Here on the live blog, we've seen plenty of incidents where cyclists have vented their frustration at motorist driving carelessly or dangerously. But this latest response — all the way from Auckland, New Zealand — is a new one even for us.
The cyclist who goes by the name of Captain Pinchy on Twitter, shared this footage of a driver making a turn across him, completely ignoring the oncoming rider in front of him, making him brake, come to halt and go around. But in the middle of all that, the cyclist decided to tug on the rear door handle of the car and leave it open, before riding away.
“Dude. If you make life difficult for me, I’ll return the favour (opens back door),” read the caption.
Most of reaction on social media has, as usual, was one to probably ignore, given most commenters were quick to jump on the cyclist-hating train which obviously veered into death threats very quickly.
“If this happened to me and I was in a car I would have just slowed down and waited. Why do cyclists expect to never have to stop?” wrote one person, to which Captain Pinchy replied: “Oh we do. We're just sick of f***wits trying to kill is and actually have the balls to point it out.”
Meanwhile, another person quoted “If you make life difficult for me” followed by a few question and exclamation marks; the cyclist replying: “It’s called 'underselling it'. Please insert 'if you try and kill me with your shitty driving' if it was hard to understand.”
One more person pointed out: “Slowing down is also an option,” which was followed by Captain Pinchy’s rebuke: “I did, but where is the lesson for the illegal turning driver if I just ignore it?”
It would be good to note here that in the UK, there’s no legal offence of opening someone’s car door without permission, however, depending on the circumstances, it could potentially be committing an offence of disorderly behaviour and vehicle tampering/interference.
> Driver handed suspended sentence for cutting across and killing cyclist claimed he was “blinded by the sun” before fatal crash – despite motorist behind saying she spotted victim
And obviously, by doing so you’re making physical contact with their car which we know most motorists aren’t too keen on. Case in point, this latest near miss, in which a cyclist was passed by a motorist on solid white lines while barely even leaving his own lane, and the distance was so little that the cyclist could give a tap on the car with just a flick of his shoulder as it was close passing him.
But the driver then pulled over a few hundred metres ahead, got out of the car and started screaming at the cyclist, while claiming that he gave “loads of room”, even proceeding to physically assault him by shoving him and his bike down to the ground.
Now we can debate all-day long whether that move is one that’s warranted and makes complete sense as a harmless act of retaliation against the driver, or does it teeter on the edge of decency, or maybe even spill over into the territories of “Yeah, I’m never doing that to anyone”, but…
Wait, there’s no but, because guess what? That’s what we’re here to do. Let me know what you make of this in the comments.
Add new comment
21 comments
RE: "They might not be perfect, but they’re a step in the right direction... More than a path, they offer kids freedom to explore and stay active"
I find statements like this difficult. Don't want to be critical (I'm aware just how much time and work goes into even something like this)! It's true in the sense that in the UK it's bold and brave to even whisper "There will be change. There is ... another mode! And what's more we will provide for it using a little of the riches currently spent accomodating driving".
... but ... that is exactly the problem. Our streets and indeed living systems are massively car-dominated. That is not sustainable (in all kinds of ways); and in fact already causes problems. Which we currently accept, because "that's how it is".
In fact "cycle lanes" and bollards are not a "game changer" *. - they're a symptom of a car-dominated system. A single cycle lane - or even a couple in a "scheme" - will not "offer kids freedom to explore and stay active". (Compare kids going to school here - or going to activities by themselves here).
Here's what "not perfect, but a step in the right direction" looks like. (Yes - they've still got plenty bollards and a few "wand / orca" cycle lanes - but they have a *network* and e.g. cycle paths have priority over side roads.)
In the UK we know what doesn't work - we've done this many times before. What we haven't done is chosen to reduce motoring convenience slightly while seriously increasing cycling convenience and attractiveness across a network. And not build in fatal compromises from the start and/or roll things back after a few months because "concerns".
* What would be a "game-changer"? Establishing the basics for mass cycling. Those are: a network of sufficiently safe and attractive cycling routes connecting destinations (e.g. shops, schools, workplaces...) which have secure parking.
Not doing that? It's a bit like we're saying "while we're obviously not going to restrict people exercising their lions and tigers in public in any serious way, we've now dug a big pit next to the footway to keep people safe (and put a small fence next to the cycle lane)."
Those bollards look nightmarish.
Just look at how hard you have to work to keep vehicles off the footway (where it would be illegal for them to drive of course, never mind impolite). Given that, the (far fewer) wands "protecting" the cycle lane might as well be made out of foam, or paper.
Glad to see those Japanese track bikes were worth the cost. How many medals did they win in the cycling again? Oh yeah, a big fat 0
Not only that, but they seemed to have a hard time 'sticking to their lane', especially near GB&NI riders. 🙄
Do you actually think they did this for the medals? This is Toray. If you know, you know.
On a different note it would be cool to measure these in a wind tunnel against the other bikes. We might never get to know how good they actually are before they get consigned to a museum.
I remember reading years ago, about how you could easily press the 'engine off' button on a bus if the driver acted like a twunt and you ended up behind it… Not sure whether that still works, cos 'elf'n'safety innit'.
As regards this case:
(1) Oldfatgit is correct - motorists are far less likely to ever be in this position because the turning motorist would be far more aware of the damage that could be done to him or to his pride and joy by another motor vehicle, so takes a lot more care and (often) even follows the road laws about giving way etc etc. Whereas if its just a cyclist then most motorists will say sod the road laws and just bully their way through.
(2) I agree with what Rendel has said below: it would be very risky to open the car door, unless you can see inside and are absolutely sure there are no unsecured children, animals, luggage, shopping, etc, which are going to spill all over the road and leave you open to legal action.
Still works I believe, for the very health and safety reasons you mention, the emergency services have to be able to shut the engine off as quickly as possible if the vehicle is on fire or leaking fuel. Don't know if the new electric buses have an equivalent though.
Most engine cut offs have been removed from the rear outer skin and tend to be located under the engine access hatch.
Alas, the days of the big red mushroom are gone.
Probably because of too many stalled busses that needed a fitter to restart them ..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgkOP31Njeo
This is from 2017, but buses don't get replaced very often.
Ahh ... the famous “If this happened to me and I was in a car I would have just slowed down and waited. " **
Yeah right, of course you would.
You would have waited while leaning on the horn and swearing your fecking head off, safe in the knowledge that you're surrounded by 2 tonnes of armour and lockable doors.
** but it wouldn't happen to you ... because *cars*.
Re the door opening, far too many what ifs:
- What if there's an unsecured (yes shouldn't be but might be) pet or child on the back seat that could fall out and be injured;
- What if the driver assumes you're trying to get to them and reacts with violence;
- What if the driver panics and shoots forward or back, hitting someone else or indeed you with the open door;
- What if any of the above results in legal action and you're clearly seen to be doing things not in self defence or the heat of the moment but in order to provoke a reaction, at best the case against the driver could fail, at worst it could be you in the dock.
I'm no angel and no stranger to hitting a roof or bonnet in the heat of the moment when someone's put me in danger, but deliberately being an annoying dick in retaliation to a crappy but not really dangerous bit of driving (I think I would have just swerved round the back and muttered "arsehole" to myself and moved on) is not only overly provocative but also looks really petty.
Imagine if one cut up a pedestrian because one hadn't looked properly and they leaned down and flicked your QR lever or brake caliper lever open, would you be OK with that?
Agree. Also many cars now will auto-lock when driving off, so it's just going to end up as grabbing the handle, which could still end up with outcomes 2, 3 or 4 above, "justified" by "touch my facking motor" response.
I just ride on with an internal expletive, swipe and hit "save clip" on the Garmin and submit to Op Snap later (assuming incident is bad enough). No point in engaging at the time, they already think you're a c**t because you're on a bike, submit footage and wait for the NIP notification. Had a NIP "keep the footage" message this week actually, it makes up for the original incident. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
agreed 100% - plus if you have the poor driving on camera, you don't need to do anything further. Just send it to the police.
...who will do the square root of nothing despite you spending over half an hour preparing a statement, uploading videos, and filling in a poorly designed form on a website that doesn't provide you with an account to save your details. One does not simply send it to the police etc. And if the Police so wish then they'll find an excuse not to prosecute even the most blatant reckless driving.
I'm not sure that's an equivalent action, its more like what if the unzipped your saddle bag.
"ArE yOu TouChIN' My BiKE?!!!"
Surely such conduct would justifiy immediate retribution / violence. At the very least a strongly worded letter to the Daily Mail explaining how the offender "damaged" your property in an entirely unprovoked attack. The tax dodging, non helmet wearing b@stard.
You keep children or pets in your saddlebag?
Carradice do make some pretty big saddlebags…
ever since they made it illegal for them to ride on the crossbar
Surely coming to a slow stop, a good stare and a slow, despairing shake of the head would suffice.