it dangerous? I take it you've not bothered to read the thread either given that 'road tax' has been covered several times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 8, 2010 Author Share Posted June 8, 2010 I wouldn't feed the trolls. The video looks like attempted murder. Since it is legal to use video to prosecute drivers for using a bus lane I would like to think that it is sufficient to bring a successful prosecution to at least remove the drivers privileges for a year or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Why? cyclists should pay road tax, they wana use roads as way of transport then they need to get theyre hand in theyre pocket...simple as. Simple as you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 I wouldn't feed the trolls. The video looks like attempted murder. Since it is legal to use video to prosecute drivers for using a bus lane I would like to think that it is sufficient to bring a successful prosecution to at least remove the drivers privileges for a year or two. Mmmmm. I've had similar incidents. I would have waited for the van. Let it go. Don't get me wrong, the driver's a tosser, literally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 It's incredible that ... swfcsy appear rational, intelligent people Rational and intelligent enough to not be able to use the written English language as intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumpyroads Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 The cyclist seriously escalated that incident by deliberately hitting the vehicle. It would have been better to let it go. I'm not saying I wouldn't have been very tempted to do the same though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike142sl Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 want to cycle on roads, pay tax like other road users, simple as.They do pay tax like other road users. So by YOUR argument they can use the roads. That's that sorted then. "simple as" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 The cyclist seriously escalated that incident by deliberately hitting the vehicle. It would have been better to let it go. I'm not saying I wouldn't have been very tempted to do the same though. I guess the cyclist would say he was alerting an unwary driver to his presence. That would certainly make it difficult for the driver to explain why he's using 4 tons of metal as a weapon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 The cyclist seriously escalated that incident by deliberately hitting the vehicle. It would have been better to let it go. I'm not saying I wouldn't have been very tempted to do the same though. Why did the van driver not just drive off - it was only a slap on the side of the van, hardly going to cause damage? Alternatively why not just stop the van and speak with the cyclist? A bit over the top swerving all over the road and almost colliding with the cyclist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.