Road rage escalation

Author
Discussion

Strawman

6,463 posts

206 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Have you noticed the people who want to make the point that getting out of your vehicle is bad also have a tendency to embellish the story to make the civic driver's action more defensible, there was shouting going on, he probably did nothing wrong earlier etc.

Limpet

6,293 posts

160 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
If you get out of a vehicle to remonstrate with another motorist, you have to accept a degree of responsibility for whatever happens.

Of course the chap didn't deserve to get run over, but if he'd just driven away and carried on his day instead of being an idiot and getting out of his van, he'd not have found himself in that position.

The problem with behaving aggressively to complete strangers is that one day you run into someone more aggressive or who gives less of a s**t than you.

RobM77

35,349 posts

233 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Strawman said:
Have you noticed the people who want to make the point that getting out of your vehicle is bad also have a tendency to embellish the story to make the civic driver's action more defensible, there was shouting going on, he probably did nothing wrong earlier etc.
If you're referring to me then I think you've mis-understood or I didn't make myself clear enough - we really have no idea what was going on at all and I think it's unreasonable to blame either party. I think it's more likely that the guy who got out of his car was an aggressive type (weedy people like me don't get out of vehicles to "have words" with other drivers), but it's by no means known as we have very little evidence. Plus I've stated a number of times that running someone over is wrong, there's no doubt in that!

Strawman

6,463 posts

206 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
f you're referring to me then I think you've mis-understood or I didn't make myself clear enough - we really have no idea what was going on at all and I think it's unreasonable to blame either party. I think it's more likely that the guy who got out of his car was an aggressive type (weedy people like me don't get out of vehicles to "have words" with other drivers), but it's by no means known as we have very little evidence. Plus I've stated a number of times that running someone over is wrong, there's no doubt in that!
Op Said

jamieduff1981 said:
The argument wasn't violent looking and there were no threatening gestures we could see. The Civic driver's decision to run him down was totally unwarranted and completely indefensible - so I decidee to involve myself afterall. Another couple of lads stopped too and also gave details.
and
jamieduff1981 said:
In this case all the verbal exchange was with the van driver standing to the side of the Civic. If he wanted to simply drive off, he could have. As the van driver walked back to his van he crossed the front of the Civic. The Civic could have waited until the driver was clear then take off. He dumped the clutch and lunged at the van driver when he was directly and centrally in front. I can't think of any reason why his intention was not to run the van driver down. He had opportunities to simply drive off. His timing couldn't have suited a deliberate run down any better.
It seems to me clear from what the only witness said that it is not unreasonable to blame the civic driver for deliberately harming someone else because a bad man spoke to him in a disrespectful fashion, cowardly as well.

RobM77

35,349 posts

233 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Strawman said:
RobM77 said:
f you're referring to me then I think you've mis-understood or I didn't make myself clear enough - we really have no idea what was going on at all and I think it's unreasonable to blame either party. I think it's more likely that the guy who got out of his car was an aggressive type (weedy people like me don't get out of vehicles to "have words" with other drivers), but it's by no means known as we have very little evidence. Plus I've stated a number of times that running someone over is wrong, there's no doubt in that!
Op Said

jamieduff1981 said:
The argument wasn't violent looking and there were no threatening gestures we could see. The Civic driver's decision to run him down was totally unwarranted and completely indefensible - so I decidee to involve myself afterall. Another couple of lads stopped too and also gave details.
and
jamieduff1981 said:
In this case all the verbal exchange was with the van driver standing to the side of the Civic. If he wanted to simply drive off, he could have. As the van driver walked back to his van he crossed the front of the Civic. The Civic could have waited until the driver was clear then take off. He dumped the clutch and lunged at the van driver when he was directly and centrally in front. I can't think of any reason why his intention was not to run the van driver down. He had opportunities to simply drive off. His timing couldn't have suited a deliberate run down any better.
It seems to me clear from what the only witness said that it is not unreasonable to blame the civic driver for deliberately harming someone else because a bad man spoke to him in a disrespectful fashion, cowardly as well.
Maybe I'm still not making myself clear here - the Civic driver was obviously in the wrong because he run someone over - that can never be right. biggrin However, just because the van driver didn't have the guy halfway out of the window by his tie screaming in his face and just because he wasn't waving his arms around like an excitable Italian, doesn't mean he wasn't engaging in some very aggressive and threatening language and behaviour. He may have been, or he may have not - we don't know. I'm confused about the accusation of cowardice though confused why is running someone over cowardly? Pretty damm nasty, yes, but cowardly?

Strawman

6,463 posts

206 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
Maybe I'm still not making myself clear here - the Civic driver was obviously in the wrong because he run someone over - that can never be right. biggrin However, just because the van driver didn't have the guy halfway out of the window by his tie screaming in his face and just because he wasn't waving his arms around like an excitable Italian, doesn't mean he wasn't engaging in some very aggressive and threatening language and behaviour.
Nor does it mean he was, so why add irrelevant detail that you've just made up?
RobM77 said:
I have a pretty low opinion of both shouting at people aggressively and running people over!
Civic driver ran someone over, van man wasn't shouting, but in your version he was.

RobM77 said:
He may have been, or he may have not - we don't know. I'm confused about the accusation of cowardice though confused why is running someone over cowardly? Pretty damm nasty, yes, but cowardly?
Because he attacked an unarmed man with his car, at no risk of injury to himself and presumably without warning.

RobM77

35,349 posts

233 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Strawman: You really need to read my posts properly, that's all I'll say. I don't have a 'version' of events - that's the whole point!

Strawman

6,463 posts

206 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
I read them properly and they add nothing. I'm curious why you felt the need to post them. What's the relevance of not liking people shouting, what's that to do with this case?

Limpet

6,293 posts

160 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Why was he out of his van in the first place?

Hol

8,360 posts

199 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Limpet said:
Why was he out of his van in the first place?
Because the Civic driver did something bad enough, to make him get out of his car and have calm words.

Otherwise nothing makes sense about the whole situation.








Hol

8,360 posts

199 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
Strawman: You really need to read my posts properly, that's all I'll say. I don't have a 'version' of events - that's the whole point!
Honestly...
You seem very afraid of the idea, that somebody might approach you at a junction (for whatever reason).


As long as you are not a serial aggressive driver and you apologise to other drivers, if you mistakenly do something bad - then you have nothing to fear.








Limpet

6,293 posts

160 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Hol said:
Because the Civic driver did something bad enough, to make him get out of his car and have calm words.

Otherwise nothing makes sense about the whole situation.
I have been driving for over 22 years, and most of these years I've done between 20 and 40k. I have never once got out of my vehicle to have a word, calm or otherwise (excluding people I know of course). It is completely unnecessary.

RobM77

35,349 posts

233 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Hol said:
Honestly...
You seem very afraid of the idea, that somebody might approach you at a junction (for whatever reason).
Eh? confused


Hol

8,360 posts

199 months

Tuesday 31st March 2015
quotequote all
Limpet said:
Hol said:
Because the Civic driver did something bad enough, to make him get out of his car and have calm words.

Otherwise nothing makes sense about the whole situation.
I have been driving for over 22 years, and most of these years I've done between 20 and 40k. I have never once got out of my vehicle to have a word, calm or otherwise (excluding people I know of course). It is completely unnecessary.
So whatever the Civic driver did must have been really bad if someone as driven as yourself has never seen its like before.


Despite your assurances to the contrary, it does happen.

RobM77

35,349 posts

233 months

Wednesday 1st April 2015
quotequote all
Hol said:
Limpet said:
Hol said:
Because the Civic driver did something bad enough, to make him get out of his car and have calm words.

Otherwise nothing makes sense about the whole situation.
I have been driving for over 22 years, and most of these years I've done between 20 and 40k. I have never once got out of my vehicle to have a word, calm or otherwise (excluding people I know of course). It is completely unnecessary.
So whatever the Civic driver did must have been really bad if someone as driven as yourself has never seen its like before.


Despite your assurances to the contrary, it does happen.
He never said it didn't happen, he said it was unnecessary.

Hol

8,360 posts

199 months

Wednesday 1st April 2015
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
Hol said:
Limpet said:
Hol said:
Because the Civic driver did something bad enough, to make him get out of his car and have calm words.

Otherwise nothing makes sense about the whole situation.
I have been driving for over 22 years, and most of these years I've done between 20 and 40k. I have never once got out of my vehicle to have a word, calm or otherwise (excluding people I know of course). It is completely unnecessary.
So whatever the Civic driver did must have been really bad if someone as driven as yourself has never seen its like before.


Despite your assurances to the contrary, it does happen.
He never said it didn't happen, he said it was unnecessary.
Yes, all because the magic pixies will point out to people that's is 'not nice' to nearly cause a four car pile up and then give the wker sign and brake-test all three cars behind them - instead of apologising.
(The above is exactly what I saw last week).




spitsfire

1,035 posts

134 months

Wednesday 1st April 2015
quotequote all
I got out of my car yesterday at traffic lights and approached the car in front... to tell him he'd left his boot open and his shopping was about to fall out.

Would I have been to blame if he'd run me over?

There are an awful lot of uber-aggressive contrarians on here, and it gets a little tiresome.

RobM77

35,349 posts

233 months

Wednesday 1st April 2015
quotequote all
Hol said:
RobM77 said:
Hol said:
Limpet said:
Hol said:
Because the Civic driver did something bad enough, to make him get out of his car and have calm words.

Otherwise nothing makes sense about the whole situation.
I have been driving for over 22 years, and most of these years I've done between 20 and 40k. I have never once got out of my vehicle to have a word, calm or otherwise (excluding people I know of course). It is completely unnecessary.
So whatever the Civic driver did must have been really bad if someone as driven as yourself has never seen its like before.


Despite your assurances to the contrary, it does happen.
He never said it didn't happen, he said it was unnecessary.
Yes, all because the magic pixies will point out to people that's is 'not nice' to nearly cause a four car pile up and then give the wker sign and brake-test all three cars behind them - instead of apologising.
(The above is exactly what I saw last week).
I can well believe it - I (and others I'm sure) see things like that all the time, but it's not a reason to be a vigilante and get out of your car to remonstrate with someone. Most people will either think they're in the right or won't care. Might it not just escalate to something far worse and regrettable as in the OP's story? In my very humble opinion, it's best to just drive defensively, try and avoid idiots (which is basically what being a good driver is all about - if everyone followed the Highway Code there would be very little skill to driving well on the public road) and try and keep the peace.

Edited by RobM77 on Wednesday 1st April 09:41

daveinhampshire

527 posts

125 months

Wednesday 1st April 2015
quotequote all
Why do people get out their car to argue the toss? The situation sounds like civic driver being young and having too much testosterone was driving like a bell end. Pisses van driver off who was most probably older and despite that held an entire road up because his ego had been dented.

As for offences, there aren't any for road rage but I imagine knowingly running someone over will put you in crown court. Saying that a large lump getting out a van threatening you would be good mitigation. It's important to remember none of us heard this conversation.

jamieduff1981

Original Poster:

8,022 posts

139 months

Wednesday 1st April 2015
quotequote all
I thought I'd chip in again to advise that the Police have not contacted me about this to date.