Advocacy & Safety - Nice editorial in the "Trentonian"

Take a read of This (http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=8280945&BRD=1697&PAG=461&dept_id=44551&rfi=6) story.

Nice.
:mad:

The author's not a columnist. . . more like a troll looking for backlash - either excessively postive or negative. Not worth the time or effort, if you ask me.

It's spring, let the bashing begin!

'cant throw on spandex and look good'...I can, Im guessing this guy cant. I didnt think club rides rode side by side, I thought it was paceline fashion, I havent been on a club ride so maybe Im wrong. I particularly liked the guys suggestions, parks and residential areas, all the bikers in his area should ride around that guys house.

Yeah. Sometimes the couch potato, pseudo-writers want to stir up controversy, so they write an article about how much they hate cyclists or whatever. I've seen one come out every summer, then people get up at arms, then they take up the challenge and do a ride, then they do a follow up and talk about how they were wrong, then they get that extra exposure they couldn't get because they suck as writers.

I'm ignoring this one.

whoa......

and thats basically my hometown newspaper, i live within 5 minutes of both 206 and princeton pike.

Let me swim upstream a bit. Share the road. It does go both ways. We want free and safe access to all roads. I know that requires an attitude adjustment by many drivers, and a serious amount of re-education for most traffic engineers. But what is the real goal. We want to be able to ride our bikes and get there.

Do we really want to get in the way of motor traffic. Not, really. We just want to be able to pedal and get there safely, smoothly and with that marvelous combination of technology and efficiency that is the modern bicycle. More than anything, I think we want to demonstrate that the bicycle can be a much more usable piece of alternative transportation than most folks realize.

I ride, and yet I would find a large double paceline that wasn't trying to be accommadating on a two-lane highway to be a bit irritating. Just like I find 18 wheelers in both lanes of a long four lane uphill to be irritating. Or more succinctly, rude.

I take the lane when I need it. But I also try to allow folks to pass when I can. Civility is a two way street. What we really want, is for that writer to be a rider.

Originally posted by MisterJ
Let me swim upstream a bit. Share the road. It does go both ways. We want free and safe access to all roads. I know that requires an attitude adjustment by many drivers, and a serious amount of re-education for most traffic engineers. But what is the real goal. We want to be able to ride our bikes and get there.

I agree, his article is somewhat right, if a club of 20 people hold up a whole lane (on a two lane road) that's just dumb... single file people, if you want to be treated (and respected) as another vehicle on the road then you need to follow the rules, (including blocking trafffic and running red lights (which cyclists are terrible for here in vegas....) other than his bashing comments at the end, he is right.

I have always taken a single-file position on group rides, irrespective of the actions of others. However, the trouble with single file group riding is that it encourages motorists to pass, while simultaneously making safe passing more difficult. Envision a motorist approaching a column of 20 cyclists from the rear. The road looks clear ahead, so he eases partway over the centerline and starts to pass the ensemble. As he approaches the midpoint of the group, he suddenly sees a large oncoming truck. Does he risk certain death in a head-on, or start easing into the cyclists? He could have completed passing a configuration of 7 rows of 3-abreast cyclists before the truck became a threat.

The best solution may be for a group of cyclists to take the lane, but to pull over into a single-file formation wherever the road widens, to let motorists pass. This would fit California's law for slow-moving vehicles (move aside when safe to do so and when 5 or more vehicles have accumulated behind you), but would require some radical motorist education.

Yet another anti-cyclist troll. He's probably the same bloke who "bashed" homosexuals and blacks before it was considered un-PC. Best to ignore people like this. If he gets zero replies, he might find something better to do with his (currently) wasted life.

Some people get mad when their "after lunch" cigarette bothers the mother of the kids next table... Or get mad at people who are prittier than them...
Don't see what to discuss in this thread :)

Originally posted by John E
Envision a motorist approaching a column of 20 cyclists from the rear. The road looks clear ahead, so he eases partway over the centerline and starts to pass the ensemble. As he approaches the midpoint of the group, he suddenly sees a large oncoming truck. Does he risk certain death in a head-on, or start easing into the cyclists? He could have completed passing a configuration of 7 rows of 3-abreast cyclists before the truck became a threat.

Er,

Wouldn't a better/safer solution than riding abreast here be to break up those 20 cyclists into smaller 5-7 bicyclist single file columns, Allowing maybe 100-200 yards min between each column. Its better training even as 2 more people get to pull ;)

Just a thought, i've never been on a big "racing" style group ride.

take care,

Steve

Steve, somehow I think you've just produced more rational thought than ever went into that article.

Last year a traffic columnist wrote a piece:

STREET SMARTS

Oh boy, it must be summer . . . . the complaints are coming in about errant cyclists!

In recent weeks drivers and cyclists alike have spent a lot of time bad mouthing each other on the In Traffic hotline. A bike may not be a vehicle by legal definition but the rider has exactly the same responsibilities on the road.

Here's a quick digest of the rules that seem to be the most frequently disobeyed by reckless riders.

- Bikes must travel in the same direction as the flow of traffic and keep as close to the right hand side of the road as is possible without riding in the gutter or through potholes.

- They must stay off the sidewalk because wheels and feet don't mix.

- Riders who are not comfortable turning left from the centre of the road, should pull into the curb and walk, not ride, across the crosswalk.

- Stopping at stop signs is not optional.

- Helmets, warning bells, and rear lights are compulsory equipment.

I wrote him and after 9 back and forths, he printed a summation of my arguments with his points:

STREET SMARTS

Commuter cyclist (closetbiker) has been sent sprawling by cars, spat upon, verbally abused, hit by beer bottles and slapped on the backside during his 17 years of pedalling to work.

But it's not deterred him from making the daily 27-minute, 13.6-kilometre trek from Steveston to Vancouver airport where he works for Air Canada . . . this month he will proudly log 100,000 kilometres in the saddle.

Last Monday's Street Smarts featured motorists' complaints about cyclists disobeying the rules of the road. This week, he tells the other side of the story:

"My experience tells me motorists drive in a dangerous manner toward bicycles by failing to yield right of way. They almost never give enough space when overtaking and frequently pass only to slam on their brakes and cut off bikes as they turn right," says a steamed (closetbiker).

"I have been hit three times and each time it was the driver's fault. Once the car took off, and the other two times both drivers admitted they saw me but couldn't explain why they then hit me!"

And (closetbiker) cites published research which reports car drivers are more than twice as likely to fail to yield to cyclists and four times as likely to hit one while turning right. He also observes cars rarely stop at the stop line but instead nose into exactly where bikes are intended to ride thus forcing cyclists into passing traffic.

(closetbiker) reasons: "I understand this is a car culture and only two per cent of the commuting public ride a bike to work but, surely, safe-driving principles should apply to all road users and traffic law should be enforced for everyone equally."

That's too cool, closetbiker. I wish all papers would take the perspective of the law abiding cyclist and print our side of the story for once. I get tired of reading about the irresponsible cyclist.

Great job! :thumbup:

Koffee

I have to give credit to the writer for printing my points. He didnät really want to but relented in the end!
:)

Word sshock, As you know I too live in Princeton, but funny how I missed that article.