A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Social Issues
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

So much for what CA drivers "know"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 12th 08, 04:12 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...567&Ite mid=3

What’s up with bicyclists on the road?

Now before I lose all of you health- and environment-minded people, let
me be the first to admit biking’s awesomeness. It’s healthy, saves the
planet and is more efficient than walking.

And I can definitely understand how cyclists could get frustrated with
bad drivers, prompting critical-mass-type events and a general
share-the-road attitude.

It’s true: Many drivers are careless, and without much more than a
plastic helmet for protection, cyclists have extra reason to be
suspicious and resentful.

The problem is that this fair frustration has a tendency to lead to a
holier-than-thou mentality that ends up harming cyclists more than anything.

How often have you seen someone biking two feet to the left of the
clearly marked bike lane?

Cars stack up behind Mr. Spandex Shorts as he moves five miles an hour
stubbornly proclaiming, “I am a vehicle too and the road must be shared!”

But rather than consider his plight, and the plight of the other 800
UCSD affiliates who bike to campus each day, all drivers behind him are
thinking is, “Man, that guy’s an asshole.”

And I don’t think they’re necessarily wrong.

What is Mr. Spandex Shorts gaining by ignoring the bike lane in favor of
the road? This is something I see every day as a driver, bus rider,
pedestrian and cyclist. No matter what mode of transportation I’m using,
it’s clear to me that most cyclists are harming, not helping, their
cause. By blatantly disregarding the bike lane, they’re just deepening
the distrust between cars and bikes, making drivers resent them and
putting themselves in very real danger.

But that’s not all cyclists do to stab themselves in the cleated foot.
Another example of this self-destructive attitude at work, which is
arguably more dangerous, is when cyclists pull up to a red light where
cars are stopped but go ahead anyway. The hypocrisy here is mind-boggling.

How can cyclists preach about being treated as equals, but then act as
though major traffic laws don’t apply to them? Not only is this common
ignore-the-red-light practice illegal, it’s pretty annoying to drivers
who come across that same rule breaker later, stubbornly biking down the
middle of their lane. Again, this kind of arrogance harms only the
cyclists themselves, as they offend law-abiding drivers and put their
own safety at risk.

You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. And the way
cyclists should convince drivers that they, too, own a share of the road
certainly isn’t by recklessly stealing it.
Ads
  #2  
Old February 12th 08, 04:50 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Bill Z.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,556
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

Eric Vey writes:

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...567&Ite mid=3

What's up with bicyclists on the road?


LOL. It's a student newspaper. That page has a link named, "Claims
of Frat Hazing Spark Several Investigations."

He asked, "How often have you seen someone biking two feet to the
left of the clearly marked bike lane" with comments about cars
stacking up behind the cyclist, referring to people riding to
class. He also asked about red-light runners. Apparently some
spandex-clad students are not obeying traffic laws, so this guy
wrote an article about it. He has to write something, after all, if
he is a "senior staff writer" and he was probably running low on
material.

BTW, bike lane or not, if 5 or more vehicles are stacked up behind you
on a two-lane road (one each direction) where passing is not possible,
you are required to pull over at the first reasonable opportunity to
let them pass. That law applies to both cyclists and drivers.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
  #3  
Old February 12th 08, 05:19 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...567&Ite mid=3

What's up with bicyclists on the road?


LOL. It's a student newspaper. That page has a link named, "Claims
of Frat Hazing Spark Several Investigations."


Yet, it was written by someone that recently read that manual and took
that test, unlike me, who certainly isn't up on the recent law changes.

BTW, bike lane or not, if 5 or more vehicles are stacked up behind you
on a two-lane road (one each direction) where passing is not possible,
you are required to pull over at the first reasonable opportunity to
let them pass. That law applies to both cyclists and drivers.


More CA law citing? You keep tossing these out as if CA law is the law
of the land. By now, after numerous examples, you should know that it isn't.
  #4  
Old February 13th 08, 12:57 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Bill Z.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,556
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...567&Ite mid=3

What's up with bicyclists on the road?

LOL. It's a student newspaper. That page has a link named, "Claims
of Frat Hazing Spark Several Investigations."


Yet, it was written by someone that recently read that manual and took
that test, unlike me, who certainly isn't up on the recent law changes.


So? He complained about bicyclist who were violating state law.


BTW, bike lane or not, if 5 or more vehicles are stacked up behind you
on a two-lane road (one each direction) where passing is not possible,
you are required to pull over at the first reasonable opportunity to
let them pass. That law applies to both cyclists and drivers.


More CA law citing? You keep tossing these out as if CA law is the law
of the land. By now, after numerous examples, you should know that it
isn't.


Where do you think UCSD is located? Maybe you shouldn't toss out URLs
to news articles without having a clue as to where they were published.
And what about the title of your thread? It specifically mentions
California. The article complains about certain bicyclists at or
near a California university riding illegally and you try to pretend
that California law is not relevant to the discussion? Get real.



--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
  #5  
Old February 13th 08, 04:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...567&Ite mid=3

What's up with bicyclists on the road?
LOL. It's a student newspaper. That page has a link named, "Claims
of Frat Hazing Spark Several Investigations."

Yet, it was written by someone that recently read that manual and took
that test, unlike me, who certainly isn't up on the recent law changes.


So? He complained about bicyclist who were violating state law.

BTW, bike lane or not, if 5 or more vehicles are stacked up behind you
on a two-lane road (one each direction) where passing is not possible,
you are required to pull over at the first reasonable opportunity to
let them pass. That law applies to both cyclists and drivers.

More CA law citing? You keep tossing these out as if CA law is the law
of the land. By now, after numerous examples, you should know that it
isn't.


Where do you think UCSD is located? Maybe you shouldn't toss out URLs
to news articles without having a clue as to where they were published.
And what about the title of your thread? It specifically mentions
California. The article complains about certain bicyclists at or
near a California university riding illegally and you try to pretend
that California law is not relevant to the discussion? Get real.




It's a California State Law that if there is a Bike lane it MUST be
used? You sure about that? In some states it is, but I didn't think that
CA was one of them. If that is the law then it is a very bad law. If I
followed it, I would be dead now. I used to use the bike lanes even when
they were in the door zone, but no more. I used to peek in the windows
of the cars and if I saw any motion, I would signal left to exit the
lane. But the inevitable happened and I didn't see the motion and a door
swung out. Fortunately I saw it in time to stop, but there was steady
traffic that day and there would have been no way to exit the bike lane
or do much of anything.

So now, I would be someone the writer wrote about. But I try not to be.
I try to avoid strets that have bike lanes all together. No reason to
rile up the motorists by not using the bike lane as they think I am
required to do.

  #6  
Old February 13th 08, 05:27 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

Eric Vey wrote:
Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...567&Ite mid=3


What's up with bicyclists on the road?
LOL. It's a student newspaper. That page has a link named, "Claims
of Frat Hazing Spark Several Investigations."
Yet, it was written by someone that recently read that manual and took
that test, unlike me, who certainly isn't up on the recent law changes.


So? He complained about bicyclist who were violating state law.

BTW, bike lane or not, if 5 or more vehicles are stacked up behind you
on a two-lane road (one each direction) where passing is not possible,
you are required to pull over at the first reasonable opportunity to
let them pass. That law applies to both cyclists and drivers.
More CA law citing? You keep tossing these out as if CA law is the law
of the land. By now, after numerous examples, you should know that it
isn't.


Where do you think UCSD is located? Maybe you shouldn't toss out URLs
to news articles without having a clue as to where they were published.
And what about the title of your thread? It specifically mentions
California. The article complains about certain bicyclists at or
near a California university riding illegally and you try to pretend
that California law is not relevant to the discussion? Get real.




It's a California State Law that if there is a Bike lane it MUST be
used? You sure about that? In some states it is, but I didn't think that
CA was one of them. If that is the law then it is a very bad law. If I
followed it, I would be dead now. I used to use the bike lanes even when
they were in the door zone, but no more. I used to peek in the windows
of the cars and if I saw any motion, I would signal left to exit the
lane. But the inevitable happened and I didn't see the motion and a door
swung out. Fortunately I saw it in time to stop, but there was steady
traffic that day and there would have been no way to exit the bike lane
or do much of anything.

So now, I would be someone the writer wrote about. But I try not to be.
I try to avoid strets that have bike lanes all together. No reason to
rile up the motorists by not using the bike lane as they think I am
required to do.


You are right. "Mandatory." But, there is a loophole in the mandatory
California law.

Exceptions a
not slower than other traffic, preparing a left turn, passing, avoiding
road hazards, on a one-way street, or approaching a place where
right-turns are permitted

Since I consider most of the bike lanes here to be placed where "road
hazards" routinely present themselves, there it is. That are
"approaching a place where right turns are permitted" is just about
everywhere.

It would be pretty easy to show one of the exceptions.
  #7  
Old February 13th 08, 05:27 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Jym Dyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 999
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

More CA law citing? You keep tossing these out as if CA law
is the law of the land.


=v= Um ... the article was from a San Diego newspaper? The
cited law is applicable in San Diego? You should maybe pay
more attention before being unnecessarily contentious?
_Jym?_

(All sentences end with a question mark because that's how
they talk in San Diego? Especially the college students?)

  #8  
Old February 14th 08, 01:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Bill Z.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,556
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

http://ucsdguardian.org/index.php?op...567&Ite mid=3

What's up with bicyclists on the road?
LOL. It's a student newspaper. That page has a link named, "Claims
of Frat Hazing Spark Several Investigations."
Yet, it was written by someone that recently read that manual and took
that test, unlike me, who certainly isn't up on the recent law changes.

So? He complained about bicyclist who were violating state law.

BTW, bike lane or not, if 5 or more vehicles are stacked up behind you
on a two-lane road (one each direction) where passing is not possible,
you are required to pull over at the first reasonable opportunity to
let them pass. That law applies to both cyclists and drivers.
More CA law citing? You keep tossing these out as if CA law is the law
of the land. By now, after numerous examples, you should know that it
isn't.

Where do you think UCSD is located? Maybe you shouldn't toss out
URLs
to news articles without having a clue as to where they were published.
And what about the title of your thread? It specifically mentions
California. The article complains about certain bicyclists at or
near a California university riding illegally and you try to pretend
that California law is not relevant to the discussion? Get real.


It's a California State Law that if there is a Bike lane it MUST be
used? You sure about that? In some states it is, but I didn't think
that CA was one of them.


The law requires the use of a bike lane when riding at less than the
normal speed of traffic (basically a "slow vehicle keep right" rule),
with exceptions for preparing for a left turn, passing slower cyclists
or vehicles, avoiding obstructions or other hazards, and when
approaching a place where a right turn is permitted. The bike lane
also had to conform to state standards when installed.


If that is the law then it is a very bad law. If I followed it, I
would be dead now.


No you wouldn't - not with the exceptions.

I used to use the bike lanes even when they were in the door zone,
but no more.


Staying clear of parked cars is allowed given the 'hazard' exception.
Futhermore, the design guidelines require enough clearance from parked
vehicles so that you can get by safely while staying in the lane, and
if the lane does not conform to those standards, you are not required
to use it no matter what.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
  #9  
Old February 14th 08, 02:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Tom Sherman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,890
Default So much for what CA drivers "know"

Eric Vey wrote:
...
So now, I would be someone the writer wrote about. But I try not to be.
I try to avoid strets that have bike lanes all together. No reason to
rile up the motorists by not using the bike lane as they think I am
required to do.

I do the exact same thing for the same reason.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"John "Cho" Gilmer keeps publishing his "Manifesto" over and over." Hoodini Racing 0 April 23rd 07 12:38 AM
Vandeman calls mountain bikers "liars" and "criminals" then surprised by hate mail! Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 0 June 1st 06 08:15 PM
Vandeman calls mountain bikers "liars" and "criminals" then surprisedby hate mail! ChainSmoker Mountain Biking 0 May 27th 06 05:39 PM
R.I.P. Jim Price (aka. "biker_billy", "sydney", "Boudreaux") spin156 Techniques 15 November 28th 05 08:21 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.