Cities Turning to Bicycles

Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:08:41 GMT, JSC6d.283143$mD.172897@attbi_s02,
tetraethyllead yahoo.com (Brent P) whined:

People driving fast through residential areas is the direct result of
screwing up the roads elsewhere. If the busy-bodies, control freaks, and
lowest common demonator believers hadn't screwed up the other roads this
problem wouldn't have occured.

The lowest common denominator is the asswipe cagers screwing up the
roads simply by being there en masse.
So, the worthless scumbags like yourself choose to blow through
residential streets trying to avoid the problems they created by
driving in the first place.
Choke.
--
zk

Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:23:18 -0500,
,
(Matthew Russotto) dithered:


I imagine next Tim will tell you that if your bicycle can't handle the
speed bumps, it's unsuitable and you should replace it with a mountain
bike or something.

The speed humps along one stretch of road by the high school, tennis
courts, sports fields and hospital are designed for the posted speed
limit - 30KmH.

At 32 KmH in a car they're barely noticed. At 37KmH on a bike the
front end goes airborne if I'm riding no handed and sitting back on
the saddle.

Your interchanging of "bump" for "hump" is either your persistent
preposterousness or deliberate disingenuousness.

IOW, you're stupid or lying though I suspect it's both.
--
zk

In article , Zoot Katz wrote:
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:08:41 GMT, JSC6d.283143$mD.172897@attbi_s02,
tetraethyllead yahoo.com (Brent P) whined:

People driving fast through residential areas is the direct result of
screwing up the roads elsewhere. If the busy-bodies, control freaks, and
lowest common demonator believers hadn't screwed up the other roads this
problem wouldn't have occured.

The lowest common denominator is the asswipe cagers screwing up the
roads simply by being there en masse.

I see the same things on bike paths.

So, the worthless scumbags like yourself choose to blow through
residential streets trying to avoid the problems they created by
driving in the first place.

I don't 'blow through' residential areas. I drive residential streets at
about the same speeds I ride through them on the bicycle.

Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:51:27 GMT, PuD6d.131665$MQ5.55161@attbi_s52,
tetraethyllead yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:

The lowest common denominator is the asswipe cagers screwing up the
roads simply by being there en masse.

I see the same things on bike paths.

Really? I've not much experience with bike paths having never seen
one. If you're talking about FMUPs then the thing that screws up those
are speeding cyclists, careless bladers, irresponsible dog walkers and
packs of young mothers out jogging their strollers. It all depends on
who you ask.
--
zk

In article , Zoot Katz wrote:
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:51:27 GMT, PuD6d.131665$MQ5.55161@attbi_s52,
tetraethyllead yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:

The lowest common denominator is the asswipe cagers screwing up the
roads simply by being there en masse.

I see the same things on bike paths.

Really? I've not much experience with bike paths having never seen
one. If you're talking about FMUPs then the thing that screws up those
are speeding cyclists, careless bladers, irresponsible dog walkers and
packs of young mothers out jogging their strollers. It all depends on
who you ask.

Don't know what FMUPs are but all those you mention cept for "speeding
cyclists" use the bicycle paths just as they drive on the roads.
Most fast cyclists are just fine and keep right except to pass. It's a
bicycle road, they are using it correctly as such. Because bike paths
have been taken over by peds a other fools that mostly drive think that high
speed bicycle travel doesn't belong on the bicycle path I use the roads.

Wed, 29 Sep 2004 19:41:41 GMT, VdE6d.138320$D%.135878@attbi_s51,
tetraethyllead yahoo (Brent P) wrote:

I see the same things on bike paths.

Really? I've not much experience with bike paths having never seen
one. If you're talking about FMUPs then the thing that screws up those
are speeding cyclists, careless bladers, irresponsible dog walkers and
packs of young mothers out jogging their strollers. It all depends on
who you ask.

Most fast cyclists are just fine and keep right except to pass. It's a
bicycle road, they are using it correctly as such. Because bike paths
have been taken over by peds a other fools that mostly drive think that high
speed bicycle travel doesn't belong on the bicycle path I use the roads.

FMUP is a friggin' multi-use path. It's not a "bicycle road". It's a
recreational facility for sharing with other users. It's not designed
nor designated as a "bicycle road", whatever that is. As I said, I've
never seen one.
--
zk

In article , Zoot Katz wrote:
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 19:41:41 GMT, VdE6d.138320$D%.135878@attbi_s51,
tetraethyllead yahoo (Brent P) wrote:

I see the same things on bike paths.

Really? I've not much experience with bike paths having never seen
one. If you're talking about FMUPs then the thing that screws up those
are speeding cyclists, careless bladers, irresponsible dog walkers and
packs of young mothers out jogging their strollers. It all depends on
who you ask.

Most fast cyclists are just fine and keep right except to pass. It's a
bicycle road, they are using it correctly as such. Because bike paths
have been taken over by peds a other fools that mostly drive think that high
speed bicycle travel doesn't belong on the bicycle path I use the roads.

FMUP is a friggin' multi-use path. It's not a "bicycle road". It's a
recreational facility for sharing with other users. It's not designed
nor designated as a "bicycle road", whatever that is. As I said, I've
never seen one.

They aren't called multi-use paths here, they are called bike paths. And
thusly should be a bicycle road, but never are.

Wed, 29 Sep 2004 20:23:56 GMT, wRE6d.72921$wV.38047@attbi_s54,
tetraethyllead yahoo (Brent P) wrote:

FMUP is a friggin' multi-use path. It's not a "bicycle road". It's a
recreational facility for sharing with other users. It's not designed
nor designated as a "bicycle road", whatever that is. As I said, I've
never seen one.

They aren't called multi-use paths here, they are called bike paths. And
thusly should be a bicycle road, but never are.

They're probably called "bike paths" so they can qualify for money
diverted from transportation funding.
Without constructing a barricade along its entire length, like a
freeway or toll road, it's foolishly naive to consider one anything
but a FMUP.
--
zk

Brent P wrote:

In article , Tim McNamara wrote:

The cause of people driving fast through
neighborhoods is pushing down on the damned gas pedal too hard.


So you believe this problem occured spontanously?

No, it didn't occur spontaneously. It occurred because there's
insufficient testing for drivers' licenses.

At a minimum, there should be intense psychological testing to determine
whether a person thinks saving ten seconds of commute time, and/or
preventing damage to his delicate toy car, is more of a concern than the
living environment of a residential neighborhood. Oh, and they should
also check to see if someone has an irrational fixation on
"transportation efficiency" or "underposted speed limits." Folks that
have those problems shouldn't get licenses.

Problem solved! And those folks would probably be more content, too.
Think of the frustration they'll never experience! ;-)




It's
a choice people make, it's a choice they are responsible for, and if
they can't be good neighbors voluntarily then they will face things
like speed bumps, restricted access residential streets, etc. Trying
to lay off the responsibility for people's inappropriate choices onto
someone else is classic mid-70's liberal bull****- it was bull****
then and it's bull**** now (and BTW, I'm speaking as a long-time
liberal).


I am not laying off responsibility. I am finding the root cause.

"Yer honor, my client had a terrible childhood! He grew up in a home
with only two televisions and no Game Boy. After that, the stress of
waiting for a traffic light would be too much for anyone! That's the
root cause of his mowing down the elderly couple. He's to be pitied,
sir, not punished!!"

More stupidity and laying the blame for personal choices at the feet
of others.


Again, I am not taking responsibility from the individual driver.

You're making excuses for them all day long. Quit whining.


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

Nate Nagel wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote in message ...

Nate Nagel wrote:


Frank Krygowski wrote:


OK, in case you want to be serious: If your car is straddling a speed
bump and scraping, you need to fix your car. Either you have a
mechanical problem like a low-hanging exhaust system, or you have
chosen to drive a car with insufficient ground clearance for the real
world.

It's perfectly fine in *most* situations. The only problems I have
(well, had) are in busybody-infested neighborhoods or annoying shopping
centers.

If "perfectly fine in most situations" is good enough for you, great.
Drive only where those situations exist.



Sometimes that's not an option, like when they become so prevalent
that it's impossible to avoid them all.

Take this slowly, Nate - apparently it's a little complicated for you:

If your car is "perfectly fine in most situations" as you claim, then
you don't have much of a problem. Quit whining.

If your car scrapes in situations that are so prevalent that you can't
avoid them, that's VERY UNUSUAL. Other people don't have this problem!
Your car is not practical enough.

You chose that car. Quit whining.


You're complaining about shopping centers? Yes, I know of speed bumps
in a local shopping center - necessary to keep entering speeders from
mowing down pedestrians entering a popular bookstore. Cars slow to
about 5 mph to cross them. I've _never_ detected a car scraping across
those. Would your car? If so, it seems your car is very unusual. The
solution seems to be: don't drive an unusual car and expect to handle
what normal cars handle easily; or take your business elsewhere.



Unusual? Here, have a look, if you insist. Does this look like a car
with exceptionally low ground clearance?

http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel/Scirocco.html

Lovely. Is it lower than the Honda Civic I had, which was low enough I
felt I had to shovel myself out of it? Is it lower than the Saturn for
which I had to cut down my repair ramps to make them usable? Those cars
didn't scrape on a speed bump, not once.

This really is sounding more and more like an operator problem.


However, every time I drove down a certain stretch

of residential street, no matter how slowly I drove, I could hear my
center resonator scraping across the top of that #$%^*& bump.

Did everybody's resonator scrape?

Apparently, this question will go unanswered.


Did _anyone_ else scrape?

And this question will go unanswered.


Again, my
bet is you needed to crawl under you car and fix something - or stop
driving a cartoon.


Would you consider a bone stock Miata a "cartoon?"

To repeat the quote I gave earlier: "The Miata is the car that makes
the statement 'Look! I'm Peter Pan, and I'm driving Minnie Mouse's
slipper!' "

Sorry I can't give proper attribution for that. I was laughing too hard
to hear who originally said it.

So it's no more a cartoon than Minnie Mouse. ;-)



No matter what you pretend, there are not very many production vehicles
whose ground clearance is unusually low - again, for practical reasons.
GM knows that Corvette drivers go to the mall, so they give enough
ground clearance to clear speed bumps; mall managers know they want
Corvette drivers to shop there, so they limit the height of speed bumps.
These facts cause a natural equilibrium to occur.


Aside from the fact that a Corvette probably has less ground clearance
than either my old car or a Miata, you should be correct. However, it
seems more and more like in an effort to REALLY slow down those
eeeeevil speeders...

It _is_ an effort to do that, obviously. And naturally, the dedicated
speeders are not happy. They can't understand why they get no sympathy!

The really obnoxious drivers never care how their behavior affects
others, do they?

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]