Vehicular Cycling (VC) - VC representing!

I was on my way home from school today when I noticed a car honking behind me. There was no one behind him and I waved him over to pass me in the other lane. He breezes by me with about 2 feet to spare then cuts in front of me. After a few hundred feet I see him pulling into some IT company parking lot. So I decided to catch up to him and give him a little VC education! After he circled the lot a few times trying to find a parking spot, he saw me and pulled over. I pulled up along side his door and he proceeded to yell at me "do you know you are not allowed to ride on the street?". I was pissed! I yelled back at him "do you know I have as much of a right to that lane as any motorcycle or scooter?!" He said "you can not drive non motor vehicles on the street". I replied back "where was a supposed to ride, there is no sidewalk. I have every right to that lane, and if you want to test me, I have my cell phone in my bag and we can call a police officer to the scene and I will file harrassment charges on you for using your horn in a non emergency and threatening manner and we will see who is right!" He said "I dont want to test you, and you may be right". My parting words were "when was the last time you had driver's education? When you were 16? Maybe 40 years ago that was what the law state, but its not like that anymore. Maybe you should know what you are talking about before you honk".

I felt so good after that. Dont people understand that if you are going to harrass someone to not do it where you can be confronted shortly after that? What if I had a gun and a temper? Well, I have the temper. Thank God I dont allow myself to own a gun. lol :roflmao2:

...what if he had a gun and a temper. Anyway, well done to you.

Best wishes in growing maturity and a long, happy life. In that last, I would advise not following and lecturing miscreant drivers. You may well find one of them willing to do you harm.

I think I could have handled myself just fine. The way I see it is not as a sense of immaturity, but making the streets safer one driver at a time. He said he was going to look it up when he gets home. If he does that and is able to see I was right, he will be much more courteous to other cyclists on the road...

Don't hold your breath...

I was on my way home from school today when I noticed a car honking behind me. There was no one behind him and I waved him over to pass me in the other lane. He breezes by me with about 2 feet to spare then cuts in front of me. After a few hundred feet I see him pulling into some IT company parking lot. So I decided to catch up to him and give him a little VC education! After he circled the lot a few times trying to find a parking spot, he saw me and pulled over. I pulled up along side his door and he proceeded to yell at me "do you know you are not allowed to ride on the street?". I was pissed! I yelled back at him "do you know I have as much of a right to that lane as any motorcycle or scooter?!" He said "you can not drive non motor vehicles on the street".

I carry small cards with me upon which are printed the laws of CA as they apply to cyclists... the first line starts with "21200. (a) Every person riding a bicycle upon a highway has all the rights and is subject to all the provisions applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this division..."

The cards are business size, and quite handy. In my over 30 years of cycling, I have come to find out that apparently it is my responsibility to train each and every darn motorist out there... :rolleyes: OK, that is not really the case, but over the years it sure seems that way... time and time again I have had situations similar to your's; when clearly some motorist did not have a clue.

So in spite of how predictable and law abiding I may be, there are those motorists who just don't know, and will tend to treat cyclists in any way they feel fit.

I have posted the laws on the outside of my cube, and found that few of my co-workers were aware of the rights of cyclists... no surprise to me.

I carry cards with Texas bike law info when on my bike. But I also carry a gun legally. If someone followed me into a parking lot and approached my car I'd be reaching for it. Maybe they do have a temper and a weapon. I have a weapon and the training to keep a semi-cool head in a threatening situation. Don't pull up beside me and start screaming.

you have good insurance, right?

i think it sounds like a potentially reasonable outcome to a possibly escalating and hazardous scenario.

most every driver I've had words with is all talk and no bluster but I've also had to use pepper spray and been chased thru residential districts by enraged motorists for just having words.

The motorists that are jackasses dont' know the rules of the road, are already dangerous drivers in and of itself. they don't care about road safety or bicyclists' rights.

I think massive public ad campaigns would serve us a lot better than the farfetched and highly unrealistic cyclist edication motive of the vc crewe.

I was ready to go to blows with him if it came to that point. Not because I wanted to persay, but I knew it could happen. I am a pretty big guy, so I felt secure in my ability to defend myself..

So I decided to catch up to him and give him a little VC education!

Road rage is not vc, unless you subscribe to HH's (may he be lurking in peace) "Monkey See, Monkey Do" version of vc.

come on, chip..... if motorists rage, surely vc bicyclists must rage too ;)

talking guns & bodily violence will get this thread locked. stay on the cycling topic!!!

is it VC to act like a jackass motorist?

is it VC to act like a jackass motorist?

Logic would suggest a "Yes" to this question.

Vehicular cyclists are all humans.
Every human is capable of jackass behavior.

Thus vehicular cyclists can accomplish jackass behavior.

Logic would suggest a "Yes" to this question.

Vehicular cyclists are all humans.
Every human is capable of jackass behavior.

Thus vehicular cyclists can accomplish jackass behavior.

Acting like a jackass is not one of the rules of the road..it's more like one of the rules of the road-rager.

VC and the ragin' cagers!

tete a tete, or turn the other cheek??

WWjfD? ;)

I was riding home this afternoon, and after going through an intersection, there was a region of the roadway that was definately one-lane each way, with no where to go on the outside but bad gravel. I let about three cars go by in the intersection, then proceeded to take the lane and ride in the right tire track, but far enough out that no one should be able to get by me without going into the other lane, across double yellow stripes. A car came behind me, went by me by a good five feet, but was three feet into the other lane with opposing traffic coming right at him. I was less than 20 yards from an area where I could go over into a bike lane when he passed.

Just after he passed me, there is a downhill where I got up to about 20 mph. The driver had already passed me, but less than 100 yards away he pulled into a filling station. I looked at my watch, and he had gained 10 seconds by the time I got to the filling station driveway, so I pulled in and went over to where he had stopped to fill his car. He was out, in the process of getting the gas, when I asked him why he had made the illegal pass to get by me? He replied, "I passed you by over five feet, so why is it an illegal pass?" I told him that he had to cross into opposing traffic, and that he had only gained ten seconds. Was that risk worth ten seconds? That was the question I left with him. He was driving a Farmer's Insurance vehicle.

I felt pretty good as I left for home.

John

I felt pretty good as I left for home.


I wouldn't have wasted my time. I have no issue if other drivers cross the double yellow to pass me when there is visibility and the opposing traffic didn't seem to be a safety problem in this case. A big so what from me.

Now if the passing driver or opposing drivers had to swerve or brake suddenly to avoid each other I could understand the issue, but still wouldn't have wasted my time.

Al

This highlights some issues of road design. I notice in the USA, the default is for a double yellow line that indicates vehicles must stay to its right. Only rarely is this a dashed line. In the UK, the default on most roads is a dashed white line - meaning that crossing the centre line to overtake on single lane roads is legal. In places where overtaking would be dangerous, solid double white centre lines (not to be crossed in normal driving) are applied.

I prefer the "allow it unless it is specifically disallowed" approach.

Ed

This highlights some issues of road design. I notice in the USA, the default is for a double yellow line that indicates vehicles must stay to its right. Only rarely is this a dashed line. In the UK, the default on most roads is a dashed white line - meaning that crossing the centre line to overtake on single lane roads is legal. In places where overtaking would be dangerous, solid double white centre lines (not to be crossed in normal driving) are applied.

I prefer the "allow it unless it is specifically disallowed" approach.

Ed

That is how it should be and very often is done in the US (although a dashed yellow is used instead of dashed white). However locally I've noted on some residential 25mph streets as part of traffic calming re-striping that double yellow are added where there were no stripes before.

Al

I wouldn't have wasted my time. I have no issue if other drivers cross the double yellow to pass me when there is visibility and the opposing traffic didn't seem to be a safety problem in this case. A big so what from me.

Now if the passing driver or opposing drivers had to swerve or brake suddenly to avoid each other I could understand the issue, but still wouldn't have wasted my time.

Al

Why not... is ten seconds "gain" worth the potential of a collision? Perhaps by asking the question, John brought up an issue the motorist is going to have to weigh more carefully in the future....

Without that question... if the motorist was in tight quarters, I would imagine that he would simply think "damn cyclist." But in reality, it was the motorist's decision.

After a few more years of commuting you might also start asking the same questions... of why you were treated a certain way or drivers acted a certain way around you... you might even eventually make a stop similar to what John did. Time will tell.

I used to be "so what" on so many similar things... only to discover that they happened over and over again... and at that point you begin to wonder why...

Why not... is ten seconds "gain" worth the potential of a collision? .

Because I didn't read from John's description that there was any real potential for collision. Perhaps he was not dramatic enough about the closeness and relative speed of oncoming traffic. But I did not read it as a blind pass as John also knew there was oncoming traffic.

Maybe the driver did not know that it was only going to save 10sec, perhaps only decided to stop to fill up when the found the station.

Al

After a few more years of commuting you might also start asking the same questions... of why you were treated a certain way or drivers acted a certain way around you... you might even eventually make a stop similar to what John did. Time will tell.

Over the past short years cycling I've come to care less about what others do and more about what I do and have come to enjoy cycling in traffic even more as a result.

Come ON, Noisebeam! You videotape motorists honking at you, passing unsafely, and post them to You Tube! you can't pull off the 'I don't care' routine in here! You are ALL ABOUT other's road transgressions....

Maybe you guys missed it was an insurance agent's vehicle. Dangerous drivers often pass unsafely to save mere seconds, endangering cyclists or worse. The 'rush around to the red light' is a commonly executed bonehead maneuver.

The fact it was an insurance agent, and john gave them cause to consider, makes me say, "kudos, John."

Come ON, Noisebeam! You videotape motorists honking at you, passing unsafely, and post them to You Tube! you can't pull off the 'I don't care' routine in here! You are ALL ABOUT other's road transgressions....

Maybe you guys missed it was an insurance agent's vehicle. Dangerous drivers often pass unsafely to save mere seconds, endangering cyclists or worse. The 'rush around to the red light' is a commonly executed bonehead maneuver.

The fact it was an insurance agent, and john gave them cause to consider, makes me say, "kudos, John."
It has been a quite a while (May 30 2007 to be exact) since I posted any motorist 'transgressions' Mainly as I have had none since then that are significant enough to show up in video, but also as I stated (and you apparently missed) I have come to care less over time. That is a mis-representation saying I am all about other's transgressions. What I have done and may continue to do is use video example to show the wide variety of driver behavior and what I do to avoid issue due to it.

You are also wrong in saying it is fact it was an insurance agent. You have no idea who was driving the car labeled with the name of an insurance company.

Al

...pretty dang sure up in the NW the farmers insurance branded vehicles are driven by farmers' agents, al. I insure with Farmers' and there's boastful stuff in the newsletters I get from farmers about their fleet.


sounds like you still (may) continue to illustrate poor (and other) motorist behaviors via posting to You tube. "I have had none since then significant to show up on video.."

do you review your commutes once you get home to see if you caught anything on video? I really don't care, just wanted to point out to other forum members perhaps not familiar with your posts, that you posted a LOT of motorist behaviors to You Tube....

...pretty dang sure up in the NW the farmers insurance branded vehicles are driven by farmers' agents, al. I insure with Farmers' and there's boastful stuff in the newsletters I get from farmers about their fleet.

sounds like you still (may) continue to illustrate poor (and other) motorist behaviors via posting to You tube. "I have had none since then significant to show up on video.."

do you review your commutes once you get home to see if you caught anything on video? I really don't care, just wanted to point out to other forum members perhaps not familiar with your posts, that you posted a LOT of motorist behaviors to You Tube....

I don't review them. If I remember something from a commute I check it out, otherwise I dump it to my external HD and eventually erase it.

Some of my videos are specific to the context of a discussion at hand also and don't stand alone.

But it is my behaviors I post in video. My behaviors are really only of (very marginal in the larger scope of life) interest if there are other drivers or pedestrians nearby so they of course involve others. For example I know many drivers will turn right without looking behind/beside them, so my behavior is to not be beside them were they could turn right.

Everyone is human and can be impatient, distracted, angry, etc. I expect to see a range of behaviors based on human nature. So I adjust my behaviors accordingly. To get upset about others would mean I would live being upset, not a life I want.

I also know that some behaviors are more likely based on mine. For example if I ride further right it encourages passing - unsafe or not. I can and have ridden right track where it would be best if I was not passed and some drivers will pass anyway. So instead of getting steamed about it I consider if moving further left would have helped eliminate the ambiguity or uncertainly.

Finally I am not sure why you are on my case about this. I simply noted I would not have wasted my time doing what John did. I did not say it was a waste of his time or inappropriate or that he should not have done it. To be clear I would not have done what he did, but I have no issue with what he did and consider his actions to be neutral to positive. But your reaction to my comment makes me think you read more into what I said than I did.

Al

It's not just cars that can be a problem. If anyone cares, during yesterdy's commutes there were two minor incidents with cyclists. The first one - a middle aged roadie, who has hung on to my wheel after I passed him, then decides to begin a pass, to my right. We're in a bike lane that is narrowing as it approaches lights. I try to discourage this by moving to the right but still he comes. Eventually I ask him not to pass on the inside (between me and the kerb) and ask him to go the other way, which he does.

Second, I was headed straight through a green light at a cross roads, and nearly T-boned by a twit on an MTB turning left in front of me after running his red.

I wonder what cycle commuting would be like if the oft expressed wishes for a vast increase in bike use were to come true?

Ed

I wonder what cycle commuting would be like if the oft expressed wishes for a vast increase in bike use were to come true?

Ed

Probably like it is in China... relatively slow and crowded. Especially if we all tried to stick to the same 5 foot wide lane.

The fleet wheeled fast cyclist garbed in lycra would probably be somewhat frustrated.

But then again, if there are enough of us, and the whole right lane was used... well it might be a rather pleasurable experience... along the lines of some of the larger organized rides we have around here. (by organized I mean only that they take your money and put up banners... ) Tecate-Ensenada, Mexicalli-San Felipi as examples... fast paced, yet crowded.

Over the past short years cycling I've come to care less about what others do and more about what I do and have come to enjoy cycling in traffic even more as a result.

I used to think primarily like that... But a few collisions, by what should otherwise have been benign motorists, and a few too many close calls, and harassment by otherwise ill informed motorists, have changed my opinion quite a bit. I used to be the care-free aggressive pseudo-messenger type cyclist... But I was tempered (tainted?) by time and events.

Seems like every time I throw a leg over saddle these days, there's one more "bad example" that I have to deal with in some way. I just bought an MTB... so I am going off road now, after well over 30 years of road cycling, regular commuting and touring.

I've come to the conclusion that cycling among fewer cars is the best way to enjoy cycling.


*****************

Motorists are always talking about "ahole cyclists" and that they are "so aggressive" and treat motorists like heck... Well it is easy to see that, after so many years of riding... I am a pretty easy going guy... but the treatment I have gotten over the years has "tainted" me regarding motorists and their actions...

I wish you all the luck in the world... that you keep your spirits high when it comes to cycling in traffic.

This highlights some issues of road design. I notice in the USA, the default is for a double yellow line that indicates vehicles must stay to its right. Only rarely is this a dashed line. In the UK, the default on most roads is a dashed white line - meaning that crossing the centre line to overtake on single lane roads is legal. In places where overtaking would be dangerous, solid double white centre lines (not to be crossed in normal driving) are applied.

I prefer the "allow it unless it is specifically disallowed" approach.

Ed

it was interesting when a local street here was stripped down and repaved. for a couple of weeks there were no lane markings at all. no double yellow, no dashed white line. the result seemed to be a more natural flow of traffic and lower overall speeds (that might have only been temporary) and i know i was granted more room than usual on this same street.

I used to think primarily like that... But a few collisions, by what should otherwise have been benign motorists, and a few too many close calls, and harassment by otherwise ill informed motorists, have changed my opinion quite a bit. I used to be the care-free aggressive pseudo-messenger type cyclist... But I was tempered (tainted?) by time and events.

Seems like every time I throw a leg over saddle these days, there's one more "bad example" that I have to deal with in some way.
Perhaps I miscommunicated in my use of 'not care'. I used to be upset my the harassers, the careless, the inattentive and it resulted in higher levels of tension. I still do wish that was not the environment (not just on the road, but in the world for that matter) - in that sense I care. I also care in the moment in the preparation or response to ensure my immediate safety. But by not care I meant I don't get upset by the individual encounters or the individuals as that does nothing for my safety or mental well being. I don't care about what I can not change at the moment.

As you know, but to be clear, I am far from a care-free cyclist in the 'care-free aggressive pseudo-messenger type cyclist' manner you describe - a description that does not fit my riding style at all. I think non-stop about my actions while driving (yes a motor vehicle too) It is part of what keeps driving enjoyable and also helps me continuously improve. I care full time about my actions and my safety as a results of those actions.

Al

Perhaps I miscommunicated in my use of 'not care'. I used to be upset my the harassers, the careless, the inattentive and it resulted in higher levels of tension. I still do wish that was not the environment (not just on the road, but in the world for that matter) - in that sense I care. I also care in the moment in the preparation or response to ensure my immediate safety. But by not care I meant I don't get upset by the individual encounters or the individuals as that does nothing for my safety or mental well being. I don't care about what I can not change at the moment.

As you know, but to be clear, I am far from a care-free cyclist in the 'care-free aggressive pseudo-messenger type cyclist' manner you describe - a description that does not fit my riding style at all. I think non-stop about my actions while driving (yes a motor vehicle too) It is part of what keeps driving enjoyable and also helps me continuously improve. I care full time about my actions and my safety as a results of those actions.

Al

I have tried on several occasions to ignore and not get upset by the actions of others... But it keeps coming back... time and time again I see how easily someone callously does something that has the potential (near miss) of harming me, when all they had to do was put 2 seconds of effort into doing the right thing. Yeah, that riles me... and as much as I have tried to ignore it, it keeps coming back. My "retaliation" has been to carry the law with me and distribute it when I can... and I have done that in different ways over the years.

Of course I will always look out for number one... but reaction times and just being human mean that I too am subject to failure, while attempting to detect the intentional or otherwise poor actions of others; that makes me vulnerable. I don't like that. It makes what should be an otherwise fun activity, and adds stress to it. So far, "out of the way of motor traffic" is the least stressful way I know of.

Riding like a kid... using back alleys and dirt paths... now that is something I am trying at the moment. Kinda puts the fun back into it.

it was interesting when a local street here was stripped down and repaved. for a couple of weeks there were no lane markings at all. no double yellow, no dashed white line. the result seemed to be a more natural flow of traffic and lower overall speeds (that might have only been temporary) and i know i was granted more room than usual on this same street.

There have been experiments based on this approach in the Netherlands and UK. I've also witnessed a marked improvement in traffic behaviour and flow on a couple of occasions where the traffic signals had failed on one of Oxford's busy roads. The worry, I suppose is that the novelty of this co-operative road use would soon wear off.

There have been experiments based on this approach in the Netherlands and UK. I've also witnessed a marked improvement in traffic behaviour and flow on a couple of occasions where the traffic signals had failed on one of Oxford's busy roads. The worry, I suppose is that the novelty of this co-operative road use would soon wear off.

In my experience totally stripe-less roads during repaving do have the effect timmhann was describing (one 7-lane arterial for 4wks) but only during the day. At night everything fell apart as even the attentive had trouble knowing how to pick a steady line given the very wide width of black pavement and the darkness making harder to use peripheral or distant objects to keep a line.

Al

The fleet wheeled fast cyclist garbed in lycra would probably be somewhat frustrated.


Oh dear, I would not like that at all :o One reason I like to ride to work is that I can ride fast and generally uninhibited by traffic (passing cars are no hindrance in general). This provides a sense of freedom not noted when driving... though both are conducted according to the much championed "Rules of the Road". More cyclists would ruin it for me :lol:

In my experience totally stripe-less roads during repaving do have the effect timmhann was describing (one 7-lane arterial for 4wks) but only during the day. At night everything fell apart as even the attentive had trouble knowing how to pick a steady line given the very wide width of black pavement and the darkness making harder to use peripheral or distant objects to keep a line.

Al

Good point.

In my experience totally stripe-less roads during repaving do have the effect timmhann was describing (one 7-lane arterial for 4wks) but only during the day. At night everything fell apart as even the attentive had trouble knowing how to pick a steady line given the very wide width of black pavement and the darkness making harder to use peripheral or distant objects to keep a line.

Al

There was an interesting article in Atlantic magazine discussing the abundance of road signs in the US, and how we do not tend to have consistent speed limits for roads that appear to be of the same type. The article also pointed out that we seem to somewhat distracting signs for just about everything...
I myself was quite dismayed recently when I saw signs telling motorists that they must yield for pedestrians at stops. One would think the laws would be sufficient... but apparently not.

Here is the article... and worth the read. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/traffic

Here is a tiny excerpt...


traffic signs in the U.K. are often on the road itself, where the driver should be looking. And most right-of-way signs are informational: there are almost no mandatory stops in the U.K. (The dominant motive in the U.S. traffic-control community seems to be distrust, and policies are usually designed to control drivers and reduce their discretion. The British system puts more responsibility on the drivers themselves.)

Speed limits in the U.K. are also simpler and better. They are set by road type, so drivers know what limits to expect on highways, rural roads, and urban roads—usually without any signs to tell them. These limits are relatively high, set assuming optimum driving conditions, in contrast to the U.S. limits, which seem to be set with something in between the best and worst conditions in mind. (Precisely where on this spectrum U.S. limits fall seems to vary from road to road, engendering mistrust of the signs in some drivers.) Nonstandard speed limits in the U.K. are rare, so you tend to take them quite seriously when they appear, and they are posted frequently—so you don’t risk missing them if you’re, say, watching the road ahead of you.

There was an interesting article in Atlantic magazine discussing the abundance of road signs in the US, and how we do not tend to have consistent speed limits for roads that appear to be of the same type. The article also pointed out that we seem to somewhat distracting signs for just about everything...

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Perhaps one problem with consistency in the US is that you have many more parties to coordinate; i.e., federal, state, and municipal agencies.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Perhaps one problem with consistency in the US is that you have many more parties to coordinate; i.e., federal, state, and municipal agencies.

Well Federal takes care of interstates... to a point, then state gets involved, but local roads are pretty much in the hands of the municipal agencies... and every local has it's own flavor.

Right here in San Diego however I was really surprised at what they would slap the 50MPH sign on... in one area it is wide mulitlaned arterials, and yet in another area it was a narrow single laned farm road, clearly neither were of the same quality; while it would be easy to do 50MPH on the arterial road, there were also driveways every couple of hundred feet and stoplights every 1/4 to 1/2 mile... making 50MPH something of a drag race. The other road was narrow and shouldered by dirt, somewhat winding, and actually difficult to do 50MPH on, but it was uninterrupted for a long distance... that seemed to be the qualifier.

Clearly these roads are at either end of the spectrum, yet are "branded" the same.

And I fully agree with the complaint about the plethora of signs... recently I have noticed this sign popping up... as if turning motorists had some sort of free pass.

http://www.trafficsign.us/100/reg/r10-15.gif

http://www.trafficsign.us/100/reg/r10-15.gif

Ah, yes, this brings me to another thing to which I have had to adjust. In the UK, if there is pedestrian control of an intersection, there is specific sequencing. Of course this necessitates all road traffic to be stopped for a time.

All of a sudden, I move to a new world where, as soon as I have a green light, the pedestrians are allowed to walk in front of my path (right or left turns). It is difficult to adjust to this (OK, my problem), and I don't think it is a good protocol for motorists or pedestrians

Ed

Glad to see someone else on this forum subscribes to worthy magazines, Gene. How about that electric car GM is fast tracking?

yes, interesting article in the Atlantic. I too doubt american motorists could even handle signless communities. think of the average 6 lane intersection at rush hour.....

perhaps making everyone more cognizant thru a paucity of signage would work in small towns (I lived in a a very small US town in the rural american west and there was not a single traffic light in the entire county. Stopsigns? maybe 6.) people still drove as if the stopsigns weren't even there...

dropping traffic controls would be a disaster in america's autocentric dystopia, particularily the congested cities..

the article was slightly scary. HH would have LOVED it! ;) ;)

Ah, yes, this brings me to another thing to which I have had to adjust. In the UK, if there is pedestrian control of an intersection, there is specific sequencing. Of course this necessitates all road traffic to be stopped for a time.

All of a sudden, I move to a new world where, as soon as I have a green light, the pedestrians are allowed to walk in front of my path (right or left turns). It is difficult to adjust to this (OK, my problem), and I don't think it is a good protocol for motorists or pedestrians

Ed

I agree and have found it really disappointing to watch some idiot driver honk at Jr High School kids who are crossing with a walk signal. The motorist assumed his green arrow gave him some sort of priority over pedestrians. The reality is that peds have Right of Way, but at that age they may not realize it (as certainly the older driver did not).

I have also dealt with this as a cyclist using the city installed walk crossings between bike paths... where again motorists feel they have ROW due to their green light and their turns.

I don't know if GB has "left turn on red" as the US has "right turn on red," but again that right turn on red situation is supposed to mean "after a stop and ensuring the way is clear..." that latter bit does not happen often. In fact it happens so poorly that if you are standing at an intersection, with a clear walk signal while you are on the right hand side crossing over... there is a darn good chance motorists won't even glance your way as they glide through the intersection watching to their left. :eek:

Glad to see someone else on this forum subscribes to worthy magazines, Gene. How about that electric car GM is fast tracking?

yes, interesting article in the Atlantic. I too doubt american motorists could even handle signless communities. think of the average 6 lane intersection at rush hour.....

perhaps making everyone more cognizant thru a paucity of signage would work in small towns (I lived in a a very small US town in the rural american west and there was not a single traffic light in the entire county. Stopsigns? maybe 6.) people still drove as if the stopsigns weren't even there...

dropping traffic controls would be a disaster in america's autocentric dystopia, particularily the congested cities..

the article was slightly scary. HH would have LOVED it! ;) ;)

The article points right to the problem... the lack of training for American drivers and the lack of consistency on road markings/designs.

This points right to the issue of certain Advocates (Forester) and their assumptions that American motorists are going to act just like British motorists and willfully heed the laws. Under that mentality Foresters' writings are correct, but the reality is a lot more cloudy. American motorists are not British motorists and they tend to react poorly to "intruders" in their perceived "free space." Not to mention that American motorists make up a bunch of laws where/when they don't know the law. (we see this all the time on opinion pages) American motorists and the roads they travel are just not "tamed" in the same fashion as British motorists and roads.

RE the GM Volt... I have a feeling it is another GM ploy to kowtow to the masses, while still maintaining their customary large car/big engine viewpoint. The reality is that GM had a head start in the electric car business and basically dropped the ball. (crushed it and didn't look back actually) Who knows, maybe there are subtle business ties with the oil industry. But the first indicator I had that GM won't be able to do this is their "well, we can almost make the 40 mile range..." statement... meanwhile other plug in small car makers have hit 80 mile ranges and are using capacitor technology to flatten the discharge curve of the battery... where GM is thinking "cooling." Frankly, I don't think they will get there in a reasonable amount of time. I'd put money on GM jumping on the "gas card" solution where they offer the short memory consumer a car with a fixed price for gas... in other words, GM is going to have to wrap free gas around every car they sell to get them off the lot. A losing proposition for GM, the consumer, and ultimately all of us breathing those fumes.

The writing was on the wall in the '70s and GM and others failed to heed it.

To return to the OP's topic, I am not sure the best tactic is to try to explain the law in that way. Why should he believe you over his experience?

Short of Gene's educational cards, I would advocate in a similar confrontation in a different direction.

I would say; "Whether or not I am allowed on the road, you have a moral and legal duty to pass slower vehicles in a safe manner and in due care."

This assertion is true on it's face and is hard to object to.

To return to the OP's topic, I am not sure the best tactic is to try to explain the law in that way. Why should he believe you over his experience?

Short of Gene's educational cards, I would advocate in a similar confrontation in a different direction.

I would say; "Whether or not I am allowed on the road, you have a moral and legal duty to pass slower vehicles in a safe manner and in due care."

This assertion is true on it's face and is hard to object to.

And the motorist response to this is "get on the sidewalk and then I have no such duty..."

Which is why I carry the cards, to prove first that I have a right to ride on the road...

Remember many motorists believe that we simply do not belong on "their" roads. :rolleyes:

There is no left turn allowed on red in the UK, although it has been discussed in the past. I like having the opportunity to ride and drive in different places. It has the possibility to help one become a better road user.

Right on red is a problem, for the reasons you state - people think they can turn right on red, but forget the stop part. When I took the driving test here last year, I was none too impressed with it's cursory nature. However, it explains a lot about the general quality of driving. Too bad that people still drive unlicenced and uninsured, causing deaths, injury and property damage.

Ed

There is no left turn allowed on red in the UK, although it has been discussed in the past. I like having the opportunity to ride and drive in different places. It has the possibility to help one become a better road user.

Right on red is a problem, for the reasons you state - people think they can turn right on red, but forget the stop part. When I took the driving test here last year, I was none too impressed with it's cursory nature. However, it explains a lot about the general quality of driving. Too bad that people still drive unlicenced and uninsured, causing deaths, injury and property damage.

Ed

Thanks for your observations... seems there are two things that Forester has underestimated in his view of American Drivers... one being the cursory nature of driving education and testing, leaving us with perhaps less then skillful drivers.

The second being the "right on red rule" which complicates intersections by permitting motorists to use their judgment about when they may proceed... being that motorist judgment is hindered by the cursory nature of their training... this puts cyclists at a disadvantage over countries that do not have such rules.

Just to re-enforce what you are saying Gene, I think that drivers are not imbued with sufficient sense of responsibility. People just don't treat driving as something that could have serious consequences if one does not follow the rules and take care. Instead many users regard the road as their individual property and operate vehicles in a selfish & thoughtless manner e.g. failure to signal, yield, stop, distracted whilst driving etc.

However, unless there is serious pressure brought to bear on this aspect of life (imagine the cost of enforcement..) and bad drivers really begin to catch some grief, nothing can change.

Ed