Saw an intelligent bicyclist today

Ed Pirrero wrote:
On Feb 27, 6:05 pm, wrote:

On Feb 27, 7:46 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:


wrote:

Slow down and think about it again, Nate. The jeans and dark shirt
should not be part of the equation. If it's night, a driver has a
right to expect cyclists to have lights, and possibly reflectors.
(That depends a bit on the jurisdiction.) But night or day, a
motorist has no right to complain about jeans and a dark shirt. They
are legal. It's up to you to watch for others on the road; how
they're dressed should not matter.

It does if they have neither lights nor reflectors.

Wow. You're having a hard time with these concepts!


No, Frank, he really doesn't. You're being a jerk, and pedantic to
boot.

If being seen in low-light conditions isn't important, why does
Colorado Cyclist sell Day-Glo orange reflectorized vests?

Why do cycling shoes have reflectorized materials in them? Why do
people attact reflector tape to their helmets or caps?

What you wear can make a difference. Suggesting it doesn't matter is
non-sensical.

I don't think he's saying it doesn't matter. He's saying
it isn't required for adequate night time detection of a
bicyclist.

I think all states require head and tail lighting for night
time bicycle operation. On top of that, most bikes come with
reflectors front and rear and possibly reflectorized areas of
the bike itself.

It certainly can't hurt for a bicyclist to wear bright glowing
clothing while pedaling his bike at night. It certainly can't
hurt for a motorist to wear a helmet while he drives.

But such things aren't additional *requirements* simply because
what *is* required is deemed sufficient for the purpose.

Hell, I've probably *SEEN* five bent up bikes laying in the middle of
the road, with cops, ambulances, etc. in that time period.

Well, yet again, your world seems to be extremely different from mine,
and from all the people I know.

So that implies that your view is correct, and his is wrong? Nice
logic use, Frank.

Each perceives his world somewhat in his way.

I don't find dead/dying bicyclists lying about the roads I ride
(or drive). I don't see 100% of bicyclists running stops where
I live.

That's my world to some extent, but I've bicycled a lot of roads
in the US and this view has been consistent everywhere I've been.

I suspect that's because yours
includes a large measure of fantasy.

Easy to be an e-thug hiding behind your keyboard, eh, Frank?

I suspect it has more to do with questioning one's observations.
There are many "common beliefs" out there that don't stand up to
close scrutiny. Check some of the urban legends sites to see.

Hell, aliens have resided in the US since the late 40's for all
we know.

Come ride with me someday. You'll see I'm right.

Sorry, but according to the rules of logic, it takes only one
counterexample to prove you wrong.

Yes. Now prove that he has ever seen one bicyclist stop. Go ahead,
it's *your* proposal, after all.

From some of the biking behavior I've seen, it's not outside the realm
of possiblity that he has never actually seen a bicyclist stop at a
light or a sign. Unlikely, but not impossible.

One "problem" with bicyclist behavior is that there is a significant
number of individuals riding bikes that are young; kids actually.
This demographic isn't necessarily known for driving "properly" on
the road, just as the 18-25 year old motoring demographic is known
to be a dangerous one in cars.

I understand the number of you bicyclists is in decline, so perhaps
when the roads are more dominated by older [wiser?] individuals, you
and other motorists will see fewer two wheeled traffic scofflaws on
the road.

The cyclists you claim to observe
do not make up the total population of cyclists.

He's not claiming he's seen that. Straw man, Frank.

No but the OP did say 100% of bicyclist he has observed don't stop
at stop signs/lights, then proceeded to apply that generalization
to "bicyclists".

That's a common thing to do but is still a broad sweeping negative
generalization that IMHO is incorrect.


SMH

Nate Nagel wrote:
Stephen Harding wrote:

N8N wrote:

Why? If I hit another car because the driver did something illegal,
or hit a cyclist because he did something illegal, I still hit
something. I'm still inconvenienced, and I still have to deal with a
lot of BS. Since my observations are that 100% of cyclists flagrantly
violate the rules of the road, that seems like a real problem to me.

[...]

100% of cyclists blatantly ignore stop signs.

Where on earth do you live?

Falls Church, VA

OK. Suburbia on steroids.

Not certain I'd want to bike commute in that area although I was
quite surprise last summer how bike friendly DC was!

How much viewing time are we talking about with this
observation? How many bicyclists over what period of time?

I've lived here for over a year. I see anywhere from 1-5 cyclists every
morning, and often a few more in the evening.

Maybe it's the same incompetent/irresponsible group you see over
and over.

My bike commute involves 10-11 miles each way with perhaps 8-10
lights along the primary route. I doubt there is a day that goes
by without *at least* one *blatant* running of a red light by a
motorist.

I'm talking the light is red and cars with the green have to wait
for the jerk to pass through before going. The motorists passing
through the light as it turns red are too numerous to bother
counting.

Assuming the sample size of your observations are sufficiently
large, I would have to predict a significant number of the
700-800 American bicyclists that die each year must meet their
end in your town, with riding behavior as you claim (assuming
you are in the US)!

I'm honestly surprised that more don't.

Just this evening I was following a cyclist who was riding after dark,
wearing dark clothing, with no headlight. *I* could see him because he
did have a taillight, but oncoming traffic couldn't (and this was a very
narrow street where you'd often have to go onto the "wrong" side of the
road to get around parked cars.) Now the other cyclist that I saw was
wearing a reflective vest, so he gets props for that, but making a left
turn a little closer to oncoming traffic than I would have considered
prudent kinda negates that.

Statistically, bicyclists involved in accidents with cars don't
get run down from behind. It's most likely the bicyclist running
a light, being on the wrong side of the road or riding at night
without adequate lighting that does him in.

Not certain what you mean by the cyclist making a left turn "a little
closer to oncoming traffic" means. That he was too far to the left
in the lane or crossed in front of oncoming traffic with insufficient
distance from traffic (cutting them off)?

If too far to the left side of the road, the bicyclist may have been
trying too hard to accommodate the motor traffic behind him. I
sometimes do this myself, moving to the near center of the road to
make a left turn rather than being farther to the right, just so
I give cars behind me more clearance to get around me.

I think too often, motorists feel a bicyclist should ride in a fashion
that causes motorists no inconvenience. That means be on the very
edge of the roadside, with pedals scraping the curbing.

The safe way is to actually "take the lane" which too many motorists
feel is "in your face" bicycling. It's really not meant to be.

The only conclusion I can draw is that either a) cyclists are idiots or
b) the act of getting on a bicycle causes one to become an idiot.

Interestingly, I have found this to be the case for motorists (and
I myself am a motorist who drives a big V-8, 4WD 1/2 ton Dodge pickup)!

I *personally know* people who are fine, intelligent and considerate
who become absolute jerks behind the wheel of their motor vehicles.

People will happily hop in front of a line of waiting cars because
they don't want to wait, but would never think of doing such a thing
(perhaps out of physical self-preservation) on foot, say for a line
outside a restaurant or theatre. But they'll do it in their
automobiles!

The list of selfish or irresponsible behaviors I have seen performed
by motorists is substantial. My general belief in the goodness of
humanity leads me to believe that most of these "automobile jerks"
are in fact pretty fine people outside their car.

Of course, it's not *just* cyclists - just that it seems that they are
more universally idiotic. Within the same two mile drive home from the
Metro station, I also saw a motorcycle cop pull a U-turn and immediately
make a left turn onto Leesburg Pike and I seriously thought he was going
to run straight into a pedestrian; I slowed in case I would end up
having to stop give a statement/help if I could.

Well we all have our bad days.


SMH

Arif Khokar wrote:

The root of the problem is that most stop signs are unnecessary. If one
has a clear view of the intersecting road, then one should only have to
yield to oncoming traffic before crossing.

As for speeding, almost all highway speed limits are under posted.

I see these comments a lot from the driving groups.

Often, I also see the comment that it is true most drivers
aren't competent, but *I* am and thus speed limits really
don't apply to me, because I know what I'm doing.

I generally agree with you that many stop signs could be
yield signs instead and that speed limits are often set quite
low (whether to handle minimum safety conditions or perhaps
just to generate revenue).

However, order on the roadway completely breaks down when
traffic laws become widely interpreted as "guidelines" that
can be ignored under certain conditions.

Surveys show virtually every driver thinks *they* are a good
driver while *everyone else* is incompetent.


SMH

On Feb 28, 9:43*am, Stephen Harding wrote:
Arif Khokar wrote:
The root of the problem is that most stop signs are unnecessary. *If one
has a clear view of the intersecting road, then one should only have to
yield to oncoming traffic before crossing.

As for speeding, almost all highway speed limits are under posted.

I see these comments a lot from the driving groups.

Often, I also see the comment that it is true most drivers
aren't competent, but *I* am and thus speed limits really
don't apply to me, because I know what I'm doing.

I generally agree with you that many stop signs could be
yield signs instead and that speed limits are often set quite
low (whether to handle minimum safety conditions or perhaps
just to generate revenue).

However, order on the roadway completely breaks down when
traffic laws become widely interpreted as "guidelines" that
can be ignored under certain conditions.

Surveys show virtually every driver thinks *they* are a good
driver while *everyone else* is incompetent.

SMH

All of your points are valid. However, I think you're confusing two
completely seperate issues. The first is the posting of speed limits,
and the second is the skill and awareness of the average motorist.
Even a marginally capable driver in a car meeting the minimum
requirements for street legality in the US ought to be able to handle
driving on an Interstate highway at a speed significantly greater than
55 MPH without any perceptible increase in risk. Anyone not able to
do so shouldn't have a license, and any car not capable of doing so
probably shouldn't be on the road.

That said, yes, there are an awful lot of drivers doing stupid stuff
every day. However, they seem to be just as likely to do something
dumb on a residential street as on an Interstate, and honestly, when I
see someone on a highway driving significantly *slower* than the rest
of traffic, that's often a flag to me that I ought to pay special
attention to them because they might be inattentive and do something
that normally would be unexpected.

nate

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:54:01 -0600, Brent P wrote:
Is it one of those stop signs you had put up to slow people down? If so,
that's the reason people don't respect it. It is a well known fact that
misused stop signs for the purpose of speed control are not well
respected and often cause drivers to go faster. It is the consquence of
'feels good' traffic 'engineering'.

Thing is, there is a proper way to protest a stop sign you think was
improperly installed. That's why you have a city council, county
board, and state legislature with public meetings and occasional elections
and the power to tell the Highway Department what to do.

Ignoring stop signs is not the proper way to protest them. One hopes that
lesson will be learned by way of an expensive ticket, rather than by way
of an injury "accident".

While cycling, I really haven't had a whole lot of trouble with bad
drivers. (12,000 miles and only two close calls - both in bright
sunshine. Unfortunately that doesn't include close calls with
illegally loose dogs. I wish sawed-off shotguns were legal, I could use
one.)

While driving, on the other hand...

Here in Northern Middle Tennessee we have a frustrating, dangerous
combination:

- Lots of hills.
- Lots of semis. (which usually can't climb Tennessee hills at the speed
limit)
- Two-lane Interstates. (which means either you follow the slow semis in
the right-hand lane, or you pass them in the left)
- Too many motorists who believe they're *entitled* to drive as fast as
they want.

Just try driving from Clarksville to Nashville at anything less than 10
over the limit. Either you'll be continuously slowing down (for slow
semis) and speeding back up, or you'll have a**holes riding two feet off
your tail and cutting through non-existent gaps to get in front as you try
to pass the semis.

Now that they've learned the speed limit can be ignored with impunity,
(sometimes...) they're branching out. To running stop signs & lights.
(not only speed-control stop signs) To ignoring oncoming traffic when
pulling out from driveways and sideroads. To passing in no-passing zones
- and even no-traffic zones.

(worst case: last winter, guy on I-24 so convinced he was entitled to go
90mph he passed me *on the right-hand shoulder*, *at an exit*, the day
after a snowstorm, when the shoulder *had frequent patches of ice & snow*.
He couldn't wait ten seconds for the other guy to finish passing me.)

Motorists have got to learn to respect traffic rules. If not for
cyclists' sakes, for each other's sakes!

In article , Doug Smith W9WI wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:54:01 -0600, Brent P wrote:
Is it one of those stop signs you had put up to slow people down? If so,
that's the reason people don't respect it. It is a well known fact that
misused stop signs for the purpose of speed control are not well
respected and often cause drivers to go faster. It is the consquence of
'feels good' traffic 'engineering'.

Thing is, there is a proper way to protest a stop sign you think was
improperly installed. That's why you have a city council, county
board, and state legislature with public meetings and occasional elections
and the power to tell the Highway Department what to do.

That's nice. it's about as effective as pounding sand in these parts and
many others. BTW, I don't ignore stop signs, I am only stating what the
results of misusing stop signs is.

Speed control stop signs are especially annoying when biking. I am far
more annoyed by them when bicycling than driving. on the order of several
times more if I am at the end of a long ride.

Ignoring stop signs is not the proper way to protest them. One hopes that
lesson will be learned by way of an expensive ticket, rather than by way
of an injury "accident".

- Lots of semis. (which usually can't climb Tennessee hills at the speed
limit)
- Two-lane Interstates. (which means either you follow the slow semis in
the right-hand lane, or you pass them in the left)
- Too many motorists who believe they're *entitled* to drive as fast as
they want.

Interesting... that list puts you as the subject of that famous George
Carlin bit about driving.

Just try driving from Clarksville to Nashville at anything less than 10
over the limit. Either you'll be continuously slowing down (for slow
semis) and speeding back up, or you'll have a**holes riding two feet off
your tail and cutting through non-existent gaps to get in front as you try
to pass the semis.

Pass, get back right... why is that so difficult for most people?

Now that they've learned the speed limit can be ignored with impunity,
(sometimes...) they're branching out. To running stop signs & lights.
(not only speed-control stop signs) To ignoring oncoming traffic when
pulling out from driveways and sideroads. To passing in no-passing zones
- and even no-traffic zones.

Maybe the speed limits should have made sense in the first place. See
that's the problem with law that's based only on authority, eventually
you get laws that don't make sense and people lose respect for
similiar laws, even ones that make sense, because of it.

(worst case: last winter, guy on I-24 so convinced he was entitled to go
90mph he passed me *on the right-hand shoulder*, *at an exit*, the day
after a snowstorm, when the shoulder *had frequent patches of ice & snow*.
He couldn't wait ten seconds for the other guy to finish passing me.

That may be shocking for you, but that's everyday driving in c(r)ook
county, IL.

Motorists have got to learn to respect traffic rules. If not for
cyclists' sakes, for each other's sakes!

Rules need to make sense to be respected. The problem with speed limits
is they are often pulled from some so called authority's ass and worthy
the same respect as anything that came out of that ass.

N8N wrote:
On Feb 28, 9:43 am, Stephen Harding wrote:
Arif Khokar wrote:
The root of the problem is that most stop signs are unnecessary. If one
has a clear view of the intersecting road, then one should only have to
yield to oncoming traffic before crossing.
As for speeding, almost all highway speed limits are under posted.
I see these comments a lot from the driving groups.

Often, I also see the comment that it is true most drivers
aren't competent, but *I* am and thus speed limits really
don't apply to me, because I know what I'm doing.

I generally agree with you that many stop signs could be
yield signs instead and that speed limits are often set quite
low (whether to handle minimum safety conditions or perhaps
just to generate revenue).

However, order on the roadway completely breaks down when
traffic laws become widely interpreted as "guidelines" that
can be ignored under certain conditions.

Surveys show virtually every driver thinks *they* are a good
driver while *everyone else* is incompetent.

SMH

All of your points are valid. However, I think you're confusing two
completely seperate issues. The first is the posting of speed limits,
and the second is the skill and awareness of the average motorist.
Even a marginally capable driver in a car meeting the minimum
requirements for street legality in the US ought to be able to handle
driving on an Interstate highway at a speed significantly greater than
55 MPH without any perceptible increase in risk. Anyone not able to
do so shouldn't have a license, and any car not capable of doing so
probably shouldn't be on the road.

55 mph speed limits were set to increase the national fuel economy.
Power required to propel a vehicle is proportional to the to cube of the
velocity. Gas starts getting burned really fast above 55 mph.

\\paul
--
Paul M. Hobson
..:change the f to ph to reply:.

Stephen Harding wrote:
Arif Khokar wrote:

The root of the problem is that most stop signs are unnecessary. If
one has a clear view of the intersecting road, then one should only
have to yield to oncoming traffic before crossing.

As for speeding, almost all highway speed limits are under posted.

I see these comments a lot from the driving groups.

Often, I also see the comment that it is true most drivers
aren't competent, but *I* am and thus speed limits really
don't apply to me, because I know what I'm doing.

I generally agree with you that many stop signs could be
yield signs instead and that speed limits are often set quite
low (whether to handle minimum safety conditions or perhaps
just to generate revenue).

However, order on the roadway completely breaks down when
traffic laws become widely interpreted as "guidelines" that
can be ignored under certain conditions.

The reason that they are becoming interpreted as "guidelines" is because
so many of them make no sense.

Changing stop signs to yield signs would probably be a big benefit to
cyclists. The problem is that many stop signs are just to slow traffic,
not to control intersections. We have one street in my city which was
used as a major commute route prior to a new freeway being built.
Someone requested that the stop signs that were put in to control speeds
be removed. While the city council agreed that the stop signs were
unnecessary, they wouldn't remove them because they were worried that if
a bad accident then occurred at one of those intersections the city
would be liable because they removed the stop signs.

Doug Smith W9WI wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:54:01 -0600, Brent P wrote:
Is it one of those stop signs you had put up to slow people down? If so,
that's the reason people don't respect it. It is a well known fact that
misused stop signs for the purpose of speed control are not well
respected and often cause drivers to go faster. It is the consquence of
'feels good' traffic 'engineering'.

Thing is, there is a proper way to protest a stop sign you think was
improperly installed. That's why you have a city council, county
board, and state legislature with public meetings and occasional elections
and the power to tell the Highway Department what to do.

Good theory anyway. Getting a stop sign removed is extremely difficult,
even when the city council admits that it is not properly placed, or was
needed at one time, but not needed any longer. They're terrified of
removing a stop sign then there being an accident at that spot.

While cycling, I really haven't had a whole lot of trouble with bad
drivers. (12,000 miles and only two close calls - both in bright
sunshine. Unfortunately that doesn't include close calls with
illegally loose dogs. I wish sawed-off shotguns were legal, I could use
one.)

All you need is a police whistle. Works on all dogs except pit bulls for
some reason.

In article ,
Nate Nagel wrote:

Ok then. Why do cyclists consistently not use lights, AND don't even
make a half-assed gesture towards safety by wearing clothing that might
be visible?

Why should they have to? They're not the ones in massive vehicles
moving at high velocities. When I'm on a bike, I reserve my respect for
other cyclists and pedestrians. Or are you going so far as to say that
even pedestrians should have to cow-tow to all the inattentive/impaired
drivers? No, the safe thing to do is start taking away licenses.

Well, maybe you live somewhere where cyclists are reasonable. I don't.

What is unreasonable is to stop *only* because a painted metal sheet
said so. Some of us actually use our brains to figure out the world
around us. Depending on the situation, that can mean taking any number
of actions that promote traffic flow.

You know, after the last crash of which I saw the aftermath, I actually
attempted to find a news article the next day and it went completely
unreported. (I was honestly curious as to the well being of the
cyclist, because the bike looked pretty well beat up. Due to the
presence of large numbers of police officers and an ambulance and fire
truck, I'm guessing that it didn't fall off of someone's bike rack.)
Similarly with a pedestrian accident that I saw only a few blocks from
my house. Apparently they aren't news-worthy.

Doesn't sound like a pedestrian problem or a bike problem. Sounds like
you have a lot of people in your area who should not be driving.

I do believe that my initial statement said something like "my
observations are 100%." As in, since I have moved to this area I have
yet to see one single cyclist stop for a stop sign. It's been over a
year, if there is even a significant minority of cyclists that actually
obey traffic laws you'd think I'd have seen one by now.

Here's a funny situation for you to ponder. It is not unheard of for a
motorcycle at a stop to be rear-ended by some moron driver that didn't
see them or didn't quite know how close they were to the bumper (I had
that happen to me). Consider the possibility that an even more
vulnerable bicyclist might not want to stop for a similar reason.
Consider the possibility that a number of the accidents you've seen in
your area actually involve the bicyclists that *do* stop when cars
aren't expecting that. Perhaps you're not seeing headlines because
"Cyclist Dead for Obeying Law" isn't the message the police want getting
out.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, ntli.net, teranews.com, vif.com, x-privat.org