A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 4th 12, 08:39 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

On Jul 3, 11:27 pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 19:22:37 +0100, Phil W Lee
wrote:


snip


Cycles are vehicle traffic.


So it written, so it must be. However, when jousting with my 35 lb
bicycle against a driver in his 4,000 lb vehicle, I often find it
difficult to insist on my legal rights.


I ride through a small farming town. Main road is interestingly
similar to Mission St above: Three lanes, the middle a left turn
lane. No bike lanes (hardly any anywhere in this town). People are
mostly nice, though, and generally partly into the middle lane to
leave space as they pass me. I ride as far right as practicable,
which is a foot or two from the curb, make no sudden position changes,
long gradual drift a little left for the storm drains.

Yesterday I'm cruising into town and this pickup truck passes me - not
giving much room, but giving extra "vroom" (accelerating past). The
pickup is modified into a box van - painted Viet era camo green.

So he's stopped at the light halfway through town, and I come up
behind at the right - but not past - as the light goes green. "Vroom"
away he goes toward the other end of town.

So next he's queued up at a four-way stop near the other end of town.
I hop onto the sidewalk, past the queue, veer into empty parking lot
at the corner, check the street, cross the street into another parking
lot, back onto the sidewalk, then roll back onto the right edge of the
road.

Camo truck pulls up alongside and hangs there. I hear him yelling
something about pick the sidewalk or the road and stay there idiot
obey the law. I don't think I violated any laws (not that I'm above
violating some laws if the right opportunity presents ;-), nor have I
impeded, endangered, or hurt anyone in any way - just having a blast.
But this guy is steaming (I guess maybe 'cause the inferior bicyclist
beat him across and out of town) - I've offended his sensibility.

So I finally look over and he's holding up traffic and foaming at the
mouth. So I raise a finger and keep riding. "Vroom" ahead... (I know
what's coming next... ) brake lights and right hook pinching off to
the curb. I throw my bike hard left - swear the lean angle put my
front wheel *under* his rear bumper as I *just* cleared him on the
left.

raamman is absolutely right - avoiding confrontation is the best
policy. Road rage is very upsetting and risky biusiness. Yes, I
could keep their hostility to a low simmer by righteously submitting
to the ways of a "legitimate road vehicle", instead of blowing their
minds (and the lids off their resentment pots) with outlandish - but
functionally harmless - hijinks. I won't "grow up" WRT to Ride Bike!
(suppress / repress the inner child), but I should have suppressed /
sublimated the cynical adult and given camo truck guy a smile and
friendly wave instead of the finger (he still might have tried to kill
me, though).


They need to learn that cyclists are part of the traffic, and if the
cars and trucks don't like that, tough, go to a racetrack.


I suspect that the local planners are into expediency. Give the
bicyclists an alternative route, and they will come. Unfortunately,
there are a few recalcitrants that prefer to live dangerously. You
can lead a bicyclist to water, but you have to practically drown them
before they'll learn to drink nicely.


Alternate routes abound.

Motor vehicles are far more capable of accepting a diversion, so
should always be the ones expected to avoid the congestion that they
themselves cause.


Huh? I see bicyclist all over the road ways, including riding on
sidewalks and splitting lanes. Bicycles are far more maneuverable
than motor vehicles, and far less restricted in where a bicycle can
ride.


*So* far less restricted that it's not even just another league; it's
a whole different ball game.

snip
Ads
  #12  
Old July 4th 12, 04:23 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
(PeteCresswell)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,790
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

Per Jeff Liebermann:
Probably true. However motorists abhor a vacuum, or in this case, an
lane with empty space. Given the opportunity, the typical motorist
will risk life and insurance to fill the lane vacuum in order to
arrive a few milliseconds earlier.


For over 10 years, I drove something in Philadelphia called The
Roosevelt Boulevard - about 10-15 miles to/from work.

They had the light timing down really well to where you could
drive from one end to the other in either direction at 28 mph and
never hit a red light.

Seemed to me that, at rush hour, a very high percentage of the
people driving that road must have been regular - if not daily -
users.

Yet day-after-day we'd see people doing crazy stuff (driving way
fast, slaloming from land-to-lane) just to slam on their brakes
at the next red light. I mean, like *anybody* could see they
were racing into a red light....

I think Jeff has it right: "... motorists abhor a vacuum..."
--
Pete Cresswell
  #13  
Old July 4th 12, 04:26 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
(PeteCresswell)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,790
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

Per Dan O:
So I finally look over and he's holding up traffic and foaming at the
mouth.


After serving as treasurer of a 1,200-member civic association
for seven years, I came away with the belief that, out of every
thousand people, at least 2 of them are stone crazy at any given
time - and it's not always the same two.
--
Pete Cresswell
  #14  
Old July 4th 12, 04:33 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 06:40:20 -0700 (PDT), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
Cruiser Philosopher" wrote:

The Wise Man chooses the middle way.


One must pick sides, for if you position yourself in the middle of the
road, you will likely be run over by next passing machine.

It's not like we want perfect
world with no cars.


To gain what you want, you must first ask for too much, and then
settle for what you originally wanted.

We could share the road nicely if our masters
decided so.


You are your own master, and your own worst enemy. They seem mutually
compatible.

The current fashion is not to share, but rather to occupy.

Sharing the road is a matter of perspective. From one view, it is the
physical manifestation of all things good about bicycling. From
another, you are a slowly moving obstruction. Size matters.

It's all big business, you know, and that stands on the path of
progress.


Big business is a successful small business that has eliminated
wasteful competition. Big business does not follow the path
progress. It follows the path of profit.

It is difficult to go forward, while looking only in a rear view
mirror.

http://www.bicyclephilosophy.com

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #15  
Old July 4th 12, 04:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Frank Krygowski[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,365
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 19:22:37 +0100, Phil W
wrote:


So why waste money on [bike lanes]?


I have no idea. It seems to be an institution running on inertia. I
suppose a study into the effectiveness of bicycle lanes to reduce
accidents or increase ridership might settle the matter. However,
without a demonstratively effective alternative to bicycle lanes, the
municipalities will probably continue to build them until they run out
of roadways, money, or both.


I think in most cases, sharrows are more benign, less expensive, and
probably still help those timid cyclists who feel they need paint on the
road to give them permission to ride there.

Cycles are vehicle traffic.


So it written, so it must be. However, when jousting with my 35 lb
bicycle against a driver in his 4,000 lb vehicle, I often find it
difficult to insist on my legal rights.


I almost never find it difficult. The law's on my side, and so is
nearly 40 years of experience as an adult cyclist.

Yeah, I know. Public roads would be great without vehicles. Take
away the vehicles, and give everyone a bicycle, and nirvana is certain
to follow. Just one small problem. Bicycles don't pay the road tax,
so the public roads will start to rapidly deteriorate without the
vehicles to support the necessary maintenance. Of course, the trucks,
buses, and delivery vehicles will still be necessary, so instead of
cars, the cyclists will get to dodge those.


One anecdote: As I've mentioned occasionally, I was responsible for
requesting the paving of a useful bike/ped shortcut path into the center
of our village. The paving was done by the water company, who have a
supply line under that right of way. That was, oh, more than 15 years ago.

I was a bit concerned about maintenance, and once asked my favorite
councilman if we could seal the pavement to make it last longer. Sorry,
no budget for that.

But all these years later, the pavement is only just beginning to look a
little rough. Seems that if you don't have motor vehicles stressing the
pavement, it lasts a tremendously long time.

Similarly, a two mile section of roadway in our local metro park was
closed to motor vehicles at least 20 years ago, though an interesting
chain of events. It was paved at that same time. Its pavement is
perfect today. Roller bladers love it.

There's no way we'll do away with motor vehicles. But if we did, I
think the pavement would hold up just fine for a long, long while.
Motor vehicles do damage that's far beyond what's covered by their taxes
and fees.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #16  
Old July 4th 12, 04:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 00:39:35 -0700 (PDT), Dan O
wrote:

raamman is absolutely right - avoiding confrontation is the best
policy. Road rage is very upsetting and risky biusiness. Yes, I
could keep their hostility to a low simmer by righteously submitting
to the ways of a "legitimate road vehicle", instead of blowing their
minds (and the lids off their resentment pots) with outlandish - but
functionally harmless - hijinks. I won't "grow up" WRT to Ride Bike!
(suppress / repress the inner child), but I should have suppressed /
sublimated the cynical adult and given camo truck guy a smile and
friendly wave instead of the finger (he still might have tried to kill
me, though).


Your negotiated settlement with the camo truck driver obviously
failed. Lacking tolerance, apparently by both parties, your options
are to either escalate the confrontation by adding ordinance and
armament to your bicycle, or getting the hell out of there before the
hostile camo truck driver uses his superior mass to your detriment.
Appeals to a higher authority are only useful for cleaning up the mess
after the damage is done. Discretion really is the better part of
valor. Calculate the odds of success. If they are too low, run.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #17  
Old July 4th 12, 04:51 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 11:26:23 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per Dan O:
So I finally look over and he's holding up traffic and foaming at the
mouth.


After serving as treasurer of a 1,200-member civic association
for seven years, I came away with the belief that, out of every
thousand people, at least 2 of them are stone crazy at any given
time - and it's not always the same two.


It's much higher than that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_disorder
In the United States 46% qualifies for a mental
illness at some point.
(...)
In the United States the frequency of disorder is:
anxiety disorder (28.8%), mood disorder (20.8%),
impulse-control disorder (24.8%) or substance use
disorder (14.6%).

Hmmm... that totals to 89%. I guess everyone in the US is nuts.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #18  
Old July 4th 12, 04:54 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Frank Krygowski[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,365
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

Dan O wrote:

Yesterday I'm cruising into town and this pickup truck passes me - not
giving much room, but giving extra "vroom" (accelerating past). The
pickup is modified into a box van - painted Viet era camo green.

So he's stopped at the light halfway through town, and I come up
behind at the right - but not past - as the light goes green. "Vroom"
away he goes toward the other end of town.

So next he's queued up at a four-way stop near the other end of town.
I hop onto the sidewalk, past the queue, veer into empty parking lot
at the corner, check the street, cross the street into another parking
lot, back onto the sidewalk, then roll back onto the right edge of the
road.


So how many seconds did your squirrely riding gain you? Probably no
more than the time saved by the typical motorist fighting to pass a
cyclist before the next red light.

Camo truck pulls up alongside and hangs there. I hear him yelling
something about pick the sidewalk or the road and stay there idiot
obey the law. I don't think I violated any laws (not that I'm above
violating some laws if the right opportunity presents ;-), nor have I
impeded, endangered, or hurt anyone in any way - just having a blast.


Every yahoo inventing his own chaotic motion in traffic feels he's
perfectly justified.

But this guy is steaming (I guess maybe 'cause the inferior bicyclist
beat him across and out of town) - I've offended his sensibility.


Thanks, Dan. You've generated another series of "Those f****ng
bicyclists..." tales for the rest of us to fight past.


So I finally look over and he's holding up traffic and foaming at the
mouth. So I raise a finger and keep riding.


Classy. :-/

raamman is absolutely right - avoiding confrontation is the best
policy. Road rage is very upsetting and risky biusiness. Yes, I
could keep their hostility to a low simmer by righteously submitting
to the ways of a "legitimate road vehicle", instead of blowing their
minds (and the lids off their resentment pots) with outlandish - but
functionally harmless - hijinks.


Thanks, Dan. You can also try going to music concerts and singing
different songs in a loud voice during the performance. Or watching a
movie while standing in front of the people seated behind you. Or
barging your way into the front of a line of people waiting to buy ice
cream.

Heck, the possibilities for your kind of fun are endless!

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #19  
Old July 4th 12, 05:16 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Hauke Fath
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

Dan O wrote:

So next he's queued up at a four-way stop near the other end of town.
I hop onto the sidewalk, past the queue, veer into empty parking lot
at the corner, check the street, cross the street into another parking
lot, back onto the sidewalk, then roll back onto the right edge of the
road.


Priceless.

hauke

--
Now without signature.
  #20  
Old July 4th 12, 05:21 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Even in enlightened California (taking the lane)

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 11:42:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

There's no way we'll do away with motor vehicles. But if we did, I
think the pavement would hold up just fine for a long, long while.
Motor vehicles do damage that's far beyond what's covered by their taxes
and fees.


I think you're only considering the short term effects. If vehicular
road traffic were abandoned, there would still be the a need for the
public utilities under the roadway and infrastructure that supports it
(i.e. bridges). I would expect the utility company to dig up the
road, and sorta patch it back together because bicycles can function
on lesser road surfaces. Similarly, bridges will be allowed to
collapse, and possibly be replaced by bicycle and pedestrian friendly
zip lines. Should we ever run out of gasoline, such a nightmare is
possible.

While there is some merit to returning to a pre-industrial agrarian
economy, it's unlikely to happen. Technical progress has a way of
sustaining itself and is unlikely to stop. The problem is that
technology is also inherently inefficient, causing some damage as well
as good. The human race has been fairly good at absorbing the side
effects of progress, but that is unlikely to continue forever. At
some point, the scale of environmental and social damage caused by
progress will result in an anti-technology backlash. If you kill off
the infernal combustion engine, the nuclear powered replacement is
likely to be worse. There are some sci-fi stories that predict all
this. Hopefully, I won't be alive to see it.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.