wphamilton

LOL, OK I guess I have no recourse in the face of this powerful display of intellect. You win. You and Genec, carry on.

wphamilton

It looks like our NYC volunteer has backed out after all, so you're at the top of the list now. I don't suppose you have a riding partner who might be amenable to participating in the experiment?

Rollfast

When you are a distinct singularity amongst the perception of other entities, and all of this perception is reliant on your existence...

This can get deep.

I don't believe I've ever made a post here that might require this URL: https://www.philosophytalk.org/

dynaryder

You do realize that that's illegal,right? Seriously,run that by a lawyer and see what they say.

No it's not. Again,check with a lawyer.

I think you should consider the lesson from Mr Croce:

Buffalo Buff

I will nver ****ing understand people with this mentality.

The cyclist made a hand gesture. The driver nearly incapacitated him. How the **** are those two things comparable?

I'd give that **** the middle finger too.

I was in this exact situation about a week and a half ago. The person slammed on their brakes, tried to run me off the road etc. Guess what was behind both of us? A ****ing cop. They got pulled over and arrested on the spot. Guess who was never even questioned for (legally) yelling obscenities and using hand gestures? Me.



Using your middle finger to express yourself is legal. So is calling someone an @SSHole. Passing within a foot of them, brake checking them, physical assult - those are all illegal. They can play tough guy all they want with me, it'll be on their record not mine.

FliesOnly1

Well...I think you are mistaken. Since we are a nation of laws, the next time that driver is given a one-fingered wave, I’ll bet he behaves in a different manner. The diver knowingly and purposefully broke a few laws. Obviously, at the time he was such a testosterone enraged a-hole that he didn't care. However, I imagine once the cuffs were put on him, he felt a bit differently. I guess I’m not the type to simply let an Assault go unpunished. That driver needed to be arrested, it’s apparently the only way he’ll learn what’s legal and what’s illegal…and maybe change his attitude.

There are essentially two issues in play here. One is whether or not it's "wise" to flip off an aggressive and dangerous driver. The other is the legal ramifications of ones' actions. Some have suggested that giving the bird is "consent" to fight. I have said repeatedly that that is NOT the case, regardless of the consequences. Two separate issues.

You'd be wrong. Despite my wife repeatedly claiming that I act like a child most of the time, I am in my mid 50s.

If turning around sends me further from potential help and/or safety, then I'm not turning around.

fitftw

If you are in the shoulder and a driver passes you and does not cause you physical injury, then you simply let it go, even if you feel disrespected.

wphamilton

You seem to have given the issue some careful thought and research, so I think that you realize that for speech (or gestures) to rise to disorderly conduct (and hence illegal) they have to be inherently likely to provoke a violent reaction, when addressed to the ordinary citizen, as common knowledge. This is not so cut and dried.

You acknowledge here that several people, repeatedly, have told you that the gesture does provoke them and others to violent reactions. It hasn't, in your experience. Doesn't that imply to you that an ordinary citizen in some subcultures, in some areas, are provoked differently than are those in your individual experience? For these ordinary citizens, it is apparently common knowledge and the bird would fulfill that criteria.

Secondly, even when the bird itself is protected as free speech, when accompanied by other gestures, actions or speech which is belligerent and aggressive it is viewed (and this by the various courts as well) as inciting violence. In this instant situation, the cyclist did proceed with belligerent shouts, and aggressive behavior including repeating the gesture. Again, it is common knowledge that repeating the gesture along with angry shouts tends to incite a reaction.

FliesOnly1

Well, be that as it may, the SCOTUS has determined that flying the bird is protected free speech. It may provoke some hot-headed individuals, but probably not most and it certainly cannot be justifiably considered as “provoking a violent reaction”. Again, I’m trying to address two separate issues here. One is the whether or not someone “should’ give an aggressive driver the finger. The other is whether or not giving the bird is legal or illegal.

Well, that’s their problem (from a legal standpoint). Sure, one can continue to act aggressively towards the [in this case] driver, which may indeed fall into the realm of provocation. However, giving a driver [that passes too closely] the finger is neither an illegal act nor justifiable provocation for the driver to feel the need to defend himself.

Ummmmm…a protected Right is a protected Right. That’s why it’s called a Right.

Agreed.

You’re kidding, right? I watched the video again…just to be sure, and I fail to see any aggressive behavior(s) on the part of the cyclist. He only flipped the driver off again (and said a couple choice words) AFTER the driver tried to run him off the road for a second time (and also after the driver had stopped and tried to impeded the cyclist forward progress by blocking him with his pickup). The driver was arrested, not the cyclist…you know this, yes? Obviously the police also failed to see this supposed “aggressive behavior” on the part of the cyclist.

wphamilton

Not always, no. The famous example is yelling "Fire" in a theater. The "bird" isn't a protected right - free speech is. The question is whether and when flipping the bird is provocative and therefore not protected.

The conditions I listed are those which the courts - including the Supreme Court - look for in determining whether a particular expression is a protected right.


That may be seen as mitigating, but to me it's clearly an escalation. Escalations are provocative and inciting.

That the police didn't ticket him for disorderly conduct could mean that he just let it slide, or that he realized that the cyclist would claim that he was trying to get the driver's attention to give him more room. Just as the driver claimed that he reacted to feeling threatened, but more credibly (since the cyclist obviously was threatened). Police sometimes don't issue citations that they believe might not stick.

Cyclists have been issued citations for that kind of conduct, and it is sometimes used as mitigation of bad driver behavior.

njkayaker

No, flipping a finger is pretty-much universally an insult.

It's weird and delusional to claim otherwise.

It's possible that people you know in certain contexts might not treat it as an insult but strangers almost certainly will.

Note that I'm not commenting on your use of it.

njkayaker

There obviously is a standard. Not everybody uses that standard.

You are claiming that the pass was "safe" because the rider happened to be lucky not to have been hit. That's wacky.

* It is completely reasonable to use "three feet" as a guide for a safe passing distance since everything discussing a specific distance all agree with three feet being a safe minimal distance.

* Regardless of a "three foot" law (which existed at this location), the pass was very close (apparently, much closer than three feet) and it was completely unnecessary to have passed that close.

Buffalo Buff

No one has the legal right to assault someone that verbally insults them and that's the bottom line. You can be upset that someone waved a specific finger your way, but that's all you can legally do. Flicking someone off is not giving consent to scrap.

njkayaker

??? This doesn't describe this situation at all.

njkayaker

Yes. I said so earlier. But that's not what I was talking about here.

* No one has a right (legal or otherwise) in response to be verbally/digitally insulted.
* Considering a finger flip (to strangers, no less) as not representing an insult is idiotic.

Both things are independent and both can (and are!) true.

njkayaker

The cyclist didn't really "escalate" the situation (he kept doing the same thing). The driver certainly escalated (repeatedly).

fitftw

I recently watched a video where a bully was talking smack to a shorter, stockier kid. The short kid ended up beating the tall kid into a pulp.

Verbal abuse, or hand gestures, are not grounds for physical abuse.

Offensive physical abuse is grounds for defensive physical abuse (and arrest.)

njkayaker

You (and others) pursing this line keep forgetting that it was was the driver who provided the initial act of provocation (*): he passed much too close when there was no reason to do so).

* Yes, one can't be 100% certain but it looks probable to me. It's certainly, a possibility, which "incite to fight" people are ignoring.

Buffalo Buff

I agree, I think I just got the impression you were implying insulting someone justifies a physical response. My apologies if that is not what you meant.

njkayaker

It's actually fuzzier than that. The SCOTUS case(s) are regarding flipping off cops, who, presumably, should be resistant to minor "provocations".

Legally Speaking: Is Flipping the Bird a Right? | ACTIVE

https://velonews.competitor.com/2007/...ree-bird_13502

Whether or not flipping off drivers is advised, drivers who have an escalated response to it are not qualified to be driving.

njkayaker

Nooo! Defintely not!

That "impression" really isn't there (and you have to look at what I was replying to).

(You want to be careful supposing people mean something "extreme" that isn't actually in the words they have used.)

RR3

The biker took a dive. Look at 1:20 in the video. The cyclist was already down before the driver got to him.

cellery

Please move this victim blaming tirade to A & S where it belongs.

genec

Says the guy that still thinks I believe a close pass is OK. It is not... but technically a close pass is legal, in almost half the states.... especially since there is no STANDARD on how close a motorist can pass a cyclist in states without a specified law. There is a 3 foot law in the state mentioned in the OP.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/transpo...icyclists.aspx

italktocats

and this is why you dont just flip people off, and you stab them in the balls if they keep going at you, you dont just cycle along