Advocacy & Safety - Driver Profiling

When you're cycling, what type of drivers give you the most trouble?

I think I've had the most run ins with male drivers in their 30s.

When you're cycling, what type of drivers give you the most trouble?

I think I've had the most run ins with male drivers in their 30s.

The problems I've had with drivers could be coupled with their profile to substantiate any stereotype you care to develop/promulgate. The bottom line for me is that my problems have come from drivers of all ages/backgrounds. That said, my "run-ins" are generally very momentary encounters. While I feel pretty safe making assumptions about their gender, my evaluation of their age and other criteria I mght use to profile them is casual at best. How do you know these male drivers with which you've had run-ins are in their 30's. You've ID'd them?

Caruso

I've had the most problems with people. Especially the ones behind the wheel, but occasionally non driving people can be a problem.

I counted the cars that buzzed me on my way home from work one day and it was all SUVs and large pickups. All the sedans and minivans passed me carefully with plenty of room.

Of course, the next day I had a sedan buzz me very closely and no problems from any SUVs.

You just never know.

Az

Live ones.

Wait, make that all drivers. A few years ago, some drunk crossed the center of a busy 4 lane undivided highway and collided head on with a truck going the other way just after passing me. Front axle came off the truck, it came out of control into the lanes going in my direction. Cars were everywhere. By the time everything had stopped, I was in the middle of the debris field that resulted from the collision (amazingly, I didn't get by anything). Only the drunk was killed. Someone still marks the site with flowers on the anniversary of accident.

Acting like an idiot seems to be equal opportunity. If I could wave my hand and make a certain type of stereotype driver disappear from the road, I'd get rid of big pickups. But that has more to do with the racket they make than how they drive.

Well to me its pretty obvious when they whiz by you and yell something out the window in broad daylight or when they throw something at you. its pretty obvious to kind of see who the trouble makers are. the times i've almost been hit it has always been a male driver.

The problems I've had with drivers could be coupled with their profile to substantiate any stereotype you care to develop/promulgate. The bottom line for me is that my problems have come from drivers of all ages/backgrounds. That said, my "run-ins" are generally very momentary encounters. While I feel pretty safe making assumptions about their gender, my evaluation of their age and other criteria I mght use to profile them is casual at best. How do you know these male drivers with which you've had run-ins are in their 30's. You've ID'd them?

Caruso


+1
I'm 35 while i my self don't drive all my friends also in the 30 to 40 age group do. At least around here we all tend to have the same attitude about most things. When we drive we tend to be a more cautious bunch with above average driving skills. Remember 15 to 20 years ago was when the whole defensive and aggressive driving thing was the most popular. So many of us had a fair number of hours in those classes. Yeh aggressive driving sounds like something that would not be a good thing to teach. But the skills you learn in such a course can be applied to every day driving. If you know how to do a hard sharp turn you are better equipped to deal with a sudden obstical (SP?) couple that with a def driving course and your better able to deal with surprises. Then theres the whole knowing how to handle your car or any ones car better knowing what a car is capable of etc. Now this is in my general area I can not and will not speak of any one elses city town state what have you. If i had to guess who most of my run ins with bad drivers happen with id say 16/17 to 25 year olds and 45+ year olds.

Well to me its pretty obvious when they whiz by you and yell something out the window in broad daylight or when they throw something at you. its pretty obvious to kind of see who the trouble makers are. the times i've almost been hit it has always been a male driver.
While I get harassed more by young males (almost always when there's a bunch of them in one vehicle), it's actually younger females that seem more aggressive.

People who harass you are often just trying to get a rise out of you. I consider people who are inattentive, have anger management issues, or not driving appropriately for conditions (i.e. can't see in blinding sun or just plain going to fast to react) to be far more of an actual threat to safety -- this group contains almost everyone.

My favorite demographic are probably the 50 somethings. Old enough to have a chance to acquire some sense and deal with most of the issues they have. Young enough to not be as seriously affected by health, vision, and other issues that make it harder to drive.

People who harass you are often just trying to get a rise out of you. I consider people who are inattentive, have anger management issues,

One day, some first graders in my class got in trouble on the playground for some potty-mouth language. When I had them back in the room, I gave my standard lecture on "bad words" which involved telling them that "even if you hear your parents or other grownups say bad words, it's still not OK for kids to say them."

One little girl piped in "My mom swears a lot." Another, "My dad says bad words when he drives." Then, "My mom always says bad words when she drives" And, "My mom says nobody knows how to drive."

Suddenly, a discussion with with six-year-olds about profanity had morphed into them revealing how their parents lost much of their self-control when they got behind the wheel of a car.

Now the thing is that I knew these parents. All of them were nice, mild mannered, people. Yet something about driving brought them to the point where they would use foul language in front of their own children that they would never use otherwise.

My point is that driving in traffic is a very dehumanizing activity. The driver might think that driving their car equates to freedom, but in reality, they are being controlled by the traffic and their freedom has long since been taken away.

Think about it. You get on your bike, and you know that a 30 minute trip is going to take exactly 30 minutes. Weather conditions might make it longer, but even that you know about ahead of time and can plan accordingly. Driving a car offeres no such predictability. A 30 minute trip can easily become an hour and a half without any warning whatsoever. How often do people leave way earlier than they need to when they have an important appointment simply because there might be traffic? I know I've done it many, many times.

"Cager" might actually be a term of sympathy when you come to think about it.

Out here in the countryside we very rarely have a male in a truck buzz us. The typical problem driver is an immigrant from the city, a wife out during the day with an SUV and a cellphone. I'd say 80% of the problems are with them, including absolutely idiotic passing blind. Most of the other 20% is from run down work trucks in a hurry. We've had exactly one attack in 20 years here, so that's not much of a problem.

But I'm not in a city. I used to be. It was different.

Regardless, getting out of the way of idiots and sociopaths seems a prudent thing.

In a lifetime of riding since the early 70's, I have had the most problems with white males, 20's to 40's. This includes young, high school and college aged males in Jettas and Acuras (the apparent standard car of choice for this age group) who have far more hormones than grey cells. Close behind and gaining are white females. This group includes the young, aggressive "Honda Chicks", and the aforementioned suburban housewives, out and about with the SUV and the never-not-in-use cell phone.

For me where i use to live it was the Sunday Christians.Another big one i noticed recently are moms returning home after dropping off their kids at school. Where i live now is a marked bus stop for school buses. I take my 6 year old nephew out to wait on the bus. I see the same cars every single day flying up the road to busy to notice the 6 year old in a driveway waiting on his bus with m just in front of him acting as a human shield basically. Any one that distracted who can not see a fairly large bright yellow orange school bus stop sign is dangerous to cyclists and walkers as well. Vanburen is a major cycling route in this area so they should fully expect us to be there but don't seem to notice.

people on cell phones. here that especially covers most SUV's and college kids.

Cell phone users, Mercedes-Benz and Nissan Murano drivers. (male v female makes no difference).

prius drivers. often self-righteous and often near silent when coming up behind you. at least they're small.

Hybrid car drivers try to run me over.

One day, some first graders in my class got in trouble on the playground for some potty-mouth language. When I had them back in the room, I gave my standard lecture on "bad words" which involved telling them that "even if you hear your parents or other grownups say bad words, it's still not OK for kids to say them."

One little girl piped in "My mom swears a lot." Another, "My dad says bad words when he drives." Then, "My mom always says bad words when she drives" And, "My mom says nobody knows how to drive."

Suddenly, a discussion with with six-year-olds about profanity had morphed into them revealing how their parents lost much of their self-control when they got behind the wheel of a car.

Now the thing is that I knew these parents. All of them were nice, mild mannered, people. Yet something about driving brought them to the point where they would use foul language in front of their own children that they would never use otherwise.

My point is that driving in traffic is a very dehumanizing activity. The driver might think that driving their car equates to freedom, but in reality, they are being controlled by the traffic and their freedom has long since been taken away.

Think about it. You get on your bike, and you know that a 30 minute trip is going to take exactly 30 minutes. Weather conditions might make it longer, but even that you know about ahead of time and can plan accordingly. Driving a car offeres no such predictability. A 30 minute trip can easily become an hour and a half without any warning whatsoever. How often do people leave way earlier than they need to when they have an important appointment simply because there might be traffic? I know I've done it many, many times.

"Cager" might actually be a term of sympathy when you come to think about it.

MrCjolsen - what you've written is articulate and polite while still getting to the heart of the matter when it comes to driving. Would you mind if I used portions of your post in planning a series of talks on commuting to work and school by bike for my fellow students? I would much appreciate it.

When it comes to me, drivers who honk tend to be a varied sort - it wouldn't be a classifiable group of people besides "driving a car". Those who yell at me angrily have all been male, usually young. The one who got out of his car and threatened me was what is commonly called "white trash" driving a Jeep.

yeah.

Delivery van drivers seem to be the most likely to speed, most likely to buzz, and most likely to be on a cell phone while doing it all. Couple that with the terrible handling characteristics vans have, and I'm worried most about them. The drivers are usually the most outwardly aggressive I've seen too. I've been given plenty of greif from cargo van drivers, and if I were to take a stab at what might eventually hit me, I'd guess a van. Even if they see me, those heavy cargo-laden vans don't stop easily.

Age and race don't matter. It's the job.

Late 20s to early 30s men & women driving older, beater type, full size cars/trucks. (Scariest was the two skinheads in an older Chevy Suburban with no license plate and a "Posse Comitatus" sticker on the back window)

When you're cycling, what type of drivers give you the most trouble? ...

near the end of a long ride the other day, i nearly got (literally) blown off the (2-lane) road by a large RV towing a large trailer, with the logo "mo racing" (must have had a race car inside).

maybe it's time to get a helmet mirror. i would have liked to have seen that one coming.

Cars/trucks full of teenagers.

I have been lucky and had all near misses with autos, thusly I moved to riding only in the 6000 acre park nearby (it's 7/10 of a mile- I truck my bike there and unload ). Two days ago I was riding down a major hill, and almost hit a woman who decided she needed to ride her bike uphill in the lane I was coming down on (the right side). I have been learning from these experiences to mostly learn that most of us feel where we choose to be, is OUR space. I think it is defintely an issue of entitlement. I have a bell on my bike- I think I will switch to an air horn.

The most aggressive ones seem to be males under 35. The ones with the least knowledge of the rules of the road seem to be females in the same age group. (They insist on passing a bike, no matter what). The worst are the pod people and the cell phone zombies. Who in the world are they talking to constantly? Each other? I have an air horn, which I am considering mounting on the bike.

People who are happy and satisfied with their lives don't hassle cyclists. But happiness doesn't neatly correlate with age, gender, race, or income.

When you're cycling, what type of drivers give you the most trouble?

I think I've had the most run ins with male drivers in their 30s.

Those in white trades vans.

Several years ago, a friend of mine mentioned how she always paid extra attention to these vehicles ("they're often driven by young men with an attitude in a hurry"), and had often had difficulties with them.

I thought that was a bit over the top, but since she said that, I actually have noticed a trend there (because of the suggestion, or because of statistical relevance, I don't know).

Allan

Hehe, the only car to give me trouble was my sister in law. :) That was fun.

People who are happy and satisfied with their lives don't hassle cyclists. But happiness doesn't neatly correlate with age, gender, race, or income.

+100, people who have hassled me in the past seem like they are already angry and unhappy before I appear in their live. That's why I ask them if they need a hug. :D Really throws them off.

My worst incidents where there was escalation have both involved young white males (one in a large pickup truck and the other in a large SUV), but I have had plenty of minor buzzings and horn honking and obscenities from all sorts. Fancy cars, crappy cars, big cars, small cars, red cars, blue cars. Young people, old people, girl people, boy people, fat people, skinny people.

If you have never ridden a bicycle on shared road; you just don't get it.

My worst incidents (which really aren't that bad) are drivers in expensive cars in wealthier areas. Maybe it is because I am scared to notice the people in the 'hood or maybe I would just expect better behavior from wealthier (implied: educated) drivers?

I don't get that much static, but you do start to notice some trends.

First, obviously, are the distracted drivers. It would give me great pleasure to rectally implant one of those phones in its 'weaving all over the place' owner.

SUV drivers are definitely over-represented in the 'arsehole' category, based either on aggressive behavior or (more often) poor visibility in those beasts.

Porsche and BMW drivers are fun too - in my experiences they like to pass me really fast while revving the engine, but they're not much danger because they don't want to risk their paintjob.

I used to think Prius drivers were more likely to be clowns until I realized it's just one guy who keeps cutting me off on my commute route.

One thing I've noticed - truck drivers are very accomodating. Not sure if it's their recognition of their truck's lack of agility or sympathy for others who have trouble with cars, but they've always helped me.

Dangerous drivers, in my mind might be categorised as follows:


1. Any driver using a (hand held) telephone. For what good the law will do, at least this will be illegal in CA next year. Whether many change their habits, we'll have to wait and see.
This is especially threatening at intersections because the driver cannot use both hands, so is often seen steering erratically through tight. Moreover they can be distracted and impeded from taking a proper look to their left. Several times drivers making a right turn to merge with the through road failed to yield the righ of way because they were busy on the telephone and neglected a proper look for traffic.

2. The clueless. Folks who don't signal, change lanes at random, forget about cyclists & cause "right hook" collisions or near misses.

3. Aggressive. Won't yield, drive in a threatening manner, buzz, intentionally cut off, shout insults etc.

Profiling these? that is hard and liable to be biased. I will say that there are so many drivers using cell phones that everyone sporting a handset behind the wheel becomes a suspect.

Ed

People who are happy and satisfied with their lives don't hassle cyclists. But happiness doesn't neatly correlate with age, gender, race, or income.

This sums up my two "bad" groups. Let me first say that in any group I can think of it is a small minority that are a problem (but 5% is a very small minority and if 5% of ALL drivers were real problems few of us would choose to cycle).

My two bad groups are very shabby and very nice (read expensive) cars. Both of these are far too often a sign of someone not happy with their life. The shabby ones because the financial side of that persons life sucks. The nice ones because it is often a sign of someone trying to make up for other shortcomings. (Hmm wonder if the very worst are those in really nice cars that have overextended the owner, worst of both sides of this idea).

I don't get that much static, but you do start to notice some trends.

...

SUV drivers are definitely over-represented in the 'arsehole' category, based either on aggressive behavior or (more often) poor visibility in those beasts.

...



Actually, there's good statistical evidence that SUV drivers *are* more likely to be 'arseholes' - there's a great study (which, of course, I can't find now :-) done for the auto industry that was quoted in "High and Mighty" about drivers of various kinds of cars. SUV drivers tended to be anti-social and vain, compared to drivers of other kinds of cars.

Of course, that's on average. Lots of SUV drivers are polite and some Prius drivers (as you point out) can be jerks. However, it's important to note that being hit by Prius (at city-ish speeds) is less likely to kill you than being hit by a Ford Exterminator.

The other drivers I most watch out for are usually on a bicycle. Most likely to do something unpredictable.

Al

Driver profiling is a great way to stay alive. I do it all the time. Here's what's pertinent in my life:

1. pickup trucks, particularly those with a "pissing Calvin" or confederate flag decal on the back window. Of course, by the time you've seen that, it's already happened. (My other vehicle is a p/u, so it's not a not-me bias).

2. Honda chicks. If they aren't on the phone, they are doing their makeup, if not both. They have no idea where the heck they are at any given moment, much less what's happening on the road around them.

3. Mom's Green Mini Van. Also distracted, also in a hurry, I'm in their way and probably a fair amount of stored aggression. Bad combination. They either don't see you, or see you, hate you, and see a nice anonymous opportunity to be angry at someone.

Driver profiling is a great way to stay alive. I do it all the time. Here's what's pertinent in my life:

1. pickup trucks, particularly those with a "pissing Calvin" or confederate flag decal on the back window. Of course, by the time you've seen that, it's already happened. (My other vehicle is a p/u, so it's not a not-me bias).

2. Honda chicks. If they aren't on the phone, they are doing their makeup, if not both. They have no idea where the heck they are at any given moment, much less what's happening on the road around them.

3. Mom's Green Mini Van. Also distracted, also in a hurry, I'm in their way and probably a fair amount of stored aggression. Bad combination. They either don't see you, or see you, hate you, and see a nice anonymous opportunity to be angry at someone.

So, tell me how profiling helps keep you alive. You take care to avoid trucks with "pissing Calvin" or confederate flag decal on the back window . . . sometime after they pass you? I use a Third Eye mirror, but it doesn't pick up rear decals at all, and it isn't very effective at spotting chicks in Honda's or Mom's in mini vans of any color.

For cyclists and cycling safety, the idea of profiling doesn't seem very useful to me. In my view it represents just another means by which we can arbitrarily classify folks to amplify our own self esteem at their expense. I certainly don't see how it is a great way for a cyclist to stay alive. We cannot really recognize or evade those profiles we happen to dread until the danger is past or has already exacted its consequences.

Caruso

So, tell me how profiling helps keep you alive. You take care to avoid trucks with "pissing Calvin" or confederate flag decal on the back window . . . sometime after they pass you? I use a Third Eye mirror, but it doesn't pick up rear decals at all, and it isn't very effective at spotting chicks in Honda's or Mom's in mini vans of any color.

For cyclists and cycling safety, the idea of profiling doesn't seem very useful to me. In my view it represents just another means by which we can arbitrarily classify folks to amplify our own self esteem at their expense. I certainly don't see how it is a great way for a cyclist to stay alive. We cannot really recognize or evade those profiles we happen to dread until the danger is past or has already exacted its consequences.

Caruso

Driver profiling is one of the methods taught by the Motorcycling Safety Foundation. Every bicyclist should read the MSF materials, as many of the safety issues are the same.

Driver profiling is a component of situational awareness; yes, it is obviously subject to error, but the error on this case is on the side of safety. If I'm prepared for unique behavior from a particular motorist but it doesn't occur, well great -- no harm, no foul. On the other hand, if the worst-case scenario does occur, my reaction time has been decreased by having already mentally prepared for this event and having a planned response.

Maybe *your* purpose in driver profiling is to bolster your ego. Mine is to help keep myself and other road users as safe as possible.

The notion of driver profiling is less important than watching for any vehicle that is (even minutely) acting in an unusual manner. This can be, but is not limited to vehicles:

Travelling faster than other traffic
Travelling slower than other traffic
Moving erratically
Approaching rapidly from a side street
Slowing just in front of, or beside you
Approaching rapidly behind.

The key, in my experience, to self preservation on a bike is "observation and anticipation, anticipation, anticipation"

Ed

Driver profiling is one of the methods taught by the Motorcycling Safety Foundation. Every bicyclist should read the MSF materials, as many of the safety issues are the same.

Driver profiling is a component of situational awareness; yes, it is obviously subject to error, but the error on this case is on the side of safety. If I'm prepared for unique behavior from a particular motorist but it doesn't occur, well great -- no harm, no foul. On the other hand, if the worst-case scenario does occur, my reaction time has been decreased by having already mentally prepared for this event and having a planned response.

Maybe *your* purpose in driver profiling is to bolster your ego. Mine is to help keep myself and other road users as safe as possible.

I don't profile at all. My purpose in responding is to question just how, on a bicycle, you manage to profile in a manner that is beneficial to your safety. The point I was trying to make in the previous post is how you manage to size up vehicles approaching you from the rear in any meaningful way that can benefit your safety. I contend that you cannot do so, and, I imagine, most others here who so forcefully proclaim that they have more problems with this or that type of motor vehicle driver probably gather their information on each example sometime after that crucial moment when, if armed with some notion of the type of driver approaching them, they would take evasive action.

In reality, most drivers who give us problems approach us from behind. If we see them coming at all, we probably don't get a good enough look at them to make an accurate evaluation as to what profile we would likely categorize them. Whether or not personal profiling is even valid is a totally different issue.

So, if you wouldn't mind (and all reading material aside), how do you evaluate the drivers approaching you from behind so that you have this body of data on them so that you know which types cause you problems. All the reading material in the world won't aid you in determining the type of decal a profile member might have on display in his/her rear window or on his/her bumper when your only vantage point is from in front of their vehicle. From what observation do you derive that situational awareness about which you speak if the potential threat is approaching from your rear and wearing his/her "colors" on the back of his/her vehicle.

That was the point I was probing.

Can you respond?

Thanks.

Caruso

So, tell me how profiling helps keep you alive. You take care to avoid trucks with "pissing Calvin" or confederate flag decal on the back window . . . sometime after they pass you? I use a Third Eye mirror, but it doesn't pick up rear decals at all, and it isn't very effective at spotting chicks in Honda's or Mom's in mini vans of any color.

For cyclists and cycling safety, the idea of profiling doesn't seem very useful to me. In my view it represents just another means by which we can arbitrarily classify folks to amplify our own self esteem at their expense. I certainly don't see how it is a great way for a cyclist to stay alive. We cannot really recognize or evade those profiles we happen to dread until the danger is past or has already exacted its consequences.

Caruso

Not all danger comes from the rear.

In reality, most drivers who give us problems approach us from behind. If we see them coming at all, we probably don't get a good enough look at them to make an accurate evaluation as to what profile we would likely categorize them. Whether or not personal profiling is even valid is a totally different issue.

So, if you wouldn't mind (and all reading material aside), how do you evaluate the drivers approaching you from behind so that you have this body of data on them so that you know which types cause you problems.
Thanks.

Caruso

I don't worry too much about the drivers behind me because, statistically, they are a very low-percentage danger. Most auto-bicycle collisions are primarily due to the motorist turning left into the bicycle's path of travel, or secondarily, right hooks. My eyes are still good enough that in daylight conditions I can get a pretty clear picture of the car and driver in sufficient time.

If you had read my original post thoroughly, you would see I had already noted the difficulty in using rear-window decals in profiling. These were noted after the events.

For traffic approaching me from the rear, I use a rear-view mirror, and am very clear with my intentions regarding lane or directional changes. The only hassles I have had from that direction have been the usual scare tactic crap, and if you don't scare easily it doesn't really make much difference. None of those jokers have had the balls to get really close, and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a beer can.

I don't worry too much about the drivers behind me because, statistically, they are a very low-percentage danger. Most auto-bicycle collisions are primarily due to the motorist turning left into the bicycle's path of travel, or secondarily, right hooks. My eyes are still good enough that in daylight conditions I can get a pretty clear picture of the car and driver in sufficient time.

If you had read my original post thoroughly, you would see I had already noted the difficulty in using rear-window decals in profiling. These were noted after the events.

For traffic approaching me from the rear, I use a rear-view mirror, and am very clear with my intentions regarding lane or directional changes. The only hassles I have had from that direction have been the usual scare tactic crap, and if you don't scare easily it doesn't really make much difference. None of those jokers have had the balls to get really close, and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a beer can.

Ok, if, for discussion sake, I accept your claim that most auto-bicycle collisions are primarily due to motorist[s] turning left into the bicycle's path, then, I guess you do your profiling from the front of the vehicle, and can check out rear window "flags" and rear bumper decals from that angle, then.

It would be curious to know from those who have offered profiles of drivers who they claim give them the most trouble whether, in their experience, those problem came from head-on encounters or from the rear. Except for one right hook that I experienced (not fun at all), all my problem encounters involved drivers who did or desired to overtake me from the rear. Fortunately, most of those encounters were more verbal in nature than physical.

I haven't taken the time to do any tallying, but, it seems to me that there are more accounts of fatalities and buzzings, close passes, etc. involving drivers passing cyclists from the rear than from those crossing the cyclists' paths while making left turns.

Personally, if left turning traffic is all I had to worry about, I'd feel pretty safe on the road. Even at 20-25 mph, I generally have a good view of oncoming traffic at intersections, and would not take a chance where there was left turning traffic by asserting my rights by buzzing through such an intersection at 25 mph.

We're talking about profiling here, not just about accidents. I would contend that, if you are riding fast enough so that you cannot avoid colliding with a left turning motorist, then, you would have come upon him/her much too suddenly to have been able to profile him/her. If the action is moving slowly enough that you have time to profile, then, there is very little danger of an incident of any kind, so, I doubt you'd even have an encounter or encounters at that slow pace to build any sort of impression about driver profiles.

I guess, basically, I think this whole notion of cyclists being able to profile motorists in a way that meaningfully increases the cyclist's safety is pretty much hogwash, and your post (I did read it carefully, several times) just more clearly pointed out the contradictions than most of the others.

. . . but, if profiling makes you feel safer on your bike (and you feel it keeps you alive), well, then, profile away.

Caruso