Vehicular Cycling (VC) - Is this VC?

Is it an inevitable part of riding without cycling facilities to be yelled at, honked at or lectured to? Does this just come with the territory? Grin and bear it, the best you can hope for? How can it be stopped, or is this not something VC advocates are interested in?

I don't consider myself VC but I do ride in the lane and act as a vehicle 98% of the time while maintaing a very respectable speed. I tend to get yelled at, honked at and lectured to about how I should be riding on the sidewalk usualy at least once a day. We have next to zero bike facilities here. I say it is ineveitable depending on where you live. Our roads are narrow and shoulderless. I however don't just grin and bear it when the cars are jerks, I particulary love it. It is extremely fulfilling to yell at or tell the motorist they are number one to me. Nothing like having a jerk yell at you, then yelling back and seeing him slam on the brakes and get out of the car to cuss at me some more - thus slowing him down even more :)
How to stop them from doing this? Well, it ain't gonna be by done by teaching bicyclists more the rules, I say motorists need to be taught MORE manners. If teaching bicyclists the rules would change it, then they wouldn't be yelling at me all the time.

Then again I haven't owned a car in 2 years by choice, so from a motorist viewpoint, I'm the wrong one to ask.

Guys (and gals) you are forgetting to put on the VC attitude, be the alpha dog and... oh gee, I forgot... you don't need to do that... just act like the driver of a vehicle and you will be treated like the driver of a vehicle.

It's that simple.

Yeah Gene, I always get beer bottles and such thrown at me when I am in my pickup, so why should be it a surprise on the bike. You just gotta see the bottle, Gene. Be....be....BE the bottle!

...be the alpha dog...

That's the ONLY way to ride if you ask me. Stare those drivers down and make them feel as if they mean absolutly less then nothing to you. They'll give you right of way then. But they may still honk and yell, lol

yes, yes, yes, and no!

Yeah Gene, I always get beer bottles and such thrown at me when I am in my pickup, so why should be it a surprise on the bike. You just gotta see the bottle, Gene. Be....be....BE the bottle!

Then like wow man, is my bike like the bottle opener?

This is a valid concern/question. Cyclists should be able to ride legally without putting up with so much motorist crap. "Get off the road" "You're not a car" & "Bikes are supposed to get out of the way" comments and horns will only be reduced through motorist training. I agree that Alpha Dog style and confidence goes a long way in improving how I'm accepted, but it shouldn't/doesn't have to be this way. When I ride in an unfamiliar area I'm less confident and usually have more problems than I do on my regular routes.

A major point of promoting the vehicular cycling paradigm is so that drivers accept cyclists on ordinary roadways. This is the motorist-education/society-education component of vehicular cycling advocacy.

If the roadway is so narrow and busy that cyclists create an unusual amount of delay for motorists, then the roadway should be improved. An example of such and improvement is a wide outside through lane. However, the inadequacy of the road for convenient overtaking should never be considered an excuse for harassing cyclists.

If the cyclist poses no inconvenience to the motorist, then the problem is clearly one of motorists considering cyclists to have an inferior right to the roadway; the only reasonable approaches here are education and enforcement to reinforce that all normal roads are legitimate bicycle facilities and that harassment by motorists will not be tolerated.

What alternative to the above approaches is there? To convince the general public that cyclists do not belong on ordinary roads, because cycling on ordinary roads is an unreasonable inconvenience to motorists and an unreasonable danger to the cyclists? To ignore the use of busy roadways by cyclists by failing to provide adequte pavement width on the roadway, and assume that cyclists should stick to sidewalks/sidepaths, as pedestrians-on-wheels? This will only increase such harassment.

It is my observation that the more often that cyclists operate on normal roads, including some cases where drivers must change lanes to pass them, the more motorists come to accept this without a fuss.

A major point of promoting the vehicular cycling paradigm is so that drivers accept cyclists on ordinary roadways. This is the motorist-education/society-education component of vehicular cycling advocacy.

If the roadway is so narrow and busy that cyclists create an unusual amount of delay for motorists, then the roadway should be improved. An example of such and improvement is a wide outside through lane. However, the inadequacy of the road for convenient overtaking should never be considered an excuse for harassing cyclists.

If the cyclist poses no inconvenience to the motorist, then the problem is clearly one of motorists considering cyclists to have an inferior right to the roadway; the only reasonable approaches here are education and enforcement to reinforce that all normal roads are legitimate bicycle facilities and that harassment by motorists will not be tolerated.

What alternative to the above approaches is there? To convince the general public that cyclists do not belong on ordinary roads, because cycling on ordinary roads is an unreasonable inconvenience to motorists and an unreasonable danger to the cyclists? To ignore the use of busy roadways by cyclists by failing to provide adequte pavement width on the roadway, and assume that cyclists should stick to sidewalks/sidepaths, as pedestrians-on-wheels? This will only increase such harassment.

It is my observation that the more often that cyclists operate on normal roads, including some cases where drivers must change lanes to pass them, the more motorists come to accept this without a fuss.

The problem is that someone has to be "first..." While I ride around in the street demonstrating the proper VC method, there are 5 X more cyclists riding the same area on sidewalks.

While taking a Road II class a couple years ago we were honked at and a motorist told me that we should be riding "like those other cyclists... " "Oh, which cyclists." "The ones on the sidewalk and at the curb... you folks should not be out in the street." My next reply: "And how exactly do you make left turns then..." His response: "Well you figure that out... "

The problem is that no one tells the motorists to share the roads and that cyclists have the same rights to the road as they. (that 5 minute speech back in drivers' ed just did not sink in) Then the motorists see all these folks on bikes riding along on the sidewalk, and that suits them just fine. (and those cyclists have no motivation for doing it any other way... nor the inclination to seek another way) Then I come along riding 15MPH in the middle of the "motorists' 35MPH lane" and the responses are uh, "less than friendly."

BTW we were also honked at in the Road I class (classic, actually) by an SUV driving motorist that thought we were not riding far enough right. We were a large group both times of about 10 cyclists... was this not "enough" cyclists for those motorists to "come to accept this without a fuss?"

Until motorists have a clue... then the individual cyclist pretty much has to fight for their postion on the road. Hardly a positive environment. (BTW bike lanes don't help much in this fight, but they do indicate that cyclists at least shouldn't be "on the sidewalk.")

The problem is that someone has to be "first..." While I ride around in the street demonstrating the proper VC method, there are 5 X more cyclists riding the same area on sidewalks.

While taking a Road II class a couple years ago we were honked at and a motorist told me that we should be riding "like those other cyclists... " "Oh, which cyclists." "The ones on the sidewalk and at the curb... you folks should not be out in the street." My next reply: "And how exactly do you make left turns then..." His response: "Well you figure that out... "

The problem is that no one tells the motorists to share the roads and that cyclists have the same rights to the road as they. (that 5 minute speech back in drivers' ed just did not sink in) Then the motorists see all these folks on bikes riding along on the sidewalk, and that suits them just fine. (and those cyclists have no motivation for doing it any other way... nor the inclination to seek another way) Then I come along riding 15MPH in the middle of the "motorists' 35MPH lane" and the responses are uh, "less than friendly."

BTW we were also honked at in the Road I class (classic, actually) by an SUV driving motorist that thought we were not riding far enough right. We were a large group both times of about 10 cyclists... was this not "enough" cyclists for those motorists to "come to accept this without a fuss?"

Until motorists have a clue... then the individual cyclist pretty much has to fight for their postion on the road. Hardly a positive environment. (BTW bike lanes don't help much in this fight, but they do indicate that cyclists at least shouldn't be "on the sidewalk.")

This clearly indicates society's ignorance about vehicular cycling. Motorists must be educated that cyclists have the right to use the roadway, and punished when they harass cyclists operating properly. Better still, society in general should be familiar with proper roadway cycling, so they do not misconstrue proper cycling to be inappropriate, unlawful, or dangerous.

How do we accomplish this? Cyclist advocates have limited power by themselves, even when we talk Clear Channel radio into airing thousands of PSAs about road sharing and distribute all the flyers in the world. This ultimately requires the cooperation of government. This is where vehicular cycling advocates target the majority of their energy, attempting to educate law enforcement at the state and local level why cyclists should be considered legitimate users of roadways, and what we believe must be done to improve the behavior of both motorists and cyclists.

In the ten years that I've been cycling in Cary, I believe that motorist harassment has decreased, while both motor and on-roadway bicycle traffic have increased. I generally sense a greater level of cooperation by drivers. The only places where I have experienced increases in harassment are on wide-lane residential streets where bike lane striping was recently added, and the corresponding area filled with debris, requiring me to stay outside the marked lane. I think the motorists may be getting used to road cyclists staying outside the debris-filled bike lanes, though.

I've been honked/yelled at while riding on arterials with a NOL. The more intense reactions have been on this type of road.

I've been honked and yelled at while riding on roads with WOL striped with a BL. The most frequently on this type of road, especially around intersections. The four times I've had things thrown at me have been when I was in a BL. I've twice had drivers swerve toward me when in a BL on intersectionless road. (both times a group ride)

The least frequent negative interactions have been on roads with a WOL.

I really can't say that any one type of road generate more unwanted behavior.

Al

This clearly indicates society's ignorance about vehicular cycling. Motorists must be educated that cyclists have the right to use the roadway, and punished when they harass cyclists operating properly. Better still, society in general should be familiar with proper roadway cycling, so they do not misconstrue proper cycling to be inappropriate, unlawful, or dangerous.

How do we accomplish this? Cyclist advocates have limited power by themselves, even when we talk Clear Channel radio into airing thousands of PSAs about road sharing and distribute all the flyers in the world. This ultimately requires the cooperation of government. This is where vehicular cycling advocates target the majority of their energy, attempting to educate law enforcement at the state and local level why cyclists should be considered legitimate users of roadways, and what we believe must be done to improve the behavior of both motorists and cyclists.

In the ten years that I've been cycling in Cary, I believe that motorist harassment has decreased, while both motor and on-roadway bicycle traffic have increased. I generally sense a greater level of cooperation by drivers. The only places where I have experienced increases in harassment are on wide-lane residential streets where bike lane striping was recently added, and the corresponding area filled with debris, requiring me to stay outside the marked lane. I think the motorists may be getting used to road cyclists staying outside the debris-filled bike lanes, though.


This pretty much hits the nail on the head. When all users of the roadway understand that all users have rights to the same road... then there is no point in the silly extra lines.

While there will probably always be room for improvement in cultural attitudes towards cyclists on the road, the best antidote I know of is for the cyclist to consistently behave in a vehicular manner. It's no panacea - you will still get yelled and honked at - but not nearly as often.

Nate claims he "[does] ride in the lane and [acts] as a vehicle 98% of the time", but it's not clear what he means by that. He also says he gets yelled or honked at at least once a day. I don't hear Steve saying he gets harrassed that often, not even Gene. I sure don't. It could be a regional thing, in which case motorists there probably get honked at daily too. Or, it could be that Nate is doing something different from vehicular cyclists who, from all over the U.S., report getting honked or yelled at more on the order of once every few weeks, if not only once every few months.

I don't get harrassed all that much... I will admit... it has probably been 3 months or so since my last "get on the sidewalk." I typically cycle every other day. About 30% of my riding is on isolated bike paths.

But then again, it is probably been 2 years or more since anyone honked a horn at me in my car. I drive about 5 days a week.

In other words, I am far far more exposed to traffic while driving a car, and I experience far far less harassement... even though I drive "painfully slow." (by "some" standards... I drive at or below the speed limit).

If there were no bike lanes for the motorists to yell at you to get in, the motorists wouldn't yell at you anymore. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Oh, wait, I guess they'll need to remove all the sidewalks first, too! :eek: :eek: :eek:

Forget the motorists, it's just the cyclists that need more training. ;) ;) ;)

If there were no bike lanes for the motorists to yell at you to get in, the motorists wouldn't yell at you anymore. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Oh, wait, I guess they'll need to remove all the sidewalks first, too! :eek: :eek: :eek:

Forget the motorists, it's just the cyclists that need more training. ;) ;) ;)

Jeeze, you were getting there... the solution is obvious... just remove the motorists. ;)

Jeeze, you were getting there... the solution is obvious... just remove the motorists. ;)
B..b...b..but the American Dream Coalition thinks that's just crazy talk! And they hired renowned bicycling 'expert' AJ to say so!

How can it be stopped, or is this not something VC advocates are interested in?


I know-----I have a great idea. Lets find a day where we all get together---and we can e-mail and text message our friends----and meet somewhere in a major metro area around rush hour and all ride at the same time down a major arterial. By blocking traffic we can prove to the motorists that we have as much right to be there as they do and once they understand they will not yelling at us and harassing us.


What do you guys think? Maybe if we try real hard we can get thousands of people and really show 'em.

Nate claims he "[does] ride in the lane and [acts] as a vehicle 98% of the time", but it's not clear what he means by that. He also says he gets yelled or honked at at least once a day. I don't hear Steve saying he gets harrassed that often, not even Gene. I sure don't. It could be a regional thing,....

That is what it is for many of us - this town is home to the largest Naval base in the world (they say) Norfolk, VA - We are JAM PACKED with cocky 18-19 year olds fresh off the boat in their new cars.

Don't matter how proper you ride - some areas have jerks for the majority or drivers.

That is what it is for many of us - this town is home to the largest Naval base in the world (they say) Norfolk, VA - We are JAM PACKED with cocky 18-19 year olds fresh off the boat in their new cars.

Don't matter how proper you ride - some areas have jerks for the majority or drivers. When I ride near the Marine (Miramar and Pendleton) and Navy (Coronado) bases in San Diego I don't notice any significant difference in treatment. A lot more motorcycles though...

When I ride near the Marine (Miramar and Pendleton) and Navy (Coronado) bases in San Diego I don't notice any significant difference in treatment. A lot more motorcycles though...
AH,but some of those cyclists are SEAL's!:p :D Might make a difference, HH!;)

While there will probably always be room for improvement in cultural attitudes towards cyclists on the road, the best antidote I know of is for the cyclist to consistently behave in a vehicular manner. It's no panacea - you will still get yelled and honked at - but not nearly as often.

Nate claims he "[does] ride in the lane and [acts] as a vehicle 98% of the time", but it's not clear what he means by that. He also says he gets yelled or honked at at least once a day. I don't hear Steve saying he gets harrassed that often, not even Gene. I sure don't. It could be a regional thing, in which case motorists there probably get honked at daily too. Or, it could be that Nate is doing something different from vehicular cyclists who, from all over the U.S., report getting honked or yelled at more on the order of once every few weeks, if not only once every few months.

Of you, Gene, and Steve; two of you live in a place with a very large and very long standing bicycling community.
Where I live, it's a car centric culture and mind set. Everyone and everything here (Detroit) depends on the American auto industry. For me, it is definately a location type thing.
In fact, the last person who said something verbally to me that I could comprehend eluded to: me, on my bicycle, as being part of the problem that the American auto industry is failing.
Granted that is just one person, but I'm sure there are others out there who would or have jumped on the same bandwagon.

Sure, cyclists fare best when they act like and are treated like operators of a vehicle. But no matter how much I act like one, I rarely get treated like one. So I have to follow a different path for safety and convenience.

What if you are a risk-averse individual who doesn't feel it's worth the hassle? I mean you know you have a right to the road. You really want to ride your bike. But add all that motorist harassment and threats of actual violence on top of your already stressful work day and what is the point?

AH,but some of those cyclists are SEAL's!:p :D Might make a difference, HH!;)
Those pals of HH may be California Real Cyclists, but they are not Real Seals.

These are Real Seals.

What if you are a risk-averse individual who doesn't feel it's worth the hassle? I mean you know you have a right to the road. You really want to ride your bike. But add all that motorist harassment and threats of actual violence on top of your already stressful work day and what is the point?

I suppose that feeling yourself to be risk-averse is part of the discomfort. The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment. When you recognize that the harassing motorist has far less traffic knowledge than you have and is (dare I use this word in this forum?) ignorant and uncouth, the amount of discomfort is much less.

When I ride near the Marine (Miramar and Pendleton) and Navy (Coronado) bases in San Diego I don't notice any significant difference in treatment. A lot more motorcycles though...

I used to ride to the Navy base on 32nd street. The sailors didn't give me as much of a hard time as the folks out in town... Out in town, I always had to "fight" for room on the streets.

I suppose that feeling yourself to be risk-averse is part of the discomfort. The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment. When you recognize that the harassing motorist has far less traffic knowledge than you have and is (dare I use this word in this forum?) ignorant and uncouth, the amount of discomfort is much less. Mr. Forester understates the liberating effect of the realization that he alludes to here.

The first time you react to honking or yelling as a good thing -- that they're letting you know that they see you -- and so you smile, nod, and/or wave back , in a genuinely friendly manner, then you will know you are starting to understand, and that you're beginning to feel like a driver, with equal rights, inwardly, which is the hallmark of a vehicular cyclist.

Of you, Gene, and Steve; two of you live in a place with a very large and very long standing bicycling community.
Where I live, it's a car centric culture and mind set. Everyone and everything here (Detroit) depends on the American auto industry. For me, it is definately a location type thing.
In fact, the last person who said something verbally to me that I could comprehend eluded to: me, on my bicycle, as being part of the problem that the American auto industry is failing.
Granted that is just one person, but I'm sure there are others out there who would or have jumped on the same bandwagon.

Sure, cyclists fare best when they act like and are treated like operators of a vehicle. But no matter how much I act like one, I rarely get treated like one. So I have to follow a different path for safety and convenience.

LOL Beyond Schwinn, I don't believe America has ever had an "American built" bike... oh sure Trek frames used to be made in the US... but we have never made a grouppo. Italian and Japanese have dominated that market.

As far as Detroit... perhaps if they saw beyond the Hummer, and tried to actually build an economical practical car... :rolleyes:

I suppose that feeling yourself to be risk-averse is part of the discomfort. The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment. When you recognize that the harassing motorist has far less traffic knowledge than you have and is (dare I use this word in this forum?) ignorant and uncouth, the amount of discomfort is much less.

Even if a physical threat is empty, it is still unlawful. I think the discomfort from harassment is even less when a cyclist experiences positive reinforcement from law enforcement officers, who take these concerns seriously enough to act upon them. Road rage hotlines and police officers who are sensitive to cyclists' concerns give cyclists a sense that they can do something positive to improve conditions for cyclists after something happens.

As vehicular cycling advocates, our goal is for law enforcement officers to respond to a cyclist's complaint of harassment with "it's our job to help protect your right to use the road" and not "you should probably go ride your bike somewhere else - how about the park?" I think police can mitigate the attempts of some motorists to instill in cyclists an inferior sense of entitlement - or, they can exacerbate it. This in turn can affect cyclists' willingness to use convenient routes, and ultimately affect the popularity of cycling transportation.

I suppose that feeling yourself to be risk-averse is part of the discomfort. The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment. When you recognize that the harassing motorist has far less traffic knowledge than you have and is (dare I use this word in this forum?) ignorant and uncouth, the amount of discomfort is much less.

Really John... you actually think that there is no real risk from harassment? What about the woman doored here several years ago while climbing Torrey Pines grade... what about bottles and cans thrown from moving cars... might they cause physical damage if they strike you. (Fortunatly those "less than knowledgeable motorists" usually fail to compensate for inertia, in their aim). But the fact is, some form of harassment can hurt you. The other fact is that motorists don't tend to experience similar harrasment.

While there will probably always be room for improvement in cultural attitudes towards cyclists on the road, the best antidote I know of is for the cyclist to consistently behave in a vehicular manner. It's no panacea - you will still get yelled and honked at - but not nearly as often.

Is this based on your personal experience? Or is this a known fact all across the nation? If it apply's all across the U.S. I take that to mean you have ridden in all areas of the country to base your opinion on that? In other words where is your proof & evidence this is the case in all areas across the U.S.? Show some statistics if you have them. Or state this is based on your personal experience in your geographical area.

My experience has proven, time & again, I am better off & get honked at, yelled at, et al less when I behave in an adaptive manner, or AC instead of strictly VC in accordance with yours or JF's doctrine & method of advised riding. I can only apply this in the areas I've ridden bike in.

They include:

Iowa: the area I live in, central Iowa, areas I have ridden in on RAGBRAI since 1998.
South Dakota: the area I near, Sioux Falls, the Black Hills area, Yankton area, Vermillion area.
Wyoming: area around Devils Tower.
Nebraska: area I live near.
Hawaii: area in & around Hononlulu.
Illinois: the area in & around De Pue & La Salle/Peru.

I would NEVER presume to claim Adaptive Cycling would apply in any area except the areas I have ridden in. But you seem to have no problem making a general statment that VC would apply to to all areas.

I suppose that feeling yourself to be risk-averse is part of the discomfort. The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment. When you recognize that the harassing motorist has far less traffic knowledge than you have and is (dare I use this word in this forum?) ignorant and uncouth, the amount of discomfort is much less.

WTF is risk averse? Sounds like another bull**** term made up by Forester.

John before you state another term will you please give us a list of these with their definitions? Seriously it sounds like you're making this crap up as you go along.

Correction here is what I found on risk averse: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_aversion

I am not sure if this is what JF means by it though. John please explain how this apply's to cycling. How in the hell does economics, finance & psychology apply in the context in which Diane is talking about here? Are you a financial, economics or even a psychology expert? Do you hold degrees in any of those fields? Have you ever worked in any of those fields as your vocation?

WTF is risk averse? Sounds like another bull**** term made up by Forester.

John before you state another term will you please give us a list of these with their definitions? Seriously it sounds like you're making this crap up as you go along.

Risk aversion is a common term used in examining decisions made by different populations, for example, people likely to move into a gritty downtown area that is starting to become revitalized, versus people who want to live on a no-surprises suburban cul-de-sac.

Risk aversion and risk perception are two different things, of course. Risk-averse people may underestimate the risk of things they do every day without thought, and risk-seeking people may overestimate the danger of things that they choose because they seem dangerous.

Back when I was a risk-seeker, I did a lot of urban roadway cycling, assuming that I'd probably get hit, but I never did. Just a lot of harassment, which made me overestimate the danger I was facing.

Now that I am risk-averse, I also do a lot of urban roadway cycling, but I don't worry about it, because I learned not to.

I suppose that feeling yourself to be risk-averse is part of the discomfort. The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment. When you recognize that the harassing motorist has far less traffic knowledge than you have and is (dare I use this word in this forum?) ignorant and uncouth, the amount of discomfort is much less.

Really John... you actually think that there is no real risk from harassment? What about the woman doored here several years ago while climbing Torrey Pines grade... what about bottles and cans thrown from moving cars... might they cause physical damage if they strike you. (Fortunatly those "less than knowledgeable motorists" usually fail to compensate for inertia, in their aim). But the fact is, some form of harassment can hurt you. The other fact is that motorists don't tend to experience similar harrasment.
Mr. Forester clearly differentiated harassment from actual violence. What you cite are example of actual violence, despite the occasional existence of which, the risk is minute.

While there will probably always be room for improvement in cultural attitudes towards cyclists on the road, the best antidote I know of is for the cyclist to consistently behave in a vehicular manner. It's no panacea - you will still get yelled and honked at - but not nearly as often.
Is this based on your personal experience? Or is this a known fact all across the nation? If it apply's all across the U.S. I take that to mean you have ridden in all areas of the country to base your opinion on that? In other words where is your proof & evidence this is the case in all areas across the U.S.? Show some statistics if you have them. Or state this is based on your personal experience in your geographical area.
It is based on personal experience mostly in California and the fact that it is consistent with reports from LCIs and vehicular cyclists all over the country.



My experience has proven, time & again, I am better off & get honked at, yelled at, et al less when I behave in an adaptive manner, or AC instead of strictly VC in accordance with yours or JF's doctrine & method of advised riding. I can only apply this in the areas I've ridden bike in. What do you mean by "strictly VC"? Here's what I think of it, from the Some VC Definitions OP (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=3990425&postcount=1):


Strict VC is strict adherence to VC while riding a bicycle. It means never riding on sidewalks, never doing a 2-step left turn, always taking the lane, never taking a short cut through a parking lot, never mountain biking, never rolling a stop (a.k.a California Stop), never riding on bike paths, etc. There are no known adherents or proponents of Strict VC, though some VC contrarians have been known to mischaracterize VC advocates as such.



I would NEVER presume to claim Adaptive Cycling would apply in any area except the areas I have ridden in. But you seem to have no problem making a general statment that VC would apply to to all areas. Certainly VC works in all areas in the U.S. I'm quite sure I would have heard of an area in the U.S. where it didn't work if there was such an area.

WTF is risk averse? Sounds like another bull**** term made up by Forester.

John before you state another term will you please give us a list of these with their definitions? Seriously it sounds like you're making this crap up as you go along.

Correction here is what I found on risk averse: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_aversion

I am not sure if this is what JF means by it though. John please explain how this apply's to cycling. How in the hell does economics, finance & psychology apply in the context in which Diane is talking about here? Are you a financial, economics or even a psychology expert? Do you hold degrees in any of those fields? Have you ever worked in any of those fields as your vocation? Do you really believe you have to be an economics or psychology expert to speak of risk aversion? It's sad that you've never heard of it until now. How old are you? Do you read a newspaper? A weekly news magazine like Time or Newsweek?

When I ride near the Marine (Miramar and Pendleton) and Navy (Coronado) bases in San Diego I don't notice any significant difference in treatment. A lot more motorcycles though...

Then you are lucky - I'd wager the fact that the Naval base here is so huge, it supplies our area with many more times the amout of young, cocky sailors then the area you are talking about.

Then you are lucky - I'd wager the fact that the Naval base here is so huge, it supplies our area with many more times the amout of young, cocky sailors then the area you are talking about.

How huge is it?



[Camp Pendleton's] diverse geography, spanning over 125,000 acres, plays host to year round training for Marines in addition to all other branches of the U.S. Military. Amphibious and sea-to-shore training takes place at several key points along the base's 17 miles of coastline. The main base is in the Mainside Complex, at the southeastern end of the base, and the remote northern interior is an impact area. Daytime population is around 100,000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Pendleton

WTF is risk averse? Sounds like another bull**** term made up by Forester.

John before you state another term will you please give us a list of these with their definitions? Seriously it sounds like you're making this crap up as you go along.

Correction here is what I found on risk averse: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_aversion

I am not sure if this is what JF means by it though. John please explain how this apply's to cycling. How in the hell does economics, finance & psychology apply in the context in which Diane is talking about here? Are you a financial, economics or even a psychology expert? Do you hold degrees in any of those fields? Have you ever worked in any of those fields as your vocation?

NC, now you must be really angry!

I used the term "risk-averse" precisely in answer to sbhikes's own statement about herself:

"Originally Posted by sbhikes
What if you are a risk-averse individual who doesn't feel it's worth the hassle? I mean you know you have a right to the road. You really want to ride your bike. But add all that motorist harassment and threats of actual violence on top of your already stressful work day and what is the point?"

Possibly, NC, you desire to question sbhikes's qualifications for using this phrase? I'm sure that she would appreciate the irony of such questioning.

By the way, although it was long ago, I taught graduate and senior students about risks as involved in business decisions, advanced the field somewhat, and even wrote a text on the subject.

Possibly, NC, you desire to question sbhikes's qualifications for using this phrase? I'm sure that she would appreciate the irony of such questioning.

:beer: :roflmao:

And who said Forester doesn't have a sense of humor?

How huge is it? you filthy dog you .... ;) but seriously



The Hampton Roads area is home to one of the nation’s largest concentrations of military personnel, with approximately 110,000 active duty military personnel. The total DoD population, including active duty, reserve, retirees and family members totals approximately 300,000 in an area with a total population of 1.8 million.

Major military units and headquarters include NATO’s Allied Command Transformation, U.S. Joint Forces Command, U.S. Fleet Forces Command, the U.S. Air Force’s Air Combat Command, U.S. Marine Corps Forces Command, and the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command. Military hardware in the area includes 70 ships, 12 submarines, 400 Navy aircraft, 80 Air Force aircraft, and a variety of Navy Special Forces and support units.

http://www.jfcom.mil/newcomer/newcomer2.htm

But keep in mind, average daily miles bicycled will add greatly to your exposure to impatient motorists ;)



or



Hampton Roads is also a chief rendezvous of the US Navy. The Hampton Roads area has the largest concentration of military bases and facilities of any metropolitan area in the world. The area is home to the Allied Command Transformation, which is the only major military command of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Langley Air Force Base is home to Air Combat Command (ACC). The Norfolk Navy Base is located at Sewell's Point near the mouth, on the site used for the tercentennial Jamestown Exposition in 1907. For a width of 500 feet the Federal government during 1902 through 1905 increased its minimum depth at low water from 25.5 feet to 30 feet, and the channel has now been dredged to a depth of 55 feet in some places.

Other area military facilities (alphabetically) include:

* Camp Peary in York County
* Fleet Training Center Dam Neck in Virginia Beach
* Fort Eustis in Newport News
* Fort Monroe in Hampton (scheduled to be closed by 2011)
* Fort Story in Virginia Beach
* Langley Air Force Base in Hampton
* Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek in Virginia Beach
* Naval Air Station Oceana in Virginia Beach
* Naval Weapons Station Yorktown in York County
* Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth (not to be confused with Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, in Kittery, Maine)
* Saint Julian Creek Naval Depot Annex in Chesapeake
* Coast Guard Integrated Support Command Portsmouth[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hampton_Roads

Mr. Forester clearly differentiated harassment from actual violence. What you cite are example of actual violence, despite the occasional existence of which, the risk is minute.
While having a bottle, can or other item thrown at you from a moving car is a form of violence, it is also harassment. Now don't go and get all Wall of Words on me here. Any attack on someone can be defined as harassment wether it be physical or mental.

The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment.
Harassment leads to violence, would you not agree? Maybe not 100% of the time but the fact remains that harassment leads to violence.
Thus the risk from harassment is violence, and that sir, is not minute, but a real threat that though maybe not common where you live, is very common in other places. And I think I may know just a little bit more on this subject than you.

While having a bottle, can or other item thrown at you from a moving car is a form of violence, it is also harassment. Now don't go and get all Wall of Words on me here. Any attack on someone can be defined as harassment wether it be physical or mental.

Harassment leads to violence, would you not agree? Maybe not 100% of the time but the fact remains that harassment leads to violence.
Thus the risk from harassment is violence, and that sir, is not minute, but a real threat that though maybe not common where you live, is very common in other places. And I think I may know just a little bit more on this subject than you. Well, share with us, please, Mr. "know just a little bit more on this subject".

Of the 700-800 U.S. deaths per year, how many are caused by harrassment that lead to violence?

Of the non-fatal bicyclist injuries suffered per year, about what non-minute percent is caused by harrassment that lead to violence?

Is it an inevitable part of riding without cycling facilities to be yelled at, honked at or lectured to? Does this just come with the territory? Grin and bear it, the best you can hope for? How can it be stopped, or is this not something VC advocates are interested in?
I've gotten a few forms of abuse, but they are rare. I remember one time in particular that a motorist honked and yelled at me for riding in the street, because I had to leave the bike lane to avoid a pothole I knew was there because I reported it a couple days before. I had no idea they had filled it in 24 hours after I reported it, but neither did the motorist know it was there in the first place. And, yes, I merged in plenty of time.

I've also had two cases of "get on the path" when I refused to ride on a path that had a stop sign at every intersection and also at driveway after driveway. I guess this design puts motorists at the top of the heap.

But I've also had some walnut honk or cuss and tell me, "You're not a car" when I was riding the road, no facilities anywhere in sight. Another fav--"Get on the sidewalk."

But I have to be honest--on the road, I've had just as many (if not more) positive comments while riding the road:

"How far do you ride? Wow, I admire what you do."

"I see you almost every day. I always leave you lots of room, and I tap my horn lightly to let you know I'm coming up from behind." (I never told this lady the horn part wasn't necessary. I just smiled and thanked her.)

"<thumbs up>"

"Yaaah! Go, dude!! <thumbs up>"

Plus, people waving me ahead, waving, etc.

I'm just telling it like I've experienced it. Of course, to be honest, most people at work, face-to-face, including my best and nicest friends, have all expressed their concern for my well-being "riding on the street with the cars."

Funny thing is, I've known folks at work who drive cars to get seriously injured, but I haven't on my bike. I've even heard, twice, cars screeching before crashing into other vehicles, all while riding to work. (No, I didn't cause those... :p )

I
Of course, to be honest, most people at work, face-to-face, including my best and nicest friends, have all expressed their concern for my well-being "riding on the street with the cars."

Ah, more evidence of the widespread prevalance of "The Notion": the belief that it is inherently dangerous to ride a bike in traffic; that cyclists, not matter what they do, are sitting ducks "out there".

Bike lanes reinforce The Notion (If the The Notion is not true... why do we need bike lanes?)

Vehicular Cycling, the Practice, Theory and Philosophy, is the only antidote.

Possibly, NC, you desire to question sbhikes's qualifications for using this phrase? I'm sure that she would appreciate the irony of such questioning.

By the way, although it was long ago, I taught graduate and senior students about risks as involved in business decisions, advanced the field somewhat, and even wrote a text on the subject.

No, I questions your qualifications for using these phrases.

You know what they say, right? Those that can't do, teach. I don't think you can do, maybe you ought to go back to teaching. Just tell me what school so I can avoid taking online classes while I am getting my Bachelors in Telecommunications then hopefully my Masters.

Well, share with us, please, Mr. "know just a little bit more on this subject".

Of the 700-800 U.S. deaths per year, how many are caused by harrassment that lead to violence?

Of the non-fatal bicyclist injuries suffered per year, about what non-minute percent is caused by harrassment that lead to violence?

Everyone in here who has been in incarcerated for the harassment and death of another human being please raise their hand.
........................................................................
................................................
.............
What, just me?
I rest my case
pj"knows just a little bit more on this subject"7

Then you are lucky - I'd wager the fact that the Naval base here is so huge, it supplies our area with many more times the amout of young, cocky sailors then the area you are talking about.

You gotta consider that many military folks commute by bike, as I did - indeed the percentage is probably higher than the percentage of the general population. During my years it was always the townies and dependents who gave me the most grief...not the folks in uniform.

Of the 700-800 U.S. deaths per year, how many are caused by harrassment that lead to violence?

First you tell me how many are not!
Oh, did I just turn your challenge around on you and refuse to answer until you answer mine? Hrm... wonder who else does this. :D



Of the non-fatal bicyclist injuries suffered per year, about what non-minute percent is caused by harrassment that lead to violence?

We aren't talking about hard statistics here, we are talking about this statement:

The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment.
And I'm telling you that this is a nonsensical statement. Harassment is a risk! A risk that sometimes leads to violence. We don't have the statistics that you are seeking with your Wall of Words question, they just don't exist! But out there in the real world, when one person harasses another, more often than not it turns into some form of violence, and not all violence is physical, words and actions themselves can be violent.
Here is an example to think of:
You are cycling along, concentrating hard on your cadence, up in front, in the bushes are some kids with firecrackers. As soon as you pass they set them off and toss them in your direction. POP POP POP POP! You lose oyur concentration, become confused, and plow into something, causing damage.
There you have it, a risk from harassment.

[EDIT]
Before you even reply to this with your Headspeak and Wall of Words remember that the statement we are talking about is
The risk of actual violence is minute; there is no real risk from harassment.