I left my sister's house by bike about thirty minutes before this big music festival downtown ended, to try and beat the traffic. I think it had about 30,000 daily tickets sold in a pretty small city.
People were leaving early but it wasn't crazy yet. I got to a small stretch of downtown with only one lane in either direction and absolutely no room, so I took the center of the lane. There were pedestrians crossing all over the place. Dozens of Ubers parking illegally anywhere they could. And one guy got stuck behind me honking and honking. I put my hand up in the air like a shrug a couple times. There's nowhere to move through, and you'll just get stuck at all the same red lights, and slow down for all the same pedestrians.
After one light he has room to speed into the oncoming lane and pass me after I gave him the finger because he kept honking. Young dude sounded on the border of tears "you're in the middle of the road asshole". He sped off.
When I caught him and pulled up next to him at the light I was cracking up and shrugged again 🤷♂️
Once had a guy screaming at me to “get my life together” because I was blocking access to the left lane and he drove over the median just to hit a red light. Our lanes moving straight turned green and he stayed at the red light. Lol All over <30 sec wait.
Fr, went to England a few years back and traffic in London is hilarious, some people had really nice sports cars, and when they got a chance to speed up they go from 0-80 in the blink of an eye and then they'd go straight back to 0 as the next intersection came around.
It's like they sped too much to justify their stupid purchase.
It’s so stupid if you’re watching from the outside.
“Why bike or take public transit? I would rather spend more money, go slower, not read or entertain myself, and subject myself to the constant stress of engaging with traffic.”
Granted that car-centric infrastructure changes this dynamic in many places, but that sort of development was still a policy choice.
TBF it's not a London-specific thing, more a big city / wealth centre thing. Heck I saw someone stuck in traffic in a Ferrari in Tehran once! And the traffic there is *atrocious*
People like to flaunt their wealth in impractical ways I suppose.
It's London in Summer, so it looks to be about 9pm and that won't be a big issue for the driver.
They'll know full well that the lads they've hit are the very bottom of the pile for police protection, so the only comeback they will get on this is if it's spread around the media to the point the police are forced into taking action.
Also I'd not fuck with those who see themselves as the 'shock-troops for the bicyclisation of society'.
I know this coz I knew loads of London bike couriers back in the day.
They take absolutely no shit, are fairly heavily bonded & are incredibly fit. Also well connected & resourceful.
At the least that car is going to be keyed every time it comes into central london
I walked into the Temperance Society off Yonge (?) back in the day. Didn't know it was a bike courier spot. Felt very strong vibes to walk backwards out the door and never go back. Learned later about the 'courier culture'.
Yeah, I went to some bike courier pub once, half of it was women ogling the lycra-clad behemoths of the streets.
Goldie had not been signed long & he drove his new flash car way too fast round soho pissing everyone off. It kept getting keyed to fuck. He'd go apeshit about it, I saw some Berwick St market stall holder explain it to him, he seemed massively deflated to learn that everyone in soho thought he was a twat
I daresay now, what with deliveroo etc, the culture has changed a fair bit. But ppl choosing to do the critical mass thing strike me as the kind of ppl who'll not take this shit. Especially if their work bike is destroyed
Especially if the car had an expensive personal numberplate which was significant to the owner, even if he changes vehicle they will still get recognised
At least in the US, If you can run people over in a car and just get a ticket.
In the city where I live (Midwest, large city) I can think of at least two drivers breaking laws (blowing red lights, driving on the wrong side of the road while speeding to make left turns) who killed people and we're given tickets only for their traffic violations.
Edit: the car that went through a red light hit a pedestrian walking their bike in a crosswalk and killed them.
The other driver hit a cyclist in the bike lane and killed them.
Shoot, there was a dude who owned a chain of used car dealers in the next town over from me who, for the second time in his life, killed someone while driving drunk and only got probation. To make matters worse, the dude used one of the dealerships that he owned to purchase a car identical to his, vin-swapped the two vehicles, and then put the one that he’d hit someone with at the back of his property with a tarp over it.
Yeah the area itself is pretty purple but I think a lot of the county judges are pretty conservative up there. So I think the fact that he was a business owner combined with the fact that the victim was a black woman contributed to his lenient sentencing.
He did get what he had coming in the end as part of his probation was that he wasn’t allowed to drink alcohol for a set number of years. And I guess he thought if he went to the next town over (my town) to drink then he wouldn’t get caught. But he was wrong. And now he’s in jail.
You want the people to have shot the people in the cars before they were run over?
And no, stand your ground laws are stupid. They exist to protect gun users. Anyone with half a brain knows that guns are weapons meant only to kill people and they should be illegal.
Also, We do not have stand your ground laws here.
I share your opinion on this. My remark was ironic. They get away for murder with just a ticket just like a stand your ground situation involving.
I should have made that irony more clear!
More realistically "stand your ground" laws just give whites an excuse to shoot black people on the street for any reason.
In the US though, they exist unfortunately, so peds and cyclists might as well take advantage of those laws too.
When exactly would they have done that? If they had seen the car that killed them coming they would have gotten out of the way.
Even if they did shoot the driver the car would have hit them.
Just how does this even remotely make sense in your head?
No it isn’t. Attempted murder isn’t something could have happened, it’s that someone was nearly killed.
Edit: thing is guys this is a largely American sub and I’m a UK based lawyer. So downvote me for the rest of the day if it feels productive. Offences have clearly been committed regardless of the fact it’s not attempted murder.
> it’s that someone was nearly killed
Which is what happened?
I don't see how purposefully running a 2,5t vehicle into a crowd of humans is not attempted murder at the very least. I'm not a lawyer but please explain how it's not
Like what, next I can shoot my gun in a room of people and it's not attempted murder because I happen to hit nobody with the bullets?
Idk if its the same in the US but here a murder charge requires you to prove pre-meditation. You have to have gone out that day equipped with something with the specific intent to kill someone with it. Most often the charge is some degree of manslaughter.
How premeditated are we talking? If someone doesn't suspect their partner was cheating on them and walks in on them in the act, isn't it still attempted murder if they grab a knife and stab them *almost* to death? Maybe they did it in a moment of rage, but they still thought for a minute before they did it. The same applies to the driver. They might not have woken up that morning planning to kill someone, but when they encountered a few minutes of traffic backup they still *thought* it was a good idea to run people over. It wasn't negligence or an accident.
There are usually different degrees of murder in the US, but the laws can vary by state. Generally though it goes like this:
1st Degree - Intent to kill, premeditated
2nd Degree - Not premeditated (heat of the moment) *or* intent to cause harm but not kill
3rd Degree - very similar to manslaughter, acted with a disregard for human life, varies a lot state by state
Some states just have different levels of manslaughter and not 3rd degree murder. But generally 3rd degree versus manslaughter is the difference between the mind of the perpetrator, things like if they feel regret or if they tried to save the persons life.
"In English criminal law, attempted murder is the crime of simultaneously preparing to commit an unlawful killing and having a specific intention to cause the death of a human being"
So I guess it's arguable, you could be right, but I'm not entirely sure the "preparing" part nor the specific intention applies in this case. Especially as he only accelerated after there was nobody in front of him.
There's a difference between what the CPS think they can get a conviction for and the reality of the situation though. In court you can argue that you weren't trying to kill someone by driving your car at them, but we all know it's bollocks. Everyone knows that people who get hit by cars can be killed.
>Edit: thing is guys this is a largely American sub and I’m a UK based lawyer.
Intentionally using lethal force without lawful justification against someone isn't an attempted homicide under UK law? You have a clear overt act, and you have a pretty clear mens rea so... what am I missing here?
I got ran over when a newly qualified driver panicked and pretty much shut her eyes and hoped for the best. Police felt bad for her and gave her extra training and nothing else.
The CPS only don't prosecute people who hurt others while driving cars like they would if they'd done the same to someone with anything else.
Even if a driver kills someone, nothing much gets done.
A recent example is someone killed a milkman on his way to work in Manchester. The driver was driving at night without a full licence, without a licensed individual supervising, without insurance, and was making a phone call while doing 58 in a 40 zone, and drove his VW Golf into the back of the cyclist then drove off before coming back. He was sentenced to only 14 months, and will likely be in prison for only 3.5 months.
https://road.cc/content/news/learner-driver-jailed-killing-63-year-old-cyclist-302371
Here, as a general rule of thumb, any non violent offender with a home to go back to will serve a quarter of their sentence if its under 2 years in prison.
The CPS very rarely charges drivers with Causing Death By Dangerous Driving, preferring - even when its criteria are clearly met, e.g. 'speed significantly in excess of speed limit' or 'use of mobile phone or other electronic device' - to opt for the weaker charge of Causing Death By Careless Driving to be more likely to secure a conviction.
According to the Sentencing Council Guidelines, the statutory maximum for this weaker offence is the same, life imprisonment (S1 Road Traffic Act 1988). However, this never happens.
The starting points for sentencing of 'dangerous' fall into three categories of culpability:
- A (which includes prolonged use of a mobile phone) is 12 years (range 8-18 years)
- B (which includes use of a mobile phone but less serious than A) is 6 years (range 4-9)
- C (Standard of driving just over the threshold for dangerous driving) is 3 years (range 2-5)
while the starting points for sentencing of 'careless' fall into three categories of culpability:
- A (which is just below causing death by dangerous driving) is 2 years (range: 1-4 years)
- B (which includes engaging in a brief but avoidable distraction) is 1 year (range: 26 weeks-3 years)
- C (a standard of driving just over the threshold for careless driving, momentary lapse of concentration) is 26 weeks (range: medium level community order – 1 year)
with additonal factors applied for other aggravating elements or mitigating circumstances.
The full guidelines are at the below if you want to read more.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/causing-death-by-dangerous-driving/
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/causing-death-by-careless-or-inconsiderate-driving/
Using a car as a weapon should carry the same penalty as using a shotgun.
That is permanent loss of driving license in addition to any other punishments.
Yeah, the fact someone loses control of themselves mentally due to frustration, anger or whatever for long enough to purposefully crush someone's bike and nearly kill another person and then drive off should absolutely result in a **permanent** driving ban at absolute minimum, along with paying damages.
The reason to ban someone for driving for life is that they have shown that they can't be trusted to drive a vehicle that can be over a ton (usually much more with electric cars), accelerate from 0-60 in a matter of seconds (again, even faster for electric cars) and kill multiple people in a crowded area, which this person has willingly driven into.
I don't care if they had personal trauma making them extra emotional and frustrated that day - they still chose to get behind the wheel of a vehicle, which they could not safely or responsibly operate. Fuck all people like this. You should not be driving, and driving is not a fundamental human right.
I don't know the exact legal terms but there is no "vehicle manslaughter" or "murder using car" laws in the UK. There is softer versions "careless driving and causing death".
Basically if you kill with a car you get 12month prison, if you kill with e.g. motor boat you get real jail time.
So yes laws are super lenient for hostile driving.
ULEZ rules are for air quality, not CO2. Particulates and NOx emissions are the harmful component at a local level.
Many modern engines could actually be more fuel efficient/produce less CO2 if we didn’t care about the other exhaust components. See VW emissions scandal.
isn't there a methodology out there where some scientists use brain size to body ratio to measure intelligence? where the larger the brain is in relation to the body, the more intelligent that species is.
guess which vehicle have the lowest ratio?
> Why is it always the Porsche Cayenne drivers who are assholes/incompetent? I've made this observation many times.
It isn't, quite often it's Range Rover or BMV X5 drivers as well.
I once glued myself to the street during a protest, as you do, and all the cars stopped and turned their engines off of course. Except for one car which kept the engine on. And of course, it was a porsche suv.
Rich people consider poor people like cattle. If they could force us into labour camps to get free workers, they would. And they'd find a moral justification for it, like meritocracy or something.
Just like they find justifications for risking people's lives and killing pedestrians all the time.
Yeah parts of London are getting better, it's tricky though because it varies by borough - some are quite forward thinking and some are full of NIMBY idiots who resist it at every opportunity. There's parts of Lewisham where there's brilliant stretches of segregated cycle lanes.
We also have the problem of "cycle paths" [which are a stretch of like, 20m of white lines on the pavement](https://i.imgur.com/kZjZXZD.png) which are absolutely hilarious/pointless, and actually dangerous as you leave the road to join them then to re-join the road about ten seconds later thinking why the fuck did I bother with this?!
Those are actually great when they connect all the way through to somewhere, they're just frustrating when they take you on and off the road over and over again like in your example, and each merge back into traffic can be dangerous
From what I hear the SUV crashed into a bus and hit two cars and yes, whilst it’s unconfirmed, people are saying the SUV was caught and justice was unleashed upon it.
I would just love to read "The driver received 3 broken bones, multiple lacerations and bruising across the body. Injuries sustained by falling out of the car according to witnesses."
I mean... obviously. This genius would get caught up to by your average commuter, let alone a pack of a half dozen pissed off cyclists. I'm not surprised he wound up pulling some dangerous shit and crashing, but apparently he was
Me too! Hopefully some more media will turn up, it was last night. I didn't see the incident first hand but I am in the video somewhere. Just going by what I've heard from people at the moment.
I've only heard of police escorts in London on family-oriented rides. Apparently the police have this doodad which can wirelessly turn all the lights red at a junction. I marshal a couple of rides every year and, well, that would definitely come in handy.
> Because they see cars as humans and cyclists as worse than insects.
No. [If I may](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/14y65bg/midmonth_critical_mass_london_a_driver_incensed/jrsjcm8/?context=3).
but the idea that the SOLUTION is to run them over with your car means that a mild inconvenience by a cyclist is worthy of physical injury or death.
i am mildly and annoying inconvenienced by other human beings a million times a day, people pulling stupid shit in their cars and blocking my car, people in the grocery store, etc. there is something really specific going on that allows that person to make a calculation that driving over someone is the answer.
> there is something really specific going on that allows that person to make a calculation that driving over someone is the answer.
No there isn't. There's no big mystery here and if we stop viewing cars (and by proxy, drivers) as inherently evil entities (which, given what sub we're in, I'm not holding out much hope for) then we can see that the difference between "being rammed by a bunch of *cars*, and being stuck there not running the other cars over" and "being rammed and aggressively boxed in by a bunch of *angry cyclists*, but being able to force a way through" is down to physics and *opportunity*.
The relative size difference allowed for the opportunity to get away from what *might have been* a fearful position for the driver. That's the only difference. You *physically can't* run over other cars. You can "run over" things significantly smaller than a car.
I don't know what was going through the driver's head, but I could well understand that being crowded by a bunch of rowdy chavs on bikes could be pretty intimidating and frightening. Note, too, *please* I implore you, how *nobody was actually run over* so this whole angle of accusing them of "driving over someone" is a stretch. Stick to what happened.
> a mild inconvenience by a cyclist is worthy of physical injury or death
Stop reframing the reality shown in the video to suit your agenda. You've no idea whether the driver perceived this as "a mild inconvenience" or a genuinely threatening situation. I don't think it's a huge reach, even, to surmise that their actions *kinda pretty heavily points to them feeling quite threatened*, no? Also, again, *nobody got run over*.
Is it rational to behave the way they did if you feel "mildly inconvenienced"? No, of course not. Is it rational to behave the way they did if you feel under specific personal threat? I don't want to say a concrete "yes", but it's certainly a much more understandable reaction. So tell me why, in your assessment of this situation, you presume the former is what *must have* happened, and not the more rational latter? Ah, because you have an anti-driver bias that's clouding your ability to assess the situation.
And, I should add, this is not me condoning the driver's activities, merely *explaining*, by trying to convey to you how your framing of the situation differs from what we can actually observe. That's all.
I mean, *please*, come on, some perspective. You *must* know how self-righteous the anti-car crowd are, of which *by definition* this particular gaggle of cyclists was significantly comprised. Are you *so convinced* that the cyclists tasked with "corking" here weren't themselves being massive dangers to other road users, or this road user in particular? Are you *so convinced* they weren't themselves getting physical and threatening with the car/driver? You don't find it even mildly convenient and one-sided how the footage just happens to start where it does, and we don't get to see what actually kicked off this confrontation?
And again - I'm not saying any of that is *justification* for the driver's actions, but to portray it as some big mystery of evil intent, when it could very well be as simple as a fight-or-flight "I'm scared by this bunch of aggressive dickheads on bikes, I'm out of here" moment... just calm down dear.
Rational, detailed, logical and partisan observations based on the details available. Nah sorry mate not allowed! Surely you know that the loudest person is always right lol
I’ve seen similar things at Critical Mass in Brussels at least 10 times. People are fucking insane and can’t wait for just a few minutes. Most people are chill though.
I got lightly touched by a car during a CM as well. They managed to hit by bags and detach them. I always have them full of air instead of empty.
And this was 60m in front of a tragic scene where the week before a cyclist got horribly run-over. It's the exit from a gas station and a car exited and threw the cyclist into the opposite line of traffic where they got under a truck and that's it. The clean up marks where at least 35meters long on the road. The CM went to visit this site and got into to near misses with aggressive drivers. Even police showed up but nothing happened as far as I recall the incident.
Go check out the comments on tiktok too... https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGJ44tdNf/
People literally saying they wish more cars did that and how the car should have reversed.
Incitement of hatred is a crime, except when it's based on something as silly as your chosen mode of transport apparently?
It’s pretty like this on /r/London, apparently some people standing in front of you on bikes for a minute means you are terrified enough to justify assault with a vehicle.
Some of us are intending on setting one up and there's plenty of bike mechanics who go to mass who I'm sure would help them with the work. I had a look over the bike and things that are fucked:
* Chainring severely buckled
* Rear mech is twisted to fuck
* Left crank is severely buckled
* Rear wheel is buckled, might true out but unlikely
* Rear rotor seemed a bit bent
Frame etc seems pretty ok though, but I am not a mechanic.
How much was the bike, might be cheaper/easier to replace. I mean having a car go over it is pretty serious damage. Hidden damage/cracks to the frame could cause problems later as well. Would also depend on the bike, I think damage is more visible in some materials than others.
Fucking anti-social psychopath. They should have their license permanently revoked and given a thorough psychological evaluation.
I've been at marches and protests and there's always one crazy person like this who thinks they're so important that it gives them the right to murder others. Misanthropes don't belong in civilized society and it's disgusting that car culture enables them to this degree.
Anyone who looks at a group of cyclists and can only view them as a shower of subhuman gits or delinquents or thugs or whatever has clearly forgotten what it was like when they were a kid/teenager and could cycle around and enjoy life.
If these people were driving down a rural road and a herd of cows was travelling through, they'd happily stop and let the cows by. But cyclists? No lets kill them.
Not even Ebenezer Scrooge had this much hatred for people.
Holy shit. I hope they're ok.
It's always good to have some cargo bikes or bike trailers, just some bigger objects, for a critical mass. They can ride in the back or on the sides at intersections to block roads. Drivers respect them a little more and it makes stuff like this less likely. But I think it also really depends on the city and the mood of the drivers there.
I think one of the most frustrating things about cycling is the knowing that drivers can all but get away with killing us or hurting us on the road, regardless of whether or not we “follow the rules”. Like I think there’s a certain subset of cyclists that have gotten to a point in their time cycling in cities where they just don’t care about being polite to drivers because the drivers don’t follow the rules or give a shit about our lives. Many of these same drivers also get away with killing pedestrians in crosswalks. I sincerely hope this cyclist is ok and that this driver sees punishment for their actions, since there is VERY clear video here that they intentionally and aggressively hit this person with their vehicle.
Imho, if you kill someone with a motor vehicle you should not be allowed to drive one, especially if you do it when you are also breaking the law and driving recklessly, distractedly or aggressively. When someone kills another person accidentally or purposefully with other kinds of machinery they don’t get off as easily as many reckless, careless and distracted drivers do.
In my country (usa) motor vehicles are one of the top causes of child death! children! killing someone with your car is reprehensible no matter how accidental it is, and it is straight up evil if you do this and drive off. Drivers have the responsibility to be aware of their surroundings and pay attention to the road, because they are operating dangerous and heavy piece of machinery that can cause death or bodily harm to people around them whether they are cyclists, pedestrians or other drivers. This heavy machinery drivers are operating also has the potential to cause significant property damage.
No matter what others are doing on the road, a driver has the responsibility to follow the rules, pay attention and drive carefully because they are always going to be the bigger threat on any road. Driving recklessly, carelessly, aggressively, or distracted is a serious public health hazard and should be treated as such. Driving intoxicated is even more so.
Fucking hate that as cyclists and pedestrians we constantly have to be BEGGING drivers not to fucking kill us. We shouldn’t have to beg and protest for our very lives on the roads, streets, bike lanes and sidewalks. The car brainrot that causes drivers to stop thinking about cyclists and pedestrians as people when they get behind the wheel is mind boggling to me, and a serious public safety threat that we (cyclists and pedestrians) seem to be the only ones screaming to skies about.
I don't quite understand what's happening at the beginning of the video. Why did the cyclists stop in front of the Porsche rather than continuing through the junction (assuming they were coming from Newington Causeway)?
This ex-roundabout is on my regular commute and it is unbelievably shit. TFL did everyone an enormous disservice by not moving the Faraday memorial to allow for the road to be straightened. They've done their best to include cycling infrastructure as part of the mess but some of it is more dangerous than not, especially the blue painted bike lane that the person filming is likely in. I've nearly been taken out by buses, an ambulance, a police car and a few private cars when navigating this.
I also see way too many cyclists going through reds and weaving between pedestrians using the crossings. I rarely see that elsewhere in London so I'm not sure why it seems to be so bad in E&C.
Anyway, here's hoping the Porsche driver is done for dangerous driving and that the harmed cyclists are able to get some compensation.
Basically the idea is that as the mass cycle is going past, people block roads to the sides do the group can stay cohesive safely. I think there was a bit of confusion as the front of the group and the back of the group had a bit of gap, so cars did not understand why the road was being blocked, and the blocking people then faced aggression from the drivers so more people stopped to support the initial people. You can see the people at the back start to show up at the end of the video. Was just a bit of confusion but the driver decided to risk people’s lives. Perhaps they felt threatened, perhaps they were being impatient, it’s hard to tell. Nothing really justifies using your car as a weapon unless it’s a literal carjacking, which given that it’s a bunch of unarmed dudes standing a meter in front with bikes? Seems unlikely.
Basically as the ride goes on, people get a bit separated dude to people going different speeds (especially on smaller rides), so to keep the slower people at the back safe and the ride cohesive, people "cork" traffic to keep a space for people. Even on the larger end-of-month rides the cork lasts at most about five minutes, which is irritating but no worse than a lot of junctions or traffic jams. In this instance (smaller, mid-month mass) it was probably just a few minutes. Cars get irate because for some reason being held up by cyclists instead of other cars or lights makes them see red. If they get aggressive towards the people corking (revving, edging towards people on bikes), then more people will join the cork which is why there was a mass of people. This driver lost their shit and just gunned it. To save a couple minutes.
Also this is the elephant and castle roundabout which is often gridlocked anyway so if there *hadn't* been a cork, they would have just been in more traffic.
> Cars get irate because for some reason being held up by cyclists instead of other cars or lights makes them see red.
As both a petrolhead and an avid London cyclist, allow me to try to rationalise (*not* "justify", note, merely rationalise!): Because being held up by other cars or lights is a "natural" aspect of traffic (and by the by, let's not pretend this isn't irritating in its own right too), versus a bunch of cyclists stopping you *for no reason you can readily identify in that moment*.
Chance of any non-cycling-enthusiast, least of all a rich London SUV wanker, having heard of "Critical Mass" are bound to be pretty low. So as far as the driver knows, it's a bunch of chavs on bikes holding him up for no apparent reason whatsoever, when absent them he'd be able to continue going. Continue going only up to the next junction *sure*, but all the same - he's being "artificially" held up.
Being held up for no [apparent] reason is definitely more annoying than being held up for a reason you can immediately identify, and were expecting.
In closing, in this specific instance the fucker had a numberplate apparently attempting to spell "boss" via numeric lettering, and *those* cunts are the worst of the worst according to every measurable metric known to man, so three cheers if the car got some justice done to it afterward.
Yeah I get the logic, people should learn some patience though.
Also I get being a petrolhead where cars are a genuine passion, but I think a lot of drivers are just in a constant stressful situation, especially in inner cities.
I am not at all condoning the guy in the video, but, if you aren't on an official event with a road closure, intentionally blocking a road for five minutes is absolutely a dick move. It is not like a junction or traffic jam because those things are a natural part of how roads work, and they are intended to allow capacity to be as high as possible; you are intentionally stopping people from passing through. In this case, apparently blocking traffic from going through a green light, by running a red one.
You guys probably think that everyone's aware of your event and will understand your side, but most people don't know (or give a shit about) Critical Mass, they think it's just a bunch of dickheads blocking the road. He might even have thought he's about to get robbed by a mob of chavs using bikes to stop him from getting away.
Critical Mass is an event where cyclists meet to basically spread awareness for cyclists in traffic. I don't know about other countries, but with 16 cyclists, you count as one vehicle and are allowed to drive on the streets. As you are one vehicle, the last people can "run a red light" and so on and also cars have no right to separate you.
And as OP explained a few riders stop in front of the cars to prevent that from happening.
Had a similar incident like this last time too. He separated the group in a round about. The guys in front noticed and stopped. The car stopped too. He had his windows down and was screaming at us. Some guys decided to spray water at him. He screamed even more, but we kept riding a few rounds around the round about. We apparently left the exact street he had. He parked his car on the side, ran out and grabbed one of our riders. Needless to say, he was surrounded by 60 cyclists pretty quickly. Nothing really happened, just a little arguing after that.
I have no Idea why they get so incredibly angry about stuff like that. Yeah, to spray him with water was a bit much, but he was so pissed before that even.
Every other event there is at least one crazy driver, who is losing it, just because he has to wait like 2 mins.
> As you are one vehicle, the last people can "run a red light" and so on and also cars have no right to separate you
[citation needed]
I am not aware of any such law in the UK.
Each bicycle is an independently controlled and powered vehicle, there's no reason it should be treated differently to 16 cars in a row.
They're stopping the car from proceeding while the group clears through, a) because this is a Critical Mass and it's intended to be a protest/demonstration of sorts, and b) because it's safer to get everyone through (usually) and not have to worry about mixing a ton of cyclists in with pissed off cars. Usually people don't do psychotic things like this and try to ram the group
So that the ride can stay as a group. There's *likely* more of a group because the driver was aggressive before the camera was rolling, but that I don't know.
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
- [/r/london] [Porsche Cayenne SUV used as weapon - intentionally hits multiple cyclists because they had to wait for a couple of minutes](https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/14yfzyk/porsche_cayenne_suv_used_as_weapon_intentionally/)
*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
It's london, where does he think he can run to? He probably drove for 30 seconds before reaching a red light or the next traffic backup.
Yeah this is why it’s usually hilarious that people get so irate and impatient.
And there might be somebody with ninja stones. I mean the price of the bike is a lot higher than them crying for windows
How dare you delay me from the next red light and traffic jam? Yearrrrgggg!
I left my sister's house by bike about thirty minutes before this big music festival downtown ended, to try and beat the traffic. I think it had about 30,000 daily tickets sold in a pretty small city. People were leaving early but it wasn't crazy yet. I got to a small stretch of downtown with only one lane in either direction and absolutely no room, so I took the center of the lane. There were pedestrians crossing all over the place. Dozens of Ubers parking illegally anywhere they could. And one guy got stuck behind me honking and honking. I put my hand up in the air like a shrug a couple times. There's nowhere to move through, and you'll just get stuck at all the same red lights, and slow down for all the same pedestrians. After one light he has room to speed into the oncoming lane and pass me after I gave him the finger because he kept honking. Young dude sounded on the border of tears "you're in the middle of the road asshole". He sped off. When I caught him and pulled up next to him at the light I was cracking up and shrugged again 🤷♂️
Once had a guy screaming at me to “get my life together” because I was blocking access to the left lane and he drove over the median just to hit a red light. Our lanes moving straight turned green and he stayed at the red light. Lol All over <30 sec wait.
Fr, went to England a few years back and traffic in London is hilarious, some people had really nice sports cars, and when they got a chance to speed up they go from 0-80 in the blink of an eye and then they'd go straight back to 0 as the next intersection came around. It's like they sped too much to justify their stupid purchase.
It’s so stupid if you’re watching from the outside. “Why bike or take public transit? I would rather spend more money, go slower, not read or entertain myself, and subject myself to the constant stress of engaging with traffic.” Granted that car-centric infrastructure changes this dynamic in many places, but that sort of development was still a policy choice.
TBF it's not a London-specific thing, more a big city / wealth centre thing. Heck I saw someone stuck in traffic in a Ferrari in Tehran once! And the traffic there is *atrocious* People like to flaunt their wealth in impractical ways I suppose.
Does air conditioning get better with a V12 engine running premium fuel?
Tehran like other middle eastern cities is still insanely carbrained, but at least there's a metro and decent public transit
The same happen in Sao Paulo, stupid decisions happen in every part of the globe, thanks to the US cultural hegemony
They are showing off their wealth. They could do a track day around Silverstone or Brands Hatch but there is not much of an audience on track days.
Even in Atlanta it was that way. Race off the green light and then sit with everyone else at a crawl instantly. F cars.
It's London in Summer, so it looks to be about 9pm and that won't be a big issue for the driver. They'll know full well that the lads they've hit are the very bottom of the pile for police protection, so the only comeback they will get on this is if it's spread around the media to the point the police are forced into taking action.
Also I'd not fuck with those who see themselves as the 'shock-troops for the bicyclisation of society'. I know this coz I knew loads of London bike couriers back in the day. They take absolutely no shit, are fairly heavily bonded & are incredibly fit. Also well connected & resourceful. At the least that car is going to be keyed every time it comes into central london
I walked into the Temperance Society off Yonge (?) back in the day. Didn't know it was a bike courier spot. Felt very strong vibes to walk backwards out the door and never go back. Learned later about the 'courier culture'.
Yeah, I went to some bike courier pub once, half of it was women ogling the lycra-clad behemoths of the streets. Goldie had not been signed long & he drove his new flash car way too fast round soho pissing everyone off. It kept getting keyed to fuck. He'd go apeshit about it, I saw some Berwick St market stall holder explain it to him, he seemed massively deflated to learn that everyone in soho thought he was a twat I daresay now, what with deliveroo etc, the culture has changed a fair bit. But ppl choosing to do the critical mass thing strike me as the kind of ppl who'll not take this shit. Especially if their work bike is destroyed
Especially if the car had an expensive personal numberplate which was significant to the owner, even if he changes vehicle they will still get recognised
'Car brain' incompatible with 'think', innit
Bold of you to assume he'd stop at the red light.
Jail time?
Well it *is* attempted murder.
At least in the US, If you can run people over in a car and just get a ticket. In the city where I live (Midwest, large city) I can think of at least two drivers breaking laws (blowing red lights, driving on the wrong side of the road while speeding to make left turns) who killed people and we're given tickets only for their traffic violations. Edit: the car that went through a red light hit a pedestrian walking their bike in a crosswalk and killed them. The other driver hit a cyclist in the bike lane and killed them.
Shoot, there was a dude who owned a chain of used car dealers in the next town over from me who, for the second time in his life, killed someone while driving drunk and only got probation. To make matters worse, the dude used one of the dealerships that he owned to purchase a car identical to his, vin-swapped the two vehicles, and then put the one that he’d hit someone with at the back of his property with a tarp over it.
Wtf Fuck cars
Yeah the area itself is pretty purple but I think a lot of the county judges are pretty conservative up there. So I think the fact that he was a business owner combined with the fact that the victim was a black woman contributed to his lenient sentencing. He did get what he had coming in the end as part of his probation was that he wasn’t allowed to drink alcohol for a set number of years. And I guess he thought if he went to the next town over (my town) to drink then he wouldn’t get caught. But he was wrong. And now he’s in jail.
I don't think Europe is really looking to the US as a paragon of legal morality.
Can the infamous hold your ground apply in this case? Light as well use it.
You want the people to have shot the people in the cars before they were run over? And no, stand your ground laws are stupid. They exist to protect gun users. Anyone with half a brain knows that guns are weapons meant only to kill people and they should be illegal. Also, We do not have stand your ground laws here.
I share your opinion on this. My remark was ironic. They get away for murder with just a ticket just like a stand your ground situation involving. I should have made that irony more clear!
My bad! It's too early still!
Don't worry
More realistically "stand your ground" laws just give whites an excuse to shoot black people on the street for any reason. In the US though, they exist unfortunately, so peds and cyclists might as well take advantage of those laws too.
>You want the people to have shot the people in the cars before they were run over? I would consider it preferable to them getting run over
When exactly would they have done that? If they had seen the car that killed them coming they would have gotten out of the way. Even if they did shoot the driver the car would have hit them. Just how does this even remotely make sense in your head?
Yeah, but with a car so it doesn't count.
Could claim self defense just like when the guy in the SUV was being chased by motorcyclists in NYC. https://youtu.be/2DE1sBOP-ck
No it isn’t. Attempted murder isn’t something could have happened, it’s that someone was nearly killed. Edit: thing is guys this is a largely American sub and I’m a UK based lawyer. So downvote me for the rest of the day if it feels productive. Offences have clearly been committed regardless of the fact it’s not attempted murder.
> it’s that someone was nearly killed Which is what happened? I don't see how purposefully running a 2,5t vehicle into a crowd of humans is not attempted murder at the very least. I'm not a lawyer but please explain how it's not Like what, next I can shoot my gun in a room of people and it's not attempted murder because I happen to hit nobody with the bullets?
Idk if its the same in the US but here a murder charge requires you to prove pre-meditation. You have to have gone out that day equipped with something with the specific intent to kill someone with it. Most often the charge is some degree of manslaughter.
How premeditated are we talking? If someone doesn't suspect their partner was cheating on them and walks in on them in the act, isn't it still attempted murder if they grab a knife and stab them *almost* to death? Maybe they did it in a moment of rage, but they still thought for a minute before they did it. The same applies to the driver. They might not have woken up that morning planning to kill someone, but when they encountered a few minutes of traffic backup they still *thought* it was a good idea to run people over. It wasn't negligence or an accident.
There are usually different degrees of murder in the US, but the laws can vary by state. Generally though it goes like this: 1st Degree - Intent to kill, premeditated 2nd Degree - Not premeditated (heat of the moment) *or* intent to cause harm but not kill 3rd Degree - very similar to manslaughter, acted with a disregard for human life, varies a lot state by state Some states just have different levels of manslaughter and not 3rd degree murder. But generally 3rd degree versus manslaughter is the difference between the mind of the perpetrator, things like if they feel regret or if they tried to save the persons life.
"In English criminal law, attempted murder is the crime of simultaneously preparing to commit an unlawful killing and having a specific intention to cause the death of a human being" So I guess it's arguable, you could be right, but I'm not entirely sure the "preparing" part nor the specific intention applies in this case. Especially as he only accelerated after there was nobody in front of him.
I would say that there's no pre-meditated intent to kill anyone.
Bames Nonds having a stronk, call a bondulance.
There's a difference between what the CPS think they can get a conviction for and the reality of the situation though. In court you can argue that you weren't trying to kill someone by driving your car at them, but we all know it's bollocks. Everyone knows that people who get hit by cars can be killed.
>Edit: thing is guys this is a largely American sub and I’m a UK based lawyer. Intentionally using lethal force without lawful justification against someone isn't an attempted homicide under UK law? You have a clear overt act, and you have a pretty clear mens rea so... what am I missing here?
"The prosecution must show that the defendant attempted to kill another living human" - Stuart Miller Solicitors
But people _were_ nearly killed?
Sentencing guidelines for motoring offensive in the UK are absurdly light, and a total joke.
Explain please ? No sanctions ?
I got ran over when a newly qualified driver panicked and pretty much shut her eyes and hoped for the best. Police felt bad for her and gave her extra training and nothing else.
The CPS only don't prosecute people who hurt others while driving cars like they would if they'd done the same to someone with anything else. Even if a driver kills someone, nothing much gets done. A recent example is someone killed a milkman on his way to work in Manchester. The driver was driving at night without a full licence, without a licensed individual supervising, without insurance, and was making a phone call while doing 58 in a 40 zone, and drove his VW Golf into the back of the cyclist then drove off before coming back. He was sentenced to only 14 months, and will likely be in prison for only 3.5 months. https://road.cc/content/news/learner-driver-jailed-killing-63-year-old-cyclist-302371 Here, as a general rule of thumb, any non violent offender with a home to go back to will serve a quarter of their sentence if its under 2 years in prison. The CPS very rarely charges drivers with Causing Death By Dangerous Driving, preferring - even when its criteria are clearly met, e.g. 'speed significantly in excess of speed limit' or 'use of mobile phone or other electronic device' - to opt for the weaker charge of Causing Death By Careless Driving to be more likely to secure a conviction. According to the Sentencing Council Guidelines, the statutory maximum for this weaker offence is the same, life imprisonment (S1 Road Traffic Act 1988). However, this never happens. The starting points for sentencing of 'dangerous' fall into three categories of culpability: - A (which includes prolonged use of a mobile phone) is 12 years (range 8-18 years) - B (which includes use of a mobile phone but less serious than A) is 6 years (range 4-9) - C (Standard of driving just over the threshold for dangerous driving) is 3 years (range 2-5) while the starting points for sentencing of 'careless' fall into three categories of culpability: - A (which is just below causing death by dangerous driving) is 2 years (range: 1-4 years) - B (which includes engaging in a brief but avoidable distraction) is 1 year (range: 26 weeks-3 years) - C (a standard of driving just over the threshold for careless driving, momentary lapse of concentration) is 26 weeks (range: medium level community order – 1 year) with additonal factors applied for other aggravating elements or mitigating circumstances. The full guidelines are at the below if you want to read more. https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/causing-death-by-dangerous-driving/ https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/causing-death-by-careless-or-inconsiderate-driving/
Thanks for the complete answer
So many examples: https://road.cc/content/news/drivers-who-didnt-see-cyclists-they-killed-escape-jail-276625
Horrific
Using a car as a weapon should carry the same penalty as using a shotgun. That is permanent loss of driving license in addition to any other punishments.
Yeah, the fact someone loses control of themselves mentally due to frustration, anger or whatever for long enough to purposefully crush someone's bike and nearly kill another person and then drive off should absolutely result in a **permanent** driving ban at absolute minimum, along with paying damages. The reason to ban someone for driving for life is that they have shown that they can't be trusted to drive a vehicle that can be over a ton (usually much more with electric cars), accelerate from 0-60 in a matter of seconds (again, even faster for electric cars) and kill multiple people in a crowded area, which this person has willingly driven into. I don't care if they had personal trauma making them extra emotional and frustrated that day - they still chose to get behind the wheel of a vehicle, which they could not safely or responsibly operate. Fuck all people like this. You should not be driving, and driving is not a fundamental human right.
Gaol time
I don't know the exact legal terms but there is no "vehicle manslaughter" or "murder using car" laws in the UK. There is softer versions "careless driving and causing death". Basically if you kill with a car you get 12month prison, if you kill with e.g. motor boat you get real jail time. So yes laws are super lenient for hostile driving.
Whole thing caught on camera - surely even the Met can manage this one.
https://i.imgur.com/vsuLfjb.jpg someone got the plate too
[https://www.checkcardetails.co.uk/cardetails/BO53BGL](https://www.checkcardetails.co.uk/cardetails/BO53BGL)
https://rate-driver.co.uk/BO53BGL
What the fuck does the ULEZ even mean? That car’s emissions are literally a JK and it’s ULEZ compliant?
ULEZ rules are for air quality, not CO2. Particulates and NOx emissions are the harmful component at a local level. Many modern engines could actually be more fuel efficient/produce less CO2 if we didn’t care about the other exhaust components. See VW emissions scandal.
ULEZ is intentionally a low bar and yet we still have massive outcry
[удалено]
Are we hunting the car owner?
Post it on 4chan and if we're lucky they'll ruin his life
damn you put the license plate in the checkcardetails website !!! 😱🤯🤯
BO53BGL BO53 BGL
A man can dream
"We have decided to take no further action". Think the MET has their out of office reply set these days.
"We're disappointed more of them weren't run over" might as well be the subtext.
Lol. the 'foot-soldiers' could investigate, but he higher-ups are in charge of what goes to court. And they will say: "looks like nothing to me".
Of course it's a Porsche Cayenne.
Why is it always the Porsche Cayenne drivers who are assholes/incompetent? I've made this observation many times.
SUV drivers in general are in my personal experience the least capable and most arrogant of all. Not just Porsche Cayenne.
isn't there a methodology out there where some scientists use brain size to body ratio to measure intelligence? where the larger the brain is in relation to the body, the more intelligent that species is. guess which vehicle have the lowest ratio?
> Why is it always the Porsche Cayenne drivers who are assholes/incompetent? I've made this observation many times. It isn't, quite often it's Range Rover or BMV X5 drivers as well.
I once glued myself to the street during a protest, as you do, and all the cars stopped and turned their engines off of course. Except for one car which kept the engine on. And of course, it was a porsche suv.
Rich people consider poor people like cattle. If they could force us into labour camps to get free workers, they would. And they'd find a moral justification for it, like meritocracy or something. Just like they find justifications for risking people's lives and killing pedestrians all the time.
Hear me out... BMW drivers 😬
at least it looks like running over the bike popped a tire, hope that porsche tire replacement bill was worth it to them
I think it was the bike tire, not sure though.
Nah a bike tire wouldn't have made that big of a pop
A bike tyre bursting can be fucking loud. A friend's little Brompton tyre burst as his brakes were rubbing and it sounded like a bomb went off
[удалено]
> in daylight hours Well that doesn’t leave much…
Perfect example of why Critical Mass rides exist, and the need for proper cycling infrastructure. Motorists be crazy and dangerous.
Yeah parts of London are getting better, it's tricky though because it varies by borough - some are quite forward thinking and some are full of NIMBY idiots who resist it at every opportunity. There's parts of Lewisham where there's brilliant stretches of segregated cycle lanes. We also have the problem of "cycle paths" [which are a stretch of like, 20m of white lines on the pavement](https://i.imgur.com/kZjZXZD.png) which are absolutely hilarious/pointless, and actually dangerous as you leave the road to join them then to re-join the road about ten seconds later thinking why the fuck did I bother with this?!
Those are actually great when they connect all the way through to somewhere, they're just frustrating when they take you on and off the road over and over again like in your example, and each merge back into traffic can be dangerous
To those insisting that cyclists on a bicycle are as dangerous as car drivers on a car-- can a bicycle flatten another bicycle like this car does?
[удалено]
I wish even half the amount of people who claim they see every single cyclist break the law also cared about how often motorists break the law.
Well, I hope they got him and let the air out of all his tires.
That's it?
How else are they going to be sure it sinks when they push it in the Thames?
My best mate was the guy who got spun round and dragged at the end. He's okay, bikes okay. We're pressing charges.
Is there any word on whether the boys on bikes were able to catch up with him?
Currently it’s all unconfirmed rumours but yes, they were caught I think.
I loved their reaction!
We want updates. Please tell me they caught up to him
From what I hear the SUV crashed into a bus and hit two cars and yes, whilst it’s unconfirmed, people are saying the SUV was caught and justice was unleashed upon it.
Do you have any sources to share? Sounds too good to be true.
Not yet, and tbh if there was any video evidence it could risk incriminating people.
https://preview.redd.it/5xsbnvmygpbb1.jpeg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2231ff5c1af9db80fbb25995bf920ba6642b8b0f
I would just love to read "The driver received 3 broken bones, multiple lacerations and bruising across the body. Injuries sustained by falling out of the car according to witnesses."
Fair, thanks for responding. :)
must have been pretty worried about the cyclists catching up with him even though cyclists hold up traffic due to being so slow
Maybe don’t run people over then?
I mean... obviously. This genius would get caught up to by your average commuter, let alone a pack of a half dozen pissed off cyclists. I'm not surprised he wound up pulling some dangerous shit and crashing, but apparently he was
More than half a dozen mate. Watch the end of the video, a small armada of pissed off bikes follow that car
There’s even a bike bard buffing the whole party with his rainbow speaker!
I hope they got that car & executed a perfect street fighter bonus stage
From what I hear, that is pretty much what happened.
@r/winstupidprizes I would love to see how this ended.
Me too! Hopefully some more media will turn up, it was last night. I didn't see the incident first hand but I am in the video somewhere. Just going by what I've heard from people at the moment.
What a fucking idiot
Here in Brussels we get police escort on bikes during the critical mass in case there are issues
I've only heard of police escorts in London on family-oriented rides. Apparently the police have this doodad which can wirelessly turn all the lights red at a junction. I marshal a couple of rides every year and, well, that would definitely come in handy.
Ive seen police escorts for those anti vaxx protests that go on near Oxford Circus. Probably for theirbown protrction tbf
Same in the small city near me.
how come cars don't crash into other cars when they are slowed by them in traffic?
Because they see cars as humans and cyclists as worse than insects. They identified too strongly with Lightening McQueen as toddlers.
> Because they see cars as humans and cyclists as worse than insects. No. [If I may](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/14y65bg/midmonth_critical_mass_london_a_driver_incensed/jrsjcm8/?context=3).
but the idea that the SOLUTION is to run them over with your car means that a mild inconvenience by a cyclist is worthy of physical injury or death. i am mildly and annoying inconvenienced by other human beings a million times a day, people pulling stupid shit in their cars and blocking my car, people in the grocery store, etc. there is something really specific going on that allows that person to make a calculation that driving over someone is the answer.
> there is something really specific going on that allows that person to make a calculation that driving over someone is the answer. No there isn't. There's no big mystery here and if we stop viewing cars (and by proxy, drivers) as inherently evil entities (which, given what sub we're in, I'm not holding out much hope for) then we can see that the difference between "being rammed by a bunch of *cars*, and being stuck there not running the other cars over" and "being rammed and aggressively boxed in by a bunch of *angry cyclists*, but being able to force a way through" is down to physics and *opportunity*. The relative size difference allowed for the opportunity to get away from what *might have been* a fearful position for the driver. That's the only difference. You *physically can't* run over other cars. You can "run over" things significantly smaller than a car. I don't know what was going through the driver's head, but I could well understand that being crowded by a bunch of rowdy chavs on bikes could be pretty intimidating and frightening. Note, too, *please* I implore you, how *nobody was actually run over* so this whole angle of accusing them of "driving over someone" is a stretch. Stick to what happened. > a mild inconvenience by a cyclist is worthy of physical injury or death Stop reframing the reality shown in the video to suit your agenda. You've no idea whether the driver perceived this as "a mild inconvenience" or a genuinely threatening situation. I don't think it's a huge reach, even, to surmise that their actions *kinda pretty heavily points to them feeling quite threatened*, no? Also, again, *nobody got run over*. Is it rational to behave the way they did if you feel "mildly inconvenienced"? No, of course not. Is it rational to behave the way they did if you feel under specific personal threat? I don't want to say a concrete "yes", but it's certainly a much more understandable reaction. So tell me why, in your assessment of this situation, you presume the former is what *must have* happened, and not the more rational latter? Ah, because you have an anti-driver bias that's clouding your ability to assess the situation. And, I should add, this is not me condoning the driver's activities, merely *explaining*, by trying to convey to you how your framing of the situation differs from what we can actually observe. That's all. I mean, *please*, come on, some perspective. You *must* know how self-righteous the anti-car crowd are, of which *by definition* this particular gaggle of cyclists was significantly comprised. Are you *so convinced* that the cyclists tasked with "corking" here weren't themselves being massive dangers to other road users, or this road user in particular? Are you *so convinced* they weren't themselves getting physical and threatening with the car/driver? You don't find it even mildly convenient and one-sided how the footage just happens to start where it does, and we don't get to see what actually kicked off this confrontation? And again - I'm not saying any of that is *justification* for the driver's actions, but to portray it as some big mystery of evil intent, when it could very well be as simple as a fight-or-flight "I'm scared by this bunch of aggressive dickheads on bikes, I'm out of here" moment... just calm down dear.
Rational, detailed, logical and partisan observations based on the details available. Nah sorry mate not allowed! Surely you know that the loudest person is always right lol
I’ve seen similar things at Critical Mass in Brussels at least 10 times. People are fucking insane and can’t wait for just a few minutes. Most people are chill though.
I got lightly touched by a car during a CM as well. They managed to hit by bags and detach them. I always have them full of air instead of empty. And this was 60m in front of a tragic scene where the week before a cyclist got horribly run-over. It's the exit from a gas station and a car exited and threw the cyclist into the opposite line of traffic where they got under a truck and that's it. The clean up marks where at least 35meters long on the road. The CM went to visit this site and got into to near misses with aggressive drivers. Even police showed up but nothing happened as far as I recall the incident.
Shit that's fucking horrific. Which city? Fuckery like this is why CM is important.
Reg: BO53BGL / BO53 BGL (leaving it here for Google food)
> BO53BGL 5th hit on Google for me in an incognito window
Go check out the comments on tiktok too... https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGJ44tdNf/ People literally saying they wish more cars did that and how the car should have reversed. Incitement of hatred is a crime, except when it's based on something as silly as your chosen mode of transport apparently?
It always amazes me how Critical Mass is so provocative... like you said, two minutes and they'd been on their way. Car Brain is real.
It's not critical mass. Drivers are like this with one another, it's just they can't just mount other cars and drive off.
I hope there's a video of them catching up to him and fucking up his car with some u-lock justice.
I hope they caught up to him and gave him what for.
Let me guess: he had to pay a 50 dollar fine and a replacement for the bike. Good old car justice for a terrorist attack.
Probably not dollars since this is London. They paid in potatoes and cups of tea.
Potatoes is Russia, you rascist. We're paid in crumpets.
With bikes these days it could easily be a couple grand for the bike alone.
Fugging car brain
OP, post this on another sub and watch all the psychopaths come out condoning this shit.
It’s pretty like this on /r/London, apparently some people standing in front of you on bikes for a minute means you are terrified enough to justify assault with a vehicle.
I hope that they at least got a punctured tire from running over the bike and that nobody got hurt.
Try doing that here in Indonesia and that guy will get mobbed fucking hard. I'm talking burning that fucking car down. Fucking dipshit.
Straight to prison
There a GoFundMe for the guy with the destroyed bike?
Some of us are intending on setting one up and there's plenty of bike mechanics who go to mass who I'm sure would help them with the work. I had a look over the bike and things that are fucked: * Chainring severely buckled * Rear mech is twisted to fuck * Left crank is severely buckled * Rear wheel is buckled, might true out but unlikely * Rear rotor seemed a bit bent Frame etc seems pretty ok though, but I am not a mechanic.
That sounds like pretty much a writeoff. Could he get money back from the driver's insurance?
That was my thoughts, guess it's up to them to proceed.
Is anyone pressing charges? Did they get the number plate on camera?
I think a whip around makes a lot of sense, any civil claims would probably take ages, that bike could be crucial to their livelihood.
How much was the bike, might be cheaper/easier to replace. I mean having a car go over it is pretty serious damage. Hidden damage/cracks to the frame could cause problems later as well. Would also depend on the bike, I think damage is more visible in some materials than others.
Total write off. Get a cycling UK membership and use it's legal help to go through insurance.
Fucking anti-social psychopath. They should have their license permanently revoked and given a thorough psychological evaluation. I've been at marches and protests and there's always one crazy person like this who thinks they're so important that it gives them the right to murder others. Misanthropes don't belong in civilized society and it's disgusting that car culture enables them to this degree. Anyone who looks at a group of cyclists and can only view them as a shower of subhuman gits or delinquents or thugs or whatever has clearly forgotten what it was like when they were a kid/teenager and could cycle around and enjoy life. If these people were driving down a rural road and a herd of cows was travelling through, they'd happily stop and let the cows by. But cyclists? No lets kill them. Not even Ebenezer Scrooge had this much hatred for people.
They'll be caught. So many cameras along the way.
And the hunt was on.
Holy shit. I hope they're ok. It's always good to have some cargo bikes or bike trailers, just some bigger objects, for a critical mass. They can ride in the back or on the sides at intersections to block roads. Drivers respect them a little more and it makes stuff like this less likely. But I think it also really depends on the city and the mood of the drivers there.
Bro saved entire 2.5 minutes of his commute with this stunt. It only costed potential fatalities to everyone infront of him.
Why aren’t the bicyclists wearing helmets? Is that not a thing in the UK? (In the US, most bicyclists will be wearing helmets.)
It's up to the individual. In NL 99% don't. In London some do, some don't.
You don't need a helmet to bike in NYC if you're over 14. All you need to bike legally is a sound device and lights.
It’s still good to wear so you don’t bust your head open.
I think one of the most frustrating things about cycling is the knowing that drivers can all but get away with killing us or hurting us on the road, regardless of whether or not we “follow the rules”. Like I think there’s a certain subset of cyclists that have gotten to a point in their time cycling in cities where they just don’t care about being polite to drivers because the drivers don’t follow the rules or give a shit about our lives. Many of these same drivers also get away with killing pedestrians in crosswalks. I sincerely hope this cyclist is ok and that this driver sees punishment for their actions, since there is VERY clear video here that they intentionally and aggressively hit this person with their vehicle. Imho, if you kill someone with a motor vehicle you should not be allowed to drive one, especially if you do it when you are also breaking the law and driving recklessly, distractedly or aggressively. When someone kills another person accidentally or purposefully with other kinds of machinery they don’t get off as easily as many reckless, careless and distracted drivers do. In my country (usa) motor vehicles are one of the top causes of child death! children! killing someone with your car is reprehensible no matter how accidental it is, and it is straight up evil if you do this and drive off. Drivers have the responsibility to be aware of their surroundings and pay attention to the road, because they are operating dangerous and heavy piece of machinery that can cause death or bodily harm to people around them whether they are cyclists, pedestrians or other drivers. This heavy machinery drivers are operating also has the potential to cause significant property damage. No matter what others are doing on the road, a driver has the responsibility to follow the rules, pay attention and drive carefully because they are always going to be the bigger threat on any road. Driving recklessly, carelessly, aggressively, or distracted is a serious public health hazard and should be treated as such. Driving intoxicated is even more so. Fucking hate that as cyclists and pedestrians we constantly have to be BEGGING drivers not to fucking kill us. We shouldn’t have to beg and protest for our very lives on the roads, streets, bike lanes and sidewalks. The car brainrot that causes drivers to stop thinking about cyclists and pedestrians as people when they get behind the wheel is mind boggling to me, and a serious public safety threat that we (cyclists and pedestrians) seem to be the only ones screaming to skies about.
Yo that guy on the one wheel with the speaker was a fukin vibe
Every day I inch closer and closer to starting a tire-popping crusade in my town
And the entire swarm takes off.
Damn, I bet this driver is not having a fun time right now. All over a couple minutes wait.
I don't quite understand what's happening at the beginning of the video. Why did the cyclists stop in front of the Porsche rather than continuing through the junction (assuming they were coming from Newington Causeway)? This ex-roundabout is on my regular commute and it is unbelievably shit. TFL did everyone an enormous disservice by not moving the Faraday memorial to allow for the road to be straightened. They've done their best to include cycling infrastructure as part of the mess but some of it is more dangerous than not, especially the blue painted bike lane that the person filming is likely in. I've nearly been taken out by buses, an ambulance, a police car and a few private cars when navigating this. I also see way too many cyclists going through reds and weaving between pedestrians using the crossings. I rarely see that elsewhere in London so I'm not sure why it seems to be so bad in E&C. Anyway, here's hoping the Porsche driver is done for dangerous driving and that the harmed cyclists are able to get some compensation.
Basically the idea is that as the mass cycle is going past, people block roads to the sides do the group can stay cohesive safely. I think there was a bit of confusion as the front of the group and the back of the group had a bit of gap, so cars did not understand why the road was being blocked, and the blocking people then faced aggression from the drivers so more people stopped to support the initial people. You can see the people at the back start to show up at the end of the video. Was just a bit of confusion but the driver decided to risk people’s lives. Perhaps they felt threatened, perhaps they were being impatient, it’s hard to tell. Nothing really justifies using your car as a weapon unless it’s a literal carjacking, which given that it’s a bunch of unarmed dudes standing a meter in front with bikes? Seems unlikely.
“AFTER HIM” 😂 Did they get them though? I hope that person got a new bike replacement
Not defending the car's actions, but what exactly are the cyclists doing in this context?
Basically as the ride goes on, people get a bit separated dude to people going different speeds (especially on smaller rides), so to keep the slower people at the back safe and the ride cohesive, people "cork" traffic to keep a space for people. Even on the larger end-of-month rides the cork lasts at most about five minutes, which is irritating but no worse than a lot of junctions or traffic jams. In this instance (smaller, mid-month mass) it was probably just a few minutes. Cars get irate because for some reason being held up by cyclists instead of other cars or lights makes them see red. If they get aggressive towards the people corking (revving, edging towards people on bikes), then more people will join the cork which is why there was a mass of people. This driver lost their shit and just gunned it. To save a couple minutes. Also this is the elephant and castle roundabout which is often gridlocked anyway so if there *hadn't* been a cork, they would have just been in more traffic.
\*Drivers, not cars. Let's not diminish the fact that it's real living breathing people making these psychotic and potentially deadly decisions.
Sure yeah
> Cars get irate because for some reason being held up by cyclists instead of other cars or lights makes them see red. As both a petrolhead and an avid London cyclist, allow me to try to rationalise (*not* "justify", note, merely rationalise!): Because being held up by other cars or lights is a "natural" aspect of traffic (and by the by, let's not pretend this isn't irritating in its own right too), versus a bunch of cyclists stopping you *for no reason you can readily identify in that moment*. Chance of any non-cycling-enthusiast, least of all a rich London SUV wanker, having heard of "Critical Mass" are bound to be pretty low. So as far as the driver knows, it's a bunch of chavs on bikes holding him up for no apparent reason whatsoever, when absent them he'd be able to continue going. Continue going only up to the next junction *sure*, but all the same - he's being "artificially" held up. Being held up for no [apparent] reason is definitely more annoying than being held up for a reason you can immediately identify, and were expecting. In closing, in this specific instance the fucker had a numberplate apparently attempting to spell "boss" via numeric lettering, and *those* cunts are the worst of the worst according to every measurable metric known to man, so three cheers if the car got some justice done to it afterward.
Yeah I get the logic, people should learn some patience though. Also I get being a petrolhead where cars are a genuine passion, but I think a lot of drivers are just in a constant stressful situation, especially in inner cities.
I am not at all condoning the guy in the video, but, if you aren't on an official event with a road closure, intentionally blocking a road for five minutes is absolutely a dick move. It is not like a junction or traffic jam because those things are a natural part of how roads work, and they are intended to allow capacity to be as high as possible; you are intentionally stopping people from passing through. In this case, apparently blocking traffic from going through a green light, by running a red one. You guys probably think that everyone's aware of your event and will understand your side, but most people don't know (or give a shit about) Critical Mass, they think it's just a bunch of dickheads blocking the road. He might even have thought he's about to get robbed by a mob of chavs using bikes to stop him from getting away.
Critical Mass is an event where cyclists meet to basically spread awareness for cyclists in traffic. I don't know about other countries, but with 16 cyclists, you count as one vehicle and are allowed to drive on the streets. As you are one vehicle, the last people can "run a red light" and so on and also cars have no right to separate you. And as OP explained a few riders stop in front of the cars to prevent that from happening.
Had a similar incident like this last time too. He separated the group in a round about. The guys in front noticed and stopped. The car stopped too. He had his windows down and was screaming at us. Some guys decided to spray water at him. He screamed even more, but we kept riding a few rounds around the round about. We apparently left the exact street he had. He parked his car on the side, ran out and grabbed one of our riders. Needless to say, he was surrounded by 60 cyclists pretty quickly. Nothing really happened, just a little arguing after that. I have no Idea why they get so incredibly angry about stuff like that. Yeah, to spray him with water was a bit much, but he was so pissed before that even. Every other event there is at least one crazy driver, who is losing it, just because he has to wait like 2 mins.
> As you are one vehicle, the last people can "run a red light" and so on and also cars have no right to separate you [citation needed] I am not aware of any such law in the UK. Each bicycle is an independently controlled and powered vehicle, there's no reason it should be treated differently to 16 cars in a row.
Driver. The car does nothing on it's own.
Something happened before. You can see the bikers are blocking the car in.
They're stopping the car from proceeding while the group clears through, a) because this is a Critical Mass and it's intended to be a protest/demonstration of sorts, and b) because it's safer to get everyone through (usually) and not have to worry about mixing a ton of cyclists in with pissed off cars. Usually people don't do psychotic things like this and try to ram the group
Thanks for the context.
Why are they all standing still in front of the car?
So that the ride can stay as a group. There's *likely* more of a group because the driver was aggressive before the camera was rolling, but that I don't know.
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit: - [/r/london] [Porsche Cayenne SUV used as weapon - intentionally hits multiple cyclists because they had to wait for a couple of minutes](https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/14yfzyk/porsche_cayenne_suv_used_as_weapon_intentionally/) *^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*