Jump to content

Lorry altercation with cyclist at Pasir Ris

1fast1

By 1fast1,
in General Car Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

pengu

pengu

2nd Gear

So the cyclist riding in the middle of the road is åéäºorååäº? mistake or harm?

 

The cyclist hide the side mirror of the lorry is åéäºorååäº? mistake or harm?

 

The lorry driver hoking and driving dangerously close to the cyclist is åéäºååäº? mistake or harm?

 

The lorry driver bang into the cyclist is åéäºorååäº?mistake or harm?

 

In the case anyone can be the aggressor, the lorry driver hoking and driving very closely to the unprotected cyclist with his big moving killing machine can be consider as the aggressor before the cyclist hit the side mirror?

 

Because the lorry was the aggressor, it resulted him paying the price of the cyclist hitting his side mirror?

 

The story can be told from both side?

 

Riding in the middle of the road is inconsiderate and irritating at most, so that action cannot be classified as being the aggressor?

So the cyclist riding in the middle of the road is åéäºorååäº? mistake or harm? Mistake, he should follow his fellow cyclist and cycle at the side.

 

The cyclist hide the side mirror of the lorry is åéäºorååäº? mistake or harm? Harm. He destroy the lorry’s mirror, causing monetary and time loss, not to mention it’s a dangerous act that can lead to accident since the lorry will be driving without a side mirror.

 

The lorry driver hoking and driving dangerously close to the cyclist is åéäºååäº? mistake or harm? Mistake. But honking is alright in my opinion if the cyclist refuse to give way and insist on road hogging.

 

The lorry driver bang into the cyclist is åéäºorååäº?mistake or harm? Harm. Without question. But whether it is intentional or accidentally (due to shock from impact of mirror getting hit is debateable. Must take note that the taxi on the right was probably honking the lorry too)

 

In the case anyone can be the aggressor, the lorry driver hoking and driving very closely to the unprotected cyclist with his big moving killing machine can be consider as the aggressor before the cyclist hit the side mirror? Nope, the first aggressor in this case is definitely the cyclist, who chooses not to be civic minded and keep to the side of the road, especially at the red light when all cars stop and he could have let the lorry overtake him at that point.

 

Because the lorry was the aggressor, it resulted him paying the price of the cyclist hitting his side mirror? Read above.

 

The story can be told from both side? Can be biased from either side, but the facts is quite plain.

 

Riding in the middle of the road is inconsiderate and irritating at most, so that action cannot be classified as being the aggressor? Nope, road hogging intentionally, even after being warned by the lorry, is aggressive. Especially since nothing is stopping him from following his fellow cyclist and keep left.

  • Praise 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
DACH

DACH

Supersonic

Someone said before, being horned is part and parcel in driving.

If this cyclists can’t stand this horning and choose to be this inconsiderate and want to cause such unnecessary drama, then he has the choice to cycle on the Cycling paths.

  • Praise 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Galantspeedz

Galantspeedz

Turbocharged
Yes same post as quoted below

 

Any old time driver who has encounter any near miss would know that, in any emergency, almost all right handed drivers will swerve to the right first before coming back left. This is instinct reaction. Was there a swerve back or a sign of any lose control of the lorry? To me that was a direct, intended hit.

 

 

Based on my own experience, I swerve away from what I wanted to avoid. Not if I am right or left handed...

 

Secondly I did not swerve back

 

Lastly, it was not intentional

 

What tianmo say is entirely plausible but I don't think you can say it is how it is with absolutely certainty

 

You mentioned that people chose to ignore tianmo and quoted tonyng post

 

So you tell me what was your logic

Link to post
Share on other sites
DACH

DACH

Supersonic

She is in front, not blind spot.

 

I did not anticipate anything... a car swerve into my lane and I instinctively swerve to avoid

So that means the swerving car is distracting you from the attention of the pedestrian instead?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Beregond

Beregond

Supersonic
(edited)

Yes same post as quoted below

 

Any old time driver who has encounter any near miss would know that, in any emergency, almost all right handed drivers will swerve to the right first before coming back left. This is instinct reaction. Was there a swerve back or a sign of any lose control of the lorry? To me that was a direct, intended hit.

 

 

Based on my own experience, I swerve away from what I wanted to avoid. Not if I am right or left handed...

 

Secondly I did not swerve back

 

Lastly, it was not intentional

 

What tianmo say is entirely plausible but I don't think you can say it is how it is with absolutely certainty

 

You mentioned that people chose to ignore tianmo and quoted tonyng post

 

So you tell me what was your logic

 自欺欺人 [;)]

talk so much no use

Edited by Beregond
Link to post
Share on other sites
Fcw75

Fcw75

Hypersonic

Not really...

 

I had a similar incident....

 

The person was standing in the middle of road in front of me on my left .. suddenly a car cut into my lane and instinctively I swerved left to avoid the car and hit the pedestrian

 

Based on your logic I would have known the person was in front and could have avoided knocking into the person..... the answer is no

 

I had a witness that substantiated my statement

 

Overhead bridge was 50m away

 

Fine 200 and deduct 6 points iirc for failure to keep proper lookout

 

Careless Driving offence probably, 6 points $150. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
inlinesix

inlinesix

Hypersonic

Yes same post as quoted below

 

Any old time driver who has encounter any near miss would know that, in any emergency, almost all right handed drivers will swerve to the right first before coming back left. This is instinct reaction. Was there a swerve back or a sign of any lose control of the lorry? To me that was a direct, intended hit.

 

 

Based on my own experience, I swerve away from what I wanted to avoid. Not if I am right or left handed...

 

Secondly I did not swerve back

 

Lastly, it was not intentional

 

What tianmo say is entirely plausible but I don't think you can say it is how it is with absolutely certainty

 

You mentioned that people chose to ignore tianmo and quoted tonyng post

 

So you tell me what was your logic

 

https://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2713306-lorry-altercation-with-cyclist-at-pasir-ris/?p=6589806

 

 

 

I would have bought his story except for one point that sits uneasy with me - he has been behind the cyclist whole time and impossible not to know cyclist is there and yet choose to swerve into a human body over a taxi that he is likely to know is not near. 
Link to post
Share on other sites
Galantspeedz

Galantspeedz

Turbocharged
Yes.. so I am trying to tell you from personal experience that it's not so clear cut

No, just to clarify your situation.

I don't think so

Careless Driving offence probably, 6 points $150.

Me? I quite sure the 200 and failure to keep proper lookout part
Link to post
Share on other sites
inlinesix

inlinesix

Hypersonic

Yes.. so I am trying to tell you from personal experience that it's not so clear cut

 

Yes.  It is never clear cut.

 

It provides an indication of his intent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Galantspeedz

Galantspeedz

Turbocharged
(edited)

Yes. It is never clear cut.

 

It provides an indication of his intent.

I think at best that's an assumption rather than an indication Edited by Galantspeedz
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hamburger

Hamburger

Hypersonic

Most mamils i believe are drivers themselves and to not look and think from a driver's perspective is really beyond me.

 

Must be the spandax. Please revert back to cottons for all leotards.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Philipkee

Philipkee

Twincharged

I think at best that's an assumption rather than an indication

I wonder if you have ever been punched. You will instinctively block and you KNOW and INTEND to block.

 

I believe it is the same here. Action was instinctive but driver also knew what he was doing.

 

Some actions, we don't get hit, and then take a deep breath and count to 5 before reacting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BenTong

BenTong

Turbocharged

I showed both videos to my Daughter who recently got her DL.

 

Her reaction:

 

(1) both CBs (my translation heh heh)

(2) the cyclist deserve it..

(3) the driver stupid.. now go jail

(4) a moment of folly, arrogance and irrational reaction ..

 

I added what is scary can happen to anyone of us, easily.. and very easy to be experts while typing behind a Huawei Matebook XPro laptop..

 

she said “ that’s you dad”..

  • Praise 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
Galantspeedz

Galantspeedz

Turbocharged
(edited)

I wonder if you have ever been punched. You will instinctively block and you KNOW and INTEND to block.

 

I believe it is the same here. Action was instinctive but driver also knew what he was doing.

 

Some actions, we don't get hit, and then take a deep breath and count to 5 before reacting.

Not sure what you trying to say but yes there have been fights before

 

How long do you think the driver in the pic took to react

post-15488-0-21494200-1545878987_thumb.jpg

Edited by Galantspeedz
↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...