Advocacy & Safety - I believe....

Just trying to get a feel for where folks here stand on the notion that cyclists should stay out of the way of cars.

By the way, all of the polls I have been launching lately, including this one, are not "anonymous."
Why hide identity? If you don't want us to know what your opinion is, then why participate in these forums at all?
And if you're not willing to defend/explain your choice, then I, for one, am not interested in knowing what it is.

I voted none as my position is:

"Cyclists should move out of the way of motorists when and only when it is safe and practical because it's polite."

Al

I voted none as my position is:

"Cyclists should move out of the way of motorists when and only when it is safe to do because it's polite."

Al
So if you need to get in the way of motorists in order to get to a left turn lane, you would stay out of the way of faster motorists? After all, it's the polite and safe thing to do in that situation, is it not?

So if you need to get in the way of motorists in order to get to a left turn lane, you would stay out of the way of faster motorists? After all, it's the polite and safe thing to do in that situation, is it not?
Of course not, I should have said: "move over when and only when it is safe and practical" I edited my original statement above.

It would not be practical to move over toward right if one was intending to turn left.

Al

I'll state the obvious...I use common sense. If I have to get in the middle of the lane and stay there for some reason, then I have no problems doing it. At the same time I do not enjoy riding with those that feel the need to educate motorists about their rights.

Sure I've flipped off a car or two (literally 1 or 2) in 19 years of riding, but it never solves anything. I also make it a point not to yell, "Oh yeah? Well when the revolution comes I'm going to melt down that SUV and make myself a bike out of it!" <--Heard on ride last year. . . not reccommended, but hilarious when said in the correct tone of voice....

So if you need to get in the way of motorists in order to get to a left turn lane, you would stay out of the way of faster motorists? After all, it's the polite and safe thing to do in that situation, is it not?

But it is contridictory to making the turn.

Personally I tend to ride out of the way of motorists so I don't have to deal with them... If I am out of the way, they tend to easily flow past me... otherwise both myself and the motorists have to continually negotiate. Now "not dealing with them" does not mean ignoring them.

But I generally believe as noisebeam stated:
"Cyclists should move out of the way of motorists when and only when it is safe to do because it's polite."

It is simply a matter of reducing conflict. That doesn't mean that conflicts do not arise... they do everyday, as there are many streets in my area that require "taking the lane" simply to get on down the road. In these cases I am right in the lane (slightly to left or right of middle) and holding that position until it is safe to do otherwise.

But generally speaking, I tend to stay out of the way... but have no problem getting in their way, if the need arises.

By law in most states bicycles are vehicles and cyclists should obey all traffic laws. Since they are frequently moving more slowly than most vehicles around them cyclists should pay extra attention to the laws and customs governing slow moving vehicles.

I believe Cyclists should work and communicate with motorists as much as possible. Let them pass when it is reasonable to do so. If the motorist has shown the cyclist he is a total moron then I would recommend staying out of his way and let natural selection follow him away from you.

I try to avoid the topic entirely and ride for fun and exercise.

I believe Cyclists should work and communicate with motorists as much as possible. Let them pass when it is reasonable to do so. If the motorist has shown the cyclist he is a total moron then I would recommend staying out of his way and let natural selection follow him away from you.
+1

I intend to stay alive\ out of harms way and use whatever means to do so. End of discussion.

None of the above/other

Cyclist should feel no absolutely obligation to stay out of the way of cars. All roads and highways, unless privately owned or designated otherwise, are public access multi-use facilities.

It's not so much that I am in there way as that they are choosing to be in a hurry.

I intend to stay alive\ out of harms way and use whatever means to do so. End of discussion.
I like the way you think.

Danka :)

I think all road users should cooperate to stay out of one another's way and maximize the smooth flow of traffic while maximizing the utility of scarce resources like parking spots. No reason why the burdens should apply to a single user class.

Paul

By the way, all of the polls I have been launching lately, including this one, are not "anonymous."
Why hide identity? If you don't want us to know what your opinion is, then why participate in these forums at all?
And if you're not willing to defend/explain your choice, then I, for one, am not interested in knowing what it is.

If you're not with us, you're against us! Sound familiar? Why is it so important for you to know each individual's vote? I understand you take this thing to heart, but jeez, dude, lighten up...

Why should it be up to the cyclist? Where's the option for "The motorist should respect the cyclist's space and right to the road, be patient, and drive in a safe, responsible manner?"

If you're not with us, you're against us! Sound familiar? Why is it so important for you to know each individual's vote? I understand you take this thing to heart, but jeez, dude, lighten up...
I'm not interested in knowing what someone thinks if he or she has not thought about it enough to be able to explain and defend it. I want to poll those who have really thought about the issue; I have no interest in baseless opinions. I believe making voters visible helps filter out the "riff-raff" votes, if you will.

If someone can't explain why he has the opinion that he has, because he doesn't understand himself why he has the opinion that he has, then he is probably less likely to vote in a poll where people can see how he voted and ask him about it.

I want to encourage informed and thoughtful opinions. I want to encourage folks to get informed and really understand why they believe what they believe. I believe "open" polls do that better more than "closed" polls.

Why should it be up to the cyclist? Where's the option for "The motorist should respect the cyclist's space and right to the road, be patient, and drive in a safe, responsible manner?"Motorists don't even respect the space of other motorists. Until they do I'm going to keep in mind that my 175 pound bike and rider are no match for a 3000 pound car if the car wants to push the issue.

SS

Motorists don't even respect the space of other motorists. Until they do I'm going to keep in mind that my 175 pound bike and rider are no match for a 3000 pound car if the car wants to push the issue.

SS

Then you agree, that the motorist is the problem and not the cyclist.

I voted none as my position is:

"Cyclists should move out of the way of motorists when and only when it is safe and practical because it's polite."

Al

+1. I also second Psimet2001 in saying, "I use common sense."

What's the big hang-up with this topic? If the question is "Should a cyclist ride down the middle of the street?", I say NO. "Should a cyclist stay as far to the right of the road as possible?", I say YES.

What's the big hang-up with this topic? If the question is "Should a cyclist ride down the middle of the street?", I say NO. "Should a cyclist stay as far to the right of the road as possible?", I say YES.
Do you see yourself as a cycling advocate?

Then you agree, that the motorist is the problem and not the cyclist.
Absolutely.
The vast majority of drivers don't pay attention, or they think of no one but themselves. Not to pat myself on the back but I'm a very careful and observant driver. This is due to many years of riding a bicycle and a motorcycle and being a target of some brain-dead driver once in a while. I'm very aware of my responsibility to see what's around me because I know what it's like to be on the other side. The problem is most drivers don't.
That being said, my point was that while the problem lies with the motorist, I'm not willing to press the issue of who's right or wrong with a 3000 lb. car travelling 30 or 40 mph. Whether I'm right or wrong I'll lose. Catastophically. I somewhat admire those VCs who do ride more like they're another car, and maybe 25 years I would have been right there too. But not these days. Too many other things to live for.

SS

Polite should not be part of the equation when it comes to moving with traffic, be it on a bike or in a a car. More often than not, being polite to one person entails holding up a third person. And disrupting the flow of traffic by needlessly yielding your right of way can create situations that are dangerous to yourself and others.

Instead of politely staying out of the way, I vote for "Ride where you must in order to respectfully assert your right to maintain a safe and efficient position in trafic." Rights that are not exercised are surrendered.

I intend to stay alive\ out of harms way and use whatever means to do so. End of discussion.

AMEN!

My feelings exactly.

I trust NO ONE on the road.

jw

I do not think I am under any obligation to accommodate motorists by moving out of their way. I ride just about the same line all the time: 2 to 3 feet left of the edge of the road, curb or fog line. I will ride on the shoulder of a high-speed road if the shoulder is a consistent width and free of hazards. I never see cars moving out of my way. Nor do I ever notice farm equipment or slow moving trucks getting out of the way for faster cars. I will, however try to keep things safe and facilitate passing by hand-signalling on roads with short sight distances. Some drivers respond to hand signals and some would just prefer to take their chances passing with no sight distance and hoping not to hit an oncoming vehicle.

I'm not interested in knowing what someone thinks if he or she has not thought about it enough to be able to explain and defend it. I want to poll those who have really thought about the issue; I have no interest in baseless opinions. I believe making voters visible helps filter out the "riff-raff" votes, if you will.

If someone can't explain why he has the opinion that he has, because he doesn't understand himself why he has the opinion that he has, then he is probably less likely to vote in a poll where people can see how he voted and ask him about it.

I want to encourage informed and thoughtful opinions. I want to encourage folks to get informed and really understand why they believe what they believe. I believe "open" polls do that better more than "closed" polls.

So why do we have the "anonymous" voting system in most democratic countries? You've delineated your choices in your polls so much, I would imagine it would take some well thought out opinions from the "riff-raff" to make a choice. I've got news for you: The way you create your polls and the requirements for someone to back up their choice DO NOT encourage informed and thoughtful opinions. Whatever, I've already wasted enough time on this...

So why do we have the "anonymous" voting system in most democratic countries?
By keeping votes anonymous in a democratic society, those in political power cannot use the political power against those who do not support them.

That is not an issue in bike forums, LOL.

By keeping votes anonymous in a democratic society, those in political power cannot use the political power against those who do not support them.

That is not an issue in bike forums, LOL.

Yep. Pick the argument safest to retort. You're still full of it...

Huh? What argument(s)? You asked a question and I answered it. You don't think the rest of your #29 was an argument, do you?

On a narrow winding road or hill, I think it is polite to pull over and let the traffic pass if a queue builds up behind you. This also applies to cars pulling heavy trailers and other slow moving wehicles.

Then you agree, that the motorist is the problem and not the cyclist.

SOME motorists are a problem. SOME cyclists are a problem. SOME pedestrians are a problem.
Sometimes I think that half of the arguments on this forum result from the sweeping generalities that get tossed around. :)

Gee, I'm sorry. I didn't realize someone being in political power was a prequisite for wanting to have an anonymous poll... :cry:

I simply do everything I can to avoid motorists whenever possible because...well...everyone here is crazy. ;)

It's not so much that I am in there way as that they are choosing to be in a hurry.


Well that is a fresh point of view... gee, if they all just slowed down we could all get along. I like it.

Yup, one thing I really enjoy about both biking and sailing is you cannot be "in a hurry." Oh you can try, but it will frustrate the heck out of you.

:)

I say use the space you need...SHARE the road. Taking the entire lane is NOT sharing, it's hogging the road. Let motorists pass you as easily as possible without jeopardizing your own safety. After all it's everyone's road.

Safety is many factors....and taking the lane ignores hte most important factor...risk of road rage. It happens, and last thing you need is to be on the recieving end of it. Best way to deal with that is to just use the posrtion of the lane that is needed to be safe, and no more. To me that is the right 1/3rd of the lane.

I say use the space you need...SHARE the road. Taking the entire lane is NOT sharing, it's hogging the road. Let motorists pass you as easily as possible without jeopardizing your own safety. After all it's everyone's road.

Safety is many factors....and taking the lane ignores hte most important factor...risk of road rage. It happens, and last thing you need is to be on the recieving end of it. Best way to deal with that is to just use the posrtion of the lane that is needed to be safe, and no more. To me that is the right 1/3rd of the lane.
Why is the right 1/3 better than the middle if passing vehicles have to merge into the adjacent lane anyway?
I find the closer I ride to the curb, the less likely vehicles will pass early and the more likely they will get stuck behind me and tailgate and then become aggitated. Ride in the center and then as they approach its obvious they can't squeeze by, so they change lanes or pass.

Tempting drivers to squeeze by when they can't is far more dangerous than giving a clear message they can't.

Al

There is a 1/4mi stretch I ride every morning 25mph posted with BL adjacent to on street parking. Since I don't ride in DZBL, I very often get slowed by vehicles going 20mph (these are sleepy just leaving the house sipping coffee before they get on the arterial drivers). Should they move right and let me pass? Well, of course legally they can't because they can't go in BL.

Al

Why is the right 1/3 better than the middle if passing vehicles have to merge into the adjacent lane anyway?
I find the closer I ride to the curb, the less likely vehicles will pass early and the more likely they will get stuck behind me and tailgate and then become aggitated. Ride in the center and then as they approach its obvious they can't squeeze by, so they change lanes or pass.

Tempting drivers to squeeze by when they can't is far more dangerous than giving a clear message they can't.

Al


DIfference is it makes it easier to pass than it would having to jump the entire lane over. Having cars pile up behind you is bad....and some of the roads I'm on that can happen very quickly. Gotta love small roads with high traffic.

DIfference is it makes it easier to pass than it would having to jump the entire lane over. Having cars pile up behind you is bad....and some of the roads I'm on that can happen very quickly. Gotta love small roads with high traffic.
The easiest way to pass is to prepare early and give oneself plenty of distance behind the vehicle one is passing. The only way one can prepare early is to know early there is a vehicle in the lane ahead that will require a merge to pass.

Passing by straddling the line is only easier in the sense one has to turn the car steering wheel a bit less, but one still has to find a gap and yield.

Al

Wouldn't this poll work better if it only had two responses?

Something like: 1) All of the stupid responses that don't agree with my point of view (phrased in a way that choosing this option makes you look like an idiot). 2) This is the response that is correct because it agrees with my point of view and therefore must be the universally accepted and correct answer to the issue (usually the longest and most detailed option).

I love spin.

Wouldn't this poll work better if it only had two responses?

Something like: 1) All of the stupid responses that don't agree with my point of view (phrased in a way that choosing this option makes you look like an idiot). 2) This is the response that is correct because it agrees with my point of view and therefore must be the universally accepted and correct answer to the issue (usually the longest and most detailed option).

I love spin.
Interesting that you see it that way. I did not try to spin in the way you imply. And 36% of the respondendts who chose one of the first choices, or "all of the above", also seem to disagree with you.

For the record, I, for one, don't think any of the responses are stupid. However, apparently Polonswim does.

Wouldn't this poll work better if it only had two responses?

Something like: 1) All of the stupid responses that don't agree with my point of view (phrased in a way that choosing this option makes you look like an idiot). 2) This is the response that is correct because it agrees with my point of view and therefore must be the universally accepted and correct answer to the issue (usually the longest and most detailed option).

I love spin.
You forgot to mention the added bonus of checking off one of the preselected "stupid" responses; the "stupid" responder can look forward to unctuous comments (AKA - so-called questions) from the OP/Polltaker about the stupid response. However providing a proper response can draw self serving praise or a "+1" from the OP/Polltaker. The purpose of these polls and the polltaker's intent is obvious; provide grist for his (agenda)mill. For those who enjoy such antics, go for it.

I normally pay no attention other than check to see who is silly enough to take HH polls seriously.

Stay out of thier way for reasons of sanity.
Cars = big, angry, mean
Bikes = small, happy, friendly.

You forgot to mention the added bonus of checking off one of the preselected "stupid" responses; the "stupid" responder can look forward to unctuous comments (AKA - so-called questions) from the OP/Polltaker about the stupid response. However providing a proper response can draw self serving praise or a "+1" from the OP/Polltaker. The purpose of these polls and the polltaker's intent is obvious; provide grist for his (agenda)mill. For those who enjoy such antics, go for it.

I normally pay no attention other than check to see who is silly enough to take HH polls seriously.


:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

So why do we have the "anonymous" voting system in most democratic countries?

By keeping votes anonymous in a democratic society, those in political power cannot use the political power against those who do not support them.

Gee, I'm sorry. I didn't realize someone being in political power was a prequisite for wanting to have an anonymous poll... :cry:

You ask me a question, I answer it. Then you take my answer out of context and generalize it in a way that I clearly did not mean. And you do this with a sanctimonious satisfaction exemplified by approving of someone else's snide and unproductive remarks. Way to go. I'm sure your Mommy is very proud of how you turned out. Flipped indeed.

To clarify, just because potential abuse of political power is the reason we have anonymous votes in democratic societies does not mean that is the only reason to have anonymous votes. There are many reasons (e.g., besides political power, personal privacy issues, avoiding hurt feelings, ...), but I am not aware of any that would apply in the polls that I have posted non-anonymously in this forum. Are you?

I voted none as my position is:

"Cyclists should move out of the way of motorists when and only when it is safe and practical because it's polite."

Al

I would have voted for this one, but I had to do "none" too.

Just trying to get a feel for where folks here stand on the notion that cyclists should stay out of the way of cars.
Gladly.

I am not obliged to "stay out of the way of cars," but I should follow the standard rules for right-of-way that motorists also follow.