honking at cyclists - why ?
William Krauss
>
> - what %-age of your "horn soundings" at cyclists are in
> anger ?
> - what %-age of your "horn soundings" at cyclists are to
> warn them of your prescence ?
> - did anyone ever tell you it was a good idea to use your
> horn to warn cyclists you were coming ?
> - if no, and you do this, what are your reasons for doing so ?
> - if yes, do you agree with this idea ?
> - if you ride a bike fairly often, do you sound your horn
> at cyclists when you drive ?
> - if you do sound your horn at cyclists, do you believe that
> bikes should not be in the road ?
> - how would you feel if a cyclist sounded a horn at you ?
> - do you have any other comments ?
Please add another question to the above:
- if and when you DO use your horn, WHEN do you sound it (how
close to the cyclist do you start sounding?? Nothing ticks me
off more than a motorist who "honks" right as they're
passing me!!
--
>>>> William D. Krauss NASA Lewis Research Center <<<<
>>>> Graphics Visualization Lab Cleveland, OH 44135 USA <<<<
>>>> ttt...@escher.lerc.nasa.gov(128.156.1.94) (216) 433-8720 <<<<
q.p.liu
>
> - what %-age of your "horn soundings" at cyclists are in
> - how would you feel if a cyclist sounded a horn at you ?
> - do you have any other comments ?
- What %-age of you drive a car while operating an extremely
overpowered stereo, causing car manufacturers to make car horns
loud, approaching the point of damaging to the hearing of those
who are not shielded by tons of metal, such as cyclists and
pedestrians? (No reply wanted.)
Paul Barton-Davis
purposes. Any summary will be similarly cross-posted ]
I am interested in getting some ideas on why drivers sound their horn
at cyclists. If you sound your horn at bikes, could you take the time
to answer the following few questions ? I will post a summary of
messages e-mailed to me in about a week or so.
- what %-age of your "horn soundings" at cyclists are in
anger ?
- what %-age of your "horn soundings" at cyclists are to
warn them of your prescence ?
- did anyone ever tell you it was a good idea to use your
horn to warn cyclists you were coming ?
- if no, and you do this, what are your reasons for doing so ?
- if yes, do you agree with this idea ?
- if you ride a bike fairly often, do you sound your horn
at cyclists when you drive ?
- if you do sound your horn at cyclists, do you believe that
bikes should not be in the road ?
- how would you feel if a cyclist sounded a horn at you ?
- do you have any other comments ?
Thank you for your responses,
Paul
--
Paul Barton-Davis <pa...@cs.washington.edu> UW Computer Science Lab
"People cannot cooperate towards common goals if they are forced to
compete with each other in order to guarantee their own survival."
Paul Callahan
> warn them of your prescence ?
The most outrageous thing about this theory (and I really believe there are
people who subscribe to it) is how drivers can imagine that their noisy,
gas guzzling engines aren't already enough of a warning to an alert cyclist.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@cs.jhu.edu
Ted Lemon
>The most outrageous thing about this theory (and I really believe there are
>people who subscribe to it) is how drivers can imagine that their noisy,
>gas guzzling engines aren't already enough of a warning to an alert cyclist.
Well, actually, if I'm descending really fast, I probably won't be
able to hear a quiet, gas guzzling engine such as are available on
most modern cars, because of the wind in my ears.
However, when my speed drops below what I consider reasonable for the
road, I generally look back to see if I need to let someone by anyway,
so honking wouldn't do any good. Experience has shown me that honking
also doesn't work on the sort of bicyclist who doesn't care whether or
not you want to pass, since s/he isn't going to pull over for you
anyway. Finally, most fast-moving bicyclists tend to keep one eye on
their rear from time to time to make sure that nobody's catching up to
them. :')
Naturally, I'm assuming that nobody's foolish enough to honk at a bike
when they're approaching it from the opposite direction...
_MelloN_
David S. Browning
I am interested in getting some ideas on why drivers sound their horn
at cyclists. If you sound your horn at bikes, could you take the time
to answer the following few questions ? I will post a summary of
messages e-mailed to me in about a week or so.
[ original questionaire deleted ]
Here's one for bicyclists: (Oops, am I being P.I.? Is it "cyclists"?)
When honked at by a cager, what %-age of the time do you bash their
windshield in with your K-lock?
What %-age their brains?
(You mean, I'm the only one???)
--
|============================================================================|
| Internet: brow...@nas.nasa.gov Phone: (415) 604-4321 |
| UUCP: {hplabs, mailrus, ucbvax, etc.}!ames!amelia!browning |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"the nice thing about true hopelessness is that you don't have to try again"|
| -- jules shear |
|============================================================================|
Tim Sullivan
>
>Naturally, I'm assuming that nobody's foolish enough to honk at a bike
>when they're approaching it from the opposite direction...
>
> _MelloN_
when the car approaching from the opposite direction toots. A quick
check over the shoulder confirmed nothing else from our direction for
at least the half mile I can see. Go figure..
unknown
In my experience there are two types of drivers who
will honk at cyclists: One is the courteous driver on a
narrow/treacherous stretch who gives the horn a couple of
light taps just to let you know he is there; The other guy
is the asshole who drives right up to your back wheel and
lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
Remember, U-locks can be used for more than just
to secure your 'cycle!
It is nice to know that there are still guys out there
who do give cyclists a little courtesy, they are more than
likely bikers themselves.
Just my 2".
o /__///___ Greg J. DeGreef
o /o ) \/_} snail:#220 8604-103 st.
o< /\-} Edmonton, Alberta
\__\\----/ T6E-4B6 (Canada)
I Wish I Were A Fish...... E-mail:use...@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA
Robyn Stewart
%Naturally, I'm assuming that nobody's foolish enough to honk at a bike
%when they're approaching it from the opposite direction...
Ooh that's the worst! I and the car are the only traffic in sight on a road
with two lanes in either direction. I am going west and he is going east.
He honks. This happened so many times on one day that I angled
my helmet mirror to see if I had "HONK" written in bearing grease across
my forehead. My best theory is that the driver is actually trying to
express some sort of sympathy and camaradie with the cyclist. Sort of
like we wave to other cyclists. The motorists don't realize how loud
their horns are when you aren't enclosed in a metal box, or that by the
time they have honked, they have gone by.
---
Robyn Stewart University of Waterloo vis...@watcsc.waterloo.edu
Doc O'Leary
I was biking towards a stop light of a two-lane highway that, after the light,
breaks apart with the left lane continuing (becoming single laned) and the
right lane turning off to another road (I think it hooks up with another
highway). Since my ride follows the left lane, I switched to it before I
reached the cars waiting at the stop light (Yes, I looked behind me for
traffic before I switched, Mom :-).
When the light turned green, I continued straight, staying to the right of the
lane I was in. Just before I reached the the part where the right lane turns
off, some guy honking his horn zooms past me and yells, "What do you think you
are, a car?"
I wonder how he would have felt if I had crossed in front of him to reach my
lane.
--------- Doc
********************** Signature Block : Version 2.4 *********************
* | "Please put litter in its place" *
* "Was it love, or was it the idea | ---McDonald's packaging *
* of being in love?" -- PF | Wouldn't that be on the ground? *
* (BTW, which one *is* Pink?) | *
* | --->ole...@ux.acs.umn.edu<--- *
****************** Copyright (c) 1991 by Doc O'Leary ********************
David M. Alexander
>I am going to try to ignore all car horns in the future, no matter how
>loud they become.
>
>>
>>2. I say never honk at a bicyclist, except if I'm 50 yards behind
>> him on a deserted road. If I'm driving in the city, the bicyclist
>> knows there are going to be cars on the road. Why honk?
>>
>
>Good idea.
There's one thing that pisses me off about cyclists, and it is the only
reason I ever honk at them, because I was taught in driving school that
this is very distracting and may cause the cyclist to loose balance/awareness.
If a cyclist can give me a good reason for the kind of cycling behavior I
hate so much, I will even consider stopping honking at them. Is that a deal
or what? But meanwhile it really bugs me.
The devious deed I am referring to, of course, is cyclists riding down
the road with their wheels right _on_ the white line dividing the right
hand lane from the bicycle lane. The problem with this, of course, is that
their _body_ is half in the regular lane while the cyclist obviously believes
that he/she is quite safe because their bicycle is more or less in the
bicycle lane. If they're in the regular lane, OK, it's just like driving
behind that old man with a hat in the '80 Escort. :-) If they're in the
bicycle lane, OK, they're in another lane and I can pass no problem. If
they're in _both_ lanes (not just for an accidental few feet; they are making
a concerted effort to stay right on that line), this is bad. What would I
do if a car were driving in two lanes; I'd honk. So I honk at the cyclist,
too. I mean, cyclists, consider how you'd like it if I drove down the road
with my right tires right _on_ the line for the bicycle lane in my car and
my fender five maybe six inches into the bicycle lane, huh?
If cyclists would stop riding with their bodies only half in the bicycle
lane, I promise to stop honking at them; OK? Cyclists, please stop driving
like that!
Dave Alexander
from the land of many cars _and_ many cyclists.
Lon Stowell
>
>It takes energy to start and stop, as anybody who drives both in the
>city and on the highway can attest - city gas milage is always lower
>than highway milage. The general reason for not stopping at
>intersections on a bike is that it can be a lot of extra work.
>
>Another reason is to shave time off your ride. Since my commute is
>about an hour and a half by bicycle, blowing through red lights and
>stop signs doesn't help me much, but for somebody with a fifteen
>minute commute, no other change in their riding style could possibly
>have as much of an effect on their transit time.
Yeah, those ambulance or hearse rides can really screw up
your commute times!
My girlfriend has a big ding in the side of her car from a
brainless cycler with this attitude. Although she is
normally a kind soul, she could easily understand why,
instead of feeling sorry about his bent wheel, I wanted to
kick the stupid SOB's butt and hope the next car he runs
into with this stupid "I'm a cyclist...I don't NEED to
stop at red-lights or stop-signs" attitude does a better
job of removing him from the gene pool.
Seriously, back to the point about hearses and ambulances.
When one of these cycle droids gets justifiably splattered,
they are always the first to crybaby about car drivers
being bullies. Just cause they think cycles are not
included in traffic laws for some stupid reason.
I've actually stopped to listen when gendarmes have busted
and chewed out some of these ***holes just cause they so
richly deserve it.
FLAME TIME> This is NOT an indictment of cyclists...just
the ones that seem to think they have special rights and
privileges just 'cause they are on a cycle--and that the
OTHER law abiding users of the streets HAVE TO look out for
their stupidity.
Alayne McGregor
>
>Question: how can a driver discern, at a glance, whether a cyclist is an
>alert one?
>
>Answer: HE CAN'T.
>
>9 times out of 10, the cyclist may know that the car is there, and the
>friendly warning toot from the driver is superfluous. However, the fact
>that cyclists do, in fact, have accidents with cars, and furthermore
>that some of those accidents are the fault of the cyclist, isn't it
>better to be safe than sorry?
Generally, these drivers have enough room to get by without going anywhere
near me -- I've been honked at when there was another lane in the same
direction for them to go into. If there isn't enough room, it's not just
one toot, it's a whole series indicating "I own the road. Get off it!".
I don't consider those toots friendly. If the cyclist is moving in a straight
line (i.e. predictably) and there's enough room to pass, why hont at all?
Alayne McGregor
ala...@gandalf.ca
Stephen Turner
A technique I have sometimes used when honked at in anger is to smile
and give a friendly wave.
The last time I was honked-at, I smiled and waved; the driver sent
me the middle finger in response. So I waved and smiled again. And
again, he sent me the middle finger, only with vigorous pump-action
arm movement. So I waved and smiled yet again. Heh heh. It's kind
of funny when you piss them off by not responding the way they wanted
you to.
Oh, in case you were wondering: we (my friend and I) were riding
safely, as far to the right as possible, and we were on a flat, straight
section of road with no traffic in the opposite direction. I really
have no idea why he honked.
--
"If it isn't Scottish, it's CRAP!!!"
Doug Fierro
>>turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same bicyclist
>>multiple times on the same narrow road. That's dangerous and very
>>stressful - for both him and me.
>
>It takes energy to start and stop, as anybody who drives both in the
>city and on the highway can attest - city gas milage is always lower
>than highway milage. The general reason for not stopping at
>intersections on a bike is that it can be a lot of extra work.
So when I blow through that red light on my 15 minute commute to
work in my car, I can tell the nice policeman(woman) "but officer, my car
has to do a lot of extra work if I stop at the light, and my gas mileage
is better if I just sort of roll through the light..."
>
>Another reason is to shave time off your ride. Since my commute is
>about an hour and a half by bicycle, blowing through red lights and
>stop signs doesn't help me much, but for somebody with a fifteen
>minute commute, no other change in their riding style could possibly
>have as much of an effect on their transit time.
Bicycle or car, the law is the same for everyone; you can get a
ticket on a bike for running a light, and you can even be convicted of
DUI as well. A bicyclist has to be more alert than the average driver
since they have more to lose in an accident.
Doug
--
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Doug Fierro
<<The only guarantee in life is that you will die>> fie...@uts.amdahl.com
UNIX division
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
JOSEPH T CHEW
I commute on a bicycle much of the time, and consider maintaining
situational awareness and doing what I can to move over and help
cars pass safely to be "my part of the bargain." I do not consider
it helpful to sound the horn, and any benefit would be diluted by the
chance of misconstruing it as editorial comment.
Cyclist's Perspective
---------------------
Even in these supposedly enlightened environs, people favor me often
enough with various anti-bicycle epithets. (At least around here they
don't throw things at you like in Georgia.) Riding in several parts of
the country, I've noticed that these slugs are always in their teens
and twenties, and that they appear uniformly lower-class (mid-prole
and low-prole if you're familiar with Paul Fussell's analysis). Make
of it what you will.
Horn honkers used to scare me at times, but not any more. Three
types DO scare me. One is the stereotypical little old lady of
whatever age and sex who has no idea where the car begins and ends.
Another is the self-important jerk who thinks his hurry is worth my
life; you know, like it would cost him cash money to hang back and
make a right turn _behind_ me instead of passing me and then
immediately cutting me off. (For some reason the afternoon commute
is far and away the worst time for these.)
The third is "tranny in drive, brain in neutral," like the one who
hit me while parallel-parking out of the left lane, or every urban
cyclist's nightmare -- the one who throws open the door without looking.
Remember, also, to put yourself in the cyclist's shoes for a moment.
He can get knocked toupee over teakettle by road hazards that you
might barely feel in a car. Sitting so much higher, he might also
be responding to something down the street that you haven't seen yet.
Driver's Perspective
--------------------
When I'm in my car, two kinds of cyclists scare me and a third tries
my patience. Kids who aren't looking where they are going are always
a terror, and so is the adult cyclist who can't hold his line steadily
enough to be passed safely. (Reasonably precise control is a big
element of holding up one's end of the bargain.)
The patience-straining cyclists are the factory riders for Team
Hothouse Flower, the local heroes who think a main traffic artery is a
good racecourse. Look for them singly or as many as three or four
abreast, re-enacting the last stage of the Tour de Narcissus at the
head of a long line of fuming motorists.
For the most part, though, the cyclists I encounter are skilled and
courteous and aware of what's going on nearby. More power to 'em --
and to motorcyclists, pedestrians, and everybody else helping save gas
and reduce congestion.
But back to the subject at hand: the horn is an extremely vague and
easily misinterpreted means of communicating with a cyclist. Use it
sparingly if you must use it at all.
--Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"
Donn Pedro
> use...@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (unknown) writes:
>
>
> > In my experience there are two types of drivers who
> >will honk at cyclists: One is the courteous driver on a
> >narrow/treacherous stretch who gives the horn a couple of
> >light taps just to let you know he is there; The other guy
> >is the asshole who drives right up to your back wheel and
> >lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
> >jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
>
> thought of passing a bicyclist on a narrow road, I have these
> points to make:
Generalization alert!
> 1. Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights
> to turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same
> bicyclist multiple times on the same narrow road. That's
> dangerous and very stressful - for both him and me.
1. Why can't some bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights
to turn green? Because some don't, I often pass the same
bicyclist multiple times on the same narrow road. That's
dangerous and very stressful - for both him and me.
That's better. Give some of us some credit.
> 2. I say never honk at a bicyclist, except if I'm 50 yards behind
> him on a deserted road. If I'm driving in the city, the bicyclist
> knows there are going to be cars on the road. Why honk?
Only if you think you are in danger of an accident. Otherwise I think
your early honking on deserted roads is fine.
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
Donald A. Varvel
>(references omitted for brevity).
>A technique I have sometimes used when honked at in anger is to smile
>and give a friendly wave.
[...]
>arm movement. So I waved and smiled yet again. Heh heh. It's kind
>of funny when you piss them off by not responding the way they wanted
>you to.
[...]
Sometimes there's more to it than that.
Several years ago I was on one of my point-to-point-in-Texas
rides (i.e., long, since no two points in Texas are very
close), proceeding happily on paved shoulder of a "farm to
market" road. (Because oil used to be expensive, Texas
FM roads are the equivalent of non-interstate US highways
in other states.) A driver honked as he went past. The
car was an old Plymouth, nicely restored. Since on the rare
occasions when I drive it is in a 1954 Chrysler, I grinned
and waved. Habit.
An hour or so later the same fellow passed from the other
direction, and waved.
Other than making me feel better for a moment, how would that
incident have been improved by a one-fingered salute? If it's
free, you might as well be nice.
-- Don Varvel (var...@cs.utexas.edu)
Daimonelix
> Remember, U-locks can be used for more than just
> to secure your 'cycle!
I find that taking off my U-Lock and chasing the car that was pissing me off
is rather difficult. I've since resorted to carrying paint pellets (they make
nice *SPLATS* on the car, piss the owner off, and...well, piss him off.
I've been considering a semi-auto paint pellet gun (which will be concealed
nicely in my fanny pack). The paint pellet gun would be nice for those cars
that piss of you and get away as fast as they can. :)
Tony
P.S., I've also found that water bottles make good grenades! Especially
when they are full! :)
Jim Wood
> In my experience there are two types of drivers who
>will honk at cyclists: One is the courteous driver on a
>narrow/treacherous stretch who gives the horn a couple of
>light taps just to let you know he is there; The other guy
>is the asshole who drives right up to your back wheel and
>lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
>jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
I quite agree. As a car driver almost always unnerved by the
thought of passing a bicyclist on a narrow road, I have these
points to make:
1. Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights
to turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same
bicyclist multiple times on the same narrow road. That's
dangerous and very stressful - for both him and me.
2. I say never honk at a bicyclist, except if I'm 50 yards behind
him on a deserted road. If I'm driving in the city, the bicyclist
knows there are going to be cars on the road. Why honk?
Jim Wood [wo...@siemens.siemens.com]
Siemens Corporate Research, 755 College Road East, Princeton, NJ 08540
(609) 734-3643
Scott Coleman
Question: how can a driver discern, at a glance, whether a cyclist is an
alert one?
Answer: HE CAN'T.
9 times out of 10, the cyclist may know that the car is there, and the
friendly warning toot from the driver is superfluous. However, the fact
that cyclists do, in fact, have accidents with cars, and furthermore
that some of those accidents are the fault of the cyclist, isn't it
better to be safe than sorry?
Ah, but looking at it from that perspective would rob you of the chance to
get on the net and bitch, wouldn't it? ;-)
Why don't you folks lighten up? My kill file already takes up enough
disk space; the flame war you're trying to start with all this "driver
bashing" can do nothing but make my kill file grow. :-(
Donn Pedro
:
: >Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights to
: >turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same bicyclist
: >multiple times on the same narrow road. That's dangerous and very
: >stressful - for both him and me.
: It takes energy to start and stop, as anybody who drives both in the
: city and on the highway can attest - city gas milage is always lower
: than highway milage. The general reason for not stopping at
: intersections on a bike is that it can be a lot of extra work.
Any REAL CYCLIST (tm) is in it for the "extra work." If cycling
were easy, everyone would be doing it and we wouldn't be having
this discussion in rec.autos.
: Another reason is to shave time off your ride. Since my commute is
: about an hour and a half by bicycle, blowing through red lights and
: stop signs doesn't help me much, but for somebody with a fifteen
: minute commute, no other change in their riding style could possibly
: have as much of an effect on their transit time.
Or thier survival.
A fifteen minute ride would only be about four miles. Including lights.
That fifteen minute commuter has no excuse to violate traffic laws, and
every reason to follow them. Your example just gives some auto drivers
ammunition to further thier anti-cycling agenda. An agenda that attempts
to remove a privelage we share with them. A privelage to use the roads.
A cyclist should either follow the law, act like a car, or walk.
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
Jonathan E. Quist
>>Question: how can a driver discern, at a glance, whether a cyclist is an
>>alert one?
>>
>>Answer: HE CAN'T.
>
>to wake them up, just in case?
>
>>9 times out of 10, the cyclist may know that the car is there, and the
>>friendly warning toot from the driver is superfluous.
>
>spacing out, the honk will almost certainly do more harm than good, knocking
>him out of his revery and either off the the road or else into the stream of
>traffic behind him. Unless you are advocating "Evolution in Action," this
>doesn't seem like a beneficial effect. Also, if you are interested in
Fine. So anyone driving a car is expected to be attentive and alert at
all times (good luck), but if you're riding a bicycle in traffic it's okay
to be totally oblivious to your surroundings, and any consequences of this
are the responsibility of the motorist rather than the bicyclist.
Maybe evolution in action isn't such a bad idea. It'd be nice to raise
the percentage of common sense in the U.S. gene pool.
I grant the same courtesy and respect to bicyclists that I do to any
other vehicle on the road, and make allowances for the fact that
they are generally slower and more susceptible to vehicle wake than
other vehicles. In return, I expect bicyclists using the road to obey
the same laws and generally follow the same rules of order that
apply to everyone else. But sorry, I make very little allowance for
premediated stupidity.
--
Jonathan E. Quist INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation
j...@i88.isc.com Naperville, IL
'71 CL450-K4 "Gleep"
DoD #094, Deployed, Operation Dessert Storm (a Flurry of Puddings)
Javier Pinto
>lane I was in. Just before I reached the the part where the right lane turns
>off, some guy honking his horn zooms past me and yells, "What do you think you
>are, a car?"
>
>I wonder how he would have felt if I had crossed in front of him to reach my
>lane.
>
Rather, the question is: how *you* would have felt had you crossed in front of
him to reach your lane?
> --------- Doc
>
--------- Javier
h philip chen
>|> >turn green?
>
>As both a cyclist and a driver, it really annoys the hell out of me to
>see a cyclist run a light or stop sign.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^
HA! Funny that you both mentioned that. One of my good friend here
(on a bicycle) got a ticket when he ran a stop sign. For those people
who feel that a *honk* is too loud, check this out...
The cop so happened to be right *behind* him that afternoon. This
friend ran pass the sign, and the cop immediately turned on the
overhead LIGHTS and SIREN. (!!!!) (Isn't that fun enough?)
Wait, there's more... Next the cop picked up his microphone and
yelled over the PA system --
"HEY YOU ON THE BIKE, PULL OVER IMMEDIATELY" (!!!!!)
Yep, he got a ticket :-)
-h.philip
--
=============================================================================
"Hmmm... let me turn this amp up to number 10..."
h philip chen
Oh, here's a little tip... Make sure the car doesn't have an NRA sticker
on the side or the back ;-)
-philip
Donn Pedro
: There's one thing that pisses me off about cyclists, and it is the only
: reason I ever honk at them, because I was taught in driving school that
: this is very distracting and may cause the cyclist to loose balance/awareness.
: If a cyclist can give me a good reason for the kind of cycling behavior I
: hate so much, I will even consider stopping honking at them. Is that a deal
: or what? But meanwhile it really bugs me.
:
: The devious deed I am referring to, of course, is cyclists riding down
: the road with their wheels right _on_ the white line dividing the right
: hand lane from the bicycle lane.
Is the bicycle lane strewn with glass and debris; never to be cleaned
by streetsweepers?
: The problem with this, of course, is that
: their _body_ is half in the regular lane while the cyclist obviously believes
: that he/she is quite safe because their bicycle is more or less in the
: bicycle lane. If they're in the regular lane, OK, it's just like driving
: behind that old man with a hat in the '80 Escort. :-) If they're in the
: bicycle lane, OK, they're in another lane and I can pass no problem. If
: they're in _both_ lanes (not just for an accidental few feet; they are making
: a concerted effort to stay right on that line), this is bad. What would I
: do if a car were driving in two lanes; I'd honk. So I honk at the cyclist,
: too. I mean, cyclists, consider how you'd like it if I drove down the road
: with my right tires right _on_ the line for the bicycle lane in my car and
: my fender five maybe six inches into the bicycle lane, huh?
Granted, I'll give you that. I wouldn't be so quick to honk every time.
: If cyclists would stop riding with their bodies only half in the bicycle
: lane, I promise to stop honking at them; OK?
Sounds ok. Is the bike lane as clean as the stripe?
: Cyclists, please stop driving
: like that!
Please don't honk every time. Besides, I doubt your message is
getting across.
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
Ian Camm
>>turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same bicyclist
>>multiple times on the same narrow road. That's dangerous and very
>>stressful - for both him and me.
Stuff deleted
>Another reason is to shave time off your ride. Since my commute is
>about an hour and a half by bicycle, blowing through red lights and
>stop signs doesn't help me much, but for somebody with a fifteen
>minute commute, no other change in their riding style could possibly
>have as much of an effect on their transit time.
>
> _MelloN_
You mean the six weeks it takes to recover from a broken leg/arm whatever?
That's not what you meant? Oh I see, you mean the 2-3 minutes they save in
traveling time is worth the possible inconvenience and discomfort of a
hospital visit which has very little chance of being made up for by a nice
compensation check, due to the accident being your fault. Or do these people
feel they have the right to openly flaunt the law and use a sharp lawyer to
ruin someone elses life (possible points on car licence from successful
prosecusion (sp?) ). Sorry got carried away for a moment. I really dislike
cyclists who disobey traffic laws of this kind as they are the sort that turn
round afterwards and say "it wasn't my fault".
Another pet hate of mine is the cyclist who you sit behind because you want to
turn left (right for anyone not in the UK) but haven't got room to get a good
way in front in front of them, who looks behind and sees you there indicating
and then turns left (right) themselves without any signal what so ever. It's
most frustrating.
Happy motoring/cycling (what's happening to this group these days, it's going
to turn itno rec.cycling.on.roads soon :-).)
Ian
--
Ian Camm | JANET: ca...@uk.ac.man.ee.els
Dept. of Electrical Engineering | ARPA: ca...@els.ee.man.ac.uk
University of Manchester, England | UUCP: ...!!ukc!man.ee.els!camm
Disclaimer: If you think I need one make it up yourself.
George Chen
>There's one thing that pisses me off about cyclists, and it is the only
>reason I ever honk at them, because I was taught in driving school that
>this is very distracting and may cause the cyclist to loose balance/awareness.
>If a cyclist can give me a good reason for the kind of cycling behavior I
>hate so much, I will even consider stopping honking at them. Is that a deal
>or what? But meanwhile it really bugs me.
>
>The devious deed I am referring to, of course, is cyclists riding down
>the road with their wheels right _on_ the white line dividing the right
>hand lane from the bicycle lane.
>
>like that!
As far as I know, there's no law that says a cyclist needs to ride to
the right of that little white line. Instead, the rider should be
riding as far right as is SAFELY possible. Important word, SAFETY!!
Have you ever ridden a bike on those so called bike lanes? They're often
nothing but a long garbage dump. Yesterday, I needed to travel cross
town and the most direct route was a wide 3-lane artery with a 10-foot
wide bike lane. NEVER AGAIN!!! I'm not referring to the occassional
pebble or branch--there were broken glass, gravel, shredded car tires,
and just about anything else that would make cycling hazardous. I'm still
amazed that I made it through that 1 mile section on my road bike without
a flat.
Now, I'm not saying that all bike lanes are this poor--Foothill Expressway
in the Bay area is a most righteous route and the road of choice for
many club rides. But don't assume that everytime a cyclist swings out
that he's just trying to annoy you.
--
*********************************************************************
George T. Chen * Where-ever you go, there you are - B.Banzi. *
gtc...@speech.sri.com * I Ski, Therefore I Am - shirtprint Whistler *
*********************************************************************
JOSEPH T CHEW
>transit time {as running stop signs and traffic signals}.
Egad.
Those blessed with a brief commute have the LEAST excuse for violating
ANY traffic law in the interest of shaving another minute off their
little morning ramble, regardless of their mode of transportation.
Y'know, I sympathize, because I used to think being an *&^@*U! to my
fellow road-users was justified by my superior sense of hurry. Lately,
with the onset of what is hopefully a bit of maturity, it has dawned
on me that the way to get there on time is to {gasp} leave earlier.
Sometimes, when none of my friends can see, I even catch myself obeying
the speed limit. But I'm not THAT mature. :)
--Joe
"Just another bicycle commuter, and former 1.5-hour-each-way car commuter"
q.p.liu
>
>I quite agree. As a car driver almost always unnerved by the
>thought of passing a bicyclist on a narrow road, I have these
>points to make:
>
However, however unnerved the person in the car is in the process of
passing a cyclist, once the deed is done, many a car will forget all
about the cyclist, thinking nothing of slamming on the brakes while
turning right. (Because i expect this behavior, i don't consider it
much of a hazard to me. Left-turning cars and cars poking out of
intersections and driveways are more difficult.)
>1. Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights
> to turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same
> bicyclist multiple times on the same narrow road. That's
> dangerous and very stressful - for both him and me.
As one who does stop and wait, there are occasions where the car has
the attitude of "you're not in a car so you have to get out of my way
and i'll blast your ears out if you don't," while stopped at
stoplights. A small fraction of cars wanting to turn right apparently
have this attitude. Another is when i start slowly, to wait for an
ugly cloud of fumes from the car just ahead to diffuse. Especially
nasty in January.
Another nasty situation was at a bottleneck, where half the road was
blocked and the traffic was going 10-12 mph. I was in the line of
cars when the car behind me had diarrhea of the horn, so i looked back
to see why. While my head was turned, the car in front of me stopped
and when i turned back, there it was. I stopped by planting my face
in the trunk of the car in front of me. The most contact i'd had with
a car in three months.
I am going to try to ignore all car horns in the future, no matter how
loud they become.
>
>2. I say never honk at a bicyclist, except if I'm 50 yards behind
> him on a deserted road. If I'm driving in the city, the bicyclist
> knows there are going to be cars on the road. Why honk?
>
Good idea.
Allen Middleton
(stuff deleted)
>If cyclists would stop riding with their bodies only half in the bicycle
>lane, I promise to stop honking at them; OK? Cyclists, please stop driving
>like that!
>
>
>Dave Alexander
>from the land of many cars _and_ many cyclists.
Hey bonehead, sometimes there are road hazards in the bike lane, stuff
drivers don't think twice about, sand, a sewer, a broken beer bottle
some redneck through out their window... You guys are bigger, can't you
give bikers a little room? Do you punchout people who walk down the center
of a hallway?
unknown
>
>> is the asshole who drives right up to your back wheel and
>> lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
>> jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
>> to secure your 'cycle!
>
>For Free" card. "Gee, officer, that guy hit my windshield with
>something. I got glass in my eyes and the next thing I knew my
>car had swerved over and hit him."
>
>STOP POSTING STUPID ADVICE LIKE THIS. It will get somebody KILLED
>and give the murderer an air-tight excuse for doing it.
>
> Larry Mayo
This is NOT advice, this is simply how I have handled
the situation on one or two occasions. No one in their right
mind would try to throw a U-lock from a moving bicycle and
expect to hit anything, let alone maintain your balance.
Simply removing the lock from it's bracket and waving
it in the offending motorists direction has been enough to
let him know that I was not pleased :-), and they have always
backed off.
Here in Canada we don't have anywhere near the vehicular
violence that occurs in the US, so perhaps a more careful
perusal of my previous posting is in order, paying more
attention to the geographical origin. The world does not
revolve around the 'states. Different countries have
different attitudes toward this sort of thing, I don't
mean to start defending overly aggressive drivers, but
up here it is not too common for cars to run over cyclists
on purpose, which Mr. Mayo's posting seems to infer is the
case in Chicago. We've all heard how safe the windy city
is, haven't we!!!
o /__///___ Greg J. DeGreef
o< /\-} Computing Services
\__\\----/ Edmonton, Alberta (Canada)
Ted Lemon
>Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights to
>turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same bicyclist
>multiple times on the same narrow road. That's dangerous and very
>stressful - for both him and me.
It takes energy to start and stop, as anybody who drives both in the
city and on the highway can attest - city gas milage is always lower
than highway milage. The general reason for not stopping at
intersections on a bike is that it can be a lot of extra work.
Another reason is to shave time off your ride. Since my commute is
about an hour and a half by bicycle, blowing through red lights and
stop signs doesn't help me much, but for somebody with a fifteen
minute commute, no other change in their riding style could possibly
have as much of an effect on their transit time.
_MelloN_
Paul Callahan
>Question: how can a driver discern, at a glance, whether a cyclist is an
>alert one?
>
>Answer: HE CAN'T.
How do you know other drivers are alert? Why don't you honk at them routinely
to wake them up, just in case?
>9 times out of 10, the cyclist may know that the car is there, and the
>friendly warning toot from the driver is superfluous.
Fine. The one time out of ten (or whatever) that the cyclist is really just
spacing out, the honk will almost certainly do more harm than good, knocking
him out of his revery and either off the the road or else into the stream of
traffic behind him. Unless you are advocating "Evolution in Action," this
doesn't seem like a beneficial effect. Also, if you are interested in
an argument from authority, the Pennsylvania driver's manual (and probably
many others) specifically says not to honk at cyclists, basically for the reason
outlined above.
It's amazing how much nicer it sounds to talk about a "friendly warning toot."
If I were to walk around shouting "Yo Butthead!" to random pedestrians, there's
a good chance that this behavior would be deemed anti-social. The police
might even ask me to stop (whether this is a good thing in a free society is
a different matter, but I'll leave it alone). Suppose I continued to do
this regardless. I could argue that is unreasonable for people to take
offense to my "jovial greeting." Even if I thought of my exclamation as
such, I could not guarantee that others would. The same applies to car horns,
which are abrasive to my ears, and anything but friendly.
>Why don't you folks lighten up?
Being honked at makes my bike ride considerably less pleasant than it would
be otherwise. If I could convince people not to do it, or at least not to
do it routinely (i.e. only honk at cyclists who are acting unreasonably),
then I would be a happier person. It's an issue that is much easier to
take lightly from the motorist's perspective.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@cs.jhu.edu
Doc O'Leary
among other things:
>I find that taking off my U-Lock and chasing the car that was pissing me off
>is rather difficult. I've since resorted to carrying paint pellets (they make
>nice *SPLATS* on the car, piss the owner off, and...well, piss him off.
And, hey, that's exactly what all us cyclists want to do to someone driving
a car. Really, it's like a soldier shooting at a tank. It might be fun, but
sooner or later the tank is going to fire back.
>I've been considering a semi-auto paint pellet gun (which will be concealed
>nicely in my fanny pack). The paint pellet gun would be nice for those cars
>that piss of you and get away as fast as they can. :)
"He reached back, officer, and pulled a gun out of his belt-thing. It scared
the shit out of me, so I ducked down, turned in front of him, and hit the
breaks. If he was wearing a helmet, I might have had to get my own gun from
the glove compartment . . ."
>Tony
>
>P.S., I've also found that water bottles make good grenades! Especially
>when they are full! :)
Seriously, Tony, these are the kind of actions that *do* piss car drivers off.
Yeah, you might get away with it (for awhile), but the next biker that the
driver comes by might get what you deserved.
"Oh, look, another one of those bike assholes. Let's see how he likes shit
being thrown at him!"
--------- Doc
********************** Signature Block : Version 2.4 *********************
* | "Please put litter in its place" *
* "Was it love, or was it the idea | ---McDonald's packaging *
* of being in love?" -- PF | Wouldn't that be on the ground? *
* (BTW, which one *is* Pink?) | *
* | --->ole...@ux.acs.umn.edu<--- *
****************** Copyright (c) 1991 by Doc O'Leary ********************
David Munroe
> It is nice to know that there are still guys out there
> who do give cyclists a little courtesy, they are more than
> likely bikers themselves.
Well I don't ride a bike, but I do slow down and move over to give the
rider as much room as I safely can. My philosophy is to try to make driving
as low-stress and enjoyable as possible, so courtesy prevails.
One interesting phenomena I've noticed late at night (11pm and later) is the
bike rider in a totally dark outfit. I'm not sure whether this is just some
kid coming home from his girlfriend's house or some guy making a quick dash
to the 7-11. He's not easy to see, though.
-Dave
Daimonelix
> If a cyclist can give me a good reason for the kind of cycling behavior I
> hate so much, I will even consider stopping honking at them. Is that a deal
> or what? But meanwhile it really bugs me.
>
> The devious deed I am referring to, of course, is cyclists riding down
> the road with their wheels right _on_ the white line dividing the right
> hand lane from the bicycle lane. The problem with this, of course, is that
> their _body_ is half in the regular lane while the cyclist obviously believes
> that he/she is quite safe because their bicycle is more or less in the
> bicycle lane. If they're in the regular lane, OK, it's just like driving
> behind that old man with a hat in the '80 Escort. :-) If they're in the
> bicycle lane, OK, they're in another lane and I can pass no problem. If
> they're in _both_ lanes (not just for an accidental few feet; they are making
> a concerted effort to stay right on that line), this is bad. What would I
> do if a car were driving in two lanes; I'd honk. So I honk at the cyclist,
> too. I mean, cyclists, consider how you'd like it if I drove down the road
> with my right tires right _on_ the line for the bicycle lane in my car and
> my fender five maybe six inches into the bicycle lane, huh?
>
Actually, I do this once in a while.. but only when there are parked cars
with people in them that I am going to be passing. People in parked cars
tend *NOT* to pay attemtion and look around before thrusting their doors
open into the bike lane.. there's been a few close calls.
However, I do understand what you mean. I've followed people (in my car)
before who were riding on "the white line", and I could not figure out why.
There were no parked cars, they weren't avoiding any obsticals... there just
isn't a reason (aside from stupidity) to do this w/out a reason.
<sigh..> Guess the world ain't perfect. Bummer, eh?
Tony
Kurt Krueger, CHSRA
in wisconsin the horn is to be used for emergencies only. i wonder if anyone
remembers that.
-kurt
Ted Lemon
>Not True. I went on a club ride today. Four of us were cruising along
>when the car approaching from the opposite direction toots. A quick
>check over the shoulder confirmed nothing else from our direction for
>at least the half mile I can see. Go figure..
I know that this is a pretty radical suggestion, but maybe the driver
was just trying to be friendly? Granted, only somebody who doesn't
actually ride would think of that as friendly, but such people do
exist...
_MelloN_
W. Scott Cranston
>
>
>
> In my experience there are two types of drivers who
>will honk at cyclists: One is the courteous driver on a
>narrow/treacherous stretch who gives the horn a couple of
>light taps just to let you know he is there; The other guy
>lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
>jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
The third type is the "friend" who sees you riding home from work, thinks
"OOh, there's so-and-so riding, I'll just say hello," and goes BEEEEP as they
zip by you, while waving in the mirror. Extremely polite "Please don't do
that, it's very startling and could cause an accident" requests are usually
met by "Well, are you a grouch! I was just saying hello."
> Remember, U-locks can be used for more than just
>to secure your 'cycle!
Indeed. I usually wear mine around my neck like jewelry. It gives me
that "junkyard dog" look and helps prevent drivers from messin' wit' me. :-)
-wsc
--
Like a bird on a wire, | Polite corrections to my grammar and
like a drunk in a midnight choir, | spelling are, as always, welcome.
I have tried, in my way, to be free. |
-Leonard Cohen | cran...@cadence.com
David Elliott
In article <1991Apr30.1...@ns.network.com>, al...@ns.network.com (Allen Middleton) writes:
|> >If cyclists would stop riding with their bodies only half in the bicycle
|> >lane, I promise to stop honking at them; OK? Cyclists, please stop driving
|> >like that!
|> Hey bonehead, sometimes there are road hazards in the bike lane, stuff
|> drivers don't think twice about, sand, a sewer, a broken beer bottle
|> some redneck through out their window... You guys are bigger, can't you
|> give bikers a little room? Do you punchout people who walk down the center
|> of a hallway?
This was uncalled for, Allen.
He was talking about cyclists who simply ride on the white stripe,
regardless of the condition of the bike lane. I for one will admit
that I have done this without even thinking about it. I stopped doing
this when I encountered a couple of cyclists riding 2 abreast with
one on the stripe, and realized where my body really was when I rode
this way.
There's a big difference between riding around an obstacle or problem
area and riding somewhere just because you feel like it.
Another thing to realize: If the stripe is the cleanest place, it may
be because cars tend to drive on that stripe. I don't trust most
drivers to realize that bikes may be there.
--
...David Elliott
...d...@smsc.sony.com | ...!{uunet,mips}!sonyusa!dce
...(408)944-4073
..."Once a head-crusher, always a head-crusher" - Mark M.
Stu Werbner
>alert one?
>
>Answer: HE CAN'T.
>
>9 times out of 10, the cyclist may know that the car is there, and the
>friendly warning toot from the driver is superfluous. However, the fact
>that cyclists do, in fact, have accidents with cars, and furthermore
>that some of those accidents are the fault of the cyclist, isn't it
>better to be safe than sorry?
>
>Ah, but looking at it from that perspective would rob you of the chance to
>get on the net and bitch, wouldn't it? ;-)
Mr. Coleman, using your (ir)rationale, one could justify honking at other
cars in traffic, under the assumption that they too, are "not alert".
>Why don't you folks lighten up? My kill file already takes up enough
>disk space; the flame war you're trying to start with all this "driver
>bashing" can do nothing but make my kill file grow. :-(
Mr. Coleman, I hereby sentence you to 100 miles of bike riding on hot
and dusty roads, used by drivers such as yourself.
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are exclusively those of the author.
Stuart A. Werbner | Motorola Inc.
s...@oakhill.sps.mot.com | Microprocessor Products Group
"There is goodness in every | Austin, Texas 78735-8598
bicycle - Rodderick Dorris." | m/d OE112 (512)891-4490
Donn Pedro
: (references omitted for brevity).
:
: A technique I have sometimes used when honked at in anger is to smile
: and give a friendly wave.
:
: The last time I was honked-at, I smiled and waved; the driver sent
: me the middle finger in response. So I waved and smiled again. And
: again, he sent me the middle finger, only with vigorous pump-action
: arm movement. So I waved and smiled yet again.
Oooooohhhh! Youre so mean! I love it. :-)
: Oh, in case you were wondering: we (my friend and I) were riding
: safely, as far to the right as possible, and we were on a flat, straight
: section of road with no traffic in the opposite direction. I really
: have no idea why he honked.
He was in a car. He is not a cyclist.
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
Walter A. Koziarz
>use...@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (unknown) writes:
>> Remember, U-locks can be used for more than just
>> to secure your 'cycle!
>I find that taking off my U-Lock and chasing the car that was pissing me off
>is rather difficult. I've since resorted to carrying paint pellets (they make
>nice *SPLATS* on the car, piss the owner off, and...well, piss him off.
>P.S., I've also found that water bottles make good grenades! Especially
>when they are full! :)
now *here's a guy with a real 'DEATH WISH'.
what do you suppose would be the outcome of him, the cyclists' "MASKED
REVENGER" paint-pelleting a car with six rowdy teenagers inside? does he think
paint pellets a match for twelve (or ten or eight, depending on car) fists??
*or* if he's lucky, he'll paint a "dirty Harry wannabee" and get a .44mag
hollow-point up his nose for his trouble.
it's a bad move to even think about menacing occupants of a car with something
even remotely resembling a firearm, you IGNORANT F*CKING *SSHOLE!!
walt k.
Brian Horisk
>that some of those accidents are the fault of the cyclist, isn't it
>better to be safe than sorry?
The problem is not the friendly honks from well behind - its those
drivers who do a big blast when they're right behind you, scaring the
sh*t out of you and making you very likely to wobble in front of them.......
Bri.
Bruce R. Miller
In article <1991May1.1...@smsc.sony.com>, David Elliott writes:
>
> In article <1991Apr30.1...@ns.network.com>, al...@ns.network.com (Allen Middleton) writes:
> |> >If cyclists would stop riding with their bodies only half in the bicycle
> |> >lane, I promise to stop honking at them; OK? Cyclists, please stop driving
> |> >like that!
>
> |> Hey bonehead, sometimes there are road hazards in the bike lane, stuff
> |> drivers don't think twice about, sand, a sewer, a broken beer bottle
> |> some redneck through out their window... You guys are bigger, can't you
> |> give bikers a little room? Do you punchout people who walk down the center
> |> of a hallway?
>
> This was uncalled for, Allen.
The _tone_ was uncalled for, yes. But the reply is exactly called for.
> He was talking about cyclists who simply ride on the white stripe,
> regardless of the condition of the bike lane. I for one will admit
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
? I'm sure that's what he _thought_ he was talking about. But I'm
pretty sure most (car) drivers dont even notice the condition of the bike
lane.
Just cause there's a white stripe along the right doesn't mean that the
shoulder is intended to be a bike lane. And even when the city intended
it to be a bike lane, that doesn't mean that it is one!
I cant recall the last time I saw a usable bike lane in this country. A
bike path, seperate from the roadway, yes, but a bike lane, no.
If anything, they would be appropriate for a 300lb, balloon tired bike.
Remember, a bad road messes up car's allignment. But for a bike, at
best, you can just get new wheels. At worst, it is unsafe too.
With all the dodging of stuff, and if you hit some of the junk you may
end up falling or swerving into the traffic.
> There's a big difference between riding around an obstacle or problem
> area and riding somewhere just because you feel like it.
Agreed, yet usually "riding around an obstacle" means riding around the
bike path. :>
> Another thing to realize: If the stripe is the cleanest place, it may
> be because cars tend to drive on that stripe. I don't trust most
> drivers to realize that bikes may be there.
It seems to me, the stripe is often the best compromise. It's as far to
the right that is usable, so it requires less driving-around than if
the biker drove in the middle of the lane.
APUZZO ALFONSO A
> to turn green?
A cyclist is technichally supposed to observe all traffic laws that cars do,
but cyclists also have significantly lower power to weight ratios than cars,
and constantly accellerating and braking is a waste of energy. A cyclist has
better visibility and manueverability in proportion to their speed than do
cars, and so this is usually safe (but not always!)
> Because they don't, I often pass the same
> bicyclist multiple times on the same narrow road. That's
> dangerous and very stressful - for both him and me.
As a guy who likes to drive in the mountains as well as ride a bike in the
mountains, I can say that passing a cyclist in a car is much more stressing
than being passed. The only time being passed is stressful, is when I'm riding
on the road because the shoulder is gravelly/damaged, and some idiot sits on
my butt going 20-30 mph in my blind spot for 5 minutes before passing. As long
as the side mirror doesn't hit me, I'm fine.
>
>2. I say never honk at a bicyclist, except if I'm 50 yards behind
> him on a deserted road. If I'm driving in the city, the bicyclist
> knows there are going to be cars on the road. Why honk?
>
>Jim Wood [wo...@siemens.siemens.com]
>Siemens Corporate Research, 755 College Road East, Princeton, NJ 08540
>(609) 734-3643
I say never honk at cyclists unless they swerve out in front of you, and in
that case you should be too busy trying to not run over them to worry about
hitting your horn. (Although anyone stupid enough to swerve out in front of
a car deserves a quick, but painful death :-) :-) ) Most people confident
enough to ride on narrow roads, are very aware of what is going on behind them.
Now if you're coming up on a biker at 100+mph, all bets are off
-Tony
--
*
* Be a non-conformist like me and don't use a .sig at all.
*
Geoff Miller
In article <7...@uswnvg.UUCP> dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP (Donn Pedro) writes:
>That fifteen minute commuter has no excuse to violate traffic laws, and
>every reason to follow them. Your example just gives some auto drivers
>ammunition to further thier anti-cycling agenda. An agenda that attempts
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>to remove a privelage we share with them. A privelage to use the roads.
You know, it's only in the last several years that I've heard
paranoid rhetoric like the above from cyclists. I wrote a letter
to the editor of a cycling magazine awhile back about the need
for cyclists to exercise basic courtesy and common sense by stay-
ing out of the way of automobile traffic. I carefully explained
that there is nothing emasculating of disempowering (to use a knee-
jerk liberalism) about that, and that it was analogous to the way
jet and propeller-driven aircraft have separate landing patterns
at airports.
Well, this resulted in my correspondence with a guy who heads
some cycling league headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, who
was evidently the magazine's editor. A genial, intelligent guy
who bills himself as a "bicycle traffic engineer." Knowledgeable
guy, written a few books, the whole academic nine yards. One
recurring theme in his letters was this inferiority complex among
cyclists. (He had another, less disparaging name for it which
I've forgotten, but that's essentially the gist of it.) It's the
result of a perceived lower notch on the vehicular food chain
relative to automobile drivers.
I've noted this same phenomenon myself, coinciding with the massive
explosion in popularity of cycling diring the last decade or so.
Once opon a time, not too long ago, confrontations and mutual
distrust and hostility between car and bicycle people were virtually
unheard of. But now cycling seems to attract a particular type of
person, a person who in many cases doesn't just enjoy bikes for their
own sake, but has an agenda -- the type of person who feels smug and
self-righteous because his vehicle of choice is non-polluting and
uses no fossil fuels, and who is often known to deliberately get
in the way of automobile traffic. I often see this perpetrated by
lone cyclists riding much farther out in the street than they need
to, and by groups of them who ride abreast instead of single file.
As a group, they tend to bleat about how drivers must share the
road with them, and yet they themselves don't seem too dedicated
to the concept of sharing. Like many people who whine about their
"rights," they don't understand that the posession of rights implies
a corresponding burden of responsibility.
I'm a cyclist as well as a driver, so I'm more than equipped to
see both sides of the issue. When I ride, I make a point of stay-
ing out of the way of others, I cross intersections at the crosswalk
rather than trying to mingle with automobile traffic out at the
edge of the left-turn lane (although I've never seen any need to
walk my bike), and I generally employ a live-and-let-live attitude
toward one and all. The vast, overwhelming majority of drivers
I encounter while riding return the favor. In fact, I don't even
remember the last time I was considered a target of opportunity by
anyone in an automobile.
Given my experience (and that of my friends and associates) that
the Automobile Culture is *not* out to "get" me or my kind, I have a
hard time understanding why these scrawny, bearded little twits
wearing Spandex pantyhose and silly little crash helmets with
dentist's mirrors on them go so far out of their way to annoy others
by deliberately getting underfoot. I've come to the conclusion
that for several years now, cycling has attracted a particularly
loathsome type of person, the self-righteous, insecure, eco-twit
bunny-hugger known as Homo Paloalticus. Why these folks allow
their convictions to become so strong that they willingly offer
themselves up as human sacrifices to the first Lincoln Town Car
to come down the pike is an honest mystery to me. While I'm
thankful for any phenomenon that will help to purge the gene pool
of stupidity, I can't help but wonder exactly what is going through
their heads!
I think that this is a mere subset of a larger social phenomenon,
one that I've labelled "Everybody Has a Right to *My* Opinion,"
or alternately, "The Berkeley Syndrome." This is the same mindset
that causes people to delay thousands of commuters on the Bay Bridge
while they voice their antiwar sentiments, or to protest against
people who wear animal fur or eat meat. It's not enough anymore for
them to simply do their thing and allow everyobe else to do theirs;
they now aren't emotionally sated unless they go forth and piss
people off.
Sorry to disappoint you people, but if there's any kind of agenda
to deprive you of your "right" to the road, it's a monster of your
own creation. You show me a little basic courtesy, thoughtfulness
and consideration -- regardless of the type of vehicle I happen to
be using at the moment -- and I'll return the favor.
>A cyclist should either follow the law, act like a car, or walk.
Agreed. Lest he be crushed to a lifeless (yet somehow satisfying)
pulp beneath the wheels of a conveyance far mightier than his own.
Geoff
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller + + + + + + + + Sun Microsystems
geo...@purplehaze.EBay.sun.com + + + + + + + + Milpitas, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Frank Zabaly
>It takes energy to start and stop, as anybody who drives both in the
>city and on the highway can attest - city gas milage is always lower
>than highway milage. The general reason for not stopping at
>intersections on a bike is that it can be a lot of extra work.
>
>Another reason is to shave time off your ride. Since my commute is
>about an hour and a half by bicycle, blowing through red lights and
>stop signs doesn't help me much, but for somebody with a fifteen
>minute commute, no other change in their riding style could possibly
>have as much of an effect on their transit time.
Ted, I don't know if you personally blow off the lights/stop signs,
so this is not a personal attack, BUT...
If you don't stop at stop signs and obey lights, you are a
cycling wimp!! (half :-) )
Anyone who can't obey the rules of the road does not receive any
courtesies from me. Period. This includes drivers who can't find
their indicators.
I've bicycled in city traffic for years, and almost been killed in a motorcyle
wreck(I was hit from behind by a car), so I am not your stereotypical "cager".
But I lose respect for any driver who can't bring him/herself to follow
the simplest of driving rules. I hope none of you cyclists ever come to grief
on the road, but realize you are increasing your chances of an accident by
skirting the rules. Life is precious -- good luck to you.
"To live outside the law you must be honest" -- Bob Dylan
Frank E. Zabaly # "All thought brings forth
Convex Computer Corp # a throw of the dice"
zab...@convex.com # --Stephane Mallarme
JOSEPH T CHEW
something even higher on the right-of-way pecking order, and even
lower on the food chain, and that's a pedestrian. Knock down an
unseen pedestrian while making an illegal maneuver and you'll have
to go play kung-fu with the Middle-aged Mutant Ninja Lawyers.
Remember, one man's insurance policy is another man's jackpot.
--Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"
Richard Griffith
>especially the pellet gun. Remember! Damage the car, and you'll be responsible
>for repairs. I can tell you that it is not a pretty sight to see a the
>result of a car/bicycle or car/motorcycle collision. I leave it to you to
>figure out which party has the most damage.
The car easily has the most damage. I had an accident last week and hit the
driver side front wheel of a car. I went over the hood and hit the
windshield (wear your helmet!!).
I scratched my knee (very minor I get worse 1/month playing Ultimate). My
mountain bike, a 2 year old Fisher Hoo Koo E Koo, survived with no damage.
The front wheel lost its alignment with the handle bars but I fixed that
by hand on the spot.
I smashed the windshield of the car (wear your helmet!!) and left two minor
dents in the side pannel and the hood. Her insurance company says it comes to
$1550 or so. The car was towed away, due to windshield damage. I rode my bike
away and have noticed no problems or frame damage.
Now I have to explain to a Judge why a 3 second light with no intersection
clearing time (double red) is too fast when I have to make a lane change to
avoid a right turn only lane that starts on the other side of the lights.
Anyone else have comments on traffic light timing. You are expected to notice
that the lights have changed within 1 second of them changeing.
--
Ultimate, its more than a game, its a way of life.
Howard Lem
>use...@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (unknown) writes:
>
>> Remember, U-locks can be used for more than just
>> to secure your 'cycle!
>
>I find that taking off my U-Lock and chasing the car that was pissing me off
>is rather difficult. I've since resorted to carrying paint pellets (they make
>nice *SPLATS* on the car, piss the owner off, and...well, piss him off.
>nicely in my fanny pack). The paint pellet gun would be nice for those cars
>that piss of you and get away as fast as they can. :)
I suggest that you shouldn't be too quick to use the paint pellet and the
especially the pellet gun. Remember! Damage the car, and you'll be responsible
for repairs. I can tell you that it is not a pretty sight to see a the
result of a car/bicycle or car/motorcycle collision. I leave it to you to
figure out which party has the most damage.
You only drop to their level by doing someone a 'discourtesy' because you
perceive they did you a 'discourtesy'. As officer Bob would say:
YOUR WRONG DOES NOT CORRECT THE OTHER'S WRONG!
Howard Lem
--
========= (-: ALL Usual disclaimers go here :-) =========
Email: how...@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
Canada Post: Howard Lem - University of Toronto Computing Services
11 King's College Rd., Rm 201B, Toronto, Ont., Canada, M5S 1A1
David Elliott
In article <MELLON.91A...@nigiri.pa.dec.com>, mel...@nigiri.pa.dec.com (Ted Lemon) writes:
|>
|> >Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights to
|> >turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same bicyclist
|> >multiple times on the same narrow road. That's dangerous and very
|> >stressful - for both him and me.
|>
|> It takes energy to start and stop, as anybody who drives both in the
|> city and on the highway can attest - city gas milage is always lower
|> than highway milage. The general reason for not stopping at
|> intersections on a bike is that it can be a lot of extra work.
This is absolutely *no* excuse for this behavior.
First of all, it causes drivers to have to be especially careful when
around cyclists.
Secondly, it requires that most drivers use a different set of rules
when dealing with cyclists. Remember: The test you have to pass to get
a driver's license only has one set of rules, and all you have to get
right is 70%.
Thirdly, in heavy traffic, it can be very annoying to the driver stuck
in traffic to watch you break the rules and get away with it while he's
stuck with the same rules. The next time he's in a sticky situation
with a cyclist, he may remember that.
Finally, you have to be awfully lazy to not be able to deal with extra
starts. These extra starts can make it all the more easy to climb that
big hill on your weekend ride, or to climb that overpass with speed on
your next ride to work.
As both a cyclist and a driver, it really annoys the hell out of me to
see a cyclist run a light or stop sign. This is the kind of thing
that's going to result in the increased removal of cycling priveleges
on our roads.
Walter A. Koziarz
someone else wrote:
>>Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights to
>>turn green? Because they don't, I often pass the same bicyclist
>It takes energy to start and stop, as anybody who drives both in the
now *there's* a good reason....
>Another reason is to shave time off your ride. Since my commute is
and another winner...
FYI, (I'm *not* sure where you're from, but this is New York State truths)
bicycles are required by NYS Vehicle and Traffic Law to obey the same rules of
the road as automobiles, i.e. stopsigns, stoplights, etc.
In the spirit of the original article, *I* honk whenever a bicyclist violates
these rules; just as I would at another motorist, etc.
Walt K.
David M. Alexander
in the left (not changing lanes, driving along like that).
You specifically deleted the part where I say I am referring to cyclists
who ride on the line for more than a short amount of time (like if they
lost concentration for a second or were avoiding a road hazard); sometimes
a quarter mile or for all I know, maybe their whole ride. If cyclists want
to use the car-sized lane, then they should use it. Like cars, they should
not cruise down the road purposely staying in _two_ lanes.
Dave Alexander
p.s. Yes, I have cycled on the bike lanes of some of the more preferred
bike routes in the area, they did not appear to be garbage strewn.
Then again, this is Palo Alto. Your mileage may vary, say, in Oakland
or Manhattan.
Tim Campbell
> [ This has been cross-posted to rec.bicycles for informational
> purposes. Any summary will be similarly cross-posted ]
>
> I am interested in getting some ideas on why drivers sound their horn
> at cyclists. If you sound your horn at bikes, could you take the time
> to answer the following few questions ? I will post a summary of
> messages e-mailed to me in about a week or so.
>
List of questions deleted
> - do you have any other comments ?
>
> Thank you for your responses,
> Paul
> --
> Paul Barton-Davis <pa...@cs.washington.edu> UW Computer Science Lab
>
> "People cannot cooperate towards common goals if they are forced to
> compete with each other in order to guarantee their own survival."
--
Actually, I think sounding the horn in certain circumstances is a good idea.
The horn wasn't added to the car for the sole purpose of irritating other
people. It should be used!
A few problems are that cars are pretty quiet. Couple this with the "white
noise" sound of the wind rushing past your ears and unless you have a mirror or
look behind you regularly (not many cyclists do either) and it's pretty easy to
imagine how many times cyclists have absolutely NO idea that there's a car
following them.
I've been on both sides of the fence here - I've been in the car and I've been
on the bike. In any case, a loud, long, blaring horn will only startle and
irritate riders. I find a couple of real short "toots" usually does the trick
without irritating riders. I also use the horn only in special circumstances
where (A) there's a pack of cars which are unable to get around the cyclist
because he is in the way, (B) there's enough room for the car to safely pass
the cyclist if only he would get over, and (C) after about a minutes worth of
following the bike, the rider has still not checked for the presence of other
traffic and is unaware that he is being followed.
Other times riders are two abreast or simply not "riding as far to the right as
conditions safely allow" - which is always good practice even if it isn't a law
in your area.
Some cyclists seem to feel it's their "God given right" to take full use of the
road. Well I'm here to tell you, after being run down by a car and living
through it, it's not such a bad idea to just pull off the road and let the cars
pass even if "you don't have to" - it only takes one driver, not paying
attention to make sure you get off the road and stay off the road... for good.
And your next of kin can sue till they're blue in the face for all the good
it'll do you.
-Tim
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In real life: Tim Campbell - Electronic Data Systems Corp.
Usenet: camp...@dev8.mdcbbs.com @ McDonnell Douglas M&E - Cypress, CA
also: tcam...@einstein.eds.com @ EDS - Troy, MI
CompuServe: 71631,654 (alias 7163...@compuserve.com)
P.S. If anyone asks, just remember, you never saw any of this -- in fact, I
wasn't even here.
Tim Campbell
> In article <1991Apr26.1...@beaver.cs.washington.edu> pa...@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:
>> - what %-age of your "horn soundings" at cyclists are to
>> warn them of your prescence ?
>
> The most outrageous thing about this theory (and I really believe there are
> people who subscribe to it) is how drivers can imagine that their noisy,
> gas guzzling engines aren't already enough of a warning to an alert cyclist.
>
> --
> Paul Callahan
> call...@cs.jhu.edu
--
Gosh Paul - that sure sounds like a fair an objective statement. See my
previous reply on this subject.
Donn Pedro
:
:
: >That fifteen minute commuter has no excuse to violate traffic laws, and
: >every reason to follow them. Your example just gives some auto drivers
: >ammunition to further thier anti-cycling agenda. An agenda that attempts
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >to remove a privelage we share with them. A privelage to use the roads.
:
:
:
: You know, it's only in the last several years that I've heard
: paranoid rhetoric like the above from cyclists.
There was nothing paranoid about my "rhetoric." Read it again.
: >That fifteen minute commuter has no excuse to violate traffic laws, and
: >every reason to follow them. Your example just gives some auto drivers
^^^^^^
Notice this part.
: >ammunition to further thier anti-cycling agenda. An agenda that attempts
: >to remove a privelage we share with them. A privelage to use the roads.
Allow me to elaborate in blunter terms.
Do not give the brain dead, uncaring, borderline, uneducated, ignorant,
and downright reckless members of the otherwise responsible driving
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Don't forget to read this part.
population by riding in such a stupid and irresponsible manner.
: It's the
: result of a perceived lower notch on the vehicular food chain
: relative to automobile drivers.
Not perceived by all.
: But now cycling seems to attract a particular type of
: person, a person who in many cases doesn't just enjoy bikes for their
: own sake, but has an agenda --
: the type of person who feels smug and
: self-righteous because his vehicle of choice is non-polluting and
: uses no fossil fuels, and who is often known to deliberately get
: in the way of automobile traffic.
The rider you describe needs experience and an education.
: I often see this perpetrated by
: lone cyclists riding much farther out in the street than they need
: to,
: and by groups of them who ride abreast instead of single file.
: As a group, they tend to bleat about how drivers must share the
: road with them, and yet they themselves don't seem too dedicated
: to the concept of sharing. Like many people who whine about their
: "rights," they don't understand that the posession of rights implies
: a corresponding burden of responsibility.
:
The riders you describe need experience and an education.
: I'm a cyclist as well as a driver,
So am I. But from the sound of it you should have wrote:
I'm a driver first and a cyclist second.
: so I'm more than equipped to see both sides of the issue.
Better than who?
: When I ride, I make a point of stay-
: ing out of the way of others,
Good advice.
: I cross intersections at the crosswalk
Bad advice.
Crosswalks are for pedestrians, not bicycles.
You are a vehicle - by law!
: rather than trying to mingle with automobile traffic out at the
: edge of the left-turn lane (although I've never seen any need to
: walk my bike), and I generally employ a live-and-let-live attitude
: toward one and all. The vast, overwhelming majority of drivers
: I encounter while riding return the favor. In fact, I don't even
: remember the last time I was considered a target of opportunity by
: anyone in an automobile.
How long have you been a serious rider?
: Given my experience (and that of my friends and associates) that
: the Automobile Culture is *not* out to "get" me or my kind, I have a
: hard time understanding why these scrawny, bearded little twits
: wearing Spandex pantyhose and silly little crash helmets with
: dentist's mirrors on them go so far out of their way to annoy others
: by deliberately getting underfoot.
How long have you been riding.? Really?
[ triade against cyclists who are not like Geoff deleted.]
: Sorry to disappoint you people, but if there's any kind of agenda
: to deprive you of your "right" to the road, it's a monster of your
No one has a right to the road. Bone up on your vehicle code.
: own creation. You show me a little basic courtesy, thoughtfulness
: and consideration -- regardless of the type of vehicle I happen to
: be using at the moment -- and I'll return the favor.
Ride like a car. Act like a car. Stay out of crosswalks where you
do not belong. Follow the rules of the road and share it with others.
: >A cyclist should either follow the law, act like a car, or walk.
:
: Agreed. Lest he be crushed to a lifeless
:(yet somehow satisfying)
Satisfying to who? I really want to know. I don't think you really
ride much Geoff. I mean *miles*. Not just a quick five miles to the
Seven Eleven.
: pulp beneath the wheels of a conveyance far mightier than his own.
There are many different kinds of cyclists. Some of them do not
follow the law, the ride against traffic, the ydo not signal, the ride
on sidewalks and across crosswalks.
There is another kind of cyclist. That cyclist rides with traffic,
follows the rules of the road, wears protective helmets (he feels safer) ,
the proper clothing (tights) for the type of riding,
uses mirrors ( to see traffic better), signals his
intentions through hand signals or by deliberate
actions, and acts like a car.
Was this a flame? No. Geoff is entitled to speak his opinions.
He said a few things I have *never* heard out of an experienced
cyclist. That is what I answered.
I was reminded of a bigot's statement of, "I dont mind (women, blacks, gays)
as long as they don't get too uppity and start demanding thier rights."
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
"It isn't what you meant that counts. Its what you wrote."
Ted Holden
>> In my experience there are two types of drivers who
>>will honk at cyclists: One is the courteous driver on a
>>narrow/treacherous stretch who gives the horn a couple of
>>light taps just to let you know he is there; The other guy
>>is the asshole who drives right up to your back wheel and
>>lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
>>jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
There's at least one variety of third possibility: the driver who honks
as a psychic substitute for carrying a slapstick to deal with bicycle
riders on roads as they probably deserve. I mean, I lift weights and
play tennis and golf for exercise, but you don't see me out on the
damned streets with my tennis racquet impeding traffic and causing
mayhem as drivers try to fight their way around me.
Ted Holden
Donn Pedro
: In article <wood.672928474@jfred> wo...@jfred.siemens.com (Jim Wood) writes:
: >
: >1. Why can't bicyclists stop at stop signs and wait for stoplights
: > to turn green?
:
: A cyclist is technichally supposed to observe all traffic laws that cars do,
I agree.
: but cyclists also have significantly lower power to weight ratios than cars,
: and constantly accellerating and braking is a waste of energy.
Any cyclist who doesn't understand why this statement makes no sense, when
applied to riding in traffic, is riding for wrong reason.
: A cyclist has
: better visibility and manueverability in proportion to their speed than do
: cars, and so this is usually safe (but not always!)
This is still not an excuse to violate traffic laws, and act as bad
ambassador to the auto public.
: >
: >2. I say never honk at a bicyclist, except if I'm 50 yards behind
: > him on a deserted road. If I'm driving in the city, the bicyclist
: > knows there are going to be cars on the road. Why honk?
: >
: I say never honk at cyclists unless they swerve out in front of you,
Honk at a cyclist from afar if:
1.) You have a wide load. And are concerned for thier safety.
2.) You are trying to alert tham of a hazard.
3.) You need to get thier attention.
Honk when very close if:
1.) You sense an impending accident.
2.) You wish to scare the hell out of the cyclist.
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
Lon Stowell
>
>1. Does your car horn make the same sound every time you honk it?
>Or are you able to modulate the horn much as a human being modulates
>their various vocal grunts and so on, so you may convey some
>recognizable meaning?
>
>A serious problem with a car horn is that it conveys 1 bit. This is not
>often a useful amount of information.
Nawwww. You can use the length to convey messages:
Hooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonk. = Get out of my way you
ignorant @#$% !
hnk hnk. (brief taps)= NIIIIIIICE shorts, ma'am. (or sir,
depending on your proclivities...)
Screeeeeeech! Hooooooooonk!= Oops. There went another
SplaaaaaT! Schwinn.
Nolan Hinshaw
of the relative lack of maneuverability of the cars around me.
The last thing I'd do is run a stop sign. The reason is that I
know that most other drivers out there are not as well trained
as I am and do not pay enough attention to what's going on
around them. If I ran a stop sign or rode out in the traffic
lanes I'd expect someone to come along and pick me off and
wonder where I came from -"Honest, officer, I didn't see him!"
You folks on the bikes might be able to see those folks in the
cars, but there's a high likelyhood that the drivers won't be
looking. Anyone who honks at you is just alerting you to the
imminent danger in which you've placed yourself by expecting
something impossible from the vast majority of drivers.
--
Nolan Hinshaw Internet: no...@twg.com
The Wollongong Group Dingalingnet: (415)962-7197
Piobairi Uillean, San Francisco
Mise mo drumadoir eile fein!
Mark Drela
|> .
|> .
!> .
|> A serious problem with a car horn is that it conveys 1 bit.
Not quite. I generally interpret one or two very hort honks as to mean
"I'm about to pass, don't swerve or bad things will happen". I don't
mind such a warning at all. On the other hand, if the guy leans on the
horn 100 yards back, and keeps it on until he is well past you, I take it as
"Get the hell of the hell off the road, you moron." This meaning is
especially clear when he adds the middle finger information bit.
Mark Drela
_______________________________
o/LO .'
O .' Gravity-Powered Technologies Lab
.' MIT Aero-Astro Department 33-214
'
Lon Stowell
>
>
> I've noted this same phenomenon myself, coinciding with the massive
> explosion in popularity of cycling diring the last decade or so.
> Once opon a time, not too long ago, confrontations and mutual
> distrust and hostility between car and bicycle people were virtually
> own sake, but has an agenda -- the type of person who feels smug and
> self-righteous because his vehicle of choice is non-polluting and
> uses no fossil fuels, and who is often known to deliberately get
> lone cyclists riding much farther out in the street than they need
> to, and by groups of them who ride abreast instead of single file.
> As a group, they tend to bleat about how drivers must share the
> road with them, and yet they themselves don't seem too dedicated
> to the concept of sharing. Like many people who whine about their
> "rights," they don't understand that the posession of rights implies
> a corresponding burden of responsibility.
AMEN!. This smugness DOES appear to be a common
characteristic of certain cyclers. Also a terrible
ignorance of the laws of physics and realities of medicine
when a 3-4000 pound car and a 200 pound cyclist attempt to
occupy the same space. Of course these same smug individuals
immediately begin bleating about the car driver!
Hopefully they will continue their ignorance and the
resulting scrunching noises will perform a Darwinian maneuver
and remove them from the gene pool...so the NEXT generation
of drivers will be spared the bother!
(I bike on occasion. I am aware that I am SLOWER than most
cars...and like other slow traffic I should stay the heck out
of the way! I am also aware that an auto can be lethal, so
I don't try any smug, self-righteous stupid maneuvers that
can result in my future inability to cycle...or walk, or
live. The legal right-of-way makes a sorry epitaph. )
Tom Suit
> Its very simple.
> When you drive a car, you hate cyclists.
> When you ride a bike, you hate car drivers.
> (I've been both, I know!)
So admit it. You were much more of a dick when you were a
cyclist, weren't you. B-)
-Tom
Donn Pedro
> As for bicyclists obeying the traffic laws...remember that there's
> something even higher on the right-of-way pecking order, and even
> lower on the food chain, and that's a pedestrian. Knock down an
> unseen pedestrian while making an illegal maneuver and you'll have
> to go play kung-fu with the Middle-aged Mutant Ninja Lawyers.
>
> Remember, one man's insurance policy is another man's jackpot.
This does apply to *all* operators of vehicles.
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
Doug Fierro
>In <1991May1.1...@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> how...@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Howard Lem) writes:
>>especially the pellet gun. Remember! Damage the car, and you'll be responsible
>>for repairs. I can tell you that it is not a pretty sight to see a the
>>result of a car/bicycle or car/motorcycle collision. I leave it to you to
>>figure out which party has the most damage.
>
>The car easily has the most damage. I had an accident last week and hit the
>driver side front wheel of a car. I went over the hood and hit the
>windshield (wear your helmet!!).
>
>I scratched my knee (very minor I get worse 1/month playing Ultimate). My
>mountain bike, a 2 year old Fisher Hoo Koo E Koo, survived with no damage.
>The front wheel lost its alignment with the handle bars but I fixed that
>by hand on the spot.
>
>I smashed the windshield of the car (wear your helmet!!) and left two minor
>dents in the side pannel and the hood. Her insurance company says it comes to
>$1550 or so. The car was towed away, due to windshield damage. I rode my bike
>away and have noticed no problems or frame damage.
You must be a complete idiot if you are in some way trying to argue
that a bicyclist will come out better from an accident than an automobile.
All I can say is stop running those Yugos off the road!
Doug
--
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Doug Fierro
<<The only guarantee in life is that you will die>> fie...@uts.amdahl.com
UNIX division
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Billy Khan
Daniel Mocsny
>When driving a car, I honk at cyclists who are:
>
>a) riding on the wrong (left) side of the street (a big hazard to me when I
>am bicycling)
>
>or
>b) flagrantly running a red light.
I have several questions about your strategy.
1. Does your car horn make the same sound every time you honk it?
Or are you able to modulate the horn much as a human being modulates
their various vocal grunts and so on, so you may convey some
recognizable meaning?
A serious problem with a car horn is that it conveys 1 bit. This is not
often a useful amount of information. When *you* hear a car horn, can
you always be sure of the following:
a. Who is honking;
b. Who or what they are honking at;
c. What message they are trying to convey by honking?
Since your car horn is an extremely primitive communications system,
it is only useful in those extremely limited circumstances where a
hearer is likely to perceive your message correctly. Usually, this
would be an emergency where you are about to collide with someone if
they don't evade immediately. When most people hear a car horn, they
first check to see if they are about to die, and if not, then they
ignore it and return their attention to all the other ways they might
be about to die.
The rest of the time, you may just be adding to urban noise pollution.
If someone is stupid enough to ride a bicycle on the wrong side of
the street, do you think they will be smart enough to figure out why
you are honking?
2. You honk at bicyclists who "flagrantly" run red lights. Do you
recognize a way to run a red light which is not "flagrant"?
I think that if you want to drive around and educate other road
users (not necessarily a bad idea, given the general absense of
education among same), you would be better off junking the horn
and investing in a public-address system.
I also hope you want to educate ALL road users without prejudice. For
example, the average motorist has no more respect for posted speed
limits than the average bicyclist has for traffic signals. Do you
now honk at every driver who is exceeding the posted speed limit?
--
Dan Mocsny
Internet: dmo...@minerva.che.uc.edu
Paul Callahan
>users (not necessarily a bad idea, given the general absense of
>education among same), you would be better off junking the horn
>and investing in a public-address system.
Definitely an idea whose time has come. I've often thought that cars (and why
not bikes?) should have a bullhorn mounted on them to let other road users
know what you are really trying to say (instead of just making an obnoxious
noise). It would certainly make traffic jams more colorful events.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@cs.jhu.edu
Carol_...@cup.portal.com
a) riding on the wrong (left) side of the street (a big hazard to me when I
am bicycling)
or
b) flagrantly running a red light.
Carol Shaw
carol_...@cup.portal.com
Ed Ravin
at the intersection while the light is green, but thanks to headwinds,
uphill grades, or rusty chain on my 3-speed, before I make it to
the end of the intersection the light is red. There are others spots where
the lights are timed so that if you're moving anything less then 30 MPH you
will be caught behind every red light possible.
--
Ed Ravin | I'm sorry, sir, but POSTAL REGULATIONS don't allow
cmcl2!panix!eravin | PLASTIC tape over PAPER tape and NYLON cord on an
philabs!trintex!elr | 86 inch girth to LITHUANIA...
+1 914 993 4737 |
Daniel Mocsny
>I can't really think of many cases where even a light tap of the horn
>is appropriate. Cyclists can hear cars coming up from behind. Our
>ability to hear cars far exceeds the ability of motorists. Honking or
>tapping the horn is loud redundancy.
Some cars are too quiet for the cyclist to hear over wind noise, which
may be the result of the cyclist's speed or the weather. Also, a
driver will usually let off the gas when approaching a cyclist from
behind, if a way around does not seem clear. This reduces the amount
of noise the car makes.
The result, in my years of riding alone and with groups, is that
under many circumstances a car can sneak up behind cyclists without
their awareness. This is particularly true for cyclists riding in
a group at relatively high airspeed (>22 mph). When I ride with such
a group, I am usually one of the few carrying a mirror, and I notice
that almost nobody else in the group is aware of cars approaching
from behind until the cars honk or pass. Except for the occasional
very noisy car, of course. I can usually see a car in my
mirror *long* before I can possibly hear it.
A lone cyclist riding at lower airspeed (either because of a tail
wind, or a lower ground speed) will usually be able to hear
overtaking cars easily. Maybe even before the car has slowed.
However, the motorist, being insulated almost completely from
outside conditions, is generally ignorant of the wind direction
and speed, and usually has no objective way to tell that the cyclist
is aware of his/her approach. A short honk from at least 200 feet
back is neither redundant nor rude. A long blast from 20 feet back
is both rude and aggressively violent.
Tom Reingold
(unknown) writes:
$ In my experience there are two types of drivers who
$ will honk at cyclists: One is the courteous driver on a
$ narrow/treacherous stretch who gives the horn a couple of
$ light taps just to let you know he is there; The other guy
$ is the asshole who drives right up to your back wheel and
$ lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
$ jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
$ Remember, U-locks can be used for more than just
$ to secure your 'cycle!
$ It is nice to know that there are still guys out there
$ who do give cyclists a little courtesy, they are more than
$ likely bikers themselves.
I can't really think of many cases where even a light tap of the horn
is appropriate. Cyclists can hear cars coming up from behind. Our
ability to hear cars far exceeds the ability of motorists. Honking or
tapping the horn is loud redundancy.
--
Tom Reingold
t...@samadams.princeton.edu OR ...!princeton!samadams!tr
"Warning: Do not drive with Auto-Shade in place. Remove
from windshield before starting ignition."
h philip chen
>
>I can't really think of many cases where even a light tap of the horn
>is appropriate. Cyclists can hear cars coming up from behind. Our
>ability to hear cars far exceeds the ability of motorists. Honking or
>tapping the horn is loud redundancy.
>
Yep, it's usually true that cyclists can hear cars coming up from behind,
unless he/she has the walkman on, near max volume, with heavy metal music
on the tape. Well, then...
Not against cyclists,
-philip
John Kim
########
Hear hear! In Boston and the surrounding area, roads are twisty,
badly labelled, potholled, rutted, and often narrow cowpaths
with some asphalt slapped on. (actually, dig down
almost anywhere in Boston and find cobblestones)
When I bike, almost nobody rudely honks at me, but everyone wants to pass
me and they aren't always carefull about it. So I hate the cars
which go too fast for me to keep up, and the cars which go
too slowly but are hard to pass, and the cars which I'm following
which suddenly slow and make a right turn without signalling.
Oh and I really ahte cars who pull into intersections or out
of driveways without looking out for cyclists.
When I drive, I really hate cyclists at the edge of the narrower
roads. I am forever scared of hitting another rider, so I
pass very carefully, which often means I have to just drive
at the cyclists pace for a while. And then cyclists weave
between the lines of cars, run red lights, and cycle
at night without reflective shit on. Of cousre, I have been
guilty of all these crimes while on my bike.
As a pedestrian, I just drool whenever a hot bike or a hot
woman on any bike goes by.
-Case Kim
Frozen Ghost
Paul Callahan
>back is neither redundant nor rude. A long blast from 20 feet back
>is both rude and aggressively violent.
This sounds like a reasonable compromise (though I must admit that my own
riding is slow enough to make it unnecessary). The trouble is, I've
never experienced the first kind of honk. Maybe if I had, then I would
agree that the driver is trying to be courteous. Usually, though, the
message seems to be "Get off *my* road!"
Concerning the attitude "I pay more taxes, so it really *is* my road," I
have to admit that this is a new one for me. The reality of the fuel
crisis hit me deeply when I was a small child, and I have trouble understanding
such an obvious lack of concern for non-renewable resources and environmental
damage. Of course motorists pay gasoline taxes, but it's very unlikely that
this even comes close to covering the real economic cost of petroleum depletion
and environmental damage, let alone buying them exclusive use of the roads.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@cs.jhu.edu
JOSEPH T CHEW
be the "odd man out" in the great game of musical chairs we call Evolution.
--Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"
Curt Vaughan
>Definitely an idea whose time has come. I've often thought that cars (and why
>not bikes?) should have a bullhorn mounted on them to let other road users
>know what you are really trying to say (instead of just making an obnoxious
>noise). It would certainly make traffic jams more colorful events.
My God ... a symphony of PAIN. Perhaps it would be workable if dB. limits
could be placed on the bullhorns. I can just imagine a traffic jam
on a hot day with motorists screaming at each other over their respective
horns .. maybe a Bull**** award could be given to the person full of the
most ****.
--
"Move from rim to hub; know the wheel." -- Gautama B.
Daniel Mocsny
>I don't have any problems sharing the road with bicycles.
Then what's the rest of this article about? Do you have trouble
sharing the USENET with them, where you have to compete on an equal
basis, without 3,000 pound of metal to protect you?
> The roads here
>are very wide and besides that, there aren't too many cyclists around.
Thanks to all the support they get from drivers like you?
>No, I don't recall *ever* honking at any bicycle. And *some* of you
>cyclists better grow up and stop thinking "I [motorist] pay more taxes,
>so it really *is* my road,". TODAY, I want to ask all the smartass(es)
>(only those who have continuously argued/implied that motorists *suck*)
>a few questions...
OK. These are all simple.
> i) how much public liability & property damage insurance does your
> bicycle have? (Don't give me any crap that because you don't
> have a motor, you don't need any insurance. I know that.)
If you know my bicycle doesn't need any insurance, because it has a
pathetically limited ability to destroy things the way your car can,
then why are you asking this question? Just to sound silly?
If I drive my bicycle into any substantial object, I might put a slight
ding in it. Insurers and legislators are quite aware of this, which is
why they focus their efforts on getting at least some of real risks
insured.
> ii) how much personal liability insurance do you have?
How many pedestrians and bicyclists get mowed down every year by
motorists?
How many pedestrians and bicyclists get mowed down every year by
bicyclists?
How many Americans get killed by lightning every year? (I'll answer
that one: it's about 100.)
When you answer these questions, I will answer your question.
> iii) who do you expect to pay for the damages if an accident occurs?
How do uninsured motorists expect to pay? Answer: they don't. Since
uninsured and unlicensed motorists abound (do you know how many are
driving around *your* state? I'll bet you see more of them than you
see bicyclists), and they represent at least 100 times the potential
liability that an equal number of bicyclists do, then why don't you
worry about them first?
Actually, insurance figures I've seen show that only about half of
auto-accident damages are actually covered by insurance. That was
in the 1970's, though. I don't know if the situation is any better
now.
Do you know what the uninsured auto liability is today? How does
this compare with the uninsured bicycle liability?
If you could persuade the uninsured drivers to become uninsured
bicyclists, your own insurance rates would go down substantially.
> iv) whose insurance is going to pay for your stay in the hospital?
Who is going to put me in the hospital? If it's you, why would you
want to do that?
> v) whose insurance is going to pay for my vehicle damage?
If I am in the hospital, and you are worried about the ding my
head made in your fender, you are a sick person. When you mow down
a pedestrian, do you ask who is going to pay to scrape the blood
and meat scraps off your grille? The physical difference between
a cyclist and a pedestrian when you hit one is negligible.
I recall that when the Chinese government executed a political
prisoner, it billed the family for the cost of the bullet. Is this
the sort of accounting you deem appropriate when weighing human
lives against the value of machines?
> vi) whose insurance rate is going to go up *even* if it is *not* my fault?
Ah, but you have been tooling around in ease and comfort and relative
safety, while the bicyclist has been getting rained on, overheated,
chilled, shouted at, honked at, run off the road, assaulted with poison
gas from your tailpipe, numbed by motor noise, flatted by the bottles
and trash tossed from passing cars, or even hit by same, etc.
If you think the cyclist is getting the better deal, you are more than
welcome to start riding a bicycle at any time. The simple truth is that
the bicyclist is at the bottom of the traffic food chain, and that's
why you don't want to be one.
Also, "fault" is a rather slippery concept. The legal definition of
"fault" is, after all, somewhat arbitrary. When you're carrying
100 times the firepower to a battle, you look a bit disingenuous
when you try to paint yourself as the victim in the encounter. With
power comes increased responsibility, at least in civilized
communities. If you want to forget civilization, and have a free-for-
all, then don't complain about locks and paint-guns, that is just the
beginning.
You may not be "at fault" if a small child, say, darts out in
front of your car. But do you want to be the person who mows her
down? Frankly, if I did that, I would not feel better merely because
I wasn't technically "at fault". I would feel sick that I had
been using the technology that increased the probability of such a
thing happening.
> vii) do you know how much does the auto insurance cost?
I have an idea. It's enough to cover your liability for the things
the law permits you to be sued for. It doesn't, however, pay for
many of the costs your automobile inflicts on your surroundings,
which you have no interest in becoming responsible for (pollution,
noise, congestion, increased probability of accidents even where you
aren't technically "at fault", increased cost of law enforcement,
etc.)
>When the day comes when you (cyclist) are required to have *sufficient*
>insurance coverage, you are welcomed to *honk* me whenever you feel
>right.
I believe that every cyclist you pass is already inhaling your
poison gas. Isn't that enough to satisfy you? Or do you also need
to speak sanctimoniously to people you are harming?
Also, the day has not come where every motorist *must* have sufficient
insurance coverage before driving a car. Sure, that is what the law
says, but your state may have 100,000 people who flout it right now.
Are you interested in bankrolling and tolerating the level of police
activity necessary to enforce the law?
>As of right now, when other motorist *honk* you, you better accept is as
>a courteous signal to let you know to be extra cautious (ie. don't give
>any surprises, and nobody is going to get hurt).
This is exactly what criminals say when they point a gun at you. And
for exactly the same reason. They really don't want to kill you to
get to where they want to go, but they will if they have to.
Most criminals would be happy if they did not have to use force, if
they could merely threaten and intimidate and get the same result.
Cars are good tools for doing this. I sure get the hell out of the
way when I think a motorist is going to run me down.
> When you get one of the
>long *honk*, just accept it like how other grown-ups accept life.
When someone flames your silly article on USENET, just accept it
like how other grown-ups accept life.
I am willing to tolerate horns if you are willing to tolerate flames.
Can you take it the way you can dish it out? Or are you just talk?
> There
>are many things in life that you will not like; this might be one of them.
Right. This might be one of them too. So show us the *RIGHT* way to
handle it, Mr. Grown-up.
h philip chen
>ch...@athena.ecs.csus.edu (h philip chen) writes, among other things:
>
>> have a motor, you don't need any insurance. I know that.)
>
Actually, I was thinking about a car in accident with a bicycle. You
might be surprised about how expensive certain parts & the labor rates
are. (Also depends on geographical location too.) Even a [big] scratch
from front to back is going to cost a whole lot. If the car happens to
be a Porsche 944, you can be sure that the owner is not going to accept
any paint job which is not considered *the best*. (Think $$)
> My
>lack of insurance has nothing to do with my right to use the road.
Yep, agree. (Reminder: I've never said bicyclists cannot use the road.)
>> iii) who do you expect to pay for the damages if an accident occurs?
>
>Since I have not paid $10,000 for an automobile, I can easily cover damages
>that my bike causes, which would be minimal.
Let's take the example earlier about one of our net.friend who smashed
into the windshield (and damaged it). If the car was a late-model
Acura Integra, the windshield is going to cost $740 (not including the
installation!) Somebody has to pay for it (well, the party at fault.)
If the car insurance's deductible is above the damage amount, the money
has to come out from someone's (or both parties') pocket.
>> iv) whose insurance is going to pay for your stay in the hospital?
>> v) whose insurance is going to pay for my vehicle damage?
>
>I'd find these two questions amusing if they weren't asked in such a serious
>manner. Yes, your car may get a dented panel or broken windshield if you
>collide with a cyclist, but that cyclist will be seriously injured or killed.
Please not! People are worth more while alive.
>You have strange priorities when you put the condition of your car above the
>life of a person. If your children were involved in a car/bike accident,
>would your first question be, "How much was the car damaged?"? For your
>children's sake, I hope not.
Part i: Hang on a minute, I HAVE NEVER put the condition of a car above the
life of a person (you're picking on the wriong person!). Part ii: You must
be kidding.. I'll never say that.
>> vi) whose insurance rate is going to go up *even* if it is *not* my fault?
>
>I've never been in an accident where the motorist wasn't (at least 50%) at
>fault. If you drive in such a way that an accident with a cyclist is likely,
>your insurance should go up. It is highly unlikely that a cyclist will
>intentionally crash into your car to raise your insurance rates.
Yep, I don't think anyone with the right mind wants to intentionally
crash into a car (well, at least I certainly hope not!)
>> vii) do you know how much does the auto insurance cost?
>
>Yes, I do. Why do you think I ride a bike? I can own a good bike for the
>cost of what some people pay yearly in insurance.
Agree/sure/no-quarrel/whatever.
>>If any *cyclist* wants to follow-up my article, ...
>I have done so.
Thank you very much. I appreciate your point of view.
>When I ride, I respect a motorists right to use the road. I only ask that
>they show me the same respect.
Ditto, I respect the bicyclists (and everyone else) right to use the
road too.
> --------- Doc
Ex-cyclist myself, (can't stand the traffic lately)
-philip
Oscar the retro-grouch
>(unknown) writes:
>
>$ In my experience there are two types of drivers who
>$ will honk at cyclists: One is the courteous driver on a
>$ narrow/treacherous stretch who gives the horn a couple of
>$ light taps just to let you know he is there;
In all my travels, I have never experienced this. If it ever did happen,
I'm sure I would buy the driver dinner at the next light.
>$ The other guy
>$ is the asshole who drives right up to your back wheel and
>$ lays on an unnecessarily long blast just to watch you
>$ jump out of your skin and maybe even crash.
Now these assholes I know all about. Especially when they then
proceed to pass you within inches of your life.
>$ Remember, U-locks can be used for more than just
>$ to secure your 'cycle!
Duh, like what?!?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| \ / One land under God has turned into |
| \ / One nation, under the influence of one drug. |
| ---------------- And the one man who is the master of that medium |
| | /----------\ | Is the president of the US of A. |
| | | Just say | o | Television, the drug of the nation! |
| | | "NO" | | Breeding ignorance and feeding radiation. |
| | | to oil! | o | -The Beatnigs |
| | \----------/ | |
| ---------------- Chris Fraser =(;^) fra...@sol.uvic.ca |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doc O'Leary
>I don't have any problems sharing the road with bicycles. The roads here
>are very wide and besides that, there aren't too many cyclists around.
>No, I don't recall *ever* honking at any bicycle. And *some* of you
>cyclists better grow up and stop thinking "I [motorist] pay more taxes,
>so it really *is* my road,". TODAY, I want to ask all the smartass(es)
>(only those who have continuously argued/implied that motorists *suck*)
>a few questions...
I've only posted one other time in this subject, relating a personal
experience with a honking motorist that happened to come up during the
thread, but I feel your questions should not go unanswered.
> i) how much public liability & property damage insurance does your
> bicycle have? (Don't give me any crap that because you don't
> have a motor, you don't need any insurance. I know that.)
> ii) how much personal liability insurance do you have?
On my bike, I cannot do nearly as much damage in an accident as a car. My
lack of insurance has nothing to do with my right to use the road.
> iii) who do you expect to pay for the damages if an accident occurs?
Since I have not paid $10,000 for an automobile, I can easily cover damages
that my bike causes, which would be minimal.
> iv) whose insurance is going to pay for your stay in the hospital?
> v) whose insurance is going to pay for my vehicle damage?
I'd find these two questions amusing if they weren't asked in such a serious
manner. Yes, your car may get a dented panel or broken windshield if you
collide with a cyclist, but that cyclist will be seriously injured or killed.
You have strange priorities when you put the condition of your car above the
life of a person. If your children were involved in a car/bike accident,
would your first question be, "How much was the car damaged?"? For your
children's sake, I hope not.
> vi) whose insurance rate is going to go up *even* if it is *not* my fault?
I've never been in an accident where the motorist wasn't (at least 50%) at
fault. If you drive in such a way that an accident with a cyclist is likely,
your insurance should go up. It is highly unlikely that a cyclist will
intentionally crash into your car to raise your insurance rates.
> vii) do you know how much does the auto insurance cost?
Yes, I do. Why do you think I ride a bike? I can own a good bike for the
cost of what some people pay yearly in insurance.
>When the day comes when you (cyclist) are required to have *sufficient*
>insurance coverage, you are welcomed to *honk* me whenever you feel
>right. You are also welcomed to overtake me from the left (faster) lane,
>and you are also welcomed to ride in the middle of the road if you want.
>When that day comes, it will be a fair game for all of us on the road.
>As of right now, when other motorist *honk* you, you better accept is as
>a courteous signal to let you know to be extra cautious (ie. don't give
>any surprises, and nobody is going to get hurt). When you get one of the
>long *honk*, just accept it like how other grown-ups accept life. There
>are many things in life that you will not like; this might be one of them.
That paragraph had "flame me" written all over it, which is why I won't
comment on it.
>If any *cyclist* wants to follow-up my article, you better answer all the
>seven questions above WITHOUT lying. (Motorists following-up don't have to
>answer the insurance questions.)
I have done so.
When I ride, I respect a motorists right to use the road. I only ask that
they show me the same respect.
--------- Doc
********************** Signature Block : Version 2.5 *********************
* | OK, one last time . . . This is *
* "Was it love, or was it the idea | an egg . . . This is an egg in a *
* of being in love?" -- PF | frying pan . . . Any questions? *
* (BTW, which one *is* Pink?) | *
* | --->ole...@ux.acs.umn.edu<--- *
****************** Copyright (c) 1991 by Doc O'Leary ********************
Russ Corfman
> But sorry, I make very little allowance for
> premediated stupidity.
Sounds like premeditated stupidity to me!
> --
> Jonathan E. Quist INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation
> j...@i88.isc.com Naperville, IL
> '71 CL450-K4 "Gleep"
> DoD #094, Deployed, Operation Dessert Storm (a Flurry of Puddings)
Ciao,
--
Russell Corfman
AG Communication Systems; Phoenix, AZ
UUCP: ...!{ncar!noao!asuvax | uunet!zardoz!hrc}!gtephx!corfmanr
Internet: gtephx!corf...@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
(602) 581-4403
h philip chen
It's been a week that we've seen thread. Isn't anyone going to give up?
No? Ok, here's more stuff to think about...
call...@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes:
>
>Concerning the attitude "I pay more taxes, so it really *is* my road," I
>have to admit that this is a new one for me.
I don't have any problems sharing the road with bicycles. The roads here
are very wide and besides that, there aren't too many cyclists around.
No, I don't recall *ever* honking at any bicycle. And *some* of you
cyclists better grow up and stop thinking "I [motorist] pay more taxes,
so it really *is* my road,". TODAY, I want to ask all the smartass(es)
(only those who have continuously argued/implied that motorists *suck*)
a few questions...
i) how much public liability & property damage insurance does your
bicycle have? (Don't give me any crap that because you don't
have a motor, you don't need any insurance. I know that.)
ii) how much personal liability insurance do you have?
iii) who do you expect to pay for the damages if an accident occurs?
iv) whose insurance is going to pay for your stay in the hospital?
v) whose insurance is going to pay for my vehicle damage?
vi) whose insurance rate is going to go up *even* if it is *not* my fault?
vii) do you know how much does the auto insurance cost?
When the day comes when you (cyclist) are required to have *sufficient*
insurance coverage, you are welcomed to *honk* me whenever you feel
right. You are also welcomed to overtake me from the left (faster) lane,
and you are also welcomed to ride in the middle of the road if you want.
When that day comes, it will be a fair game for all of us on the road.
As of right now, when other motorist *honk* you, you better accept is as
a courteous signal to let you know to be extra cautious (ie. don't give
any surprises, and nobody is going to get hurt). When you get one of the
long *honk*, just accept it like how other grown-ups accept life. There
are many things in life that you will not like; this might be one of them.
> The reality of the fuel
>crisis hit me deeply when I was a small child, and I have trouble understanding
>such an obvious lack of concern for non-renewable resources and environmental
>damage. Of course motorists pay gasoline taxes, but it's very unlikely that
>this even comes close to covering the real economic cost of petroleum depletion
>and environmental damage, let alone buying them exclusive use of the roads.
>
What? You ran out of bright ideas already? The subject line says
"Re: honking at cyclists - why?", and why are you trying to give some damm
lecture on environmental issues? Like everyone is so dumb and not concerned
or something. Who died and made you the net.politically.correct.god? Let's
face it -- everything that we do in life is bad for something else, and
there is *lots* (enough) of this in the mass media already. Stick to
the main issue "honking.. - why".
Wait, there's more... Gasoline tax? Those miserable dollars? Heck,
I'm not even worried about it. I pay over 20 times more on insurance
dollars than on the gasoline tax. If we meet by accident, my *insurance*
is going to go up even further, and you're going to have to explain that
to the court in a civil lawsuit. As for now, you better get the gasoline
tax thing out of your system. (I read rec.bicycles also.)
Well, I told you earlier and I'm going to tell you again -- I don't have
anything against cyclists, and I don't have any problem sharing the road
with *anybody*. Just act responsible and follow all the rules & regulations
of the road like how others have too. (Of course, this is *NOT* a
blanket statement because there are also many good and courteous cyclists
out there too. Sorry if some of you feel targeted. I'm only going
after those that doesn't have any common sense and blame everything
on the motorists.)
>--
>Paul Callahan
>call...@cs.jhu.edu
Still not against cyclists,
-philip
============================================================================
Read and think carefully before you *cyclists* follow-up. There are enough
foolish people on the net. (Can you say "paint guns" and "lock".) Better
still, just drop the whole thing and we'll get back to our normal newsgroups.
Sam Henry
ch...@athena.ecs.csus.edu (h philip chen) writes:
>
>It's been a week that we've seen thread. Isn't anyone going to give up?
>No? Ok, here's more stuff to think about...
>
>are very wide and besides that, there aren't too many cyclists
>around.
how generous of you to share something that is not yours to withold to
begin with. in some places, the roads are not quite so wide and it
doesn't matter a single iota how MANY cyclsits there are. just be
the one that gets crowded a little too far by some ..... in too big a
hurry. excuse me, but Friday pm, just such an idiot left a parking
lot like i didn't exist.
>No, I don't recall *ever* honking at any bicycle. And *some* of you
>cyclists better grow up and stop thinking "I [motorist] pay more taxes,
>so it really *is* my road,". TODAY, I want to ask all the smartass(es)
>(only those who have continuously argued/implied that motorists *suck*)
>a few questions...
>
> i) how much public liability & property damage insurance does your
> bicycle have? (Don't give me any crap that because you don't
> have a motor, you don't need any insurance. I know that.)
don't need? how about the crap that i can't get it. i have to carry
the insurance as personal liability and household goods coverage--and
the rates are higher than auto coverage.
> ii) how much personal liability insurance do you have?
never answer that question except to your attorney. i have it and i
am comfortable with the limits, jerk.
> iii) who do you expect to pay for the damages if an accident
>occurs?
Friday evening, i would have expected the ditz late for her date to
pay.
after that, it depends on the accident. blameless cyclists? hardly,
i have seen idiots on all forms of wheeled conveyance from roller
blades and skate boards to the largest of motorized behmoths.
> iv) whose insurance is going to pay for your stay in the hospital?
my group health care, plus whatever my attorney can get out of the
idiot that put me there if it wasn't this idiot.
> v) whose insurance is going to pay for my vehicle damage?
probably not the same insurance company that will get to skate on my
bicycle damage.
> vi) whose insurance rate is going to go up *even* if it is *not*
>my fault?
according to the defensive driving class **I** took ...
there are no faultless accidents.
> vii) do you know how much does the auto insurance cost?
approximately 1/12 of my annual take-home.
>
>When the day comes when you (cyclist) are required to have *sufficient*
>insurance coverage, you are welcomed to *honk* me whenever you feel
>right.
well, since being required to have it and having it are usually two
different things in the world of auto driving,
i HONK you anyway, jack.
>You are also welcomed to overtake me from the left (faster) lane,
can i do it closely enough that i damage your vehicle with my handle
bars, as i have been damaged by side-view mirrors?
>and you are also welcomed to ride in the middle of the road if you
>want.
you still don't understand that that is some times the safest place
for a cyclist to be--for both the cyclist AND the autoist.
>When that day comes, it will be a fair game for all of us on the
>road.
this is not a game we're talking about, child, which is part of the
problem.
>As of right now, when other motorist *honk* you, you better accept is
>as a courteous signal to let you know to be extra cautious (ie. don't
>give any surprises, and nobody is going to get hurt).
that sounds ominously like a bully's threat: "we'll play this game by
my rules and nobody gets hurt!" bullshit. you honk, i'll slow down
and look at you like you're weird because you haven't the faintest
idea what the heck is going on ahead of me, and there ain't nothing
you could do about if i could move over and let you by. you learned
to drive in Houston, right?
>When you get one of the long *honk*, just accept it like how other
>grown-ups accept life. ...
of course, i so seldom see a motorist accept a long *honk* with
equinanimity that i don't have any role models.
>
>
>Still not against cyclists,
thank the net.gods. you certainly came off hostile to me.
>-philip
>
>If any *cyclist* wants to follow-up my article, you better answer all the
>seven questions above WITHOUT lying. (Motorists following-up don't have to
>answer the insurance questions.)
what is this, moderation by examination? and which seven part test
did you pass to post your drivel?
you lied about not being against cyclists.
sam henry <she...@rice.edu>
Proud driver of the blue Ross dump truck!
Wanna ride?
Joe Staudt
Holden) writes:
( discussion of despicable cyclist habits omitted for brevity )
> I mean, I lift weights and
>play tennis and golf for exercise, but you don't see me out on the
>damned streets with my tennis racquet impeding traffic and causing
>mayhem as drivers try to fight their way around me.
>
>
>Ted Holden
And you don't see my riding my bike through tennis courts and golf
courses impeding play and causing mayhem as the players try to fight
their way around me. Bikes belong on the streets as much as cars, and
the laws apply to them equally, also. If you're going to bitch about
cyclists, at least be intelligent about it!
Joe Staudt (recent born-again cyclist and longtime car nut)
--
Joseph Staudt, Telxon Corp. | ...!uunet!telxon!joes || joes%tel...@uunet.uu.net
P.O. Box 5582 |
Akron, OH 44334-0582 | Heavy, adj.:
(216) 867-3700 x3522 | Seduced by the chocolate side of the force.
Dennis O'Connor x4982 room 6-230N
]
] ch...@athena.ecs.csus.edu (h philip chen) writes:
] > i) how much public liability & property damage insurance does your
] > bicycle have? (Don't give me any crap that because you don't
] > have a motor, you don't need any insurance. I know that.)
]
] If you know my bicycle doesn't need any insurance, because it has a
] pathetically limited ability to destroy things the way your car can,
] then why are you asking this question? Just to sound silly?
First let me say I like to bike and don't mind driving. Then...
First, a bicycle's reduced capacity to directly cause damage does not
imply a reduced capacity to indirectly cause great damage. Imagine you're
in your car and some cyclist streaks out from some place you can't see.
You reflexively swerve to avoid, and head-on an oncoming bus. Who caused
the accident ? Maybe you did, by trying to avoid a 100% probabilty of
killing the cyclist. But I think it's reasonable to conclude it was
the cyclist who caused the accident. Any vehicle allowed on the public
roads can cause great carnage through it's improper operation. ( I do
realize that even pedestrians can cause this kind of "collateral damage",
but, their not LEGALLY allowed on the roads except at crossings, yes?)
Second, I've always needed to pay for "uninsured motorist" insurance
in every state I've lived in. I can't think of a reason a bicycle
rider is at any less risk from uninsured motorists. Should they therefor
be required to have this kind of insurance ?
I really DON'T want bicycling to become ensnared in the cogs of government
regulation, and I don't want the cost of cycling driven up ( yes, I do
own a helmet, and it cost 1/3rd what my bike originally did ). But it's
not fair to give cyclist a free lunch either. Is there a resolution to
these conflicting goals ?
--
--
Dennis O'Connor, uunet!srg!titania!doconnor
non-representative.
Paul Callahan
> Thanks to the thread I've been
> reading here I quickly got over the shock of this #&$%@# cyclist
> running the stop sign and almost getting himself killed and
> immediately knew what I should do. I HONKED LONG AND LOUD!
I don't think any reasonable person is going to argue about honking
at anyone (cyclist, pedestrian, skateboarder, or whatever), who is clearly
doing something likely to cause an accident. That's what horns are for.
In spite of this, I'm still fairly certain that the Pennsylvania drivers manual
(the only one I'm familiar with) does not recommend honking at cyclists for
any reason.
My problem is with drivers who honk *routinely* to assert their
dominance on the road, or out of a misguided sense that they are being helpful.
I feel that my anger is justified toward the former (whom I'll never convince),
but I am willing to hold out some hope for the latter. Perhaps if they
understood all the circumstances, they might change their behavior.
I might add that I am personally in favor of cyclists obeying a uniform
vehicle code. I always wait at red lights (though I often feel like a
twit when I realize it has a sensor I can't trigger--in which case I walk
the bike across if there is no pedestrian button). I consider it my part of
the bargain to obey the law, and I ask in return that drivers show me a
reasonable amount of courtesy.
I'm very confused about why the existence of cyclists who run stop signs should
act as a justification for honking at me. I'm also confused about why
municipalities do not often uphold their side of the legal bargain by making it
practical for me to obey traffic lights (i.e., by allowing me to trigger the
sensors). All I can assume is that bicycles are not taken seriously as a
means of transportation. This is the point I find most disturbing.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@cs.jhu.edu
Tom Reingold
$ [...]
$ I think that if you want to drive around and educate other road
$ users (not necessarily a bad idea, given the general absense of
$ education among same), you would be better off junking the horn
$ and investing in a public-address system.
$ [...]
In article <callahan....@newton.cs.jhu.edu> call...@cs.jhu.edu
(Paul Callahan) writes:
$
$ Definitely an idea whose time has come. I've often thought that cars (and why
$ not bikes?) should have a bullhorn mounted on them to let other road users
$ know what you are really trying to say (instead of just making an obnoxious
$ noise). It would certainly make traffic jams more colorful events.
How about a points system for your license, but your fellow citizen
awards you the points rather than the state? If you cut someone off or
do something similarly stupid, your fellow road-user shoots a
suction-cup dart onto your car. If you accumulate more than three
darts in a month, the state suspends your license.
Mark SOKOLOWSKI
>>
>> The reality of the fuel
>>crisis hit me deeply when I was a small child, and I have trouble understanding
>>such an obvious lack of concern for non-renewable resources and environmental
>>damage. Of course motorists pay gasoline taxes, but it's very unlikely that
>>this even comes close to covering the real economic cost of petroleum depletion
>>and environmental damage, let alone buying them exclusive use of the roads.
>>
Well .... Perhaps I hoped for something of this sort to come along.
I'm for the protection of the environment, and I have even taken an interesting
course as an elective called "physics of energy", which deals with global
assessement of energy exchanges in our modern and technological society.
(Fuel depletion, alternative energy resources etc...), so I'm certainly not
an ignorant in these matters.
I will tell you *ONE* thing:
Around us the universe is puddy much f***** up....
THE SUN ALONE IS WASTING *MILLIONS* OF TONS OF
MATTER-EQUIVALENT ENERGY EACH SECOND!!!!!!
EACH SECOND, THE SUN IS WASTING THE ENERGY THAT
OUR "IMPERIALISTIC", "ENVIRONMENT-DESTROYING"
CIVILIZATION WOULDN'T CONSUME IN 10 BILLION YEARS!!!!
Now, stretch your imagination a little bit, and think about
the *BILLIONS* of suns making up our middle-sized average galaxy. And
what about the *BILLIONS* of galaxies????? Supernovaes??? Quazars???
Black holes that kill entire stars that would otherwise give billions
of years of precious energy to the surrounding dead void???
I think it will be kind of hard to beat me on the "GLOBAL APPROACH"
view, so all of you hippies yelling about a few cars using up too much energy,
give me a break!
Mark
Brian E. D. Kingsbury
|> >call...@cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes:
|>
|> Well .... Perhaps I hoped for something of this sort to come along.
|> I'm for the protection of the environment, and I have even taken an interesting
|> course as an elective called "physics of energy", which deals with global
|> assessement of energy exchanges in our modern and technological society.
|> (Fuel depletion, alternative energy resources etc...), so I'm certainly not
|> an ignorant in these matters.
|>
|> I will tell you *ONE* thing:
|>
|> Around us the universe is puddy much f***** up....
|>
|> THE SUN ALONE IS WASTING *MILLIONS* OF TONS OF
|> MATTER-EQUIVALENT ENERGY EACH SECOND!!!!!!
|> EACH SECOND, THE SUN IS WASTING THE ENERGY THAT
|> OUR "IMPERIALISTIC", "ENVIRONMENT-DESTROYING"
|> CIVILIZATION WOULDN'T CONSUME IN 10 BILLION YEARS!!!!
|>
|> Now, stretch your imagination a little bit, and think about
|> the *BILLIONS* of suns making up our middle-sized average galaxy. And
|> what about the *BILLIONS* of galaxies????? Supernovaes??? Quazars???
|> Black holes that kill entire stars that would otherwise give billions
|> of years of precious energy to the surrounding dead void???
|>
|> I think it will be kind of hard to beat me on the "GLOBAL APPROACH"
|> view, so all of you hippies yelling about a few cars using up too much energy,
|> give me a break!
|>
|> Mark
Great. Now, *harness* it!
Until we can do that, we'd better conserve what we've got.
Brian
Paul Callahan
might as well.
In article <1991May6.2...@cs.mcgill.ca> ms...@cs.mcgill.ca (Mark SOKOLOWSKI) writes:
>I will tell you *ONE* thing:
>
> Around us the universe is puddy much f***** up....
>
> THE SUN ALONE IS WASTING *MILLIONS* OF TONS OF
> MATTER-EQUIVALENT ENERGY EACH SECOND!!!!!!
> EACH SECOND, THE SUN IS WASTING THE ENERGY THAT
> OUR "IMPERIALISTIC", "ENVIRONMENT-DESTROYING"
> CIVILIZATION WOULDN'T CONSUME IN 10 BILLION YEARS!!!!
To point out the obvious, you are ignoring the issue of whether the energy
wasted would have been usable by people. But I'm not really talking about
energy; I'm talking about petroleum. It has many uses besides burning up while
idling in the morning rush hour. A significant part of our technological
culture is based on the use of petroleum products for plastics and other
petrochemicals. A great deal of it is being burnt needlessly by motorists who
could be using alternative means of transportation. I have nothing against the
use of petroleum; I would just like to see people appreciate it more.
> I think it will be kind of hard to beat me on the "GLOBAL APPROACH"
True. If your approach is this global, or rather cosmic in perspective, I'm
sure it won't bother you at all when our technology grinds to a halt for
lack of resources and our environment becomes too poisoned to support life.
Oh well, another planet bites the dust--big deal, lots more where that
came from. I have a considerably more parochial view. I'd like to see
the human race prosper. This isn't going to happen if we use up all our
oil before discovering how to tap the more significant resources
you allude to.
>... so all of you hippies yelling about a few cars using up too much energy,
>give me a break!
Unfortunately, we are talking about *many* cars using up much more energy than
would be necessary if things were done in a sensible manner. For example,
people are supposedly into fitness these days. If this entails driving
to a fitness center, taking an elevator to the appropriate floor, and riding a
stationery bicycling, then there is something seriously warped about modern
culture. I'm really not that into fitness, but I'm willing to use my own
muscles for the minor tasks that confront me in daily life.
On my last long bike ride, I found it rather disconcerting to see more bikes
mounted on cars than in use. The road I was on was far from ideal for biking,
and I can understand why people would rather drive their bike to somewhere
safer. But for me, the whole cycling aesthetic is lost when you can't use the
bike for the whole trip. If this trend continues, bicycling will just become
another weekend diversion, like surfing, and I'd really hate to see this happen.
I'm not a hippy, by the way, not that there's anything wrong with being one.
I happen to like technology. People who don't like technology don't have to
worry so much about petroleum running out, I suppose, since we could just
ignore it and live in harmony with nature (ignoring, temporarily, the ecological
impact of pollution). I see petroleum as part of the means of escaping the
limited resources of this planet. To squander it foolishly before we determine
how to produce it in unlimited quantity is an amazingly short-sighted policy.
Weather permitting, bicycling strikes me as the method of choice for one
person of unremarkable health to travel distances of, say, 5 miles (to be
conservative) on a regular basis. Cars are useful things, I'll admit. I
would not like to bike in heavy rain, and I would not like to have to carry
a weeks worth of groceries by bike. As it happens, I don't own a car, but
I can understand why people find them useful.
However, there are instances in which bikes are as practical as cars. If
people were using bikes only in the instances in which they were unquestionably
the most reasonable way to get from point A to point B, we would still probably
have a lot fewer cars on the road. Ironically, one of the major contributors
to the impracticality of bike-riding is the danger caused by the excessive
number of cars.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@cs.jhu.edu
David Munroe
> The last thing I'd do is run a stop sign. The reason is that I
> know that most other drivers out there are not as well trained
> as I am and do not pay enough attention to what's going on...
> Anyone who honks at you is just alerting you to the
> imminent danger in which you've placed yourself by expecting
> something impossible from the vast majority of drivers.
Regardless of how well trained anyone is or thinks they are (it doesn't really
matter), the traffic lights, signs, and laws apply to everyone: motorists,
bicyclists, and pedestrians.
-Dave
Geoff Miller
>There was nothing paranoid about my "rhetoric." Read it again.
I read it twice before I even posted my response. It was rhetoric,
and it was definitely paranoid.
------
>>That fifteen minute commuter has no excuse to violate traffic laws, and
>>every reason to follow them. Your example just gives some auto drivers
^^^^^^
Notice this part.
Noticed it the first time around.
------
Do not give the brain dead, uncaring, borderline, uneducated, ignorant,
and downright reckless members of the otherwise responsible driving
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Don't forget to read this part.
Read it.
------
>>It's the
>>result of a perceived lower notch on the vehicular food chain
>>relative to automobile drivers.
>Not perceived by all.
But apparently perceived by enough that it's significant.
I'm not going to write in some ponderous, quasi-legal style designed
to take every possible contingency into account. Clearly, there
are going to be exceptions to any statement regarding a large group
of people. So let's not get bogged down in trivialities, eh?
------
>The rider you describe needs experience and an education.
A little common sense would be in order as well. And I didn't
describe a single, hypothetical rider; I described behavior and
an attitude that was presesnt in many cyclists that I have observed
personally and whose words I've read in cycling magazines, email
newsgroups and elsewhere.
------
>>I'm a cyclist as well as a driver,
>So am I. But from the sound of it you should have wrote:
>I'm a driver first and a cyclist second.
Why? Because in this case I came down firmly on the side of
motorists? Don't you think it's a bit presumptuous of you to
assume that I'd do so in all cases? After all, you don't have
much of a sample size to base your extrapolation on.
I'm an empiricist; I call 'em as I see 'em. My pointing out
that much of the friction between drivers and cyclists is the
fault of cyclists doesn't necessarily serve to indicate any
particular bias on my part.
It's been my experience that many (but by no means not all) cyclists
in my area seem to have an attitude problem. It's also my firm
belief that if cyclists show basic courtesy and pay attention to
what's going on around them, as they'd have motorists do, cyclist/
driver confrontations would be far less common.
------
>>so I'm more than equipped to see both sides of the issue.
>Better than who?
Why do you ask, "Better than who?" My statement wasn't relative.
I didn't say I was better equipped than anybody else. I said I
was able to see both sides of the issue.
-----
>>I cross intersections at the crosswalk
>Bad advice.
>Crosswalks are for pedestrians, not bicycles.
>You are a vehicle - by law!
Bad choice of words on my part; what I meant was, "at the corner,"
not specifically in the crosswalk. Although I can't see that riding
through a crosswalk would cause any particular problem if there
were no pedestrians in it, the law notwithstanding. The point was
that while I don't swing out into traffic to use the left-turn-only
lanes, I don't fall to the other extreme of walking my bike across
in the crosswalk. Riding across at the streetcorner has always
served me quite well, since the traffic lights work in my favor and
I neither expose myself to possible injury by riding unnecessarily
close to automobile traffic, nor do I get in the way of any drivers.
Let's return to the subject at hand, shall we? We weren't talking
about pedestrians.
The other day my car nearly got sideswiped by some dildoid in the
adjacent (inner) left-turn lane who drifted outward as we made the
turn. Had he hit me, it would've been bad enough getting my car
dented up, but the consequences would obviously have been a hell of
a lot more severe if I was on a bike. Therefore, I cross corner-
to-corner when I ride.
------
>How long have you been a serious rider?
Since 1962, when I got my first two-wheeler. How's that?
But what exactly do you mean by "serious rider?" I've been serious
right from the beginning in terms of riding safely. Other than
that, what criteria are there for determining how "serious" somebody
is about riding a bicycle?
------
>How long have you been riding.? Really?
Since 1962. Really.
------
[ triade against cyclists who are not like Geoff deleted.]
"Not like Geoff?" I'm observant enough to identify a particular
subset of cyclists, and you immediately assume that I dislike
such people only because they're "different" from me in some way?
Maybe it's not the fact that they're "different." but the fact
that they're twits, that I dislike.
------
>No one has a right to the road. Bone up on your vehicle code.
Wrong. _Everybody_ has a right to the road. That's why the
concepts of responsibility and courtesy come into play. Bone up on
reality and common sense.
------
>Ride like a car. Act like a car. Stay out of crosswalks where you
>do not belong. Follow the rules of the road and share it with others.
You really jumped on that crosswalk thing, didn't you? Too bad
it's a trivial aside that really has very little to do with the
matter at hand, which is the relationship between cars and bicycles.
Bikes are vehicles, but they're not cars. There are certain places
where bicycles don't belong. Bikes have no more business out in
the middle of the street than mopeds have on the Interstate or
ultralights have on runway 28-Left at SFO.
------
>>>A cyclist should either follow the law, act like a car, or walk.
>>Agreed. Lest he be crushed to a lifeless
>>(yet somehow satisfying) pulp beneath the wheels of a conveyance far
>>mightier than his own.
>Satisfying to who? I really want to know.
Satisfying to me, of course; I'm a confirmed social Darwinist I
find it immensely satisfying when any dumb-genes are given the bum's
rush. In fact, I like it so much that I'm sporting the Mother Of All
Hard-Ons just sitting here thinking about it.
Now you know.
------
>I don't think you really ride much Geoff. I mean *miles*. Not just a
>quick five miles to the Seven Eleven.
Why? Do you feel that if I did, I naturally wouldn't hold the
opinions that I do?
Or do you feel that if I don't ride fifty miles every Satyrday,
or ride a bicycle to work, that my opinion is somehow worthless?
Feh. Let's just say that I ride quite a bit, sometimes near, some-
times far.
And what difference does it make how far I ride at a stretch, or
how often I ride at all? Would that make me any less worthy to
make the observations I've made? I'm not going to be drawn into a
pointless my-dick-is-bigger-than-your-dick one-upmanship thing over
whose opinions carry more weight as a function of who rides more
miles. That's juvenile.
------
>There are many different kinds of cyclists. Some of them do not
>follow the law, the ride against traffic, the ydo not signal, the ride
>on sidewalks and across crosswalks.
Und zey will be exshturminatedt!
------
There is another kind of cyclist. That cyclist rides with traffic,
follows the rules of the road, wears protective helmets (he feels safer) ,
^^^^^^^
He's a wimp who lacks confidence in his own ability to stay out
of trouble on what is essentially a glorified child's toy.
------
>the proper clothing (tights) for the type of riding,
I didn't know that those fruitcake tight pants you guys wore
were "proper"; I hope the Lifestyle Police don't come after me
one of these days! Cutoffs and OP-type shorts have always worked
just fine for me, and they have the added advantage of not making
me look like a refugee from a ballet school.
------
>uses mirrors ( to see traffic better),
(to look like a doofus) Whatever happened to *turning your head*
to check for traffic? Not high-tech or trendy enough?
I think the idea of having little mirrors on a goddam crash helmet
(on a *bicycle,* yet!) is probably the biggest case of dickheaded
tech-gratia-techis whiz-bang ]<ool-toy overkill that I've heard of
in about twelve days. Do you also have a Cray XM-P to operate your
garage door opener? How about a Connection Machine with individual
heat and moisture sensors wired to the 65,536 parallel processors to
monitor the exact degree of crunchiness on your toast at a sub-micron
level? I mean, the possibilities are fucking ENDLESS.
This once again is a case of fucking in a hammock to prove you're
studly enough to do things the hard way. Pardon me while I get
an albino Samoan dwarf to fellate me while I motor in a borrowed
Benz.
------
>signals his intentions through hand signals or by deliberate actions, and
>acts like a car.
No problem with that, except that some riders take this "act like
a car" thing way too far. Bikes don't belong out in the street
mingling with automobile traffic, because of the speed differential
between the two types of vehicles, and because of the serious con-
sequences in any car-bike collision. That's why I don't use left
turn lanes on a bike, or ride out in the middle of a lane on a city
street.
------
>Was this a flame? No.
My ass. :^}
What was it you said?
"It isn't what you meant that counts. Its what you wrote."
------
>Geoff is entitled to speak his opinions.
That's mighty white of you. :^}
------
>He said a few things I have *never* heard out of an experienced cyclist.
>That is what I answered.
Well, guess what? Never say never, Donn. Because sooner or
later, reality will bite you on the ass. I really hate to burst
your bubble, but there *are* experienced cyclists like me who
are well-rounded enough to see the Big Picture and not just look
at things from the perspective of a self-righteous, candy-assed,
tight-pants-and-silly-little-helmet-wearing trendoid eco-twit.
I'm not saying that *you're* one of those people, necessarily; after
all, I don't know you. But if the shoe fits, I'd be happy to lend
you my shoehorn.
------
>I was reminded of a bigot's statement of, "I dont mind (women, blacks, gays)
>as long as they don't get too uppity and start demanding thier rights."
I've got no problem with people having rights, as long as they're
equally eager to shoulder the burden of responsibility that goes
along with them. And your use of the loaded term "bigot" is a bit
much, don't you think? Let us pause while I shoot down your rhet-
orical device with a conceptual Stinger missile.
------
>"It isn't what you meant that counts. Its what you wrote."
I stand by my words.
Geoff
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller + + + + + + + + Sun Microsystems
geo...@purplehaze.EBay.sun.com + + + + + + + + Milpitas, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Tom Suit
> In article <67...@male.EBay.Sun.COM>, geo...@purplehaze.EBay.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller) writes:
> > I'm an empiricist; I call 'em as I see 'em. My pointing out
Pointing out reality to any special interest group that has
conflicting views to that reality usually results in shrieks
of "bigotry" or "discrimination" or "racism" or "censorship"
ad nauseum. Natural selection is a very discriminating process.
The laws of physics don't accomodate any kind of "rights", and
ignoring the laws of physics often results in natural selection
being demonstrated.
> > Satisfying to me, of course; I'm a confirmed social Darwinist I
> > find it immensely satisfying when any dumb-genes are given the bum's
> > rush. In fact, I like it so much that I'm sporting the Mother Of All
> > Hard-Ons just sitting here thinking about it.
If only it happened more often! Those "dumb-genes" invariably end
up driving insurance rates skyward for the rest of us.
> > Und zey will be exshturminatedt!
Zealots rarely seem to recognize sarcastic humor when it slaps
them in the face.
> > studly enough to do things the hard way. Pardon me while I get
> > an albino Samoan dwarf to fellate me while I motor in a borrowed
> > Benz.
Nothing like using an extreme to make a point...
> > That's mighty white of you. :^}
Geoff, didn't you know that whites are forbidden from making
ANY kind of racial joke?
> > at things from the perspective of a self-righteous, candy-assed,
> > tight-pants-and-silly-little-helmet-wearing trendoid eco-twit.
What happened to "bunny-hugging"?
> I've read this group long enough to know that Miller isn't uninformed
> about the technical aspects of rec.autos. However, I liked it much
> better when he stuck to those. This is truly a display of one of the
> most rude, offensive, bigotted, and audacious flames I've ever seen.
> That's too bad.
Rude? Well it certainly doesn't try to gloss over any ugly truths.
Offensive? Certainly to those on the receiving end of it.
Bigotted? Well, if you call "Hey, that's not MY point of view!"
bigotted, then absolutely.
All in all, I think it is a work of art bordering on creative
genius. Geoff, you get a high-5 from several of us at GMU.
And for those of you who somehow felt that Geoff's article violated
your rights in some way, get some common sense, or exercise your
"right of way" in front of the next 18 wheeler. The former will
probably lead to the latter, depending on the degree of your new
found social consciousness.
-Tom
Donn Pedro
Took it to rec.bicycles where this now belongs. Were talking
about cycling, not autos.
dfp...@uswnvg.UUCP
Ben Sloan
> I'm an empiricist; I call 'em as I see 'em. My pointing out
...
> Satisfying to me, of course; I'm a confirmed social Darwinist I
> find it immensely satisfying when any dumb-genes are given the bum's
> rush. In fact, I like it so much that I'm sporting the Mother Of All
> Hard-Ons just sitting here thinking about it.
...
> Und zey will be exshturminatedt!
...
> I didn't know that those fruitcake tight pants you guys wore
> were "proper"; I hope the Lifestyle Police don't come after me
.....
> studly enough to do things the hard way. Pardon me while I get
> an albino Samoan dwarf to fellate me while I motor in a borrowed
> Benz.
...
> That's mighty white of you. :^}
...
> at things from the perspective of a self-righteous, candy-assed,
> tight-pants-and-silly-little-helmet-wearing trendoid eco-twit.
...
> along with them. And your use of the loaded term "bigot" is a bit
> much, don't you think? Let us pause while I shoot down your rhet-
I've read this group long enough to know that Miller isn't uninformed
about the technical aspects of rec.autos. However, I liked it much
better when he stuck to those. This is truly a display of one of the
most rude, offensive, bigotted, and audacious flames I've ever seen.
That's too bad.
Ben Sloan
b...@emx.utexas.edu
K. M. Sandberg
>...
>I don't have any problems sharing the road with bicycles. The roads here
>are very wide and besides that, there aren't too many cyclists around.
>No, I don't recall *ever* honking at any bicycle. And *some* of you
>cyclists better grow up and stop thinking "I [motorist] pay more taxes,
>so it really *is* my road,". TODAY, I want to ask all the smartass(es)
>(only those who have continuously argued/implied that motorists *suck*)
>a few questions...
>
> i) how much public liability & property damage insurance does your
> bicycle have? (Don't give me any crap that because you don't
> have a motor, you don't need any insurance. I know that.)
> ii) how much personal liability insurance do you have?
> iii) who do you expect to pay for the damages if an accident occurs?
> iv) whose insurance is going to pay for your stay in the hospital?
> v) whose insurance is going to pay for my vehicle damage?
> vi) whose insurance rate is going to go up *even* if it is *not* my fault?
> vii) do you know how much does the auto insurance cost?
These questions have NOTHING to do with who uses the road nor who
pays for the roads. Everyone pays and uses the roads either
directly or indirectly and insurance does not affect that and
is just a bogus excuse to try and claim that you have more of a
right to use the road.
>When the day comes when you (cyclist) are required to have *sufficient*
>insurance coverage, you are welcomed to *honk* me whenever you feel
>right. You are also welcomed to overtake me from the left (faster) lane,
>and you are also welcomed to ride in the middle of the road if you want.
>When that day comes, it will be a fair game for all of us on the road.
>As of right now, when other motorist *honk* you, you better accept is as
>a courteous signal to let you know to be extra cautious (ie. don't give
>any surprises, and nobody is going to get hurt). When you get one of the
>long *honk*, just accept it like how other grown-ups accept life. There
>are many things in life that you will not like; this might be one of them.
Have you bothered to READ and UNDERSTAND what you are saying?
If you have insurance then you have the right to honk at someone?
and you can do all sorts of other things? Please do a reality check.
>...
>Wait, there's more... Gasoline tax? Those miserable dollars? Heck,
>I'm not even worried about it. I pay over 20 times more on insurance
>dollars than on the gasoline tax. If we meet by accident, my *insurance*
>is going to go up even further, and you're going to have to explain that
>to the court in a civil lawsuit. As for now, you better get the gasoline
>tax thing out of your system. (I read rec.bicycles also.)
In case you have not checked, insurance is to cover any actions that
may occur so that you do not have to pay the full amount yourself
or to protect against someone else who does not have the money,
either from insurance or assets. In California insurance is NOT
required, you do have a choice and what must be shown is that you
have the ability to pay a certain amount if you cause damage
to someone's property or their body. If you want to post a bond
you can legally drive without insurance.
>Well, I told you earlier and I'm going to tell you again -- I don't have
>anything against cyclists, and I don't have any problem sharing the road
>with *anybody*. Just act responsible and follow all the rules & regulations
>of the road like how others have too. (Of course, this is *NOT* a
>blanket statement because there are also many good and courteous cyclists
>out there too. Sorry if some of you feel targeted. I'm only going
>after those that doesn't have any common sense and blame everything
>on the motorists.)
You might want to use some common sense yourself. You use the arguement
that because you pay a company money so that you will not have to
come up with the money should an accident happen, which has nothing
to do with paying for the roads or anything else, that you have
more of a right to use that road and do it in any way you like.
Cyclists ARE following the rules with regard to insurance and they
should also follow the other rules, but even if they fail to do so,
nobody has the right to inflict harm to them, nor do they have the
right to harm others.
>...
>If any *cyclist* wants to follow-up my article, you better answer all the
>seven questions above WITHOUT lying. (Motorists following-up don't have to
>answer the insurance questions.)
If it were not for the fact that your article sounds serious, I would
have thought it was a joke. What a defense, answer silly questions
or don't respond unless you drive a car. Well, although I sometimes
ride a bike, I would not consider myself a cyclist at all, and I
do normally drive, but I still think your arguments are completely
without merit. It is really not a "them" vs. "us", since many people
ride a bike at sometime and would like to be safe doing so.
Kemasa.
--
The best defense is insanity.
e-mail address: sand...@ipla01.hac.com