Forester says...

On Feb 3, 12:50*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
Frank Krygowski considered Wed, 2 Feb 2011
10:28:42 -0800 (PST) the perfect time to write:


How common is it, really, for a cyclist to be prosecuted for
controlling a lane that's too narrow for safe passing?

We had a widely publicised case over here, where the rider (Daniel
Cadden, iirc) was convicted of obstruction in the magistrates court
(which doesn't set a precedent) but this decision was overturned on
appeal (which usefully, Does set a precedent).
This established that in England and Wales, it is perfectly legal for
cyclists to take the lane where necessary, and even where there is an
alternative cycling route.
The principal expert witness called on Daniel Cadden's behalf was John
Franklin.

A good man.

- Frank Krygowski

On Feb 2, 9:58 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Feb 3, 12:50 am, Phil W Lee wrote:



Frank Krygowski considered Wed, 2 Feb 2011
10:28:42 -0800 (PST) the perfect time to write:

How common is it, really, for a cyclist to be prosecuted for
controlling a lane that's too narrow for safe passing?

We had a widely publicised case over here, where the rider (Daniel
Cadden, iirc) was convicted of obstruction in the magistrates court
(which doesn't set a precedent) but this decision was overturned on
appeal (which usefully, Does set a precedent).
This established that in England and Wales, it is perfectly legal for
cyclists to take the lane where necessary, and even where there is an
alternative cycling route.
The principal expert witness called on Daniel Cadden's behalf was John
Franklin.

A good man.


Noted.

On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:25:37 -0600, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:

Anything unpredictable and violating traffic regulations by cyclists
will irritate motorists.

What irritates me is how stupid a lot of them are. I came around a curve
doing about 60mph on a 2 lane highway with no shoulder and came up on a
group of riders riding 3 and 4 abreast and they didn't move over. If
another car had been coming the other way, guess who would have died? It
wouldn't have been me, but some of them. Now that's what irritates
motorist. I just started riding about 8 months ago, and I can assure you,
I won't ride on any road with a speed limit over 35mph that doesn't have
a shoulder to ride on. I look at it like this. When riding, I'm just
another bump in the road to someone driving a 3000 lb vehicle, and I stay
way the heck out of their way. Having the right of way doesn't mean crap
when you're dead or in the hospital. if you want to live to my age (64)
or older, I'd suggest you not worry to much about the rules and stay the
hell out of their way. People these days have little respect for anyone,
much less cyclist.

Wes Newell wrote:

I came around a curve
doing about 60mph on a 2 lane highway with no shoulder and came up on a
group of riders riding 3 and 4 abreast and they didn't move over. If
another car had been coming the other way, guess who would have died? It
wouldn't have been me, but some of them.

Then you had no business driving that fast in those conditions. What
if it had been a fallen tree instead of a group of riders across the
lane? Or a group of cows? Or a police roadblock?

Don't drive like a callous, reckless asshole, and you won't find
yourself in difficult situations. The burden of ethical conduct is on
the motorist, who is the one bringing the deadly risk to the road.

Now that's what irritates
motorist. I just started riding about 8 months ago, and I can assure you,
I won't ride on any road with a speed limit over 35mph that doesn't have
a shoulder to ride on.

**** you and the stinking death wagon you rode in on, then. Sell your
bike; take up hang gliding or bungee jumping or something else you can
drive your car to.

Do try harder not to kill anybody else while you're at it.

On 2/2/2011 7:25 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:

Anything unpredictable and violating traffic regulations by cyclists
will irritate motorists.

Traffic, stop lights and bad weather irritate motorists. Point is, the
average motorist is already irritated. That's one good reason to ride a
bike.

On 2/3/2011 2:09 AM, Wes Newell wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:25:37 -0600, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:

Anything unpredictable and violating traffic regulations by cyclists
will irritate motorists.

What irritates me is how stupid a lot of them are. I came around a curve
doing about 60mph on a 2 lane highway with no shoulder and came up on a
group of riders riding 3 and 4 abreast and they didn't move over. If
another car had been coming the other way, guess who would have died? It
wouldn't have been me, but some of them. Now that's what irritates
motorist. I just started riding about 8 months ago, and I can assure you,
I won't ride on any road with a speed limit over 35mph that doesn't have
a shoulder to ride on. I look at it like this. When riding, I'm just
another bump in the road to someone driving a 3000 lb vehicle, and I stay
way the heck out of their way. Having the right of way doesn't mean crap
when you're dead or in the hospital. if you want to live to my age (64)
or older, I'd suggest you not worry to much about the rules and stay the
hell out of their way. People these days have little respect for anyone,
much less cyclist.

You just need to control the lane. Ask Frank.

On 2/3/2011 11:00 AM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Wes considered Thu, 3 Feb 2011
07:09:51 +0000 (UTC) the perfect time to write:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:25:37 -0600, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:

Anything unpredictable and violating traffic regulations by cyclists
will irritate motorists.

What irritates me is how stupid a lot of them are. I came around a curve
doing about 60mph on a 2 lane highway with no shoulder and came up on a
group of riders riding 3 and 4 abreast and they didn't move over. If
another car had been coming the other way, guess who would have died? It
wouldn't have been me, but some of them.

Then you were driving recklessly.
You should ALWAYS be able to stop within the distance you can see to
be clear.
A group of riders should be no more of a problem to cope with than an
agricultural vehicle, a broken down motor vehicle, an unexpected
traffic queue, or anything else.

"Should" being the operative word here.
Now that's what irritates
motorist.

Only bad ones.

Don't have data to back this up but I would be willing to bet that the
percentage of bad drivers is not close to 0.


I just started riding about 8 months ago, and I can assure you,
I won't ride on any road with a speed limit over 35mph that doesn't have
a shoulder to ride on.

You accept being bullied of the road by reckless drivers?
Worse, you seem to participate in the bullying.

I look at it like this. When riding, I'm just
another bump in the road to someone driving a 3000 lb vehicle, and I stay
way the heck out of their way. Having the right of way doesn't mean crap
when you're dead or in the hospital. if you want to live to my age (64)
or older, I'd suggest you not worry to much about the rules and stay the
hell out of their way. People these days have little respect for anyone,
much less cyclist.

And you think you'll gain any respect by cowering in the gutter?

He said that when the limit is above 35 mph he will only ride on the
road if there's a shoulder. Doesn't seem unreasonable depending on the
traffic. Hardly what I'd call cowering in the gutter. Are you
recommending that he rides 30 k/h in the lane in that circumstance? If
so, how about at 40 mph limit? 50? When is it Ok to ride on the
shoulder?

This is a road that I take often to get to Oka park where we play in the
hills:
http://tinyurl.com/4u464ox

Speed limit is 80 k/h around turns and steep grades but 100 k/h when
straight. Traffic is usually a bit heavier as this is a truck bypass
route as well. Would you suggest staying off the shoulder?

On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 00:30:27 -0800, Chalo wrote:

Wes Newell wrote:

I came around a curve
doing about 60mph on a 2 lane highway with no shoulder and came up on a
group of riders riding 3 and 4 abreast and they didn't move over. If
another car had been coming the other way, guess who would have died?
It wouldn't have been me, but some of them.

Then you had no business driving that fast in those conditions. What if
it had been a fallen tree instead of a group of riders across the lane?
Or a group of cows? Or a police roadblock?


I guess some will always fail to see the point. What does it matter to
the dead cyclist?

Don't drive like a callous, reckless asshole, and you won't find
yourself in difficult situations. The burden of ethical conduct is on
the motorist, who is the one bringing the deadly risk to the road.

Oh, I could have stopped, but still, it was irritating. I thought that
was what this was about. Btw, a fallen tree wouldn't have made a choice
to fall in the roadway. These cyclist made a choice to put themselves in
harms way. Now if you don't think that's irritating to motorist....

Now that's what irritates
motorist. I just started riding about 8 months ago, and I can assure
you, I won't ride on any road with a speed limit over 35mph that
doesn't have a shoulder to ride on.

**** you and the stinking death wagon you rode in on, then. Sell your
bike; take up hang gliding or bungee jumping or something else you can
drive your car to.

I ride for exercise. I would take up running, but can't stand for more
than a few minutes with a bad back.

Do try harder not to kill anybody else while you're at it.

On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:00:54 +0000, Phil W Lee wrote:

Wes Newell considered Thu, 3 Feb 2011
07:09:51 +0000 (UTC) the perfect time to write:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:25:37 -0600, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:

Anything unpredictable and violating traffic regulations by cyclists
will irritate motorists.

I just started riding about 8 months ago, and I can assure
you,
I won't ride on any road with a speed limit over 35mph that doesn't have
a shoulder to ride on.

You accept being bullied of the road by reckless drivers? Worse, you
seem to participate in the bullying.

I accept facts. A person on bike is no match for a 3000lb vehicle and
that's why I try my hardest to stay the hell out of their way.

I look at it like this. When riding, I'm just
another bump in the road to someone driving a 3000 lb vehicle, and I
stay way the heck out of their way. Having the right of way doesn't mean
crap when you're dead or in the hospital. if you want to live to my age
(64) or older, I'd suggest you not worry to much about the rules and
stay the hell out of their way. People these days have little respect
for anyone, much less cyclist.

And you think you'll gain any respect by cowering in the gutter?

Yes. It's called common courtesy. The roads were built for automobiles
that can go a lot faster than I can on a bike. I give them the right of
way because it doesn't bother me to do so, and I stay safer because of
it. Recently, I woman jogging on a hiking trail was killed in Dallas when
a cyclist ran into her. She had the right of way too for all the good it
did her.

On Feb 3, 11:39*am, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 2/3/2011 11:00 AM, Phil W Lee wrote:



Wes *considered Thu, 3 Feb 2011
07:09:51 +0000 (UTC) the perfect time to write:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:25:37 -0600, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:

Anything unpredictable and violating traffic regulations by cyclists
will irritate motorists.

What irritates me is how stupid a lot of them are. I came around a curve
doing about 60mph on a 2 lane highway with no shoulder and came up on a
group of riders riding 3 and 4 abreast and they didn't move over. If
another car had been coming the other way, guess who would have died? It
wouldn't have been me, but some of them.

Then you were driving recklessly.
You should ALWAYS be able to stop within the distance you can see to
be clear.
A group of riders should be no more of a problem to cope with than an
agricultural vehicle, a broken down motor vehicle, an unexpected
traffic queue, or anything else.

"Should" being the operative word here.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Now that's what irritates
motorist.

Only bad ones.

Don't have data to back this up but I would be willing to bet that the
percentage of bad drivers is not close to 0.





* * * * * I just started riding about 8 months ago, and I can assure you,
I won't ride on any road with a speed limit over 35mph that doesn't have
a shoulder to ride on.

You accept being bullied of the road by reckless drivers?
Worse, you seem to participate in the bullying.

* * * * * * * * * * * * I look at it like this.. When riding, I'm just
another bump in the road to someone driving a 3000 lb vehicle, and I stay
way the heck out of their way. Having the right of way doesn't mean crap
when you're dead or in the hospital. if you want to live to my age (64)
or older, I'd suggest you not worry to much about the rules and stay the
hell out of their way. People these days have little respect for anyone,
much less cyclist.

And you think you'll gain any respect by cowering in the gutter?

He said that when the limit is above 35 mph he will only ride on the
road if there's a shoulder. *Doesn't seem unreasonable depending on the
traffic. *

Are you serious? Do you really avoid all shoulderless two-lane roads
in the country? Do you recommend others do that?

Hardly what I'd call cowering in the gutter. *Are you
recommending that he rides 30 k/h in the lane in that circumstance? *If
so, how about at 40 mph limit? *50? *When is it Ok to ride on the
shoulder?

This is a road that I take often to get to Oka park where we play in the
hills:http://tinyurl.com/4u464ox

Looks fine.

Speed limit is 80 k/h around turns and steep grades but 100 k/h when
straight. Traffic is usually a bit heavier as this is a truck bypass
route as well. *Would you suggest staying off the shoulder?

If people want to use an available shoulder, fine, provided it's good
enough to ride. But if there were no shoulder, would you really never
ride there? And what do you do if the shoulder has a spot that's too
rough, or too covered with gravel?

It's beginning to sound like you couldn't ride in most of the places I
enjoy riding!

- Frank Krygowski