The_Jazz

RB, it seems to me that you're imposing personal preferrences upon your idealized cityscape. "more public transit=more better. more bikes=more better" is in no way a statement of fact. The infrastructure along with the necessities of suburbanization (stores etc.) spring directly from the rejection of cities by the monied classes ever since there were cities that was accelerated by the American middle class in post-WW II. I think that I can very successfully argue that the quality of life is higher in the suburbs than in the city, despite the abundance of chain restaurants and stores.

But you raise a very interesting question in "why". Personally, I'm just as intolerant of drivers and runners not obeying rules as I am bikers. I'll also admit to getting very annoyed at bikers who inconvience me even when they're doing nothing wrong. That said, I'd never honk or try to scare a runner, pedestrian or biker who is in the right (in the wrong would be another storry) But I do realize that my attitude falls outside the norm, most like since I've been on the receiving end of folks that aren't paying attention or doing things that are stupid intentionally. I'm interested to hear why others cop the attitudes they do.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

Sue

There are cyclists here, more than I've ever seen in other places I've lived. Seems that most of them (about 95% or so) obey the traffic laws just the same as someone who's driving a car. There's an occasional one who will just do what they please, when they please, where they choose to do so, but it's rare from what I've seen here.

__________________
Teg yw edrych tuag adref.

roachboy

huh. i didn't realize my dislike ot the burbs came through in what i wrote above. but it's true that i detest the suburban model as a space in which i personally would want to live--this based on 7 years having tried it out. but i also figured out pretty quickly that i am not of the demographic--primarily i don't have kids--and am not religious---so i didn't access the two primary frameworks of social solidarity that were available...this isn't to even start with my personal preferences. so what i concluded really was that the burbs are just not a space for me.

but that's different from the broader argument i was making--and is (i think) beside the point.

a. quality of life arguments lean on quality of life measures, which are constructs and so are obviously a problem. there's little in the way of agreed upon criteria that you can point to in order to measure it. and so there's little in the way of meaning that one can impute to them. so were you to try to make an argument on these grounds, chances are pretty high that it'd end up becoming an argument about what the measures are that you're relying on. and they'd matter, otherwise what we'd be talking about really is our individual attitudes toward the burbs, who likes them more, who less---which isn't uninteresting--but it also seems like the sort of conversation that would be best spread over a half dozen sentences made while consuming a beverage or 5 in a publick house.

b. the elements of the post-ww2 suburban model were self-evidently triggered by the extension of mass production techniques into areas like house design & construction, the development of appliances, the relatively low cost of an automobile at the time--so the whole model really floats on an ocean of debt--mortgages, consumer debt. but it was a great consumption engine, that model. and it had perverse political effects. but the fact is that over the past 10-15 years the demographic trends that shaped the burbs have started to reverse---it is no longer at all obvious that people, particularly younger people, want to live in these spaces in the same numbers as was the case 60 years ago. secondly--and probably more importantly--the development of the burbs coincided with a shift in urban planning that took quite a long time to take hold really that was geared around transforming cityscapes around automobiles as a way to accomidate increased flows of people into and out of cities---and this planning shift happened to privilege automobiles as a primary transportation system at the expense of public transit--and this is obviously a class move, every bit as obvious as putting gates up around a bunch of toll brothers houses. the burbs were about class homogeneity---that's one of the things that makes them unlivable for freaks like me. so they were built around the *separation* of class fractions through a form of geographic segregation--and thinking in terms of discrete towns was an aspect of this.

but the fact is that the suburbs were always parts of regions and these regions were characterized by networks of flows ---since we're talking about transport, flows of people---and that the automobile functioned to link and separate in a particular set of ways following on a particular type of logic of what amounts to class warfare. now that the demographic trends are reversing or have reversed in many areas--and as a function of a host of other, mostly unintended consequences of the planning logic that enabled this form of class warfare to operate---it makes no sense to simply stand the old model on its head--rather it's more sensible i think to undo it. and a step in that direction is to move toward thinking in terms of regional systems of public transit as the primary mechanisms for enabling population flows to shift into and out of cities, move away from cars---and to explore new ways of thinking urban space around that.

it's not a coincidence that in the mythology of the suburbs, the city was a wasteland so long as what was understood as living in that wasteland were colonies of poor folk. you can see in the "realization" that cities are more than a bit livable for lots of people that now there's a more differentiated public view of these spaces--track local television news programs---i remember philadelphia in the middle 80s being presented as the wild wild west on local tv news--it almost seemed that the idea was to keep people huddled in their tract house, wrapped up in a nuclear family, glued to the television monitor. it's all different now. funny how that works.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

MSD

There is no gray area, they are legally entitled to their own lane as if they were a motor vehicle. The are similarly prohibited from using sidewalks.

Jimellow

I'm not really familiar with what a bike lane is. I don't think I've seen one in Pennsylvania, but it certainly seems like a wonderful thing. I follow the laws of the road and am a considerate rider, and even then realize that riding can be very dangerous. I don't really understand why cyclists would ride in some of the methods described here, as it seems they're greatly increasing their odds of serious injury.

For me, the worst aspect of biking is hugging the white line, just inside the shoulder, without really having a shoulder to speak of. The options are either: 1) Swerve left and into the flow of traffic or 2) Swerve right and off the road entirely, likely being dumped off the bike as a result of terrain change.

As for my situation... It's difficult to pinpoint the reason the driver would have beeped. I was hugging the line tightly and there wasn't another car on the road. Perhaps he/she was having a bad day and didn't like bicyclists. Perhaps the driver had dealt with inconsiderate riders before and assumed I was one as well. Hell, maybe they had just been laid off and weren't too fond of any aspect of the world lately.

I was intrigued by the fact that they stopped and then drove off after I pedalled towards them. I gather that is either: A) The driver thinking better of a confrontation or B) The passenger/spouse urging, and ultimately convincing, the driver to let it go and continue on their way.

It's unfortunate that those that designed the roads and pathways in the part of the state/country I reside didn't have more foresight in regards to bicyclists and their presence on the roads, especially around recreational areas. As an example, French Creek State Park is a very popular area, and features quite a few country roads ridden often by cyclists. There are no bike paths, and the roads feature many blind turns around terrain that changes elevation often. It's a horrible combination for cyclists, as even if they do hug the white line, there is a high chance they'll still get clipped by cars hugging the line as well to avoid oncoming traffic around turns. This coupled with the fact that I know quite a few drivers enjoy taking their cars to the limits through the twisty country roads generally results in a bad situation for all parties involved.

As is the case with most things, I don't see much changing in regards to the car/cyclist relationship, whether it be in regards to the drivers themselves or the roads they ride on. Cars are ingrained in our society, and more and more are using the roads every year. Roads themselves are already established and it's unlikely more lanes are going to be added, or other adjustments made at this point.

I personally don't think cyclists enjoy being thrown onto a road and forced to share it with cars, but around here it's generally the only option available. Bike lanes sound great, but I haven't seen a single one yet.

__________________
Desperation is no excuse for lowering one's standards.

snowy

Wow, this thread has made my issues between cars/bicycles seem really small.

I live in a League of American Bicyclists Gold community. All of our major arterials have bicycle lanes, and there are several dedicated bike/pedestrian paths around the community. Every now and again I come across an inconsiderate driver. Usually this consists of them thinking that they can beat me across an intersection because they're a car, even though I have right of way. I almost got thrown over my handlebars last week after having to slam on my brakes because some idiot pulled across the road I was on, even though I had right of way. I'm also paranoid of being doored or turned into, but that's really about it.

If anything, riding a bicycle has made me a more considerate and cautious driver. I will wait to see what a bicyclist does before going, because I don't want to hurt anyone. When a car goes up against a bicycle, everyone loses--the bicyclist gets hurt, and the driver has to live with that for the rest of their lives. It's not worth it.

However, when gas prices went sky high last spring I saw a lot of new bicyclists on the road, and I was not impressed. Many of them had no idea as to what set of rules they should be following. We need more education so that new cyclists know the rules and know what's required of them. I get really irritated when I see bicyclists where they shouldn't be, like the sidewalk (there are exceptions to this; there is a section of town where riding on the sidewalk is required as that is where the bike path goes, oddly enough, and I'm totally fine with little kids riding bicycles on the sidewalk because it's safer in our town). Perhaps every time a bike is sold we ought to require retailers to hand out a pamphlet with the rules and regulations for bicycles.

And in some places, rolling through a stop sign--provided the intersection is clear--is perfectly legal on a bicycle. It's called an Idaho stop. We tried to pass a bill here that would have made it legal in Oregon, but it died before it reached a vote. Hopefully it will be back someday.

I love riding my bicycle and I expect I will be riding it for a long time to come. I feel fortunate, having read some of the other posts in this thread, to live where I live and to be able to pretty much ride my bike instead of driving my car wherever and whenever I like. I'm not the only one, either--many people in my community choose bicycling, walking, or taking public transportation over driving. I would say fewer people drive here than elsewhere, but that's because here driving can be more of a hassle than it's worth. To be honest, it takes the same amount of time to drive to campus/ride my bicycle/ride the bus, but if I ride the bus or my bicycle, I don't have to find a place to park, which would add about 10 minutes on to driving. It's the same with the store--the bike rack is right next to the door, so it's much more convenient, unless I'm buying big stuff.

I love my town

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Rekna

I think the stupidity goes both ways. I've seen automobile drivers be idiots and assholes around bikers and I've seen the reverse. Where I live we have bike lanes every few roads but that doesn't stop idiot bikers from riding their bike during rush hour down the busiest street in the area when the next road over has a bike lane....

The fact is that there are idiots in the world. In an ideal world drivers would be cautious with bikers but as we have established people are idiots. Therefore the best behavior is for the bikers to be extremely cautious. After all it doesn't matter whose fault it is the biker will always lose.

Jinn

You seem to be laboring under the false impression that I accept "any vehicle that can legally be on the road" should include bicycles. I do not think bicycles should be operated on already dangerous motorways, particularly since they are immune the same registration and insurance requirements as the rest of the vehicles. For that matter, I believe the subcategory of motorized vehicles (under 49cc) which I see riding down under the same conditions (no registration, no license, no insurance) should be similarly banned.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

The_Jazz

Ah, I see - you're laboring under the false impression that driving a car makes you more special than someone on a bike. But what you accept and what the law accepts are at complete odds. And the law's going to win until it's changed. Until that happens, you're still being inconsiderate and dangerous.

In other words, your opinion of the way the world should work has little to do with the way that it does.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

Jinn

Sounds familiar.

What was that crunch I just heard? Might've been the bicyclist who thought he belonged on roads designed for cars. Oh well..

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

The_Jazz

Send me your prisoner ID number and address where you're incarcerated. I'll make sure to write. You should probably also plan on punching the biggest motherfucker in the face as soon as you get there in order to establish your dominance.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

FoolThemAll

It makes him more able to act like the vast majority of other vehicles on the road. The impression that he's more special than a bicyclist in that way isn't false.

As I recall, the OP was a discussion of both 'is' and 'ought'.

__________________
I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

Baraka_Guru

Wow, this thread is a fascinating microcosm reflecting the ideas in Rousseau's Social Contract.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

roachboy

it's better if you can ride without having to wonder if the guy in the car behind you is a sociopath, i find.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Baraka_Guru

I really thought our society was built around "a human being is a human being like the next." I didn't realize the sheer amount of manufactured materials built around oneself boosted one's position on the social hierarchy while making one's way around the public sphere—and the capacity for velocity being a great boon to that.

The bottom line is that there are laws in place to ensure we all have relatively equal rights of travel and passage in the areas within which we live. And thank goodness for that.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Jinn

Big, fast moving things have had the 'right of way' since the beginning of time. It has nothing to esoteric deconstructions of society or our materialistic association with manufactured materials.

It has to do with me traveling 60 miles per hour, 88 feet per second, with a stopping distance over three hundred feet and bicycles who think that they are somehow legally entitled to travel on the same thoroughfare. It's just as much about my safety as theirs, and has nothing to do with our respective moral or human worth. I recognize that bicycles MAY travel on these roadways in a legal sense, but that doesn't mean (as aptly characterized above) that they OUGHT to, or that the law should allow them to. By extension, neither should I make it comfortable for them to endanger themselves and myself in such a way.

It's worth nothing that there are less than a dozen streets within a 15 mile radius from my home or workplace with mean speeds below 30 mph, yet I see as many bicycles in that same journey; I'm not talking about bumper-to-bumper cars and bicycles here.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

braisler

I've been a cyclist for over 20 years. I've ridden a bike for over 30. And that's some of the difference for me; there are cyclists and there are people riding bikes.

To me, true cyclists are much more likely to obey the rules of the road and ride in a responsible manner. People riding bikes often fall well outside of this group. To be sure there are exceptions within both populations. People riding bikes includes families with little kids who swerve erratically all over multi-use trails, indigent persons riding a Huffy with flat tires, students riding to and from classes while talking on their cell phones (yes, I've seen it more than once). These are the people who are far more likely to disobey the rules of the road and cause headaches or accidents for those around them. And even if they don't actually cause an incident, they certainly lower public opinion of cyclists in general.

And to Jinn and any other drivers who don't think that cyclists belong on your roads... watch who you piss off. I've known a couple of cyclists who obtained concealed carry permits, and pack a small caliber hand gun in their saddle bag in preparation for just such an encounter with an aggressive motorist.

__________________
---
You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.
- Albert Einstein
---

shakran

that isn't true. Since rules started to be imposed on navigation, smaller boats have had the right away, and sailboats also have the right of way. Now that isn't to say that it's not moronic for a guy in a sailboat to dash in front of a tanker and drop anchor, any more than it is to say that bicyclists who dart in front of cars aren't idiots.

They think they're legally entitled to travel on the road because they /are/ legally entitled to travel on the road. The caveat to that is that bicycles must obey traffic laws, and we all know that many of them don't. They run stop signs, they cut across lanes without signaling, they ride on the wrong side of the road, they ride on the /sidewalk/ on the wrong side of the road, and they ride on the road even if there's a perfectly good bike path right next to it.

It really is a two way (heh heh) street. Motorists are jackasses for crowding and intimidating bicyclists, and bicyclists are jackasses for impeding the flow of traffic and thinking that traffic laws don't apply to them. We really need some cops out there writing tickets for those problems, rather than worrying about someone going 10 over on the interstate.

Baraka_Guru

Jinn, I think you place too high a value on driving.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

The_Jazz

Really? As Shakran pointed out, maritime laws agree with the land laws and have for centuries. And only in the absence of codified law did the bigger faster thing have the right of way.

Congratulations, you've gone from inconsiderate driver to vigilante. You have the duty to avoid causing accidents regardless of what vehicle you're driving, which would include causing someone else to wreck. Failure to do so is a crime in all 50 states.

The thing is bicycles don't "think" they are legally entitled - they are, pure and simple. Don't like it? Talk to your state legislature. If you're going to do something to a cyclist, don't be surprised if you end up in jail or worse. You'll be completely in the wrong both legally and morally.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

Jinn

Thanks?

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

Baraka_Guru

Actually, I should be thanking you. You've given us some insight as to why some drivers don't respect cyclists.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Jinn

For what it's worth, I believe we recognize the same problem, in that bicycles and cars ought to have safe ways to travel, with as little interaction between the two as possible.

That said, the majority of the posts (and the OP itself) are entirely focused on the 'rights' of bicyclists and the fact that car drivers are not respecting those rights. While you could argue that I place "too high a value on driving,' you're in the same breath ignoring the flip side of that coin, in that many place 'too high a value on bicycling'.

In every major city I've been in, roads are DESIGNED for motor vehicle traffic; streets and signs are marked for visibility to car drivers. Lane widths and traffic engineering occurs for cars. Light timing and stopping distance, dotted lines vs solid lines, these are all designed with MOTOR VEHICLES in mind. There are very few dedicated 'bike lanes,' and in the case that they do exist they are very poorly designed.

The United States is not like Holland, is not like France, is not like Columbia, is not like India where bicycle traffic is the norm or even the majority of traffic. Bicycles are by far the minority of traffic (even to pedestrians) and as such shouldn't expect conventional roadways are designed or are even safe for them, even if the laws allow it. I view a meandering bicyclist going down a lane in a 45 mph road with as much derision as a person walking down that same lane. They're a slowly moving BARRICADE and present a danger to the MAJORITY of traffic on that road, which is motor vehicles.

The solution is something like this:



Ultimately the question shouldn't be why drivers are not respecting the 'rights' of bicyclists, but why bicyclists are trying to operate en-masse on roadways NOT DESIGNED FOR THEIR SAFETY where they present a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to other vehicles going MUCH faster than they are.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

filtherton

Do they make cars large enough to hold that misplaced sense of self importance?


I think that the general tendency of both cyclists and drivers to ignore traffic laws renders the the notion of traffics laws as common denominator largely irrelevant.

samcol

I was referring to the grey area in their behavior. Depending on the bike rider, I'd say where I live less than half of them actually follow the vehicle traffic laws. Other's lie somewhere between a vehicle and pedestrian in their behavior.

I don't have a problem with bikes riding in the suburb areas or country roads, or bike lanes, but when they are riding it in 4+ lane downtown traffic it gets pretty stupid and endangers everyone. If the solution is more bike lanes I'm fine with that, but currently it's not fun as a motorist, and I can't imagine it being much fun for someone on a bike either.

__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize.

JamesErwin

You said it best. People put themselves and their priorities above not only other drivers but cyclists as well. I just hate driving anywhere. I live in South Florida where riding in the bicycle lane is considered by most to be "annoying".

I say 'share the road'

FoolThemAll

It took me a while to realize that this forum isn't really all that more strict than others in deterring and punishing trolls. You just have to know how to troll properly so that it falls under the radar. Well, unless you're World's King or something.

__________________
I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

roachboy

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

percy

I got a chuckle out of this. Likewise it's nice from a car drivers point of view to know the direction an ipod laden cyclist may dart off in any direction at any time. I find anyways.

But your point about the burbs is spot on RB. In the next 30+ years more people will live in the downtown cores, walk, cycle, be close to work and amenities. ...and those dreaded burbs that you detest as do I will be our urban slums.

Now I am venturing out on my mountain bike,...not on the roadway, mainly because of some of the idiots who drive cars, but moreso because there are some excellent trails through the green spaces that surround my home,...and it has dried out enough to be enjoyable.

Just hope I don't have to deal with idiot cyclists.

snowy

Perhaps this is true where you live, but it's absolutely false where I live. In the city survey last year, only 57% of people drove a car as their primary mode of transportation; 22% rode a bicycle, 3% took the bus, and 12% walked; 11% of that 57% carpooled. As such, our transportation network is designed for all of these groups. There are parts of town where it is inadvisable to drive a large car/SUV, mostly because the streets are too narrow.

I should note my city only has 53,000 people, so we're not exactly a bustling metropolis, but we make it work, and no one has died here yet (fingers crossed).

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

StanT

Not entirely true, at least in Colorado. Colorado law has specific provisions prohibiting bicyclists from "impeding the normal flow of traffic". While that is a bit vague, it does get prosecuted.

Rekna

The problem with bikes and cars stems from the speed of traffic flow. Roads are designed for a certain speed and traffic moves at that speed. If someone is not moving close to that speed they create a hazard. This is why there are minimum speed limits on many roads. I suspect most of the angst between bikers and vehicle drivers stem from the disparity in the speed at which they travel. It doesn't take a genius to realize a biker going 30 on a road with cars going 60 is a bad idea.

While car drivers should be more considerate and should be willing to work around bikers, bikers should also realize that they shouldn't be on those roads and should go 1 road over where the speed limit is 30. It will be safer for everyone involved.

Cynthetiq

I don't sense that anyone respects anyone else. Everyone else seems that it's more important that they are walking/riding/driving and are trying to get there.

Bikers in NYC don't respect pedestrians, and pedestrians don't respect cars and haven't ever in the time I've lived here.

And that divided roadway, I walk down one of those everyday on the way to work for the past few months. Can you believe that the bicyclists don't even use it? No, they ride on the side walk or in the street all the time. Can't be bothered to ride the extra few feet I guess.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Jimellow

I just got back from a ride.

I'm riding on the same stretch of road as the incident described in my original post.. No cars, totally empty road. I'm riding the white line as I always do, and a passing car throws an empty soda can at me.

I don't understand it, and instead of going on a diatribe about why people are assholes and why I'm glad I have a very mild personality, I'll just say that it's very discouraging to witness the human race and how they treat their own kind.

__________________
Desperation is no excuse for lowering one's standards.

Painted

I've come across unkind drivers,
and kind ones alike.
but never have I seen,
a bicyclist who wasn't a prick.

__________________
I came across a nice rack at the department store

percy

Maybe it's just the mentality of the people where you live. I have never seen anyone throw something at a cyclist but I have had a beer bottle thrown from a passing car at me while on my motorcycle, but it missed me.

Was in Quebec so one reason could have been the guy was a drunk asshole. Could have been the Ontario plate on my bike as well. Who knows.

My bike ride earlier was uneventful. Just had to swerve around the piles of crap from all the Canadian geese making their way back from Florida.

newtx

Road rage is rampant. I don't think it matters if you on foot, bike , or motorcycle. Basically if you slow them down they are really chapped. I have had motorist throw stuff at me while running off the road. I think it pisses drivers off that you chose to save fuel and/or try to get in shape. Sad but true- automobile drivers are becoming a sorry lot.

spectre

I was reminded of this thread today as some asshole on a bike decided he was going to make a right turn. That doesn't seem so bad until you get the full picture. He was on the left shoulder of the road on a one way street. The light was red, and people were crossing in the crosswalk, which he felt at that moment was intended for him. He proceeded to plow through the crowd of people so he could make his turn. He didn't just go straight through and then go along the street he was turning down. He went through the entire length of the crosswalk full of people for all four lanes of the street before moving back to the street right before the sidewalk.

I say this because it just goes to show that it's not some condition unique to drivers, it's a human thing. Some people are just assholes no matter what form of transportation they use.

__________________
"Fuck these chains
No goddamn slave
I will be different" ~ Machine Head

canuckguy

That is sad mate, don't sweat it and just continue to ride and do your thing. Make yourself as visible as possible and own your lane.

Not my best moment but I had a guy throw change at me. I think he underestimated that I can ride at the same speed of traffic and caught up to him at the light. I squirted him in the face with my water bottle (poweraide is sticky!) when he rolled his window down to yell at me. In general I behaved just like him which made me no better. I should have just rode on by.

I now ignore those assholes or grab the plate numbers and report them after I get home. I would rather arrive alive than confront some "tough guy" in a car pretending to be the law.

Not sure when everyone became so impatient in life but oh well. Just find routes that are less busy and more bike friendly. We can both be on the roads if the respect goes both ways.

Cynthetiq

Maybe the Santa Monica Bike Path issue is a reflection on just how much people respect each other.

On Santa Monica's beachfront bike path, an uneasy mix - Los Angeles Times

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.