What Right-Wing Governance Does For Cycling

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.

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

On 3/13/2011 11:34 PM, Dan O wrote:

Anything that lets you type in the message body ought to let you
insert quote delimiters.

Sure but it's pretty annoying when you have long lived threads to keep
track of who wrote what. (couldn't happen here but still...)

With the last update of WLM that removed the auto quote, I switched to
Thunderbird.

On 3/14/2011 2:06 AM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Duane considered Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:51:50
-0400 the perfect time to write:

snip

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?

What do you do when the do that and there is no bike lane?

When there is no bike lane, they don't seem to feel any entitlement to
force you to use it.

My point is that some motorists feel entitlement to the road. I've had
more cars pass too close to me when I wasn't in a lane than when I was.
I've had as many yell at me to get off the road when there wasn't any
where to get as well. Some people are idiots.

Look, I don't want to make it sound like it's a daily battle around
here. Most motorists are too polite, if anything. The clowns that
aren't don't seem to be affected by bike lanes or not though. They're
just clowns.

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.

Duane Hebert writes:

On 3/14/2011 2:06 AM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Duane considered Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:51:50
-0400 the perfect time to write:

snip

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?

What do you do when the do that and there is no bike lane?

When there is no bike lane, they don't seem to feel any entitlement to
force you to use it.

My point is that some motorists feel entitlement to the road. I've had more
cars pass too close to me when I wasn't in a lane than when I was. I've had as
many yell at me to get off the road when there wasn't any where to get as well.
Some people are idiots.

Look, I don't want to make it sound like it's a daily battle around here. Most
motorists are too polite, if anything. The clowns that aren't don't seem to be
affected by bike lanes or not though. They're just clowns.

If there IS a bike lane then use it. Simple.

On 3/14/2011 9:39 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
Duane writes:

On 3/14/2011 2:06 AM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Duane considered Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:51:50
-0400 the perfect time to write:

snip

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?

What do you do when the do that and there is no bike lane?

When there is no bike lane, they don't seem to feel any entitlement to
force you to use it.

My point is that some motorists feel entitlement to the road. I've had more
cars pass too close to me when I wasn't in a lane than when I was. I've had as
many yell at me to get off the road when there wasn't any where to get as well.
Some people are idiots.

Look, I don't want to make it sound like it's a daily battle around here. Most
motorists are too polite, if anything. The clowns that aren't don't seem to be
affected by bike lanes or not though. They're just clowns.

If there IS a bike lane then use it. Simple.

Seems simple to me.

Per Nate Nagel:
Um, there are some things about Japanese culture that I'm NOT completely
nuts about...

As a nation, they'd score some points if they'd own up to
Nanking.
--
PeteCresswell

On Mar 14, 9:49*am, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 3/14/2011 9:39 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:

If there IS a bike lane then use it. Simple.

Seems simple to me.

Sure. Use this one:
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...rd-to-imagine/

Use this one:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.me...h/whitgift.jpg

Use http://tinyurl.com/6kzydms

Use the ones in the photos at
http://www.humantransport.org/bicycl.../uastripes.htm

Don't worry. Don't bother to think. Follow the stripes, wherever
they lead. It's so simple!

- Frank Krygowski

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.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971