widmn

I'm a biker myself and I'm sorry but I have to say this and I don't want to flame, but I have to say it anyway.
Many bikers are seem so rude and thoughtless. They ride in the middle of the road holding up traffic with their expensive bikes going 20 MPH in a 30 or 40 zone. Some ride in clubs like gangs blocking the road for cars. They don't pull over in single file. They just keep on going. It may be legal but its also stupid.
Is there an answer to this problem on our highways???

Personally, I don't so this. I pull over to allow cars to go by and I even stop to give them the right of way. I know I can't go as fast as a car and I certainly won't win out in a contest. I believe that roads were built first for cars and trucks, then for other things.
please opine.

www.southernblades.com

DanFromDetroit

Are you looking for a career change ? I hear Clear Channel Communications is looking for a few good DJs. You look like you show some promise

Dan

caloso

Don't know where you're from widmn, but out here in the Golden State, cyclists have a right to be on any public road (with the exception of specified, controlled access freeways). And any vehicle overtaking another has the duty to do so safely.

And then there's the old canard that the roads were built for cars. In fact, the American road system was modernized in response to lobbying by cyclists. Do a search; it's been discussed many times.

widmn

In my mind, It doesn't matter what you think your rights are. If you p$%^s enough people off by arrogant rude behavior, your "rights" may be taken away. I believe there may be answers to this issue, but it is clearly an issue because I see other comments for other threads indicating it is a nationwide problem and we will never solve the issue if we just insist that we have the right to be A$3$%^^holes and keep on behaving like we own the road. We do not own the roads and if we are lucky, we may be privileged to keep on sharing them with our bigger larger brothers.

ChezJfrey

Too funny! Now, I'm off troll hunting. . . Anyone seen one?

Roughstuff

Actually on these discussion boards there are two RELATED, but not identical topics being discussed, and darned if I don't mix them up alot myself.

One is the issue of legal standing of bikes on the roadway and as many folks have made clear, the laws say that Bikes are entitled to their fair share of roadway along with any other vehicle.

The other issue is just roadway courtesy. Always an endangered species, i think it died a painful death over the last two decades. My attitude as a cyclist on the road has always been to feel i would be better off if the cars coming up behind me got past me as quickly and safely as possible. With my rear view mirror I find that 95% of the cars pull over far to the left almost as soon as I come into their view. The next four percent pull over and honk thankfully when I let them know they are behind me and wave them along.

Of that deadly 1% who don't or can't move over: I always have been a defensive rider. (I have been in exactly two collisions with a car on my bike: both were my fault! eek!) The situation I watch out for is the case where the rider, a passing car, and an oncoming car are all gonna come together at the same time on a two lane road. No one has anywhere to go! I try to avoid this by being proactive: sometimes I speed up, other times I slow down, so that all 3 vehicles don't come together. If its unavoidable sometimes I 'll just stop riding and let everything pass.

Most folks I talk to are riding in densely populated urban areas; short commutes to work or other rides. This isn't part of my market. For short distances (say, less than 3 miles) I almost always walk. For longer distances, I take a car. I use my bike for 30-40 mile training rides or long summer tours. Pardon my modesty, but I have never seen my bike as anything more than a secondary vehicle on the road. All the features which make it feasible for cars to ride swiftly on a fairly crowded road--turn signals and brake lights are the ones I usually talk about--either don't exist on bicycles or require you to remove your hands from the steering/braking mechanisms at the very moment you need them the most.

The goodwill generated by cyclists in the 1970s crossing the country as part of our bicentennial celebration has long been obliterated by sidewalk riding dirt bikers or delivery boys slamming down pedestrians in crosswalks. Cyclists are just going to have to earn it back, on person at a time.

Your point about single file is well taken. Similarly riders should be a safe distance apart...but my goodness your Lance Armstrong wannabees never thought of 'drafting' as tailgating.


roughstuff

temp1

There is enough room for both, just get allong. Sometimes I'm in a car's way, sometimes cars are in my way, but usually cars are in other car's way and I am long gone.

widmn

Roughstuff, My point exactly. You are a defensive good rider IMHO. A secondary vehicle who realizes that bikes are more manueverable and can stop quicker than cars. You are not who I am talking about. Its the 25 club guys Lance A.'s all in formation going 15 or 20mph who block traffic forever who are the problem for all bikers.

temp1

I almost took some of these people out once, curvy mountain roads, clots of riders going over the center line, no warning there would be riders, dangerous situation. Darwin award winners? I hope you are refering to extream situations like this.

Roughstuff

On my website I make it clear that trucks can, do and should 'own the roads.' Most truckers are far more courteous than the average automobile driver; they have a good view of the road because they are so much higher in their cabs, and they are hauling goods and services most of us want; not a bunch on snifflin' little urchins to a local mall. Long before drivers turned cell phones into just another distraction, truckers used their CBs to call in accidents, disabled vehicles, hazardous road conditions, and what have you.

roughstuff

ChezJfrey

Personally, I'll hold up as many autos as I please if the road warrants it. If I can stand getting to my destination at a speed of 18-20mph, so can everyone else - they'll just have to wait. Everyone behind me should have left earlier, or taken a different route.

See, these sentiments can go both ways. Your trip is no more, and no less important than anyone else's; even the person on a bicycle. Just because you're a wimp and must be protected against the weather in your car, doesn't make your transportation any more important or necessary than the cyclists. They don't (and shouldn't) have to cede the road to every damn vehicle they come across during their trip.

Why should the cyclist have to pull over and stop? Why not the cars? They can wait until the bicycle is gone, then proceed without the bother. Both of these vehicles are typically lugging (on average) one person to a destination that is only important to that individual. Neither of these individual's needs/desires warrant special consideration.

So, if you're in the car, waiting impatiently. . . get over it - you're not that special.

temp1

Can I get that on the back of a jersey?

Roughstuff

Wow...talk about unilateralism! Hold up those schoolbuses, ambulances, fresh/frozen food delivery vehicles, soccer moms off to pick up their kids, and most of all Ted Kennedy with his latest flame! Why don't we just make the national speed limit 18-20 mph and bicycles will have no problems under any circumstances? I doubt it.

roughstuff

widmn

"Why should the cyclist have to pull over and stop? Why not the cars? They can wait until the bicycle is gone, then proceed without the bother. Both of these vehicles are typically lugging (on average) one person to a destination that is only important to that individual. Neither of these individual's needs/desires warrant special consideration.

So, if you're in the car, waiting impatiently. . . get over it - you're not that special."

For the same reason they don't allow people to drive 40 MPH on the freeway. Most courtious slow moving trucks/drivers also pull off the road to allow faster moving traffic to pass. It should be no different with cycles. You are one of those people who obviously think that "you're more special" (read arrogant) than all of the motorists. You and your anger are part of the problem. Instead of trying to come up with solutions, you just say "screw em." Respectfully, You may also want to check into an anger management class.

Brillig

I sometimes ride in the middle of the road, but on a cheaper bike, so is that okay?

There are no rules for this, it varies by situation. When I am on tight windy roads (with no shoulders) appraoching a blind curve I will be in the middle of the lane to prevent those motorists who don't quite understand how to drive from trying to pass me at this point. The alternative is sticking to the side and putting my life in danger that a car will come in opposing traffic and the motorist will take me out in an effort to avoid a head-on collision. The sad truth is that many motorists don't think about this so it's our job to think for them.

I'm also into the lane as I need to be to avoid being doored if there are cars parked.

But I have NEVER held up traffic. Cars sometimes must wait five seconds for a break in opposing traffic before passing but that's the extent of it. If you are riding on roads that are busy enough that traffic is actually building up behind you then I agree you should move over and let them by or better yet, find a new route.

temp1

When I lived in Chicago I almost always rode in the middle of the lane or in the middle of the street, but that's because traffic moves so slow there and there were so many damn cars in the way. Most of the time you can forget the bike lane, its full of cars and I almost got run over by busses, twice.

widmn

Yes, on a cheaper bike that's OK. Bwahahaaaaaa.

caloso

Wow, now that you put it that way, I guess I'm wrong. I had no idea I was crippling the national economy and exacerbating the education crisis. And here I thought I was just trying to get to work on time. So naive I've been!

Please. I ride on the road, which my sales tax dollars have helped construct, and I obey the California Vehicle Code. I expect the drivers behind to obey the Vehicle Code too. I ride on the right, in a bike lane if provided or "as close to the curb as practicable." But I interpret "as close as practicable" liberally as necessary to ensure my safety. Not to ensure the convenience of drivers.
I consider it assertiveness. If you or a following motorist considers it arrogance, so be it.

RacerX

What it boils down to is this:
The law says you should be a defensive driver. Courtesy, not road rage. Priviledge not a right. Cyclists have the same rights as motorists on the road.

If a group of cyclists slows down a car for 30 seconds, all hell breaks loose and it's target practice on cyclists.

If it was a Mack truck slowing you down, would you be advocating "rude Mack truck drivers" get off the road?

The problem is the motorist's mentality that is so prevalant and accepted in society: Unability to cope with changing situations, rage and the idea you are not to be inconvienced- and if you are, violence is justified.

The problem isn't bikers.

Or do you find those silly crosswalks a major pain in the butt too?

ChezJfrey

RacerX, my post was a bit of sarcasm to illustrate exactly what you point out - imposing a slight inconvenience is tantamount to provoking hostility. I merely tried to show the all-too-common, one-way thinking that occurs when a typical driver encounters a bike: All bikes must yield to a car because, "My time is more important." It's just as valid to reverse this to, "All cars must yield to bikes, because their time is unimportant to me, the cyclist." Both views are eqally valid based on the flawed logic.

I don't purposely delay traffic, but if the conditions warrant me taking a traffic lane, I do so. And I will remove myself from it, out of courtesy, when I am able. Until then, cars behind will just have to wait until they are able to move beyond. We are all (legal users of the road) entitled to, and subjected to this.

Gee, sometimes you have to wait. . . you'd think the traffic jams would condition a driver to expect delays as a matter of course.

Edit to add: And Oregon just passed a law that requires autos to wait until a pedestrian is across ALL lanes of traffic at controlled stops before continuing across the crosswalk (even right turns must wait until the ped steps foot on the sidewalk at the other side). How impatient are people going to get while wating for someone to cross the entirety of a 4-lane, with center turn highway, before making their right turn? I'm thinking everybody will curse this law because it slows them down and nobody will abide by it. . . or as we've already experienced in January, someone will jump into impatiently into the bike lane to swerve around cars stopped at the crosswalk and "accidentally" run the pedestrians down, killing them. Those "pesky" crosswalks should be done away with. . .

Roughstuff

There ya go, Caloso! Not only are ya crippling the economy, causing the national debt to soar, but because ya held up all that traffic ya caused global warming too. I'll bet a cyclist got in the way of the martian lander! Meebeep!

You keep falling back on the law, and I keep falling back on courtesy. Since I am riding a vehicle which provides so much less information to riders behind me (Again..turn signals and brake lights, among other things), it is a fantasy to suggest that I should be in the main line of traffic at any thing short of dire need. Furthermore , because I have fewer blind spots and better hearing about what is going on on the roadway, it is easier for me to be courteous and act on that courtesy than it is for someone boxed in a vehicle. Finally, in the event that an accident (please..an accident, ok? Not a 'crash' like the NTSA calls them) occurs, it is my ass that is gonna suffer the most (motorcyclists have the same risk); that, in and alone in itself, is enough to make me the rider who is intelligent enough to give way when push comes to shove and way must be given.

roughstuff

Roughstuff

Well I know many many many locations where heavy commercial vehicles are excluded from the roadway for exactly that reason. In many other areas they are prohibited from the extreme left lane. And I might add that what vehicle cuts in and out of traffic, spews unburned fossil fuel, and pulls into bicycle lanes to drop passengers off at the curb, more than a BUS does? Yet busses give cycling organizations the vapors because it taunts them with their fantasy of urban mass transit.

I don't know. Ask the cyclist-urban delivery boys who decided that crosswalks and pedestrians were fair game.


roughstuff

caloso

Are you implying that my mere presence on the road and the safe, lawful operation of my vehicle is a discourtesy to drivers?

I don't buy that.

Drivers have plenty of opportunity to display some courtesy by staying off my wheel, by not throwing or yelling things at me, by overtaking me in a safe and efficient manner. Your idea that good manners requires me to make up for their vehicles' shortcomings? Ridiculous.

Here's how I'm courteous to drivers: my vehicle takes up a 20th as much road as theirs; I'm keeping gasoline prices down by lessening demand; I'm not putting any pollution into the sky (in fact, I'm cleaning up a tiny bit of it by passing it through my lungs); and I'm not taking up a parking spot.

Such a deal! All they have to do in return is not run me down or right hook me.

RacerX

Yeah that's a great attitude. Hope that works out for you.

temp1

.
I'm not sure what you'er getting at, but urban mass transit is not a fantasy, and I love it. The busses I mentioned earlier were of the school variety.