Threat from motorist

amaferanga

Motorist this morning:

Next time I see you I'll run you down

After we (me and girlfriend) held him up in a bus lane for a few seconds (which he shouldn't have been in anyway). Bit further on he's stopped and gets out the car as we pass and shouts:

f*@# off f*@# off

And I tell him that it was a bus lane.

We see him again later after he's parked up and is walking through the city centre and he swears at me again before telling me he'll run me down.

The scary thing is we see him fairly often and I've noticed him before as he generally passes us VERY closely. Reported to the police, but don't have the full registration yet.

For anyone in Sheffield cycling along Fred Mulley road and then Furnival Road at around 8:30am look out for this idiot: black BMW 1 series, registration YR07***, South African flag in the back window of the car.

Why are there so many numpties in this country?

iPad

It's not my side of town, but I'll keep an eye out.

If you get any more of the reg let us know.

And definitely report him for threatening behaviour.

UndercoverElephant

amaferanga wrote:

South African flag in the back window of the car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSLMKUXZ3hk

DanielCoffey

If you have the budget, grab yourself a cheap bike camera, say the MuVi from Amazon/ebay and have it running as you are about town.

PBo

UndercoverElephant wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

South African flag in the back window of the car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSLMKUXZ3hk

haven't clicked yet, but I'm guessing - spittiing image?


clicking now....


Yes!!! Not just me who gets that song in their head whenever they hear of some unsavoury 'bok behavior..... :evil:

.....am I racist??? :shock:

BigJimmyB

amaferanga wrote:

....BMW......

Shock, horror

amaferanga

DanielCoffey wrote:

If you have the budget, grab yourself a cheap bike camera, say the MuVi from Amazon/ebay and have it running as you are about town.

I looked into getting one last winter actually and then decided against it, but I have now bought an MD80 (very similar to the Muvi) on ebay for £7.81 and a high speed 4Gb SD card for £8. Seems to get decent reviews and for £16 if its crap it really doesn't matter.

jopari

amaferanga wrote:

I looked into getting one last winter actually and then decided against it, but I have now bought an MD80 (very similar to the Muvi) on ebay for £7.81 and a high speed 4Gb SD card for £8. Seems to get decent reviews and for £16 if its crap it really doesn't matter.

A bit off-topic, but do you know which e-bay seller you bought from? There are so many selling the MD80, and I'd want to know a recommended one (i.e. no hidden costs, quick delivery etc).

Ta!

daniel_b

jopari wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

I looked into getting one last winter actually and then decided against it, but I have now bought an MD80 (very similar to the Muvi) on ebay for £7.81 and a high speed 4Gb SD card for £8. Seems to get decent reviews and for £16 if its crap it really doesn't matter.

A bit off-topic, but do you know which e-bay seller you bought from? There are so many selling the MD80, and I'd want to know a recommended one (i.e. no hidden costs, quick delivery etc).

Ta!

I was thinking that too!

Oh and a BMW, and a 1 series driver, there is no hope for the man, I would just give him your sympathy.

Dan

wvanry

just lifted this off another site F.Y.I

`don't get involved, in fact taking a picture could result in them getting even more wound up. Simply stop, move off the road, make mental note of car description and plate. When they have left the area phone police.
Always Always report incidents, this way the police get to build up a picture of regular offender, and it is often the same group of people in their different cars.
You can ask for action and might have to go to court, you do not neccessarily need witnesses. HOWEVER if you want swift action and the Police will be much keener to follow this, as it takes little of their time to action, ask for a Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002. This relates to the driver and any car he may be driving, might be in his parent's car or his own car, does not matter. The warning will be issued in writing there and then, any second reported offence (see what I mean when I say always report matters) and the car is seized without notice.
Approx cost to retrieve is £100 for removal and £12 for every day retained, usually three weeks can be a lot more, vehicle can also be kept and crushed.
Here are brief details:-

* Delete as appropriate
1. " You are/have been driving in a careless / inconsiderate manner
Contrary to section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
or
2. You are / have been driving on common land / moorland / land which is not part of a road / a footpath / bridleway / restricted byway
Contrary to section 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
Then add in either case
In a manner which is causing / has been causing / is likely to cause
Alarm distress or annoyance to members of the public.
I must warn you that if you continue to drive the vehicle in the same way or if you drive the vehicle in the same way on any other occasion, I can seize the vehicle under section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002." `

amaferanga

jopari wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

I looked into getting one last winter actually and then decided against it, but I have now bought an MD80 (very similar to the Muvi) on ebay for £7.81 and a high speed 4Gb SD card for £8. Seems to get decent reviews and for £16 if its crap it really doesn't matter.

A bit off-topic, but do you know which e-bay seller you bought from? There are so many selling the MD80, and I'd want to know a recommended one (i.e. no hidden costs, quick delivery etc).

Ta!

They all seem to say much the same - 2 - 4 weeks for delivery. I've not had great experiences with sellers from Hong Kong in the past, but all have either sent a replacement after the original has gone missing in the post or refunded me. This seller is called strong-stock and has 99.4% positive for 785 sales, which isn't at all bad.

I can't recommend them, but I'll try to remember to post back here when it arrives. Certainly can't complain about the price!

amaferanga

wvanry wrote:

just lifted this off another site F.Y.I

`don't get involved, in fact taking a picture could result in them getting even more wound up. Simply stop, move off the road, make mental note of car description and plate. When they have left the area phone police.
Always Always report incidents, this way the police get to build up a picture of regular offender, and it is often the same group of people in their different cars.
You can ask for action and might have to go to court, you do not neccessarily need witnesses. HOWEVER if you want swift action and the Police will be much keener to follow this, as it takes little of their time to action, ask for a Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002. This relates to the driver and any car he may be driving, might be in his parent's car or his own car, does not matter. The warning will be issued in writing there and then, any second reported offence (see what I mean when I say always report matters) and the car is seized without notice.
Approx cost to retrieve is £100 for removal and £12 for every day retained, usually three weeks can be a lot more, vehicle can also be kept and crushed.
Here are brief details:-

* Delete as appropriate
1. " You are/have been driving in a careless / inconsiderate manner
Contrary to section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
or
2. You are / have been driving on common land / moorland / land which is not part of a road / a footpath / bridleway / restricted byway
Contrary to section 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
Then add in either case
In a manner which is causing / has been causing / is likely to cause
Alarm distress or annoyance to members of the public.
I must warn you that if you continue to drive the vehicle in the same way or if you drive the vehicle in the same way on any other occasion, I can seize the vehicle under section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002." `

I agree about the taking pictures comment, but this will be a tiny little video camera mounted on my bars (probably) so it'll be fairly discreet. I know that pulling out a camera or your phone to take a picture of an already irate motorist is likely to escalate the situation.

I think there's certainly a good argument against video cameras on the bike, but at the moment I think there's a slightly better argument in their favour. I'm going to try it, but if it does get me into more trouble with motorists then I'll probably go back to swearing under my breath and shaking me head (which doesn't seem to achieve much).

The Rookie

wvanry wrote:

ask for a Section 59 Police Reform Act 2002. This relates to the driver and any car he may be driving, might be in his parent's car or his own car, does not matter. The warning will be issued in writing there and then, any second reported offence (see what I mean when I say always report matters) and the car is seized without notice.
`

Shame whoever wrote that hadn't a clue about S59....
1/ it relates to the car and NOT the driver
2/ It requires one of a range of criminal offences to be commited that also constitues 'anti-social' behaviour, just being anti-social is not enough, threatening to drive over you is not a road traffic offence and wouldn't apply. Second offence likewise has to be from the same range of criminal offences.

Usually merely a 'report' from a member of the public would not usually be considered sufficiently reliable (it could be malicious in its own right) to instigate an S59.

Simon

Clever Pun

PBo wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

South African flag in the back window of the car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSLMKUXZ3hk

haven't clicked yet, but I'm guessing - spittiing image?


clicking now....


Yes!!! Not just me who gets that song in their head whenever they hear of some unsavoury 'bok behavior..... :evil:

.....am I racist??? :shock:

sterotypes are there sometime for a reason... I've met a few very nice South Africans though in fairness

amaferanga are you blik?

BentMikey

I'm going to completely disagree on the taking a photo/video comment. It's my experience that as soon as you mention the video camera, it almost invariably stops any further misbehaviour from an errant moton. That's the ideal - nip an incident in the bud before it gets any worse.

Oh, I'm not sure S59 is suitable according to my sergeant mate.

clanton

Post deleted

amaferanga

Clever Pun wrote:

PBo wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

South African flag in the back window of the car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSLMKUXZ3hk

haven't clicked yet, but I'm guessing - spittiing image?


clicking now....


Yes!!! Not just me who gets that song in their head whenever they hear of some unsavoury 'bok behavior..... :evil:

.....am I racist??? :shock:

sterotypes are there sometime for a reason... I've met a few very nice South Africans though in fairness

amaferanga are you blik?

No.

the_village_idiot

i would have told him to p!ss off as it was a bus lane- and if he threatened me again just hit him

Tonymufc

the_village_idiot wrote:

i would have told him to p!ss off as it was a bus lane- and if he threatened me again just hit him

Now I'm not advocating violence here, but I tend to deal with incidents like this in one way and one way only, and that is to tell the little sh1t to pull over and see if they are as hard as they make out. 9/10 they just carry on and don't bother stopping. However there is the odd occasion when the do stop. Now I'm not a big guy by any stretch of the imagination, 5'8' to be exact, but I'm as game as anything and don't take sh1t from anyone regardless of how big they are. And on the occassion when they have pulled over and get out and make their way over I start to take my helmet and skull cap off to reveal a skin head and goatee beard. Not what they were expecting. Its usually at this point that I get "I'm sorry mate I didn't see you". Just because you ride a bike doesn't give these w@nkers the right to bully you when you're out on the road. The law in this country is a joke so I wouldn't put too much faith in the road traffic act. Thats there to make money out of law abbiding motorists that get caught out every now and then because they're an easy target for the law. Direct action, make a stand, and don't become a victim. Rant over.

the_village_idiot

Tonymufc wrote:

the_village_idiot wrote:

i would have told him to p!ss off as it was a bus lane- and if he threatened me again just hit him

Now I'm not advocating violence here, but I tend to deal with incidents like this in one way and one way only, and that is to tell the little sh1t to pull over and see if they are as hard as they make out. 9/10 they just carry on and don't bother stopping. However there is the odd occasion when the do stop. Now I'm not a big guy by any stretch of the imagination, 5'8' to be exact, but I'm as game as anything and don't take sh1t from anyone regardless of how big they are. And on the occassion when they have pulled over and get out and make their way over I start to take my helmet and skull cap off to reveal a skin head and goatee beard. Not what they were expecting. Its usually at this point that I get "I'm sorry mate I didn't see you". Just because you ride a bike doesn't give these w@nkers the right to bully you when you're out on the road. The law in this country is a joke so I wouldn't put too much faith in the road traffic act. Thats there to make money out of law abbiding motorists that get caught out every now and then because they're an easy target for the law. Direct action, make a stand, and don't become a victim. Rant over.

Thats a little too gung ho for me- you never know if as they aproach to shake your hand they dont stab you with a knife hidden behind their back....

Mr Sworld

Make a stand every time! There are very few that will leave the safety of the tin box and if they do.... You're on a bike! They aren't going to catch you on foot!

Mithras

[JOB HEAD ON] I wouldn't advise anybody enticing a driver out of a car to sort things out Queensbury Rules Style. Firstly, it makes you the aggressor and whilst most drivers will not get out of the car and the few who do think better of a confrontation. That leaves a small percentage who will fancy thier chances. This leaves you open to either a good kicking or a nice warm feeling (not the I'm hard as nails me feeling). The one you get around the back of your collar followed by the nice shiny wrist bracelets. Best case scenario is that you win the fight and get charged with assault. You could lose and still get charged with affray.
Very worst case, they don't get out of thier tin boxes, they just run you over.

If you have to defend yourself because some irate idot decides to have a pop at you thats fine, you can even launch a pre-emptive strike if you can justify it. NEVER EVER instigate the old fisticufs what ever the reason! [JOB HEAD OFF]

iPad

Mithras wrote:

[JOB HEAD ON] I wouldn't advise anybody enticing a driver out of a car to sort things out Queensbury Rules Style. Firstly, it makes you the aggressor and whilst most drivers will not get out of the car and the few who do think better of a confrontation. That leaves a small percentage who will fancy thier chances. This leaves you open to either a good kicking or a nice warm feeling (not the I'm hard as nails me feeling). The one you get around the back of your collar followed by the nice shiny wrist bracelets. Best case scenario is that you win the fight and get charged with assault. You could lose and still get charged with affray.
Very worst case, they don't get out of thier tin boxes, they just run you over.

If you have to defend yourself because some irate idot decides to have a pop at you thats fine, you can even launch a pre-emptive strike if you can justify it. NEVER EVER instigate the old fisticufs what ever the reason! [JOB HEAD OFF]

Making assumptions from this that you are a member of the Police, can I ask you a question?

I used to study Karate and our chief instructor was a senior police officer. He used to inform us of protocols regarding the law and violence / self defence. I remember him telling me that if your are in "fear for your life" you are legally able to use what ever force is required to defend yourself (he did point out that should you cause someone serious harm or fatly wound them, it would be difficult to prove how in fear of your life you actually were).

My question is...if someone is threatening to run you over with their car, then would that constitute a threat on your life with a (potentially) deadly weapon (i.e a car) and in that case, would you [theoretically] have the right to defend yourself, using whatever force is necessary?

If someone threatened to kill me in the town centre, I would do what ever is required to take that threat away, which would involve me not stopping until one of us was unconscious...!
That said, I would in no condone violence, but I would always defend myself...(I once ended up as a victim of violence, and I made sure there is no way that will ever happen again).

UndercoverElephant

Problem is, in that situation surely the threat to your life has ceased, due to the motorist having get out of his car. From then on, you're just taking revenge for what went before.

graeme_s-2

iPad wrote:

I used to study Karate and our chief instructor was a senior police officer. He used to inform us of protocols regarding the law and violence / self defence. I remember him telling me that if your are in "fear for your life" you are legally able to use what ever force is required to defend yourself (he did point out that should you cause someone serious harm or fatly wound them, it would be difficult to prove how in fear of your life you actually were).

My question is...if someone is threatening to run you over with their car, then would that constitute a threat on your life with a (potentially) deadly weapon (i.e a car) and in that case, would you [theoretically] have the right to defend yourself, using whatever force is necessary?

As someone with no legal expertise, qualifications or experience, I find it hard to imagine in what circumstance you would be able to use physical violence to defend yourself from someone trying to injure you with a car. If they're not in the car any more, then the immediate threat to your life has already been removed. I struggle to imagine a situation where you're able to haul someone trying to run you over out of their car and give them a hiding.

iPad

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Problem is, in that situation surely the threat to your life has ceased, due to the motorist having get out of his car. From then on, you're just taking revenge for what went before.

But has it though? If he said that he was going to get a gun later and shoot me, would I be entitled to defend myself?

I don't see why we should have to live in fear because of the actions of a handful of tw@ts like that..!

I bet if the OP had looked like that bloke David Hay fought recently, the driver wouldn't have threatened him. He was a bully and needs to be taught a lesson in the only language these thugs understand :evil
[f*ck me, I sound like a Daily Mail reader :shock: , I must sit in a darken room somewhere and calm down]

iPad

Graeme_S wrote:

iPad wrote:

I used to study Karate and our chief instructor was a senior police officer. He used to inform us of protocols regarding the law and violence / self defence. I remember him telling me that if your are in "fear for your life" you are legally able to use what ever force is required to defend yourself (he did point out that should you cause someone serious harm or fatly wound them, it would be difficult to prove how in fear of your life you actually were).

My question is...if someone is threatening to run you over with their car, then would that constitute a threat on your life with a (potentially) deadly weapon (i.e a car) and in that case, would you [theoretically] have the right to defend yourself, using whatever force is necessary?

As someone with no legal expertise, qualifications or experience, I find it hard to imagine in what circumstance you would be able to use physical violence to defend yourself from someone trying to injure you with a car. If they're not in the car any more, then the immediate threat to your life has already been removed. I struggle to imagine a situation where you're able to haul someone trying to run you over out of their car and give them a hiding.

Just because a car's not moving, does not stop it from being a threat, and I wouldn't have to pull someone out of it to give them a good hiding, I could easily do it though a window :twisted:

The Rookie

iPad wrote:

But has it though? If he said that he was going to get a gun later and shoot me, would I be entitled to defend myself?

Yes, but not against the threat (you can't beat him up just because he said he would go get a gun) but against the actuatlity (he's got a gun and coming after you).

There is a valid defence of self defence, which can sometimes be stretched (think of John Prescott attacking that farmer, once he egg had been thrown there was actaully nothing to defend against, but self defence was accepted on the basis that an asault had occured and there was a continuing threat - although it was never tested in court.

Allowing the beating up someone who makes a threat with no substantive proof that that threat would ever be realised is tantamount to permitting anarchy!

Simon

iPad

The Beginner wrote:

iPad wrote:

But has it though? If he said that he was going to get a gun later and shoot me, would I be entitled to defend myself?

Yes, but not against the threat (you can't beat him up just because he said he would go get a gun) but against the actuatlity (he's got a gun and coming after you).

There is a valid defence of self defence, which can sometimes be stretched (think of John Prescott attacking that farmer, once he egg had been thrown there was actaully nothing to defend against, but self defence was accepted on the basis that an asault had occured and there was a continuing threat - although it was never tested in court.

Allowing the beating up someone who makes a threat with no substantive proof that that threat would ever be realised is tantamount to permitting anarchy!

Simon

Shame

Cos I f*cking hate living in fear

Tonymufc

Mithras wrote:

[JOB HEAD ON] I wouldn't advise anybody enticing a driver out of a car to sort things out Queensbury Rules Style. Firstly, it makes you the aggressor and whilst most drivers will not get out of the car and the few who do think better of a confrontation. That leaves a small percentage who will fancy thier chances. This leaves you open to either a good kicking or a nice warm feeling (not the I'm hard as nails me feeling). The one you get around the back of your collar followed by the nice shiny wrist bracelets. Best case scenario is that you win the fight and get charged with assault. You could lose and still get charged with affray.
Very worst case, they don't get out of thier tin boxes, they just run you over.

If you have to defend yourself because some irate idot decides to have a pop at you thats fine, you can even launch a pre-emptive strike if you can justify it. NEVER EVER instigate the old fisticufs what ever the reason! [JOB HEAD OFF]

Like I said, I'm not encouraging any sort of violence, but the law fails the law abiding public.Take the case of the trucker that killed the cyclist and threw his bike over a hedge row to conceal his crime. He was given a two year sentence. Rob a bank and you get ten years. Go figure. This isn't a personal attack towards police officers but the useless laws they enforce. A driver tries to kill you with his car so you offer the little sh1t out. Give him a slap and its the cyclist thats gonna get done. What a great country we live in. Remember everyone crime does pay because the law is always on the criminals side.

greg66_tri_v2.0

iPad wrote:

Just because a car's not moving, does not stop it from being a threat, and I wouldn't have to pull someone out of it to give them a good hiding, I could easily do it though a window :twisted:

You'd have to be alongside it to pull someone out of it. If it's not moving then, it's not much of a threat. Cars have a tough job going sidways from a standing start.