Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

On Dec 12, 2:00 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 12/12/2010 2:58 PM, Dan 0verm n wrote:
[...] I disagree. (Deliberately) changing is never okay. Omitting is
certainly okay if marked as such. Revised m[e]s[sa]g[e] should not be
attributed to someone who didn't write it.

It is correct in English to indicate editorial changes in brackets ([]),
as I have done above.


That's okay for me ('cause I'm a wild and crazy guy :-)

On Dec 12, 2:58*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 12, 4:04*pm, Dan O wrote:

On Dec 12, 11:54 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

If someone spends so much time posting dire warnings, or vividly
describing potential crashes, their message certainly is one of
danger. *If someone wants to rebut every possible claim that cycling
is reasonably safe, or that cyclists can do well using ordinary
vehicle techniques, then the message is certainly danger.

**** you.

Oh, that's certainly impressive!

Frank, that's brevity at its best.
Clear, direct and and to the point.
Take a hint.
DR

"Frank Krygowski" wrote in message
...
On Dec 12, 1:32 am, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 11, 9:39 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI

$southslope.net" wrote:
On 12/11/2010 7:15 PM, DirtRoadie WHO? ANONYMOUSLY SNIPES:

So when Duane writes a paragraph saying that Quebec motorist will run
down from behind a cyclist on a pleasant country lane, I paraphrase
that as "Danger! Danger!"

Are you talking about the time that I told you that a motorist bumped me
from behind? I told you repeatedly that it was no big deal. My point was,
given a separate bike path parallel to the road, I would prefer to ride
there without traffic to worry about. To you this is a problem for some
reason. Of course, I'm a coward for that sentiment.

When James writes a paragraph mentioning his car-bike crash, and
claiming that every bicyclist he knows has frequent near misses, I
paraphrase that as "Danger! Danger!"

How can you argue with James' personal experience? Just because it's
different than yours, in a city where a motorist only sees 1 cyclist in a
half
hour? My experience is closer to his than to yours.

And pardon me in advance if I mis-remembered any details just then, or
who exactly said what. I'm doing all this by memory, not taking
copious notes. The point is both of those posters have contributed a
LOT of warnings to this discussion.

Nonsense.

Furthermore, when I gave data showing the dangers must not be extreme
(data on tremendous numbers ridden before bad events) nobody
acknowledged. James went on about the terrors of Melbourne. Duane is
still talking about choosing between the sidewalk and ... well, he
doesn't want me to repeat his words, because they've since become
offensive to him.

snip a lot more needless justification

And I remain astonished that a person can say "Riding properly is
quite safe, and people shouldn't be scared away from cycling," and be
continually attacked for that by other cyclists.

No one to my knowledge has ever criticized you in any way for saying
that. It's the rest of your patronizing, insulting crap that you start when
someone
disagrees with you that causes that reaction.

On Dec 12, 3:00*pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 12/12/2010 2:58 PM, Dan 0verm n wrote:
* [...] I disagree. *(Deliberately) changing is never okay. *Omitting is
certainly okay if marked as such. *Revised m[e]s[sa]g[e] should not be
attributed to someone who didn't write it.

It is correct in English to indicate editorial changes in brackets ([]),
as I have done above.

Proofreading aside, tell us about parody and libel.

DR

"RobertH" wrote in message
...
On Dec 12, 12:54 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

So when Duane writes a paragraph saying that Quebec motorist will run
down from behind a cyclist on a pleasant country lane, I paraphrase
that as "Danger! Danger!"

When James writes a paragraph mentioning his car-bike crash, and
claiming that every bicyclist he knows has frequent near misses, I
paraphrase that as "Danger! Danger!"

It seems to me that you cry "Danger! Danger!" every time you preach
the gospel of "controlling" lanes, ostensibly for safety purposes.
Most of the rest of us don't seem to feel the same threat-level from
passing drivers that you do.

And I remain astonished that a person can say "Riding properly is
quite safe, and people shouldn't be scared away from cycling," and be
continually attacked for that by other cyclists.

First of all, it is not certain that you understand what it means to
ride properly. Second, pointing out the flaws in your arguments and
interpretation of data is not attacking. It is you who does the
majority of attacking in these discussions.

Riding "properly" to Frank is riding the way that Frank says to
ride. Given that there are so few cyclists in Ohio based on his claim
that motorists there only see 1 per half hour, I would have to say that
his advice is maybe not the best.

(This is when we get into the Poor Ol' Frank phase of the thread.
Don't worry, folks, it's almost over.)

One could hope.

On Dec 12, 1:58 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 12, 4:04 pm, Dan O wrote:

On Dec 12, 11:54 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

If someone spends so much time posting dire warnings, or vividly
describing potential crashes, their message certainly is one of
danger. If someone wants to rebut every possible claim that cycling
is reasonably safe, or that cyclists can do well using ordinary
vehicle techniques, then the message is certainly danger.

**** you.

Oh, that's certainly impressive!


No one here wants to rebut every claim that cycling is reasonably
safe. Riding Bike is not something any of us are afraid of, or think
anybody else whould be afraid of. I'm certainly the last person who's
going to say that anyone cant do reasonably well riding however the
**** they want to - okay? There are dangers, though; they're
relative; and we don't all get off on fuddy-duddy mode. You say
things like, "Well then , why aren't you afraid of getting killed
falling out of bed", and **** like that. You keep telling eveyrbody
they're doing it wrong. Hence, first comes disagreement, then your
smarmy derision, to which I eventually respond as above.

It's December. It's been raining, and the creek is really high. It's
about 60 degrees today, and I was thinking about going down to the
creek and wading across and trying not to get swept away. There used
to be a covered bridge upstream that us kids would punch a hole in the
metal roof every summer to jump off. One January I went up there to
jump. The roof was sealed, but the deck wall was high enough. The
water was roiling. Even though I had jumped off this bridge a million
times, I was more uncertain (scared?) then ever at that moment. The
water was really fast and deep. Had rocks moved? I went for it... no
splash! The bubbles in the water made it so soft, and I bobbed right
up like a cork, made for the bank. I'm so glad I did that.

Your spiel means jack to me.

On Dec 12, 2:18 pm, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 12, 1:58 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Dec 12, 4:04 pm, Dan O wrote:

On Dec 12, 11:54 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

If someone spends so much time posting dire warnings, or vividly
describing potential crashes, their message certainly is one of
danger. If someone wants to rebut every possible claim that cycling
is reasonably safe, or that cyclists can do well using ordinary
vehicle techniques, then the message is certainly danger.

**** you.

Oh, that's certainly impressive!

No one here wants to rebut every claim that cycling is reasonably
safe. Riding Bike is not something any of us are afraid of, or think
anybody else whould be afraid of. I'm certainly the last person who's
going to say that anyone cant do reasonably well riding however the
**** they want to - okay? There are dangers, though; they're
relative; and we don't all get off on fuddy-duddy mode. You say
things like, "Well then , why aren't you afraid of getting killed
falling out of bed", and **** like that. You keep telling eveyrbody
they're doing it wrong. Hence, first comes disagreement, then your
smarmy derision, to which I eventually respond as above.

It's December. It's been raining, and the creek is really high. It's
about 60 degrees today, and I was thinking about going down to the
creek and wading across and trying not to get swept away. There used
to be a covered bridge upstream that us kids would punch a hole in the
metal roof every summer to jump off. One January I went up there to
jump. The roof was sealed, but the deck wall was high enough. The
water was roiling. Even though I had jumped off this bridge a million
times, I was more uncertain (scared?) then ever at that moment. The
water was really fast and deep. Had rocks moved? I went for it... no
splash! The bubbles in the water made it so soft, and I bobbed right
up like a cork, made for the bank. I'm so glad I did that.

Your spiel means jack to me.

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 12, 4:04 pm, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 12, 11:54 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

If someone spends so much time posting dire warnings, or vividly
describing potential crashes, their message certainly is one of
danger. If someone wants to rebut every possible claim that cycling
is reasonably safe, or that cyclists can do well using ordinary
vehicle techniques, then the message is certainly danger.
**** you.

Oh, that's certainly impressive!

You are.

JS.

On Dec 12, 1:22*pm, RobertH wrote:

You get a lot of 'depends' on this question because it does depend.

Frank Krygowski would never let details like details get in the way of
his obsession with taking control. He's that kind of a guy.

DR

Phil W Lee wrote:

One thing that is clear is that far too many truck drivers dismiss
anything they are passing as soon as their cab is level with it, and
will move back in FAR too soon. If that happens, you have to brake
hard, and the following traffic will then leave you blocked against
the kerb, shaving extremely close, because many will be driving too
close to the vehicle in front to have sufficient view along the
kerbside to where you have been stranded.

Wow! Sounds dangerous, Phil. Careful Frank doesn't mark you as crying
"Danger! Danger!" or words to that effect. He might say you are scared
out of your wits and should take up roller blading, for example.

I didn't experience such things while I cycled in the UK. Most
motorists I encountered seemed quite patient and did not drive in a
threatening or aggressive manner. I was obviously not in your area.
The Crawley Wheelers were a nice bunch of folks too.

http://www.crawleywheelers.co.uk/

JS.