[Closed] Richmond Park road rage nutjob..

Following a further 30 mins of tense discussion we have reached a point where I think I understand where she is coming from. Basically the infrastructure in the UK is not safe for cyclists so cyclists for their own self preservation should not ride on roads.

Nothing against cyclists, just that a cyclist will never win against a car so why take the risk.

The infrastructure is absolutely fine
Remove every car from the road and is functions beautifully and safely fopr every cyclist
the issue is the large metal boxes that use the infrastructure with us who do not give us enough respect or space or patience and endanger us to shave a few seconds of their time [ or in a busy city no time at all as they just get to the next trafic jam a few seconds earlier
What risk did the cyclist take there apart from being there?
Did you tell her women should no go out dressed like that at night alone as the infrastructure is just not safe?Why take the risk ? and that they should all stay at home for their own safety?
Its victim blaming basically rather than blaming the cause

I will guess that John won't rise to your pedantic interpretation of what he said in order to get a rise.

We will see.

Im sorry, but the belm is suddenly strong in this thread.

The Land Rover and the yellow Ka attempted to pass the cyclist on a mini-roundabout.

The Land Rover pulled over to the left as if to force the cyclist off the road. That's a classic punishment pass, right there. The yellow Ka simply drove off.

The gentleman driving the Land Rover got out of his car, made numerous threats toward the cyclist and saw fit to attempt to escalate the dispute, using threatening behavior and repeated threats of violence, lamenting the fact that there were witnesses.

The cyclist didn't handle himself well, but neither would I if I had two tonnes of ****-Panzer driven by a screaming, self-entitled chimpanzee attempting to use it as a weapon to intimidate. I'd like to think I'd remain calm, but I suspect I'd be screaming right back at him. And so would most of the sanctimonious posters on here.

Anyway, said chimpanzee was then subject numerous allegations of violent/threatening behavior towards staff from an ex-employee and thanks to his own evidence posted on twitter has been proven to possess a little tinkie.

I think the mods should close this thread down, there's nothing more to see here.

Actually Junkyard, I think you make a very valid point there - i see no reason why in commuter hotspots like London whole streets running parallel to main traffic routes could not be set aside as cycle superhighways (with junctions etc arranged accordingly to ease the flow of bikes in and out of town)

@john2000 unless she has some very redeeming features, I prescribe a new wife. There's nothing else to be done I'm afraid.

Absolutely agree with you junkyard, as does my placid wife. Take the cars off the road and the freaks off the street and everyone is safe.

I will guess that John won't rise to your pedantic interpretation of what he said in order to get a rise.

Both are victim blaming but the latter will be accused of hyperbole or some such, while the former is just common sense.

(Just in case it needed to be explained)

She has a number of redeeming features Boblo, she is a keeper.

<applause> for JY

No one spotted the edit did they? ......phew!

Closure to traffic in Richmond Park at weekends is something that definitely needs to be pushed. Any hint of a warm sunny day and the place is just back to back cars and cyclists trying to get past each other. As a minimum a one way system should be implemented which would enable a nice separate car and bike-lane system. The issue then would be the weekend warriors shouting at slower leisure cyclists and their kids for going to slowly.

That wouldn't solve the problem with this stretch of road though as it connects to other thoroughfares as well as to Richmond Park.

There needs to be a much greater acceptance on both sides that the roads are shared and consideration needs to be given to that to ensure incidents like this one don't become the norm.

Amen to many of you. The problem is not the roads, it's the vehicles, or more specifically the behaviours and expectations of a large subset of the people that drive them.

Closure to traffic in Richmond Park at weekends is something that definitely needs to be pushed. Any hint of a warm sunny day and the place is just back to back cars and cyclists trying to get past each other. As a minimum a one way system should be implemented which would enable a nice separate car and bike-lane system. The issue then would be the weekend warriors shouting at slower leisure cyclists and their kids for going to slowly.

Really? Why on earth would they want to close the park to traffic on the weekends? Just to appease cyclists? I ride in the park once a week and I would hate to see the roads closed. You have to remember it's a huge, accessible park on the edge of a city populated by over 6 million people, it's not a velodrome filled with deer. Of course it gets busy, but it's there to be used by everyone, walkers, runners, cyclists, horse riders, families etc. How would all the non-cyclist get to anywhere within the park and enjoy it without being able to drive in and use the car parks and support the rest of the facilities there?

There needs to be a much greater acceptance on both sides that the roads are shared and consideration needs to be given to that to ensure incidents like this one don't become the norm.

^^This is the only sensible and practical solution, unfortunately there are idiot motorists, idiot cyclist, idiot walkers, idiot runners, idiot dog walkers all using the same space.

[EDIT: and lots of nice normal people too! 😀 ]

I think you could do it such that the roads to the car parks were open only, although not most practical. I think the better option is for a big one-way system. This would really benefit and stop the cars that use the park as a short-cut.

Roads open to car parks, Boris Bike stands and 10mph mobility scooter/golf buggy hire in the car parks, sorted.

LHS - I still think you are missing the point, you are looking at this from a cyclists point of view when it is a multi-use park.

I sometimes use the park as a "shortcut". Why? Because it's a really nice place to drive through. And why shouldn't I use it as a shortcut, I don't abuse or intimidate cyclists and I have every right to use it in that way.

If anything the park is already biased in favour of cyclists at some times of the year, the opening times for traffic are loosely based on dusk and dawn, so you can go through the cycle-friendly gates when the place is shut to cars and enjoy a traffic free ride?

unfortunately there are idiot motorists, idiot cyclist, idiot walkers, idiot runners, idiot dog walkers all using the same space.

Yet if only one of those groups was removed, most of the problems would disappear - only one of those groups kills thousands of people every year. It's not a symmetrical issue.

I'd like to point out that a car (whatever its exact weight) is not a lethal weapon. It's a form of transport - just like a bicycle.

My kitchen knife is a device for preparing my dinner. It is a food-preparation implement, just like spatula.

Yet if only one of those groups was removed, most of the problems would disappear - only one of those groups kills thousands of people every year. It's not a symmetrical issue.

So how would all the roadies who drive into the car parks on the weekend to enjoy the park on their bikes get there? I'm sure you're going to say they should ride there but the fact is the car parks are full of bikes being unloaded from cars.

It is a multi use park, but i think it can be multi use without having the streams of traffic going through it. As long as those people travelling by car can reach it and park up then that should be it. During the week it should be open to traffic as it would cause insane congestion in other areas if it didn't. People going for nice drives through the park at weekends shouldn't be encouraged in my personal point of view.

I also don't think as a contrary point of view that London Dynamo weekend warriors should be treating it as their own personal velodrome and shouting at everyone who dares to impede their progress.

You appear to be completely missing the point. I'm hoping that the roadies driving into the park aren't part of the idiot motorists group. I'm not suggesting banning all cars from the roads, simply that resources should be concentrated on addressing idiot drivers rather than wasted on the rest.

warns74 - Member

How would all the non-cyclist get to anywhere within the park and enjoy it without being able to drive in and use the car parks and support the rest of the facilities there?

i know **** all about London, but even i know that Richmond Park is a leisurely 20min dawdle from the station.

edit: i'm wrong, my apologies.

it's a leisurely 20min dawdle from about 10 different stations.

shouting at everyone who dares to impede their progress.

Out of interest, what are they shouting?

I ride c100 miles a week, commuting and club and I've never experienced shouting in terms of abuse - but all the time in terms of warnings and safety - frequently me when pedestrians walk into the road without looking.

If you're coming up fast behind a slow-moving group, shouting 'coming through/on your right' is common practice for safety reasons... if the faster riders kept their mouths shut and one of the slower riders didn't look behind them before moving out for some reason, you'd have riders all over the floor... and in Richmond Park that means potentially under the wheels of a car.

Richmond Park is frequently used for training because it's safer than main roads and has some tidy hills in it, so forcing everyone to ride slowly would be unhelpful unless we want UK to no longer be the pre-eminent country at pro-level by cutting off the grass roots.

Fast riders shouting a warning seems to be the best way to manage the problem of riders moving at different speeds.

I'm not suggesting banning all cars from the roads, simply that resources should be concentrated on addressing idiot drivers rather than wasted on the rest.

From what I've seen, the Park Police deal with idiot drivers and idiot cyclists alike.

i know **** all about London, but even i know that Richmond Park is a leisurely 20min dawdle from the station.

edit: i'm wrong, my apologies.

it's a leisurely 20min dawdle from about 10 different stations.

Good luck with dictating how people should get to places.

I am interested to see how this brouhaha (or should it be Brewhaha?*) with the videoed angry driver will affect the business in reality. Both in the short and longer term. An interesting test of the effects of online exposure of this sort of thing and effects of social media campaigns.

Also as a regular user of Richmond Park I agree with Warns74. There is no need for any of the changes suggested. The park is for the recreational use of everyone and should not be changed for what appears to be the benefit of cyclists only when it disadvantages many of other user groups. It's should be about considerate shared use. They already have a ban on commmercial vehicles driving through the Park by the way, which at the very least restricts the width of vehicles that can drive through the park, and I've seen it enforced by the police who patrol within the park.

*I'll fetch my coat

Fast riders shouting a warning seems to be the best way to manage the problem of riders moving at different speeds.

Richmond park is a 20mph zone. A lot of club cyclists often go in excess of this and with so many different park users crossing trails, crossing roads etc there is absolutely no place for this in the park environment. At many path crossings you regularly see the weekend warriors approaching at over 20mph shouting at pedestrians crossing the road. Pedestrians have the right of way.

I am not saying this is the norm, but from someone who is in the park everyday whether it is cycling, running or walking the dog, the anti-social behavior of a minority of cyclists is growing.

warns74 - Member

Good luck with dictating how people should get to places.

i'm not dictating anything.

you asked how people would travel to a park that's already surrounded by train stations, if they didn't want to cycle and driving was further discouraged.

i subtly suggested that they might consider using a train.

my opinion in this counts not one jot. My idle ramblings can hardly be considered dictatorial.

I am not saying this is the norm, but from someone who is in the park everyday whether it is cycling, running or walking the dog, the anti-social behavior of a minority of cyclists is growing.

That's a shame. I guess it's a result of new riders carrying on behaviours they exhibit in other parts of their lives - ie: poor risk management and a sense of entitlement. I find though that the more people get into cycling, the more they adapt to the unspoken codes of riding with skill and consideration...

Re pedestrians crossing the road - are you saying drivers and cyclists all have to stop - as in at a zebra crossing but without any of the usual lights and markings - because that's daft - changing the rules as you pass from the public highway to the park is bound to lead to confusion ie: how will anyone know the priorities have changed? I haven't ridden in RP for a while but I never knew that and never saw any notices about it either - so if I saw a pedestrian stepping into the road, I'd be shouting out a warning - from the point of view of believing I had right of way and was preventing a collision, not from the point of view of any sense of entitlement...

i'm not dictating anything.

you asked how people would travel to a park that's already surrounded by train stations, if they didn't want to cycle and driving was further discouraged.

i subtly suggested that they might consider using a train.

my opinion in this counts not one jot. My idle ramblings can hardly be considered dictatorial

My apologies, it is a very helpful suggestion, even if the original question was rhetorical, (in the context that the park was there for all user groups to enjoy and the facilities were there to accommodate cars).

Pedestrians have priority when crossing the road, whether there is a zebra crossing at that junction or not.

IMO that needs to be better publicised then - no-one riding will know that - so the shouting may well be shouting a warning if someone's stepping out into the road rather than abuse. It's also a bit daft, changing the priority to the reverse of what it is on the public highway - it's bound to cause confusion

Pedestrians have priority when crossing the road, whether there is a zebra crossing at that junction or not.

This spurred a search on Google and I came across [b]'On the Road in Richmond Park' produced by the Richmond Park Local Policing Team.[/b] It sets out the rules and guidance for park users, including motorists and cyclists:

FRP.ORG.UK "http://www.frp.org.uk/pdf/frp/44_On_the_Road_In_Richmond_Park_Website_version_040712.pdf"

Among many things it says:
- Consideration for Pedestrians:
Pedestrians have priority, so let people cross if you see them waiting.

On the road [cyclists]:
- Ride no more than 2 abreast.
- Keep groups tight and to 8 riders or less.
- Warn of hazards with hand signals if possible. (Avoid shouting)

It also says that drivers (and cyclists) can cross the double solid white lines to overtake a cyclist travelling 10mph or less.

You learn something new, as they say.

So, unless you go hunting for info, no-one knows that pedestrians have priority... that's effective isn't it!
And in the meantime, the Great British Public are so convinced that cyclists are anti-social menaces, that any shouted warning is assumed to be abuse... when in fact the problem that needs solving is proper communication to all Park users of the reversal of the right of way when you pass through the gates of the Park...

+ has anyone actually thought it through? - stopping a bike from 20mph ain't easy...

This is an interesting article...

[url= http://www.****/news/article-3110608/The-cyclists-revenge-Coffee-shops-owned-butcher-filmed-astonishing-rant-cyclist-attacked-TripAdvisor-dozens-poor-reviews-complaining-owner.html ]http://www.****/news/article-3110608/The-cyclists-revenge-Coffee-shops-owned-butcher-filmed-astonishing-rant-cyclist-attacked-TripAdvisor-dozens-poor-reviews-complaining-owner.html[/url]

I knew this, isn't it in the highway code?
Rule 170;

watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way

This is an interesting article...

Whilst Im a little late to this pissing party, has nobody noticed that the cyclist spits on the small angry man at 0:47 secs?
Not sure whether that was deliberate or accidental though. No very nice either.

As an aside, the DM isn't the only repository for offensive comments - have you seen the ITN coverage on facebook?

It saddens me that there are so many knobbers out there, even the Daily Heil doesn't catch them all.

So one of the most basic things in the Highway code on pedestrian right of way is a surprise to many here.

I am hoping none of you drive a car...

What's in the HC isn't quite the same - it's about peds crossing side roads you might be turning into.

That highway code section is about [b]a road into which you are turning[/b] and pedestrians have priority [b]if they have started to cross[/b].

The RP leaflet takes things further and says that you should let people cross [b]if they are waiting[/b]. It goes beyond those that have started to cross already and is not limited to a road into which you are turning.

There is a difference.

[i]EDIT - Beaten to it by aracer[/i]

EDIT - Beaten to it by aracer

He certainly did! 😀

you should let people cross if they are waiting

from cycling in Holland this is what seems to happen anyway when strict liability is in force.

maybe it is because of the fear of an potential insurance scam ?