Google sponsored links
Please list all of the books on traffic cycling that you have read, and note the one that helped you improve your traffic cycling the most.
After posting, select the one book that helped you the most in the poll's list.
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content
here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
-
http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in
this thread)
-
http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in
this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
-
http://www.bikeforums.net
I read what I read and condense it to useable forms in my mind. I take what there is to be taken, and discard the rest. Then I reread at a later time; sometimes the discarded stuff gains in importance and the formerly valuable stuff lessens its luster. What is important changes as my life changes. Sometimes I am in a certain mood, or have a certain problem, and some book is better than another. Such as now; I gain more from Hurst's book than any other. I know the techniques; I want to know about the philosophy and making commuting less of a bull fight and more of an everyday thing. Hurst talks about that; more instructional books don't. Eight years ago, Forester's book was sacrosanct; I didn't know the techniques and I wanted to learn.
Other books are good as well. The Immortal Class is a good read; getting into the "why" of cycling from the pros which are on their bikes for 5 days a week, 10 hours a day, every working week of the year. He talks about the "exposure principle" and what it means to be interacting with cars all day long. Helpful when I had a long commute over narrow, rural roads and was getting stressed out with all the car interactions.
Heft on Wheels is another good read from a guy who used a maniac cycling schedule to lose 75 lbs over a summer. Not only cycling, but changing your life and your habits in a permanent way.
Even the internet has good reading on cycling. Cycling is more than about legalistic techniques and vehicular cycling. I am past that. I use vehicular cycling as a tool. Once you are familiar enough with the tool, you stop thinking so much about it. After all, do you still read the instructional manual of a philips head screwdriver? There was a time when that was new too, solving the problem of always needing the screwdriver perfectly in line with the screw.
A short story called The Quitter reminds me of why I enjoy cycling.
A site called Bike Reader has tons of good essays from talented writers, running the gauntlet of "right to the road" type essays to "zen of bike racing" essays.
There are books and essays which I return to constantly, rereading them periodically; they are like good friends. There is no, one, best I can pick out from my library. And there is no one book I would consider "the ultimate bible" on cycling technique, phychology, physiology, or philosophy. Each has little tidbits which resonate with my experiences; though I remember all. As my experiences change, different tidbits from different books start resonating. There is no big light which goes on over my head and causes me to worship a particular author and set him head and shoulders above the rest. Knowledge from what I read goes into a big vat; those bits which resonate float to the top. Those bits which don't sink, not to be forgotten; but if one all of the sudden becomes very relevent again, it comes shooting back to the surface.
I dont feel a need to read books by other people on traffic cycling.
What makes the authors experience or opinions any more valid than
mine or anyone else who posts here ? I believe it is ludacris to think
what is going to work for rider "A" is unconditionally going to work for
rider "B". Geographic / infrastructural differences, prevailing attitudes
of the regions road users, etc etc make it impossible to tell someone
else how they should be riding. For instance, having lived a few places
on the East Coast and 41 years of riding there.....I feel it safe to say
that what works here in Vermont will at least get you beat up by a
car load of IROQ-Z kiddies in South Philly. I have read enuff stuff here
and in cycling publications to feel that the authors writings are almost
an exersice in arrogance more than reality. I know this will be interpritted
differently than I meant it to, but it is not meant to be inflammatory.....
Just another opinion.
I think you probably should have allowed for multiple selections. At anyrate, I've read quite a few books and most of them seem long-winded. The reading materials that have helped me the most include.
State-provided rules of the road as this allows me to understand what drivers are being taught.
NTSB, IHTSA and other government reports/studies detailing cycling incidents
Internet sites such as those from the late Ken Kifer
I usually am able to take away a little gem of wisdom from each book or publication I've read but the one single book that's provided me with the most information was The Bicycle Commuting Book by Rob Van der Plas. The book itself is pretty slim and a quick read. About a third of it is dedicated to equipment choice, usage and maintenance. Another third is devoted to riding technique. And the last third decribes traffic negotiation. The last part is maybe 20 pages or so but adequately arms the typical cyclist with enough information to handle the majority of traffic situations. The copy I have is pretty old. I think it dates back to 1990 or so but the traffic safety section is still quite relevant.
I dont feel a need to read books by other people on traffic cycling.
What makes the authors experience or opinions any more valid than
mine or anyone else who posts here ? I believe it is ludacris to think
what is going to work for rider "A" is unconditionally going to work for
rider "B". Geographic / infrastructural differences, prevailing attitudes
of the regions road users, etc etc make it impossible to tell someone
else how they should be riding. For instance, having lived a few places
on the East Coast and 41 years of riding there.....I feel it safe to say
that what works here in Vermont will at least get you beat up by a
car load of IROQ-Z kiddies in South Philly. I have read enuff stuff here
and in cycling publications to feel that the authors writings are almost
an exersice in arrogance more than reality. I know this will be interpritted
differently than I meant it to, but it is not meant to be inflammatory.....
Just another opinion.
Ignorance is bliss.
Just another opinion.
^^^^ HH, You make my point, concisely.
Ego over reality. Why are VC proponents sooooo
unable to look outside of thier own tiny, tiny sphere of reality ?
.::EDIT::. Why is it so unfathomable to believe that some people
dont share the same militaristic obsession to a cause and dont see
a need to ?
Im a vegitarian....Should I be militantly taking everyone on the board
to task for not obsessing over my personal agendas ??
After all...a vegitarian rider is going to be a more fit and able rider. Right ?
Why are VC proponents sooooo unable to look outside of thier own tiny, tiny sphere of reality ?
Lem, you got it right, except for the 'reality' part. IMO, mostly fantasy.
:D
^^^^ HH, You make my point, concisely.
Ego over reality. Why are VC proponents sooooo
unable to look outside of thier own tiny, tiny sphere of reality ?
Why are you still beating your wife?
What I mean is that your question ASSumes that VC proponents are unable to look outside of their own tiny, tiny sphere of reality, which is an absurd premise for which you have no basis.
Why is it so unfathomable to believe that some people dont share the same militaristic obsession to a cause and dont see a need to ?
What makes you think it's unfathomable to anyone? Ignorance is rampant.
Im a vegitarian....Should I be militantly taking everyone on the board
to task for not obsessing over my personal agendas ??
No. By the way, last I checked this was a thread that I started.
After all...a vegitarian rider is going to be a more fit and able rider. Right ?
Not necessarily.
^^^^^ "What I mean is that your question ASSumes that VC proponents are unable to look outside of their own tiny, tiny sphere of reality, which is an absurd premise for which you have no basis."
And, once again......you prove this point perfectly.
"What makes you think it's unfathomable to anyone? Ignorance is rampant"
Not anyone....just militantly obsessed VC proponents (small minority) as my post clearly states.
"No. By the way, last I checked this was a thread that I started.
Not necessarily"
The same understanding of sarcasm as of reality. None.
"Why are you still beating your wife?"
Childish, Totally uncalled for. You have lost any credability you may previously have
had as a worthwhile poster.
Have a great day.
Having lived a few places on the East Coast and 41 years of riding there.....I feel it safe to say that what works here in Vermont will at least get you beat up by a car load of IROQ-Z kiddies in South Philly.
Just another opinion.
Certainly an intelligent opinion too and worth considering. Though my opinion was that I was not worried about IROQ-Z kiddies in South Philly (a little after my time, since I left Philadelphia cycle commuting in 1976 except for visits back to see relatives or my daughter in College).
In fact I had few worries from motorists on the city streets and I didn't find it necessary to show my ignorance by cycling on the River Drives instead of the adjacent MUP. I was concerned with the bored local gentry lounging around the corner especially if a State Store (liqueur and wine distributer in PA) was nearby. I cycled through every neighborhood of Philly, including South Philly since I frequently cycled at night to the Spectrum and Vet's Stadium from West Oak Lane for basketball and baseball games. Day trips to South Philly were a must every week to pick up good cheese in the Italian Market and to enjoy the atmosphere back when it was Italian.
I laugh to think of Sir Alpha Dog, the blissful know-it-all, practicing his book learned control techniques with steely eyed gazes as he lawfully waited for lights to change and came to full stops at traffic controls in the hood infested 'hoods.
^^^ :beer:
Thank you....
Where does you Daughter go ? My son goes to Cabrini in Radnor...
Back to the subject at hand....There are threads in the fixed forum about how
hostile Philly streets are. I had a bottle thrown at me on my motorcycle, totally
unprovoked. You cannot go by 'rules' or what should be right in this type of environment.
If HH thinks this mentality can be changed he should be over in Iran brokering peace,
not enlightening us poor, ignorant proles on this board.
Also....the MUP's have gotten totally unrideable. The sidewalk syndrome x 10 :eek:
Accidents and hostilities waiting to happen.
The same understanding of sarcasm as of reality. None.
"Why are you still beating your wife?"
Childish, Totally uncalled for. You have lost any credability you may previously have
had as a worthwhile poster.
Have a great day.
Are you not familiar with common usage of, Are you still beating your wife?, as the quintessential loaded question? No offense was intended.
^^^ :beer:
Thank you....
Where does you Daughter go ? My son goes to Cabrini in Radnor...
Also....the MUP's have gotten totally unrideable. The sidewalk syndrome x 10 :eek:
Accidents and hostilities waiting to happen.
My daughter graduates from Drexel this year, her twin brother also just graduated from a private college. Maybe I'll think about retiring; since i've got both the time and seniority and have had it for the last two years.
'Tis a pity if the MUP has deteriorated that badly. I noticed scads more joggers than the 70's but not that many more cyclists and none seemed nutty about going faster than conditions allowed. And now at least the West River Drive is closed at least one weekend day every week for recreational cyclists. I can only speculate if the club riding peloton boys complain about all those "incompetent cyclists" getting in the way on "their" road now. Probably don't dive out of the way when the command "on your left" is bellowed at them. Of course neither do motorists.
I've read many books on bicycling over the years. But I've learned more from other bicyclists and from experience than could ever be learned from books.
Books I've recommended to others are:
"Fever Pitch" by Nick Hornby
"The Grass of Another Country" by Chrisopher Merrill
Neither of them has anything to do with bicycling but I've enjoyed reading them so they enriched my cycling experience indirectly. The second one is pretty dated; the first one is a classic that never gets old. In fact, maybe I'll read that again. If I knew of a bicycling equivalent of Fever Pitch, I'd certainly recommend that.
When asked to recommend a book about cycling technique, I tell people Street Smarts by John S. Allen.
I've read and enjoyed Nick Hornby's How to be Good. I'll have to look for Fever Pitch.
I would think that if any cyclists get info about cycling at all it's not from books. Possibly it is from magazines, but those are as targeted to the elite (i.e. people with college degrees and/or disposable income) as any book would be. Most magazines targeted to a particular interest are more about selling you more gear than about any kind of real information or education.
If anybody truly cared about reaching the common man with bicycle riding instruction they would print the info on the side of beer cans and take-out coffee cups.
But let's get real The idea that anybody needs to study a book to understand how to ride a bike in traffic--that anybody would even suggest an idea like that--indicates elitism to the extreme.
Serge,
As I've stated many times I gained my knowledge of urban cycling through decades of.... urban cycling. My question would be, what books did all of these authors read? Oh, that's right, none. The authors gained their cycling knowledge through experience, not from a book, or armchair pontificating. These are not holy texts, just compilations of personal experiences. At their hearts they are fairly valid and insightful, but as I said earlier they are also jargon-filled and needlessly long winded. But you don't make much money selling clearly written pamphlets.
But let's get real The idea that anybody needs to study a book to understand how to ride a bike in traffic--that anybody would even suggest an idea like that--indicates elitism to the extreme.
I'll get even more real. Seriously suggesting this "notion" of an idea indicates a bad case of naďveté, doofism, or downright stupidity.
I voted "other".
I will be authoring a book called "Neck Punch". Oh it'll be great!
We should start a bikeforums book group. Rule #1: No books about cycling will be read by the group.
:D
I've only read Hurst's book, which I think is excellent. A very well-written, sensible book with a lot of neat history thrown in. (I had no idea who Major Taylor was before I read this book.) Apparently Hurst posts on these forums now, which is very cool.
I will probably continue to avoid Forester like the plague, due to the constant trolling by his snivelling acolytes on this forum. I mostly do cycle "vehicularly" and follow the laws of the road, the ones that make sense for bicycles, anyway, but I have no interest in joining this VC-fundamentalist club I keep encountering here. Kind of ironic Serge would criticize Lem for asking a loaded question, when literally every single thread he posts has a semantically loaded question as it's title. Check out these threads if you don't believe me... http://www.bikeforums.net/search.php?searchid=2323150
For extra points: Bump ALL of Serge's threads. That should stir up a minor sh!tstorm...
:p
For extra points: Bump ALL of Serge's threads. That should stir up a minor sh!tstorm...
:p
Not necessary. Read one you read 'em all. The bottom line: Buy the Book or die!
Back to the subject at hand....There are threads in the fixed forum about how
hostile Philly streets are. I had a bottle thrown at me on my motorcycle, totally
unprovoked. You cannot go by 'rules' or what should be right in this type of environment.
If HH thinks this mentality can be changed he should be over in Iran brokering peace,
not enlightening us poor, ignorant proles on this board.
Also....the MUP's have gotten totally unrideable. The sidewalk syndrome x 10 :eek:
Accidents and hostilities waiting to happen.
I had my life threatened for trying to parallel park and coming close to backing into someone's car (who failed to realize that I was moving in reverse the whole time when he pulled up behind me) and I was involved in a hit and run (again while driving). In both cases I was following "the rules" but I don't see how bending "the rules" would have changed anything in either situation or when you had a bottle thrown at you.
Do you really consider the city of Philly that lawless that one needs to break laws to survive? I've seen the same or worse outside of the city. At least we agree on the MUP's.
Are you not familiar with common usage of, Are you still beating your wife?, as the quintessential loaded question? No offense was intended.
No offense intended? So besides being a manipulative narcissist that can't see over its own hand mirror you're also a complete idiot? For an advocate of VC you are a poor choice. Your attitude is poor as are your people skills. So are mine but I make no bones about it.
You'd shoot the Pied Piper for failing to recognize the ecological niche that rats occupy and let the villagers die of the plague.
VC needs someone that does not do their best to drive people away, someone that doesn't feel the need to sweep clean their holy dais of any dissenting opinion by attacking even polite dissension among otherwise supportive people.
You are a freak, and part of the problem.
Ive had sooo many random acts of uncivilness visited upon me totally
unprovoked I will NEVER visit Philly again. The prevailing Philly mindset
is not one I can be around. I have never experienced the mindless negativity
in NY or any other east coast city that I get in Philly.
I guess I really shouldnt be commenting on this thread using Philly as an example
because of my bias. :eek:
The DMV booklet on driving rules and regulations is my favorite read in any state. They all make it clear I have a Right to be there. I quote it in the rare cases a motorist talks to me.
Serge,
As I've stated many times I gained my knowledge of urban cycling through decades of.... urban cycling. My question would be, what books did all of these authors read? Oh, that's right, none. The authors gained their cycling knowledge through experience, not from a book, or armchair pontificating. These are not holy texts, just compilations of personal experiences. At their hearts they are fairly valid and insightful, but as I said earlier they are also jargon-filled and needlessly long winded. But you don't make much money selling clearly written pamphlets.
John Allen's Streetsmarts is a clearly written pamphlet, and I read it before I read Effective Cycling.
The pamphlet was not able to convey the most important aspect of traffic cycling: how to build confidence cycling in traffic. That's what EC did for me.
I too, after 30+ years of experience, was fairly confident in traffic. I THOUGHT I was very confident. But I had no idea how much more confident I could get until I studied EC, and applied the subtle and seemingly inconsequential differences in my own riding, and experienced the dramatic differences - particularly in how much better I was noticed and treated - until I went through it myself.
As to where the book writers learned this stuff... hey, some people are better at learning and explaining certain things than others. If it takes 30 years of experience to learn something, why not put in a book so that others can learn in a matter of months what it took the writer decades to learn?
Maybe others like all that head stuff in the other books (I've also read some of John Allen's stuff) but it's all so dry and cerebral and that's just not what it's like for me when I ride my bike.
That could be part of the problem. As an engineer, I'm conditioned to reading dry stuff, and getting passionate about it.
As is made evident by many, Forester's dry style simply does not capture the interest of many readers, and so they don't pay as much attention to the details is required to really get it. The result is, they don't get it, and end up thinking Forester recommends riding a bike as if it is a car, and other misconstrued stuff like that.
I'm pleased to report that my city, on its website, links to the online version of John Allen's "Street Smarts." I was kind of surprised, because the pamphlet advocates such things as:
The law gives you the right to use the road, the same as a motorist, and to make other traffic slow down for you sometimes. The driver approaching from the rear is always required to slow and follow if it's not possible to pass safely.
It may seem dangerous to make a motorist slow for you, but it's not. The usual reason that bicyclists feel unsafe on narrow roads is that they do not take control of the situation. Remember, the drivers behind you don't have room to pass you safely anyway.
... and ...
Where there are parked cars, the usable width of the street begins about 3 feet out from them - or from a wall, hedge or other obstruction. As you approach a blind intersection or driveway, you should be even farther from the edge of the road - imagine a car hood poking out. Don't ride in the danger zone!
Those aren't revolutionary words in this forum. But I would have expected the city to take a more "official jargon" approach and just link to the CA DMV website and all its unhelpful, vague (but legally safe) language about how to ride safely. Instead, they link to this easy to read pamphlet that provides real-world examples and stresses cyclist empowerment. Yay city! That was my happy discovery of the day.
And now, since it's the only non-vehicle-code publication I've read on the subject, I'll give it my vote.
Edit: OOh, one more quote gem:
If your bicycle doesn't trip the detector, you have to wait for a car to do it, or else you have to go through the red light. Going through the red isn't against the law, because the light is defective. If you ever have a crash or get a traffic ticket because a traffic light won't turn green, it's the fault of whoever installed the detector.
I've always wondered about the legality of that (and, granted, this isn't a legal text but a guidebook). I wonder how a police officer would see the situation.
What weakens Forester's argument is his patronizing assumption that non-engineers have neither the patience nor the intelligence to let the details speak for themselves.
What makes you think that Forester assumes that non-engineers have neither the patience nor the intelligence to let the details speak for themselves?
His opinionated interpretations of statistics leave little room for dialogue and leave at least this reader feeling like I'm being preached to- something that makes me seriously doubt the author's veracity since it's seems so rooted in ego.
Why is veracity relevant unless you're taking something on faith? In terms of the topic of traffic cycling, I take nothing anyone says on faith. In a sense, I don't believe anything anyone says, and I don't expect anyone to believe anything I say (see my signature). In other words, I assume that Forester, Franklin, Allen, Hurst, Glowacz, et all all have zero veracity. Then I let them prove otherwise. I listen to what they have to say, and think about it. If it makes sense to me, then I'll try it, and decide for myself whether it's actually true or not.
Yes, if someone is saying something that cannot be corroborated, then veracity matters to me. But since that's not the case here, I find it to be irrelevant. For example, I can corroborate for myself whether Forester's claims about the effectiveness of destination positioning at intersections, for example, are accurate. If I can't corroborate it, regardless of who is saying it, I'm probably not going to believe it anyway.
So, when I'm reading something, I ignore the presentation, and try to distill the content as much as I can, then I judge that. I don't judge how it was presented, or who presented it. All that matters to me is the content. Maybe that's why I seem to be much less bothered by Forester's opinionated style than you are.
Who cares about patience or intelligence when it comes to reading a book anyway.
If the book is boring, if the book turns you off, if it is not worth finishing for whatever reason, then people won't read it.
We aren't in high school anymore so nobody forces us to read bad books anymore. Legal stuff yes, bad books no. So I vote with the guy who said the DMV pamphlets helped him most. I agree they are the best, the most factual, the most reliable, the most quotable, and you have to read them anyway at least once in your life (unless you never get a license to drive.)
I agree they are the best, the most factual, the most reliable, the most quotable, and you have to read them anyway at least once in your life (unless you never get a license to drive.)
Isn't that a bit like someone in China who has never left his village claiming that Chinese food is the best cuisine in the world? What does he know? What is he comparing against?
As someone who has never read a traffic cycling book, what do you know? What are you comparing against?
Who cares about patience or intelligence when it comes to reading a book anyway.
If the book is boring, if the book turns you off, if it is not worth finishing for whatever reason, then people won't read it.
We aren't in high school anymore so nobody forces us to read bad books anymore. Legal stuff yes, bad books no. So I vote with the guy who said the DMV pamphlets helped him most. I agree they are the best, the most factual, the most reliable, the most quotable, and you have to read them anyway at least once in your life (unless you never get a license to drive.)
I found the manuals to be quite useful when I first resumed cycling a few years ago. For most cyclists, they contain enough information for occasional short rides in traffic. But there are a couple problems with them.
For one thing, the manuals were not written by cyclists, and therefore lack authority. All of the books mentioned here (Forester, Hurst, et al) are imbued with the wisdom and experience of real cyclists. Although the authors differ on some details, for the most part they are in agreement about how to ride in traffic. They do have different writing styles and empahsize different points. I find Hurst to be the best written, Franklin to be clear and concise, and Forester to be the most systematic. (I read Glowacz, but don't remember much about it.)
Another problem with the manuals is that they are too concise and general. All of the books obviously go into more detail and provide many examples and illustrations.
As to finding these books "boring"--this is sometimes a comment on the reader's learning style as much as the author's writing skills. I thought all of them were reasonably well-written (especially the Hurst, as I already said). If reading always leaves you yawning, of course you won't like these or any books. To go beyond the driver's manuals, you might want to take a class, if you find an oral presentation to be more useful. Obviously a video would be great for visual learners, but I'm not aware of any. And of course, experience is a great teacher, provided you survive the class, as you obviously have.
Has anybody read "Sloan's Complete Book of Bicycles"? This has a chapter on riding in traffic that is not very VC at all.
They do have different writing styles and empahsize different points. I find Hurst to be the best written, Franklin to be clear and concise, and Forester to be the most systematic. (I read Glowacz, but don't remember much about it.)
I agree with your assessments (Glowacz has some very good advice, with some very dangerous and stupid advice - what he calls "sly tricks").
Has anybody read "Sloan's Complete Book of Bicycles"? This has a chapter on riding in traffic that is not very VC at all.
ROTFLOL! I was going to include this on the list as a joke, bug figured no one would get it.
My favorite is his recommendation to avoid any road that does not have onstreet parking.
Isn't that a bit like someone in China who has never left his village claiming that Chinese food is the best cuisine in the world? What does he know? What is he comparing against?
As someone who has never read a traffic cycling book, what do you know? What are you comparing against?
I have read Hurst's book. And through you I've read numerous quotes and long email letters by Forester.
What I mean by the DMV handbooks and the actual words of the law is that these are the voice of authority. They are infinitely more quotable and reliable. If you have a disagreement with a stranger or a policeman what is going to make you sound like you are in the right? You quoting John Forester or Robert Hurst, or you quoting the law? What opens more people's eyes: when I tell them I read in some book somewhere that I'm allowed to use the full lane or when I tell them it says in the law that I'm allowed full use of the lane?
I agree, Diane. But one caveat: the manuals like "What Every Driver Must Know", while distributed by the state, are not authorative. They often misstate the actual vehicle code, especially when discussing bikes. I almost always find that people who ride bikes know more about riding bikes than do people who drive cars and write books for the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Isn't that a bit like someone in China who has never left his village claiming that Chinese food is the best cuisine in the world? What does he know? What is he comparing against?
As someone who has never read a traffic cycling book, what do you know? What are you comparing against?
I bet he knows Chinese food really well and likes it to boot!
I read Hurst's book and liked it OK. It was a fun read. Learned a few things.
John Foresters book really didn't do anything more than put what I know into dull and tedious prose. If he is really that interested in helping cyclists ride in a safer, more effective manner, then he would have had the book drafted by someone that could actually write.
My riding style was more informed by The Art of War (Sun Tzu) than Effective Cycling.
My riding style was more informed by The Art of War (Sun Tzu) than Effective Cycling.
Interesting. Forester's style worked for me, but the main thing I got from EC was not so much the particular techniques, but a change in attitude. I can see how applying The Art could produce a similar internal effect on someone. I never thought of applying it in traffic cycling. Very interesting.
My riding style was more informed by The Art of War (Sun Tzu) than Effective Cycling.
Well, if you're going to go there then mine was influenced by The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
DON'T
PANIC
I have read Hurst's book. And through you I've read numerous quotes and long email letters by Forester.
What I mean by the DMV handbooks and the actual words of the law is that these are the voice of authority. They are infinitely more quotable and reliable. If you have a disagreement with a stranger or a policeman what is going to make you sound like you are in the right? You quoting John Forester or Robert Hurst, or you quoting the law? What opens more people's eyes: when I tell them I read in some book somewhere that I'm allowed to use the full lane or when I tell them it says in the law that I'm allowed full use of the lane?
Exactly why I carry cards in my wallet that tell me exactly what the vehicle code is, and what numbers I need to tell the officer to look up in his book.
Hasn't yet happened... But I am prepared. ;)
Previous -
Top -
Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007
BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.