Originally Posted by
justblues
I thought that car drivers were inattentive when it came to bicycles, but that's nothing compared to pedestrians. There is a greenway with a paved bike path near my home. There is a clearly marked walking lane and a clearly marked bicycle lane. Guess where the walkers prefer to walk?...I managed to not injure anyone yesterday but there were some close calls. Fortunately, I was on a hybrid so I could go off road when needed to avoid pedestrians.
Originally Posted by
Biker395
It's like you're singing my song.
Yes, it is irritating when pedestrians ignore plainly marked lines delineating space designated for bikes and space designated for pedestrians….I've come to the conclusion that the people that do that fit into one of two categories: (1) the ignorant (2) the arrogant. I think the ignorant fall prey to the malady affecting all humans (including cyclists) ... they aren't very good at considering others, particularly when the "others" aren't doing what they are doing. That's why a lot of motorists give cyclists a hard time, and consider pedestrians a nuisance ... why cyclists consider pedestrians a nuisance ... and why pedestrians consider both motorists and cyclists a menace. The arrogant ... well ... they're just ***holes…
So if you're going to ride on the bike paths (and it doesn't matter that they are not MUPs ... most don't understand or care to understand the distinction), you have to press your chill button ... and sometimes hold it down ... and expect the unexpected.
Originally Posted by
Biker395
There are places hereabouts where the bike paths are preferable for a number of reasons:
1. Faster transit (no stop signs).
2. Alternative roads are bike unfriendly (high volume of high speed traffic, little shoulder and bad sightlines)
3. Better views.
I have the advantage to take or leave the Bike Paths (or MUPS), and usually the Road is preferable. With that said, I think the above quotes express a remarkable ME FIRST attitude, especially on the usually congenial and mellow Fifty-Plus sub forum.
Originally Posted by
spdracr39
Treat pedestrians like you would want to be treated by cars. they are entry level users and don't understand the rules.
Originally Posted by
Carbonfiberboy
I ride a road bike. It's a vehicle. I ride it on the road.
From a recent parallel thread on the Commuter sub forum,
"how do you alert your presence to other pedestrians/cyclists/motorists?":
Originally Posted by
FBinNY
Not saying this is a legal definition (so let's not argue the point) but
I consider MUPs to be pedestrian paths on which bicycles and other wheeled users are welcome.
The definition is handy because, while it doesn't change anything,
it does affect my outlook and lower my expectations regarding pedestrian conduct. I announce my presence as a courtesy, and hope they'll respond by moving over, but I don't get upset or rattled it they don't, and will go around them on the lawn if necessary.
…It's not ideal if I'm trying to make time, but is very workable, and if I want to go faster, I use the roads.
Originally Posted by
Jim from Boston
I once violated a ped's space (on the street), and went back and apologized. Afterwards I wrote my cyclist's golden rule, and later wrote a corollary:
Originally Posted by
Jim from Boston
I have a golden rule of cycling, “Do unto the peds, as you would have the cagers do unto you.” So while peds should be more alert, walking on a MUP is a pretty carefree activity, whereas cycling demands more attention, and cyclists IMO, are possibly more vulnerable in a crash.
The ability of a cyclist to do damage in a crash I would say is intermediate between that of a ped and an automobile, but I think a cyclists’s own safety demands that he/she be the most attentive of the three, and frankly assume the others are jerks.