"you give up your rights as a cyclist when staying on the road wherethe paths are available"

On Sep 24, 8:59*am, " wrote:
On Sep 23, 9:30*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

*Do you really expect warm regards when you tell
someone "**** off"?

Do you really expect warm regards when you tell someone their kids
will grow up to be social retards if you make them wear helmets while
biking, skating, similar? Don't weasel, you meant to be insulting.

You didn't **** off yet Frank.

Hey, someone poked you back, and you accused *them* of acting like a
girl.

There's some mentality you could get straightened out, for starters.

Especially since we found out that all the library work and digging on
the internet and all the other "work" (including insulting anyone who
didn't toe your line) "against MHL's" was done, root cause, because
you think you look funny in a helmet and you don't want to be made to
wear one. And wow, did that take a ton of shoveling. Including a large
pile of "Oh the children!!!" (who won't ride their bikes if they are
made to wear a helmet!!!!) of your own.

Oh, I see! You're continuing some ancient pro-helmet rant!
Astonishing!

Well, for some people, a game of hopscotch triggers a life-long
grudge. For others, it's a discussion on helmets.

And some people wonder how human beings get into so many wars!

- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 05:59:21 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Sep 23, 9:30*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
*Do you really expect warm regards when you tell
someone "**** off"?

Do you really expect warm regards when you tell someone their kids
will grow up to be social retards if you make them wear helmets while
biking, skating, similar? Don't weasel, you meant to be insulting.

You didn't **** off yet Frank.

Hey, someone poked you back, and you accused *them* of acting like a
girl.

There's some mentality you could get straightened out, for starters.

Especially since we found out that all the library work and digging on
the internet and all the other "work" (including insulting anyone who
didn't toe your line) "against MHL's" was done, root cause, because
you think you look funny in a helmet and you don't want to be made to
wear one. And wow, did that take a ton of shoveling. Including a large
pile of "Oh the children!!!" (who won't ride their bikes if they are
made to wear a helmet!!!!) of your own.

Don't look down, your fly is open. --D-y

Dear D,

What on earth happened to you?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Bill Bushnell wrote:

It is for this reason that bicyclists don't use Alma St. in Palo
Alto because when one does, there are car skid marks to show the
effect.

For those who don't live in the area, Alma St. is a four-lane
boulevard, that runs roughly north to south through Palo Alto,
California. On its western side is a railroad and an occasional (~1
per mile) controlled crossing, and on its eastern side for most of
its length are residences and businesses that have driveways and
frequent cross-streets. Through downtown parallel parking is
allowed on the east side.

The skid marks that I have observed being left on the road are not
from autos slowing suddenly for the unseen bicyclist, but from autos
who follow too closely when then car in front slows nearly to a stop
to make a right turn or to enter a driveway.

I have observed the panic of cars (seen from my car) when someone
moves over into the left lane suddenly exposing a bicyclist traveling
about 15mph directly ahead. I have observed this over many yeas since
Alma St. was re-striped to four lanes from two similar to Embarcadero
Rd. where bicycles are also discouraged. I rode on that road to
7-8-9th grade when it was two lanes and my favorite game was to see
whether I could "take the lane" on the way to lunch without a car
going my way. Those were more pleasant times when Palo Alto was less
than 25,000 pop.

There is a reason the speed limit is 35 mph, and I wish it were
enforced or that calming measures were taken. Traffic routinely
travel 40-45 mph, sometimes faster.

That's my point. If you have closing traffic from behind and the
driver doges at the last moment, it requires heavy braking.

I occasionally ride bike on Alma St. usually south of Meadow but
occasionally all the way through to Menlo Park when traveling
northbound, where it is by far the fastest non-freeway route through
Palo Alto. I see other bicyclists doing the same, and we're usually
not riding slowly, 20-30 mph.

That far south, there is no curb and no holly bushed trimmed flush by
passing vehicles.

Evelyn Ave. through Sunnyvale is situated similarly with residences
and business on one side and a railroad (same railroad as is
alongside Alma) on the other, but the city (Sunnyvale) recently put
the road on a lane diet that has made the road much more
bike-friendly than it used to be. I wish that Palo Alto would
consider the same for Alma.

Me too! But first I would like the broad well paved bicycle-
pedestrian path along the west side of the RR to be extended to
California Ave, where nearly empty Park Blvd makes a good bicycle
route to the south.

Jobst Brandt

Bill Bushnell wrote:

It is for this reason that bicyclists don't use Alma St. in Palo
Alto because when one does, there are car skid marks to show the
effect.

For those who don't live in the area, Alma St. is a four-lane
boulevard, that runs roughly north to south through Palo Alto,
California. On its western side is a railroad and an occasional (~1
per mile) controlled crossing, and on its eastern side for most of
its length are residences and businesses that have driveways and
frequent cross-streets. Through downtown parallel parking is
allowed on the east side.

The skid marks that I have observed being left on the road are not
from autos slowing suddenly for the unseen bicyclist, but from autos
who follow too closely when then car in front slows nearly to a stop
to make a right turn or to enter a driveway.

I have observed the panic of cars (seen from my car) when someone
moves over into the left lane suddenly exposing a bicyclist traveling
about 15mph directly ahead. I have observed this over many yeas since
Alma St. was re-striped to four lanes from two similar to Embarcadero
Rd. where bicycles are also discouraged. I rode on that road to
7-8-9th grade when it was two lanes and my favorite game was to see
whether I could "take the lane" on the way to lunch without a car
going my way. Those were more pleasant times when Palo Alto was less
than 25,000 pop.

There is a reason the speed limit is 35 mph, and I wish it were
enforced or that calming measures were taken. Traffic routinely
travel 40-45 mph, sometimes faster.

That's my point. If you have closing traffic from behind and the
driver doges at the last moment, it requires heavy braking from
following cars.

I occasionally ride bike on Alma St. usually south of Meadow but
occasionally all the way through to Menlo Park when traveling
northbound, where it is by far the fastest non-freeway route through
Palo Alto. I see other bicyclists doing the same, and we're usually
not riding slowly, 20-30 mph.

That far south, there is no curb and no holly bushes trimmed flush by
passing vehicles. THere is no escape fo the bicyclist.

Evelyn Ave. through Sunnyvale is situated similarly with residences
and business on one side and a railroad (same railroad as is
alongside Alma) on the other, but the city (Sunnyvale) recently put
the road on a lane diet that has made the road much more
bike-friendly than it used to be. I wish that Palo Alto would
consider the same for Alma.

Me too! But first I would like the broad well paved bicycle-
pedestrian path along the west side of the RR to be extended to
California Ave, where nearly empty Park Blvd makes a good bicycle
route to the south.

Jobst Brandt