majority of riding is in violation of VC principles- what to do?

[Bekologist]

I ride MILES AND MILES of roads with parking on the side of the road or shoulders that allow motorists to pull over and stop if needed.

EVERY TIME A CAR PASSES ME on my left I am violating the safety rules of avoiding riding to the right of cars that might pull right or park to my right-

- What to do? My road position conflicts with vehicular rules......Every time I get passed it's in violation of the vehicular edict of avoiding riding to the right of where cars can turn right or across my path to pull over-

WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS VC CONTRADICTION?

[AlmostTrick]

Make a confession to Father Forester in the VC confession thread. This isn't your first time so you won't be let off easily.

[noisebeam]

Are you saying that in your fine state that motorists when pulling onto a shoulder to park cut across it? Strange.

Al

[The Human Car]

You are obviously suffering from motorist-pulling-over-to-fix-a-flat superstition. The solution is to confront your fears and put tacks in the road so motorists actually have to pull over and then you can pass them vehicularly on the left.

[TheWheelman]

I ride MILES AND MILES of roads with parking on the side of the road or shoulders that allow motorists to pull over and stop if needed.

EVERY TIME A CAR PASSES ME on my left I am violating the safety rules of avoiding riding to the right of cars that might pull right or park to my right-

- What to do? My road position conflicts with vehicular rules......Every time I get passed it's in violation of the vehicular edict of avoiding riding to the right of where cars can turn right or across my path to pull over-

WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS VC CONTRADICTION?

Just go grovel to your local road-governing bureaucrat for a segregationist stripe to be painted to the left of you. (Oh, I forgot: you already do that anyhow. Well, what I mean is just don't forget this time to disclose to the bureaucrat that you don't represent cyclists.) Once your beloved segregationist stripe is painted, you'll be in full compliance with VC-, i.e. the car haters' version of VC in which no car may enter your space.

[Bekologist]

wheel, you are SO caustic.

it's not about the stripe. did you even read what I was describing?

vehicular cycling edicts state a vehicular bicyclist shouldn't position themselves to the right of cars that might potentially pull to the right, turn right, or pull across the path of the bicyclist.

To ride VC I need to be positioned so no cars pass when there's a possibility of them turning in front of me, correct? Destination positioned so I'm not riding to the right of potentially turning traffic, correct?

Part of the VC argument against bike lanes at intersections is that they put bikes to the right of potentially turning traffic. AL (Noisebeam), a VC exemplar, is SOOO paranoid about hooking traffic he wants bike lanes stopped 200 feet before EVERY residential driveway and curb cut, no matter how minor or unused.

Well, to continue the logic of the VC hook paranoia, I'm concerned about all the miles and miles I ride where there's parking or shoulders and cars are passing me- a car could turn across my path at any moment to park or pull over!!

How do I manage the VC "hooking car" phobia in wide lanes? Ride 18 feet from the parked cars?

See, wheel, EVERY TIME A CAR PASSES ME and there's parking or a shoulder, I've violated the VC principle of never being positioned to the right of potentially turning traffic. This has nothing to do with bike infrastructure, fearmonger wheel.

[John Forester]

wheel, you are SO caustic.

it's not about the stripe. did you even read what I was describing?

vehicular cycling edicts state a vehicular bicyclist shouldn't position themselves to the right of cars that might potentially pull to the right, turn right, or pull across the path of the bicyclist.

To ride VC I need to be positioned so no cars pass when there's a possibility of them turning in front of me, correct? Destination positioned so I'm not riding to the right of potentially turning traffic, correct?

Part of the VC argument against bike lanes at intersections is that they put bikes to the right of potentially turning traffic. AL (Noisebeam), a VC exemplar, is SOOO paranoid about hooking traffic he wants bike lanes stopped 200 feet before EVERY residential driveway and curb cut, no matter how minor or unused.

Well, to continue the logic of the VC hook paranoia, I'm concerned about all the miles and miles I ride where there's parking or shoulders and cars are passing me- a car could turn across my path at any moment to park or pull over!!

How do I manage the VC "hooking car" phobia in wide lanes? Ride 18 feet from the parked cars?

See, wheel, EVERY TIME A CAR PASSES ME and there's parking or a shoulder, I've violated the VC principle of never being positioned to the right of potentially turning traffic. This has nothing to do with bike infrastructure, fearmonger wheel.

This whole issue is just one more example of deliberate misuse of words, semantic foolishness. The instruction to cyclists is: "Never overtake on the right-hand side of vehicles that can, or might, turn right."

[Bekologist]

jhon, you're dodging the issue.

I'm not talking about overtaking cars on a bike, Im illuminating the glaring VC contradiction of being inapropriately destination positioned every time there is the combination of on street parking or a shoulder with a motorist passing a bicyclist.

Or is it okay in the VC lexiconflagration to bicycle in a position that leaves the bicyclist vulnerable to right hooks from turning traffic?

[sbhikes]

The answer is so clear, Bek. I'm so ashamed you haven't figured it out. It's the steely-eyed stare. Just do that to every passing driver to show your alpha doggedness and they won't dare cut across your path. It's the antidote to any and all contradictory VC situations. As long as you're steely-eyed staring and fanny wagging and making gesticulations of various body parts, you're proving your VC mettle and nobody will ever mess with you.

[Bekologist]

Yeah, I've tried the steely eyed glare at traffic behind me but doubt they can see my scowl in a take-a-look mirror.

I figure the VC cure is riding ON the first dashed stripe or fully to the left of the first thru lane, taking the second thru lane, but wouldn't I then need mirrors on both sides of my helmet?

[StrangeWill]

Make the best choice in relation to the situation, think on your feet, you can't run a blanket rule over the ever changing environment of the road. You'll need to apply what you've learned as things happen.

And generally, you'll always be at risk no matter how you ride, so generally you'll just be fighting the chances that everyone else fights when they get on a bike or drive in a car, just use what you've learned to minimize the chances.

In this situation: It's extremely rare to have a car randomly pull over, and you'd probably hear the flat also, not to mention I don't see them being abrupt with a flat tire, so chances are you're riding good for the chances of your situation of occurring.

[Bekologist]

strange will, it's the principle. I've got a lot of miles under my saddle - I've been taking the lane since the 1970's.

Noisebeam is a great example of holding the VC fearmongering party line that a bike lane has to end 200 feet before the end of every driveway, no matter how minor, to minimize right hook positioning.

I propose that ALL riding done to the right of traffic when there's parking or a shoulder is in violation of right hook positioning edicts of the rabid VC.

if cars are passing you on your left and there's parking or a shoulder on your right, you're in a hookable position. No matter how wide the lane, no matter the stripes, etc.... 18 foot lane, parking on your right? even if you ride 10-15 feet from the parked cars, a motorist that's passing you on your left could pull over to park or just talk on the phone AT ANY MOMENT.

Ands it doesn't have to be in shared lanes... a month or so ago I posted about a motorist hooking me from a completely ajacent lane...

I ride MANY MILES in violation of VC destination positioning rules, and so do the rest of you.

A car passes you on the left, you're in violation of destination positioning rules of vehicular cycling if there's parking or a shoulder within -I'll use Noisebeam's metric - 200 feet.

I spread the shame and fear.

[John Forester]

jhon, you're dodging the issue.

I'm not talking about overtaking cars on a bike, Im illuminating the glaring VC contradiction of being inapropriately destination positioned every time there is the combination of on street parking or a shoulder with a motorist passing a bicyclist.

Or is it okay in the VC lexiconflagration to bicycle in a position that leaves the bicyclist vulnerable to right hooks from turning traffic?

Whatever you happen to write here, you set up this discussion as if the Effective Cycling instruction to cyclists were worded differently from what it is.

As for your latest question, the instruction has always been that in those locations where there is much right-turning traffic, the cyclist is advised to move left of its path, or, if not that far left, sufficiently far left to block it. However, the cyclist, any cyclist, remains vulnerable to right hook collisions; nobody knows how to stop all of them, and the kind of facilities that you, Bekologist, advocate make them more likely than do plain roadways. This is just another of your silly semantic games with little reference to fact.

[Bekologist]

JHON. Did I say anything about 'effective cycling' instruction?

Did I propose bike lanes as a solution to bicyclists being vulnerable to hooks?

Resoundingly, NO to both those followup questions.

The solutions, if there are any, would be to eliminate on-street parking, make the speed limit 15 MPH and make it illegal for cars to pass bicyclists, but that's something you and your fellow motoring lobbyists would never stand for.

I'm illuminating the glaring contradiction that the act of 'vehicular' cycling with cars passing bikes when there's side of road parking or shoulders is in violation of vehicular rules to not route thru traffic (bikes) to the right of potential right turns (parkers).

Capiche?

[syn0n]

Why be such an upstart and ride your bike there? Tell the world to go **** itself; get a Hummer.

[StrangeWill]

strange will, it's the principle. I've got a lot of miles under my saddle - I've been taking the lane since the 1970's.

Noisebeam is a great example of holding the VC fearmongering party line that a bike lane has to end 200 feet before the end of every driveway, no matter how minor, to minimize right hook positioning.

I propose that ALL riding done to the right of traffic when there's parking or a shoulder is in violation of right hook positioning edicts of the rabid VC.

if cars are passing you on your left and there's parking or a shoulder on your right, you're in a hookable position. No matter how wide the lane, no matter the stripes, etc.... 18 foot lane, parking on your right? even if you ride 10-15 feet from the parked cars, a motorist that's passing you on your left could pull over to park or just talk on the phone AT ANY MOMENT.

Ands it doesn't have to be in shared lanes... a month or so ago I posted about a motorist hooking me from a completely ajacent lane...

I ride MANY MILES in violation of VC destination positioning rules, and so do the rest of you.

A car passes you on the left, you're in violation of destination positioning rules of vehicular cycling if there's parking or a shoulder within -I'll use Noisebeam's metric - 200 feet.

I spread the shame and fear.

I figured you were talking about being passed on a two laned road, and being right hooked by people passing you.

[Helmet Head]

You're worried about being right hooked by someone passing you and then pulling into a midblock curbside parallel parking spot??? Stay out of the door zone (track at least 5' from the left edge of parked cars), Beck, and you'll be far enough left to practically eliminate this risk.

Much ado about nothin', as usual.

[Bekologist]

helm, I'm not worried, and your pithy 'advice' doesn't negate the contradiction of vehicular bicyclists riding to the right of potential right turning traffic.

This contradiction between vehicular cycling and the rules of the road is glaring and apparant.

unlike the fears of some in here who worry about nonexistant glass or invisible road debris as a potential problem for vehicular cyclists riding right, being to the right of potential right turning traffic IS a safety issue.

[invisiblehand]

EVERY TIME A CAR PASSES ME and there's parking or a shoulder, I've violated the VC principle of never being positioned to the right of potentially turning traffic. This has nothing to do with bike infrastructure, fearmonger wheel.

Interesting ...

I believe that cars driving to turn onto another road and continue on their way are a different animal than those pulling over to stop driving and therefore constitutes a different level of risk. But it is the case that drivers have pulled in front of me and stopped short to park.

[Bekologist]

differerent animal? interesting.

different level of risk? sounds right. I'd agree that a parking strip or residential driveway present low levels of risk from hooks, and that intersections generally provide a greater percentage of risk because more motorists might be actively turning right.

However, the scaling of risk doesn't nullify the glaring contradiction presented when vehicular cycling to the right of traffic in shareable lanes on a road that has parking or a shoulder. This position - to the right of traffic that might turn across your path - violates general rules of the road.

How do we VC stand for this disregard for the rules of the road? Consistently ride the center line or in the second lane over with helmet mirrors on both sides as I've already suggested?

Clearly, invisiblehand and myself are not the ONLY cyclists in America that have had motorists pull up short to park.

On a related note, and another thread.... steady faster traffic, shareable lane, driveway or minor intersection...where does the vehicular cyclist ride????

[StrangeWill]

helm, I'm not worried, and your pithy 'advice' doesn't negate the contradiction of vehicular bicyclists riding to the right of potential right turning traffic.

This contradiction between vehicular cycling and the rules of the road is glaring and apparant.

unlike the fears of some in here- (hint hint - Helemt head-) who's worried about nonexistant glass or invisible road debris as a potential problem for vehicular cyclists riding right, being to the right of potential right turning traffic IS a safety issue.

The thing is I'll have people tell me all day on my bike or in my car how I could be safer, however 99.9% of the time whoever is giving advice is totally not in the position to be giving it, I had someone that was pulling out without looking behind them BOX MY CAR into a parking space to tell me to not drive so fast because I could have clipped him, note: I have right of way, and was going the parking lot speed limit. May have been in 1st gear, but still the speed limit. He was the only one being a danger, yet he needed to stop and "educate" me. Cute, I almost busted his face with my maglite thinking he was going to rob me or something.

Bottom line: Dumb people feel like they need to educate the smart over anything.

I think being worried about every little thing while on the bike is the most dangerous thing to do, be aware, but don't think every piece of matter is out to get you.

Basically I'm waiting till we see some posts/news clippings of some uber-safe VCers.

[Roody]

It would be helpful to discuss in realistic terms things that a rider can do to minimize the risk of right hooks. Arguments ad absurdum are so junior high. Especially coming from a rider who, by his own admission, is a repeated victim of near right hooks.

[Bekologist]

roody, if you don't understand the contradiction, stay out of the debate.

sophmorically coming in and deriding me does nothing to lesssen my argument.

this may be slight hyperbole, but it isn't absurd-

Riding or driving to the right of traffic that can turn right or cut across ones' path is in violation of general rules of the road.

riding in a shareable lane position when there's parking or shoulders to pull over on is in violation of rules of the road. that car passing you MIGHT PARK OR PULL OVER. Bikes travelling to the right of potentially turning traffic is against vehicular rules, isn't it?

Like I said earlier, it isn't just invisiblehand and myself that have had motorists pull up short to park..... as you guys begin to add up the miles, roody, it will happen to you and helemt head someday, despite your best lane positioning intents and head's simpleton advice of 'five feet from the parked cars...'

How do the "vc" explain and cope with this vehicular contradiction? Acceptance? 18 feet to the left in a wide outside lane? helmet mirrors on both sides and an unwavering position from the dashed left lane stripe of every outside lane?

[Bekologist]

I guess the question for a whole seperate thread, roody, (and one that's likely been done before if you need some tips) is how does a bicyclist realistically reduce the risk of right hooks from motorists violating rules of the road while sharing lanes with faster traffic where there's parking or a shoulder?

I'm positive most of the forum readers here understand how to reduce the incidents of right hook. Despite that, even helmet felt he had to reiterate his overly rigid and unrealistic boilerplate 'five feet' rule advice

This thread is about the vehicular contradiction in shareable lane positions as cars pass alongside roads with parking or shoulders.

[Roody]

roody, if you don't understand the contradiction, stay out of the debate.

sophmorically coming in and deriding me does nothing to lesssen my argument.

this may be slight hyperbole, but it isn't absurd-

Riding or driving to the right of traffic that can turn right or cut across ones' path is in violation of general rules of the road.

riding in a shareable lane position when there's parking or shoulders to pull over on is in violation of rules of the road. that car passing you MIGHT PARK OR PULL OVER. Bikes travelling to the right of potentially turning traffic is against vehicular rules, isn't it?

Where do you get the absurd notion that it's not vehicular to have other vehicles traveling to the left of you? This happens every minute of every day that you ride a bike, provided you are slower than the cars. You'll have to explain yourself a lot better, or I'm going to continue to think you're just being absurd to make a "point" that can't be made with rational argument.

Like I said earlier, it isn't just invisiblehand and myself that have had motorists pull up short to park..... as you begin to add up the miles, roody, it will happen to you someday, despite your best lane positioning intents or head's simpleton advice of 'five feet from the parked cars...'

In my nearly 25,000 miles of city riding over the last six years, I've had a couple near-right-hooks. But since I learned better lane positioning, they've stopped happening to me.

How do the "vc" explain and cope with this vehicular contradiction? Acceptance? 18 feet to the left in a wide outside lane? helmet mirrors on both sides and an unwavering position from the dashed left lane stripe of every outside lane?

Sorry, your absurd arguments are not persuasive or useful. I would find it helpful if you provided some tips for avoiding right hooks, but I guess that would be asking for too much?