What Right-Wing Governance Does For Cycling

On 3/14/2011 5:45 PM, Peter Cole wrote:
On 3/14/2011 5:14 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Peter Cole wrote:
On 3/14/2011 1:54 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Peter Cole wrote:
On 3/13/2011 10:21 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 3/13/2011 8:31 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Nate considered Sun, 13 Mar 2011
20:53:44
-0400 the perfect time to write:

On 03/13/2011 08:33 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Mar 13, 5:09 pm, Duane wrote:
On 3/13/2011 6:55 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:

On 3/13/2011 5:50 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/13/2011 6:18 PM, Peter Cole wrote:

snip

So flip him off& keep riding.
Works for me.

Seriously, as I posted above, how is it that the same people
urging
taking the lane and ignoring the upset caused the motorist by
having to
slow down, seem to be the same people saying that if we have
bike
facilities, motorists may think that we belong only in bike
facilities.
BTW I would think it more of an issue with separate facilities
then bike
lanes. if I'm on a road with a lane marked for my bike, I'm
likely in it
anyway unless there are obstacles.

The people who are already afraid of motor vehicles are not
going to
deal well with intimidating behavior, such as speeding up and
braking
at the last second behind the cyclist, or pulling alongside,
then
swerving towards the cyclist.

Not sure what you mean. I'm with the flip him off and keep riding
idea. Doesn't matter to me what he's upset about. Besides, your
description of intimidating behavior sounds like a normal day
on the
road. At least some days...

Motorist hostility abounds. This will never change until laws and
transportation policy (including the economics of private motor
vehicle tranport - subsidies allowed for those in need) change to
pummel the car culture into submission.

I think that's just a simplification of a more widespread issue
with US
culture, which is that people in general are rude and tend not to
think
things through very much. It just so happens that the vast
majority of
people who are old enough to drive use a motor vehicle as their
primary
means of transportation. They'd still be rude if they were walking
on a
sidewalk.

Generally, it's less of a problem without the perception of
anonymity
and invulnerability that being hidden inside a car engenders.

And it isn't just in the US - it's anywhere that doesn't have the
civilising influence of presumed liability laws (which personally, I
don't believe go far enough even where they exist).

However, the US has a popular culture that glorifies solving problems
with violence.


In the US we kill each other, in Japan they kill themselves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Japan


As Berra noted, 'you can see a lot by just looking' :

http://danmark.wordpress.com/2006/07...-nations-ever/



specifically
http://www.lilliput-information.com/...s/intkrim1.gif

and then we find:
http://fathersforlife.org/health/who_suicide_rates.htm

So maybe Japan isn't 'world class' in seppuku and maybe the
Scandivaians
are 'multi tasking' in both events. USA has a lot of murders. But then
again we have a lot of people.

"America is big and diverse. We have one of everything" is my usual
expression. Outliers are not trends.


I'm not sure what your point is. America has roughly 5x the homicide
rate and 1/3 the suicide rate of Japan. That's all I was saying. I
don't know what you're saying.


Just that human behavior is complex and defies simple analyses.


But not statistics.

One wonders.

On 3/14/2011 8:31 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 3/14/2011 7:16 AM, Peter Cole wrote:
On 3/13/2011 9:21 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Peter considered Sun, 13 Mar 2011
18:18:26 -0400 the perfect time to write:

On 3/13/2011 2:08 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Mar 13, 10:43 am, Duane wrote:
On 3/11/2011 8:00 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:

On 3/11/2011 3:14 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:

Installing bicycle lanes leads to their mandatory usage, de facto or
legally enforced.

I haven't seen this but I'll take your word for it. In that case, we
should fight against mandatory usage of bike lane laws.

Well, it's a tough sell to the non-cycling majority who would probably
just scowl about wanting to have our cake and eat it to - at their
expense, of course.

The law here requiring use of available bike lane includes a number of
exceptions - including one for avoiding debris, which seems to be a
blanket exception leaving it totally at my discretion since *every*
bike lane collects debris. However...

One morning after the snow and ice hit us, and the roads had been
heavily "sanded", I was riding in on a four-lane + bike lanes road.
All the "sand" and other debris had been pushed over to the bike lane,
the entire width of which was a good half-inch deep with black, wet
muck. The stripe was even covered. So I was bout a foot or so out
into the right traffic lane. A big truck came up ehind me and
honked. His left lane was empty. I proceeded straight on, as far
right as practicable. He honked again, so I turned my head and waved
him around. He continued to follow, but closed in and honked some
more. Eventually the stripe sort of emerged from the much, so I
drifted right over the stripe, riding *very* cautiously in the muck.
He buzzed past - hinking some more.

This is what Tom meant by defacto requirement - motorists *expect* us
to use the bike lane, are clueless to the issues that the exceptions
in law at least provide for, and will agressively act out their
hostility to try and force us into them.

So flip him off& keep riding.

What do you do when they pull up alongside and then deliberately
change lanes into the side of you, to FORCE you into the bike lane?

I'll let you know when that happens, if ever.

I have had cagers pull up beside me, then swerve to the right while
yelling at me to get on the (defective) bike path.

I've had motorists trying to run a stop sign yell at me to get on a bike
path when there isn't one for miles. What's your point?

We shouldn't have facilities because it gives motorists something to
complain about? Or we shouldn't have facilities because some may be
defective?

Or we shouldn't have facilities in case a motorist wants to yell at us
to use one, it might be defective?

Can't really parse it more than that. Care to expand?

On 3/14/2011 8:32 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 3/14/2011 8:14 AM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/13/2011 10:11 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 3/13/2011 8:59 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
[...]
Don't get me wrong. I don't want bike lanes or paths everywhere. Only
where they can be useful. Mostly on busy roads in congested cities.
Apparently this attitude is untenable to some. Shrug

snip

How about a wider than normal inner lane with a lower speed limit?


Sure. Not sure when that would happen though.

Makes more sense to lobby for, than for separate and unequal facilities.

Bike lanes are unequal. They give me the same right to use as a regular
lane gives a motorist and additionally prevent the motorist from access.
I like the idea.

Per AMuzi:
And the Persians/Iranians haven't made amends for sacking
Athens (just before coming in 2d at Salamis).

Then there were a series of raids by the various Mayan
kings, enslaving and/or sacrificing the survivors in the
1200s to 1400s. No apologies there either.

Yeah, but

- The rape of Nanking happened within the lifetime of some people
still living today

- Japan still has war memorials eulogizing some of the
perpetrators

- There is a significant level of denial at the national
level.

It wouldn't get us anything - but it would get Japan as a
nation/people enhanced credibility.
--
PeteCresswell

On Mar 15, 9:00*am, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/14/2011 8:32 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:



On 3/14/2011 8:14 AM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/13/2011 10:11 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:
On 3/13/2011 8:59 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
[...]
Don't get me wrong. I don't want bike lanes or paths everywhere. Only
where they can be useful. Mostly on busy roads in congested cities.
Apparently this attitude is untenable to some. Shrug

snip

How about a wider than normal inner lane with a lower speed limit?

Sure. Not sure when that would happen though.

Makes more sense to lobby for, than for separate and unequal facilities..

Bike lanes are unequal. *They give me the same right to use as a regular
lane gives a motorist and additionally prevent the motorist from access.
* I like the idea.

I agree that they are necessary on many roads or that they could work
to bring people out, but first we solve the mystery of why they
disappear into thin air...

They go for a short distance, then you are on own your own in enemy
territory. Are the designers reckless or stupid? I guess there's a
difference b/ the two terms: reckless is when they don't care because
they don't ride it. Is someone trying to score points by counting the
miles of bike lanes in a given city?

And another problem is the lack of enforcement...

http://miami.mybikelane.com/

THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO SEND UNDERCOVER CYCLISTS ON THE ROAD. Don't
worry about budget. We take the agents from prostitution and
narcotics, and I'm sure they can catch plenty of unlawful drivers to
feed the city coffers, which is the bottom line, right?

On 3/15/2011 9:45 AM, His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the
Stop the Bull**** Campaign wrote:
On Mar 15, 9:00 am, Duane wrote:
On 3/14/2011 8:32 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:



On 3/14/2011 8:14 AM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/13/2011 10:11 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:
On 3/13/2011 8:59 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
[...]
Don't get me wrong. I don't want bike lanes or paths everywhere. Only
where they can be useful. Mostly on busy roads in congested cities.
Apparently this attitude is untenable to some.Shrug

snip

How about a wider than normal inner lane with a lower speed limit?

Sure. Not sure when that would happen though.

Makes more sense to lobby for, than for separate and unequal facilities.

Bike lanes are unequal. They give me the same right to use as a regular
lane gives a motorist and additionally prevent the motorist from access.
I like the idea.

I agree that they are necessary on many roads or that they could work
to bring people out, but first we solve the mystery of why they
disappear into thin air...

They go for a short distance, then you are on own your own in enemy
territory. Are the designers reckless or stupid? I guess there's a
difference b/ the two terms: reckless is when they don't care because
they don't ride it. Is someone trying to score points by counting the
miles of bike lanes in a given city?

I posted a pic of one here that ends unpredictably and since it's a
bi-directional one, it lands you against traffic. Bad design.
I won't take it in that direction but it is supposed to be getting
rectified. Not sure how yet.

And another problem is the lack of enforcement...

http://miami.mybikelane.com/

We have cops on bikes that give tickets on bike trails and the regular
cops give tickets for blocking bike lanes. Cops in Montreal love to
give tickets so this isn't really an issue.

THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO SEND UNDERCOVER CYCLISTS ON THE ROAD. Don't
worry about budget. We take the agents from prostitution and
narcotics, and I'm sure they can catch plenty of unlawful drivers to
feed the city coffers, which is the bottom line, right?

We need those agents to police the politicians here though...

On Mar 15, 10:12*am, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/15/2011 9:45 AM, His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the
Stop the Bull**** Campaign wrote:



On Mar 15, 9:00 am, Duane *wrote:
On 3/14/2011 8:32 PM, T m Sherm n _ *wrote:

On 3/14/2011 8:14 AM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/13/2011 10:11 PM, T m Sherm n _ *wrote:
On 3/13/2011 8:59 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
[...]
Don't get me wrong. I don't want bike lanes or paths everywhere. Only
where they can be useful. Mostly on busy roads in congested cities..
Apparently this attitude is untenable to some.Shrug

snip

How about a wider than normal inner lane with a lower speed limit?

Sure. Not sure when that would happen though.

Makes more sense to lobby for, than for separate and unequal facilities.

Bike lanes are unequal. *They give me the same right to use as a regular
lane gives a motorist and additionally prevent the motorist from access.
* *I like the idea.

I agree that they are necessary on many roads or that they could work
to bring people out, but first we solve the mystery of why they
disappear into thin air...

They go for a short distance, then you are on own your own in enemy
territory. Are the designers reckless or stupid? I guess there's a
difference b/ the two terms: reckless is when they don't care because
they don't ride it. Is someone trying to score points by counting the
miles of bike lanes in a given city?

I posted a pic of one here that ends unpredictably and since it's a
bi-directional one, it lands you against traffic. *Bad design.
I won't take it in that direction but it is supposed to be getting
rectified. *Not sure how yet.

It's so good to hear that the authorities still hear people's
complaints somewhere else. Not a chance that would happen here. And
people have been conditioned NOT to complain so we have a dilemma
there. Or maybe it's because they know it doesn't make any difference.


And another problem is the lack of enforcement...

http://miami.mybikelane.com/

We have cops on bikes that give tickets on bike trails and the regular
cops give tickets for blocking bike lanes. *Cops in Montreal love to
give tickets so this isn't really an issue.

I meant UNDERCOVER, so any violation against a cyclist's space could
be directed at a cop.


THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO SEND UNDERCOVER CYCLISTS ON THE ROAD. Don't
worry about budget. We take the agents from prostitution and
narcotics, and I'm sure they can catch plenty of unlawful drivers to
feed the city coffers, which is the bottom line, right?

We need those agents to police the politicians here though...

Oh sorry, we need the politicians to agree to my plan.

On 3/15/2011 10:41 AM, His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the
Stop the Bull**** Campaign wrote:
On Mar 15, 10:12 am, Duane wrote:
On 3/15/2011 9:45 AM, His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the
Stop the Bull**** Campaign wrote:



On Mar 15, 9:00 am, Duane wrote:
On 3/14/2011 8:32 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:

On 3/14/2011 8:14 AM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/13/2011 10:11 PM, T m Sherm n _ wrote:
On 3/13/2011 8:59 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
[...]
Don't get me wrong. I don't want bike lanes or paths everywhere. Only
where they can be useful. Mostly on busy roads in congested cities.
Apparently this attitude is untenable to some.Shrug

snip

How about a wider than normal inner lane with a lower speed limit?

Sure. Not sure when that would happen though.

Makes more sense to lobby for, than for separate and unequal facilities.

Bike lanes are unequal. They give me the same right to use as a regular
lane gives a motorist and additionally prevent the motorist from access.
I like the idea.

I agree that they are necessary on many roads or that they could work
to bring people out, but first we solve the mystery of why they
disappear into thin air...

They go for a short distance, then you are on own your own in enemy
territory. Are the designers reckless or stupid? I guess there's a
difference b/ the two terms: reckless is when they don't care because
they don't ride it. Is someone trying to score points by counting the
miles of bike lanes in a given city?

I posted a pic of one here that ends unpredictably and since it's a
bi-directional one, it lands you against traffic. Bad design.
I won't take it in that direction but it is supposed to be getting
rectified. Not sure how yet.

It's so good to hear that the authorities still hear people's
complaints somewhere else. Not a chance that would happen here. And
people have been conditioned NOT to complain so we have a dilemma
there. Or maybe it's because they know it doesn't make any difference.


We have cycling organizations here that get involved so sometime things
get fixed. This particular lane is not in Montreal so they didn't
involve the cycling organization in the design stage. Montreal usually
does that now.

Not perfect yet but at least there are some methods to get things fixed.
It helps that the administration is pro cycling for a change.


And another problem is the lack of enforcement...

http://miami.mybikelane.com/

We have cops on bikes that give tickets on bike trails and the regular
cops give tickets for blocking bike lanes. Cops in Montreal love to
give tickets so this isn't really an issue.

I meant UNDERCOVER, so any violation against a cyclist's space could
be directed at a cop.

Ah.


THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO SEND UNDERCOVER CYCLISTS ON THE ROAD. Don't
worry about budget. We take the agents from prostitution and
narcotics, and I'm sure they can catch plenty of unlawful drivers to
feed the city coffers, which is the bottom line, right?

We need those agents to police the politicians here though...

Oh sorry, we need the politicians to agree to my plan.

Trick is to get the politicians thinking that it's popular and they'll
agree. Problem is that they get their fingers in the construction costs
so you need the cops.

On Mar 15, 9:00*am, Duane Hebert wrote:

Bike lanes are unequal. *They give me the same right to use as a regular
lane gives a motorist and additionally prevent the motorist from access.

They give you the right to use the bike lane. They tend to take away
your right to use the rest of the road - for example, to merge left
for turns, to avoid parked car doors, to avoid debris or potholes.

Sure, you can still merge out over the line; but in some places you'll
be ticketed for doing so.

Sure, you may fight the ticket. You might even win; but you'll still
be out the time and aggravation.

But even more sure, the lane does _not_ prevent the motorist from
access. Any painted line you can ride over, a motorist can drive
over. Your dreaded attack from the rear is still possible.

* I like the idea.

We know. But it still makes little sense.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...rd-to-imagine/

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...h/whitgift.jpg

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt.../uastripes.htm

- Frank Krygowski

On 3/15/2011 9:34 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per AMuzi:
And the Persians/Iranians haven't made amends for sacking
Athens (just before coming in 2d at Salamis).

Then there were a series of raids by the various Mayan
kings, enslaving and/or sacrificing the survivors in the
1200s to 1400s. No apologies there either.

Yeah, but

- The rape of Nanking happened within the lifetime of some people
still living today

- Japan still has war memorials eulogizing some of the
perpetrators

- There is a significant level of denial at the national
level.

It wouldn't get us anything - but it would get Japan as a
nation/people enhanced credibility.

Japan has revised more history books than the Texas Board of Education.
Which is saying something.