Thursday, 4 November 2010

Coping with poor infrastructure. Threats to kill.

Of course islands in the centre of the road are useful for pedestrians, though perhaps not quite as useful as an old fashioned pedestrian crossing.  They do seem to proliferate on my route to work and they do potentially cause problems for cyclists.  The way to negotiate them safely is to take the lane and this is particularly so if you cannot trust the impatient motorist behind you.  Thankfully this island near Houslow is not paired with a narrow cycle lane like the subject of my last post.  However some motorists do still express a preference for us to keep to the side of the road, in this case accompanied rather charmlessly with a threat to kill.



One of the more polite adjectives he uses is 'cocky' a word I used to hear in my first year at primary school from second years.  You see, we cyclists ought to recognise our inferiority to people like him in their 'motors' and we should not be upsetting the natural order of hierachy by getting about as fast as them.

A threat to kill is unlawful and I believe needs to be taken seriously when communicated from someone in a motor car to a cyclist.  I contacted the Metropolitan Police about this and the answer is that they will only look into it if I go into a Met station and fill in that form.  No, there is noone to whom I can e mail the video.  Shall I bother?

Postscript:  yes, I did bother, prompted by the many views here that I should.  For the results see my next post.

12 comments:

  1. Should you bother? Yes.

    It's hard work, but frankly he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I concur...yes most definitely bother!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, absolutely. And, dare I say it, post it on roadsafe.

    And twitter, for that matter. There is simply no situation in which such behaviour is appropriate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes. I had a driver effectively try to run me off the road (in anger, as oppose to just plain old fashioned NIMBYISM) There were witnesses, I went to the Plod and the CPS chose to prosecute. The trial is in Jan and the driver is being charged with speeding, negligent driving and failing to stop after an accident. The Plod take this sort of thing very seriously indeed. (But be warned - my incident was Oct 2009 and the trial is in Jan 2011!) It's hard work but this sort of behaviour should not go unchecked.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Absolutely needs to understand that what he said was wrong otherwise the behaviour will continue until someone gets hurt

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think as 'a man of the law' with video evidence perhaps you are best placed to see something like this through. Please report it.

    Great blog BTW.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Martin, I've hhad a chat with someone at another force who suggested that you should - if you're prepared to! - go back in and ask to speak to at least a sargeant or inspector, since it does look like a criminal offence has been committed ... Please drop me a note at timlennon@mac.com if you want his details.

    Yours,

    Tim.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You should report it, even if you do not intend to prosecute, the police can visit the driver to have a word and verbal warning about this type of driving and attitude. I am in the middle of this process now following this incident. The Police have been very supportive for this and I am awaiting their comments after speaking to the driver.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hinrf9D-TAA

    ReplyDelete
  9. Definitely bother. Should be a very easy detection for plod.

    ReplyDelete
  10. +1 for yes - definitely bother!

    ReplyDelete