Why don't car drivers respect bicyclists?
 

I was out riding earlier and during the ride up a gradual and reasonably steep hill, a passing car beeped at me. Not the "Heads up, I'm here" beep, but the "Hey asshole, get off the road!" type of beep. It was a two lane road (one lane each direction), and not heavily trafficked. I was hugging the white line/shoulder as well as I could without risking falling off, and the road runs through an area heavily populated by boats, bikers, and people doing leisurely things. In other words, it wasn't a highway.

I'm a very laid back guy, but I flipped the driver off, and upon seeing this in the rearview mirror, the driver stopped the car up the road. I sped up my pedaling pace towards the car, but the driver ultimately drove off without further incident. Flipping him off was a bad idea, I acknowledge that. We all do stupid things at the spur of the moment, and this was one of those things, but I don't think I'm wrong in feeling that the move made by the driver was very brash and inconsiderate.

I don't really understand why some people are so inconsiderate when it comes to sharing the road with bicycles. Throughout the course of my ride today, I probably had fifty to sixty cars pass me at some point without incident, but the one that did was on the road I would suspect to be least likely of such inconsideration. At the time of the incident, the road was empty, literally. There was another biker about 500 yards behind me, and another half a mile up, already cresting the hill. There were no cars and the beeper could easily have gone around me without incident. It's a sweeping, and wide, road and of the roads I was on today, it was easily the least cramped of the bunch.

As someone that enjoys to think things through and ponder, I am curious about why some drivers are so reluctant to share the road with bicyclists. It's difficult enough to hug the white line without ditching your bike off the shoulder, and all the bikers I've seen while driving my car or bike have made the best effort possible to stay near the shoulder and not drive in the middle of the road near traffic. Yet, despite this, it seems car drivers often don't respect, or even acknowledge the presence of bicyclists on the road.

In Pennsylvania, most roads have minimal consideration for bicyclists in the first place. The shoulder is often miniscule, thus putting riders in a dangerous position on the road, and due to the nature of traffic, the shoulders are often filled with glass and other debris that makes riding there hazardous at times. Just yesterday I blew out a tire as a result of riding on the shoulder, but at least such incidents are expected given the nature of debris being pushed to the shoulder throughout the course of heavy traffic. The inconsideration of some car drivers is what I don't really understand, especially given that it doesn't seem like a lot to ask to share the road with someone that is fully exposed to the environment and doing the best they can to not get killed in the process of going for a ride.

America is a car country. Pedestrians and bicyclists are at the bottom of the food chain, and even motorcyclists don't get much respect.
Just yesterday I was biking back up the hill from grocery shopping, and some kids who seemed to be 17-18 screamed something out the window, going too fast for me to understand, but it sounded something like "bike" and "fag." I just grumbled something in my head about him being lucky enough for daddy to buy him a car (brand new SUV), but people in cars just don't give three shits, in general, about non car drivers.

Some towns are much better designed for bicyclists. Boulder, Co is one of them. Bike tracks everywhere, large bike lanes, etc.
I just wish more towns could be like this.

You will get alot of vehicles who have little or no respect for cyclists. Ignorance at times is hard to accept fro those who choose to portray that attitude.

However, that ignorance or disrespect towards cyclists is also a learned ability. And sometimes warranted. I drive a car, a motorcycle as well as a bicycle and the amount of cyclists out there who have an absolute flagrant disregard for the rules of the road is staggering.

When riding a bicycle, like any other road worthy vehicle, a stop sign means stop, ..not sail through it. Right of way to pedestrians is not only meant for vehicles with a 4 stroke engine....etc etc

Bottom line, there are idiots everywhere using whatever mode of transportation available to them who couldn't care less about anyone but themselves. That's life.

i guess its a case of drivers thinking along the lines of "im bigger and faster than you, so you need to get the fuck out of my way."

people are assholes.

simple enough.

Bikeing may have nothing to do with it.
Some people just release their hostilites when driving.

you'd think that towns would at least take care of the large rocks that get pulled out of people's gravel driveways when they pull out--or that people who own the fucking driveways would do it--it's not that hard---but out here in ruralia, it's can be a really unpleasant surprise running into a band of rocks along the shoulder leaving you nowhere to go but out into traffic that's going 50...

anyway, i think the problem is basically a dick thing--sovereign bourgeois travellers going on their desperately important journies do not take kindly to having their Progress interrupted or even slowed down by those of us who ride bikes. whatever. for the most part, i don't care about the problems people in cars might have with bikers.

but i have to say i mind less getting yelled at by idiots in cars than i mind people who talk on their fucking cell phones while driving. this seems the furthest extension of the narcissism of driving, really. most of the more dangerous situations i've found myself in--particularly riding in cities--ave involved people who turn themselves into idiot drivers by blabbing on the phone while they're at the wheel. it seems to me that whether you think of it or not, when you talk on your phone while driving you put people in danger.


as for why that happens--i doubt there's anything like a single answer.

maybe something will come to me.

It goes both ways. I've seen bicyclists weaving in and out of traffic, nearly causing accidents, running red lights and stop signs, and just riding as though they can do whatever they want. There have been many near accidents caused by inconsiderate bicyclists. I know that's not true for all and doesn't justify the sort of behavior that you saw, but it does happen pretty frequently.

Funny, I was going to ask why bicyclists don't respect pedestrians. I used to run every morning through Prospect Park. During one morning jog I was nearly run down by a cyclist who then cursed at me for having the audacity of being in his way.

Everybody like to blame drivers, but what about bicyclists who barrel through on red lights through busy intersections? Or dart recklessly in and out of traffic? They can't have it both ways. They want to be given the same amount of courtesy as any other motor vehicle, but act like pedestrians. The stuff they do on the road would lead to a revoked license for any other driver.

I think it's time some of these cyclists take a look in the mirror and realize that their behavior at times is no better than the motorists they despise.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/ny...0bridge&st=cse I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I agree with percy - I respect the right of bicyclists who respect the law, but it bothers me when (a seemingly large amount of) bicyclists want the best of both worlds - they want to be treated as equals on the road; yet demand the same rights as pedestrians, also.

You show me a bicyclist who stops at stop signs, yields when he has a yield sign, rides single-file, and walks his bike across crosswalks; and I'll show you 99 more out of 100 who don't - at least where I live. Your mileage may vary.

As far as the experience of the O.P., I have no problem sharing the road with bicyclists. Sometimes while driving down a 6-lane arterial, though, I have to wonder why they don't use an adjacent parallel local road.

Yeah, I agree with this. That's not an excuse for what happened to you. From what you describe, of course the driver was at fault. But driving and working in the big city, I find 8 or 9/10 cyclists have no regard for traffic laws (yet get pissy when a car or pedestrian cuts them off).

frequently in a city context, aggression keeps you safe. on a bike, you don't have any metal between your skin and the ground, so it pays to be that way---put yourself in the middle of traffic if you're doing to make a turn, etc. if you don't do it, cars will just run you down. so maybe you're confusing aggressive riding--which is forced by cars and how the drivers are--particularly someplace like the loop in chicago (if you aren't aggressive there, you're in trouble)--with something else.

or maybe you don't pay a whole lot of attention to bikers because you like talking on your fucking cellphone. who knows?

strange thing is that most all the bikers i know and have seen respect red lights, crosswalks, etc. in chicago, you have no choice regarding the former, because not doing it will definitely get you killed. it's the same most cities, but chicago drivers are particularly aggro. i've been riding more or less every day for about a decade at this point--it seems to me that if you think most bikers are reckless, chances are you aren't paying attention. maybe you're talking on your cell. who knows?

with crosswalks, i'm not sure what you're talking about. in terms of crossing, i don't see the problems that are metioned above--and i'm one of those people on a bike---i just don't see it. not even at long lights--pederstrians are rarely in any danger from a bike--but bikes can be endangered by pedestrians, who are often pretty arbitrary in their choices about when to cross, they don't necessarily look for bikes. but i doubt there are a whole lot of experienced bikers who don't walk across a crosswalk if they're in one--pushing yourself along on your bike isn't much different, you're just still mounted.

if you ride in a bike lane in a city, you have to continually watch out for pedestrians--again, i've seen very few problems in all the time i've been riding.

of course there are idiots. i dislike when i see these folk--and i have, and do from time to time--because they make things shitty for the rest of us

the exception--places where anarchy seems to reign----mixed-use trails: the lakeshore trail in chicago on a weekend in summer for example. there, the scariest situations do not involve pedestrians but rather bladers--particularly bad bladers--because their movements are arbitrary and they often do not look behind them when they decide it's a great idea to make a cut. same thing in philly on the loop that runs along the schuykill to the art museum. you have to yell alot to warn people you're coming---it's hard not to want to get up a head of steam on a trail because you can't really do it on the streets. i think everyone tends to obliviousness on these trails, for different reasons. but personally i think roller bladers are a menace.

Sorry RB, but every day going between work and the train station, I see a biker run a light, cut off a car, or barrel through a group of people walking (this is in the Chicago loop). I've been clipped and nearly hit several times by bikers who didn't respect the traffic signal.

You are right, in some cases, bikers do have to be aggressive not to get overrun, but many take it way too far and are downright dangerous on the road.

I've not seen a lot of inconsiderate drivers even when I was riding my bicycle almost every day. I think a part of it was that I do as you did, riding in an area that has less motor vehicle traffic. I'm guessing that he 'expected you to move onto the dirt shoulder but unless you had a dirt bicycle that could have caused you an accident. I doubt he did much bicycling.

I must admit that I have been a little inconsiderate myself at times but that's primarily when the bicyclers are riding in the middle of the road, looking oblivious to the traffic behind them that's backing up and acting like they own the road. I've even heard some cyclists with the attitude that motorists should give way to the 100% of the time because the 'ppor cyclists' could get hurt so much more easily. Yes motorists should be careful but also the cyclists should be careful not to hold up traffic or cause motorists to take risks that could cause accidents. For example, when the motorist you encountered, passed you, he could have easily hit an unseen oncoming car that was coming over the hill in front of you. He should not have honked like that though. Just doing so could have startled you into jerking your handbars and sent you flying into the ditch or road in front of him.

Yep this is a car nation, car world for that matter. I'm bigger, yet I'm secretly envious of you are on your bike. Breezing along.

Well, no. I live in Ottawa Canada, which has some of the best bike lanes and paths for cyclists in North America, and I will tell you,...come up here and see for yourself. 9/10 cyclists you will see within 1 minute will break a traffic law,...guaranteed.

Maybe the four feet of the paved road, encased by white lines (bicycle lanes) are not wide enough because most of these idiots bike 2 feet outside of them to the left and almost in the middle of the traffic lane. Sometimes 2 bikers side by side. Special now, aren't we!!

I can also tell you the ratio between cyclists disobeying the rules of the road compared to drivers on cell phones is about 100:1. So maybe cyclists who ride like assholes have cell phone envy, making them not paying attention to their surroundings, but rather completely oblivious to everything in sight.

To those of you who respect and obey the rules of the road, fellow cyclists, motorcyclists and vehicle drivers, keep setting an example with your behaviour. It can be contagious.

uh...have you ridden in a bike lane? you'd have to be an idiot to ride to the inside of them if there are parked cars. getting doored is not fun. trust me.

spec: i don't know, maybe things look differently from the sidewalk, or maybe the fact that i rode into the loop every day for 2 years wasn't long enough, but i seriously haven't seen much of what you're talking about. maybe a few who try to jet across an intersection under the mistaken belief they can beat the light--i dunno. groups of pedestrians crossing against a light--that i can kinda understand. but with the light? almost never. not even couriers, who usually get blamed for this sort of stuff.
but the loop is chaos--it's one of the most nerve-wracking places to ride a bike i've ever experienced.

i'm not saying anything never happens, btw--i just haven't seen much of it. nothing like what folk are talking about. and i've never been endangered by another biker--but i cannot tell you how many cars have put me in danger, often significant danger. the way i figure it, if i'm turning and have to get into the outside to do it, i'm going and i really don't care if it slows down drivers. i really don't. you have to act as though most people in cars are not going to see you, that they're potential problems. if you don't do that, you don't ride in busy areas of the city.

come to think of it, i know at least a half dozen friends who have been hit by cars while riding.

I agree that there is a lack of respect for cyclists out there. However I don't believe it's simply a matter of car drivers disrespecting cyclists. It's simply a matter of people not respecting others in general.

With regards to cycling and driving: I used to cycle nearly every day and it reached the point where the stress of getting to the lakeshore almost undid the pleasure of cycling along the lakeshore. While I was never subjected to the kind of hostile treatment that has been described here, I have witnessed other cyclists victim of aggressive and hostile drivers. What eventually stopped me cycling was the theft of my bike.

Having said that, I also have to agree with spectre with regards to cyclists around the downtown area. There seems to be a general snobbery among the cycling elite that seems to emanate from their pores. I see on a daily basis the blatant disregard for traffic laws exhibited by cyclists in the loop. In fact, I will say that I have never, ever seen a cyclist stop at a red light - as is the law. I have never, ever seen a cyclist yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk - as is also the law.

I've been on public transportation where the bus has been forced to slam on its brakes because a cyclist swerved in front of a bus in order to make a right turn.

I feel little sympathy for cyclists who cry foul at drivers when those same cyclists have no respect for pedestrians or the traffic laws to which they are supposed to adhere. Likewise, I sympathize with cyclists who obey the laws of the road and are continually put in danger with impatient or inattentive drivers. The cyclists who ride down Diversey take their lives in their hands as it's a fairly narrow street with a lot of parked cars, a lot of traffic, and little room for error.

You have to own the lane if your going to be on a busy road. I avoid major road ways, only using when forced (rare) and only use rural roads and less busy area's. When riding on busy road you have to own the lane nearest the shoulder, ride in the wheel rut.

If you don't you risk having drivers pass you full speed with only inches between you. Not good. If you own the lane than you force the drivers to slow down and wait to pass you. I try and think of it as when you were a kid you probably saw alot more tractors on the roads going back and forth between fields. Same thing as i am going the same speed (25-40kmh).

I try and respect the rules of the road but I lack and run lights etc when in non traffic situations. I am trying to stop chasing drivers down who brush me too. we all can be on the roads but some should be avoided due to speeds and traffic. common sense must be used.

I agree - it's every bit as bad in Toronto (and Montreal and London). Cyclists don't like to slow down or stop - the effort to get going again is something to be avoided. So stop signs and red lights are mere suggestions to many of this lot.

As a driver, I do my best, but if you are in the middle of the lane in a 45 zone going 25, you're going to piss me off. And if you throw something at me as I pass, I might decide to run you down. That's something you have to factor in to the equation.

Here as well (New Jersey)
I live in an area that is very busy with people-the majority of whom are immigrants-who ride bicycles and they do not stop for lights(even if opposing green light traffic is in full movement), weave back and forth in traffic and on and off sidewalks, doing this all while fully expecting cars to stop on a dime when they do so.
I have also been on country roads where groups of cyclists will ride two or three abreast and fully expect cars or motorcycles to go around them, even if it means crossing a double yellow to do so. If the road is that narrow, they shouldn't be in that thick of a grouping.

If you really want to see aggressive cyclists, spend a day in Manhattan. Then again, it's survival of the fittest there.

I really think the mentality of many cyclists is no different than that of drivers. Unfortunately, that mentality has taken a nosedive when it comes to respect, following basic rules and using common sense.

Northern Virginia has *the* worst bicyclers. When they're in traffic, they assume the part of any other vehicle and take up as much space as a car. But come a red light, all of a sudden they become pedestrians and weave through stopped traffic to run the light.

There are multi-use paths all over this area, but that's not quite enough. Those are only for convenience should a stop sign be in the way on the road.

And I say this as a cyclist.

Hutchinson, Kansas is the worst town to be a cyclist in. Full of rednecks, half educated and underemployed, they take out their anger on cyclists. I've had cigarettes pitched at me, a carload of thugs tried to remove me from bike (they were involved in a club shooting the very next week), and one shirtless, messed up hair, cheek full of tobacco redneck just openly laughed at me for being on a bicycle. I wasn't wearing spandex and had a shirt on, and he was laughing at me.

I hate Kansas.

This is what I was here to say and JJ, you just beat me too it and said it well.

We've all been assholes at some point, and sometimes we expect that the rules don't apply to us because of our particular situation. It would be nice to say that we all follow the law 100% of the time, but we all know that's just not true.

Back in the day, I ran a lot. I've run in rural Iowa and only had 2 incidents involving aggressive drivers (one of which almost evolved into a fight). I've run in Southern California with no incidents beyonds being heckled by some kids. I've been hit by cars once in Tennessee (7 stitches) and Illinois (twice, both with cars coming out of alleys) and by a bike once in Illinois (he definitely got the worst of it since I ran on and he took an ambulance to the hospital with at least a broken collarbone). Of those 6 incidents, I was at fault twice (I was being a dickhead in IA and I was jaywalking in TN). In all of them, I was insanely lucky I wasn't injured or injured more seriously. One of the reasons that I wasn't is that I always try to be aware of my surroundings, even when I'm in the middle of nowhere or if I'm behind the wheel.

Pedestrians in a cross-walk ALWAYS have the right of way, especially if there's no light (in Illinois anyway - your state may be different but probably not). There are no exceptions. If they're off the sidewalk and in the cross-walk, you have to stop, whether you're on a bike or in a car. I'll admit that I don't always stop at stop signs when I'm on my bike, but I do if there's another car in the intersection. And having been in the receiving end, I make damn sure I know where the bikers are when I'm driving or getting ready to get out of my parallel-parked car.

I can only be responsible for me. If others on the road can't do the same, I just make note of them and stay as far aways as possible. And I avoid as many surprises as possible.

I definitely agree that it comes down more to the person than the vehicle they happen to be driving/riding.

I've noticed that driving on the shoulder/white line can result in overthinking and even sudden moves when I know a car is behind me, and thus I don't take issue at all with a concerned beep that lets me know a car is coming up on me. When riding, I'm generally staying in a very tight area, and I'm quite good at not weaving all over the place, but other drivers don't know this; they are likely seeing me on the road for the first time. If I do swerve a bit out, that could spook them and cause them to overreact, even though I'm pretty good at correcting myself and staying straight.

I've also found that looking back over the shoulder to check for traffic often results in my body following, resulting in a slight swerve, which can be troubling if there is in fact a car coming up behind me. One of the guys at the bike shop I go to has mirrors that attach to to the bottom of his handlebar grips (Google search result example: http://www.aspirevelotech.com/Listings/Mirror.htm) and he's said these mirrors have saved his life a few times on the road.

There is a multi-path use I was on yesterday in the earlier portion of my ride, and those can be tricky, as you often have families on bikes, people walking, and runners. I'm very respectful of others when I ride, but even then, a kid riding with his family can swerve suddenly or cause a potential incident, so it's best to be careful in general.

Country roads are great to ride on, and while they do have less traffic, they also tend to have less shoulder, more blind turns, less visibility and thus just as much risk of accident. I guess the key is to just be as safe and considerate as possible and hope for the best. They're called accidents for a reason, but it's certainly possible to reduce the chances of one occurring.

I think it would be nice if people had a more open mind and put themselves in the shoes of others while on the road. When driving in an urban environment, I've had cars follow behind me on stretches of road without any parked cars, only to have them pass me when I get to an area with cars parked along the curb. I can't help but imagine myself driving into an recently opened car door, and this train of thought is generally followed by images of how badly I'd be hurt when this in fact happened. One of the images that is stuck in my head, likely until the day I die, is of a UCI Pro Tour cyclist riding down a cobblestone hill in the Gent-Wevelgem race only to fall directly on his face and be mangled, badly. If nothing else, it motivates me to drive as safely as possible so that I minimize the odds of myself being involved in such an accident; though I don't see myself driving on cobblestones any time soon. ;)

Cyclists and drivers have to come to an understanding. I give cyclists a wide berth, and I wait for a safe time and give them a quick tap of the horn to let them know I'm going to pass. Most cyclists keep in the shoulder when possible and make themselves as little of an inconvenience to traffic when there's no option but to use a lane (which they have every legal right to do.)

Some drivers think bikes should stay off the road, and a noticeable number of cyclists feel no obligation to follow traffic laws. I suspect that if asshole drivers were given bicycles and forced to ride, they would blow red lights and keep a pocketful of rocks to throw at bad drivers. Similarly, I suspect that these cyclists who ride like jackasses would be the drivers in the 3-ton SUV or bright red sports car weaving through traffic, speeding, and treating the first five seconds of the red light like it's still yellow. There's a superiority/inferiority complex duality between the two because of the size, power, and safety imbalance between cars and bikes. In the end, I think people just need to chill out, leave ten minutes early so they have a buffer, and show a bit of courtesy toward fellow road-goers.

These are guidelines for people using the recreational paths in my neck of the woods.(Ottawa Canada)

http://www.canadascapital.ca/bins/nc...&lang=1&bhcp=1

Cyclists posting vehicles parked in bike lanes

Cars parked illegally in bike lanes in Ottawa tagged as ottawa on - MyBikeLane.com

The law (according to Ministry of Transportation in Ontario Canada)

Cycling Skills - 5) Cycling and The Law

All this talk of laws is irrelevant. Traffic laws only apply when there is a cop around. I think most drivers/cyclists follow the golden rule and the ones who don't are the same ones who are typically referred to as assholes.

I must be one of those inconsiderate motorists out there. If there isn't a specific 'bike lane' on the road, I don't think a bicycle should be out there on it. Roadways are for MOTORIZED vehicles. If I had a dime for every time someone on a bicycle road in front of me doing 25 under the speed limit, I'd be giving Gates a run for his money.

As a motorcycle rider myself, it's already dangerous enough when you've got an engine under you to get out of harm's reach. The solution is more bike lanes, not cars and bicycles learning to share the road. They shouldn't be. Bicycles need to get off my fuckin road!

There has been some talk (and really nothing but talk up to this point) about cyclists becoming licensed and requiring insurance. So far the idea is a no go, especially among cyclists for obvious reasons

Unfortunately for you, the law contradicts your opinion in most of the US.

Let me remove all doubt from your mind: YOU ARE AN INCONSIDERATE - AND DANGEROUS - MOTORIST. If that's your usual attitude while driving anyway. The rule of the road is that any vehicle that can legally be on that road (in other words, excluding dumbass bikers that think they can be on an interstate) has to share the road with other vehicles. If they're street-legal, then they're all equall in the eyes of the law.

There are inconsiderate bikers and inconsiderate drivers. I try to never be either, although I don't always succeed at that.

I agree. If it's a road where the bike can't maintain the posted speed limit or there's no bike lane or shoulder, then bikes shouldn't be there. It's dangerous for everyone not just the biker. This goes for many moped riders as well. Both bikes and mopeds ride this grey area between following traffic laws and following the 'pedestrian right of way'.

---------- Post added at 05:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:48 PM ----------

Who's more inconsiderate and dangerous: the 99% of people on the road who are motorists, or the 1% of bikers slowing everyone else down and creating even more dangerous situations than already exists on the road.

I live at 8500' above Boulder, CO. My commute time in the winter is 30-35 min. In the summer, it can double due to recreational bicyclists that just can't comprehend that "share the road" applies to them, too. Despite signs everywhere stating "single file law applies", they ride 2 and 3 accross. We are talking about a winding canyon road that has a single passing zone in 15 miles. Even after the county widened the road to install a bicycle lane uphill, groups opt not to use it forcing all traffic to cross a double yellow line around blind corners to get by.

If bicycles are out, I am generally on a motorcycle, rather than a car. Even then, the bicycles are hard to miss. I've been clipped twice while passing them within a foot of the center line. Honestly, you'd think that if I can control an 800# motorcycle and keep it within a foot or so of the center line, a bicycle could manage to stay within the other 8'. In a few cases, I've used the bicycle lane to pass groups, where it seemed that their intent was to specifically block me.

I'm courteous if the bicyclists are, as well. 90% of the time, this is the case. However, I have no choice but to commute this path to work.

I saw some old dude on a bike (riding opposite the direction of travel) the other day get all butthurt that a car was blocking the sidewalk. I my younger days I would have let the guy know that (1) he was riding the wrong direction and (2) he's not supposed to be riding on the sidewalk in the first place.

If the motorists aren't following the rule of the road, then the motorists. If the bikers aren't by riding 2 or more across, then the bikers. And if a runner is on the same road and is following the same rule (only facing traffic), then he's got just as much right as everyone else to be out there. Being in a car in no way grants special rights, which is, of course, what you're claiming here. Surprise! You don't have any. Just like the bikers. Everyone is equal.

~~~~~

Eh. I don't often see bicyclists adhering to the same speed range. As someone who biked frequently back in Michigan and has yet to drive since moving to Seattle, I really don't understand the idea of bikes and motor frickin' vehicles sharing the same lanes. I know it's widespread, I know it's accepted, it still strikes me as insane.

One more vote for Jinn's view.

FTA - I didn't say that it makes sense or is even the best thing, but that is the law most places. On local roads and state highways (assuming that they aren't a part of an interstate highway or subject to specific local laws) there is no minimum speed limit. There is, though, a maximum speed limit. Although it is almost the universal practice, you are not required to travel at the maximum speed limit, regardless of the vehicle. Again, motor vehicle drivers don't have special rules.

yeah, in the end it doesn't matter what you do and do not understand--it doesn't matter if you like the fact there are bikers or not---99% of drivers seem to be able to navigate the complexity of seeing a bike and not doing anything stupid because their Sovereign Bourgeois Progress is inflected thereby. you have to deal with it, just like people like me have to deal with you.

i'm getting more interested in returning to the question in the op though--so far we see that there are frictions between drivers and cyclists (and runners)--but there's no real exploration of why that is the case. i find it curious that, for example, folk point to bikers "not obeying the rules"---which in all probability you do not entirely adhere to yourself (like speeding or driving while buzzed or without a seatbelt or while talking on your cellphone)---but when it comes to bikes, folk are suddenly Great Upholders of the Sanctity of the Rules. why is that?

for myself, alot of the attitude i've developed comes just from people doing little things that in another space probably would have meant nothing, but which happened in a place that endangered my life in some cases (nearly getting crushed by cars, getting bumped by them while riding, getting doored, hundreds of near misses). trying to get through areas on a weekend night that are full with drunken stupid people can also be a great delight. nothing better than bottles being thrown at you or ultra-erratic driving to perk a boy right up. but most of this follows from being in a vulnerable position.

but it reinforces the broader position i have that the decision in american city planning to open urban spaces up for automobile traffic in the way that happened after world war 2 was a terrible one. there's no reason people should drive into or out of a city for the most part. more public transit=more better. more bikes=more better. think of the amount of dead space created by asphalt lines drawn back and forth across a cityscape. think of the environmental consequences of the traffic. the diminuition of the quality of life caused directly and indirectly by traffic. the expense of maintaining infrastructure. all so the suburbanites can get into and out of the giant mall that is a city.

i'm not advocating a total driving ban--but rather a rethink of the dominant transportation model in urban regions---not just cities, but in the regions that interact with urban centers---abandoning this silly town model, moving toward regional ones.

and i'm not arguing that everyone should ride a bike either. the only reason i do it is that i enjoy it. nothing principled about it really. i'd just rather not be taking my life into my hands when i do it.

As a heavy user of public transportation, everyday pedestrian, and occasional cyclist, I agree with you for the most part, roachboy. Larger cities especially would thrive more if they found a way to further open up safer channels for non-automotive traffic. I, for one, would ride my bike far more if I didn't feel like I were risking my life and limb for a simple 15-minute journey. I'd go as far as 30 minutes to 45 minutes easily if I felt it was reasonably safe.

I'm a by-the-book kind of guy when it comes to traffic rules, and I seriously think there are a good number of cyclists and drivers alike that need to wake the fuck up and realize they're within a society, not on a Kessel Run.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 :D

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.

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.

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.

Sounds familiar.

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

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.

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'.

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

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

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.

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'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.

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.

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

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.

Thanks? :confused: :rolleyes:

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

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.

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.

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.

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". :shakehead:

I say 'share the road' :thumbsup:

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 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.

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).

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.

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.

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 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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

the Idaho Stop
 

Since Snowy mentioned it earlier in the thread, I thought I'd post this video demonstrating the mechanics of the proposed Idaho Stop legislation that apparently failed in Oregon.


Judging from the post history on the thread, this won't do anything to win over the hearts of those who feel bikes don't belong on roads without lanes dedicated to their use, but as a cyclist that values my forward momentum, I feel this is a step in the right direction.

Most of the time I have no problem whatsoever with cyclists - I have friends and family that cycle absolutely everywhere - my parents both ride over 6km to work everyday for example.

When don't I respect cyclists? When they do dangerous things that put themselves, me and whoever is in the car with me at risk of an accident - when they are riding down the centre of a lane at under 30km, when they decide it's perfectly ok to ride across the road without checking for traffic, when they don't wear lights or reflective clothing of any kind and I'm meant to use my psychic powers to see them at night, when they ride to the very front of the lane while we're stopped at lights not realising that the entire reason motocycle riders do that is because they have a faster acceleration then most cars which the majority of cyclists do not.

Take everything I hate about pedestrians while I'm driving and add the belief that they belong on the road and you get about 90% of cyclists it seems. The ones that tell me when they're turning (indicate), wear protective gear and obey road rules I have no grudge towards. Unfortunately as seems to be so often the case it's those responsisble cyclists that seem to be in the minority.

I should probably add that the majority of the ity I am living in has specially built bicycle pathways next to almost every major road (not on highways or freeways) this means the path is built out of larger blocks is smooth (as opposed to paving) and 2 or 3 times as wide as a pedestrian footpath - cyclists just decide to use the road anyways.

Here on my side of town, the cyclists don't respect the drivers. They think just because they're on a bike, stop signs don't apply to them, which last time I checked, they're supposed to abide by these signs just like every other person.

And they insist on riding down roads with heavy traffic when they'd do themselves and everyone else a huge favor by keeping their sport for subdivisions or parks.

Plus I don't like spandex. http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/2267/icon11h.png

there are assclowns on both sides of the story, but the ones in the cars seem to outnumber the cyclists.

i've had people tell me how they hate cyclists on the road and how when they see them they like to drive up close to them and push them off the road. they are so cute when they find out i'm a cyclist who commutes and rides all over. i think they are jealous. they are sitting in traffic while cyclists are whizzing past them, they are in thier car while cyclists are in the fresh air. they are spending money on gas, etc etc.

i could never figure out why me on a bicycle is a threat to a dude in a huge truck, enough so he gets close to me, revs his engine, call me faggot, etc. and i don't even wear lycra shorts or a cycling jersey.

here are my reasons:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...n_reaction.jpg


Hunter College Bicycle Study in NYC

The other day I was on the sidewalk walking down the street when a bicyclist on the SIDEWALK actually was MAD that I was in their way. The other day I was crossing with the light, and a bicyclist shouted at me because they were running the light and wanted to alert me that they were going to cross in front of me.

that guy is an assclown who needs to be punched. it bothers me when i see adults on bicycles on the sidewalk. adults riding a bicycle on the sidewalk are as ignorant as the ones in the cars who get angry that a cyclist is on "their" road. grrrrr, humans make me so angry sometimes.

Just my opinion, but these aren't very reasonable reasons to not respect bicyclists.

First of all, if you are going to base your level of respect for an entire mode of transportation based on operator adherence to traffic laws, you wouldn't respect anyone.

It has been my personal experience that everyone, cyclists, drivers and pedestrians routinely violate traffic laws. And why wouldn't they? The important criteria is risk (consequences x probability of getting caught/injured)- it is generally no more risky for a cyclist to run a red light than it is for a pedestrian to jaywalk or for an automobile to exceed the posted speed limit by 5-15 mph.

These routine violations of traffic law only become an issue when they are done carelessly. Carelessness is a human attribute, it isn't the sole domain of the cyclist. I think that most people who attribute their disdain for cyclists to some sort of chaste notion traffic law conformity are full of shit.

Second, the act of basing your respect for individuals on general statistics is a symptom of a lazy mind. I mean, it's one thing to use statistical descriptions of how people behave to form public policy. It's another to use those same descriptions to preemptively dismiss people you've never even met.

It's not as simple as that filth. It's just a matter of expectation. I expect cars and taxis to act a particular way in Manhattan. I know that taxis will cross 3 lanes of traffic to catch a fare. I know that cars will make left turns from the right lane in heavily trafficked area.

If I'm crossing the ONE way street I'm not expecting ANY moving traffic to be coming at me from a different direction than the ONE way that all the vehicles are coming from. I can't tell you how many times I've been almost hit or yelled at to "Watch it!" from a biker going down the ONE way street from the wrong direction. Apparently according to your posts, I'm the asshole for doing the normal codified behavior, and the deviating behavior is the one that's in the right.

So this group is trying to do something about it.

for the benefit of those others to know what the laws are...



---------- Post added at 12:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:54 AM ----------

re: the rolling stops, well cars are most efficient in the same manner and for the same reasons. Why wouldn't you give them the same kind of pass?

Right, but if this is happening enough to justify your ire, then perhaps you ought to reevaluate your expectations, because they are clearly inadequate.

And if you think I think you're the asshole for only looking one way when you cross a one way street, then you've misread me. I realize that cyclists can be assholes. What I've also been trying to point out is that being an asshole is a human property, not a cyclist property, and so making the distinction between cyclists and drivers with respect to assholish behavior is silly.

The chance that someone is an asshole increases dramatically if that person criticizes cyclists for not obeying traffic laws while s/he routinely disobeys traffic laws. Do you ever jaywalk? As far as I can tell, 99.999999% of all drivers who criticize cyclists for not obeying traffic laws fall into this category.

But I appreciate the fact that you've brought up what this driver/cyclist conflict is really about, which is that drivers and cyclists tend to have differing expectations for how cyclists should behave.

I predict that if expectations were to become more realistic, and if folks on either side stopped hiding behind self righteous generalizations, that the problem would largely cease to exist.

I just want to note the irony in the fact that the article quotes a pedestrian as an authority on predictable behavior. I don't know how many times I've had to swerve to avoid oblivious pedestrians. Even so, I would never say that I don't respect pedestrians as a group.

From what you said above it seemed to me that you were of the mind that breaking the law is okay, as long as you personally aren't surprised by it. Maybe you should have listed your expectations?

It depends on what you mean by efficiency. Cyclists actually produce the energy used to propel their bicycles. Drivers don't. In terms of personal energy expenditure, momentum represents a much larger personal energy expenditure when one is on a bicycle than when one is driving a car.

I guess I need to update my sig again to include drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists.

Do it. :thumbsup:

Cyn,

cheers to that. :)

The law is the law, but in many cases car drivers are giving themselves that pass already. From something I saw today:

Source: Why do they do that? Traffic lights and stop signs

No they are not giving themselves that pass. They are taking it. I'm referring specifically to your video where they are saying that it will be legal for bikers to roll through stops. If it's good for them, why not also for cars for the same "efficiency" reasons. Hypermilers would love it.

The difference is that I see and know of citations being handed out for "California stops" as they were called back home, whereas I do not see bikers ever getting any kind of citations. The only time I have seen bikers in NYC get any citations have been for the Critical Mass rides.

In Minneapolis, unless there is something egregious about a rolling stop, you'd be hard pressed to get a ticket regardless of whether you're in a car or on a bike. Such is the nature of an overworked, undersized police department.

That being said, I know people who have been ticketed for rolling stops on bikes and I know of pedestrians who've been ticketed for jaywalking.

Visibility is also a factor. On a bike, when I approach a stop at the normal 10-15mph that I usually go (unless I'm stomping, which is rare these days) I can see in nearly any direction for a good distance and determine if I can roll through a stop.

In a car, when I approach a stop at 30-35 mph I don't have the visibility nor do I have the reaction time to safely roll through.

Cars are dangerous things; I don't care how good a drive you think you are. Your reaction time and the stopping time, your visibility is not as good as a bike. I'm not saying that all cyclists are better at these things ... but given proper training for either vehicle the bike is simply safer.

Besides, it's not about your cars efficiency (except from a fuel standpoint, and if that's what you're worried about you should probably ride a bike) ... all the car driver has to do is press on a pedal and get going; this requires almost no effort. From a dead stop a cyclist has to balance the bike and move slowly through an intersection; which can be more dangerous than just rolling through if there are no cars present.

My point of view is that motorists are simply complaining that they have to expend a little more effort in turning that oh-so-difficult steering wheel, or pressing on that gosh-darned gas or break pedal. It takes absolutely no effort to drive a car, it can take some mental acuity, and if most drivers were as good as they say they are they would have no difficulty avoiding pedestrians and cyclists.

But that's just my rant. I ride a bike to work every day. I break the rules and ride off-road as much as possible. Which pisses off the motorists who think I should obey every law they obey, but when I do obey the laws they get pissed off because "I'm in their way." As far as bikes are concerned it's damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't so screw it. I don't purposely pull out in front of cars, I don't purposely try to piss off the drivers--I try to avoid them as much as possible.

So then a motorcycle should also be able to roll through stops in the same manner at the same 10-15 mph speed. Visibility is the same especially in states with no helmet laws.

Possibly. However, the question of efficiency still applies. It takes little effort to twist a wrist. The wobbliness still counts though ... motorcycles are harder to control from take off and at lower speeds.

The main difference I see is motorized vs. non-motorized.

Originally Posted by vanblah
Visibility is also a factor. On a bike, when I approach a stop at the normal 10-15mph that I usually go (unless I'm stomping, which is rare these days) I can see in nearly any direction for a good distance and determine if I can roll through a stop.

In a car, when I approach a stop at 30-35 mph I don't have the visibility nor do I have the reaction time to safely roll through.

Cars are dangerous things; I don't care how good a drive you think you are. Your reaction time and the stopping time, your visibility is not as good as a bike. I'm not saying that all cyclists are better at these things ... but given proper training for either vehicle the bike is simply safer.

Besides, it's not about your cars efficiency (except from a fuel standpoint, and if that's what you're worried about you should probably ride a bike) ... all the car driver has to do is press on a pedal and get going; this requires almost no effort. From a dead stop a cyclist has to balance the bike and move slowly through an intersection; which can be more dangerous than just rolling through if there are no cars present.

My point of view is that motorists are simply complaining that they have to expend a little more effort in turning that oh-so-difficult steering wheel, or pressing on that gosh-darned gas or break pedal. It takes absolutely no effort to drive a car, it can take some mental acuity, and if most drivers were as good as they say they are they would have no difficulty avoiding pedestrians and cyclists.

But that's just my rant. I ride a bike to work every day. I break the rules and ride off-road as much as possible. Which pisses off the motorists who think I should obey every law they obey, but when I do obey the laws they get pissed off because "I'm in their way." As far as bikes are concerned it's damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't so screw it. I don't purposely pull out in front of cars, I don't purposely try to piss off the drivers--I try to avoid them as much as possible.

To me this is exactly why cars don't play well with bikes. After you pass them they run back past you at red lights and you have to pass them again (often in a narrower place and they have no respect for the "rules of the road". In a perfect world--like Boulder Colorado-- There would be bike lanes and roads everywhere to make life safer and easier for evryone

In Memphis the narrowest part of the road is usually at an intersection where they have tried to squeeze in a turn lane. If I am at an intersection like this in the far right lane I usually have a car pull up right next to me. This is dangerous and against the law. You may not pass any vehicle in it's own lane unless there is three or more feet of clearance.

I think we've been over the whole "respect for the rules of the road" argument. There is fault on all sides with regard to this. Cars, motorcycles, bicycles, pedestrians all have people who don't respect the rules of the road. It's not just bicycles.