[censored].

John B said:

dkahn400 said:

Really? I experience some kind of unprovoked assault or attempted
assault from a motor vehicle about every 2 months on average.

You don't get out much then ;-)

I'd have issue with the 'unprovoked' bit.

Sure, there are stupid people doing dangerous things on a near daily
basis, but unprovoked assault by someone who is acting to do you
specific harm, rather than just undertaking a stupid manoeuvre as they
make their way somewhere?

I do decent commuting mileage (~40-50 miles a week, all in zone 2/3 west
London) with the occasional longer ride into the Surrey Hills and I
can't remember the last time someone actively tried to take an
unprovoked shot at me. It has happened, just really, really infrequently.

On the other hand, maybe that it's that word - "unprovoked".

I see plenty of cyclists around whose style is going to annoy other
people - and I don't just mean the red light runners and pavement
artists. I mean those with decent gear, reasonable talent and all the
attitude as they pile around urban areas like it is a race track -
exactly the attitude that would make them *really* dangerous behind a
wheel and could make them a target for irate oiks.

chris harrison wrote:
unprovoked assault by someone who is acting to do you

Quoted message said:

specific harm, rather than just undertaking a stupid manoeuvre as they
make their way somewhere?

Yep.

I see this every day in my East London commute. I've also been
deliberately driven into by a driver using a car with fake plates.

Quoted message said:

I see plenty of cyclists around whose style is going to annoy other
people ..... they pile around urban areas like it is a race track -

Cyclists going fast are an understandable target for someone using half
a ton of steel as a weapon?

There is NO EXCUSE for drivers attacking cyclists using their vehicle
as a weapon, yet it happens all the time.

Google Carl Baxter for an extreme example.

http://www.thebikezone.org.uk/motorcarnage/baxter.html

"dkahn400" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

"dkahn400" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You forgot Coren and Conway (and Katz, I think) ;-)

Quoted message said:

Katz and one or two others I knew about, but not Coren or Conway. My
grandfather apparently signed himself Kahn or Kahan as the fancy took
him.

Quoted message said:

There is also an unrelated Cornish name, Carne.

Sir Roy York Calne AAW...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

spindrift said:

chris harrison wrote:
unprovoked assault by someone who is acting to do you

Quoted message said:

specific harm, rather than just undertaking a stupid manoeuvre as they
make their way somewhere?

Yep.

I see this every day in my East London commute. I've also been
deliberately driven into by a driver using a car with fake plates.

Well move to West London then, it seems nicer over here 🙂

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I see plenty of cyclists around whose style is going to annoy other
people ..... they pile around urban areas like it is a race track -

Cyclists going fast are an understandable target for someone using half
a ton of steel as a weapon?

No, that is not what I said. "Going fast" is not equivalent to using the
road "like it is a race track".

Quoted message said:

There is NO EXCUSE for drivers attacking cyclists using their vehicle
as a weapon, yet it happens all the time.

No it doesn't happen all the time. It might happen to you, but it
doesn't happen to me.

If it happens to you "all the time" then maybe it is your riding style
that's riling them? That's not defending them, but it is searching for a
possible reason for our differing perspective that is more than just the
15 miles of Central London in between us.

I do not ride timidly or slowly, yet I cannot think of a time when I was
the victim of an unprovoked attack. Plenty of rubbish driving, just no
outright callous vindictiveness.

I'm minded always of Hanlon's Razor, "Never attribute to malice that
which can be adequately explained by stupidity."

chris harrison said:

Quoted message said:

Well move to West London then, it seems nicer over here 🙂

I quite agree. I rarely have any trouble except getting shouted at by
the very occasional impatient driver who seems to believe I should be
cycling in the gutter so they can pass me more easily.

I believe I live in the same parish as Dave Kahn too!

I find London an absolutely brilliant place to cycle - lots of car free
bus lanes allowing you to pass stationary cars with a huge grin on your
face, enough cyclists so we are not considered a particular oddity, huge
amounts of congestion keeping road speeds to those at which you can
easily keep up with the traffic flow and, most important of all, no hills!

Julesh

chris harrison said:

John B said:

dkahn400 said:

Really? I experience some kind of unprovoked assault or attempted
assault from a motor vehicle about every 2 months on average.

You don't get out much then ;-)

I'd have issue with the 'unprovoked' bit.

As you presumably weren't there you'll just have to take my word for
it. I'm not talking about simple dangerous driving either, but actual
assaults. I've had things thrown at me from cars, I've been pushed or
punched from cars, I've had bottles and other missiles hurled at me by
pedestrians, I've had pedestrians jump into the road and try to grab
the bike, and I've been rammed from behind by a driver who was annoyed
that I was holding him up in the bus lane. You could probably count
that last one as provoked. For the others the only provocation was
being a vulnerable target.

--
Dave...

dkahn400 said:

I was simply explaining why I have a name that is easily mistaken for
the Muslim Khan, which is the most common surname in Pakistan and
Afghanistan. Kahn is a variation of Cohen. Other variations include
Kahan, Kagan, Kane, Kaplan and, surprisingly perhaps, Schiff.

That's interesting, thanks. I had no idea there were so many
variations. I apologise for making an incorrect assumption based on
ignorance.

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Subscribe to PlusNet <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/referral/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Danny Colyer said:

That's interesting, thanks. I had no idea there were so many
variations. I apologise for making an incorrect assumption based on
ignorance.

No apology required, I assure you.

--
Dave...

chris harrison said:

If it happens to you "all the time" then maybe it is your riding style
that's riling them? That's not defending them, but it is searching for a
possible reason for our differing perspective that is more than just the
15 miles of Central London in between us.

Well, 15 miles of Central London and a huge demographic shift from some
of the poorest boroughs in the country to some of the richest.

I'd love for you to join me on my commute through Waltham Forest,
Hacknet, Tower Hamlets and The City, statistically the most dangerous
place in the UK in which to cycle.

As to riding style, I've been thinking about this and you are probably
partly right, with caveats.

Take Sewardstone and Old Ford Road.

Streetmap:

http://tinyurl.com/zhzxt

This is a narrow residential road with speed bumps. A cyclist assumes
the Primary Riding Position and can easily go faster than the vehicles
that have to slow down for the bumps, BUT drivers cannot countenance a
cyclist ahead of them so they overtake, cut in, slam the brakes on and
cut up the cyclist.

Now, you can anticipate dangerous and illegal behaviour by holding back
and allowing cars to get ahead, although of course you never know which
driver is going to be numpty enough to do something impatient and
dangerous.

But why should you?

I don't, and if a collision occurred it would be the drivers' fault,
not mine.

Any cyclist in East London has a story of abuse from drivers, objects
thrown, windscreen washers set to spray cyclists, sideswipes,
aggressive driving.

Thank your stars for where you live.

Quoted message said:

I agree with you that trouble is only to be expected if you react
to provocation,
You appear to be saying something beyond
just that the victim is asking for trouble, you are saying that the
victim is *morally responsible* for that trouble

If someone is "asking for trouble" they bear some of the blame when
that request is answered.

In article <[email hidden]>, Julesh

() said:

and, most important of all, no hills!

FSVO "no". Keep close to the river and you may be OK, but both Norf and
Saarf have some distinctly lumpy Scenery.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
And then there was light and He thought it was good, so He threw the
receipt away.