Ride your bike

Jens Müller wrote:
recycled schrieb:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Jens Müller wrote:
Bill Z. schrieb:
Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a
car and a bicycle to procede side by side.

Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_?

When they are holding a mobile phone in one hand and a Big Mac in the
other, yes. When they are screaming at the brats in the back seat
while holding a cup of coffee, yes.

And sharrows open their eyes?

The reality in the US is that there are funds dedicated to "bicycle
facilities", and sharrows are certainly better than the "bicycle ghetto"
bike lanes; since the bicycle lanes put the cyclists at more risk from
right turning motorists and when the cyclist has to leave the lane to
make a left turn.

Or when they simply do not realize the far side of their vehicle is
_that_ close to the cyclist.

Why is the stupid cyclist driving on the edge of the carriageway?

Even if the cyclist is riding in the left hand normal motor vehicle
wheel track, the incompetent "cagers" may pass to closely.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"People who had no mercy will find none." - Anon.

Jens Müller wrote:
Tom Sherman schrieb:

Indeed. I used to live in a city that had little bicycle icons and a
white dividing stripe painted on the wider sidewalks as a "bicycle
path". Needless to say, riding on these sidewalks is more dangerous
than riding vehicular style in the street. However, where they exist,
cagers (motorists) will often point at the cycling farcility (sic) and
yell at the cyclist to get off the road.

And why doesn't the DMV just revoke their licenses?

Actually, the DMV can not only revoke licences - that requires the
police to write a citation, the district attorney to prosecute and the
court to revoke. In almost all of the US, these parties will be motor
vehicle centric, and ignore such behavior.

As an example, Google "Boub v. Wayne" - the Illinois State Supreme Court
decided that cyclists are "allowed" but not "intended" users of the
road. Therefore, if the government body in charge of the roadway decided
to install full width drainage grates with openings wide enough to trap
normal bicycle wheels, the government would NOT be liable for injuries
to cyclists and damages to bicycles caused by these grates.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"People who had no mercy will find none." - Anon.

On Jul 26, 9:50*am, Tom Sherman
wrote:
Jens Müller wrote:
recycled schrieb:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Jens Müller wrote:
Bill Z. schrieb:
Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a
car and a bicycle to procede side by side.

Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_?

When they are holding a mobile phone in one hand and a Big Mac in the
other, yes. When they are screaming at the brats in the back seat
while holding a cup of coffee, yes.

And sharrows open their eyes?

The reality in the US is that there are funds dedicated to "bicycle
facilities", and sharrows are certainly better than the "bicycle ghetto"
bike lanes; since the bicycle lanes put the cyclists at more risk from
right turning motorists and when the cyclist has to leave the lane to
make a left turn.

Or when they simply do not realize the far side of their vehicle is
_that_ close to the cyclist.

Why is the stupid cyclist driving on the edge of the carriageway?

Even if the cyclist is riding in the left hand normal motor vehicle
wheel track, the incompetent "cagers" may pass to closely.

If you ride a bit left (say, in the center of the lane) and a cager
passes too closely, you have some room to move away. A mirror helps
gauge whether that's necessary.

But if a cyclist does take the lane that way, almost all motorists
give plenty of clearance once they can pass.

Not that I _always_ take the lane. I share when it's safe to share,
and take the lane when it's not safe to share.

- Frank Krygowski

Jens Müller writes:

Bill Z. schrieb:
Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a
car and a bicycle to procede side by side.

Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_?
It's damn obvious when a lane it too narrow for two vehicles side by side.

You mean like it's "damn obvious" where too lanes merge, so we shouldn't
put those arrows on the road indicating that one is approaching a
point where too lanes join?

It's not "damn obvious" to a lot of people that a lane is too narrow
for a bike and car to procede safely side by side unless passing is
completely impossible. If it were that obvious, we wouldn't see cars
passing bicycles with 1.5 feet of clearance, and we wouldn't see
bicyclists hugging the curb when they should use the full lane.

Also, lanes frequently narrow at intersections to squeeze in a turn
lane. Putting a sharrow there is as sensible as putting up a sign or
pavement marking indicating that two lanes merge.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow
for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side.
Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_?

=v= Many motorists are blinded by their sense of entitlement.
I've had some yell at me to ride on the sidewalk, in which
case the sharrows are handy to point at: "See that, right
there? That's where I'm supposed to be riding."

=v= They do indeed look on with wonderment, as if they've
never noticed such a thing before. Dunno wheter it actually
changes their behavior, though.
_Jym_

P.S.: Note followups. Why is r.b.rides even in this thread?

What exactly does a sharrow look like? I've never seen one or
heard the term.

=v= Here's one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jym/1595443054/

_Jym_

In my area (Suffolk Co. NY) I see green signs with white cycles posted on
the roadsides. They always make me wonder, where the hell is a bike
supposed to ride on this little roadway? Will a motorist with cellphone
and coffee even see the signs, and if so will they instantly become more
focused?

I live in Nassau. Those green signs are useless, as they only really serve
to make drivers think cyclists are ONLY allowed on those roads. This makes
drivers even more aggressive against cyclists riding anywhere else!