Advocacy & Safety - make a car driver wear his ass for a hat, then what happens?

I love hearing stories of bikers dealing out justice to ******* motorists... but it makes me wonder, will that motorist not play around next time, and actually hit me?
You know that thing *******s sometimes do, when they drift into you pretending they don't see you back there, but they don't actually have the balls to really take you out... well some dick was doing that to a messenger I know, who is built like Hercules (son of Zeus)... eventually the cock pulled over for some real manly confrontation with Hercumessenger, bad idea.. luckily the driver's fancy BMW got some U-Lock justice, rather than his skull. Anyways, is this guy going to splatter me or you with his fine german driving machine if we run into him, or would it be a personal thing....

i doubt motorist is going to differentiate Hercumessenger from you or me next time.
can you describe said bmw so that i can be sure to avoid it.

Why didn't you dim-witted friend simply slow down a bit and let Mr BMW go about his merry way? The stupidity of actually encouraging the confrontation is amazing.

Yeah, why bother having a spine in this situation, right dobber?

Why didn't you dim-witted friend simply slow down a bit and let Mr BMW go about his merry way? The stupidity of actually encouraging the confrontation is amazing.

If you never call cagers on their actions they may never stop their stupidness until they really do kill someone. Gettin' his car fixed fixed will serve as a reminder he isn't the cock of the walk he thought he was. Maybe, just maybe,he's realized the sheetmetal was the better receiver of ulock.

"It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees"
Midnight Oil

youre entitled to the lane just as much as the car. technically, they are assaulting you with a deadly weapon. im pretty sure if you fight back its considered self defense.

youre entitled to the lane just as much as the car. technically, they are assaulting you with a deadly weapon. im pretty sure if you fight back its considered self defense.

oh man has that line of thinking ever gotten me thrown in jail. you must know that your average policeman is strongly prejudiced in the favor of a car-driver right? i hope you like the feeling of handcuffs.

Yeah, not quite. If they hit you with the car, then stopped and apologized it'd be a typical accident, call the cops, get insurance. If they hit you with the car, then ran off, it'd be a hit and run, call the cops. If they hit you with the car, stopped, and you beat up their car with a ulock, you're a dumbass, and you're probably in as much or more trouble as they are. If they hit you with the car, turn around and try to hit you again THEN you're entitled to self-defense. And causing cosmetic damage probably wouldn't even qualify.

Getting too close to a bicyclist is NOT assault.

remember Mr. Furious (ben stiller) from Mystery Men?? that's kinda what I do when I get mad at cars... I'M A VOLCANO OF FURY THAT'S ABOUT TO GO POMPEII ON YOU!! temperature rising, heart beat racing, fury increasing!! except i'm not really that psychotic or quite such a freak... maybe that's all happening in my head actually...

oh and the car driver I was referring to... more specifically what happened in that incident.... the car driver was driving like a dick, messenger called him on it by yelling at him... the guy noticed, acted even more agressive, so biker slaps the guy's car and continues ahead of the driver due to traffic conditions (bikes don't have to wait sucka!) anyways.. this is one of the funniest parts, the car driver is furious, and cuts down some side streets and somehow manages to inercept bike dude on his route, pretty lucky, i doubt it was like watching that guy drive in "the italian job." that's when the real confrontation started with the swinging of the metal locking device! glaven! (simpsons scientist voice) ahem... so that dude was lookin for trouble!

Ever been "discussing" through the window...he gets closer in his wheels...and you swerve towards the car and he serves to avoid you? :lol: Two for flinching. When i messed the prettiest sight was a sideview mirror hangin by a servo wire.

youre entitled to the lane just as much as the car.

You might wanna take a gander at your local laws because, even though you are supposed to ride in the street, automobiles have the right of way in most cities.

You might wanna take a gander at your local laws because, even though you are supposed to ride in the street, automobiles have the right of way in most cities.

automobiles = vehicle

bicycle = vehicle

NO difference.

Maybe its different in Pyongyang.

If them charging you with a car is considered assault, well then, in Michigan you can go ahead and kill the driver with that U-Lock and get away with it. Self-defense whut whut!

You might wanna take a gander at your local laws because, even though you are supposed to ride in the street, automobiles have the right of way in most cities.

Yeah, around here i know that cyclists are required to ride as far to the right as possible. Meaning, as far right as safely possible, i.e. enough room around cars so you don't get doored, far enough left so you don't get a puncture from debris on the side of the road, but not taking an entire lane when it isn't necessary.

automobiles = vehicle

bicycle = vehicle

NO difference.

I think that in many places, bikes are considered a slow moving vehicle, and thus are required to yield to larger, faster vehicles. Same way as a bus and a motorcycle have different governing regulations.

EDIT-- Now I'm not so sure...I've been looking through the bike regs for my state, and bikes are apparently allowed to pass cars on the right, which seems like it voids any kind of necessary yielding. I haven't found anything stating where in the road bikes should be, etc. Maybe they are classed the same as cars.

I find it odd, here in Toronto they don't seem to mind you taking the lane in reeeeaaaly crappy weather. The kind where they slow down as well. I have been told by several boys in blue that taking the lane is legal here. Rush hour still has it's asshat moments. Doorzone riding is the norm here as they park in the curb lane after 9, leaving one lane through most of the core. Add streetcars and their damned tracks for extra agro. When i messed Montreal, riders were speed bumps in comparison.

You might wanna take a gander at your local laws because, even though you are supposed to ride in the street, automobiles have the right of way in most cities.

Find me one city (edit: in the US) where that's the case and I'll eat my hat.

Yeah, why bother having a spine in this situation, right dobber?

It takes more brains to avoid a situation than to be suckered into one. You wanna play in traffic, go right ahead.

It takes more brains to avoid a situation than to be suckered into one.

Well said.

Won;t he feel dumb when the driver emerges with a baseball bat or a shotgun.
Then there's the fear of what he does he next time he sees you riding.
Dolt

i think being progressive in choosing a cleaner more sustainable mode of transportation is awesome and applaud those who do it.


but if you're a ****ing dumbass who goes hulkzilla on someone because they're in a car and don't respect you, you don't impress me.

U-lock justice is bull****. unless someone's trying to mug me or jump me my Ulock will be for locking purposes only.

Here's an example taken from the New York state website:

Section 1234. Riding on roadways, shoulders, bicycle or in-line skates lanes and bicycle or in-line skates paths.
(a) Upon all roadways, any bicycle or in-line skates shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skates lane or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skates lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn or when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that would make it unsafe to continue along near the right-hand curb or edge. Conditions to be taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, in-line skates, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or traffic lanes too narrow for a bicycle or person on in-line skates and a vehicle to travel safely side-by-side within the lane.

But also, it says this:



Section 1231. Traffic laws apply to persons riding bicycles or skating or gliding on in-line skates.
Every person riding a bicycle or skating or gliding on in-line skates upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this title, except as to special regulations in this article and except as to those provisions of this title which by their nature can have no application.

So, it looks like (at least in NY state) a bike has all of the rights and responsibilities of a motor vehicle, but is required to stay as far to the right as possible.

"Asshat" is the most obnoxious term on the internet.

Wouldn't this whole thread be better off in Living Car-free?

Wouldn't this whole thread be better off in Living Car-free?
Actually, Advocacy and Safety is the best fit.

So, it looks like (at least in NY state) a bike has all of the rights and responsibilities of a motor vehicle, but is required to stay as far to the right as possible.

That's pretty standard wording. It doesn't mean cars always have the right of way.

There was a guy that used to swerve at me and my buddies on his way home from work. He thought it was pretty funny until I called my cousin the cop, who just happened to see it happen one evening. After the guy was charged with wreckless driving, he actually stopped one evening and apologized to us and we never had a problem with him again.

i probably shouldn't share this but a friend of mine had a confrontation with a motorist he's also areal big muscular type and the driver was a little drip and was driving one of those tricked out little hondas and at the end of the arguement the motorist had a rather large crack in his windshield.

Am I wrong in thinking that anything you do intentionally with your U-lock to an automobile instantly puts you on the wrong side of the law regardless of what the motorist did in the first place?

Am I wrong in thinking that anything you do intentionally with your U-lock to an automobile instantly puts you on the wrong side of the law regardless of what the motorist did in the first place?

Yeah, but if you are moving and the side of the car gets scratched up, he'd had have to have hit you, right?

Yeah, but if you are moving and the side of the car gets scratched up, he'd had have to have hit you, right?
So you're saying it's OK to hit somebody else because they get too close to you, and you don't have to worry becaue you can get away with it? My position is this: if you're going to ride on the road, you're going to have to deal with BS every once and a while. Cars, motorcycles, bikes, and pedestrians all cause problems for other road users every day. It's not the vehicle type, it's the user of the vehicle.


Am I wrong in thinking that anything you do intentionally with your U-lock to an automobile instantly puts you on the wrong side of the law regardless of what the motorist did in the first place?
Hitting a car because it gets to close very well may fall into the category of road rage, and if the only thing the driver did was "get too close" before you decided to lash out, you'd certainly be in the wrong. If you were in a car you you chucked a tire iron at another car because it cut you off, you'd be charged with road rage. I imagine you'd face similar charges assuming the driver could find a way to stop you without running you over. :rolleyes:

So you're saying it's OK to hit somebody else because they get too close to you, and you don't have to worry becaue you can get away with it? My position is this: if you're going to ride on the road, you're going to have to deal with BS every once and a while. .
:

Yes, at some point and time it has to stop. There has to be a penalty for car aggression. If law enforcement, did what it's name suggests, you wouldn't need to do it.

You can take it until they push you off the road, but if the try to push me, they will pay a price.
Thankfully I live in an excellent place to bike: low speed limits, careful, conservative drivers, somewhat aggressive law enforcement. If I never leave my town, I'd never have a problem.

I carry a revolver when driving and when biking. More and more people go around armed. Makes for civility.

I carry a revolver when driving and when biking. More and more people go around armed. Makes for civility.


No, it makes for stupidity. Thinking you'll solve the problem with lethal force is that of small minded people.

Indeed....:lol: my weapon will make sure everyone is civil. *sigh*
Just like Dad's belt makes sure the kids are well behaved.

I think there is room for some middle ground here. If someone passes me close enough that I can hit it without effort, it very well might get smacked with the flat of my hand. It gets the point across without inflicting any damage and if the driver chooses to make an issue of it, there is no evidence. Sometimes people are so clueless about their unsafe driving habits that they need to be made aware when they are endangering others.

Indeed....:lol: my weapon will make sure everyone is civil. *sigh*
Just like Dad's belt makes sure the kids are well behaved.


Well for one thing when I'm armed I'm more civil and far less confrontational.

I'd no sooner wander around the Kentucky backroads unarmed now than I would've in 1782. Meth-heads are as dangerous as Shawnees and Tories were, maybe worse.

Daniel Boone's brother was shot and beheaded by Shawnees not far from where I live, maybe he should have talked it over with them.

Here's an example taken from the New York state website:

Section 1234. Riding on roadways, shoulders, bicycle or in-line skates lanes and bicycle or in-line skates paths.
(a) Upon all roadways, any bicycle or in-line skates shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skates lane or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skates lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn or when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that would make it unsafe to continue along near the right-hand curb or edge. Conditions to be taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, in-line skates, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or traffic lanes too narrow for a bicycle or person on in-line skates and a vehicle to travel safely side-by-side within the lane.

But also, it says this:



Section 1231. Traffic laws apply to persons riding bicycles or skating or gliding on in-line skates.
Every person riding a bicycle or skating or gliding on in-line skates upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this title, except as to special regulations in this article and except as to those provisions of this title which by their nature can have no application.

So, it looks like (at least in NY state) a bike has all of the rights and responsibilities of a motor vehicle, but is required to stay as far to the right as possible.


It's the same here, you have to stay within a meter of the curb or parked vehicles and cars are supposed to give you a full lane when they pass you.

"Asshat" is the most obnoxious term on the internet.

Worse than "blogosphere"?

Well for one thing when I'm armed I'm more civil and far less confrontational.

I'd no sooner wander around the Kentucky backroads unarmed now than I would've in 1782. Meth-heads are as dangerous as Shawnees and Tories were, maybe worse.

Daniel Boone's brother was shot and beheaded by Shawnees not far from where I live, maybe he should have talked it over with them.

Point taken.. I am speaking from a CAnadian Urban setting ... I can't, nor would I speak for the backwoods of anywhere. If it's that dangerous then hell's yes, carry by all means.

When was the last time I was given a full lane when passed. I won't even bother slappin' out at a close pass generally in the city but the lane changers that just keep comin' at you will get a panel knock (informative not combative). I don't stretch out to get at then either, if you get to within a foot I will let you know I'm there.

Meth-heads are as dangerous as Shawnees and Tories were, maybe worse.

Daniel Boone's brother was shot and beheaded by Shawnees not far from where I live, maybe he should have talked it over with them.
you have got to be ****ting me

you have got to be ****ting me

No, he's not...and you wanna know what's even more f'ed up? Daniel Boone's brother was riding fixed at the time.

you have got to be ****ting me


Not at all. And not only that but he had two sons killed by Indians and a brother-in-law and a couple of nephews too. And his daughter was kidnapped by Shawnees but he hot-footed it north, cut them off and got her back. Plus he was captured and adopted into the Shawnee nation.

All that and Boone liked Indians and held no grudges, in later life he hunted with his Shawnee kinsmen in Missouri. A most remarkable and admirable man.

Not bike related but a little history is always nice.

He understood the white man had it coming.

Well for one thing when I'm armed I'm more civil and far less confrontational.

Explain how packing heat makes you more civil. Is it like a security blanket?

And this is why I don't dick around with drivers


“It all started around 12:30 on 1000 block of Southeast Clinton Street. Police said 46-year-old Johnny Eschweiler was driving along when he reported a cyclist kicked his car. Officers said Eschweiler sped up and hit the cyclist, who rolled onto the hood of the car, smashing the windshield.

The car continued on about 75 feet, sideswiping a car and hitting a truck before turning a corner where another cyclist heading towards the car was then hit, investigators said.”

Looks like the second cyclist was collateral damage from the first cyclist (supposedly) setting off the psycho

"Explain how packing heat makes you more civil. Is it like a security blanket?"

Yes.

"Explain how packing heat makes you more civil. Is it like a security blanket?"

Yes.

You know what Yoko Ono said about a warm gun, don't you?