Originally Posted by
prathmann
Are we reading the same article, since I didn't get any of the above? Not sure what really happened since we only have the writer's side, but at least from his statements the situation started when the car driver 'migrated into the curb lane.' That doesn't indicate the the cyclist was FRAP. Even if he was right in the middle of the right (curb) lane; i.e. 'taking the lane', he could still get squeezed over to the side of the road by the encroaching car. And the car continues to move to the right into the cyclist after he tries to get the driver's attention by yelling. Hitting the car was a last-ditch effort to make the driver aware of the cyclist's presence - how is that "crossing the line?"
It does sound as if the conversation after that point got increasingly uncivil and was probably counterproductive.
Verbally getting the motorist's attention was the good part. The cyclist hitting the vehicle with their fist, is the bad part. Because that led to the verbal threat from the vehicle's passenger(and probably the driver too).
While the cyclist was being squeezed between the vehicle and the curb, when I have stupidly 'let' myself get stuck in those situations as a result of not 'taking the lane', I hit the brakes and come to a dead stop against the curb. So I can get back into the flow of traffic when it is possible to do so.
By 'taking the lane', it gives the cyclist 'fallout' room to momentarily avoid the occasional 'drifter'.