Google sponsored links
Based on your posts, I would bet that's because you tend to be "out of the way" almost all of the time. If you "mind your place" (out of their way), the yahoos will leave you alone.
. . . and what is wrong with that? I'd say that shows Diane is choosing good routes.
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
Did somebody say "double discount" . . . is Target having a sale? . . . I'm THERE!!! :)
Polyester sleeveless shirts for 9 bucks, more if you give em a steely-eyed, alpha-dawg stare and claim that the lack of sleeves adds to the notion that sleeves cause farmer's tans.
How does HH know this? Because he was the right-turning driver. Perhaps if HH had put his right turn signal on, rather than using the Serge Mind-meld technique of signaling his intentions, the cyclist would not have come up on the right.
Actually, I know this because I was two cars back (driving my mom to the doctor) and watched the whole thing go down.
I think we've all seen cyclist pull bonehead stunts. I see hardly any other cyclists in this area, but in the last two weeks I've seen two bonehead maneuvers. Both at the same intersection, which isn't a hard intersection to negotiate at all.
The layout of this intersection is E/W NOL, no stop, straight through/right turn lane and separate left turn lane. N/S NOL, stop signs, one lane in each direction.
45 mph all directions. No sidewalks, no BL. The E/W has an added on paved shoulder too narrow for anything at ~1' wide.
Bonehead #1: Wrong way, E bound on paved shoulder of W bound lane. Nothing special, we've all seen something like this.
Bonehead #2: I'm in the car W bound, approaching him from behind with the intention of turning left. His line is in the right tire path of the highway. His road position looks very good. He gets to the intersection and instead of merging into the left turn lane, he whips a left from the right side of the road. He had plenty of room, I passed him after we were S bound, but when he did it, it left me wondering, "<WTF kind of bonehead maneuver was that?>".
Polyester sleeveless shirts for 9 bucks, more if you give em a steely-eyed, alpha-dawg stare and claim that the lack of sleeves adds to the notion that sleeves cause farmer's tans.
:lol:
Most of us who have been here awhile have learned to 'pre-discount' pretty much everything you say.
That explains much.
Combine that with the fact that you pre-discount what anyone who disagrees with you has to say...
Speak for yourself, please.
From the Cyclist hit, then killed in Austin... thread:
From the "debate" section:
But put a person trying to ride a bycicle on that road and they don’t just endager their life but mine too! And don’t tell me that we are suppose to share the road. I don’t see the majority of byciclists sharing the same laws; stop signs, turn signals, speed limits… You want me to slow down and move out of your way…into on coming traffic. Ride your bike where their are bike lanes!
Sigh...
Ride your bike where their are bike lanes!
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/talk/2006/04/18/is_it_safe_to_bike_on_loop_360.html
You guys that still don't see a connection between The Notion and bike lanes need to get your heads out of the sand. Bike lanes are certainly not the root cause of the problem, but, like I've said probably half a dozen times in this thread, the help deepen the beliefs held by the morons who react viscerally to cyclists riding in the traffic lanes.
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/talk/2006/04/18/is_it_safe_to_bike_on_loop_360.html
Oh, man, that debate is a difficult read. One post expressing The Notion after another. Even the cyclists do it.
Billh, is that you writing all those posts?
Did somebody say "double discount" . . . is Target having a sale? . . . I'm THERE!!! :)
But beware the "double discount" or "blue light special" in the Notions section. Someone might show impatience and push their shopping cart ahead of yours if a gap appears. Divine Proof of the evil of the the Satan Worshippers from Bentonville, Ark in collusion with the godless heathen from Amsterdam.:rolleyes:
It's funny that Serge immediately and automatically assumed that I ride way off to the side cringing in fear at all the big mean cars and my boyfriend is the certified VC ® bicycle rider riding confidently and alpha-doggedly in traffic.
Au contrair. I'm the one who rides VC and he is not. The bike lanes are immaterial because we both use them, and while he uses the bike path its full length I will ride a portion of the bike path route on the street instead of the path with no static from the traffic at all.
And you don't believe that sexism isn't as alive and well as it ever was.
bike lanes don't exist here in Huntsville. People need to get the **** over themselves and learn to drive.
Bike lanes DO NOT cause the notion.
The Notion can exist in the absence of bike lanes.
Removing bike lanes will not eliminate the prevalence of The Notion.
But, anything we do to try to reduce the prevalance of The Notion is a complete waste of time while Notion-reinforcing bike lanes are so prolific.
"Ride your bike where their [sic] are bike lanes!" - a typical moron.
Societal attitudes do change. I truly believe there is less racism and sexism today than there was 50 years ago in our culture, though we still have a long way to go. The changes in attitudes about smoking are truly dramatic. Now look at drunk driving. I remember as a kid in the 60s hearing the adults joke about a friend who was so drunk, when the cops pulled him over he fell out of the car. Ha ha ha. The cops drove him home. That would never happen today.
What we need to change similarly is societal attitudes about cyclists on the roads in the traffic lanes (to make it much more acceptable). I don't have a solution either, but I do know we're never going to get anywhere on this issue with all these bike lanes all over the place. Each bike lane demarcates the officially sanctioned place for cyclists to travel to be outside of the regular traffic lanes. That cannot be helping our cause.
OK I can buy issues with bike lanes on slower street also being linked to "the Notion," and this is why I see a need for BL only on faster streets where the lane division situatuation is fairly consistent.
Now addressing the societal change issue is another thing altogether... in the past your goal was to change the cyclists... to make them more responsible. And while I cannot disagree that there are cyclists that cause us issues, I still see the biggest problem is the basic mindset of the motorists. While some BL may reinforce the notion, BL did not put the notion there in the first place, and the notion is the root cause of the problem. Work that, as well as the side issues of cyclist education and the elimination of some BL, and the end result should be a more harmonious road using society.
While some BL may reinforce the notion, BL did not put the notion there in the first place, and the notion is the root cause of the problem. Work that, ...
Anything we do to try to reduce the prevalance of The Notion is a complete waste of time while Notion-reinforcing bike lanes are so prolific.
"Notion" exist with/without bike lanes mostly because of ignorance, education via share the road signs and other safety messages would be great in allevating this problem. You could also put in video/radar to slow traffic but that will be a hard sell if you ticket too many drivers you'll get a back lash.
Zero bike lanes up here but looks like they will be putting on some paint this year, Instead of of bike sign if that is the problem, they should put ONLY NON-MOTORIZED VEHICLE allowed on the lane like they do for MUPs.
Anything we do to try to reduce the prevalance of The Notion is a complete waste of time while Notion-reinforcing bike lanes are so prolific.
I donno... it sure seems like we have a long way to go to train motorists about the Notion and why their view is wrong... surely along the way we can introduce them to the concept of bike lanes.
At any rate, this is not going to be a quick easy task.
I donno... it sure seems like we have a long way to go to train motorists about the Notion and why their view is wrong... surely along the way we can introduce them to the concept of bike lanes.
I don't care how you introduce bike lanes - they are going to be seen for what they are: the space on the road where cyclists can be expected to ride, the flipside of which is just as undeniable: cyclists should not be expected outside of the bike lane in the traffic lanes. And you hammer the knuckleheads with this concept by painting enough bike lanes in town, and they are going to be absolutely convinced that on all streets, bike lane or not, cyclists should not be expected in the traffic lanes, period, end of story.
Even if you could commandeer all the major networks and flood them with PSAs with naked women taking the lane, you still wouldn't shake this notion from their neanderthal minds, as long as you have the 6" stripe painted along the edge of the road with BIKE LANE stenciled inside of the demarcated rubble-collecting gutter space.
OK forget the BL... I just wanna see the PSAs. :D
http://www.brooksengland.com/press/2006_01/new_products/MadeInDowningStreet.pdf
Uh, what was that message again???
http://www.brooksengland.com/press/2006_01/new_products/MadeInDowningStreet.pdf
:beer:
http://www.brooksengland.com/press/2006_01/new_products/MadeInDowningStreet.pdf
Thanks for the heads-up. Not suitable for viewing in ones office!
Not suitable for viewing in ones office!
My apologies. Don't you just hate the 'open office' environment? I long for the good ol' days when I had a room with a door instead of a cubicle...:(
Plus, the Brits are so much more nonchalant about these things than Yanks are; remember, we got the Puritans now. ;)
Noisebeam you were speeding! Bad boy! :)
I think part of it is many drivers think of going 15 mph over the speed limit as a matter of policy. As I have said before, one of the GREAT ways to make sure drivers respect the rules of the road and show more respect for cyclists, is to do so when YOU are driving a car. Our road here has a speed limit of 40 in most places and less near schools and curves (it is rural residential). I NEVER go over 40 mph on this road, and in fact I LOVE it when people get pissed off in a line behind me, especially the future Morons of America from the local high school on their way home after 'class. '
I enjoy blocking traffic on 25 mph residential streets, too. No guilt. There are some 25 mph residential streets on my route that cars like to use to as cut throughs to avoid more congested 35 mph arterials. When a car is stuck behind me, I figure it's either 1) a resident who has complained to local government about cars driving too fast through his or her neighborhood; or 2) a cut-through driver. In either case, I don't feel bad if they get stuck going 15-25 mph for a little bit. I want it to be miserable for cut through drivers to cut through residential neighborhoods (especially mine). The occaisional honk only shows that I am succeeding.
When I spend any time behind a windshield (sorry Bek, but I do)
Al
Al, when I spend time behind the windshield I try to drive 80 or 90 miles an hour. I like to drive gravel forest roads about 60 or so. I developed the habit of driving unecessarily fast while doing a lot of volunteer mountain rescue and working up in the mountians....fast gets you there quicker!
.....Anyway, so there's a 'notion' that bikes should keep out of the way of faster vehicles. This is simple traffic engineering dynamics, and codified in every state in the union with some form of "slower vehicles keep right" rules in their State legal codes.
The notion of efficient traffic engineering is not a faulty body of thought, a school of unrealistic sophists, OR operating with disticntly flawed methodology; the design of roadways in America are designed with a high degree of engineering standards to meet all applicable warrants on that specific roadway.
The rise of unlivable, unsustainable suburban communities in America gave rise 4 decades ago to "notions" of what has now become a school of design, a whole body collective of architectural and civic planning, that encourages livable, walkable and bikeable communities that rely less on petrocentric private car use.
This whole school, this mainstream movement in civic planning for livable communities is collectively grouped as "New Urbanism."
Couple the "notions" of efficient traffic engineering with New Urbanism, and you have, VOILA! [b]VELOTRANSIT[/i] accomodations.
New Urbanism. Anyone heard of this "notion?" Mr. HEAD, are you familiar with the not-so-new school of civic planning called "New Ubanism?"
I think you guys have a harder time of it because you are men.
Honestly, I do not experience a "get out of the way" mentality very much at all. However, on the same exact route my boyfriend does.
There have been a couple of times when I've been mistaken for a man (such as while riding a motorcycle with a big jacket and helmet) and the invective and rage I've had to experience is astonishing. I do not experience this normally to any degree. If anything, motorists are more often protective of me, offering to block the path of others for me, allowing me to go at stop signs when it's not technically my turn, making a huge path around me and rarely ever close-passing or buzzing me.
I think it's a male thing.
So before you ascribe some global, sweeping theory like "the Notion", please stop and decide if there is a gender bias in there somewhere. I suspect that there is. Possibly a homophobic one as well.
I wouldn't discard your experience, but I have to say it gives me pause (especially the "homophobic" comment, assuming far too much.)
Fortunately, most victims of the "bicycles don't belong on the road with cars" mentality are quite friendly and passive. They express their concern for my welfare in earnest kindness. Almost all drivers treat me well.
Some of the most blatantly aggressive drivers who honked at me, shouted at me, swore at me and even threatened me with their vehicle have been female (and even with kids in the car.) But I don't claim all women have problems, since I've gotten the same thing from men.
I enjoy blocking traffic on 25 mph residential streets, too. No guilt. ...
I want it to be miserable for cut through drivers to cut through residential neighborhoods (especially mine). The occaisional honk only shows that I am succeeding.
Just goes to show, different strokes for different folks! Some bicyclists get their joy from the most peculiar activities. Peculiar "notions" of bicycling advocacy exist also. At least one self proclaimed über-advocate claims to enjoy teaching lessons to motorists by swerving all over the highway to make them slow down before passing him, even on multiple lane roads.
I dunno ... my attitude is like a big truck on a mountain road. When possible, and as often as I can, direct the traffic behind me so not to slow down anyone. Pull aside and signal "pass" and when I need to take the lane signal "hold on". Works well for me, with the aide of my little mirror.
Anything we do to try to reduce the prevalance of The Notion is a complete waste of time while Notion-reinforcing bike lanes are so prolific.
Complete Bull. The vast MAJORITY of roadways in america have no bike lanes yet are filled with angry drivers.
There is not just a 'notion' that bikes should keep out of the way of faster vehicles. This is simple traffic engineering dynamics, and codified in every state in the union with some form of "slower vehicles keep right" rules in their State legal codes.
The 'notions' of efficient traffic engineering is not a faulty body of thought, a school of unrealistic sophists, OR operating with disticntly flawed methodology; roadways in America are designed with a high degree of engineering standards to meet all applicable warrants on that specific roadway.
The rapid growth post-WWII of unlivable, unsustainable suburban communities in America gave rise 4 decades ago to "notions" of what has now become a school of design, a whole body collective of architectural and civic planning, that encourages livable, walkable and bikeable communities that rely less on petrocentric private car use.
This whole school, this mainstream movement in civic planning for livable communities is collectively grouped as "New Urbanism."
Couple the "notions" of efficient traffic engineering with New Urbanism, and you get velotransit accomodations.
New Urbanism. Anyone heard of this "notion?" Mr. HEAD, are you familiar with the not-so-new school of civic planning called "New Ubanism?"
New Urbanism.
A letter to the editor this morning decries the needless wasteful spending for a bike path bypass for a dangerous, narrow, steep, windy road popular with cyclists and commuters seeking a quick shortcut. A road that always results in cars following cyclists until there is room to pass. I personally go about 5 mph on that road. So, build a bike path that does get bikes out of the way and what are we called? "Special Interests". The letter even begins with "Hey drivers, wake up!"
Do you really think cyclist/driver duality is about bike lanes? Or is it about the idea of what good, hard-working, red-blooded American taxpaying adults are, and that your typical spandex bicyclist isn't one.
To me that carries a touch of talk radio diatribe and homophobia. After all, if you all were red-blooded American men you wouldn't be parading around on your delicate skinny bikes wearing revealing costumes. We all know "special interest" is a right-wing code word for gay--or environmentalist (also considered less than fully masculine.)
Oh, man, that debate is a difficult read. One post expressing The Notion after another. Even the cyclists do it.
Billh, is that you writing all those posts?
HH, repeat after me . . . "Bicycles are different than cars, bicycles are different than cars" . . .
say NO to the 'caristrocracy', reject petrocentrism.
Embrace New Urbanism. Debase the RV-like delusion of personal car as castle, America, and ride.
I don't WANT to have to ride my bike like it is a car, motorbike, vespa, RV, bulldozer, or gorilla playing basketball- I want to ride my bike as if it were a bicycle!
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
(duh)
A letter to the editor this morning decries the needless wasteful spending for a bike path bypass for a dangerous, narrow, steep, windy road popular with cyclists and commuters seeking a quick shortcut. A road that always results in cars following cyclists until there is room to pass. I personally go about 5 mph on that road. So, build a bike path that does get bikes out of the way and what are we called? "Special Interests". The letter even begins with "Hey drivers, wake up!"
Do you really think cyclist/driver duality is about bike lanes? Or is it about the idea of what good, hard-working, red-blooded American taxpaying adults are, and that your typical spandex bicyclist isn't one.
To me that carries a touch of talk radio diatribe and homophobia. After all, if you all were red-blooded American men you wouldn't be parading around on your delicate skinny bikes wearing revealing costumes. We all know "special interest" is a right-wing code word for gay--or environmentalist (also considered less than fully masculine.)
The only problem with your imagery is that it doesn't fit all cyclists... so cannot be the source of the Notion. While that sort of thing can be triggered... and seems to be the root cause of a lot of teen male taunting that may happen to some cyclists, it is not likely to be a huge contributing factor.
I know that the evening I had the encounter with that motorist, I was anything but a lycra clad cyclist on a skinny bike... I was wearing a sweatshirt, and khaki shorts, and riding a fat tire cruiser. Hardly fitting the image you painted. I had also earlier seen two other locals riding about looking virtually the same.
If anything, at that moment, I looked like either your typical beach bum, or DUI. :D The former which is a pretty common sight here in San Diego.
Now I do understand what you are saying... and the typical taunt to lycra covered cyclists is something along the lines of "hey, Lance wannabe... "
MR. HEAD claims driver education is worthless in the face of all the bike accomodations; How misleading and delusional of him!
if only one one hundreth of one percent (or less) of all the roadways in america have velotransit accomodations, how can this be
a)misconstrued as prolifigate;
and
b) the root cause of the anticyclist attitudes amongst drivers?
How could the incredibly small miles of velo transit in America be of more importance to quell, versus improving roadway conditions OVERALL by drivers education, signage, etc?
MR. HEAD claims driver education is worthless in the face of all the bike accomodations; How misleading and delusional of him!
if only one one hundreth of one percent (or less) of all the roadways in america have velotransit accomodations, how can this be
a)misconstrued as prolifigate;
and
the root cause of the anticyclist attitudes amongst drivers?
b) the root cause of the anticyclist attitudes amongst drivers?
How could the incredibly small miles of velo transit in America be of more importance to quell, versus improving roadway conditions OVERALL by drivers education, signage, etc?
Beck,
As usual, you're not paying attention, so it's pointless to try to engage in an intelligent discussion with you.
I never claimed "driver education is worthless in the face of all the bike accomodations".
I never claimed bike lanes are "the root cause of the anticyclist attitudes amongst drivers".
I'll bet you and your mirror can have a very interesting conversation, but unless you're going to address what I have actually said, please keep me out of it.
I think the best 'education' could be frequent use of a properly designed "Share the Road" signs.
Properly designed by not showing or implying that cyclist should be on far right of road and sign background in yellow color.
Al
MR. HEAD claims driver education is worthless in the face of all the bike accomodations; How misleading and delusional of him!
Thats not what he has said:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=2404688&postcount=123
Al
A letter to the editor this morning decries the needless wasteful spending for a bike path bypass for a dangerous, narrow, steep, windy road popular with cyclists and commuters seeking a quick shortcut. A road that always results in cars following cyclists until there is room to pass. I personally go about 5 mph on that road. So, build a bike path that does get bikes out of the way and what are we called? "Special Interests". The letter even begins with "Hey drivers, wake up!"
Do you really think cyclist/driver duality is about bike lanes? Or is it about the idea of what good, hard-working, red-blooded American taxpaying adults are, and that your typical spandex bicyclist isn't one.
To me that carries a touch of talk radio diatribe and homophobia. After all, if you all were red-blooded American men you wouldn't be parading around on your delicate skinny bikes wearing revealing costumes. We all know "special interest" is a right-wing code word for gay--or environmentalist (also considered less than fully masculine.)
Sounds like the "special interests" in this case are not the cyclists, who, like you, can travel without any issues at 5 mph up this hill. The "special interests" are the motorists who have to slow down and follow the cyclists up the hill. It is for their benefit that the bypass needs to built, not for the benefit of the cyclists.
If they want to build it, that's their business. The only relevance to cyclists and cycling advocates would be to be involved with the design, if they decide to build for the benefit of motorists. If they do decide to build it, then cycling advocates should be involved with making sure it's a sensible design, paying particular attention with the start/end (and any midway) intersections with the vehicular roadway.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars. Bicycles are different than cars.
(duh)
You catch on quick! Now, start thinking of bicycles as not just vehicles, but as "slow-moving vehicles", SMV's if you will, and you should be fine. Don't get me wrong, I think The Notion as genec defined it, is dangerous and wrong. It's just the RESPONSE to The Notion (dun, dun, dunnnnnnh) is where we differ.
Anything we do to try to reduce the prevalance of The Notion is a complete waste of time while Notion-reinforcing bike lanes are so prolific.
What's this total line of bullshizzle from page 5 then , Mr. HEAD?
You pretend the bike lanes are the problem, the cause of the notion, but the VAST MAJORITY of roads have no bicycle accomodations whatsover.
You mislead, delude and flat outright LIE, Mr. HEAD. You are pathetic, and one heck of a sophist. Aristophanes would be proud.
Now, start thinking of bicycles as not just vehicles, but as "slow-moving vehicles", SMV's if you will, and you should be fine.
ROTFLOL! You're telling ME to start thinking about bicycles as SMVs? What the heck do you think I've been doing here for almost two years?
Here's a post of mine from November 2005:
SMV = slow moving vehicles
I really like the approach of thinking and referring to bike bans as bans of SMVs. That is, if bikes are banned, like on a freeway, it's really all SMVs that are banned. So it's not really bikes per se that are banned when bikes are banned, but, rather, all slow moving vehicles that are banned, which is treating cyclists vehicularly... just as vehicularly as all the other drives of banned SMVs are treated.
Hence, if bikes are banned, but other SMVs are not, we should fight that. On the other hand, if they put in a bike lane to give us access despite the ban on SMVs, that's fine by me... the one application of bike lanes where the postives clearly outweigh the negatives (hence, why I think "no smvs" should have its own column in our matrix). On the other hand, on a road where other SMVs are not banned, there should be no requirement or expectation that cyclists should keep to their own lane. Why should cyclists be treated differently from other SMV drivers?
http://www.bikeforums.net/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1758167
And here's a snippet from the OP of the May 2005 The role of attitude in traffic cycling thread with a reference to the concept:
... how to think vehicularly as I was riding my bike in traffic, and to think of myself as a driver of a vehicle (not like a driver of a car - like the driver of vehicle, albeit a narrow and relatively slow one - there's a big difference). Only when you really feel like a vehicle driver, can you think like one in realtime situations. And not until you learn to feel and think like a vehicle driver, can you act like one.
Sounds like the "special interests" in this case are not the cyclists, who, like you, can travel without any issues at 5 mph up this hill. The "special interests" are the motorists who have to slow down and follow the cyclists up the hill. It is for their benefit that the bypass needs to built, not for the benefit of the cyclists.
Someone should write a letter to the editor and point this out, as a rebuttal - that the bicycle bypass is actually being built for the benefit of motorists.
If they do decide to build it, then cycling advocates should be involved with making sure it's a sensible design, paying particular attention with the start/end (and any midway) intersections with the vehicular roadway.
The most sensible thing you've said in the last several pages of this thread...
Anything we do to try to reduce the prevalance of The Notion is a complete waste of time while Notion-reinforcing bike lanes are so prolific.
What's this total line of bullshizzle from page 5 then , Mr. HEAD?
You pretend the bike lanes are the problem, the cause of the notion, but the VAST MAJORITY of roads have no bicycle accomodations whatsover.
You mislead, delude and flat outright LIE, Mr. HEAD. You are pathetic, and one heck of a sophist. Aristophanes would be proud.
I'm going to assuming that you're not playing dumb, but that you really don't get it.
Do you think racially segregated facilities (water fountains, back of the bus) were the cause of racism? Of course not. But don't you see that a government effort to address racism is moot when the same government sanctions racially segregated facilities? This has nothing to do with cycling or bike lanes, but it's important that you be able to understand this relationship in order to understand what I'm trying to explain. If you can't understand the futility of fighting racist notions while at the same time sanctioning segregated racial facilities, even though those facilities are not the cause of racism, you will be unable to understand the futility of fighting The Notion while at the same time sanctioning segregated cycle facilities, even though those facilities are not the cause of The Notion.
If you still don't get it, I'm sorry I'm unable to put it in simpler terms for you. Perhaps someone smarter than me can explain it in a way for you to be able to understand it.
Edit: I will add that even if only a small percentage of roads actually have bike lanes, if they're sprinkled all over town, that makes them prolific, and sufficient to reinforce The Notion and deepen and solidify the beliefs of the morons who think that cyclists don't belong in traffic lanes. Just like just a few racially segregated water fountains sprinkled around some southern town is enough to reinforce, deepen and solidify racist notions in that town. Again, if your brain can't appreciate this analogy, without thinking that I'm equating something with the horrors of racism, I have no idea how else to convey this point to you.
Don't get me wrong, I think The Notion as genec defined it, is dangerous and wrong. It's just the RESPONSE to The Notion (dun, dun, dunnnnnnh) is where we differ.
How do you think we should respond to The Notion? Acquiesce? If you can't beat 'em, join 'em? Is that your position? (if not, I've misunderstood - please help me).
It is The Notion. And the notion isn't "everything should get outta the way". It's "bicycles should get outta the way". Don't try to overgeneralize it, it doesn't work.
Motorists willingly accept considerable delays without blowing up at anybody like this jerk did. They patiently wait for the little old lady to cross the street while the traffic light goes through three cycles. They do not yell obscenities at tractor drivers on rural roads. In short, they can be generally made to obey the rules of the road even if they inconvenience them.
It's just that they don't believe that it's right for bikes to be on the road. To them it's like letting pedestrians all over the road and into left-turn lanes. They think we should stick the sidewalk and the gutter, and consider themselves supergenerous and virtuous when instead of yelling "Get off the road!" and running us over to teach us a lesson they simply squeeze us within half an inch of the curb while honking madly. They feel they've done a good deed: educated the moron-biker, but not too harshly. They honestly do.
Not all of them are like this of course. But a plenty. This is sad and I don't know what to do about this. The examples I quoted above show that the motorists CAN be taught to wait and not resent it, but the society doesn't want to teach them they should wait for the cyclist. And I don't want to try to change the world all by myself: better to be alive in the gutter than dead in the middle of the lane. :(:(:(
How do you think we should respond to The Notion?
Ideally: Work with the cycling community to encourage/get more folks trained to ride on the streets and to use whatever portion of the roadway is needed to stay safe and positioning oneself correctly at intersections. The more folks doing this the more it will become accepted as the norm.
Reality: It ain't gonna happen (at least where I live) and as more folks do ride in the road, a growing number of motorists will start to complain. Driving conditions are getting more congested, faster and agressive, folks are killing each other trying to out drive each other in motor vehicles. Blasts of intense motorist aimed PSAs about cyclist riding legally on roads are needed. Frequent roadside "Share the Road" signs to to educate motorists and cyclists.
Al
...society doesn't want to teach them they should wait for the cyclist.
...as more folks do ride in the road, a growing number of motorists will start to complain. Driving conditions are getting more congested, faster and agressive, folks are killing each other trying to out drive each other in motor vehicles. Blasts of intense motorist aimed PSAs about cyclist riding legally on roads are needed. Frequent roadside "Share the Road" signs to to educate motorists and cyclists.
Now we're talkin'! IMO, 'Share the Road' doesn't quite cut it, though. The message needs to be less vague and more explicit. I personally like the San Francisco signage: Bicycles Allowed Full Lane - Change Lanes to Pass.
Word on the street in PDX that the police get calls from a few motorists cell phones every Sunday night at about 11 PM regarding all the crazy cyclists on the Highway. That would be the ZooBomb Hellway run, totally legal. The police dispatchers have finally been trained to ignore these calls. :D
It is The Notion. And the notion isn't "everything should get outta the way". It's "bicycles should get outta the way". Don't try to overgeneralize it, it doesn't work.
Motorists willingly accept considerable delays without blowing up at anybody like this jerk did. They patiently wait for the little old lady to cross the street while the traffic light goes through three cycles. They do not yell obscenities at tractor drivers on rural roads. In short, they can be generally made to obey the rules of the road even if they inconvenience them.
It's just that they don't believe that it's right for bikes to be on the road. To them it's like letting pedestrians all over the road and into left-turn lanes. They think we should stick the sidewalk and the gutter, and consider themselves supergenerous and virtuous when instead of yelling "Get off the road!" and running us over to teach us a lesson they simply squeeze us within half an inch of the curb while honking madly. They feel they've done a good deed: educated the moron-biker, but not too harshly. They honestly do.
Not all of them are like this of course. But a plenty. This is sad and I don't know what to do about this. The examples I quoted above show that the motorists CAN be taught to wait and not resent it, but the society doesn't want to teach them they should wait for the cyclist. And I don't want to try to change the world all by myself: ...
:beer: Excellent post! I agree with all of the above, but...
...better to be alive in the gutter than dead in the middle of the lane. :(:(:(
The implication of this statement is where we differ. I find that asserting my rights to the "middle of the lane" (when safe and reasonable to do so) reduces my risk. Despite the widespread prevalence of The Notion, the number of people who are actually willing to intentionally run us down to teach us the lesson of The Notion is miniscule. To worry about such tiny risks in general would mean to essentially stop living (not to mention that to the cyclist it often means choosing lane positioning that makes him less visible and less predictable, and, thus, less safe).
Do not acquiesce to The Notion. Live!
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.