Here's what someone sent to our local newspaper. This motorist used almost every "I hate cyclist" cliche that could be used. The scariest part is this motorist is out there on the road somewhere nearby.

http://www.hometownnewsol.com/rantsnraves.html Scroll down to see "Cyclist Frustration"
The text of the rant:
Bicyclist frustration
This is in regard to the bicycles. Again I was held up and put in danger by a person on a bicycle on the road. Even though there was a sidewalk parallel to the road, they chose to ride in harm’s way, and why, I don’t know. Is there a reason these people feel that they have a right to endanger others as well as people driving a car? The roads were built for cars and trucks; they weren’t built for bicycles.
What happens, God forbidding, if a motorist hits a person riding a bicycle? First time that happens, the bicyclist becomes hurt or even worse than that. Secondly, the driver would usually be sued, probably lose everything he’s ever worked for in his life, all because of a bicyclist that wanted to ride down the center of the road and show they have the authority to do that.
What makes people do these crazy things? I’ll never understand. Hopefully, they’ll stop doing it and take other people into consideration. They put their self in danger, they put me in danger, they put everybody around them in danger just so they can – it must be an ego thing.
I hope this makes it in the paper. Maybe some of these bicyclists will see theirselves and not do that. Ride on the sidewalk if you have to, but they’re not doing that.
Editor’s note: Florida Statute 316.2065 gives bicyclists the right to ride on the road itself, though they are to ride as close to the right-hand curb or edge of the road as possible, unless they are passing another bicycle or vehicle, preparing to make a left-turn, or avoiding obstructions and hazards that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand edge of the road. On a one-way highway with two or more marked lanes, bicyclists may ride as close to the left-hand curb as practicable.

At least the newspaper editor did a public service by adding the reference to the Florida Traffic Code that says the cyclist does have a right to be there. I sent an email to the newspaper thanking them for adding the clarification. Heaven forebid, other motorist should read this and start thinking the same way... ooops, to late.

d.tipton

This person is certainly ignorant (and probably stupid), but does not seem to be a danger to cyclists. He/she is clearly worried about getting sued if a cyclist is hit, so presumably he/she is careful not to hit anyone.

When people start talking about "tort reform" or "stopping nuisance lawsuits," remember how much the fear of litigation protects innocent citizens from ignorant people like this letter writer.

Poor baby. It's so sad that the big bad bicyclists put him in such unspecified danger. He's a brave motorist to take such risks with all those crazy two wheelers running rampant in his town.

I can't tell you how many times I've been driving my 5,000lb Toyota Landcruiser down the road, and nearly get wiped out by some 150lb menace on his 20lb road bike. Those guys must go 20MPH! Imagine what would happen to me in my steel cocoon if he hit me. Terrifying.

At least the newspaper editor did a public service by adding the reference to the Florida Traffic Code that says the cyclist does have a right to be there. I sent an email to the newspaper thanking them for adding the clarification...

d.tipton

- - Thanks for sending the email. Did the paper print it?

There is a key phrase used by the author of the letter:
" ... all because of a bicyclist that wanted to ride down the center of the road... "

I, for one, really don't know the circumstance that prompted the letter, but if the cyclist really was riding down the "center of the road", then the motorist might have a right to complain. As all responsible cyclists should also complain.

.

The roads were built for cars and trucks; they weren’t built for bicycles.


Interesting statement. I was always under the impression that the roads were built for horse & carriage. Cars have only been widely using them for the last 70 - 80 years.

And actually the first US nation wide road improvement effort was spurred by bicyclists.

THE GOOD ROADS MOVEMENT
There initially was a great deal of rural resentment against "elitist" idle rich bicyclists by farmers who feared that road improvements would increase property taxes. The League of American Wheelmen then began an educational program for the "good roads movement". They claimed that good rural highways would increase land values, open new markets for food, provide consumer access to manufactured goods, increase school and church attendance, end rural poverty and isolation, reduce wear and tear on horses and wagons, and save money on road maintenance. To support their cause they placed articles in magazines such as Outing, Century, and Scribner's and produced their own journal, Good Roads. They also allied with other organizations with a rural or agricultural focus, such as the national Grange and the Eastern Seaboard Association, supporting such projects as a continuous highway connecting Boston and Washington D.C., which would include a rebuilding of the Boston Post Road through Connecticut. In 1892, these organizations formed the National League for Good Roads, whose mandate was to campaign for state aid for roads and to push the establishment of the National Commission on Highways. The newly formed League was run by several prominent Wheelmen, including Arthur Pope, as well as some distinguished road reform proponents such as General Roy Stone of New York and Senator Charles Manderson of Nebraska. State divisions of the league worked for state appropriations to improve roads and drafted model state-aid laws. On a national level, their work resulted in an appropriation of $10,000 to the Department of Agriculture in 1893 for the creation of the Office of Road Inquiry (ORI), a bureau whose mandate was to provide information on improving roads. General Roy Stone was to be its head. Placing the ORI (the forerunner of the Federal Highway Administration) in the Agriculture Department signified the federal acceptance that rural roads needed improvement more than city streets, particularly to allow farmers to get their goods to markets. The machinery was now in place to head the nation and Connecticut toward improved roads. The ORI provided a center of information for a locally oriented good roads movement and created model legislation for the formation of state highway departments, legislation that was initially drafted by Stone. New Jersey (1891) and Massachusetts (1892) immediately formed highway departments. Connecticut requested copies of the model legislation and California, Maryland, New York and Vermont also began to plan for state highway departments. Clearly, roads were on their way to improvement.


http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?a=1380&Q=259692&dotPNavCtr=%7C40015%7C

This person is certainly ignorant (and probably stupid), but does not seem to be a danger to cyclists. He/she is clearly worried about getting sued if a cyclist is hit, so presumably he/she is careful not to hit anyone.


Wrong, the root of the rants is in his first sentence.

This is in regard to the bicycles. Again I was held up and put in danger by a person on a bicycle

Completely laughable, he was put in danger? Danger from what?

The rest of his ignorat garbage is a result of him trying to make it sound like that was not the SOLE reason of his complaint (re: referring to cycilsts own saftey, yeah right like you would give a **** about that). And the his argument about "getting sued" to get other motorists on his side.

What a piece of garbage.

For some reason, I assumed a woman wrote this. Again, I hate being held up by cyclists. They always do that, and then I'm put in danger by having to drive at or under the speed limit.

- - Thanks for sending the email. Did the paper print it? ...

I just got the paper out of the mail today (03-19, Saturday) and replied today. It's a local community newspaper. Not one of those biased newspapers you have to pay for. It's a weekly newspaper so won't see it in print until next week (if printed at all).
I'm not in a bike club but know that there are a few around. I'm hoping the local club members
respond to the article as well. I think I'll hit their websites and forward them the link also.

I've read most of the sources for vehicular cycling and this article in the newspaper caught my eye.
Seems the writer took all "pro-motorist" positions and dumped it into one article. Never seen something like this so close to home.

The newspapers coverage area is Merritt Island, Cocoa Beach, and Cape Canaveral, FL. The article was in the Viewpoint section so essentially it's the Opinion section and was not an article that the newspaper itself was writing.

Again, I'm glad to see that someone on the staff of the newspaper is aware of the Florida Traffic Law and added to the rant to show that bikes do have a right to use roads.

d.tipton

The pedal on the left, or the center pedal if you have a clutch, will slow your vehicle down to avoid hitting anything. Some people need to be reminded of that fact constintanly.

- - Thanks for sending the email. Did the paper print it?

There is a key phrase used by the author of the letter:
" ... all because of a bicyclist that wanted to ride down the center of the road... "

I, for one, really don't know the circumstance that prompted the letter, but if the cyclist really was riding down the "center of the road", then the motorist might have a right to complain. As all responsible cyclists should also complain.

.

There is alot missing from the rant as far as details go. One of the exceptions in the Florida Traffic Code that allows a cyclist to ride away from the right is if the lane is not wide enough to allow a another vehicle (typically motor vehicle) to pass safely in the same lane. So if the lane was narrow enough to warrant riding away from the right side, the cyclist could infact be in the middle of the lane legally. This may not have anything to do with the circumstances the ranter was ranting about.

d.tipton

This is in regard to the bicycles. Again I was held up and put in danger by a person on a bicycle on the road.
Held up by a bicyclist? Where are your driving skills, Mr. Motorist?

Put in danger? Again, I have to ask: where are your driving skills? Your lack of skill is what's dangerous.

Even though there was a sidewalk parallel to the road, they chose to ride in harm’s way, and why, I don’t know.
Harm's way? Mr. Motorist, are you saying a bicycle on the road where you are driving is in "harm's way?" If so, you need to have your license revoked!

Is there a reason these people feel that they have a right to endanger others as well as people driving a car? The roads were built for cars and trucks; they weren’t built for bicycles.
Mr. Motorist, you should study your history, and also the vehicle code.

What happens, God forbidding, if a motorist hits a person riding a bicycle? First time that happens, the bicyclist becomes hurt or even worse than that. Secondly, the driver would usually be sued, probably lose everything he’s ever worked for in his life, all because of a bicyclist that wanted to ride down the center of the road and show they have the authority to do that.
Mr. Motorist, here you admit the cyclist has the authority to ride on the road. Secondly, you admit the courts would award legal damages for your negligence if you hit the cyclist who is lawfully operating on the road.

What makes people do these crazy things? I’ll never understand.
Mr. Motorist, perhaps you never will understand. By your own admission, the cyclist is lawful and your negligence could get you sued. As a wise man once said, "It's better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

(Thanks, D. Tipton, for the quotes.)

As a wise man once said, "It's better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

That's actually a paraphrase from an old book called The Bible, if I recall correctly.

For some reason, I assumed a woman wrote this. Again, I hate being held up by cyclists. They always do that, and then I'm put in danger by having to drive at or under the speed limit.

I got the impression that this was an older person. I sense that they are worried about getting hit from behind by another car because they are going slow behind the cyclist.

i saw a ton of these in my paper this summer. most were crappy rants that were from people who did not know that cyclists have a right to ride on the road, but there was one that made a very good point. It said that he [the driver] had no problem with bikes on the road. his problem was when cyclists rode four or five wide and blocked the entire road without acknowledging when a car was trying to get around them .He suggested that groups of cyclists should ride no more than two abreast, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. i guess my point was that, while motorists do seem to ***** a lot and not understand the laws that grant us protection, we always say that we have equal rights, and yet so many of us fail to respect motrists while demanding that they respect us. I know that the majority of cyclists are perfectly respectful and reasonable to motrists and are law abiding riders, but the ones that aren't seem to ruin it for the rest of us. sorry if it was a little OT, but i guess the letter to the paper part strirred up some memmories

Those packs of roadies, bunch of road hogs. Terrible.

Sometimes papers print stuff like that to get more letters in. Especially if they printed it with those glaring grammatical errors and an editors note about what the law really is underneath.

With all the complaining we (me too!) do here about cagers, it's hard to fathom why we get upset when they do the same thing. :)

If you think about it, this motorist ignorance on getting sued by cyclists is probably keeping us alive! If he discovered how lax the courts are in convicting someone who kills a cyclist, I can just imagine the kind of monster he would turn into!

The only danger this motorist has is with his own kind!

This is in regard to the bicycles. Again I was held up and put in danger by a person on a bicycle on the road. Even though there was a sidewalk parallel to the road, they chose to ride in harm’s way, and why, I don’t know. Is there a reason these people feel that they have a right to endanger others as well as people driving a car? The roads were built for cars and trucks; they weren’t built for bicycles.
What happens, God forbidding, if a motorist hits a person riding a bicycle? First time that happens, the bicyclist becomes hurt or even worse than that. Secondly, the driver would usually be sued, probably lose everything he’s ever worked for in his life, all because of a bicyclist that wanted to ride down the center of the road and show they have the authority to do that.
What makes people do these crazy things? I’ll never understand. Hopefully, they’ll stop doing it and take other people into consideration. They put their self in danger, they put me in danger, they put everybody around them in danger just so they can – it must be an ego thing.
I hope this makes it in the paper. Maybe some of these bicyclists will see theirselves and not do that. Ride on the sidewalk if you have to, but they’re not doing that.

Translation: I don't know how to drive, or how to pass a slower moving vehicle and I certainly don't know the motor vehicle code for my state. And I have no intention of trying to learn any of this as long as I can still drive my car without having to know these things.

Here's what someone sent to our local newspaper. This motorist used almost every "I hate cyclist" cliche that could be used. The scariest part is this motorist is out there on the road somewhere nearby.



There is nothing scary about this motorist who is simply stupid, seemingly not aggressive however.

That's actually a paraphrase from an old book called The Bible, if I recall correctly.

Actually it is a quote from an old book called The Tao Te Ching :D

Geez, didn't you Aussies ever watch the old Kung Fu series? :rolleyes:

Key here is education. Before cycling (and comuting) I had no idea that bikes were allowed on the road and thus while totally wrong, the assumption of some people should be expected.

I think cycling organizations should lobby that bicycle facts be emphasized on DMV tests, maybe a few public safety commercials made as I'm sure we'll all be surprised that some people who we think are just being jerks just really don't know any better.

Sometimes papers print stuff like that to get more letters in...
You mean newspapers have trolls just like newsgroups do. In the immortal words of Johnny Carson, I did not know that.
d.tipton

I think the guy should lay off his crack pipe... Its probalby some fat **** hick who drives his beat up chevy drinks beer all the time and has NO friends...

Actually it is a quote from an old book called The Tao Te Ching :D

Geez, didn't you Aussies ever watch the old Kung Fu series? :rolleyes:

I did when I was little, but then again, I'm not an Aussie.

I did when I was little, but then again, I'm not an Aussie.


:lol: Sorry, I forget that sometimes location has nothing to do with nationality.

Anyway I remember that quote becase it was one of the few things said that actually made sense.

That's actually a paraphrase from an old book called The Bible, if I recall correctly.
YOU can't even admit --- in that YOU have NO capability in following that guideline of keeping YOUR mouth shut.

Sadly, this is a typical reaction to anything that isn't on the road with 4 wheels in Florida. That includes pedestrians, motorcycles and bicycles. That's one of the reasons why we have one of the highest accident/death totals for pedestrians.

The letter deserves a factual, cordial, intelligent response, preferably from a Florida-based bicyclist. Do not start a flame war and do not descend to the writer's level, but take the high ground, even admitting, for example, that there are bicyclists who do ride irresponsibly (e.g. unlit at night, wrong side of the road, violating right-of-way of other vehicles, etc.), and pointing out that such cyclists endanger lawful vehicular cyclists.

I think the guy should lay off his crack pipe... Its probalby some fat **** hick who drives his beat up chevy drinks beer all the time and has NO friends...

While we're tossing out stereotypes, I'd say that, judging from the manglish, it's a little Chinese guy in one of them massive land yachts. If that was me, I probably wouldn't have much confidence in my own driving abilities either.

While we're tossing out witty quotes: "There's nothing worse than being wrong at the top of your voice." - forgotten attribution.

And while we're tossing out legal advice, kudos to the editors for their correction, but I'd wager that the word isn't 'possible' but rather 'practicable' (please check this). There's an important difference. Thank them all the same, but point out the correct wording.

YOU can't even admit --- in that YOU have NO capability in following that guideline of keeping YOUR mouth shut.

The last thread was closed. Leave the argument there. If you want to argue with him about the finer points of...well whatever you are going on about, please PM him and leave us out of it.

Maelstrom
MOD

Can you imagine, me being critical of cyclists...But, one instance comes to mind where cyclists were in the wrong, possibly encouraging idiots to go on a rant such as this one in Florida.
But, we have a beautiful road east of Bonsall circling the crest of a really beautiful valley south of Mt.Palomar...More than once, I spotted an out of town club riding 2-3 abreast atop this ridge..It is two narrow lanes...Cars would back up and the cyclists not yield...The neighbors got to hate cyclists....Finally, another Saturday, I noticed a police patrol on a motorcycle about the time cyclists show up in this area...
After a couple Saturdays of this police harassment this club got the idea of how to make for better community relations..
California same as most states..Cyclists can ride on the road, but as far to the right as possible...I think that generally means single file..
This Florida goon is a wacko, but lets do our part to not encourage idiots such as this...

YOU can't even admit --- in that YOU have NO capability in following that guideline of keeping YOUR mouth shut.

The last thread was closed. Leave the argument there. If you want to argue with him about the finer points of...well whatever you are going on about, please PM him and leave us out of it.

Maelstrom
MOD


It appears he's been told. About time!

Hey Expat, whatever did you do to this molten character? I mean, I presume he is hoeing into you for some reason... that is, if I could make any sense of his almost unintelligible postings.

Seems to me molten = meltdown. Or maybe this guy has picked on you to progressively close down various threads across the board.

It appears he's been told. About time!

You report, we work. :)

Hey Expat, whatever did you do to this molten character? I mean, I presume he is hoeing into you for some reason... that is, if I could make any sense of his almost unintelligible postings.

Seems to me molten = meltdown. Or maybe this guy has picked on you to progressively close down various threads across the board.


My apologies to anyone who lets their curiosity get the best of them. He's followed me from this thread:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=88752&page=1&pp=25

And no, he doesn't make much sense, as you can see from post 66 in that thread. Whatever, I'm not losing any sleep over it.

[edit] I should note that if I'm ever in the Oceanside area, I'll track him down and have a word with him.

http://www.hometownnewsol.com/rantsnraves.html
Well, I just received the April 1 issue and only the shortest response to the "frustrated" ranter was printed (paper real estate issue I presume) however there are several responses listed on the papers website in the rants-n-raves section.
Follow the link above to see the responses the newspaper posted.
d.tippy

Sometimes papers print stuff like that to get more letters in. Especially if they printed it with those glaring grammatical errors and an editors note about what the law really is underneath.

And I think an newspaper in Australia got caught out having Letters to the Editor from a person that didn't exist.

I was riding on a road the other day, that I had not been on in a few years, and noticed a few of these for the first time. (Swansea, Mass.)

With work other towns can be encouraged to put these up too. At least it's something constructive that can be done.

I went to that page and damn there's a lot of responses from cyclists in the rants and raves section:

In response to ‘Bicyclist Frustration’

I would like to be the first in applauding the editor’s response to this particular rant.
I am also a cyclist, and no other recreation or hobby has caused me to study the Florida Traffic Code more than cycling – not even taking my driver's test for automobiles.
Thank you for providing a public service by letting the public know that the Florida Traffic Code considers a bicycle operated on a public roadway as a vehicle and therefore has all the rights as all other vehicles on the roadway.
With these rights comes the responsibility of operating their bicycle in obedience to all traffic laws. This is where a lot of cyclists fall short.
There are many drivers on the road today that feel the same as the “frustrated” motorist, but this is due to the general lack of familiarity with the traffic law.
The ranter wrote that they were “held up and put into danger” by a bicyclist. By that logic, a slow-moving motor vehicle would also need to be off the road. Where does it stop? Can only the fastest vehicles stay on the road?
“They put themselves in harm’s way…” Statistically speaking, if a cyclist is operating their bicycle as a vehicle on the roadway, they are 2.5 times less likely to be in a bicycle accident than if they were on the sidewalk or bike lane.
“What happens, God forbidding, if a motorist hits a person riding a bicycle?” The same thing that happens when a motorist hits another motorist: People die.
Interstate 95 through Brevard County is notorious for costing people their lives. Yet people still drive it. No motor vehicles have been banned from using the interstate, yet some motorists want to insist on banning cyclists from the roads though the Florida Traffic Codes say they have the same rights as all other vehicles.
“What makes people do crazy things?” I ask the same question. Why limit the scope to cyclists?
“It must be an ego thing…” Actually, it’s not an ego thing. Do all motorists drive on the roads to show off because they have egos? A few do. But mostly, motorists use the roads to get from one place to another. The cyclists are generally doing the same thing on their vehicles.
“Ride on the sidewalk if you have to” – and what happens if there is no sidewalk? And what if there is no shoulder, though there’s no law requiring cyclists to ride there, either?
Believe it or not, a cyclist is 2.5 times more likely to be hit by motorist if the cyclist is on a sidewalk than they would be riding on the road.
The ranter seems to have the extreme of attitudes I’ve experienced on the road as a cyclist. For the most part, motorists generally don’t want to run over a cyclist. And there is a small percentage on the other end of the spectrum that are very courteous to cyclists.
I believe in sharing the road. One advantage I've experienced since riding a bike on the roadway is that I feel it makes me a better motor vehicle driver. Everyone should try it.

Roads were built for people, not cars and trucks

Will someone explain to the gentleman who believes that he was (a) held up by a cyclist and (b) was put in danger by the cyclist, that the roads were built for people – not cars, trucks, etc. How people choose to travel is up to them.
Will he explain why he had an absolute right, though it’s not enshrined in law, to occupy the cyclist’s particular space on the road, rather than the rider? And how did the cyclist endanger him? I have never heard of a single collision between motor vehicle and bicycle in which the driver came off worse than the bicycle rider. Also, can he explain why would the driver lose everything he had worked for if he hit a cyclist, unless he was deemed at fault for the accident? And can he explain exactly what he does whenever he’s held up by another motorist?
Bluntly, the original ranter is an ignoramus. Cycling on the highway, and doing so safely, is practiced by millions all over the world, even though we share the road with people like him. – Mike Healey, in the United Kingdom
P.S.: Ain’t the Web wonderful?
P.P.S.: Cycling on the sidewalk endangers pedestrians and riders alike and is more likely to lead to collisions at intersections. Cyclists are 2 to 3 times more likely to have an accident on the sidewalk than on the road.
Editor’s note: A study of police reports in Palo Alto, California, from July 1985 to June 1989 indicated that collisions with motor vehicles accounted for 314 of 371 bicycle accidents for which good police reports were available. The average cyclist on the sidewalk in this study incurred a risk that was 1.8 times as great as their risk on the roadway. The risk of riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is higher than riding on the roadway for both sexes, for all ages, and especially for travel against traffic on the sidewalk.

Bicycle education helps

Love the Hometown News. I really appreciated the editor's note regarding the misinformed caller.
Besides having the right to the roads, bicycles are banned from many community sidewalks. The caller should have done a little “homework” before calling.

A bicyclist’s view

On a peacemaking mission here, I am a bicycle rider. I try my best to adhere to the Florida state law, which states that it is my responsibility to ride as closely to the edge of the curb as possible. I give hand signals wherever appropriate, and unless I have to turn left out of a one-way street, I do not enter the fast lane of traffic. I submit right-of-way to all four-corner stops. And common sense instructs that the pedestrian pathway is not the best place for the bike, for the sake of people – especially the elderly and children – who may be walking or playing there.
To respond to the frustration of one person who wrote recently, I can understand their dilemma. Perhaps their frustration stems from inadequate understanding of what it is like to have to rely upon bicycling as a sole means of transportation.
At the age of 50, to maneuver a cycle is a daunting challenge in itself, for some people. I wonder, have you tried it lately? There are the cracks in the pavement, many twigs, chunks of trash, rocks and other obstacles of which one must be wary in the gutter lane. There are mean people in cars who like to blow on their horn to see if they can scare you. There are a few here and there who won’t stop for you to go by when it is your turn at a stop sign, and occasionally among the younger group, there are those who shout obscenities at you, just for fun.
There was a time when I was disabled and could not drive. I relied on the bicycle as my only transportation to work. I also had to deliver a child to daycare on the back of a bike. Sometimes during rainstorms, I would arrive at my low-paying job completely drenched. The good news was that no one at work could notice I had also cried my way through the entire eight-mile distance.
In town, we have many situations in which able-bodied men and women must drive themselves to work by means of a bicycle, or choose not to work. They only have the two choices. We also have many in our community who consider it work to maintain a certain level of physical fitness, and to those my hat is off. The dedication it takes to get out there in the hot Florida sun, no matter what the weather produces, is something I do not possess.
Egomaniacs? Crazy people? People who want to injure you in some way? Have another look at the human beings you are accusing of these things. I would ask that most respectfully.

I was riding on a road the other day, that I had not been on in a few years, and noticed a few of these for the first time. (Swansea, Mass.)

With work other towns can be encouraged to put these up too. At least it's something constructive that can be done.

Another thing to be added to the sign is a picture of a pedestrian.