Originally Posted by
genec
The delays we normally speak of are due to traffic back up from slow traffic, not an intentional diversion due to paying attention to something other than driving. In that this delay and diversion were due to someone not attending to their driving responsibilities, this is not the same thing... and warrants other attention... such as a honk or slap.
Gene, if you go back and re-read the OP you'll see that the driver of the SUV was stopped at a stop sign:
<Quote>
I was riding on a main thoroughfare yesterday, and a woman in an SUV pulled out very hesitantly from the stop at the end of a highway off-ramp, sort of stopping and going.
</Quote>
He also goes on to say that he thought that she was trying to judge his speed, and that she was kind of stopping and going.
<Quote>
I figured she was trying to judge whether she'd have time to make a left onto the thoroughfare before I passed. I'm thinking 'GO, already, you've got plenty of time'.
</Quote>
So how is that really any different from the delays of slow traffic that is normally encountered?
<Quote>
Then, she just stops dead across the westbound lane.
</Quote>
He then passes behind her probably more dangerous then if he had passed in front of her, and as he passes slaps her SUV. So given that she was stopped at a stop sign, other then stopping and going and then deciding to send or read a text how was she a threat to anyone?
Originally Posted by
genec
You are getting hung up on this "hands on private property thing..." Yes, a car is private property, driven in a public environment, and likely touched by more than just the owner... and if the owner cannot perform their duties properly, no doubt many people will be touching their car... police, towing companies, maybe ambulance drivers... and perhaps irate cyclists.
Just because it's private property in public environment, that doesn't give cyclists or pedestrians the right to touch or slap a car.
The police, towing companies and ambulance crews have been authorized by the city, county or state to touch peoples cars. And in the case of the police and tow truck drivers if they inflict unnecessary damage to said vehicle they are held accountable.
I had a similar discussion with the father of my niece. One of the malls back in Poughkeepsie, NY instituted a curfew on unescorted children i.e. teenagers on the weekends. Due to the fact that they would go in buy a cup of soda in the food court and then take up several tables for hours on end. Usually getting into fights, with several other innocent customers getting injured in the process.
He didn't see it that the mall had the right to limit how long unescorted children i.e. teenagers could be in the mall. Using the argument that if his daughter needed to go to CVS to buy something that was her right. I (and I think several others) tried to explain to him that yes they did and that they weren't banning them from the stores or even the mall. They just had to be escorted by a parent or guardian while in the mall itself. But were free to leave store A, walk around on the sidewalk and enter store B, and so on. He didn't see it that way. Seeing the mall as being "public property, even after having it explained to him that it isn't that it's private property with public access.
He works construction and when I used the example of mommy and daddy driving up to his construction site and dropping the kiddies off for the day did he finally start to get it. As just as he wouldn't like it if that happened the employees at the malls, libraries, etc. don't like it when parents drop their kids off and use them as free babysitters.
I'm not saying that I don't understand the frustration of a motorist who doesn't get moving and is blocking traffic, but that doesn't mean that a cyclist or pedestrian has the right to touch or slap a car to get the driver's attention and get them moving.