Commuting - The Atlantic - article about agressive bicyclists

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2012/07/when-bad-guys-ride-bikes/2536/

I hope I've been appropriately kind to pedestrians. I try to give them space and the right of way even while running.

Along with bike licenses and stronger traffic enforcement, maybe they could also outlaw headphones and ear buds for walkers and runners.

It's easy to point fingers at others, but far too few look at their own actions with objective eyes.

I'll stop here before this gets bumped to that other section of the site.

So we have a gal living in Mexico City writing about cyclist in US cities, talking about a collision for which she does not even bother stating if the runner was even on the correct side of the path.

Pretty useless article.

So we have a gal living in Mexico City writing about cyclist in US cities, talking about a collision for which she does not even bother stating if the runner was even on the correct side of the path.

Pretty useless article.

Really? Kinda reminds me of a posting in these forums involving a head-on collision between two cyclists where the poster really downplayed the fact that he was riding illegally. And as per numerous posts in the forums here, the statements: "Cyclists flout the rules, say detractors. They ignore red lights and stop signs. They ride against traffic. They pedal on sidewalks where pedestrians aren’t expecting them." All sound pretty accurate to me, regardless of where the author to that article is writing from.

Clearly, the best solution is better pedestrian education (Ped Ed) and a requirement for all peds to wear helmets. Remedial walking courses.

Clearly, the best solution is better pedestrian education (Ped Ed) and a requirement for all peds to wear helmets. Remedial walking courses.

But cyclists can't have it both ways. We demand that motorists respect vulnerable road users whilst being complete tools around pedestrians ourselves. With increased size and speed comes increased responsibility. This goes for 18 wheelers on roadways and cyclists on MUPS.

Clearly, the best solution is better pedestrian education (Ped Ed) and a requirement for all peds to wear helmets. Remedial walking courses.
Agreed!

But cyclists can't have it both ways. We demand that motorists respect vulnerable road users whilst being complete tools around pedestrians ourselves. With increased size and speed comes increased responsibility. This goes for 18 wheelers on roadways and cyclists on MUPS.

Yes we can; you just need to acknowledge that cycling is superiour to both motor vehicles as well as walking and prioritize things as such.

Really? Kinda reminds me of a posting in these forums involving a head-on collision between two cyclists where the poster really downplayed the fact that he was riding illegally. And as per numerous posts in the forums here, the statements: "Cyclists flout the rules, say detractors. They ignore red lights and stop signs. They ride against traffic. They pedal on sidewalks where pedestrians aren’t expecting them." All sound pretty accurate to me, regardless of where the author to that article is writing from.So you really think that motorist, cyclist and pedestrians in the US are as bad as those in Mexico City?

So you really think that motorist, cyclist and pedestrians in the US are as bad as those in Mexico City?

Absolutely. We aren't special over here, we are one of the worst countries for alternative transportation, especially cycling. A car-centric society breeds machismo, regardless of whether its a car, bike or motorcycle. Many other countries are better set up for drivers and cyclists to play nice, relieving the "need" for cyclists to enter pedestrian territory, ie the sidewalk.

I'd rather be a cyclist in Mexico City than New York City...

I must confess, I am always puzzled by the hostility to claims that cyclists sometimes behave carelessly. I ride every day and I see it, every day. I mean, yes, some drivers are ********, and some pedestrians are ********, but some cyclists are also ********. The guy who blasts through an area clearly marked "Slow, pedestrian crossing" at full speed and then shrieks at the kid in the crosswalk for being in his way; that guy is an *******.

I don't think the suggestion in the article of enforced safety classes is the answer. I do think there need to be more dedicated bike lanes, both on the street and on recreational trails, and better signage and law enforcement to keep those lanes bikes only. Because I think we can all agree: the real trouble makers are those damn rollerbladers. ;)

Clearly, the best solution is better pedestrian education (Ped Ed) and a requirement for all peds to wear helmets. Remedial walking courses.

I've got just the course to offer, "Effective Walking." My tests and unique analysis of data show that "crashes" will be reduced by 80% for those exposed to my instructions. And anyone who casts doubt on my findings and course material is nothing but an incompetent dunderhead.

Clearly, the best solution is better pedestrian education (Ped Ed) and a requirement for all peds to wear helmets. Remedial walking courses.


I take it you're kidding, but remedial walking courses are necessary in some areas. On my commute this morning, I had a jaywalking women, look RIGHT at me, and step off the curb right in front of me, into the center of the lane I was traveling at 18-20mph in. Luckily, I was able to swing around her into another lane, because there was really no traffic.

It's only a matter of time into a jaywalker gets killed by a cyclist in Providence and it won't necessarily be the cyclists fault. For some reason, people don't realize getting hit by a bicycle is still going to hurt.

I had a similar situation 20 years ago, I was riding a local path and rounded a curve obstructed by bushes at 5 to 10 mph, and met a couple of peds walking towards me on the same side as I was on. The paved path surface was wet and slippery, I inadvertently grabbed too much front brake and down I went, fortunately without striking the peds.

I've since changed my commute route to the roadway, since peds are basically trained to walk against traffic and I ride with it, making the path much more unpredictable and slower than the roadway, plus the roadway has far better lines of sight.

The way I see it, this whole overblown story might have a happy ending when people realize that if there is a problem with cyclists running over and killing a handful of pedestrians, there is a full-blown crisis with motorists running over pedestrians.

I get jaywalkers stepping out in front of me all the time, sometimes when I'm going fast enough to hurt them. The example of a collision on a bike path just outlines the problems with peds on bike paths. They generally feel free to wander aimlessly while not paying attention to their surroundings.

I can't help but think that most of these accidents between cyclists, automobiles, and pedestrians are caused by stupid self-centered morons who don't have any extra capacity in their brains to think about other roadway users. I have been that guy before, I caused a crash with a car because of my idiotic behavior and I am lucky enough to have lived to learn from my mistake. It's the driver who can't handle the 5 second delay that he or she incurs when safely passing a cyclist, and the cyclist who can't be bothered by stopping for red lights, and the pedestrian who can't handle walking the extra 90 feet to a crosswalk.

We would all be better off if we could give one extra second of thought about other people before acting, but our society has de-evolved into a do-whatever-you-want-let-everybody-else-worry-about-themselves place and the actions of law enforcement only serves to exacerbate the situation.

I can't help but think that most of these accidents between cyclists, automobiles, and pedestrians are caused by stupid self-centered morons who don't have any extra capacity in their brains to think about other roadway users. I have been that guy before, I caused a crash with a car because of my idiotic behavior and I am lucky enough to have lived to learn from my mistake. It's the driver who can't handle the 5 second delay that he or she incurs when safely passing a cyclist, and the cyclist who can't be bothered by stopping for red lights, and the pedestrian who can't handle walking the extra 90 feet to a crosswalk.

We would all be better off if we could give one extra second of thought about other people before acting, but our society has de-evolved into a do-whatever-you-want-let-everybody-else-worry-about-themselves place and the actions of law enforcement only serves to exacerbate the situation.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. It's all about thinking less about your own needs and more about others that you may encounter on your way.

-G

I've got just the course to offer, "Effective Walking." My tests and unique analysis of data show that "crashes" will be reduced by 80% for those exposed to my instructions. And anyone who casts doubt on my findings and course material is nothing but an incompetent dunderhead.

At this point I would like to propose a new "Vehicular Walking (VW)" thread (sticky perhaps ... mod's???) be started over in A&S.

So how many people have been killed by cyclists? How does that rate with other accidents out there? Is this really something everyone should be up in arms about. It seems to me that articles like this are more of a proxy for expressing their irritation at cyclists on the roads and an attempt to upset the public about it.

I'm doing my part by riding as much as possible, being courteous to peds on the MUP and setting an example by following traffic laws on the streets. I just wish everyone did.

wow.. must stop replying to asshats in the comments... damn youz!

So how many people have been killed by cyclists? How does that rate with other accidents out there? Is this really something everyone should be up in arms about. It seems to me that articles like this are more of a proxy for expressing their irritation at cyclists on the roads and an attempt to upset the public about it.

I would be really surprised if there are an average of 10 pedestrians killed a year for the entire country. It's just a "man bites dog" kind of story and probably has an unspoken bias that bikes don't belong on the road to it as well. Granted, every such fatality is something to be lamented and avoided at all costs, but as I stated above, the real crisis is motorist/pedestrian death rate which is really outrageous. There is an effort to make roads more pedestrian friendly, but in the end, most of the U.S. is pedestrian unfriendly. Even in areas where there is a lot of foot traffic.

Really? Kinda reminds me of a posting in these forums involving a head-on collision between two cyclists where the poster really downplayed the fact that he was riding illegally. And as per numerous posts in the forums here, the statements: "Cyclists flout the rules, say detractors. They ignore red lights and stop signs. They ride against traffic. They pedal on sidewalks where pedestrians aren’t expecting them." All sound pretty accurate to me, regardless of where the author to that article is writing from.

Sad to say, I agreed with the part of the article you quoted too. I have talked to numerous Salmon, and other "bad actors", and believe most are not bad. They're just ignorant. The safety of riding with traffic is counterintuitive to many of those who have not had the dynamics explained to them.

So we have a gal living in Mexico City writing about cyclist in US cities, talking about a collision for which she does not even bother stating if the runner was even on the correct side of the path.

Pretty useless article.
I think this kind of reflex (and so hostile!) dismissal of any critique of cycling is also pretty useless. The article states the path isn't divided at that spot. The cyclist rounding a blind turn at speed on a multi-use path is pretty obviously at fault, either in part, or whole.

So we have a gal living in Mexico City writing about cyclist in US cities, talking about a collision for which she does not even bother stating if the runner was even on the correct side of the path.

Pretty useless article.
Yes, but those facts wont matter to most who have already made up their mind on the subject.

Yes, but those facts wont matter to most who have already made up their mind on the subject.

How exactly do these "facts" apply here?

I think this kind of reflex (and so hostile!) dismissal of any critique of cycling is also pretty useless. The article states the path isn't divided at that spot. The cyclist rounding a blind turn at speed on a multi-use path is pretty obviously at fault, either in part, or whole.

I have to agree... I try to always approach blind corners on the MUP with caution - I generally treat them with the expectation that there is someone around that corner and I should be prepared to avoid them.
That being said, I generally ride defensively since I have seen drivers, cyclists and pedestrians doing all sorts of crazy traffic manoeuvres over the years - just last week I saw a dude on a brakeless fixie riding on the sidewalk, against traffic, (barely) weaving around pedestrians who couldn't see him coming - all while talking on a cell phone! But I digress... It is the vehicle operators responsibility to be in control of their vehicle at all times, so blasting around a blind corner too fast to stop on a non segregated MUP is automatically the riders fault.

That being said, the article seems to make it out that this is becoming a menace to society and a larger problem than it is - I doubt this is a very common occurrence compared to car vs pedestrian incidents, and due to it's painful nature, I doubt there's a lot of repeat offenders.

I think this kind of reflex (and so hostile!) dismissal of any critique of cycling is also pretty useless.
The thing is, the story is overblown, and there are a lot of bullies driving motor vehicles that really don't need to be encouraged in their self-appointed efforts to police cyclists. It's easy to find threads on BikeForums about accidents between negligent motorists and cyclists that are far worse than anything in that article. This kind of article adversely affects cyclists that go out of our way to be safe and considerate of other road users.

Here, lemme break it down for you guys:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Koobazaur/traffic_collision_fault_chart.jpg

It's a people problem, not a mode of transportation problem. If cars and bikes were suddenly outlawed, I promise you there'd be people breaking every walking law that existed.

I think this kind of reflex (and so hostile!) dismissal of any critique of cycling is also pretty useless. The article states the path isn't divided at that spot. The cyclist rounding a blind turn at speed on a multi-use path is pretty obviously at fault, either in part, or whole.
Of course, blame the cyclist without any of the facts even if the runner might have been running on the wrong side of the path. For all we know the cyclist may have only been traveling 3 mph when the runner could have run into a nearly stopped cyclist.

There have been many times on the "bike path" that I have come to a complete stop 20 yards away and had walkers on the wrong side nearly walk into my front wheel.

But I digress... It is the vehicle operators responsibility to be in control of their vehicle at all times, so blasting around a blind corner too fast to stop on a non segregated MUP is automatically the riders fault.I hope you never end up on a jury, ready to convict without any of the facts, just choosing to make up your own supposed facts.

With you, it would have been my fault if any of those walkers hurt themselves walking into my completely stopped bike.

I've got just the course to offer, "Effective Walking." My tests and unique analysis of data show that "crashes" will be reduced by 80% for those exposed to my instructions. And anyone who casts doubt on my findings and course material is nothing but an incompetent dunderhead.

I propose special walking lanes that will compose of a partial network that won't allow you really go anywhere, but it will keep those pesky walkers out of the way of superior cyclists.

Here, lemme break it down for you guys:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Koobazaur/traffic_collision_fault_chart.jpg

OMG, there is in the very center a group of dumb people that walk, ride bikes and drive... they must be eliminated at all costs.

I hope you never end up on a jury, ready to convict without any of the facts, just choosing to make up your own supposed facts.

With you, it would have been my fault if any of those walkers hurt themselves walking into my completely stopped bike.

Unlikely this case would end up in front of a jury, however, from the information presented in the article the cyclist 'slammed' into her, not 'bumped' or 'tickled'.
Secondly part of the bike dug into her head quite deeply, although unlikely - I will concede that it could be possible from low speed but I can't imagine how, it again suggested to me that the cyclist was going at a decent speed.
However, you are correct that I am basing my statement on incomplete information regarding the incident and I was making a fairly generalized statement.

Immediately after I posted I thought I should have added the caveat of "while the vehicle is in motion" but I thought it went without saying. I'll try to be more precise, but I'll leave the post as-is since it's been commented on.
Anyway, the point is that in the case of someone walking into a stopped vehicle of any sort - as the operator you've done all that's humanly possible and are definitely 'in control' so I don't think that counts as recklessness.

Here, lemme break it down for you guys:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Koobazaur/traffic_collision_fault_chart.jpg
As someone who drives, walks, AND rides bikes, I'm greatly affronted by this diagram.

As someone who drives, walks, AND rides bikes, I'm greatly affronted by this diagram.

I think that diagram was meant to show that there are dumb people in all three of the other groups not that people in all three groups were dumb.

I think that diagram was meant to show that there are dumb people in all three of the other groups not that people in all three groups were dumb.

zing. there is a reason why the three circles dont overlap creating a "person who does all 3", I wasnt targeting those who do all 3, just pointing out that each group contains not-so-clever folks who will invariably lead to an accident.

heck every once in a while you'll even hear of pedestrians walking into each other. granted, there is not as much damage-potential as with the other modes of transportation, but the point stands.

I'm aware, I was just being fatuous.

Here, lemme break it down for you guys:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Koobazaur/traffic_collision_fault_chart.jpg


Yep. :thumb:

My only problem with this graphic is the size of the circles is wrong. People who drive and people who walk are much larger circles than the people who bike circle thus entitling those two groups to a larger share of the dumb pie.

Aggressive drivers are a much larger problem and threat nationwide to other humans regardless of transportation mode.
pretty much an article about nothing because its easier to talk about nothing than to talk about complex issues that need to be addressed.

Here, lemme break it down for you guys:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Koobazaur/traffic_collision_fault_chart.jpg

Bingo!

Unlikely this case would end up in front of a jury, however, from the information presented in the article the cyclist 'slammed' into her, not 'bumped' or 'tickled'.
Secondly part of the bike dug into her head quite deeply, although unlikely - I will concede that it could be possible from low speed but I can't imagine how, it again suggested to me that the cyclist was going at a decent speed....

Even that claim is pure supposition.


"I think what happened is our heads hit and then something on his bike must have punctured my forehead," she says about the accident. It could have just as easily been a branch from one of the bushes that the runner noted were along the path or the cyclist helmet.

Sounds like the runner was cutting the corner of the bend, never a good idea; but will will never know because poorly written article leaves out the facts.

I agree in a sense it is an article about nothing, in that it is one anecdote. I ignored the silly solutions. But The Atlantic isn't exactly Bike Forums, and their editor's column was about how bike sharing and the Olympics have changed cycling in London. It is strange for a magazine that normally carries big ideas and deep thoughts.

I also recall that Honolulu already requires bike permits, and that they have a speed limit of 10 mph for bikes on sidewalks, both of which I ignored when I lived there. Analysis?

The linked article was objective and well-written. Though the title does seem to imply that the article is going to be bashing cyclists, it instead offers a pretty accurate account of the situation. It turns out that some cyclists have bad habits, or worse, are downright inconsiderate of others. It's true that it is easy to forget that there are other vulnerable users out there that we should be aware of and be considerate towards.

Florida is the WORST (no I don't have the statistics but I do have the experiences). I have ridden in Alabama (FUN), North Carolina (FUN) and California (busy but fun).

For some reason, from my experiences in FLORIDA people in cars and pedestrians see cyclists as competition. I have literally had to ride on the grass because some people refuse to move more to one side so we can pass cohesively. Stare downs, I see their teeth clenching as if to say, "I am NOT going to move!"

In Florida, sadly, it truly is safest to share the sidewalk (MY THOUGHTS). Many may disagree but the bike lanes are very narrow and drivers are constantly weaving in and out of the bike lanes usually with cell phone in hand. I have attempted the bike lanes and inevitably the cars simply come much too close. A friend was hit because the driver turned around to buckle in a toddler. Another friend hit in the bike lane because couple was arguing and fists started flying--car swerved.

My neighbor has been hit 5 times. Another neighbor was killed on his chopper motorcycle last year. Florida is dangerous. I love love love bicycling and commute most places within 10 miles. Would love to commute to my first career (24 miles) but ----it simply is not safe.

Two years ago, I was working at a neighborhood school. A quite vibrant kindergarten student was killed. She was riding on the sidewalk, a car was in the path so she maneuvered into the street and was mowed down by a speeding car. Her sisters, friends and classmates observed her flying up in the air and landing 60 feet on her head. She never recovered. The witnesses state she was singing while riding and had the biggest smile on her face. The guy stopped and was inconsolable--however he was speeding, blasting loud music----

My friends and fellow riders state it is only a matter of time before I am hit or killed. I can't stay off my bicycle. I really love riding but...in Florida my experience has been--:(

There appears to be this quite nasty aura of aggressive thinking--and a stereotype--bicyclists have DUIs, are crack addicts and/or prostitutes.

I note cyclists on average bicycles, Wal-Marts or old beaters are quite friendly. My experience: the road cycling crew have not been very ...nice.

Riding at night (midnight to be exact) is so relaxing. The weather is cool. I love it. Unfortunately, again--I know this is a generalization but as a native Floridian I have to state: people in this state have a very serious problem with minding their own business.

Riding alone is like having a sign on your forehead, "Yes! Please disturb my peace!"

You cannot walk alone--people consider you a threat. Riding alone--you must be looking for drugs. It is bizarre. I only stay because parental obligations and my careers. Otherwise, I would move to Montana, Oregon--somewhere remote.




:(