"This is Called 'Car Punching'"

I assumed that the cyclist was mad about having to merge into
45 mph traffic to pass - an 8 foot shoulder is not wide enough
to safely pass a parked car.


Sort of; an 8 foot shoulder with a parked car and traffic may present a
challenge, but it's a challenge we're used to dealing with most
everywhere we ride. The problem is that there was a PERSON in the car,
in the driver's side, and the person could, at any time, open up a door.
A car in that situation deserves a very cautious approach, and I would
suggest that any cyclist who did manage to bang on a car in that
situation is CRAZY because he or she is riding far too close to it.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA


"Bill Z." wrote in message
...
Jym Dyer writes:

Nothing in the original account talked about a cell phone
call, ...
... nor did it say the cyclist was cut off (which is not
likely given that this road is straight with no business
driveways along it and a 45 mph speed limit).

=v= While it's remotely possible that this incident was the
work of a sociopathic cyclist who just goes around hitting cars,
I find *that* unlikely.

I assumed that the cyclist was mad about having to merge into
45 mph traffic to pass - an 8 foot shoulder is not wide enough
to safely pass a parked car.

I don't think it is likely that the cyclist was cut off, although
that is possible - usually cyclists get cut off when people turn
into driveways or onto cross streets and those are few and far
between on this road (no driveways and few cross streets).

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Jym Dyer" wrote in message
...
=v= There was a letter to the "Mr. Roadshow" column in the
_San_Jose_Mercury_News_ last week from Jane Phipps, a motorist
who pulled into the shoulder because she had "an urgent need
to attend to," and said her car was banged on by a cyclist:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12431993

Below is my response to Gary, written today (6/6/09)-

Gary: The reason a parked car, with somebody in it, is incredibly
dangerous is because the driver's door can swing open, into the path of
the cyclist, without warning. With a car taking up the entire shoulder,
and two lanes of high-speed traffic, there is simply no place for the
cyclist to safely go. That's why the shoulder is for emergency-use only.

It is simple fact that parking on the shoulder to take that phone call
put others at risk.

Should the cyclist have banged on the car? I don't think so, and I think
it was dangerous to do so, because the cyclist obviously had to be
placing him or herself in a position of great harm if that door had
opened. But it's also possible the cyclist had no choice but to ride
that closely, due to approaching traffic from behind, or the assumption
that could be the case.

On a normal city street, the cyclist has the option to "take the lane"
relatively safely and avoid the dangers posed by parked cars. This is
simply not the case on Foothill. And one more time, a reason why parking
there is for emergencies only. It's hard for me to imagine knowing that
an *incoming* call is an emergency that must be instantly dealt with.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA




"Jym Dyer" wrote in message
...
=v= There was a letter to the "Mr. Roadshow" column in the
_San_Jose_Mercury_News_ last week from Jane Phipps, a motorist
who pulled into the shoulder because she had "an urgent need
to attend to," and said her car was banged on by a cyclist:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12431993

There are followup letters today. Check out the first one:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12480108

| This is about the incident on Foothill Expressway when a woman
| pulled over to the shoulder to make an emergency phone call
| and a bicyclist rode past and slammed his hand twice against
| her car, creating two dents. This is called "car punching" and
| is a term used by some bikers for intentionally denting cars
| when the driver does something that is dangerous for bicycles.
| ...
| Jim Bodwin
| Cupertino

=v= I have never heard the phrase "car punching." Have you?
Has anyone, aside from the one cyclist Jim Bodwin of Cupertino
has an anecdote about? Gary Richards made sure to highlight
it in the column headline, so now all his readers will think
it's a common phrase and practice.

=v= Also, I smell a rat. The original correspondent only
mentioned "an urgent need to attend to" and yet Jim Bodwin of
Cupertino somehow knows that it was "an emergency phone call."
(The word "emergency" is very relevant because it's what the
California Vehicle Code requires for pulling over into the
shoulder.) Two letters down, correspondent Derek Lindsey of
Santa Clara somehow has also somehow thought to promote the
"urgent" need to an "emergency," and oh so very conveniently
asks Richards to "expound on what an emergency actually is."

=v= Richards replies:

| I define an emergency as an immediate safety issue or an
| urgent matter of great importance. Phipps received an urgent
| message from her husband, who was in New York for an important
| meeting.

Right. It was an IMPORTANT meeting, so the URGENT matter is
nearly just exactly the same thing as an EMERGENCY. Heck, if
it's good enough for Mr. Roadshow, surely the CVC is applicable,
right? Yak away, motorists! Don't mind little old us, you need
to pull over into the shoulder for EMERGENCY phone calls from
the other side of the country, where IMPORTANT things happen!
_Jym_

"Mike Jacoubowsky" writes:

"Jym Dyer" wrote in message
...
=v= There was a letter to the "Mr. Roadshow" column in the
_San_Jose_Mercury_News_ last week from Jane Phipps, a motorist
who pulled into the shoulder because she had "an urgent need
to attend to," and said her car was banged on by a cyclist:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12431993

Below is my response to Gary, written today (6/6/09)-

Gary: The reason a parked car, with somebody in it, is incredibly
dangerous is because the driver's door can swing open, into the path of
the cyclist, without warning. With a car taking up the entire shoulder,
and two lanes of high-speed traffic, there is simply no place for the
cyclist to safely go. That's why the shoulder is for emergency-use only.

Well, that makes two of us who told him about the risk of passing too
closely to parked cars.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Bill Z." wrote in message
...
"Mike Jacoubowsky" writes:

"Jym Dyer" wrote in message
...
=v= There was a letter to the "Mr. Roadshow" column in the
_San_Jose_Mercury_News_ last week from Jane Phipps, a motorist
who pulled into the shoulder because she had "an urgent need
to attend to," and said her car was banged on by a cyclist:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12431993

Below is my response to Gary, written today (6/6/09)-

Gary: The reason a parked car, with somebody in it, is incredibly
dangerous is because the driver's door can swing open, into the path
of
the cyclist, without warning. With a car taking up the entire
shoulder,
and two lanes of high-speed traffic, there is simply no place for the
cyclist to safely go. That's why the shoulder is for emergency-use
only.

Well, that makes two of us who told him about the risk of passing too
closely to parked cars.

Hopefully there will be more.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

On a normal city street, the cyclist has the option to "take the lane"
relatively safely and avoid the dangers posed by parked cars.

Maybe "relatively" but not all that safely. In Cupertino, there was a
school where parents routinely parked in the bike lane (which was signed
for no parking). So if you were in the bike lane and reached the school
at around 3:00 p.m. you would be forced out into the traffic lane for
several blocks, which was also quite busy. It was safer just to stay in
the traffic lane and take the lane than to go out into the traffic lane
once you reached the cars that were parked their illegally. A call to
the sheriff was pointless (you know the sad history of the sheriff and
bicycles in Cupertino!). They claimed that the cars were "pausing" not
parking, and wouldn't ticket them.

Then the elementary school changed from Portal elementary to Collins
elementary (because the Collins elementary campus became Lawson Middle
and Portal had to move to another location) and the problem went away
completely. I don't know if it was because the school told parents that
they couldn't park in the bike lane, or because the change to a
neighborhood school from a magnet school meant more students walking and
less parents driving or what. It certainly wasn't because the sheriff
decided to enforce the no parking in the bike lane law.