FBinNY 

IMO the driver was without a doubt 100% in the wrong as far as the assault goes. Getting flipped off doesn't warrant an assault. It warrants a shout, flipping the person back, or whatever --- in proportion to the low grade insult of being flipped off.

However, while flipping the driver off the first time might have been a spontaneous reaction to the close pass, and understandable, what follows wasn't. Once the driver showed propensity to escalate by stopping and trying to block the road, then continuing the action is just plain dumb. Either explain the issue as you pass, for whatever that may be worth, or move on with you life. In the normal course of events you and any driver will be miles apart within minutes, and likely never see each other again.


WHY anyone escalate a situation with someone who outweighed him 10:1 is beyond me.

Number400

The person driving the truck was an arse. The person riding the bicycle can flip off drivers all day and more charged confrontations may happen as a result. The person on the bike would be better off stopping and not re-passing the offending vehicle. Wait until they lose patience and drive off, don't put yourself back in their path. Had the vehicle been waiting up the road for me like that, I would have shifted into my small ring, dismounted and tried to walk past on foot and in the grass and avoid further confrontation. If I was then assaulted, I would be in a better position to defend myself (bike in between and sharp cog teeth) and any confrontation would be more on my terms.

mozad655

Well when is too close? I think this depends on your nerves as a cyclist. I woudn't have payed much attention to this and you'll often find cyclists in traffic riding even closer to cars at similar speed.

The driver was initially clearly trying not to cross to the other lane as this was not permitted because of the double line. So he did the right thing and slowed down while giving as much room to the cyclist as possible. The problem was started by the cyclist and escalated by the driver.

If your too slow to ride at car speed and you have bad nerves, then you shoudn't ride on a no-overtake road. Otherwise your just blocking the road. The cyclist clearly started this. The driver reacted like a fool.

wphamilton

He should cross the double yellow line, or stay behind the cyclist.

If we're critiquing the cyclist, he should probably take the lane there.

The second flip-off is deliberately escalating. That rudeness pales to insignificance compared to what the driver did.

Keith99

Snap back and you're drunk, but you'll be sober in the morning.

The dumb variety will be so confused they can't function. The smart ones will laugh and buy me a round!

Since I'm a Prop I'm part of a group often refered to as 'The Fatties' or 'The big uglies'. He's going to have to work a lot harder to upset me.

Keith99

What the cyclist did was stupid. While us props joke about trucks losing when they hit us, we know it isn't really true. He was lucky. Anyone jerk enough to do what the driver did is jerk enough to use the truck as a weapon.

And the driver was a wimp, even old and fat as I am he would have gone down for good if he tried that with me.

Matariki

It seems to me that since the driver quickly responded to the initial gesture, he must have been looking in his rear view mirror. While he may have done it to assure that he had passed the cyclist safety, it was probably because he wanted to see the reaction to his intentional first pass.

I once flipped a guy off once for a bonehead (but not intentional move) and after chatting with him ( a bit heated at first) at the next intersection he said "You know, had you not given me the finger, we could have had a more productive conversation from the start". I have never used that gesture since.

mozad655

He is not allowed to cross the yellow line and he has the right to overtake a slow cyclist that is not living up to the speed regulations. A cyclist at that speed should not be on that road if he is not ready to be overtaken.

That would be called a block. No road user is allowed to block the road with slow speed. If you do that around here and the police sees you, they will pull you over. Being a cyclist and exposed doesn't give you the right to be slow and block the road. You shoudn't be on that road to begin with if you can't keep up or handle being overtaken.

FliesOnly1

Quote:

Originally Posted by mozad655

The driver was initially clearly trying not to cross to the other lane as this was not permitted because of the double line. So he did the right thing and slowed down while giving as much room to the cyclist as possible. The problem was started by the cyclist and escalated by the driver.

If your too slow to ride at car speed and you have bad nerves, then you shoudn't ride on a no-overtake road. Otherwise your just blocking the road. The cyclist clearly started this. The driver reacted like a fool.

Wow. Where to begin? First off, the motorist tried to squeeze by while driving in a zone with a double yellow line. You do understand that a double yellow means you cannot pass...yes? Second, he did not really "slow down" that much, nor did he even come close to "giving as much room to the cyclist as possible". The driver should have waited until he could safely pass the biker...period. He did not do that. Third, the problem was most definitely NOT started by the cyclist. That is laughable and...well...ridiculous to suggest. Fourth there's really no such thing (at least not where I live) as a "no-overtake road". Most roads have sections where you can legally pass and sections where it is illegal to pass. This bicyclist happened to be in one of those latter sections. And lastly, the biker in no way started this. He was out riding his bike as he is legally allowed to do. All of this...100%...is the fault of the motorist. The reaction of the motorist tells it all. He obviously knew he was in the wrong, and was looking for a response from the biker. He got one, and then escalated the situation dramatically. And then he lied to the police (apparently being too dumb to notice the camera on the bikers helmet). I hope he gets a HUGE, GINORMOUS fine, in addition to being sentenced to some community service cleaning garbage up along the shoulder of the road where he committed his crime.

mozad655

I'm sorry but I'm not going to buy that nonsence. The overtaking was nessescary due to low speed of cyclist, it was safe and at low speed. Cyclist overreacted. Driver went beserk. Just because I am a cyclist doesn't mean that I will defend a cyclist when he is clearly wrong. I'll explain why.

1) A double yellow line means you cannot pass, but this is assuming the road user in front of you is not blocking the road. A cyclist at slow speed is a road block and you have the right to pass road blocks. 2) The speed was clearly not that high and serious harm was way out of the question, which adds to how wrong it was to give the driver the finger. 3) He gave him as much room as possible. 4) The overtaking was safe. Driver did not have to wait to "safely pass". Road circumstances could continue that way for many miles for all he knew. 5) Problem began when cyclist gave him the finger. Even if it was a slightly close overtaking, he should be more grown up in his way of complaining. 6) There is such thing as no-overtake roads. A no-overtake road is a road where it is illegal to pass when overtaking requires change in lane. This is the law where I live. As for the rest of your respond it is the typical "cyclist is always victim"-mentality.

FliesOnly1

Please...just stop...this is getting absurd. The cyclist has the legal right to ride on that road. The motorist can pass when it is safe to do so (at a safe distance). He (the motorist) did neither of those.

FBinNY 

the laws about crossing a double yellow to pass a cyclist, dog or pedestrian vary by state. The double yellow lines are based on distances required to pass a vehicle moving at speeds close to the limit, and many states allow crossing to pass very slow vehicles, ie. a bicycle or farm tractor, when it's safe to do so.

So, common sense should rule. There was no oncoming traffic, and room to pass if he moved over. I don't make a big deal about whether a driver moves all the way into the oncoming lane, or moves over a few feet and splits lanes, since either give me the room I need for a safe pass. Or the driver could have safely passed more closely if he slowed to a lower speed differential.

Also, under the laws of most states, a cyclist is exempt from minimum speed laws that might invoke a charge of impeding traffic. The cyclist has the right to the road, as long as he's making a good faith effort to keep right, and move at whatever speed is sustainable.

This isn't about law, it's about common sense and nothing else. As a driver, if you see a cyclist ahead, find a way to pass him safely --- plain and simple. As a cyclist who's been somehow offended by a driver, either let it go, or vent your displeasure if it makes you feel better -- once, then move on with your life.

BTW- the irony here is that the cyclist missed the opportunity to defuse this when the driver tried to block the road. At that point he might have tried to explain why he flipped off the driver, and said it wasn't personal, just about the close pass. I've had similar incidents, and generally been able to end them with both the driver and I having some better understanding of each other, and no hard feelings.

FliesOnly1

The cyclist was the victim...that's why the other guy got arrested.

FBinNY 

Of the assault, not of the close pass, which was a separate incident.

mozad655

Some states may allow but my area certainly doesn't. You don't cross that line just because a cyclist is afraid of being overtaken. As far as I'm concerned the speed was low and safe during the overtaking. I don't see what the driver could have done any differently there, besides breaking the law and crossing lanes. The driver did find a way to pass him safely. The whole reason we are having this argument is because the paranoid cyclist overreacted.

Cyclists have the right to the road, but they have to follow the same regulations as other road users. This includes speed (if they don't want to be overtaken). "Good effort" is not enough.

FBinNY 

See my first post here (no.26) I ONLY faulted the driver for the assault. What preceded it was nothing, both the pass, and the finger. IMO both are idiots, but I'm more forgiving of idiots that pass my "no harm-no foul" test than I am of assault.

BTW- I was in court once when someone was fighting a double yellow summons for passing a dog running down the lane. After his explanation the judge said that you can't cross the double yellow for any reason, and as going to find him guilty. He countered with, what about a car stalled in the lane, or a boulder?. That gave the judge pause and after rethinking her "for whatever reason" decided that there had to be common sense exceptions, and ruled "not guilty".

Law may be black and white, but life isn't and there's margin at the fringes if not abused.

wphamilton

Wrong, in most states it is allowed to pass a cyclist. Or dog, or whatever.

Unless there is a posted minimum speed, or it is a controlled access highway, there is no minimum speed regulation.

The cyclist's speed is irrelevant to whether he should be on that road, since it is not a controlled access road.

Wrong on both counts. Unless you don't live in the USA, which is possible but I don't get that from your posts. Do you know what the FRAP laws say for your state?

FliesOnly1

Ummmmm...you don't know this for sure. All we know is that the driver was arrested for assault. If an unsafe pass is intentional, that is legally defined as an assault. If the video convinces a judge (or jury) that the driver passed too closely and/or at too high a rate of speed, then that would be considered an assault. If the assault results in an injury, then it's considered battery. You need to also understand that in the legal system, "injury" is not a medical term. Rather, all the rider need show for this to be considered as battery is that there was offensive physical contact. And since we clearly see that in the video you are basically wrong on just about every aspect of your defense of the driver. I hope you're not his lawyer.

I-Like-To-Bike

Good luck convincing anyone besides an A&S brand congenital victim of motorist meanies that an unsafe pass as shown in the video was an "assault."

genec

What speed regulations? Care to cite said speed regulations that do not allow for a slow moving vehicle on your local roads?

Unless otherwise posted... there is no minimum speed... This is well observed by the movement of such things as farm tractors.

And if a following motorist "MUST" pass, they should do so in a safe manner... such as waiting for an area without double yellow lines. Of course if the cyclist gets a bunch of vehicles behind them... perhaps they should pull off the road.

This was a case of one cyclist and one impatient motorist.

Now the response of the cyclist IS somewhat negative... but it physically causes no harm... However, the motorist stopping... what exactly were his intentions?

But again, what speed regulations are you speaking of here? Do you know of some local law regarding this road or other roads?

GravelMN

What does flipping someone off accomplish? Most of them are going to laugh and flip you back knowing that they accomplished their goal of pissing you off. This just encourages them to do it again. Some will engage you in an argument with more threats and gestures. A few will physically retaliate running you off the road, getting into a fist fight, possibly injuring you or damaging your bike. In very rare (thankfully) circumstances you will find yourself facing one or more individuals, possibly armed, with the mentality and ability to kick your arse.

Never, ever, has anyone who has made an intentional close pass and been flipped off said, "Sorry, my bad. I apologize. It will never happen again and I'll be sure to give the next cyclist I encounter adequate room and a pleasant smile when passing."

_____________

On another aspect of this thread: There are narrow roads with yellow lines and not much in the way of shoulders. We have a lot of them around here. The vast majority of the time, the situation is resolved by the driver behind me slowing way down, me moving as far to the right as I can, and we watch out for each other during a close but slow pass. If the road is too narrow for this and there is no way for the driver to legally or safely move left, I'll pull into a driveway, crossroad, or off onto the unpaved shoulder if I can.

degnaw

Lift your arm with your hand palm up, like a "wtf?" gesture.

Obviously the driver is in the wrong, but why go around flipping off potential homicidal maniacs in 3000+lb killing machines?

I-Like-To-Bike

Advice is good; hyperbolic rhetoric/over-the-top description of motorists and their vehicles are worthy of a "wtf?" gesture from the general public.

walrus1

Your post is so dead wrong it's not even funny. In fact it is probably the dumbest thing I've read all day. He flipped off a truck that endangered is life. Nothing wrong with that. In NYC we tend to throw in some choice words as well. The motorist was completely in the wrong here. He probably would have found a reason to attack someone else at another point. The cyclist didn't nothing to provoke him and the driver was simply a time bomb waiting to off. The drive flipped him off three times. That's a **** you not a taunt. Unless you live in a kindergarten it's exceptionally common out in the real world.

The fact you state, and I qoute, "The man who assaulted him could have done much worse. I can credit him for restraining his anger at least even though I didn't care for his response" tells me you probably shouldn't be telling anyone anywhere how to act. You realize you just condoned an assault on a cyclst? Are you sure your on the right forum?

HTupolev

There are often laws requiring that motor vehicles don't deliberately operate their vehicles at slow speed outside of special safety concerns.

There are also often laws saying that a jurisdiction may require an explicit minimum speed on certain roadways if they so choose. Although, in my experience this is implemented only very rarely.

There are also sometimes laws requiring that slow vehicles move right when there's safe clearance to do so if there's a significant buildup of faster vehicles behind them. Some skinny highways have brief stretches of right-hand lane specifically to enable slow vehicles to make room; in these cases, if you're on a bike, you should definitely move into these areas if you've got cars behind you.

And sometimes bikes are explicitly forbidden from riding along certain stretches of major highway. This is usually stated clearly on the on-ramp signage.

But I don't think I've ever heard of a situation where bikes are both permitted on a stretch of road and required to be going the speed limit. Typically it's totally legal for cyclists to be going slow on a roadway.