Yea, that doesn't seem right. You can easily be vigilant and breaking every rule in the book; and likewise, you can be following ever rule in the book and have your head in the clouds.

Whoa, horsey. Following the rules implies vigilance? Impossible to follow the rules if you're not vigilant? Did you mean to write that?

That is a massively incorrect statement.

Robert I was hoping you'd catch that. Yes, that's exactly what I meant. Unfortunately I don't have time to discuss this further.

I will say this: obeying the rules of the road requires vigilance. If you're not vigilant, you're inevitably going to break one of the rules, probably sooner than later. Not to mention that PAYING ATTENTION is arguably the primary rule of the road [1 (http://www.roadtripamerica.com/DefensiveDriving/Rule01.htm)].

You have to pay attention to know when who has the right-of-way, when you have to yield, when someone else is supposed to yield to you (and to make sure they do), etc. For drivers of slow moving vehicles (including bicyclists most of the time) you have to pay attention to traffic around so that you know when to yield to faster traffic: when they're behind and it's safe and reasonable to yield. For drivers of narrow vehicles (like motorcyclists and cyclists), you have to pay attention to the constantly changing scenario to apply lane positioning rules correctly.

It is impossible to follow the rules of the road without paying constant attention to what is going on around you.

Vigilance and vehicular behavior go hand in hand, two peas in a pod. A good understanding of the rules of the road helps you focus on what is relevant to your safety, and ignore the irrelevant.

That's all I have time for now, for about a week. Cya.

you can be following ever rule in the book and have your head in the clouds. Nope. Having your head in the clouds is the first step to breaking the rules (from running red lights to not noticing the pedestrian stepping out midblock who has the right-of-way).

But I agree you can be vigilant without following the rules.
But it's a lot easier to be vigilant to what is relevant when you are following the rules.

Maybe he wasn't calling you a liar, though it does seem that way. I know for one than when I tell people online that I program robots with lasers attached to them their BSOmeter goes buzzing. Though the fact is, I program large robots with high powered class 4 lasers attached to them.
I wasn't calling him a liar.
Just some things, like him being a driving instructor, are hard to believe, ya know? That's all I meant by "supposedly"...

I wasn't calling him a liar.
Just some things, like him being a driving instructor, are hard to believe, ya know? That's all I meant by "supposedly"...
So you were rather "questioning" that he is indeed a driving instructer, I see.
However, I am currently making plans of motorizing my robots, and they WILL find you!! muwahahahaha
If only I could figure out a way to power them away from where they sit...
:D

I program large robots with high powered class 4 lasers attached to them.

Let me know when you have a system worked out that I can put on my bike. Maybe the best defense is a good offense. :D

There's that Mr. Head myopia again. There is more than one type of driving instructor. "Driving instructor" isn't limited to folks who espouse strict DD/extreme paranoia driving practices.

You're welcome to come for a free ride anytime, or I can ride along with you. I'm sure there's even something that the great Head could improve upon.

Just bring your Helmet, Head.



I for one can easilly see how one could wonder about your claim to be a driving instructor (in the teach novice people how to survive on the road sense of the word). If you want to pick a fight, go ahead and give partial info. It is easy to then jump out and say "gotcha" when questioned. Of course there are different kinds of driving instructors! In the context of this thread, you implied, or made it easy for others to assume, that you taught novice drivers on the street. I know that people should not make these inferences, but deliberately setting this up and then jumping out and yelling GOTCHA is a tad ridiculous, no?

Btw, your credibility will go up if you can manage to disagree with someone without having to resort to mockery in almost every post you make in response to them.

I've described the situations I've personally had occur to me where I did nothing blatantly wrong and got into an accident - unless you argue that sitting behind the steering wheel of a car is blatantly wrong in and of itself (a not unreasonable position), in the 'how many accidents' poll.

Sorry, I am completely uninterested about how much credibility you attach to my posts based upon the way that I poke fun at Mr. Head's outrageous posts. You'll just have to deal with it.


It is a thin line you tread....


Harassment occurs when a member insults, attacks, and denigrates another member at any time. We have zero tolerance for taking an argument about a any topic to a personal level. For instance, the use of terms such as "idiot, moron, stupid" and other derogatory terms constitutes harassment. The idea is to make this a pleasant environment to discuss cycling, not a schoolyard, or name-calling and rock-throwing festival. Repeated critical and sharply negative posts toward a forum member can also constitute harassment.