People have different views of the world than you do, in case you haven't noticed.

Noticed, don't care. If you don't want your car damaged, don't take it onto the road. Damage happens.

I guess I also have to say this --

Your anti-car attitudes are exactly what keeps cyclists from getting respect they deserve on the roads.

It's especially saddening to see it so prevalent in the Advocacy & Safety forum. It's completely counterproductive to generate hostility. No wonder other, more public discussions (such as in the comments section of every news article posted here) are loaded with anti-biking opinions from "cagers".

Mutual hostility & distrust is NOT equivalent to mutual respect. Learn the difference.

I guess I also have to say this --

Your anti-car attitudes are exactly what keeps cyclists from getting respect they deserve on the roads.

It's especially saddening to see it so prevalent in the Advocacy & Safety forum. It's completely counterproductive to generate hostility. No wonder other, more public discussions (such as in the comments section of every news article posted here) are loaded with anti-biking opinions from "cagers".

Mutual hostility & distrust is NOT equivalent to mutual respect. Learn the difference.
+1

As for the original ad, I thought it was a very funny TV AD!! Not a documentary, but a little comedy piece used to sell a product. I think the cyclist's finger-drumming was a great touch. Exaggeration. Hyperbole. It's just TV, it's not real. Some of us could lighten up a little, but probably won't.

It is not personal space. It takes up a whole lot of public space. Wholey different than putting your hands onto a person's body.

If you have a car and you are so uptight that you don't want it touched, keep it at home. Cars on the road get touched, scuffed, scratched, hit with rocks, cans, birds, and all other manner of road debris. That's the facts. I your car is stopped in the middle of a lane at a light, I won't give any thought to sliding past it on my way to the front of the line. Alot different than a car sliding past a slower moving bike because you can't hit a bike without endangering the life of the rider. You can bounce down the side of a Porsche just fine without endangering the driver.

You are an idiot. If you touch a car, expect to get yours when the driver doesn't like it.

You are an idiot. If you touch a car, expect to get yours when the driver doesn't like it.

When in doubt call names, eh?

As far as I'm concerned bumping is part of riding in heavy traffic. Doesn't bother me, and really I've never had a significant problem after bumping, or sliding past a car. Most of the time when it happens it is very heavy traffic and I am long gone before the car even begins moving.

"I don't get caught, so it's okay."

That's what I'm hearing you say. Sounds pretty smug & selfish to me.

When in doubt call names, eh?

As far as I'm concerned bumping is part of riding in heavy traffic. Doesn't bother me, and really I've never had a significant problem after bumping, or sliding past a car. Most of the time when it happens it is very heavy traffic and I am long gone before the car even begins moving.

I'm serious, my car is about to get a fresh coat of clean red paint and if some asshat like you scratches it up, I'll find them and make them pay for it.

I'm serious, my car is about to get a fresh coat of clean red paint and if some asshat like you scratches it up, I'll find them and make them pay for it.

Sorry, heard it all before, wouldn't happen. Better not take your car into downtown Cincinnati, Oh. around rush hour. You'd be at a stop light in a long line of cars, I'd go by and you'd never see me again. And if by chance you did catch up, I'd show you a few handfulls of roofing nails.

Sorry, heard it all before, wouldn't happen. Better not take your car into downtown Cincinnati, Oh. around rush hour. You'd be at a stop light in a long line of cars, I'd go by and you'd never see me again. And if by chance you did catch up, I'd show you a few handfulls of roofing nails.

THAT would be an entertaining encounter, I'm sure.

Sorry, heard it all before, wouldn't happen. Better not take your car into downtown Cincinnati, Oh. around rush hour. You'd be at a stop light in a long line of cars, I'd go by and you'd never see me again. And if by chance you did catch up, I'd show you a few handfulls of roofing nails.

I love it. I love how your true colors show.

What a low-class **** you are.

I still want to see him "show me his handfuls of roofing nails".

I'd show you a few handfulls of roofing nails.

And I'd show you what my oil pan looks like.

I love my car, you touch it, thats irritating. You make a mark on it, thats ending in an altercation. You challenge me on it? thats ending in a felony.

Sorry, heard it all before, wouldn't happen. Better not take your car into downtown Cincinnati, Oh. around rush hour. You'd be at a stop light in a long line of cars, I'd go by and you'd never see me again. And if by chance you did catch up, I'd show you a few handfulls of roofing nails.
Your attitude is poor for two reasons - one, you clearly demonstrate that you only care about yourself, and two, you think you're invincible. Eventually, if you go around damaging peoples property, intentionally or not, you will piss someone off enough and they may end up encountering you about it when you find out that some people actually remember what you and your bike look like.

I have a photographic memory. If you hit my car and caused damage, and then pedaled away, I'd be able to remember exactly what you and your bike looked like. And you can bet if I saw you bike locked up somewhere you'd come back to find that some ******* damaged your property, and left without a care.

As for me, I don't lean on vehicles, because I'm not lazy and I'm not a pedestrian. I'm a vehicle and I respect the boundaries of other vehicles in hopes of earning that same respect from other road users in return, whether they travel by bike, motorcycle, or automobile.

Of course, it's also "antisocial" to just ride up to a car and put your hands on it without asking the owner if it's alright.

The cyclist was, on purpose, the stereotypical "roadie" at its worst -- bright, skin-tight outfit, fancy bike, and such self-importance that nobody else seems to matter.

That's why it's so damn funny to see him fall over. ;)

+1 when that cyclist offers to pay for the swirls and scratches on my nice paintjob on my restored truck , i might not cram it into reverse.....

its quite simple: DONT TOUCH WHAT DOES NOT BELONG TO YOU!

I still want to see him "show me his handfuls of roofing nails".


me too. I wonder if his attitude will change as i'm showing him my 9 Wedge upside his face a few times.

:)

All talk people have tried and failed. When it comes down to it, you'd do what everybody else does, sit in your car, and do nothing. You think to yourself " did that guy just rub my car?" and that would be the end of it.

Again if you love your cars so much, leave them at home, once it goes onto the road, you are exposing your vanity to the mercy of others.

hostile to cyclists

insensitive baby.
The cyclist was also being disrespectful

Again if you love your cars so much, leave them at home, once it goes onto the road, you are exposing your vanity to the mercy of others.

What if your ass got doored? Don't like getting doored keep the bike at home. Once it goes in between cars your exposing it to....

****it, it's to early for this crap. Your a dick and don't deserve to have legs.

Barracks, you're wrong legally and morally in your described reaction to a perceived slight. That you consider a large inanimate object an extension of yourself and are in effect willing to defend it's "honour" with --violence against another living human being-- is disturbing, especially as your defense of that attitude sounds something along the lines of "that's how everyone is here, so deal with it".

Even some of the worst most antisocial degenerates behind the wheel or on the bike would acknowledge that as entirely unreasonable. Having lived most of my life in Texas and put well over a hundred thousand miles on two wheels, as well as half that many on four I've met some doozies. Your attitude, were it not just a bit of internet pomp and feather fluffing, would put you squarely with the worst of them, fools without conscience or basic consideration of others.

It doesn't matter one bit (in the real world) that you love an inanimate object enough to kill or maim to prevent the threat of a small scratch, or to avenge a smudge of grease from a hand. Your visceral reaction may "feel" correct, but it isn't on any level, that you'd threaten to take someone's family member away forever over that should make you feel ashamed when you look at a member of your own family.

maddyfish fighting fire with fire with regard to incorrect social posturing is pointless, what did you think a person with an illogical, unreasonable attitude would react with? Just because you're correct to value the life and limb of your fellow citizen above the exterior paint of the common automobile doesn't make you right, especially if your act intentionally damages private or public property. The possibility of an over-stated, illegal & immoral reaction doesn't justify the provocation that precedes it.

Bushman, get a real paintjob on your truck for christsake, and post a picture if you're going to gush about it at every turn. If I hadn't sold my IH 1000D Travelall I'd show you a rust free beast that'd make you cry, did I mention I'm from Tx?

People > Possessions in the context presented herein, the touching of cars. That is all our society has to say about it, at least those who acknowledge others within our society.

Barracks, you're wrong legally and morally in your described reaction to a perceived slight. That you consider a large inanimate object an extension of yourself and are in effect willing to defend it's "honour" with --violence against another living human being-- is disturbing, especially as your defense of that attitude sounds something along the lines of "that's how everyone is here, so deal with it".

Even some of the worst most antisocial degenerates behind the wheel or on the bike would acknowledge that as entirely unreasonable. Having lived most of my life in Texas and put well over a hundred thousand miles on two wheels, as well as half that many on four I've met some doozies. Your attitude, were it not just a bit of internet pomp and feather fluffing, would put you squarely with the worst of them, fools without conscience or basic consideration of others.

It doesn't matter one bit (in the real world) that you love an inanimate object enough to kill or maim to prevent the threat of a small scratch, or to avenge a smudge of grease from a hand. Your visceral reaction may "feel" correct, but it isn't on any level, that you'd threaten to take someone's family member away forever over that should make you feel ashamed when you look at a member of your own family.

maddyfish fighting fire with fire with regard to incorrect social posturing is pointless, what did you think a person with an illogical, unreasonable attitude would react with? Just because you're correct to value the life and limb of your fellow citizen above the exterior paint of the common automobile doesn't make you right, especially if your act intentionally damages private or public property. The possibility of an over-stated, illegal & immoral reaction doesn't justify the provocation that precedes it.

Bushman, get a real paintjob on your truck for christsake, and post a picture if you're going to gush about it at every turn. If I hadn't sold my IH 1000D Travelall I'd show you a rust free beast that'd make you cry, did I mention I'm from Tx?

People > Possessions in the context presented herein, the touching of cars. That is all our society has to say about it, at least those who acknowledge others within our society.

Great, another overzealous hippie.

Lots of people have real money into their cars, a car can be an extension of your personality just like a bike can. $5k in bodywork is not invested lightly, trust me. By damaging a car that someone has that kind of money into, you are implying a slight against that person's work, no matter how you look at it.

I'm still waiting for the confrontational, mentally damaged tool I've been arguing with for the whole thread to back up his idiotic claim "I'll show you a couple handfuls of roofing nails"

Real money? I doubt you know what that looks like, not in amounts that'd have you value my car over say, your own son in a moment of indiscretion?

You're a weakness embodied if you value a possession over a human being to that extent. Yah punchy, I'm a gun-owning, tax-paying hippie from Texas with a thing for old IH trucks. Go soak your head, wannabe.

Barracks, you're wrong legally and morally in your described reaction to a perceived slight. That you consider a large inanimate object an extension of yourself and are in effect willing to defend it's "honour" with --violence against another living human being-- is disturbing, especially as your defense of that attitude sounds something along the lines of "that's how everyone is here, so deal with it".

You "deal with it" by not instigating confrontations in the first place.

Simple, isn't it? Why can't you figure that much out? It only took one sentence to say.

So you can't acknowledge that the escalation to violence is wrong where none previously existed and where you already have just protections under the law? You're about as American as Stalin on a bad day.

Real money? I doubt you know what that looks like, not in amounts that'd have you value my car over say, your own son in a moment of indiscretion?

You're a weakness embodied if you value a possession over a human being to that extent. Yah punchy, I'm a gun-owning, tax-paying hippie from Texas with a thing for old IH trucks. Go soak your head, wannabe.

I never said I valued my car over people. I can understand accidental scratches. When you beat up my paint by filtering between lanes to the front, however, that's bound to piss me off.

So you can't acknowledge that the escalation to violence is wrong where none previously existed and where you already have just protections under the law? You're about as American as Stalin on a bad day.

Neither one of us mentioned violence. The maddyfish guy did.

All talk people have tried and failed. When it comes down to it, you'd do what everybody else does, sit in your car, and do nothing. You think to yourself " did that guy just rub my car?" and that would be the end of it.

Again if you love your cars so much, leave them at home, once it goes onto the road, you are exposing your vanity to the mercy of others.
Again, if you damaged my car, and left the scene like an ass, next time I see your bike parked somewhere, I might slash your tires and seat so you can spend a $100 or so fixing the damage that someone caused by someone disrespecting your property.

This "it's in public, so I can damage it as much as I want" argument is incredibly stupid. You're a cager with pedals, nothing more.

Sure, violence is wrong, but that's not going to help after somebody breaks your legs. They were wrong, but you've still got to deal with being a gimp.

Actually maddy initially suggested that if it happens by accident or if it's just a scratch, that it was the potentially deadly reaction to minor property damage that disturbed him, prompting his unreasonable postings. Both sides of the argument were unreasonable and feeding off the other. All I've said is that we're a society bound by law and that it is sufficient to follow that in these situations. Your lot & maddy were both out in left field with exaggerations of what you'd never do to someone else, unless of course you or Barracks or maddy really are a group of actual sociopaths, which I doubt. maddy's unreasoning reaction is a reaction to sicking assertions of a willingness to harm others even to death over something anyone can pay for, or maybe just buff it out.

Besides which, if maddy can't filter without contacting vehicles then maddy needs to work on the basics anyway. I've filtered forward for thousands of miles over years of time and contacted vehicles only a few times, less often than an average driver encounters parking over a similar time frame.

To bump vehicles regularly doesn't concern me with regard to the vehicle, but with regard to the rider. I still wouldn't run them over for it, if I thought it intentional I'd try and put law enforcement on them, but not by pursuing necessarily. What am I going to tell the parents of someone I off while trying to pursue some dumbass that scratched my car? "I was after this other guy, see the mark he left?!"

I bumped a side mirror a few months ago filtering forward with 48 donuts onboard, on my way to a civic meeting. There was no damage and we exchanged pleasantries and parted ways. A few years ago my pedal scratched the fender of an inattentive driver who merged into my lane. I pulled them over and gave them a hundred dollar bill for even being able to do that. You guys shouting the hillbilly slogans don't need to feel threatened by any perceived lack of personal responsibility on my part. I'm sure not taking maddys side.

Actually maddy initially suggested that if it happens by accident or if it's just a scratch, that it was the potentially deadly reaction to minor property damage that disturbed him, prompting his unreasonable postings. Both sides of the argument were unreasonable and feeding off the other. All I've said is that we're a society bound by law and that it is sufficient to follow that in these situations. Your lot & maddy were both out in left field with exaggerations of what you'd never do to someone else, unless of course you or Barracks or maddy really are a group of actual sociopaths, which I doubt. maddy's unreasoning reaction is a reaction to sicking assertions of a willingness to harm others even to death over something anyone can pay for, or maybe just buff it out.

Besides which, if maddy can't filter without contacting vehicles then maddy needs to work on the basics anyway. I've filtered forward for thousands of miles over years of time and contacted vehicles only a few times, less often than an average driver encounters parking over a similar time frame.

To bump vehicles regularly doesn't concern me with regard to the vehicle, but with regard to the rider. I still wouldn't run them over for it, if I thought it intentional I'd try and put law enforcement on them, but not by pursuing necessarily. What am I going to tell the parents of someone I off while trying to pursue some dumbass that scratched my car? "I was after this other guy, see the mark he left?!"

I bumped a side mirror a few months ago filtering forward with 48 donuts onboard, on my way to a civic meeting. There was no damage and we exchanged pleasantries and parted ways. A few years ago my pedal scratched the fender of an inattentive driver who merged into my lane. I pulled them over and gave them a hundred dollar bill for even being able to do that. You guys shouting the hillbilly slogans don't need to feel threatened any perceived lack of personal responsibility on my part. I'm sure not taking maddys side.

I think I may not be being clear. Maddy feels that cars are just tools, no one cares about them. That is wrong. I love my car, it's not a tool. It's a toy. Same as my bike. If I can find a guy who scratched my car knowingly and didn't stop to talk to me, I'll mention it to him in a calm, controlled manner. If he's reasonable, then no harm done. If he's a jerk, then I go away thinking "What a jackass," and if it's majorly expensive I'll get authorities involved. I'm sure not going to chase him down or try to run him over. Where I live, it's not hard to find someone again.

I bumped a side mirror a few months ago filtering forward with 48 donuts onboard, on my way to a civic meeting. There was no damage and we exchanged pleasantries and parted ways. A few years ago my pedal scratched the fender of an inattentive driver who merged into my lane. I pulled them over and gave them a hundred dollar bill for even being able to do that.

That's the difference. You're talking about remaining civil with the traffic you encounter; maddyfish says that he just doesn't care about any damage he causes, and that he's regularly done it in the past without even apologizing or offering to take care of it.

My argument is that the "don't care, you can't catch me anyway" attitude is a serious problem out in the real world. The little punks who try to shoot us with BB guns have that same kind of attitude. One day, maddyfish will get what he deserves, and when he comes back here to cry about it, I'll just quote his posts from this thread and laugh at his plight.

And, yes, maddyfish was offended by the TV commercial because he's represented by that cyclist.

Well see that's reasonable, someone seems to want to run them under the axles, perhaps I read too many posts at once and got some posts confused. Yep, reading backwards, I apologize, I'd inadvertently associated a post by some tool named "wethepeople" to both you and Barracks at diff times. The oilpan comment. Having seen oilpans I have a particular aversion to road rage apologists.

Well see that's reasonable, someone seems to want to run them under the axles, perhaps I read too many posts at once and got some posts confused. Yep, reading backwards, I apologize, I'd inadvertently associated a post by some tool named "wethepeople" to both you and Barracks at diff times. The oilpan comment. Having seen oilpans I have a particular aversion to road rage apologists.

I see what you mean, but in WTP's defense that comment was made AFTER maddy made a threat with roofing nails.

And if by chance you did catch up, I'd show you a couple of handfuls of roofing nails

And I'd show you what my oil pan looks like

Still not the right thing to say, just providing some background.

yep, I'm not dyslexic but sometimes it jacks me when the posts reverse order during "Reply" I know why it's better that way but I still confuse posts occasionally.

And we wonder why bikes seem to gain a toehold in the car dominated American system. We have cyclists talking about how they love their car so much that if someone were to brush against it...

Contrast that to many European countries. I've sat & watched people "bump park" their cars between two closely parked cars, with the parked car owners sitting near me & not batting an eye. And these were nice cars, BMW's, Mercades, etc. I can't begin to imagine what the reaction would be in the US. Well, yes after reading this thread, I guess I can.

A "bump park" is a parallel parking technique where you pull forward until you hit the bumper of the car ahead of you & then reverse until you hit the car behind you. Repeat until you're far enough off the street to call it parked.

It's sad comments like this that make crazies like "maddyfish" look a tiny bit less crazy, because they distract from the silliness that he's posting.

You claim to be 15 years old. What is the driving age in Canada and how exactly did you come by that $5k in body work (or is that hypothetical), let alone your car?

Totally hypothetical.

So all of your "my car"/"my paint" angst was about a hypothetical car from someone who cannot even legally drive?

Yep.

So you were lying, yet "serious" below.

"I'm serious, my car is about to get a fresh coat of clean red paint and if some asshat like you scratches it up, I'll find them and make them pay for it."

By my car there I mean my Dad's car, the one I get in a few years.

That's funny.

Why is it funny?

CrankshaftYQX = forever known here as FactShrankYQX

or just loser

Don't lean on my car unless you're naked... then you can't scratch it. If you wanna strip naked so you can rest on my car at a light... go for it... but don't touch unless your naked. :mad:

Don't lean on my car unless you're naked... then you can't scratch it. If you wanna strip naked so you can rest on my car at a light... go for it... but don't touch unless your naked. :mad:

I'll settle for her wearing a thong if she doesn't want to be naked... :D

I like it....funny!

I don't lean on cars. Unless you count crashing into them when they cut me off.

I just prefer not to clip out, and since there is no law requiring it, I'm not going to.

There may not be laws requiring you to clip out but theres laws about you being next to me at a light. You put yourself there not me. your supposed to be in fron or in back but not to the side.

Touch my car and you'll find me drifting to the side just enough to let you know its not a wise move.

Don't assume that my car is just a "tool".

People have different views of the world than you do, in case you haven't noticed.

I wouldn't want anyone touching my "Tool" either.:D

I wouldn't want anyone touching my "Tool" either.:D

Depends on who it is:D

Further, I don't get this whole, "I might accidentally hit your car" baloney. If someone hits me when I'm on the bike, I'm upset and I understand a driver feeling the same way. They don't touch me and I afford them the same respect. My exception to that might be a Metro Bus, as I helped pay for it and I'm certainly not scratching it by touching it.

And if by chance you did catch up, I'd show you a few handfulls of roofing nails.

me too. I wonder if his attitude will change as i'm showing him my 9 Wedge upside his face a few times.


Gee, perhaps this whole "don't touch my car" thread is ready for one gigantic trollostomy.

Hasn't this silly thread outlived any usefulness it ever had?

A ripe candidate for foo. ;)

I'd inadvertently associated a post by some tool named "wethepeople" to both you and Barracks at diff times. The oilpan comment. Having seen oilpans I have a particular aversion to road rage apologists.

Please don't shoot me mr. gun owner :rolleyes:

...your highlight of one line for commentary while ignoring the remaining content is a good sign that you suck in general lol!

Says the hypersensitive moron who hides his insults in white text...

Can I borrow you for a sociology paper?

if you're writing sociology papers on a bike forums post you need to get a life.