Yet ANOTHER Anti-cycling Editorial
Tom Ruta
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/stories/990810/2706069.html
Tom
p.s. She does have a point about cycle couriers, though.
They are truly a menace to everyone and themselves.
Avery Burdett
Apart from tarring all cyclists with the same brush, I thought it was a
pretty reasonable commentary, Tom. Did I miss something?
--
Avery Burdett
Ottawa, Ontario
Dick Durbin
ru...@cadvision.com wrote:
> From Calgary's favorite MENSA daughter...
>
> http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/stories/990810/2706069.html
Seemed pretty reasonable to me.
--
Dick Durbin
Tallahassee, FL
www.tfn.net/~ddurbin
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Jessica L. Mosher
Ranting nature aside, she does demonstrate one point that I think few
cyclists think about. When you break the law in front of a driver, they
want you off the road. When it happens repeatedly, they get inspired to
write an editorial such as this. And perhaps later on, they'll write
their legislative representatives.
That's if you're lucky enough to get a sane, mature person. The others
just get mad and take it out on the next cyclist they see (maybe me
commuting on Monday morning...).
I'm not saying I don't break the law. I do run stop signs, when there's
noone around to see me doing it. What really gets me mad is hammering
on a group ride, a bunch of riders run a stop sign, then are cheap
enough to use my stopping and putting a foot down momentarily for the
driver to drop me. <sarcasm> Wow, what animals they've proven themselves
to be. =-P </sarcasm>
--
Jessica L. Mosher UniKix Technologies
j.mo...@unikix.com
"At the end of the day, it is our actions, not our beliefs, that define
who we are and what we are." --Unknown
Jack Dingler
I just read your editorial. It makes perfect sense to me. I've found
that people cycle the way they drive. Conscientious drivers make
conscientious cyclists, dangerous drivers make dangerous cyclists.
Still over all, I'd rather see the law breaking occurring with cyclists
at fault. Overwhelmingly, they're only risking their own lives. When
motorists behave in this fashion, they're capable of taking many more
people with them.
I'm in Texas, where as I understand it, our fatality rates are similar
to yours. According to some close friends in Edmonton, the drivers in
your area drive like we do. Currently in the US, we ~42,000 fatalities
a year, caused exclusively by motor vehicle operators doing dumb
things. In my area, red light running accounts for the bulk of fatality
accidents. Next is running stop signs, followed by driving too fast for
conditions.
As motorists, we become blind after a while even to our own actions.
Because of grass fires, we have laws against throwing cigarette butts
out of the window. I've ridden with a number of people, who I've heard
go on at length about how stupid it is to do that, then flick a lit
cigarette out of the window. My own mother got extremely irate when I
pointed this out to her and denies to this day that she did that. I've
also ridden with people who've run several stops signs in a row and then
argue that they didn't. Speeding is now considered a right in my area.
Some people get irate anytime conditions force them to drive slower than
the speed limit. One woman totaled two vehicles in front of my house.
When the officer asked why she didn't stop at the two-way stop sign, she
responded, "I thought it was a four way stop." She had no drivers
license or insurance. In front of the stop sign, there are gouges in
the pavement caused by vehicles running the sign while exceeding the
speed limit. It's achurch zone, so maybe they think they're protected
by God.
When I read rants like yours, I can't help but think that the writer is
blind to carnage improperly operated motor vehicles cause on a daily
basis. I also find it hard to believe that the writer doesn't see the
continuous litany of traffic offences committed by motor vehicle
operators. If they do see these offences then I don't understand why
the writer believes these crimes are righteous.
I'm sure you're aware that motor vehicle accidents are one of the
leading causes of death in North America. I'm sure you're also aware
that they are the 'leading' cause of death in children 14 and under.
Knowing that you must know this, why don't you write about the need for
better enforcement of traffic laws for all users and for stricter
license requirements and education? Why concentrate your tremendous
energy on what is actually no more than a minor annoyance to you?
Jack Dingler
Pete
Jack Dingler <jdin...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:37B06277...@texas.net...
> I've
> also ridden with people who've run several stops signs in a row and then
>
> argue that they didn't.
Talking to my neighbor about this, she said that she *does not* run stop
signs. I pointed out to her that she runs at least one stop sign at least
once or twice a day, every day.
We live on a 100 yard long cul de sac, with a stop sign at the end. "There
isn't a stop sign there". "Uhhh...yes there is." She had to actually go out
and look.
She has lived on this street for 9 years. About 4000 passes by this sign.
Pete
she still doesn't stop at it.
Eleanor MacMaster
I must confess that I cringe when I see the reckless and
inconsiderate (not to mention illegal) behaviour of some cyclists
-- and couriers are the worst offenders. I cringe becuae
I don't want to be seen as belonging to that group. But I
also fear that the more of this kind of riding that goes on,
the bigger is the chance that ever-more restrictive laws will
be passed against cyclists.
It is certainly true that cab drivers are every bit as bad
as couriers, we are in a minority, so have more to fear from
the loose cannons in our midst than do motorists.
--
"Biker Chick"
Avery Burdett
Tom Ruta (ru...@cadvision.com) writes:
> ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Avery Burdett) wrote:
>
>>> http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/stories/990810/2706069.html
>>>
>
>>Apart from tarring all cyclists with the same brush, I thought it was a
>>pretty reasonable commentary, Tom. Did I miss something?
>
> share the busy main roads with cars. (They can use the bike
> paths or the side streets; I'm not suggesting they be banned
> from the centre of the city, just that they be put in their
> place. ) "
>
Where it concerns the "cyclists" she describes, I agree with her first
sentence, thus my comment about tarring us all with the same brush. Those she
describes are our enemies too. They haven't earned the right to be called
cyclists in the sense that you and I are called cyclists.
> AFAIK, "their Place" - is on the road. Isn't it?
No. Their place is back in the classroom learning that with
rights comes responsibilities.
> Another is the allusion to "its okay to run down cyclists if
> they piss you off - you'll get a short sentence".
>
> I swear the dog days of August is when these journalistic
> hacks pull out the old dogma and publish it.
>
> Tom
>
> "A child's first car is his bike" - RightRiders ca. 1988
Avery Burdett
>>> From Calgary's favorite MENSA daughter...
>>>
>>> http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/stories/990810/2706069.html
>
> summarily cleared from the main streets maintained for the
> use and convenience of cars and public transit. "
Tom, I think she was referring to the cyclists who were writing to her.
Here's the full quote:
But after a week of being subjected to letters containing language
better suited to a wharf and to the kind of road rage one usually sees
behind the wheel of a souped-up pickup, cyclists have proven to me
that I am right: they need to be summarily cleared from the main ......
[Geez, Tom you are starting to make me look moderate :-)]
>
> Last time I checked d the code in Alberta we had the right
> to the roads as much as anyone else.
Mitch Haley
> I'm not saying I don't break the law. I do run stop signs, when there's
> noone around to see me doing it. What really gets me mad is hammering
> on a group ride, a bunch of riders run a stop sign, then are cheap
> enough to use my stopping and putting a foot down momentarily for the
> driver to drop me. <sarcasm> Wow, what animals they've proven themselves
> to be. =-P </sarcasm>
Or better yet, when you are leading the paceline and somebody calls
out "4-way stop" and then chews you out because you stopped for
the car that got there first. Last time I rode with that club.
Mitch.
Dorai Sitaram
Avery Burdett <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>
>Tom Ruta (ru...@cadvision.com) writes:
>> ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Avery Burdett) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Tom Ruta (ru...@cadvision.com) writes:
>>>> From Calgary's favorite MENSA daughter...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/stories/990810/2706069.html
>>
>Here's the full quote:
>
> But after a week of being subjected to letters containing language
> better suited to a wharf and to the kind of road rage one usually sees
> behind the wheel of a souped-up pickup, cyclists have proven to me
> that I am right: they need to be summarily cleared from the main ......
The sentence as it stands suggests that it is the
cyclists who were subjected to a week's worth of horrid
letters and road rage. :->
--d
Lewis Johnson
> From Calgary's favorite MENSA daughter...
>
> http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/stories/990810/2706069.html
I read it and I sympathize with many of the things she observed. No, not the
running over bicyclists part, but I am embarassed to be seen as a cyclist
just like the ones who run the stop signs and ride against traffic.
I think that we may be seeing some evidence of the problems that occur when
you distill bicycle safety down to "Wear your helment".
I find special irony in the gentleman who I occassionally see on the way
home who routinely comes off the sidewalk into the intersection crossing
against the red light while wearing a helment. Once when we met at the light
(he stopped for traffic) he mentioned to me how dangerous it was for me
riding in the street with no helment.
I like-wise have no sympathy for the LBS employee today who told me of
getting a ticket for riding just 3 blocks in his neighborhood at night
without lights, I imagine he did have his helment though.
I routinely see helmented riders on bicycles without a proper fit, or no
lights in the evening, or riding against traffic, or jumping to the sidewalk
to avoid a redlight, or cutting through parking lots.
I would have no problem with much more vigerous enforcement of the traffic
laws for all vehicles. Maybe a special tax on helments to fund this! ;)
Darren
wrong side of the road, riding on sidewalks (unless of course they are for
bikes also), running red lights and stop signs etc...
I will not defend these morons. However I wish that people would not just bunch
all bike riders together.
Darren
Jym Dyer
> the road. When it happens repeatedly, they get inspired to
> write an editorial such as this.
=o= Other drivers constantly break the law in front of drivers.
Why are such editorials against drivers so rare?
> That's if you're lucky enough to get a sane, mature person.
=o= Quite a few of these commentators write about KILLING US
WITH THEIR CARS. That's neither sane nor mature.
<_JyM_>
Jym Dyer
> red light running, speeding in residential areas, etc.
=o= Yes, but none of them are aimed at drivers as a group,
whereas the editorials against cyclists tend to take that
form.
=o= I believe that this is simply the well-known dynamic
of an entitled majority making sweeping and negative
generalizations about a majority.
<_Jym_>
ken...@nojunk.rahul.net-
>=o= Other drivers constantly break the law in front of drivers.
I see lots of editorials about auto road rage, drunk driving, red light
running, speeding in residential areas, etc. I wish there were more.
>=o= Quite a few of these commentators write about KILLING US
>WITH THEIR CARS. That's neither sane nor mature.
I agree that these statements (joking or not) are extremely offensive
and immature.
--
Ken Lee, http://www.rahul.net/kenton/
Doug Huffman
road. This specifically includes motor vehicle drivers.
I am sorry that no Police Departments can afford to vigorously enforce ALL
traffic control devices.
Jessica L. Mosher wrote in message <37B05C0C...@unikix.com><snipped>
Mitch Haley
> We live on a 100 yard long cul de sac, with a stop sign at the end. "There
> isn't a stop sign there". "Uhhh...yes there is." She had to actually go out
> and look.
>
> She has lived on this street for 9 years. About 4000 passes by this sign.
>
> Pete
> she still doesn't stop at it.
Let me guess, is her vehicle classified as a "truck" by the EPA?
Around here, a lot of drivers buy trucks so they can "feel safe"
while driving in an unacceptably dangerous manner. We find them
parked on their roofs next to the freeway whenever it snows.
Mitch.
Pete
Mitch Haley <rw...@spam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7orqhp$k...@newsops.execpc.com...
>
> Let me guess, is her vehicle classified as a "truck" by the EPA?
>
Almost. A mid 90's Taurus wagon.
> Around here, a lot of drivers buy trucks so they can "feel safe"
> while driving in an unacceptably dangerous manner. We find them
> parked on their roofs next to the freeway whenever it snows.
Drive any car like a fool, and you will have unpleasant results.
Pete
Purdy
wrote:
>We live on a 100 yard long cul de sac, with a stop sign at the end. "There
>isn't a stop sign there". "Uhhh...yes there is." She had to actually go out
>and look.
>
>She has lived on this street for 9 years. About 4000 passes by this sign.
>
>Pete
>she still doesn't stop at it.
Once you start ignoring a sign or a law, it gets to be habit, and then
you don't know you are doing it at all. Cyclists blowing stop signs
can distract drivers and the distraction can create an accident. When
a cyclist loaded with well-learned bad habits gets behind the wheel of
a car, do they suddenly transform from bad cyclist to good driver?
The article stereotypes all bike riders from the actions of a few.
When I'm riding and a bad driver almost hits me, my first tendancy is
to be less courteous to the next driver. This tends to create more
problems and ultimately leads to articles such as the one under
discussion.
The real focus should be keeping cool, riding/driving carefully and
trying to leave people a little happier that they shared our road.
bodhi...@my-deja.com
was warranted. Banning cyclists from the roads isn't the solution;
educating them and enforcing the traffic laws equally for cyclists and
motorists would seem more equitable to me.
ken...@nojunk.rahul.net-
>She had some very good points, but I don't think that her conclusion
>was warranted. Banning cyclists from the roads isn't the solution;
>educating them and enforcing the traffic laws equally for cyclists and
>motorists would seem more equitable to me.
Also, make roads safer for bicyclists so they are encouraged to follow the law.
V. Aebli
So some cyclists blow stop lights and ride against traffic because the
roads are unsafe? How wide does a lane have to be to encourage a cyclist
to stop at a red light?
Verne - having had enough of this "not my fault" mentality
--
Al Raden
> She had some very good points, but I don't think that her conclusion
> was warranted. Banning cyclists from the roads isn't the solution;
> educating them and enforcing the traffic laws equally for cyclists and
> motorists would seem more equitable to me.
They are enforced equally - in most cases they're not enforced for either
motorists or cyclists.
I'm also coming to the conclusion that some cyclists are not educatable.
Most of the bike lanes in our area have graphics of a bike and large
arrows indicating the direction of the lane. I still constantly encounter
people riding the wrong way. You think they'd figure out what the arrows
mean, but no...
- al
Joshua_Putnam
>Al Raden <alra...@ibm.net> wrote:
>...
>>I'm also coming to the conclusion that some cyclists are not educatable.
>>Most of the bike lanes in our area have graphics of a bike and large
>>arrows indicating the direction of the lane. I still constantly encounter
>>people riding the wrong way. You think they'd figure out what the arrows
>>mean, but no...
>They are if the fines are high enough. Amazing what a bit
>of money can do...
Existing fines are adequate, what's missing is enforcement. A
fine that's never levied has little value -- when's the last time
you saw someone actually get one of those thousand dollar fines
for littering?
--
Jo...@WolfeNet.com is Joshua Putnam / P.O. Box 13220 / Burton, WA 98013
http://www.wolfenet.com/~josh/
Avery Burdett
Tom Ruta (ru...@cadvision.com) writes:
> jo...@WOLFENET.COM (Joshua_Putnam) wrote:
>
> ...
>>Existing fines are adequate, what's missing is enforcement. A
>>fine that's never levied has little value -- when's the last time
>>you saw someone actually get one of those thousand dollar fines
>>for littering?
>
> courier who whipped off a sidewalk onto the wrong way on a
> one way street. I assume they got a citation. One of about
> a million bike related violations I saw yesterday (and then
> there's the cars..)
When a cyclist gets killed, the cause needs to be reported accurately in
the media. Typically, such deaths are related to cyclist error or cyclist
inability to mitigate the errors of others, but are blamed on other factors -
cars, barehead, etc.
Public perception needs to be changed from "cycling is dangerous therefore
stick a helmet on cyclists and put them in bike lanes and on bike paths
(sidewalks)" to "cycling is very safe, except when cyclists fail to operate
their bicycles as drivers of vehicles" (tm Forester).
If it could be instilled in the public's mind that poor riding habits are
directly related to massively higher risk of injury or death, maybe a lot
of the improper behaviour would go away.
But at the moment we have the one-note-helmet-johnnies setting the agenda,
and a reason why focussing on helmets indirectly costs the lives of
cyclists.
Tullio
> Yesterday walking to work I saw the police pull over a bike
> courier who whipped off a sidewalk onto the wrong way on a
> one way street. I assume they got a citation. One of about
> a million bike related violations I saw yesterday (and then
> there's the cars..)
Watch a four-way stop intersection some time and count how many cars a)
come to a complete stop; b) signal properly; and c) can figure out whose
turn it is.
If people can't follow traffic laws when they are driving what makes
anyone think that they can follow them on a bike?
Todd Kuzma
Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery
LaSalle, IL
e-mail: tul...@TheRamp.net
Raleigh-Schwinn-Specialized
Bianchi-Waterford-Torelli-GT/Dyno
Burley-Co-Motion
David Balfoort
the cyclists actions. Not a very reliable source.
David
Tom Ruta wrote:
>
> MOre often then not around here the papers report both the
> helmet status and the cyclists actions. I will say that the
> helmet thing gets slightly higher status in the reports.
Pete
Tom Ruta <ru...@cadvision.com> wrote in message
news:390e1360.2086919271@news.supernews.com...
> ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Avery Burdett) wrote:
>
> ...
> >When a cyclist gets killed, the cause needs to be reported accurately in
> >the media. Typically, such deaths are related to cyclist error or cyclist
> >inability to mitigate the errors of others, but are blamed on other
factors -
> >cars, barehead, etc.
> >
>
> helmet status and the cyclists actions. I will say that the
> helmet thing gets slightly higher status in the reports.
We had a child get injured recently in a neighboring town.
Cause of injury: "She was not wearing a helmet."
Not because "She ran the stop sign" (she did).
Pete
Tom Kunich
news:390e1360.2086919271@news.supernews.com...
> ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Avery Burdett) wrote:
>
> >When a cyclist gets killed, the cause needs to be reported accurately in
> >the media. Typically, such deaths are related to cyclist error or cyclist
> >inability to mitigate the errors of others, but are blamed on other
factors -
> >cars, barehead, etc.
>
> MOre often then not around here the papers report both the
> helmet status and the cyclists actions. I will say that the
> helmet thing gets slightly higher status in the reports.
I cannot remember when an incident was reported where the helmet status
wasn't reported but MOST of the time the facts in the case are not reported
or inaccurately reported.
Last year while riding from Fremont to Monterey we passed a police group in
San Jose picking up a dead cyclist who apparently darted from the sidewalk
out into the street and was struck but a right turning car. Nothing at all
in the newspapers. Doubt it made the TV news.
jon_w...@my-deja.com
ru...@cadvision.com wrote:
> From Calgary's favorite MENSA daughter...
>
> http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/stories/990810/2706069.html
>
>
> p.s. She does have a point about cycle couriers, though.
> They are truly a menace to everyone and themselves.
From the article---
While stopped at a red light with the right-hand signal flashing, one
bicycle sneaks up on the right, between me and the curb; another sneaks
up on the left and rests on the front fender before making a right turn
in front of me. The other, the one whose death wish is greater, because I
can't see him and can't believe anyone would be that stupid, waits for
the light to turn green and pedals straight through the intersection. I
don't hit him, because I'm young enough to have good reflexes.
----------
Both of these manuvers are legal where I live in California.
Jon
Tom Kunich
news:37B30F...@TheRamp.net...
> Tom Ruta wrote:
>
> > Yesterday walking to work I saw the police pull over a bike
> > courier who whipped off a sidewalk onto the wrong way on a
> > one way street. I assume they got a citation. One of about
> > a million bike related violations I saw yesterday (and then
> > there's the cars..)
>
> Watch a four-way stop intersection some time and count how many cars a)
> come to a complete stop; b) signal properly; and c) can figure out whose
> turn it is.
Those who have been here for awhile might remember that I did this little
experiment and came up with 2% of the cars coming to a legal stop. Not a
much higher percentage for trucks and that day EVERY SINGLE BUS ran the stop
signs. Though later in the day I've watched the buses stopping correctly.
Perhaps 1/2 of the cars barely slowed while running the stop signs. I really
don't want to hear from people claiming that their right-of-way is being
stolen by some cyclist. A car running stop signs can kill people. A cyclist
threatens just himself.
Jym Dyer
> They are truly a menace to everyone and themselves.
=o= Not according to studies conducted in Canada. Their
accident rate is no higher than anyone else's; the damage
they do is (surprise, surprise) much less than what cars
do routinely.
<_Jym_>
Mitch Haley
> Around here police officers usually do a bit of forensic
> work on an accident site. I consider that reliable.
I assume fatalities generally involve competent analysis.
Around here, fatality scenes are closed down and there
are several cops on the scene to investigate.
Lesser accidents will depend on the competency/caring of
one particular cop. I know of an accident in which a motorcycle
hit a truck in the rear wheel, tore a hole in the truck's rear tire.
Was rather obvious with the truck resting on the rim.
The accident report included a diagram clearly showing the cycle
striking the front bumper of the truck. Made me doubt that
particular deputy's forensic skills.
Mitch.
Avery Burdett
(jon_w...@my-deja.com) writes:
.......
>
> From the article---
>
> While stopped at a red light with the right-hand signal flashing, one
> bicycle sneaks up on the right, between me and the curb; another sneaks
> up on the left and rests on the front fender before making a right turn
> in front of me. The other, the one whose death wish is greater, because I
> can't see him and can't believe anyone would be that stupid, waits for
> the light to turn green and pedals straight through the intersection. I
> don't hit him, because I'm young enough to have good reflexes.
>
> ----------
>
> Both of these manuvers are legal where I live in California.
>
There are lots of manoeuvres which are legal but which are not too
smart. Both of the ones described above are both illegal in Ontario and
plain dumb everywhere.
Avery Burdett
That's one measure but since couriers generally have pretty good
bike handling skills, they ought not to have the same poor record as
everyone else. They are a menace because their poor behaviour is so
visible, and the general public doesn't distinguish between couriers and
other cyclists.
As I said earlier, we all get tarred with the same brush.
Citing poor motorist behaviour as an excuse, is the same as saying "we
should all come down to that level".
For a change, let's admire good drivers regardless of the type of vehicles
they drive. The knee-jerk defence of poor behaviour because it's a cyclist
doesn't do responsible cyclists any good.
J Rappe
>
>That's one measure but since couriers generally have pretty good
>bike handling skills, they ought not to have the same poor record as
>everyone else. They are a menace because their poor behaviour is so
>visible, and the general public doesn't distinguish between couriers and
>other cyclists.
This is utter horseshit. I was a courier for years and never had one
collision. I do not feel any responsibilty to mold peoples opinions
about cycling by riding in a particular fashion, if for no other reason
than the riding style that without a doubt infuriates motorists
the worst is riding correctly and legally. There is nothing that
pisses drivers off more than riding in a lane of traffic
such that they can't illegally pass. By your logic, legal riders
are a menace because irritate motorists and promote road rage.
--
-john Finally the day came when I did desperately want a job.
jrappe@ I needed it. Not having another minute to lose,
bigfoot. I decided that I would take the last job on earth,
com that of messenger boy. -- Henry Miller
Avery Burdett
J Rappe (nos...@enteract.com) writes:
> Avery Burdett <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>>
>>That's one measure but since couriers generally have pretty good
>>bike handling skills, they ought not to have the same poor record as
>>everyone else. They are a menace because their poor behaviour is so
>>visible, and the general public doesn't distinguish between couriers and
>>other cyclists.
>
> This is utter horseshit. I was a courier for years and never had one
> collision. I do not feel any responsibilty to mold peoples opinions
> about cycling by riding in a particular fashion, if for no other reason
> than the riding style that without a doubt infuriates motorists
> the worst is riding correctly and legally. There is nothing that
> pisses drivers off more than riding in a lane of traffic
> such that they can't illegally pass. By your logic, legal riders
> are a menace because irritate motorists and promote road rage.
No. The logic is that couriers have an inability to ride legally and it's
their illegal behaviour which, as you so elegantly put it, "pisses drivers
off". Just as equally, they "piss off" pedestrians and responsible cyclists.
J Rappe
>
>No. The logic is that couriers have an inability to ride legally and it's
>their illegal behaviour which, as you so elegantly put it, "pisses drivers
>off". Just as equally, they "piss off" pedestrians and responsible cyclists.
Only problem with that is that its wrong, as I pointed out.
John Galt
>
> While stopped at a red light with the right-hand signal flashing, one
> bicycle sneaks up on the right, between me and the curb; another sneaks
> up on the left and rests on the front fender before making a right turn
> in front of me. The other, the one whose death wish is greater, because I
> can't see him and can't believe anyone would be that stupid, waits for
> the light to turn green and pedals straight through the intersection. I
> don't hit him, because I'm young enough to have good reflexes.
What an obviously prejudiced point of view. The bicycles are "sneaking",
even though they aren't doing anything wrong. Young enough to have good
reflexes . . . but is she old enough to be a responsible operator of an
automobile?
--
John Galt
"If we have the potential to create a Utopia,
why do we often resemble a primitive society?"
gal...@starwarp.com http://www.starwarp.com/The_Observatory
All rights reserved Copyright (c) 1998 by John Galt
(Remove NOSPAM from address when sending email)
David Balfoort
>
> Avery Burdett <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
> >
> >No. The logic is that couriers have an inability to ride legally and it's
> >their illegal behaviour which, as you so elegantly put it, "pisses drivers
> >off". Just as equally, they "piss off" pedestrians and responsible cyclists.
>
> Only problem with that is that its wrong, as I pointed out.
Where did you point it out?
David
Purdy
<tku...@diabloresearch.com> wrote:
>A car running stop signs can kill people. A cyclist
>threatens just himself.
While I've no wish to detract from your argument, the last is not
true. This year in Toronto a cyclist ran a light/stop/xwalk (can't
remember) and killed a little old lady. The mother of a woman I work
with had her independent life ended when a sidewalk cyclist put her
into a nursing home. Further, the antics of a bad cyclist can
distract a driver leading to an even more serious accident.
J Rappe
I've spent a lot of time working as a courier in downtown Chicago. During
that time I've never been menaced by any motorists who were so offended
by my cycling that they used their driving as threat to murder me. I've
also spent a lot of time riding on arterial streets. During this time
I've been so menaced more times than I could count. The particular
riding behaivior that seems to enrage motorists is asserting the right
to lane a traffic. It really doesn't matter how little this even
"inconvieniences" them; you can be riding on a four-lane street with
no traffic and the mere presense of a cyclist in the right lane will
some drivers into a fury.
I also don't buy the assertions that couriers are so "visible" that
they have the ability to "tar all cyclists with the same brush."
There are really very few couriers, and they usually work in a very
geographicaly limited area. Most drivers, pedestrians, and "responsible
cyclists," for that matter, rarely encounter them.
I find it somewhat amusing that a guy who is complaining about all
cyclists being painted with the same brush, seems to have no compunc-
tion about painting all couriers with the same brush.
J Rappe
>> From the article---
>>
>> While stopped at a red light with the right-hand signal flashing, one
>> bicycle sneaks up on the right, between me and the curb; another sneaks
>> up on the left and rests on the front fender before making a right turn
>> in front of me. The other, the one whose death wish is greater, because I
>> can't see him and can't believe anyone would be that stupid, waits for
>> the light to turn green and pedals straight through the intersection. I
>> don't hit him, because I'm young enough to have good reflexes.
>
>What an obviously prejudiced point of view. The bicycles are "sneaking",
>even though they aren't doing anything wrong. Young enough to have good
>reflexes . . . but is she old enough to be a responsible operator of an
>automobile?
Really, I find the remarks of someone who advocates the murder of
cyclists so far beneath contempt to be unworthy of comment.
David Balfoort
didn't agree with him. That's hardly surprising given you've worked as
a courier. Avery presents a stronger argument.
David
J Rappe wrote:
> >> Only problem with that is that its wrong, as I pointed out.
> >
> >Where did you point it out?
>
> I've spent a lot of time working as a courier in downtown Chicago.
<Much personal experience and opinion deleted. >
Tom Kunich
Firstly it is the exceptions that prove the rule. YES, it is possible for a
bicyclist to kill a pedestrian but I was talking about occupants of cars was
I not? And what is more likely? A car running a stop sign killing a
pedestrian or a bicyclist doing the same?
As for a "bad cyclist" distracting a driver -- give me a break, drivers are
in control of 3,000 lb.s of steel. If they cannot give sufficient attention
to that task to retain control when someone of no threat to them does
something absurd then they have no business being issued a drivers license.
Purdy
>I've spent a lot of time working as a courier in downtown Chicago. During
>that time I've never been menaced by any motorists who were so offended
>by my cycling that they used their driving as threat to murder me. I've
>also spent a lot of time riding on arterial streets. During this time
>I've been so menaced more times than I could count. The particular
>riding behaivior that seems to enrage motorists is asserting the right
>to lane a traffic. It really doesn't matter how little this even
>"inconvieniences" them; you can be riding on a four-lane street with
>no traffic and the mere presense of a cyclist in the right lane will
>some drivers into a fury.
As an on and off commuter for the past 2 years, I've got probably the
equivalent of 2 months of courier riding experience, largely on
arterials.
Friday afternoons tend to feel bad. Some drivers seem desperate to
shave a few seconds off the trip home, no matter how many lives they
have to risk. I have had other drivers buzz me on an empty 3 lane
arterial where, if it were rush hour, there would be an HOV lane. But
early on a Friday evening maybe they were just drunk and having
trouble staying within the 2 other lanes rather than intentionally
buzzing me.
I've had others come really close, but some drivers seem incapable of
driving in the middle of the road and seem glued to the left or the
right. So I don't know if they intended anything or if it was
ordinary driver incompetence.
Other worse examples could also be explained by drugs or incompetence.
So I can't echo your "sending drivers into a fury" experience while
riding, only while driving, when I of necessity take the whole lane.
When I ride on narrow arterials, I ride within 3 inches of deathtrap
sewer lids and so most automobile drivers can share the lane. When I
ride farther out, to avoid the bumps and potholes on poorly
constructed or maintained roads, then relations get a bit more
"interesting." I feel more comfortable on the road bike with 27x1-1/4
tires for bouncing around within a 6 inch wide strip of street next to
those deathtrap sewers which shadow me from the inebriated and the
inattentive. Funny, when I was beginning to ride, that sort of
assertion would have scared the daylights out of me,
>I also don't buy the assertions that couriers are so "visible" that
>they have the ability to "tar all cyclists with the same brush."
>There are really very few couriers, and they usually work in a very
>geographicaly limited area. Most drivers, pedestrians, and "responsible
>cyclists," for that matter, rarely encounter them.
In Toronto you can't go downtown without encountering them.
>I find it somewhat amusing that a guy who is complaining about all
>cyclists being painted with the same brush, seems to have no compunc-
>tion about painting all couriers with the same brush.
Yeah, it's so easy to do. I've done the same for cyclists, drivers and
couriers, and countless other groups. But I guess that just proves how
important it is NOT to set an example that encourages people to do it.
Avery Burdett
Tom Ruta (ru...@cadvision.com) writes:
> nos...@enteract.com (J Rappe) wrote:
>
> ...
>>I also don't buy the assertions that couriers are so "visible" that
>>they have the ability to "tar all cyclists with the same brush."
>>There are really very few couriers, and they usually work in a very
>>geographicaly limited area. Most drivers, pedestrians, and "responsible
>>cyclists," for that matter, rarely encounter them.
>>
>
> are recognizable and by far the greatest threat to all
> decent cyclists.
Same here. They are concentrated in business areas of urban centres.
Exactly where commuters, cyclists, motorists and pedestrians see their
misbehaviour.
Part of the problem is the economic incentive to break the law. Same as
taxi drivers. Although I don't agree with their methods, they do a hell of
a good job getting stuff delivered quickly.
>
>>I find it somewhat amusing that a guy who is complaining about all
>>cyclists being painted with the same brush, seems to have no compunc-
>>tion about painting all couriers with the same brush.
>
> I see literally DOZENS of couriers a day in downtown and
> almost without exception the only time I see one close to
> obeying the law is if the police are right on their courier
> bag.
>
> Tom
>
> "A child's first car is his bike" - RightRiders ca. 1988
Purdy
Ever notice how driver accidents happen in series on the highway?
Next driver looks at first accident, turns to exclaim how awful it was
and smashes into the car in front. From what you say, all secondary
accidents should result in people losing their licenses.
Larry Schuldt
>Avery Burdett <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>>
>>No. The logic is that couriers have an inability to ride legally and it's
>>their illegal behaviour which, as you so elegantly put it, "pisses drivers
>>off". Just as equally, they "piss off" pedestrians and responsible cyclists.
>
>Only problem with that is that its wrong, as I pointed out.
Sorry, I don't think it's wrong. I work in downtown Chicago.
As a cyclist, I don't want drivers' image of cyclists to come from the
last courier they saw.
As a pedestrian, I want those idiots off the sidewalks. They're
threatening pedestrians and they're giving one hell of a bad example
to those cyclists who can't handle their bikes as well.
As a driver, I don't want to have to keep looking in directions from
which NO vehicle should be coming in order to watch for couriers. What
makes traffic laws work (IMO) is predictablity. Everyone knows what to
expect of the other guy. Couriers introduce chaos.
larry
John Rappe
>
>Trust me - in the original editorial writer's home, couriers
>are recognizable and by far the greatest threat to all
>decent cyclists.
I certainly don't trust you on this. Actually I find your
implication that couriers are indecent sufficent to disqualify
your opinion from whatever merit, and again, this theory that
drivers hate couriers so much that they save this hatred up
until they can transfer it to "decent" cyclists is simply absurd.
>I see literally DOZENS of couriers a day in downtown and
>almost without exception the only time I see one close to
>obeying the law is if the police are right on their courier
>bag.
Of course people who work in the small area of town where the
couriers work will see them. I didn't say no one sees them.
--
John Rappe
>
>As a cyclist, I don't want drivers' image of cyclists to come from the
>last courier they saw.
So you honestly believe that with a couple hundred less couriers on
the street, in a city the size of Chicago, motorists would suddenly
radically change their driving habits, and start treating cyclists
with respect and care? I rather doubt it.
>As a pedestrian, I want those idiots off the sidewalks.
Absolutely. This is inexcusable.
>As a driver, I don't want to have to keep looking in directions from
>which NO vehicle should be coming in order to watch for couriers. What
>makes traffic laws work (IMO) is predictablity. Everyone knows what to
>expect of the other guy. Couriers introduce chaos.
Couriers can look out for themselves. If you're doing questionable
things that rely on a driver to do something he doesn't expect,
you soon find yourself splattered on the pavement.
John Rappe
>
>I've had others come really close, but some drivers seem incapable of
>driving in the middle of the road and seem glued to the left or the
>right. So I don't know if they intended anything or if it was
>ordinary driver incompetence.
>
>Other worse examples could also be explained by drugs or incompetence.
>So I can't echo your "sending drivers into a fury" experience while
>riding, only while driving, when I of necessity take the whole lane.
Oh, I know driver incompetence is responsible for a lot of this
stuff, but I bet you've all encountered plenty of drivers who were
doing it intentionaly and maliciously. Sometimes they are glad to
let you know, by rolling down their windows and screaming obscenities
at you.
John Rappe
>You didn't point out that Avery was wrong. You pointed out that you
>didn't agree with him. That's hardly surprising given you've worked as
>a courier. Avery presents a stronger argument.
Well, this is of course basically just opinion either way. But as
I said in another reply in this thread, blaming a tiny percentage
of cyclists for the behaivior of motorists in relation to cyclists
generally, is just a bit much.
John Rappe
>As an on and off commuter for the past 2 years, I've got probably the
>equivalent of 2 months of courier riding experience, largely on
>arterials.
Incidentally, riding downtown is a breeze compared to commuting.
John Rappe
>jmr...@excite.com (John Rappe) wrote:
>>
>>So you honestly believe that with a couple hundred less couriers on
>>the street, in a city the size of Chicago, motorists would suddenly
>>radically change their driving habits, and start treating cyclists
>>with respect and care? I rather doubt it.
>>
>
>would cease.
A man can dream.
--
-john Finally the day came when I did desperately want a job.
I needed it. Not having another minute to lose,
I decided that I would take the last job on earth,
Larry Schuldt
>Larry Schuldt <lsch...@mc.net> wrote:
>>
>>As a cyclist, I don't want drivers' image of cyclists to come from the
>>last courier they saw.
>
>So you honestly believe that with a couple hundred less couriers on
>the street, in a city the size of Chicago, motorists would suddenly
>radically change their driving habits, and start treating cyclists
>with respect and care? I rather doubt it.
>
Care to show me where I said that?
>>As a pedestrian, I want those idiots off the sidewalks.
>
>Absolutely. This is inexcusable.
>
And they're on the sidewalks all the time now and it's getting wrose.
>>As a driver, I don't want to have to keep looking in directions from
>>which NO vehicle should be coming in order to watch for couriers. What
>>makes traffic laws work (IMO) is predictablity. Everyone knows what to
>>expect of the other guy. Couriers introduce chaos.
>
>Couriers can look out for themselves. If you're doing questionable
>things that rely on a driver to do something he doesn't expect,
>you soon find yourself splattered on the pavement.
That doesn't make the driver involved feel any better. Thank GOD we
don't have laws that automatically make the driver at fault in
bike-car collisions with these guys around!
larry
PS. Lest you believe I'm a motorhead, I sold my car over a year ago.
Larry Schuldt
wrote:
>
>I don't think I've ever seen a courier who has been on the
>sidewalk.
>
Try walking around the Loop sometime! It won't take long. I took a
walk Wednesday at lunch and counted no less than couriers riding down
the sidewalk.
>...
>>Couriers can look out for themselves. If you're doing questionable
>>things that rely on a driver to do something he doesn't expect,
>>you soon find yourself splattered on the pavement.
>
>Not fair to the innocent (and I use the term loosely)
>driver. Why should I be involved with someone with a death
>wish? If they want to kill themselves, ride off a cliff or
>into some brick wall.
>
>Tom
larry
John Rappe
>On 14 Aug 1999 03:35:00 GMT, jmr...@excite.com (John Rappe) wrote:
>
>>Larry Schuldt <lsch...@mc.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>As a cyclist, I don't want drivers' image of cyclists to come from the
>>>last courier they saw.
>>
>>So you honestly believe that with a couple hundred less couriers on
>>the street, in a city the size of Chicago, motorists would suddenly
>>radically change their driving habits, and start treating cyclists
>>with respect and care? I rather doubt it.
>>
>
>Care to show me where I said that?
Perhaps you didn't. That did seem to be the argument you were joining,
so I hope you'll forgive me if I misconstrued your response.
John Rappe
>OOPS! I meant to say "I've NEVER seen a courier who hasn't
>been on the sidewalk".
It's a bit difficult to argue with someone with omniscient knowledge,
so I think I'll leave it at that.
Larry Schuldt
wrote:
>lsch...@mc.net (Larry Schuldt) wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 14 Aug 1999 12:45:46 GMT, ru...@cadvision.com (Tom Ruta)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I don't think I've ever seen a courier who has been on the
>>>sidewalk.
>>>
>>Try walking around the Loop sometime! It won't take long. I took a
>>walk Wednesday at lunch and counted no less than couriers riding down
>>the sidewalk.
>OOPS! I meant to say "I've NEVER seen a courier who hasn't
>been on the sidewalk".
>
>TOm
That's OK, Tom, I meant to say I counted noless than 6 couriers on the
sidewalk!
Typos happen.
larry
Bill Zaumen
> jmr...@excite.com (John Rappe) wrote:
>
> >...but I bet you've all encountered plenty of drivers who were
> >doing it intentionaly and maliciously. Sometimes they are glad to
> >let you know, by rolling down their windows and screaming obscenities
> >at you.
>
> And if there is any truly aggressive behaviour, you should
> file a "manner of driving" complaint with the police. They
> are obligated to investigate it.
That'll do a lot of good in the present political climate in the U.S.
About 8 years ago, I filed a complaint against a driver who made
three attempts to run me off the road. The driver lived in town,
got a visit from the police, and told the police that I was behind him
and that he thought I was too close (I wasn't) so he slammed on the brakes
three times, stating that he did it too hard the first time. He also
stated that there were too many bicycles in town, that I was speeding,
and that he couldn't outrun me.
I managed to avoid an accident but the DA refused to prosecute
the rat. Apparently using a car as weapon to intimidate others
is perfectly OK as long as the driver doesn't actually hit someone.
Bill
--
As an anti-spam measure, my email address is only provided in a GIF
file. Please see <http://home.pacbell.net/zaumen/email.gif>.
Jack Dingler
Couriers = 0
Infractions = 0
Jack Dingler
Tom Ruta wrote:
> jmr...@excite.com (John Rappe) wrote:
>
> ...
> >It's a bit difficult to argue with someone with omniscient knowledge,
> >so I think I'll leave it at that.
>
> Tell you what - I'll count couriers on the way to work
> tomorrow and note illegal activities. Will post in the AM.
> You do the same, okay?
>
> Tom
Brent Peterson
>
> I've spent a lot of time working as a courier in downtown Chicago. During
> that time I've never been menaced by any motorists who were so offended
> by my cycling that they used their driving as threat to murder me. I've
> also spent a lot of time riding on arterial streets. During this time
> I've been so menaced more times than I could count. The particular
> riding behaivior that seems to enrage motorists is asserting the right
> to lane a traffic. It really doesn't matter how little this even
> "inconvieniences" them; you can be riding on a four-lane street with
> no traffic and the mere presense of a cyclist in the right lane will
> some drivers into a fury.
I have to back up this observation. Riding legally in the
chicago area does get drivers angry. More than once I have
had a driver become enraged. Recently an old man threatened
to run me over with his Ford Crown Victoria because I took the
lane at a stop sign. Even though I was signaling a right turn
this *$&*@!~ tried to blow the stop sign and pass me on the right.
When he couldn't the words ensued. (One lane each way, illegal
to pass 100ft from an intersection on a 2 lane road in IL)
I see people riding on sidewalks, the wrong way etc. They
do not seem to generate any rath from drivers as they remain
fearful. However the safety from drivers not seeing them etc
is very much compromised.
Pete
Today ...
Regular POB's 4
Major Infractions 7
Pete
its not just couriers giving us a bad name
Jack Dingler wrote in message <37B82505...@texas.net>...
John Rappe
>Jack Dingler <jdin...@texas.net> wrote:
>
>>Today...
>...
>>> Tell you what - I'll count couriers on the way to work
>>> tomorrow and note illegal activities. Will post in the AM.
>>> You do the same, okay?
>
>only saw each for 15 or seconds.
>
My count: 8 couriers, 1 infraction (running a red, from a stop,
in the absence of cross-traffic.)
I did see 2 non-couriers on the sidewalk.
Tom Kunich
news:cz5u3.36023$X5.26...@firenze.visi.net...
> I know this is focused on couriers, but...
>
> Today ...
>
> Regular POB's 4
> Major Infractions 7
>
> Pete
> its not just couriers giving us a bad name
And if that wasn't enough. Remember that I sat in a position to watch 9 stop
signs and in 30 minutes over 100 cars, trucks and buses pulled through these
signs. About 120 vehicles -- less than 5 stopped enough to be called legal
and only one vehicle came to an unambiguous stop.
Let's not kid ourselves that cars are somehow more lawful than bicyclists.
S Tyler
pissed if a cyclist creeps up alongside. I can buy that. The cyclist
should not be splitting lanes. However, when the cyclist is to the right
side of the right lane, the cars will squeeze around the cyclist to the
point of having to inch forward slowly so that they don't scratch their
paint job on that nasty old bicycle.
Yesterday, I was being passed by cars while coming to a green light. I had
no choice but to stay to the right. I was intending to go straight through
the light. I had not signaled a turn( a concept lost on many drivers). A
driver from the opposite side of the intersection jumped out to make a left
turn in front of me, risking hitting me head-on. Avoidance of this jerkoff
required FULL pressure on my brakes. If he had done this with a car moving
at the same speed as my bicycle, there would have been a major head-on
accident. This was an unambiguous case of a driver cutting off a legally
operating cyclist. This is ONLY the fifth time that my actions, and my
actions alone have prevented me from being hit by a car, and all five times
I was operating within the law.
Conversely, I cannot count the times that I have seen cyclists breaking the
law while I was both riding nearby in a legal fashion and driving my car.
It goes both ways. The main difference is that a car is a deadly weapon and
a bicycle is merely a toy. (tongue planted firmly in cheek)
Uncheers,
Steve "My bicycles are NOT toys"
Brent Peterson wrote in message <7pa2u8$e9...@nntp.cig.mot.com>...
Cary Weitzman
jmr...@excite.com (John Rappe) wrote:
>>Tom Ruta <ru...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>>My count today? 11 bike couriers - 8 infractions. And I
>>only saw each for 15 or seconds.
>My count: 8 couriers, 1 infraction (running a red, from a stop,
>in the absence of cross-traffic.)
>
>I did see 2 non-couriers on the sidewalk.
Oh geeze, you guys live in Blissville. Where to start...
How about with the the 3 girls in their late teens riding down the sidewalk
at lunch downtown, I catch a bit of the conversation "...that's why I'm
telling you you should learn to ride with no hands. How else are you going
to ride and talk on your cell phone..."
On the ride home: 20 POB, 3 couriers, 14 infractions (running red lights,
going straight from turn only lanes, hopping on and off the sidewalk) from
repeat offenders, mostly POBs, the couriers were well behaved.
Then there was the guy in the small group I was riding from stoplight to
stoplight with. Despite the fact that most of us were riding much faster,
he had to push his way in front of everyone else lined up at the light or
ride around the outside of the cars to get there. Then we'd all be put in
the position of having to pass him when the light changed and we were
moving again or riding uncomfortably slow. Every damned light for blocks.
When I finally asked him what was up, was he was aware that he was
endangering himself and everyone else by doing this, his well considered
and rational response was "fuck you".
A fairly typical ride home.
-Cary (Toronto, Canada, in case you were wondering)
chris mcmahan
Excuse me? Now it's the automobile driver's fault for being distracted
by some idiot on a bicycle doing stupid stuff? And when the car hits
that cyclist as he darts out in front of those 3000 lbs of steel, the
poor automobile driver wil be blamed just as vehemently because he
wasn't paying attention. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Chris McMahan
"Tom Kunich" <tku...@diabloresearch.com> writes:
> Purdy <resi...@home.com> wrote in message news:37b46c83.242971311@news...
> > On Thu, 12 Aug 1999 14:42:49 -0700, "Tom Kunich"
> > <tku...@diabloresearch.com> wrote:
> >
> > >A car running stop signs can kill people. A cyclist
> > >threatens just himself.
> >
> > While I've no wish to detract from your argument, the last is not
> > true. This year in Toronto a cyclist ran a light/stop/xwalk (can't
> > remember) and killed a little old lady. The mother of a woman I work
> > with had her independent life ended when a sidewalk cyclist put her
> > into a nursing home. Further, the antics of a bad cyclist can
> > distract a driver leading to an even more serious accident.
>
> Firstly it is the exceptions that prove the rule. YES, it is possible for a
> bicyclist to kill a pedestrian but I was talking about occupants of cars was
> I not? And what is more likely? A car running a stop sign killing a
> pedestrian or a bicyclist doing the same?
>
> As for a "bad cyclist" distracting a driver -- give me a break, drivers are
> in control of 3,000 lb.s of steel. If they cannot give sufficient attention
> to that task to retain control when someone of no threat to them does
> something absurd then they have no business being issued a drivers license.
--
=============================================
Chris McMahan | chris....@lexis-nexis.com
=============================================
kbar...@home.com
run stop signs and red lights, the typical cyclist runs them at maybe
5-10 mph, usually after slowing down to check for cross-traffic, while
the motorist typically runs them at three times that speed, and in the
case of "beating" out a red light (which usually means flat-out running
through it with maybe a few milliseconds of yellow light at the
beginning), most motorists are crossing at anywhere from 40-60 mph,
since they generally speed up to "beat" the light. Now I ask, which
violation (motorist or cyclist) is the greater public safety issue?
Of course the best way to look at this issue is statistically; how many
injuries are attributed to cyclist vs motorist flaunting of stop signs
or lights? Any numbers out there?
Tom Kunich
news:b7ehfly...@shell.one.net...
>
> Excuse me? Now it's the automobile driver's fault for being distracted
> by some idiot on a bicycle doing stupid stuff? And when the car hits
> that cyclist as he darts out in front of those 3000 lbs of steel, the
> poor automobile driver wil be blamed just as vehemently because he
> wasn't paying attention. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Excuse me Chris but this isn't MY opinion. It is the LAW. Anyone that is in
charge of a lethal weapon is REQUIRED by LAW to maintain control of that
weapon.
What a funny idea that someone would lose control of 3,000 lb.s of steel
because they saw something unusual!
Jack Dingler
had a sign at D/FW airport that people would actually read. A motorist was
reading the sign and struck a parked car. The jury decided it was American
Airline's fault.
Evidently, we need blinders on drivers to prevent them from being distracted.
What with dogs, kids, birds, members of the opposite sex (maybe), interesting
signs, cell phones, reading to be done, makeup jobs, laptop data entry and
countless other distractions that will cause a driver to lose control over the
vehicle, being so prevalent, drivers need all the help they can get.
I've been struck from behind three times because a driver was reading. Twice, my
vehicle was totaled. We need to find out who the writers are, and sue them too.
All these evil distractions. It's a wonder we're not all dead.
Jack Dingler
chris mcmahan wrote:
> Excuse me? Now it's the automobile driver's fault for being distracted
> by some idiot on a bicycle doing stupid stuff? And when the car hits
> that cyclist as he darts out in front of those 3000 lbs of steel, the
> poor automobile driver wil be blamed just as vehemently because he
> wasn't paying attention. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
>
David Cásseres
nos...@enteract.com (J Rappe) wrote:
>Avery Burdett <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>>
>>That's one measure but since couriers generally have pretty good
>>bike handling skills, they ought not to have the same poor record as
>>everyone else. They are a menace because their poor behaviour is so
>>visible, and the general public doesn't distinguish between couriers and
>>other cyclists.
>
>This is utter horseshit. I was a courier for years and never had one
>collision. I do not feel any responsibilty to mold peoples opinions
>about cycling by riding in a particular fashion, if for no other reason
>than the riding style that without a doubt infuriates motorists
>the worst is riding correctly and legally. There is nothing that
>pisses drivers off more than riding in a lane of traffic
>such that they can't illegally pass. By your logic, legal riders
>are a menace because irritate motorists and promote road rage.
The man is right. It is not bad or scary riding by "irresponsible
cyclists" that makes some motorists go around bad-mouthing all cyclists
and arguing we should be kept off the roads. It is the mere presence of
bikes on the road, no matter how they are ridden. Denouncing "bad
cyclists" as Avery does merely adds more voices to those of the
bike-hating motorists.
--
David Casseres
Exclaimer: Hey!
The Wheelman
this article is that she stereotypes. Giving the impression of "all"
instead of "many".
And a good many of the cyclists I've seen behave almost exactly as
described. Especially the "weekend warriors" Those who ride with the
club on Sunday and not much else.
Spread all over the road (sometimes into opposing lanes!), not moving
over to let cars pass, no signals (legal ones, anyways), running stop
signs, even stoplight, at major intersections, no less.
Pace lines are the worse. Screaming through the intersection LOOOOONG
after the light has turned red. As one poster pointed out, just like
many [California] drivers. I will drop out of such a line without a
moment's thought. The last thing I want is to be associated with this
kind of behavior.
My "bicycle school" was riding to/from school in the early '70s along
Wilshire boulevard at rush hour. And I'm still commuting by bike.
Believe me, courtesy and respect for others AND THE LAW goes a hell of a
lot further towards friendly car/bike relation, believe me.
I guarantee, at least, it will put an end to articles such as the one
this thread is about!
"May you have the wind at your back.
And a really low gear for the hills!"
The Wheelman
Chris'Z Corner
"The Website for the Common Bicyclist":
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Trails/2952/index.html
Purdy
</bap9/@/my-dejanews.com/> wrote:
>I have to back up this observation. Riding legally in the
>chicago area does get drivers angry. More than once I have
>had a driver become enraged. Recently an old man threatened
>to run me over with his Ford Crown Victoria because I took the
>lane at a stop sign. Even though I was signaling a right turn
>this *$&*@!~ tried to blow the stop sign and pass me on the right.
>When he couldn't the words ensued. (One lane each way, illegal
>to pass 100ft from an intersection on a 2 lane road in IL)
On my much cited HOV lane arterial, drivers use the HOV lane as a high
speed passing lane, particularly at stop lights where, perhaps, the
lower speeds make it seem less dangerous.
One evening after HOV hours, a car tailed me to the light so I
followed my usual habit and moved my bike to the left of the lane to
allow right turning cars to go around the corner, as is legal on a red
light here in Ontario. Several cars turned, the light turned green and
I started forward at low speed while looking down fumbling for my clip
and weaving left and right to keep my balance.
Suddenly a car appeared at most 4 inches from my right and the driver
yelled something like "stupid," I can't tell as I yelled "SHIT" so
loud I couldn't hear him.
Today the pollution was a hair below a caution so I drove, and
surprised myself by unconsciously doing a high speed pass in the HOV
lane IN HOV HOURS!
I think drivers put their cars anywhere there's a space that can give
them a few feet advantage in their direction. They will play ruthless
chicken if you don't cut them off. They bluff, threatening accidents.
The strongest nerve wins (perhaps dullest may be more accurate).
The honking, shouting & signing are all part of this oneupmanship
game. Usually it has no serious meaning.
I believe this attitude, this type of driving should be stopped. It's
not a game. We are just trying to get home in one piece. I work with a
great guy who drives at reckless speed, breaks countless traffic laws,
but doesn't believe he's a danger to others. He should lose his
license as should all other gamesmen ... including me, if I can't
learn to stop passing in the HOV lane!
Jack Dingler
This thread, other threads and the current Jerry Jones debate playing out
in my area has really driven home to me, the fact that Americans really
don't have any respect for the law. I don't know what's changed, whether
it's me, my family or the world around me, but I grew up with my family
reinforcing to me, the idea that the law is important and represents an
important part of the social fabric that once made our nation great.
Now, I'm an adult and much of my family that tried to teach me these
things have passed away. The family I have left that I believe holds
these ideals, I don't have much contact with. People I associate with,
people I work with, and people who express their ideals to the public are
now teaching me that I should spit on the law whenever the law isn't
convenient. Their teaching me that rules are for weenies. Their teaching
me that the law should be used as a weapon to get the other guy.
How do I know this? I just watch them drive. Everytime we break a law
out of convenience, we're spitting on the law, and spitting on the fine
men in blue, who are sworn to uphold the law. Everytime we speed, or roll
through a stop sign, we're rejecting the law and telling society, that it
can go in the toilet. Everyday that we go out and commit multiple crimes
on the roadways, we're teaching our children to reject the law. Even when
we whine about the unfairness of getting pulled over, 'when everyone else
is doing it', we're teaching our children one more important lesson.
If you want to spit on the law, if you want to spit in the face of a law
enforcement officer, if you want to spit on the justice system, just use
whatever legal vehicle you currently operate, and use it to commit public
crimes out of protest. Go ahead, run stop signs, drive 45 in a 30, run a
red light, cut off another driver and refuse to use turn signals. If you
want a lawless society, you have to start with the little things. Our
justice system has been rock for democracy, and rocks erode from the
littlest things. So, if your sick of justice, sick of the law, and sick
of the men in blue, show it, by helping to erode the rock justice, in your
own personal ways, and teach your children the same values.
Jack Dingler
Purdy wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 1999 17:22:00 -0500, Brent Peterson
> </bap9/@/my-dejanews.com/> wrote:
>
> >I have to back up this observation. Riding legally in the
> >chicago area does get drivers angry. More than once I have
> >had a driver become enraged. Recently an old man threatened
> >to run me over with his Ford Crown Victoria because I took the
> >lane at a stop sign. Even though I was signaling a right turn
> >this *$&*@!~ tried to blow the stop sign and pass me on the right.
> >When he couldn't the words ensued. (One lane each way, illegal
> >to pass 100ft from an intersection on a 2 lane road in IL)
>
> On my much cited HOV lane arterial, drivers use the HOV lane as a high
> speed passing lane, particularly at stop lights where, perhaps, the
> lower speeds make it seem less dangerous.
>
<snip>