when i first started cycling as my near-exclusive mode of commuting, i tried my darnedest to follow the laws of the road, be a responsible cyclist, etc.
2 years later, i don't see the point at all. i don't follow the written laws of the road unless they happen to coincide with the logical, unwritten laws of bicycle transit. (opften, they *do* coincide, but not always.) let's face it: no matter what's right, no matter how things ought to be, modern american roads are built for automobiles. now, i know what counter-arguments i'm likely to hear, so let me address them here:
-'but bicycles have been on american roads since long before the automobile became available to the american people.'
that's true, and i agree. but that's not what i'm talking about. i'm talking about today's roads, and that the ppl who design such things take the car into account looooong before ppl on foot, bike, motorcycle, longboards, or rollerskates. not that it's right, but it's true.
-'but we have the right to the road, just as much as the automobile.'
again, i agree. again, this is true. but, modern traffic laws, and the current structure of the roads, these things are removing our ability to sanely operate our bicycles on the right, despite our rights. sure, in most places, it's easy to ride vehicularly and legally. but there are those places where doing so simply does not make sense! sometimes, i'm forced to choose between legality and sanity, and guess what?
-'if we aren't responsible, law-abiding cyclists, we will develope a negative image for cyclists in the eyes of motorists.'
guess what, again? motorists already think that you're a loser, and that you probably smell wierd, and that you ought to either buy a car or get on the sidewalk, regardless of your hand-signals, state-of-the-art cyclo-lighting, and bright yellow attire. as it stands now, the vast majority of america has roundly rejected cycling as a legitimate form of transposrtation. personally, i love it. but the typical motorist thinks that cyclocommuting is madness, and that cyclists on the road are annoying obstacles. no amount of obsequious respect for the law will change that.
ok, i'm sure ppl will snipe at me anyway, but i got the usual biggies mentioned up there, so ppl will know that i'd considered them in my development of my current riding style.
also, for the sake of safety, i will recommend that novice commuters obey the law as much as possible for as long as it takes to see how roadways work for & against the cyclist. then, they can abandon the law and do what makes sense.
............
as i said before, i used to try like mad to ride around legally. i remember riding home from a party one night at about 4am. (yes, i was sober.) i was stuck at a red light on a fairly major road, where it intersects a state highway. the light, as luck would have it, is triggered by sensors. by bicycle & i, no matter where we placed ourselves on the road, did not weigh enough to trigger those sensors. (my motorbike and i rarely have enough weight, either.) so, i found myself hitting the little pedestrian-crossing buttons repeatedly, so as to force a green light.
madness!! not only is that action probably illegal, it's realllllly senseless, when all i had to do was run the red light once there was no cross-traffic. (and there was barely any cross traffic!) the responsible, legal thing to do would've been to wait for a car to come my way, set off the trigger, and cross when it was green. only, i didn't want to wait 45 minutes.
another time, i was caught in a downpour. i was at a stop sign, trying to turn left. cars were pouring by me, very few of them doing anything NEAR the 25mph limit. they can see that i'm soaked and waiting, but the motorists didnt care. i'd have probably stopped for a cyclist in this situation, but i dont expect that from anyone. i just wish they'd obey the speed limit (esp in rainy conditions) so i could find a hole in traffic.
but they didn't, so i took it. maybe it was stupid or antisocial, but i ended up shouldering my bike, and hopping directly into the crosswalk. (which i'm pretty sure is a legal maneuver.) without waiting. yeah, cars locked up their brakes, skidded out. i guess i couldve caused an accident, but i dont care. it's not my fault that these particular motorists werent obeying the speed limit, weren't paying attention to the world they're driving through, and weren't considerate of others.
these days, i treat stopsigns as stopsigns, same as cars do. i slow down enough to see if the coast is clear, and stop if it isnt. if it is, i cruise thru at 5mph. just like most cars do. i also treat redlights as stopsigns; see the first three sentences of this paragraph.
it doesn't make sense to stop and wait for cars that are not there, just because some computer program has turned a light from green to red! this is the insanity that motorists have earned; it isn't for me. and, given the fact that i know from experience that i wont be cited, i have no reason at all to wait at that light, except to please ppl on this forum, or to try and please the motorists who either hate or pity me anyway.
as for lights, i use lighting on my bike because it makes me visible, and hopefully, it'll help me be seen by motorists. it's a safety issue. i dont have lights on the bike due to the laws that require it.
when you've been cycling on the road daily, you get a feel for what is safe and what is mindlessly stupid. you also get the notion that very few ppl are even aware of the laws dictating bicyclist behavior on the road. most motorists dont know them; the ones i've spoken to either admit ignorance, or tell me i belong on the sidewalk. most of the local cyclists don't know them; the majority ride wrong-side, or on the sidewalk. even the local cops dont know them. in all the surrounding towns, save philly, that ive observed bike-cops in, the lunatics have been on the sidewalk almost every time! i even saw a bike cop in collings'hood, nj wrong-siding!
who was i obeying those traffic laws for? initially, i was doing it to fulfill my desire to ride legally, i guess to prove that i could. but these days, i realize that the rational cyclist will reach a given destination much more quickly than a legal one will. ( i know b/c i've tried, with friends.)
feedback is appreciated, but i hope flames will be kept to a minimum. obviously, any of you who disagree doubtlessly believe my life is in constant danger on the road, so there's no need to compound the risk with flames
-rob
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
well, for me it depends on the situation.
If it were a stop sign on Rte 38, or 73, I'd sure as hell
stop. If its a side street the slow to 5mph works for me.
I've run red lights, but only after determining that I couldn't trip the sensor.
As for the cop on the sidewalk, alot of them are replacing "walking the beat", it's not a means of transportation per se, but a means of patrolling the neighborhood.
I bother because for the most part it keeps me safe. I think that if we (cyclists) did more to ensure predictablity to motorists, and seem less likely to act like idiots we might get more respect.
Marty
Allister
but the typical motorist thinks that cyclocommuting is madness, and that cyclists on the road are annoying obstacles.
The thing that spins me out, and it was highlighted when I visited the Yahoo board last night on te 'Miss America' story, is that the same idiots that decry how cyclists get in their way and block traffic in the same breath can winge about how bike lanes are a waste of space and money without the slightest trace of irony, or even self awareness.
I know how you feel. The law is an ass. Even if you obey the law perfectly, there's no guarantee that you won't get shafted in an collision even apart from the physical injuries. I say do your best, obey the law as best you can, break it if you feel it's necessary, but if you get caught and ticketed, pay up without complaint.
DnvrFox
the light, as luck would have it, is triggered by sensors.
Around here, the latest technology is some sort of TV camera from across the street mounted up high aimed at where cars/bikes would be sitting waiting for a change. Seems to work ok so far. Don't know what it senses - infrared?? visible light??
Anyone know how these things work?
closetbiker
who was i obeying those traffic laws for?
-rob
Well Rob, I'd say you were following those rules for your benefit.
Laws usually reflect the safest way to ride. If you want to ignore them and ride the way you think is safer, go ahead. At the least, it will be unlikely you're going to hurt a motorist. If you hit a pedestrian, you'll be on the better end, but you're still likely to hurt yourself.
the light is triggered by sensors. by bicycle & i, no matter where we placed ourselves on the road, did not weigh enough to trigger those sensors.
Place your chainline along the cut in the pavement where the sensor wire is buried. The steel in the chain trips the sensor and changes the light every time.
SamDaBikinMan
the light, as luck would have it, is triggered by sensors.
Around here, the latest technology is some sort of TV camera from across the street mounted up high aimed at where cars/bikes would be sitting waiting for a change. Seems to work ok so far. Don't know what it senses - infrared?? visible light??
Anyone know how these things work?
Image systems are being used in industry a lot these days. Many applications are dealing with barcode reading where with laser scanners you only get a specific number of scans per second the image systems take a snapshot of the barcodes and then process it. It effectively stops the action and can better identify the object.
I would think a comparator looks at the normal image of the veiwpoint without traffic and constantly checks for a variation in the control image. Looking for changes in contrast etc is pretty simple.
Chris L
who was i obeying those traffic laws for? initially, i was doing it to fulfill my desire to ride legally, i guess to prove that i could. but these days, i realize that the rational cyclist will reach a given destination much more quickly than a legal one will. ( i know b/c i've tried, with friends.)
From what I've read, you were probably following the road rules to a greater extent than you realised. If you're stopped at traffic lights with a non-responsive sensor, you have a legal right to proceed through them after stopping and ascertaining that the sensor will not work -- I do this myself everyday. I also treat stop signs largely as you do (or did when there used to be some in my old commute), but I think the issue here is compliance with the spirit of the law. If you make sure the coast is clear and you won't hit anybody, do what you like. Just pay up the relevant ticket when/if you get it (as Allister noted).
Above all else, I generally don't let the behaviour or perceptions of motorists alter my own behaviour in any way. I consider myself a law-abiding cyclist, or at least one who complies with the spirit of the law. I don't ride on the wrong side of the road, or on the footpath (although Queensland is the sole Australian state where that would be legal).
However, I do give hand-signals when I turn. If nothing else, it does allow me to gauge the actions of the others on the road after I've signalled my own intentions, and I figure the few courteous motorists left out there at least deserve some reward.
JRA
[left]... the latest technology is some sort of TV camera from across the street mounted up high aimed at where cars/bikes would be sitting waiting for a change.
Video detection uses artificial intelligence developed for use in weapons like smart bombs and cruise missiles. A processor "learns" what the image looks like and detects when a vehicle arrives at a pre-defined location within the image.
Video detection is much more flexible and has lower maintenance costs than inductive loop systems which require that wires be embedded in the pavement.
I wonder how good video detection is at detecting bicycles. Some of the inductive loop systems won't even detect a motorcycle. (There's one near me that doesn't even detect an SUV. I try to avoid that intersection even in my car, but sometimes I forget)
chewa
I say do your best, obey the law as best you can, break it if you feel it's necessary, but if you get caught and ticketed, pay up without complaint.
Amen!
pnj
I agree. screw the rules. break the law. live for your self.
I was driving my car the other day and a couple of guys on road bikes passed me on the right as I slowed down for the stop sign. I though, "i hope these guys don't squeeze over infront of me and actually wait for the damm cars."
I was stoked when the one guy just bailed strait out, cut left into the intersection then continued to go in the same direction as he originaly was only now on the wrong side of the road. once through the intersection, he cut back to the right side of the road.
SD Fixed
I say do your best, obey the law as best you can, break it if you feel it's necessary, but if you get caught and ticketed, pay up without complaint.
Here here!!
This should be the motto of plenty of us here!
supcom
You can legally proceed through an intersection if the vehicle sensor cannot detect your bike. - Points off for ignorance of the law.
If you ride in the rain, you get wet. It goes with the territory. - Points off for unstructured whining.
The law requiring lights is for safety and is the same reason why you use lights. - Points off for arguing your opponent's position.
C'mon, surely you can do better.
Chris L
If you ride in the rain, you get wet. It goes with the territory. - Points off for unstructured whining.
I will add to this by asking what's so damn wrong with getting wet anyway? It's only water after all.
Crank It Up
This brings me back fond memories of commuting around campus on my Urban Assault Vehicle aka Raleigh MTB during undergrad. IT'S THE SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST! Most motorists around Westwood don't give a damn about cyclists.
I've had numerous idiots open their car doors in front of me (luckily I anticipated and got out of the way). One moron came out of a side street without looking and braked at the last second: I went over the hood but luckily landed on my feet. The forks were bent and I managed to get my LBS to replace under warranty.
Another incident: I was half way across an intersection when the light turned yellow, started sprinting but some dude making a right turn from my 4 O'clock hit my rear wheel and knocked me down. I rolled on the ground but no injuries. The motorist was kind enought to stop (surprisingly) and offered to pay for all damages. I had some chest pain but school's heath center checkup showed no internal injuries. Again, the LBS just straightened out the rear triangle: that MTB was bulletproof. Try that with a alum. or carbon frame! :D
Moral of stories: ALWAYS wear a hemet and try to be courteous to motorists, e.g. not hogging up lanes, not darting in and out between cars, signal ahead of time, etc....and most motorists will show some common courtesty to us cyclists! :)
randya
Yeah, I like this thread! Motorists would whine about bicyclists even if all cyclists obeyed all the laws all the time (which, after all, they understand and obey even less than cyclists). As far as motorists are concerned, cyclists are either slowing them down or passing them while they are stuck in gridlock, so they will never be satisfied, nevermind their 'I own the road' mentality. And then they have the nerve to threaten us with physical harm, from the safety and comfort of their glass, plastic and steel enclosures. They may be in the majority, but what a bunch of arrogant dickheads...
Be courteous to motorists? Don't hog the lane? How exactly is this the moral of this story; how do you define these things; and what difference does it make when the motorists *think* you are hogging the lane, when what you are actually doing is legally avoiding the dooring and other hazards that exist in the gutter, where they *expect* you to be riding?
I think the best training for motorists would be to get them out of their cars and put them on bicycles in traffic for a couple of hours/days/weeks. Then they might think twice about their driving attitudes and behavior towards cyclists.
Chris L
I think the best training for motorists would be to get them out of their cars and put them on bicycles in traffic for a couple of hours/days/weeks. Then they might think twice about their driving attitudes and behavior towards cyclists.
Great idea in theory, but I'm not sure it would work. They'd be all nice and sycophantic until you put them in their cars, then the old "I'm alright, Jack" attitude so prevalent in the human race generally would come out once again.
Crank It Up
Be courteous to motorists? Don't hog the lane? How exactly is this the moral of this story; how do you define these things; and what difference does it make when the motorists *think* you are hogging the lane, when what you are actually doing is legally avoiding the dooring and other hazards that exist in the gutter, where they *expect* you to be riding?
Haha!!! I must be getting "civilized" in my old age (35+). Yes, years ago I've had my share of being run off the road, honked at, yelled at, and having little punks throw stuff at me, etc....My weapons of retaliation were the waterbottle (spray some of that on the punk kid trying to dump his happy meal on ya) and the U-lock swung around like a nunchucku (haha! I've scared off a few morons who got out of their cars at lights to confront me with this). :D
Urban commuting is a matter of survival. The school of hard knocks (commuting) on city streets has taught me some basic rules: situation awareness- know what's happening around you and anticipate possible problems, e.g. the butthead making that left turn right in front of you, jerk cutting you off to make a right turn, bus merging, etc. Always presume that the peabrain in that car doesn't see you. I've always planned the most efficient and least dangerous routes and have alternate routes if problems arise. Survival dictates common sense, e.g. why wait at an intersection with a red light when the crosswalk has "walk" blinking: hey... merge over to the crosswalk and keep going...safely.
My definition of being courteous to motorists just means stay visible and predictable and not making any suicidal moves in taffic. After all , most of us are motorists too. When driving (now mostly in the burbs), I ALWAYS give fellow cyclist plenty of room. Bottom line: most people are mindless barbarians when driving. Stay safe. :)
randya
Well said! I've got no argument with your response, Crank it Up.
I guess I'm just a little sensitive, since here in Portland, 'The Most Bicycle Friendly City in the US' three times running, there seems to be a motorist backlash resulting from motorists' apparent recent discovery that they have to share the road with cyclists, which has made it into the local daily newspaper. I think the paper is just using this 'controversy' to sell papers. If you ask me, the paper should not be running these stories as 'Us vs. Them' issues, but rather, as: 'How can we all learn to get along and safely share the roads together?' But far be it for me to decide how the newspapers' publishers make their decisions...
surreal
Supcom writes:
"You can legally proceed through an intersection if the vehicle sensor cannot detect your bike. - Points off for ignorance of the law."
you got me; i did not know that. i can be fairly certain, then, that a significant number of local cops don't know that, either, as the majority of the cops i've talked to re: cycling laws are not very familiar with them. but you're right; i was unaware of that legal right to run a redlight if the sensor cannot detect my bike. in fact, i'm still not sure that's the case, but i shall look into it.
"If you ride in the rain, you get wet. It goes with the territory. - Points off for unstructured whining."
this seems unfair; no one told me that i'd lose points for unstructured whining. this is bikeforums, and more than 25% of the content here is unstructured whining! =) seriously, i apologize if the purpose of that whining wasnt made clear in my original post. i don't mind getting wet. i'd rather stay dry, but i get soaked when i ride in the rain. no biggie.
the point i was actually whining about was that the motorists where being inconsiderate *and* breaking the law at the same time. if these guys were all cruising at 25mph(the posted limit) but i couldnt find a break, i wouldn't whine about it. but these motorists were, as they usually do 'round here, breaking the limit by 10-20mph. (feel free to deduct points for guessing their rate of velocity without using a properly calibrated radar gun.) i was whining about that particular story to illustrate that a significant number of motorists are inconsiderate dildo outlaws, which makes me feel a wee bit better about my own recent selfish,& sometimes unlawful, behavior on the road. if you can't beat 'em, join em.
"The law requiring lights is for safety and is the same reason why you use lights. - Points off for arguing your opponent's position."
no. if you read my original post again, you'll see that i mentioned that safe, rational riding often "coincides" with legal riding. to be sure, this is no mere coincidence. i'm not making an argument that cycling laws aren't safe, or that the law should be broken for safety's sake. i'm saying that, when i do adhere to the cyclists' laws of the road, it is b/c they often reflect the safer cause of action. i am not doing it out of some sort of obsequious compliance with the law.
listen, i ride on the right side of the road(usa). i have a blinkie. i throw hand signals whenever there are automobiles, fellow cyclists, or pedestrians around to see 'em. i'd still do those things, even if the state outlawed blinkies and hand signals, and mandated wrong-side cycling.
i agree that the law often has safety in mind. i am not arguing against these laws, *unless compliance becomes a nonsensical hassle*. i'm not really seeing this whole discussion as an argument with an imaginary opponent. i see it as a discussion, asking people why they do wierd things, like stop for that redlight at a 3-way intersection, even if a cyclist in the shoulder has no concrete reason to do so. (you've seen 'em; let's say you're headed north, and a 3 way intersection occurs when another roadway joins from the west. this other roadway does not continue across the road you're on; it stops right there. why stop? i might slow up a bit, just in case there's a crackhead in the mix, but why stop?
"C'mon, surely you can do better."
i don't know if i can; you never actually gave me an overall scopre for my post. i have a pretty good idea of exactly how high i can score, but you didnt quantify the points you deducted. so, you tell me: how'd i do? then maybe i can tell you if i can do better.
-rob
ps-although i didn't visibly subtract any points, i give you an "86" for your reply.
nathank
well, reading the initial post i found myself agreeing but expecting many responses to the tune of "cyclists need to follow the laws to set a good example so motorists respect cyclists and treat them better"... and i was pleasantly surprized at the comments!
i do attempt to follow the "spirit" of the law, but as has been expressed here, most of the laws are written and roads/intersections/traffic control devices designed with automobiles in mind AND most motorists don't follow the law to the letter either... so i ride first and foremost what is SAFE for me. 2nd a compromise between what is the law and what is reasonable (i.e. sitting in traffic inhaling fumes on a reasonable vehicle - the bicylce - is not right as i am contributing little to the problem and can easily get through ----- or waiting at a red light during the middle of the night when no cars are around. a cyclist "running the red light" does not present the social danger to others that a motorist does).
this means i treat stop signs as yield signs, stop lights as stop signs and in gridlock traffic i split lanes and pass stopped cars. sometimes i take the lane, sometimes i ride to the right. and if there is a "mandatory" bike path or worse multipath i take the road if the path is too unsafe (normally b/c of pedestrains or many auto intersections). Note: this can also be a problem in Europe. yesterday i was riding my road bike and in the street as the "bike lane" designed for speeds in the 15-20km/h range was not safe riding 30+km/h b/c of pedestrains and obstructed view on curves, etc. A motorist felt i SHOULD have been on the path so felt justified in passing me with about 2cm clearance. i caught the driver at the light and politely told him that was unreasonable and asked him to in the future pass with a little more care and he responded "you should be in the bike lane" meaning since i wasn't in the the bike lane i didn't deserve any reasonable treatment (i.e. to "teach" me a lesson to stay off the road). (2 cycliing friends al well as 2 other unknown cyclists also felt the motorist was a real prick)
it means i also avoid wrong-way riding, use hand-signals, try to ride predictably, use visible clothing and lights and reflectors at night and try to ride "reasonably" meaning if there is a line of cars behind me i will when convenient try to let them pass or wave them by.
of course the best solution would be for these things to be coded into the law (for bicycles):
* stop sign as yield
* traffic light as stop sign
* passing on right allowed
* lane-splitting in traffic
* lane sharing (riding 2 or 3- abreast), especially in traffic
and some places like Oregon are trying, but all-in-all cyclists just aren't "important" enough to get the laws changed and/or the general public/government/law enforcement thinks of bicycles as toys - or maybe trasnport for kids, but rarely ever for hard-core fit cyclists like myself who logs thousands of miles per year. so in this respect i support advocacy groups with the hope to improve things.
until then i ride what is SAFE and CONVENIENT while still being predictable/reasonable. although i have many potential conflicts with cars i am pretty good at predicting idiot behavior. actually the biggest dangers tend to come from the times when i am riding "within the law" and have the right of way so am less cautious (i.e. going through a light on green or a 2-way stop where I have the right of way). these tend to be FAR more dangerous than my "running red lights" as i am very conscious of looking for cars before i "run the light".
LittleBigMan
i was stuck at a red light on a fairly major road, where it intersects a state highway. the light, as luck would have it, is triggered by sensors.
I always treat a red light as inoperative (I stop, then proceed when safe) if nobody is around to trigger it for me. I don't have a problem with it, and I don't think I'd have any arguments from the police.
I think I've gained a degree of respect from motorists by being predictable and following traffic rules. Understanding the spirit of the law is better than being blindly legalistic.
SD Fixed
Great idea in theory, but I'm not sure it would work. They'd be all nice and sycophantic until you put them in their cars, then the old "I'm alright, Jack" attitude so prevalent in the human race generally would come out once again.
Chris, as a driver and a cyclist, I have to confirm your idea. I find that after time, I gain some habits I find completely horrid. Constant reminding, and getting onthe bike are the only cures for me.
Society as a whole needs a paradigm shift.
John E
First and foremost, ride defensively. Second, ride courteously, but assertively. Third, whenever it does not conflict with the first item, ride legally. Fourth, if you encounter hazards or unreasonable inconveniences, such as freely-flowing merges/diverges or nonresponsive traffic signals, get active politically and make a difference.
When I was a UCLA undergrad, several Earth Action Council members taped "Don't You Wish I Had A Bike Lane?" signs on their rear racks.
Denver -- In answer to your traffic signal imaging question, my cycling activist friends in Santa Barbara are generally very pleased with the technology. The camera has a stored picture of the intersection, against which it correlates (compares pixel-for-pixel) real-time images. Any significant difference between the stored and real-time images indicates the presence of a pedestrian, bicyclist, or motor vehicle. The technology can be further enhanced to provide different lengths of green light cycles of different road users.
randya
I think that motorists should stop whining about cyclist misbehavior and take responsibility for their own misbehavior. For starters, most motorists are recidivist speeders, and don't even get me started on motorists who run lights and don't signal. Conclusion: people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
I like the following 'Share the Road' message for motorists, because it focuses on motorist behavior, and simply states that cyclist education is also occurring:
It's too bad motorists seem to want to blame cyclists for their traffic woes, when in reality, all they need to do is look at themselves and their fellow motorists if they are seeking the cause of the traffic hell they have to endure every day.
FLYBYU
I fully agree with everything you say. A friend of mine was riding to our group meeting place when he was hit by a car, he was riding down a 40ft wide road on the right on a cloudy morning with his flashing red light on the back. Some idiot lady clipped him in the leg with her fender, then after that she just slows down a bit and looks in her rearview mirror (I guess to see if she killed him or not) and since he was still on the bike she sped off. As he was busy assessing his injuries he forgot to get a licence number, not that the police would probably done anything anyway, however they are better here cause we have bike cops and they know the feeling. But we are never going to get the respect we are entitled to on the road, I get the same problems when I'm driving, cause my car is tiny everyone trys to run me over. Sometimes I just want to take certain people out of their cars at stoplights and beat some sense into them, people are just jerks in general. I'm just waiting for the day when one of them decides to confront me in person, they better start running before they even get their door open.
jester69
I like the following 'Share the Road' message for motorists, because it focuses on motorist behavior, and simply states that cyclist education is also occurring:
I do like that flyer, it is very good. The only point on it I might disageee with is that its up to the motorist to "recognize situations and obstacles which may be hazzardous to cyclists...." That is our job. We should be predictable and either take the lane OR wait until it is clear to avoid an obstacle. Never trust a car to look out for you.
But, I guess its a nice thought. Reading that flyer made me want to get a few thousand printed up and go put em under peoples windshield wipers at the mall, or hand them out somewhere. I bet the local REI would give me permission to hand them out some saturday. Probably the health food store too.
Well, its probably a more productive idea than whinging on here anyhoo, heh.
take care,
Jester
Juha
We had a bit similar thread in a newspaper's web site a week ago. All kinds of people were discussing the use of lights on bikes. This one guy announces that he thinks all (bike) lights are unnecessary in city environment. He can see the road, he can see other road users and avoid them. Consequently he will not use any lights on his bike.
Pretty soon the obvious drawbacks of this strategy were explained to him. Things might go his way as long as he is the only one invisible and as long as he never makes a single mistake.
Methinks same kind of logic applies here: no matter what other road users do, lawful and predictable riding at least leaves you with a bit more margin of error, should you make a mistake.
--J
And having said this, I am the first to admit I break the rules every now and then. :beer: