Northeast - angry pedestrian on riverside tried to pull me off my bike!

so, i'm riding south on riverside dr. probably in the 90's. as i cross one of the intersections, this mid 50 year old guy jumps out and blocks my path. i try to turn but he has his arms and legs out so i can't get by without hitting him. so, i slam on the brakes and i'm like "what's up man?". he starts saying stuff about me running red lights. not seeing any value in having a discussion like this, i just start to pedal away. he grabs my arm and tries to force me off the bike!! i swing around to get his arm off me and end up backhanding him across the face! then i start yelling at him and calling him all the names in the book. he walked off and i kept yelling at him as i rode away.

what the hell? anyone run into this crazy ass on sunday afternoon? seems like tensions are getting pretty high lately.

I can't believe you actually stopped for the guy. ;) I would've gone right around him, assuming there wasn't a car behind me.

I don't think "tensions are high" because some weirdo tries to be a traffic cop. You're just habitualized to an utterly neutered New York. It's not f'in 1977, you know....

Eash, glad you're physically o.k. Sorry for your run in with the nut. About once a year, I get a lecture or screamed on for the sins of all 'the damn bikers'.

Sounds to me like someone needs to stop running red lights. End of problem!

Sounds to me like someone needs to stop running red lights. End of problem!


Sounds like someone needs to go back A&S. Most of the lights on Riverside are east bound one way streets and crosswalks that make no sense whatsoever to stop in unless pedestrians are crossing; barely any traffic.

Best way I've found in dealing with some of these self-proclaimed vigilante nutjobs is just to ignore 'em and keep going.

Eash, glad you're physically o.k. Sorry for your run in with the nut. About once a year, I get a lecture or screamed on for the sins of all 'the damn bikers'.

haha. i guess it was my turn today then. there were an unbelievable amount of cyclists streaming up and down riverside on sunday.

You're just habitualized to an utterly neutered New York. It's not f'in 1977, you know....
Yeah, cuz if it was 1977, that mid 50 yo guy would be in his early 20's and would've been trying to rob your bike. ;)

That guy was probably just a safety nazi that yells at everyone "breaking the law", i.e.; cyclists that run reds, jaywalkers, litterbugs, etc.

That reminds me of when I volunteered at a rest stop for the NYC century. I was asked to write "SLOW DOWN TURN LEFT" on the ground of the path right before the rest stop. Shortly after doing this a jogger (probably in his late 40s early 50s) came up to some of the people at the rest stop and said "I know you wrote slow down, but someone is going to get hurt. You need to make sure people are slowing down." and then went over to his jogger buddies and kept saying to them "someone is going to get hurt."

Some people are just crotchety.

I think he made a valid point.

Did anyone get hurt?

It also doesn't help when cyclists give attitudes to pedestrians. Imagine the case if the roles were reversed. In some cases I wouldn't be too happy about a cyclist riding in disregard either.

Cyclists shouldn't be too self-righteous. I know we pass red lights all the time, but personally, I slow down just in case.

I think he made a valid point.

Did anyone get hurt?

It also doesn't help when cyclists give attitudes to pedestrians. Imagine the case if the roles were reversed. In some cases I wouldn't be too happy about a cyclist riding in disregard either.

Cyclists shouldn't be too self-righteous. I know we pass red lights all the time, but personally, I slow down just in case.

so, am i being self-righteous for not wanting to be forced off my bike and into a confrontation in the middle of the road? i don't know who this guy is or what plans he has.

and the roles would never be reserved. i'm never going to jump out in front of someone and grab them. at least not for cycling.

and lastly, how many pedestrians jay walk every day in the city? does it make sense to stew in anger over that? maybe i should attack the next guy who walks across the street against the red light.

I happen to be a (usually) mellow guy but I think it is one thing for a driver, pedestrian or anyone else to yell or throw things at a cyclist. However, if they go out of their way to put their hands on one then all bets are off. If anyone ever puts their hands on me while I am riding and minding my own business I will do my level best to make sure they regret it. That guy should have been knocked on his behind. Now I am sure there are many of you who would call this overreacting and it may be, but noone has the right to assault a cyclist (or anyone else for that matter) for no reason and I would react accordingly if they did so to me. This was not a case of some nut job driver in a 3000lb piece of metal, this is some guy physically accosting a rider with intent to cause injury. This is a case pf perceived danger to one's self and it can justifiably be dealt with by force...albeit not excessive force.

I wouldn't have just stopped at slapping the guy.

That being said, the law says that bicycles are vehicles and are subject to the rules of the road, one of which is red means stop.

so, am i being self-righteous for not wanting to be forced off my bike and into a confrontation in the middle of the road? i don't know who this guy is or what plans he has.


In this case, I'd have to say the pedestrian was being excessive and disruptive.

I'm referring to a lot of cyclists, who may not include you, who are no better than SUV drivers who think they own the road, except because they're on the bike, they think they have some divine right to do anything they want because they are not a car.

In this case, I'd have to say the pedestrian was being excessive and disruptive.

I'm referring to a lot of cyclists, who may not include you, who are no better than SUV drivers who think they own the road, except because they're on the bike, they think they have some divine right to do anything they want because they are not a car.

okay, i gotcha. i do agree with you though - there are definitely some cyclists who act self entitled. i do run red lights, which may seem hypocritical, but i never even come close to hitting people. if it's not safe i don't go though until it is.

I wouldn't have just stopped at slapping the guy.

That being said, the law says that bicycles are vehicles and are subject to the rules of the road, one of which is red means stop.

I see more cars ignoring the red means stop rule on Riverside Dr. than cyclists. Of course I see far more cars on Riverside Dr. than cyclists...

Yikes, sorry Tim. Don't feel bad, you have no one to blame but nycphotography, I think he almost ran over a small group of children last time coming back from bear mountain...

According to my cop friend, cyclists aren't expected to stop at reds. It's illegal to run reds, but so's jaywalking and for the most part, cops don't bother w/ cyclists unless directed to by the higher ups.

I see more cars ignoring the red means stop rule on Riverside Dr. than cyclists. Of course I see far more cars on Riverside Dr. than cyclists...

As I am sure your mother said, "And if everyone else jumped off a bridge, would you do to?"

According to my cop friend, cyclists aren't expected to stop at reds. It's illegal to run reds, but so's jaywalking and for the most part, cops don't bother w/ cyclists unless directed to by the higher ups.

I've just looked over the NY statute in question--I work in a library that has the State Codes for all 50 states--and I don't see a bicycle exception to the stop-on-red rule.

Who was it that said "the expression 'the quick and the dead' refers to NY jaywalkers."?

I've just looked over the NY statute in question--I work in a library that has the State Codes for all 50 states--and I don't see a bicycle exception to the stop-on-red rule.

I'm certain that there there is no "bust cyclist ass on last Fri of the month" rule in there either.

Why do people get so hung up on particular laws that they begin to totally ignore common sense and practicality?

Why do people get so hung up on particular laws that they begin to totally ignore common sense and practicality?

Because once we start picking and choosing which laws we are going to obey and which ones we aren't, they aren't laws any more, but guidelines, or even suggestions, and before you know it we're back to the State of Nature, in which (as a clever old Brit told us) life is 'nasty, poor, brutish, and short.'

On why we should obey laws we do not agree with, a certain old Greek gentleman explained it better than I could a very long time ago. (http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/crito.html)

Because once we start picking and choosing which laws we are going to obey and which ones we aren't, they aren't laws any more, but guidelines, or even suggestions, and before you know it we're back to the State of Nature, in which (as a clever old Brit told us) life is 'nasty, poor, brutish, and short.'

On why we should obey laws we do not agree with, a certain old Greek gentleman explained it better than I could a very long time ago. (http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/crito.html)

+slippery slope.

Problem is, there really isn't any clear line on bicycles and red lights in New York City - certainly not in Manhattan. 99.9% of the time, when they aren't enforcing this particular law, they'll ether wave you through or look at you like there's something wrong with you.

There's a bunch of cantankerous boomers who frequent Riverside Park. When they're not complaining about 'Lance Armstrong' on the esplanade they're yelling **** you at each other. Too much viagra if you ask me :p

On a side note - Last year during the the last leg of the Tour de Bronx, some woman on the sidelines started yelling about all of these bicycles running the red light. Just when it looked like she might get confrontational a scooter cops stopped in the middle of the intersection and waved us all through. Now we know why there's a police escort. To protect cyclists from pedestrians!

There's a bunch of cantankerous boomers who frequent Riverside Park. When they're not complaining about 'Lance Armstrong' on the esplanade they're yelling **** you at each other. Too much viagra if you ask me :p

The fact that other people behave badly does not give you license to behave badly.

The bottom line is that the angry pedestrian was the reckless and irresponsible party. What if Timmhaan had swerved to avoid him and fell or got into some kind of accident as a result. And grabbing a cyclist like that could be viewed as some sort of an assault.
This moron pedestrian responded to a minor traffic infraction with an illegal action that could have lead to serious injury to both himself and the cyclist.

The bottom line is that the angry pedestrian was the reckless and irresponsible party. What if Timmhaan had swerved to avoid him and fell or got into some kind of accident as a result. And grabbing a cyclist like that could be viewed as some sort of an assault.
This moron pedestrian responded to a minor traffic infraction with an illegal action that could have lead to serious injury to both himself and the cyclist.

And Timmhaan had every right under the law to defend himself from assault. There is not, however, under the law, a right of retaliation and there is a duty to withdraw.

And Timmhaan had every right under the law to defend himself from assault. There is not, however, under the law, a right of retaliation and there is a duty to withdraw.

Agreed. Which is exactly what Timmhaan did. The potential injury that the pedestrian could have suffered that I was refferring to would have been an injury he could have sustain if Timmhaan had been unable to avoid him while he was extending his arms and trying to obstruct Timmhaan's riding pass.