Do you think the cyclist was actually angry with himself - for his own stupidity? Or was the cyclist genuinely cross with the poor motorist who, no doubt, would have suffered lifelong guilt had the accident resulted in death?
2006-07-20 23:16:28 · 27 answers · asked by yam_farmer 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Beause some people are just arrogant twats.
Might be a bit of psychology going on too - he's in shock, and might be angry at himself.
My brother fell off his motorbike and broke his arms a few years back. It was entirely his fault. I arrived at the scene 20 minutes after and the ambulance had just got there. My brother was running up and down the road, his broken arms hanging uselessly at his sides, and then he started shouting at ME!
2006-07-20 23:54:26 · answer #1 · answered by badgerbadger 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
could be a couple of possibilities for the anger . Did the cyclist move out at the green and finding pedaling slow going gain the same point in the road as the car driver.
The cyclist may have been angry at the driver because he felt he should have been seen by the driver. If it had been a car would the driver still have hit that.
Fright causes a reaction similar to anger.
2006-07-20 23:26:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it's the cyclist's fault for jumping the light. Yet some cylcists think that road signs and regulations don't apply to them. Here it is in black and white :
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36, TSRGD reg 10(1)
However, every motorist has the duty of care to avoid dangerous situations should one arise. When someone jumps a red light, regardless of whether it's in a truck, car or bicycle, an oncoming motorist should do all that he can to avoid an accident. Just because a cyclist is clearly in the wrong by jumping a red light doesn't mean that the guy driving the car can just ignore him and not try to slow down to avoid.
2006-07-20 23:27:51 · answer #3 · answered by k² 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The cyclist was angry because it is never their fault, always the car drivers!
Lycra-louts should have to be insured and hold a licence, then when they jump lights, ride on the pavement, weave between people crossing pedestrian crossings, etc they would face a penalty by way of points and a fine!
Before you start thinking "car driver", I am a car driver, motorcyclist and bike rider, I obey the rules of the road no matter which form of transport I am using, my life and that of others is worth more than a few seconds saved in time on a journey!
2006-07-20 23:22:54 · answer #4 · answered by Nick B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They think that the world revolves around them and drivers should watch out for them and give them the right of way. Some cyclists won't use common sense. They're better than you because they don't pollute. They'll ride on the white line even when there's a paved shoulder. They shoul ban them from any road where they can't do the speed limit. I would save a lot of lives. It's more dangerous than second hand smoke and they banned that.
2006-07-20 23:36:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't cycle really but I think that cyclists should stick to the rules.
I guess anyone would be angry if he was hit by a car. But yeah, he should have been abiding by the traffic rules.
Thing is I'm too scared to ride my bike on the road because of some arrogant drivers.
2006-07-20 23:24:09 · answer #6 · answered by victory 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For some reason many cyclists believe that the highway code and the road laws do not apply to them. they get angry when they get hurt even if they are in the wrong. To all the cyclists out there it is NOT ok to jump red lights, it is NOT ok to swerve in and out of pedistrians on a crossing when they have the green light to cross.
And for those who are wondering I am a cyclist and so is my boyfriend. We do follow the laws of the road and highway code and we don't get hurt.
2006-07-20 23:29:21 · answer #7 · answered by Tuppence 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The cyclist is silly for thinking he can break the rules, they are there for a reason but he was probably angry because the car could do more damage to him than he ever could, plus having the right of way does not excuse you from having to look before you act.
2006-07-20 23:22:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I also think it's mainly based on selfishness. These people KNOW the rules as we're all taught from a very young age to STOP at the red light -- cars do it (usually), pedestrians do it, people in wheelchairs do it, everyone with common sense and follows traffic safety do it. It's also the law. Indeed, for some reason, being on a bicycle allows you to cycle in the middle of a lane (we have no bike-exclusive lanes/routes around here), do left turns without using hand signals, ride the opposite way toward incoming traffic, and a bunch of other law-breaking things. But no, they're on a bike and they have right of way. Cars won't dare touch them. Oh no. It boggles the mind.
2016-03-27 01:51:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was probably embarrassed and a bit shaken up. Cyclists often feel venerable an din a lot of cases motorists can be quite possessive of the road (although that doesn't sound to be the case this time)
2006-07-21 01:05:25 · answer #10 · answered by guest 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The cyclist was angry with the motorist. And I agree, it was the cyclist who was mainly in the wrong. Though judges don't agree with us. My sister was in a similar accident.
2006-07-20 23:21:40 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋