I Blame the State DMV's...
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,548
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,366 Posts
Are we getting away from the original intent of the rant?
The issue is that:
A group IS singular.
but
The individuals within the group ARE plural.
Often the distinction between singular and plural groups gets complicated. For example endless debates about the proper use of DATA being a group of numbers or observations. People discuss a single datum less frequently.
I found this page about apostrophes and things like abbreviations.
https://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp
I choose not to use apostrophes when denoting plurals of abbreviations and acronyms. But, either is acceptable.
And, of course, there are issues with typos, autocorrect, and editing. Homonyms? We all survive with minor grammatical errors, or liberal choices in writing. Did I have a one word sentence?
"...the RCMP are..."
"The RCMP is..."
A group IS singular.
but
The individuals within the group ARE plural.
Often the distinction between singular and plural groups gets complicated. For example endless debates about the proper use of DATA being a group of numbers or observations. People discuss a single datum less frequently.
I found this page about apostrophes and things like abbreviations.
https://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp
I choose not to use apostrophes when denoting plurals of abbreviations and acronyms. But, either is acceptable.
And, of course, there are issues with typos, autocorrect, and editing. Homonyms? We all survive with minor grammatical errors, or liberal choices in writing. Did I have a one word sentence?
#27
Banned
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,548
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,366 Posts
The elderly drivers do change, sometimes for the better, being more careful drivers, and often driving less. But, at some point, many drivers become unsafe, and often nothing is done until some major event happens.
Retesting every 5 years would be a major hassle for all, but if they are safe drivers, it shouldn't be more than a minor annoyance.
Restricted licenses? Home to store?
This topic brought up the thought of doing a single retest of young drivers, make sure they're slowly improving, and not ignoring everything they should have known.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,530
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2112 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times
in
443 Posts
Apostrophes is the plural of apostrophe. Apostrophe-s is an apostrophe followed by an s.
Nobody dots the letter I, and while you might top a T, you don’t cross it.
Finally, while 6’s and 7’s versus 6s and 7s is an “interesting” academic question, almost every copy editor will guide a writer towards or toward sixes and sevens.
-mr. bill
Nobody dots the letter I, and while you might top a T, you don’t cross it.
Finally, while 6’s and 7’s versus 6s and 7s is an “interesting” academic question, almost every copy editor will guide a writer towards or toward sixes and sevens.
-mr. bill
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,548
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,366 Posts
So, in Star Trek, one has Number One...
And... 1's job is to go on all the dangerous missions while the captain stays on the ship.
#31
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13659 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
The only real trouble I've had with other vehicles on the road whilst I was riding a bicycle was with other BICYCLISTS. I Hamilton Ontario (Canada) I crashed into a bicycle that came zooming out of a one way street (the bicyclist was riding the wrong direction) onto a bust main street King Street. What made it so bad and unavoidable was that the street the wrong direction riding bicyclist came out od had a blind corner and he was not visible to traffic. The other instance was a crash at night when a bicyclist in dark clothing on a dark colour bicycle was riding on a sidewalk that was in a poorly lit area and he decided to suddenly cross the road but did so without looking and from under a large tree in full leaf that rendered him invisible.
There are idiot bicyclists just as there are idiot E-bike riders just like there are idiot automobile drivers.
Cheers
There are idiot bicyclists just as there are idiot E-bike riders just like there are idiot automobile drivers.
Cheers
As far as the DMV... wouldn't it be cool if they tested drivers with a video drive simulator that included things like "cyclists taking a lane?" Imagine the scores...
"Uh sorry sir, you killed a cyclist... no license for you." "Oh and that's the low score for the week."
Last edited by genec; 10-20-19 at 05:57 AM.
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,624
Bikes: iele Latina, Miele Suprema, Miele Uno LS, Miele Miele Beta, MMTB, Bianchi Model Unknown, Fiori Venezia, Fiori Napoli, VeloSport Adamas AX
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times
in
640 Posts
Well, you are in freaking Canada for christsake... try a bike commute in a typical crowded azzhle American city during rush hour on a "share the road" street... Now that's competitive road use, my friend. (gee, you use "whilst;" we know you are in the "land of polite." Say hi to my friends in Calgary )
As far as the DMV... wouldn't it be cool if they tested drivers with a video drive simulator that included things like "cyclists taking a lane?" Imagine the scores...
"Uh sorry sir, you killed a cyclist... no license for you." "Oh and that's the low score for the week."
As far as the DMV... wouldn't it be cool if they tested drivers with a video drive simulator that included things like "cyclists taking a lane?" Imagine the scores...
"Uh sorry sir, you killed a cyclist... no license for you." "Oh and that's the low score for the week."
FWIW, I commuted for years in Toronto Canada during rush hour on some very busy streets without any bicycle lanes or other bicycling infrastructure at all. Some of those streets included Eglinton Ave, Bloor Street, Yonge Street and Finch Avenue. Therefore I'd say that I do have experience riding on very busy roads with heavy traffic in rush hour.
Yes, it'd be nice if motorists were tested in a better way. It'd also be nice if motorists paid a heavier price whenever they caused an "accident". It'd also be nice if bicyclists would behave in a predictable manner and obeyed the law as applicable to them. Like I said, my two bicycling accidents were caused not by irresponsible motor vehicle drivers but by irresponsible bicyclists.
Once the testing is done for ANY road user how do they intend to enforce those standards? I see many motorists taking actions that put others at risk and I've see police officers watch that action and do nothing. Is it only when someone gets seriously injured or killed that action will be taken.
We can test from now until doomsday but the thing is that once the tests are passed the motorists (or bicyclists) will revert to their standard behaviour unless there is more enforcement of laws as they pertain to dangerous actions taken by motorists.
Cheers
#33
Half way there
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,958
Bikes: Many, and the list changes frequently
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 990 Post(s)
Liked 884 Times
in
529 Posts
Which is why members of the group use the plural pronoun "we" when referring to the group.
Since the "individuals" you refer to above = "the group", and you claim "the group" is singular, then by your logic the "individuals" must then be singular, right?
Since the "individuals" you refer to above = "the group", and you claim "the group" is singular, then by your logic the "individuals" must then be singular, right?
#34
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13659 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
WOW! No need to cuss.
FWIW, I commuted for years in Toronto Canada during rush hour on some very busy streets without any bicycle lanes or other bicycling infrastructure at all. Some of those streets included Eglinton Ave, Bloor Street, Yonge Street and Finch Avenue. Therefore I'd say that I do have experience riding on very busy roads with heavy traffic in rush hour.
Yes, it'd be nice if motorists were tested in a better way. It'd also be nice if motorists paid a heavier price whenever they caused an "accident". It'd also be nice if bicyclists would behave in a predictable manner and obeyed the law as applicable to them. Like I said, my two bicycling accidents were caused not by irresponsible motor vehicle drivers but by irresponsible bicyclists.
Once the testing is done for ANY road user how do they intend to enforce those standards? I see many motorists taking actions that put others at risk and I've see police officers watch that action and do nothing. Is it only when someone gets seriously injured or killed that action will be taken.
We can test from now until doomsday but the thing is that once the tests are passed the motorists (or bicyclists) will revert to their standard behaviour unless there is more enforcement of laws as they pertain to dangerous actions taken by motorists.
Cheers
FWIW, I commuted for years in Toronto Canada during rush hour on some very busy streets without any bicycle lanes or other bicycling infrastructure at all. Some of those streets included Eglinton Ave, Bloor Street, Yonge Street and Finch Avenue. Therefore I'd say that I do have experience riding on very busy roads with heavy traffic in rush hour.
Yes, it'd be nice if motorists were tested in a better way. It'd also be nice if motorists paid a heavier price whenever they caused an "accident". It'd also be nice if bicyclists would behave in a predictable manner and obeyed the law as applicable to them. Like I said, my two bicycling accidents were caused not by irresponsible motor vehicle drivers but by irresponsible bicyclists.
Once the testing is done for ANY road user how do they intend to enforce those standards? I see many motorists taking actions that put others at risk and I've see police officers watch that action and do nothing. Is it only when someone gets seriously injured or killed that action will be taken.
We can test from now until doomsday but the thing is that once the tests are passed the motorists (or bicyclists) will revert to their standard behaviour unless there is more enforcement of laws as they pertain to dangerous actions taken by motorists.
Cheers
BC and Calgary are a bit less hostile.
And, as far as drivers... mandatory 5 or 7 year retesting on simulators, that use real world situations and measure reaction times... reduce the DMV lines to first timers, and folks with complicated paperwork.
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,548
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,366 Posts
WOW! No need to cuss.
FWIW, I commuted for years in Toronto Canada during rush hour on some very busy streets without any bicycle lanes or other bicycling infrastructure at all. Some of those streets included Eglinton Ave, Bloor Street, Yonge Street and Finch Avenue. Therefore I'd say that I do have experience riding on very busy roads with heavy traffic in rush hour.
Yes, it'd be nice if motorists were tested in a better way. It'd also be nice if motorists paid a heavier price whenever they caused an "accident". It'd also be nice if bicyclists would behave in a predictable manner and obeyed the law as applicable to them. Like I said, my two bicycling accidents were caused not by irresponsible motor vehicle drivers but by irresponsible bicyclists.
Once the testing is done for ANY road user how do they intend to enforce those standards? I see many motorists taking actions that put others at risk and I've see police officers watch that action and do nothing. Is it only when someone gets seriously injured or killed that action will be taken.
We can test from now until doomsday but the thing is that once the tests are passed the motorists (or bicyclists) will revert to their standard behaviour unless there is more enforcement of laws as they pertain to dangerous actions taken by motorists.
Cheers
FWIW, I commuted for years in Toronto Canada during rush hour on some very busy streets without any bicycle lanes or other bicycling infrastructure at all. Some of those streets included Eglinton Ave, Bloor Street, Yonge Street and Finch Avenue. Therefore I'd say that I do have experience riding on very busy roads with heavy traffic in rush hour.
Yes, it'd be nice if motorists were tested in a better way. It'd also be nice if motorists paid a heavier price whenever they caused an "accident". It'd also be nice if bicyclists would behave in a predictable manner and obeyed the law as applicable to them. Like I said, my two bicycling accidents were caused not by irresponsible motor vehicle drivers but by irresponsible bicyclists.
Once the testing is done for ANY road user how do they intend to enforce those standards? I see many motorists taking actions that put others at risk and I've see police officers watch that action and do nothing. Is it only when someone gets seriously injured or killed that action will be taken.
We can test from now until doomsday but the thing is that once the tests are passed the motorists (or bicyclists) will revert to their standard behaviour unless there is more enforcement of laws as they pertain to dangerous actions taken by motorists.
Cheers
The "written" exams are now being done on computer which can include video scenarios. I think the kids have to get something like 80% right, but I do think there should be some "Veto" questions that if they are wrong it is an automatic failure. Things like cross walk questions, safe passing of bicycles, etc.
When I took my driving exam, years ago, I was instructed to pull up behind two kids crossing a moderately busy 3 or 4 lane street on their bikes. I had no idea what to do, so I just sat and waited for them to cross... and didn't fail the test.
They should take statistics on written questions that are frequently failed. On my written exam, there was a question about what to do if another car comes up behind oneself. Speed up, maintain speed, or slow down. I think the actual answer required more situational information than was provided in the question.
#36
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13659 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
I've never found those driving simulator games to be particularly realistic feeling, although it could be a programming thing. I think some flight training simulators are good, although, again, they may not give an accurate feel for the plane.
The "written" exams are now being done on computer which can include video scenarios. I think the kids have to get something like 80% right, but I do think there should be some "Veto" questions that if they are wrong it is an automatic failure. Things like cross walk questions, safe passing of bicycles, etc.
When I took my driving exam, years ago, I was instructed to pull up behind two kids crossing a moderately busy 3 or 4 lane street on their bikes. I had no idea what to do, so I just sat and waited for them to cross... and didn't fail the test.
They should take statistics on written questions that are frequently failed. On my written exam, there was a question about what to do if another car comes up behind oneself. Speed up, maintain speed, or slow down. I think the actual answer required more situational information than was provided in the question.
The "written" exams are now being done on computer which can include video scenarios. I think the kids have to get something like 80% right, but I do think there should be some "Veto" questions that if they are wrong it is an automatic failure. Things like cross walk questions, safe passing of bicycles, etc.
When I took my driving exam, years ago, I was instructed to pull up behind two kids crossing a moderately busy 3 or 4 lane street on their bikes. I had no idea what to do, so I just sat and waited for them to cross... and didn't fail the test.
They should take statistics on written questions that are frequently failed. On my written exam, there was a question about what to do if another car comes up behind oneself. Speed up, maintain speed, or slow down. I think the actual answer required more situational information than was provided in the question.
Likes For Rollfast:
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 109
Bikes: Giant Cypress
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
6 Posts
Just need to vent: Arg! I'm really tired of drivers constantly telling me to use the sidewalk! It's very irritating because the majority don't cycle and therefore, aren't familiar with what is and isn't safe. It's not safe to cycle on the sidewalk, downhill at 25-30+ mph, with sideroads and driveways along the sidewalk. Drivers wouldn't have visibility to see me coming down that fast, some like to stop for a split second and quickly pull out of the sidestreet, and my bike isn't like a car (which can stop with brakes more quickly and suddenly).
I'm tired of drivers automatically assuming that because I'm cycling on the road, or in the middle, avoiding potholes and debris, that I must be doing something wrong. It's not the end of the world for a driver to spend two seconds, slowing down and passing a cyclist or another vehicle, especially when the driver also has enough time to spare to harass a cyclist.
It comes across as really arrogant when drivers automatically think they know everything about what a cyclist should or shouldn't do when they don't know anything about cycling on the road.
The "advice" that they think they're trying to give to cyclists is bad and wrong; if I followed their advice, I'd be hit by a car pulling out from a sidestreet or driveway (and it most likely wouldn't be considered the driver's fault because they wouldn't expect or be able to see me going downhill that fast; it would be considered my fault for speeding down the sidewalk).
It's unbelievable to think that there are drivers who are giving cyclists (possibly teaching their children that, too--because one driver who honked at me turned into an elementary school parking lot) that bad, unsafe advice and that they might follow their advice and get hit.
I wouldn't be surprised if the reason they're harassing me is because they see my backpack that I use to commute and are incorrectly assuming I'm a child (who is ignorant about the rules of the road).
I'm tired of drivers automatically assuming that because I'm cycling on the road, or in the middle, avoiding potholes and debris, that I must be doing something wrong. It's not the end of the world for a driver to spend two seconds, slowing down and passing a cyclist or another vehicle, especially when the driver also has enough time to spare to harass a cyclist.
It comes across as really arrogant when drivers automatically think they know everything about what a cyclist should or shouldn't do when they don't know anything about cycling on the road.
The "advice" that they think they're trying to give to cyclists is bad and wrong; if I followed their advice, I'd be hit by a car pulling out from a sidestreet or driveway (and it most likely wouldn't be considered the driver's fault because they wouldn't expect or be able to see me going downhill that fast; it would be considered my fault for speeding down the sidewalk).
It's unbelievable to think that there are drivers who are giving cyclists (possibly teaching their children that, too--because one driver who honked at me turned into an elementary school parking lot) that bad, unsafe advice and that they might follow their advice and get hit.
I wouldn't be surprised if the reason they're harassing me is because they see my backpack that I use to commute and are incorrectly assuming I'm a child (who is ignorant about the rules of the road).
Last edited by anon06; 11-01-19 at 10:05 AM.
#39
Senior Member
#40
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Just need to vent: Arg! I'm really tired of drivers constantly telling me to use the sidewalk! It's very irritating because the majority don't cycle and therefore, aren't familiar with what is and isn't safe. It's not safe to cycle on the sidewalk, downhill at 25-30+ mph, with sideroads and driveways along the sidewalk. Drivers wouldn't have visibility to see me coming down that fast, some like to stop for a split second and quickly pull out of the sidestreet, and my bike isn't like a car (which can stop with brakes more quickly and suddenly).
I'm tired of drivers automatically assuming that because I'm cycling on the road, or in the middle, avoiding potholes and debris, that I must be doing something wrong. It's not the end of the world for a driver to spend two seconds, slowing down and passing a cyclist or another vehicle, especially when the driver also has enough time to spare to harass a cyclist.
It comes across as really arrogant when drivers automatically think they know everything about what a cyclist should or shouldn't do when they don't know anything about cycling on the road.
The "advice" that they think they're trying to give to cyclists is bad and wrong; if I followed their advice, I'd be hit by a car pulling out from a sidestreet or driveway (and it most likely wouldn't be considered the driver's fault because they wouldn't expect or be able to see me going downhill that fast; it would be considered my fault for speeding down the sidewalk).
It's unbelievable to think that there are drivers who are giving cyclists (possibly teaching their children that, too--because one driver who honked at me turned into an elementary school parking lot) that bad, unsafe advice and that they might follow their advice and get hit.
I wouldn't be surprised if the reason they're harassing me is because they see my backpack that I use to commute and are incorrectly assuming I'm a child (who is ignorant about the rules of the road).
I'm tired of drivers automatically assuming that because I'm cycling on the road, or in the middle, avoiding potholes and debris, that I must be doing something wrong. It's not the end of the world for a driver to spend two seconds, slowing down and passing a cyclist or another vehicle, especially when the driver also has enough time to spare to harass a cyclist.
It comes across as really arrogant when drivers automatically think they know everything about what a cyclist should or shouldn't do when they don't know anything about cycling on the road.
The "advice" that they think they're trying to give to cyclists is bad and wrong; if I followed their advice, I'd be hit by a car pulling out from a sidestreet or driveway (and it most likely wouldn't be considered the driver's fault because they wouldn't expect or be able to see me going downhill that fast; it would be considered my fault for speeding down the sidewalk).
It's unbelievable to think that there are drivers who are giving cyclists (possibly teaching their children that, too--because one driver who honked at me turned into an elementary school parking lot) that bad, unsafe advice and that they might follow their advice and get hit.
I wouldn't be surprised if the reason they're harassing me is because they see my backpack that I use to commute and are incorrectly assuming I'm a child (who is ignorant about the rules of the road).
#41
What happened?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,927
Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
255 Posts
It's not safe either way, if you assume one or the other is totally safe. You still have to look and listen and be careful.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.