silmarillion

+1!

SBRDude

No, that's NOT what I said. That's what YOU are reading into what I said.

Like I said before, if I warn my wife that the roads are slippery, I am not telling her not to drive on them. I have simply given her information (or possibly just reminding her) so that she can proceed as safely as possible. Now, if I thought she shouldn't be driving on them and I told her so, then that's a different situation.

Digital_Cowboy

So once again we see that it's okay for you to either twist things or read things into what they wrote, but when it happens to you, you get all upset over it. Very interesting.

Chris516

You warning your wife about the road conditions, would be far different, from an LEO saying the same thing to an ordinary cyclist.

The difference would be, you would be warning your wife out of love, compassion, and concern.

Whereas an LEO would be saying the same warning out of frustration and consternation.

Two entirely different sets of emotion, to the same statement, due to the key people involved in the respective situations.

SBRDude

Upset? I'm not upset. That's you being wrong. Again. Now, go change out of your Star Trek pajamas and get ready for work.

SBRDude

How on earth do you know what the emotional state of the LEO is???

Chris516

When have you ever come across an LEO, that made a stop on a cyclist out of love, compassion and concern, unless they were a cyclist themselves. I highly doubt you will find one making a stop on a cyclist for those reasons.

SBRDude

You didn't answer the question. You're assuming you know the emotional state of all LEOs who offer cyclists warnings.

I don't doubt that some of them are jerks, just as some cyclists are jerks, but I don't share your assumption about their emotional state. I think it's fairly rational and reasonable for a cop to warn a cyclist about dangers without reading more into it than face value.

Digital_Cowboy

Then how do you explain the off duty traffic homicide cop who pulled me over several years ago and started out with"

"You and your clubs need to learn. . ."

Only to change it to:

"I'm sick and tired of cleaning your brains off of the roads."

He started out adversarial and it went downhill.

genec

What I want to know is where is John Forester in this conversation... why isn't he telling these LEOs that "cyclists fare best... bla bla bla?"

Apparently these LEOs believe that cyclists fare best at the side of or off the road.

SBRDude

Yes, Star Trek boy, we all know that your catalog of personal anecdotes are an accurate representation of how the majority of people think. Thanks for your "informed" input once again.

Chris516

That would be a fair assertion, if experience didn't get in the way.

SBRDude

And we all have our own experiences, to be sure. I would just caution anyone reading the A&S that the experiences posted around here tend to be quite extreme and not necessarily representative of cycling in general. I remember the first few times I came here - I was almost afraid to ever get on a bike again!

Chris516

I hope your not implying that, those with supposedly 'extreme' experiences should join the CM crowd?

Doesn't getting passed on the road by a motorized vehicle by less than what the law allows(3-5ft. in certain jurisdictions) bother you? Yes, Reactions may seem extreme, but what do you expect when a cyclist has a right to be on the road, yet the motorist certainly doesn't think so and the motorist behaves almost intent on causing the cyclist to crash. Also, If the same motorist does cause the cyclist to crash(and maybe even get killed) guess what, the motorist won't care. Then that is compounded by law enforcement not caring, even to the point of blaming the cyclist even after the cyclist has died as a result. Then the emotional coup de grace' is the motorist claiming they didn't see the cyclist. Yes, Both motorists' and/or cyclists' get lost in a motorist's blind spot. But show where more than 50% of the time, motorists' are profusely apologetic to a cyclist, and about hitting them with their motorized vehicle, regardless of who's fault the accident was.

Yesterday I was 'taking the lane', going at a good speed(20-25mph), when a motorist behind me suddenly honked obviously wanting me out of their way so they could speed. When they could have easily passed me in the passing lane, without honking in the first place.

Now, Sure I can just emotionally brush it off as another dumb motorist. At the same time, am I not supposed to feel any ounce of disgust?

Put it in perspective. If someone shoots a gun at you, but thankfully the bullet ONLY goes by your ear, wouldn't you be thankful to still be alive, yet, mad at the person that shot the gun at you.

Read your local laws and think about your right to bike on the road.

Schwinnrider

It was a two lane 45mph non-divided highway. I only had to be on that road for about a half mile before I would detour into a housing development with minimal traffic. The driver's excuse was he didn't see me until the last second. Apparently he was tailgating a car and when that car passed me he ran right into me.

I wasn't seriously injured. Bruised butt, bruised calf, minor abrasions. Cracked helmet was kind of scary. It's sort of miraculous, actually.

What did I learn from the incident? Two things. First, always wear your helmet. I don't know what impacted my helmet, or what my helmet impacted, but it was enough to crack it. My skull would have taken the hit otherwise. Second, always take the lane. I was being a timid rider and sitting too far to the right. I gave the arsehole driver who passed me before the hit too much opportunity to make a stupid move. Now I control the lane no matter what. My safety comes first.

SBRDude

I guess it depends on the speed. Where I am most often passed in close quarters, cars are probably going anywhere from 20 to 40 mph, so I don't mind a couple feet at those speeds.

My bigger concern is actually when cars get backed up behind me because it increases the odds that someone will get impatient and do something stupid. I quit riding on one road in particular because more than once multiple cars got backed up and then all of them tried to pass and the last guy came too close (for my standards, at least) to a head on collision in the other lane. It would have been his own fault, of course, but I would still be involved and I just don't want that on my conscience so I don't ride there anymore.
If a motorist is trying to drive unsafe, that's a situation I don't want to be involved in. I would try to get out of the way ASAP by pulling over, taking a different road, etc. I believe in my right to be there, but I'm not going to die over it.
This is where I have to disagree with you. I doubt that most people who kill others on accident don't care about the tragedy. And, I don't believe there are a bunch of motorists out there hell bent on running down cyclists and killing them just to prove a point. People like that are crazy, and like I said, I don't think most people are crazy.

Chris516

I would rather be in a ton of metal, than passed too close, regardless of their speed. I don't want to be like the guy in the All State car insurance commercial where the car is in a spin and the guy is hanging on to the car from outside, but with his back to the car.

As for someone getting impatient and/or stupid just because they are behind me. I have encountered that numerous times. Every time I have encountered motorists' like that, I shake my head and/or, tell them to shut up. Because if they are in such a rush, they should get in the passing lane. That is what it is there for.

Trying, and doing, are two different things in this situation. One requires intent, while the other only requires stupidity but not intent.

There is still the 'hit and run' crowd. For one, the doctor out in California who intentionally caused the accident with the two cyclists that rear-ended him. There are many more like him.

SBRDude

Yes, IF there is a passing lane, of course, but the situation I'm describing is a two lane road without much of a shoulder. I can legally ride there, but I choose not to.
I thought you said the motorist intended to cause an accident. I now see that's not exactly what you meant.
People leave the scene of an accident because they don't want to get in trouble. That doesn't mean they don't care about what they've done to others, it just means they care about themselves more than others.

Chris516

I know.

I was referring both, to those with intent, and those with just plain stupidity that weren't paying attention.

But just as there are those that will stay at the scene, there are those that don't care.

It is safer to assume a motorist won't care, than would care. Because of the hostility towards cyclists and their respective right(s) to the road.

SBRDude

Yes, there are people who simply don't care if they harm or kill others, but I'm pretty sure that is far from normal.
A civil society is based on the premise that people are ultimately civil and care enough about themselves and others to get along civilly.

If you really are assuming a motorist doesn't care about killing you, you'd be an idiot for riding a bike because it would be like playing long-term russian roulette. Since you do ride a bike, you must not really mean what you're saying.

Chris516

In a civilized society, that is definitely far from normal. But when a person gets' behind the wheel, 'normal' transposes into 'free-for-all', because of the ever prevailing wind of the 'me first' attitude motorists suddenly project.

Exactly! But when a person gets behind the wheel, their whole attitude, their whole demeanor changes. From the friendly 'How can I help?' attitude, to the 'get out of my way!' pomposity.

Yes, It is like playing russian roulette. But I find it worse, to not ride in the road.

SBRDude

Sorry, but I don't share your views on massive psychological shifts when people get behind the wheel.

Chris516

Think of the 'Share The Road' signs that exist. It is not unreasonable to say, that the majority of motorists(who are not also cyclists) think 'Share The Road' means that they don't need to follow BEHIND a cyclist, but that they can be even with a cyclist in the same lane.

How does that apply to the 'psychological shift' upon getting behind the wheel. Those same individuals that are nasty behind the wheel, may be a person that is very charitable when not behind the wheel.

The doctor out in LA who went to prison for intentionally backing into the two cyclists, may have been wonderful with his patients. But when it came to his being behind the wheel, he became another person.

ChasH

Essentially what the cop told me in the ER after a woman made a left turn in front of my GSX1100G. When it comes to police bias, bicyclists take a second place to motorcyclists IME - but others may differ.

ChasH

Another basic distinction SBRDude is incapable of making. What else is new ....