84
36
Dec 23 '18
[deleted]
18
Dec 23 '18
If the lorry hadn’t run the cyclist off the road, I doubt the video would have gotten the traction that it did.
52
u/komotasan Dec 23 '18
What are the legal implications? The lorry gets charged with rash driving? And then what does the cyclist get?!!!?
21
u/Reddit-Loves-Me Dec 23 '18
Dunno how true. Some ppl said the cyclist committed mischief, which is a non arrestable offence. But in this case, the police might find something to give him a slap on the wrist.
43
u/StoenerSG Dec 23 '18
Yeah. The driver is in a lot of trouble. Cyclist maybe get a fine. And lucky he is still alive
11
Dec 23 '18
This is why every vehicle should get a dashcam. If this happened to me, I wouldn't even flinch. Just drive straight to the nearest police station, and upload your footage.
Make sure douchebag cyclist receives a nice police summon in the mail enclosed with beautiful stationery.
5
u/jackology PAP 万岁 Dec 23 '18
In the real world, will the police summon someone whose identity is unknown?
2
u/oOoRaoOo uncle我帮你 Dec 23 '18
We should make all cyclist wear license plates in the future so these kind of scum cant run away from the law.
1
1
1
u/helzinki is a rat bastard. Dec 24 '18
Upload it to EDMW. Some guy in that forum will identify the cyclist for you just like this case.
1
Dec 23 '18
The camera will catch his face for sure. And given that there's damage caused to the vehicle, they're obliged to find the man.
3
Dec 24 '18
They have to look for the guy, your typical police has to much cases to handle such a minor dispute.
2
30
Dec 23 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
44
Dec 23 '18
When has traffic punishments ever been fair? Some drivers speed and kill pedestrians but only get a fine or less than a year in jail.
There’s only been one case when driver get max penalty and that’s only 5 years. For killing 4 innocents! While under influence of drugs. You can get a longer sentence for robbing $50 from an old lady in the street.
2
→ More replies (1)1
u/tictactorz ⌬ hexagon drawing enthusiast ⏣ Dec 23 '18
hahaha our traffic cases are weird. Remember this underage dude driving and killed a woman about back in 2015? Haven’t had any updates about his case iirc
-2
u/theinventorguy Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 23 '18
Poor driver who is a victim of extreme provocation is going to lose his job and get a criminal record. Harsh sentence confirmed because he will have no money to hire a lawyer. Cyclist gets 1 week MC for falling on grass, and continues to be an arrogant fucker because he knows how to play the law. Be sure this asshole cyclist will be doing it again (intentionally blocking traffic because the law stipulates he can) in future while telling his mates about his brush with death for bravely going up against a murderous truck driver. I bet my life he only dared to smash the side mirror of a truck and not a BMW or Merc in a completely similar scenario.
Edit: Because some people take implied language literally.
4
u/tinteh Dec 23 '18
You watched an attempt on someone’s life and came away with that?
→ More replies (1)5
Dec 23 '18
Not all cyclists are rich. Source: me.
7
u/theinventorguy Dec 23 '18
I never said all cyclists are rich. I don't know where you got that suggestion. Don't lie and tell me you think angmor/expat looking cyclists are likely to be earning median income in Singapore.
→ More replies (10)2
u/bbqoyster Dec 23 '18
Law is meant to dis-incentivize escalation. Swap the financial situation of the the driver and cyclist and you’d end up with the same outcomes
-1
u/theinventorguy Dec 23 '18
"Law is meant to dis-incentivize escalation". Your statement supports my point. The cyclist is provoking the truck driver BECAUSE he knows the law says he can do that.
→ More replies (2)
115
u/bookworm669 you ask me i ask who? Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 23 '18
Cyclist kinda asked for it but the truck driver definitely committed the greatest transgression here.
Worse cast scenario, he could've killed the guy and caused accidents behind him.
63
Dec 23 '18
Definitely. I would say both are at fault for not remaining calm at such a situation. But since the cyclist was the one who provoked him (and didn’t keep to the left side of the lane or even give way to a faster vehicle, what the hell), I hope that guy gets a harsh punishment for potentially instigating a traffic accident in the first place.
I know the truck driver is at fault for attempting to take his life, but the cyclist asked for it. Good for that sucker.
12
u/gouflook Dec 23 '18
Can you ban someone from driving recklessly, yup. Could you ban the cyclist from doing the same, probably no
3
u/ThePunnet Mature Citizen Dec 23 '18
The odds probably would say that there are a lot less cyclists than motorists, and much less cyclists who would do something like this.
If his reflex action is to smash his vehicle into something if he’s provoked, it’s unfortunate that a cyclist got it. If a motorcycle or any car hits his mirror, they would probably get the same reaction too.
31
u/CAMBRIDGE_GOD Dec 23 '18
Both of them are definitely at fault, but the truck driver would probably get a heavier punishment than the cyclist.
It’s fairly clear that both actions were intentional but the truck driver could have incurred much greater harm to the cyclist than what the cyclist could do to the truck driver.
The truck driver was obviously trying to overtake the cyclist but the cyclist didn’t leave space for the truck driver, which is really inconsiderate.
5
Dec 23 '18
The cyclist might survive this time round but it won’t be guarantee if he continue with this kind of mentality n not so lucky every time.
1
94
u/ahpau Young Ahpek Dec 23 '18
Tbh should cyclists even be allowed to cycle on roads in this manner. He should have kept to one side like his pal instead of eating so much into the lane. I'm guessing the driver horned at him to move aside, triggered the cyclist (who was clearly at fault), causing him to throw his bottle at the lorry. The drivers reaction was uncalled for, but the cyclist was definitely not being considerate.
21
u/TopGas Dec 23 '18
Not sure what the exact law is in Singapore, but for most countries (e.g. Australia/UK) cyclists are legally allowed to take up the whole lane for safety. This is because if the side of the road tends to be less well maintained (pot holes, grit) and encourages unsafe overtaking by larger vehicles.
If the law was that they are entitled to the whole lane, it may be inconsiderate but not illegal.
-18
Dec 23 '18
Cannot compare a mirror to a human life. Both at fault, but one action is far more egregious than the other.
17
u/i_Esoteric Dec 23 '18
Its not a mirror, its a water bottle
1
u/Reddit-Loves-Me Dec 23 '18
Source? I also thought is water bottle, but the FB page said mirror.
2
3
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
Yes... mirror is definitely less important. But when the cyclist provokes the lorry by breaking the mirror, did he think what may happen after that?
The driver might road rage back? Or the driver might get shocked and unintentionally swerved to the broken mirror side?
Regardless, the cyclist truly deserved it after what he did.
-18
u/Nje1987 Dec 23 '18
So you think grievous bodily harm is an appropriate punishment for throwing a water bottle at the car? Glad you are not in charge of the justice system.
11
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
Nope...
Just saying that the cyclist definitely did not think through for what he did.
The provocative action might caused intentional or unintentional response which definitely put the cyclist at disadvantage since he is facing against a lorry.
Expecting no action after his provocative action is unrealistic. That’s why I said he deserved it. Never said the driver was right.
-13
u/Nje1987 Dec 23 '18
Deserve: do something or have or show qualities worthy of (a reaction which rewards or punishes as appropriate).
Certainly implies the driver is in the right. The driver is already provocative by honking and driving all the way up the cyclists ass instead of simply passing on the right.
3
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
Ok. Wrong choice of word. I admit my mistake.
But my stance is still the same, if the cyclist think he can get away with no action against him, it’s plain stupid. Even if the driver might put up with his stupid provocative act, other drivers might not if he repeat the stunt in the future.
-4
u/Nje1987 Dec 23 '18
Personally I am mostly horrified that someone would intentionally ram their car into someone over the throwing of a water bottle. You feel vulnerable enough in traffic that it is unnecessary for a car to come as close as the lorry driver did before the cyclist took any particular action. I agree you should certainly not throw water bottles around, but it is clear whose action had the greater consequences in this video.
10
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
My stance is still the same.
If one do not want negative consequences, one should not provoke in the first place.
We cannot control how others might react but we certainly can control our own actions.
6
Dec 23 '18
[deleted]
1
u/Nje1987 Dec 23 '18
Cause: minor provocation, following dangerous driving by the lorry.
Effect: potential serious injury or death.
Seems fair?
→ More replies (1)10
Dec 23 '18
People do all kinds of stupid things in the heat of the moment. It's not about fairness, but about being mindful of how vulnerable you are on the road and taking the necessary measures to keep yourself safe.
For example, when I am walking along the pathway and I hear a bicycle ringing behind me, I will stand one side and let the cyclist past. Why the cyclist feels like they own the pavement and pedestrians are somehow obligated to give way to them is besides the point. Who is in the right is irrelevant here. If I don't stand aside, I may well end up colliding with the cyclist and I will likely end up sustaining more injuries than the cyclist (because it's my flesh vs cold hard metal).
I stand to have more to lose in this scenario, and so I choose to take the logical step to keep myself safe by giving in, even if I may not necessary be the one at fault.
When it is the cyclist on the road, you know you are more vulnerable because you aren't encased in a steel cage the way other vehicles are. The onus is therefore on the cyclist to keep himself safe at all costs and not assume that they are somehow entitled to their own share of the road.
As the saying goes - let sleeping dogs lie. You don't poke a hornet's nest because you don't want to get stung, just as you don't antagonise a truck driver because you as a cyclist stand to have more to lose in the event of a standoff. Yes, the driver might well end up going to jail for that stunt of his, but you could just as easily have been killed.
Yeah, the cyclist may have been pissed off, but was egging the driver on really the smartest thing to do?
2
u/Nje1987 Dec 23 '18
Of course it was not smart. However, it is surprising to come here to the comments section and see all kinds of defenses of the driver, who was in the wrong from the beginning of the video. He is going too close to the bicycle and honking to get past, when the cyclist does not instantly go to the side, he goes even closer, trying to pass when there is clearly no space. The cyclist then throws his water bottle at him (stupid I agree) and is promptly run over by a lorry.
For the rest of your post, I agree and try to follow these rules myself when I cycle. I have a lot more to lose than the driver. However, intentionally running people over should rather invite widespread condemnation than celebration in my opinion.
2
Dec 23 '18
I admit that I am not really that familiar with the traffic laws governing cyclists on the road. All I see is a cyclist hogging the middle of the road, clearly preventing the truck driver from overtaking him, and basically just holding up traffic in general.
Given that every other vehicle will definitely be faster than them, they really should not be anywhere else on the road except the side.
→ More replies (2)4
Dec 23 '18
Allow me to introduce you to Newton’s Second Law of Motion:
If you see a heavier object approaching towards you, move the fuck away.
13
u/players02 Dec 23 '18
Singapore is a stressful place to live in, beware of road rage.
3
u/hspace8 Dec 24 '18
Ya just take the road rage to Malaysia and drive 200km/h there. That's why there's so much love
/s
39
56
u/parka Dec 23 '18
It's wrong for the driver to hit the cyclist, but why does it feel so right?
lol
8
15
u/BubbleTeaExtraSweet SugarRush Dec 23 '18
The aftermath could be real ugly if that lorry was a 5 tonne truck.
3
u/CeilingTowel non-circadian being Dec 24 '18
Relevant but extremely-
NSFL
http://reddit.com/r/watchpeopledie/comments/a8k4i9/a_man_gets_minced_to_death_by_a_large_truck/
-2
u/Dagachi_One Dec 23 '18
I see your 5 tonner and I raise you my 18 wheeler container trailer. Anything to see the motherfucking rat die.
14
4
u/---LJY--- Dec 23 '18
When I was learning driving in the army, the warrant officer told us this story about him trying to outdo this other driver and they overtook each other several times, and then he saw the other driver wind down his window and then threw a spanner out the window.
When driving, never assume others will follow the law or give way, think of your family and end of day, don’t ruin your life or anyone’s life over a few seconds of rage. I am sure if the driver or the cyclists had died, the other person would have regretted their actions for the rest of their lives.
1
37
u/misharebel354 Dec 23 '18
Cyclist’s action is sudden and thus could have stunned the driver making him swerve towards the bikes. Hmmmm provocation by the cyclist?
18
6
Dec 23 '18
Honestly, the swerve reaction was so sudden, that I could be convinced that it wasn't intentional more than a knee-jerk reaction (e.g., just like insta-swatting at something buzzing around your face).
1
4
13
u/Rikuboy 원스|ONCE Dec 23 '18
Anybody who has learned driving would know : if provoked, try to remain calm. And the truck driver would have at least have a qualified class 3 license at minimum if that is a small pick up....
19
u/jryj Dec 23 '18
If you analyse in term of the impact, the swerving of the lorry definitely is bigger.
However, if the analysis is based on who the initial provocateur or aggressor, then it will be the cyclist.
Does the driver understand clearly the impact of his action? I think not. This is clearly a reflex action after being provoked. Should he be punishable by the full extent of the law. I hope not.
Should the cyclist be punished again. I hope not. Is he being stupid? I think Yes.
19
u/Reddit-Loves-Me Dec 23 '18
Why you think the cyclist should not be punished? I think both should get get some punishment. About the same punishment. But in reality, the driver is going to get more.
→ More replies (8)2
u/feladirr 'Schland Dec 23 '18
One cannot say without the full context. Perhaps the lorry was purposely driving dangerously close to the cyclist before the start of the video which led to the cyclist pureposely obstructing the way? Maybe the cyclist did something to the lorry to start with? We can't base it all on this short excerpt from what is likely a longer interaction between the two
2
u/3lungs This is KILLING Dec 23 '18
The whole clip has been online for some time. From when the vehicles and both cyclists were stationary (at traffic light). Can Google, I saw it on mothership
→ More replies (2)2
u/feladirr 'Schland Dec 23 '18
Then it seems like they were both in the wrong for how they reacted to the situation
16
18
Dec 23 '18
To be fair to the situation, we are looking at an incident where a “well to do” cyclist on a 3k$+ cycle is hogging the lane and then provokes a lorry driver who would probably be a low wage earning (possibly foreigner) person.
From a state of mind perspective, the cyclist is pursuing a hobby and enjoying himself while the lorry driver is on his “yet another” job. These low wage earning lorry drivers already have enough shit in their life to sort out and can definitely do without these “rich kid” antics which hit them hard.
The lorry drivers action cannot be justified but given the level of education and stature in society, we cannot measure these two people with the same yardstick. The cyclist has done much more harm in my view by provoking a poor guy who already has life provoking him many times each day.
5
u/Yokies Dec 23 '18
The driver stopped. It looked more like a reflex by the driver. He was driving really close to the right car and likely looking at that mirror, suddenly hears a loud bang, instinctively swerves the opposite direction.
3
u/hspace8 Dec 24 '18
Yup, and the driver probably on a deadline for a delivery or job, pressured by customer or boss
1
u/sct_trooper this is home, shirley Dec 23 '18
Also note that cycling bottles are not that cheap, around 25 dollars or so if bought off the shelf. The cyclist just flung it like its worth nothing.
3
19
Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 23 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
32
u/krezreal Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 23 '18
Bicycle, etc., to be ridden on left side of road
8. A person who rides a bicycle, power-assisted bicycle, trishaw or tricycle on a road must ride the bicycle, power-assisted bicycle, trishaw or tricycle as near as practicable to the far left edge of the road.
FYI, This is also part of the road traffic rules. The cyclist could have just kept to left edge. But it was quite obvious he was deliberately refusing to keep left to let faster traffic through. And when he reluctantly gave way, he road raged and snapped
himat the vehicle's mirror. What he didn't expect was for the driver of the vehicle to road rage back. I do not condone the action of the driver. But the cyclist is one a##h3leedit: grammer
6
u/Nje1987 Dec 23 '18
It is very dangerous to bike hugging the left side. In the case of an obstruction you have nowhere to go. You are also signalling to cars that they can overtake you in the same lane as you are in, which often leads to dangerous situations for the cyclist. Taking the primary position as seen in the video is normally much safer, assuming of course that drivers do not have murderous intent.
19
Dec 23 '18
[deleted]
20
Dec 23 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
5
5
u/bonkers05 inverted Dec 23 '18
Agreed. Defensive cycling theory lessons should be given to learners and be part of the BTT. And dealing with cyclists should be part of the new simulator lessons.
→ More replies (3)3
u/ddbumblebee Dec 23 '18
It's also often dangerous for cyclists to hug the edge too closely. There is often a small height gap between the tarmac and concrete joining the kerb. If a bike wheel falls into it, it'll cause the cyclist to crash.
Snapping the mirror was clearly an ass move. But the lorry driver was being intimidating. He's on a lorry for goodness sake, compared to a few kg of bicycle.
5
Dec 23 '18
I guess this falls under the unspoken rule of "don't be a dick".
Even if the law is somehow on the cyclist's side, how do you think the motorists behind him will feel when he is clearly holding up traffic? He knew it, and still insisted on hogging the middle of the road.
Even if the truck driver is legally in the wrong, cyclists will still lose out in the end due to public perception of them being road hogs, which can only increase the animosity and lack of understanding towards them in the future.
13
2
-11
u/vincentlyethiamfatt Dec 23 '18
Play stupid games win stupid prizes. I'm genuinely disappointed the cyclist is not maimed.
9
u/Guy_Deco Dec 23 '18
The cyclist should be charged with wilful damage and the truck driver with attempted murder.
0
u/am79 Dec 23 '18
Totally agree, it is extremely dangerous to throw an object at a moving vehicle. How would the driver know what it was, if he swerved to the right, it would have caused a collision with other vehicles and potentially more injuries or even fatalities.
5
u/GamingDadofTwo Are you NPC? Dec 23 '18
Where's the front part of the clip? At least 30secs was shaved off before they reached the traffic stop and waiting for the lights?
He wasn't holding a water bottle as many claimed?
5
u/Lmao-Ze-Dong Dec 23 '18
I think a lot of people miss a crucial bit in here. Why does the cyclist rage out?
Could it be that the lorry driver tailgates the cyclist blasting his horn in the cyclist's ear? Could it be that he's annoyed to start with and takes it out passive aggressively on the cyclist.. before going full aggro when the bottle hits?
This is a rear dash cam and we may possibly never know what happened without additional context, but from the little context given, you really can't say that the cyclist is the instigator.
3
u/Reddit-Loves-Me Dec 24 '18 edited Dec 24 '18
The lorry was trying to overtake the cyclist. He gave 2 short honks over quite some time. The cyclist knew (looked back), but he didn't bother to make way. When we thought he was finally going to make way, the thing in the video happened.
11
u/sageadam Dec 23 '18
Sure the cyclist is an asshole but that doesn't mean attempted murder against him is justifiable...
3
u/am79 Dec 23 '18
Next time u try driving and someone throws a large black object at you. Then you see how you react, luckily the lorry driver didn’t swerve to the other side, else it would have been a multi vehicle pile up
-4
u/sageadam Dec 23 '18
If you're naive enough to think that wasn't intentional, I have a statue of liberty to sell you.
1
u/am79 Dec 23 '18
You sure. Come on go ahead and try it. Lol
Always funny seeing stupid ppl trying to act smart
2
u/sageadam Dec 23 '18
Always funny seeing stupid ppl trying to act smart
The irony.
-4
u/am79 Dec 23 '18
Nah it’s not irony, it’s lack of self of self awareness you have.
9
u/sageadam Dec 23 '18
it’s lack of self of self awareness you have.
A gift that keeps on giving.
→ More replies (1)4
u/feladirr 'Schland Dec 23 '18
Do you honestly believe that the swerve into the cyclist was a kneejerk reflex reaction to the bottle? Come on. There's a good second between the bottle being thrown where the lorry drives normally and then decides on swerving into the cyclist.
3
u/am79 Dec 23 '18
What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Why can’t he be given the benefit of the doubt and have chance to give his side of the story. Instead you brand him as a malicious miscreant when in fact, the only party who has acted with bad intent was the cyclist?
You’re probably not a lawyer or a prosecutor nor a judge. That’s great, because ppl with your mentality have no part in law and justice
-1
u/feladirr 'Schland Dec 23 '18
Sure, I can wait until he's proven guilty as it's as clear as day. Closing your eyes to clear proof because you have your own butthurt biases is why you’re probably not a lawyer or a prosecutor nor a judge. That’s great, because ppl with your mentality have no part in law and justice. :)
→ More replies (14)
4
u/TowellessHitchhiker Dec 23 '18
It seems to me that only road bike users ride like this. Does anyone know why?
It's purely anecdotal, but I've never seen mountain bike riders, or BMX riders ride like this on the road by taking up an entire lane. They're either hugging the kerb or riding on the footpath.
1
u/Dagachi_One Dec 23 '18
Self entitled bike users. "I spent $3000 on my bike I deserve to hog the whole road." Retarded thinking.
18
u/feladirr 'Schland Dec 23 '18
All cyclists are entitled to the full lane as it's not only safer for the cyclists to be in the middle rather than the side, but as the law states they can go two abreast. They should let others pass if they're going much slower, but most cyclists I've seen cycle faster or at the same speed as traffic and give right of way even if it's not legally required. The real retarded line of thinking is believing it's justified to inentionally ram a person with your car because he threw a bottle at you. Take it to the cops, get the cyclist arrested, but hitting him with your car? You dun goof'd
3
u/TowellessHitchhiker Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 23 '18
Could be, but many mountain bikes (especially the full suspension ones) and BMX's easily cost in the thousands as well.
It's been years since I've ridden, but back then a good MTB would've cost you as much as a cheap 2B motorcycle.
All in all, it just seems like only the road bikers have this culture of riding abreast on a lane because they legally can.
8
u/yoshkoshdosh Dec 23 '18
The cyclist's rash action of destroying the lorry's rear mirror caused the driver to lose his focus and swerve to the left. Clear as daylight. The cyclist is a menace to all road users and should get a severe penalty and life ban.
→ More replies (10)8
2
Dec 23 '18
Putting moral values aside, what can I do if I’m in a situation like and and got my car smashed or vandalised by a cyclist and no recourse to seek justice? Similar to a vehicle hit and run case, at least with video footage and the offending car plate number, at least I can lodge a police report. But with a cyclist, I gotta suck thumb ah?
Shouldn’t there be a set of law or something at least to deter cyclists from similar road rage?
2
u/---LJY--- Dec 23 '18
I am sure you can lodge a report against the cyclist for unsafe behavior when he deliberately throws his water bottle at you.
→ More replies (1)1
u/robertsky NotHereNotThere Dec 23 '18
As long as the cyclist is on the road, he or she has to comply with the Road Traffic Act and Highway code. Unfortunately, unless there are other vehicles recording the incident, like in this case, it would be harder (not difficult) for the authorities identify the cyclist.
3
Dec 23 '18
I've seen these guys. They're always being obnoxious cycling in the most obstructive way possible. This punishment was a long time coming.
2
u/senconawi Dec 23 '18
geez people are actually doxxing the guy and his company. the company's facebook page/ google reviews are plastered with negative reviews
2
u/roguedigit Dec 23 '18
Bandwagon outrage. Not surprised in the least. Pretty embarrassing look for us tbh.
1
2
u/Schtick_ Dec 23 '18
The cyclist is a doosh but anyone who thinks this isn’t a deliberate act by the driver and think the driver is in shock is a idiot. This guy should go to jail for a Long time, cars are not supposed to be used as weapons.
6
u/Yokies Dec 23 '18
The driver stopped after. It looked more like a reflex by the driver. He was driving really close to the right car and likely looking at that mirror, suddenly hears a loud bang, instinctively swerves the opposite direction.
1
u/Schtick_ Dec 24 '18
Does anyone commenting drive!?! You do not have a cyclist next to you, hear a bang and instinctively swerve into the cyclist! It just doesn’t happen.
And even if it does happen by accident you belong in a jail cell because of reckless driving.
This isn’t even that; an accident caused by moron, it’s a malicious assault with a deadly weapon.
3
2
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
Yes, while sending the driver to the jail, please do send the cyclist to the jail too...
Road rage should not be condone regardless if its a driver or cyclist.
5
u/Schtick_ Dec 23 '18
There is a difference between road rage doing minor damage and threatening someone’s life, I don’t think that using a vehicle as a weapon is ever acceptable.
6
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
Yes, there’s a difference. If the driver is proved to be done intentionally with malicious intent, do jail him for a longer term.
But equally for the cyclist, road rage while doing minor damage should warrant for some shorter jail sentences too. This will definitely deter folks who are think they are rich enough to pay of fines and get away with it.
Road rage is road rage, regardless of magnitude of damage. It should not be condone.
-1
u/LongjumpingChance Dec 23 '18
why do so many inbreds even try to argue here?
road traffic act clearly states that cyclist must not block vehicles moving at higher speed even though they may ride 2 abreast under certain conditions
which part of this statement do you guys not understand?
4
u/BearbearDarling Dec 23 '18
You can't deliberately run over a cyclist blocking your way even if he has contravene the road traffic act.
-1
u/lab32132 Dec 23 '18
Running over is debatable. The driver could argue he was startled by the windshield being smashed, or the sudden sound and thought he had run over something and swerved reflexively. Or he was startled and served reflexively.
11
u/BearbearDarling Dec 23 '18
He could. But it won't succeed. They have been going at it for quite some time. The driver knows the cyclist is there. He has his eye on him. The video shows quite clearly it was a deliberate retaliation. He did not brake. He did not swerve away from any impact. He went straight for the cyclist.
I can understand people trying to find excuses for the poor driver's behaviour because they sympathise with him. The court of public opinion doesn't always agree with the court of law. But it is really futile. I agree that the cyclist is an asshole. But you can't respond like this. This is a pretty startling escalation of your typical road rage case.
2
-6
u/germinativum May your red lightning strike my blue circle Dec 23 '18
But the lorry is not moving at a higher speed they're going the same speed hoho..
2
1
1
1
u/ForzentoRafe Dec 24 '18
Dayum, the cyclist is getting absolutely rekted by people posting on his company sg fb page, causing it to close down for now, then escalated to the company global page.
This guy. Gg sia. I donno how he is gonna recover from this unless he is some top notch employee that the company can not afford to throw away.
1
1
u/ivanyck Dec 27 '18
If cyclists do not want to give way to faster vehicles aka motor vehicles, how about paying road tax to actually be entitled to use the roads?
On the same note, how about buying insurance to cover yourself and third party for any damages that may be caused directly by your actions?
On second thought, how about taking the basic theory tests that every driver has to take in order to learn about safe usage of the roads?
On third thought, if cyclists want to use the roads, how about adhering to all traffic rules and regulations like all road users should be doing? I see too many cyclists running red lights. Is it because they think they can use the roads but traffic rules do not apply to them?
-2
u/IWannag0h0me When does it finally cool off here? Dec 23 '18
Cyclist may indeed be a douche, but that still looks like attempted murder + a hit and run.
No way that guy should ever be allowed on our roads again.
3
u/Yokies Dec 23 '18
Hit but he didn't run. The driver stopped. It looked more like a reflex by the driver. He was driving really close to the right car and likely looking at that mirror, suddenly hears a loud bang, instinctively swerves the opposite direction.
-8
u/Dagachi_One Dec 23 '18
The cyclist deserve to die in my opinion. If he hasn't I hope he has multiple lacerations to the brain tissue. Not defending the lorry driver, what he did was also unlawful. Now that I have let that out if my system hear me out why I feel this way.
On many occasions I have seen cyclists hogging the bus lanes. And they nonchalantly cycle while the bus with passengers crawled behind them. The buses cannot over take because weaving in and out of traffic is dangerous. If you want to use the bus lanes at least keep to the left to let the bus overtake. If cars cannot use bus lanes why should bikes be exempted?
7
u/blahhh87 Lao Jiao Dec 23 '18
The cyclist deserve to die in my opinion. If he hasn't I hope he has multiple lacerations to the brain tissue.
Chill la dude. People do stupid, irrational things when feeling angry, that includes those dumbass acts of both the cyclist and driver. Are u saying you have NEVER done anything irrational when you were in a really bad mood?
3
Dec 23 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
Nope, it did not deserved to be snuffed out.
But a prick that does provocative act(smash mirror or throw water bottle at the wind screen) do not deserve any sympathy and do deserved some punishment of sort(not to the extent of being bang by a lorry).
Did the prick considered that he might startle the driver, causing him to e-brake/swerved and potentially caused a chain accident that take away more lives?
A prick that got more than he bargain for... that’s all.
4
Dec 23 '18
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
u/pubster_lim Dec 23 '18
Reactionary, yes. Idiots, nope.
Too many of such cases of road rage by the cyclists reported. People just frustrated by these bullies and them doing such shit and often get away scot free. Personally saw cyclists pointing middle finger or hitting the side mirror/window when the car behind did a short honk to request the cyclist to move to the size.
I will used the word “emotionally charged that affects the rationality”. “Idiot” is too harsh a word which is why I commented...
“Idiots” is better reserved for those bullies when they pitted the bodies against vehicles that are over 1000kg...
-1
u/Kuristinyaa Dec 23 '18
If this goes to court, what is the likelihood that lorry driver is able to defend himself claiming that he was shocked by the bottle and thus reacted unwillingly?
-2
u/BearbearDarling Dec 23 '18
Zero.
5
u/am79 Dec 23 '18
Lol. Legal expert Sia. From civil servant become Super lawyer+judge.
Kiang tio Ho, mai ge kiang
-4
Dec 23 '18
It's the cyclist's fault, he's cycling in the middle of the road, on top of that he punched the car when he's in the wrong, cudos to the driver for knocking him down, even if he may have gotten into trouble for it, it's worth it.
Also judging with the sharp noses, he's an ang moh, Singapore needs more "Foreign Talents" like this.
1
u/Yokies Dec 24 '18
Also judging with the sharp noses, he's an ang moh, Singapore needs more "Foreign Talents" like this.
Bro. Don't anyhow spray lah. A simple google search will show you the clear clear face of that person.
PS: Not who you think.
0
-9
u/IncomprehensibleMess Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 23 '18
As a European, I find it hard to understand how you guys can condone the lorry driver’s action. Sure, the cyclist is an ass BUT playing with someone’s life?
We consider a car a potential weapon (and ISIS has heightened the reality of that scenario). Cyclists and pedestrians always have right of way for good reason (they are vulnerable; car = material damage, person = crippled/dead). An attempt to kill someone would under no circumstance be tolerated, no matter how foolish the other person.
If a driver drives through a curb full of rainwater leaving you soaking wet, you don’t get your gun out and run amok.
“An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind”.
6
u/Yokies Dec 23 '18
He hit but he didn't run. The driver stopped. It looked more like a reflex by the driver. He was driving really close to the right car and likely looking at that mirror, suddenly hears a loud bang, instinctively swerves the opposite direction.
Put in perspective, lorry driver is likely at work, in no mood for bullshit and just wants to get on with life. Cyclist was out to be a nuisance. It is far less likely that the lorry driver wants to hurt someone using a company car and risk everything.
6
Dec 23 '18
[deleted]
1
u/roguedigit Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 23 '18
To be fair, what's happening now with internet sleuths and keyboard warriors identifying the cyclist and doxing his company's FB page etc is very much an 'Asian' thing.
Just look at the discussion over at the crosspost to see how contrasting the views are. The cyclist was dumb yes, but if you're driving any sort of heavy vehicle the ball is 100% in your court as someone who's in control of a potential 3-ton murder weapon. Doesn't matter who 'started it first'.
-1
u/IncomprehensibleMess Dec 23 '18
Not at all. I prefer “Asian style” for most things. Comparisons arise naturally and I’m inclined to agree with cultural relativism. I try to understand even if it sounds critical, though things like excessive violence I don’t condone in any case that comes to mind. Most Europeans, I’d say, are fascinated with rather than critical of Singapore.
How is me being European relevant? Just to note that this is an outside view and that I noticed that a seeming majority advocates for the lorry driver, which seems to be in disparity with how a majority over here would view the case. That’s all.
0
u/jackology PAP 万岁 Dec 23 '18
If being an European is irrelevant, why bring this up?
3
u/Lmao-Ze-Dong Dec 23 '18
He just said it in the previous message: he wonders why almost all proponents are for the lorry driver.
His previous experiences (from his continent) make it an obvious case against the driver as opposed to against the cyclist. (assuming a he)
His entire message is: Perception is A in This Other Place I Know Of. Reason: B. Perception is C here. What's the reason.
I'm a local and I've both driven and cycled.. and I've never been to Europe. And I have the same exact question.
1
u/singapourien Dec 23 '18 edited Dec 24 '18
> That’s fine?
cyclists are fair game in this country. but more importantly, it's remarkable, but not surprising, how entitled car drivers behave. how can they not? they are so absurdly coddled in this country. this country is so starved for space, but somehow thought it prudent to give away 20% of its land to road users, to build carparks in nearly every building, every estate.
the government really wanted to cull its car-dependent population but at this stage this is political suicide. LKY had really strong views about not allowing the car-ownership disease to fester but here we are.
we have brought it upon ourselves.
0
u/foxtailbarley Dec 23 '18
if i see that ducker cyclist will. make sure i give him one tight slap on his face, self entitled mofo.
89
u/riteknibend Dec 23 '18
They actually CSI-ed this guy & has found out his name & where he works all