|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1051
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
Duane Hebert wrote:
"DirtRoadie" wrote in message ... On Dec 8, 6:48 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" wrote: Screw that; if I am driving my truck and someone is tailgating, I will take the chance of them getting the trailer ball on my Class III hitch through their radiator. Tom is proud to boast of his Class III balls, well, at least one. Wonder what he has on the back of his bent though. http://www.bullsnuts.com.au/ JS. |
Ads |
#1052
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
On Dec 8, 7:09*pm, James wrote:
Jay Beattie wrote: In Oregon -- which is pretty standard UVC: O.R.S. 811.130 West's Oregon Revised Statutes Annotated Currentness Title 59. Oregon Vehicle Code Chapter 811. Rules of the Road for Drivers *Speed *(Impeding Traffic) 811.130. Impeding traffic; penalties snip-- (4) A person is not in violation of the offense described under this section if the person is proceeding as part of a funeral procession under the direction of a funeral escort vehicle or a funeral lead vehicle. What if Frank is about to become a funeral procession? Good point. Maybe Frank actually has the while thing worked out. Pure genius! I think the hangup there though is there is the "proceeding" part. I wonder if being a radiator shroud on an 8.5 foot wide truck meets that requirement. DR ---- |
#1053
|
|||
|
|||
Kill-filing
On 2010-12-09, T?m Sherm?n? ?_? "" wrote:
On 12/8/2010 8:22 AM, Duane H?bert wrote: On 12/7/2010 8:13 PM, T?m Sherm?n? ?_? wrote: On 12/7/2010 8:22 AM, Duane H?bert wrote: On 12/6/2010 9:21 PM, T?m Sherm?n? ?_? wrote: On 12/6/2010 10:08 AM, Duane H?bert wrote: At home I use Outlook Express for a news reader.[...] Bill Gates holding a gun to your head? Huh? Why would anyone use a Micro$oft product when better, free alternatives are available? (Assuming that they are given a choice.) I haven't got around to installing TBird at home. Last year when I tried it, it sucked too much. The current version seems ok - I'm using it at work. The "Huh?" was more about you telling me to use a newsreader that will let me respond to your posts in lieu of you not doing funny things to your header. So huh? My header is UTF-8 compliant. Alas, usenet is not. It's a 7-bit medium. -- Kristian Zoerhoff |
#1054
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
On Dec 8, 6:01*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 8, 4:02*pm, Duane Hébert wrote: What is there to clarify about that statement anyway? *You say that you ride in the middle of the lane regardless of any circumstances because you control the lane. And Frank Krygowski wrote: No, I didn't say that! *(If you think I did, find a quote.) Dear Frank: See below. Frank continued: *I've mentioned dozens of times over the years that I share the lane whenever it's safe to do so. *And you guys claim I misrepresent you! "Guys" is what he said. Plural right? Yeah, thats right. A WHOLE bunch of people find Frank to be a liar. But Frank then continued: OK, fine. *You're going to bail out and shake your fist. (and here comes the good part) I'm going to continue to ride in the center of the lane, and I'm not going to cede my legal right to the road out of fear the trucker is really a murderer. We rest our case. DR |
#1055
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
DirtRoadie wrote:
On Dec 8, 6:01 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Dec 8, 4:02 pm, Duane Hébert wrote: What is there to clarify about that statement anyway? You say that you ride in the middle of the lane regardless of any circumstances because you control the lane. And Frank Krygowski wrote: No, I didn't say that! (If you think I did, find a quote.) Dear Frank: See below. Frank continued: I've mentioned dozens of times over the years that I share the lane whenever it's safe to do so. And you guys claim I misrepresent you! "Guys" is what he said. Plural right? Yeah, thats right. A WHOLE bunch of people find Frank to be a liar. But Frank then continued: OK, fine. You're going to bail out and shake your fist. (and here comes the good part) I'm going to continue to ride in the center of the lane, and I'm not going to cede my legal right to the road out of fear the trucker is really a murderer. We rest our case. Nice one, centurion. JS. |
#1056
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
On 12/8/2010 8:12 PM, James Steward wrote:
Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote: Then, when you have found the shrubbery, you must place it here beside this shrubbery, only slightly higher so you get a two-level effect with a little path running down the middle. A path! A path! Then you must cut down the mightiest tree in the forest with.... a herring. We shall do no such thing! Cut down a tree with a herring? It can't be done. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#1057
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 12/8/2010 8:12 PM, James Steward wrote: Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote: Then, when you have found the shrubbery, you must place it here beside this shrubbery, only slightly higher so you get a two-level effect with a little path running down the middle. A path! A path! Then you must cut down the mightiest tree in the forest with.... a herring. We shall do no such thing! Cut down a tree with a herring? It can't be done. Don't say that word. JS. |
#1058
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
On Dec 8, 4:38*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 8, 4:54*pm, Jay Beattie wrote: On Dec 8, 9:40*am, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Dec 8, 11:26*am, RobertH wrote: On Dec 7, 7:35 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° How does defensive driving apply? *The only similar situation would be on a low-powered scooter that could not keep pace with other motorized traffic. False. When you're simply cruising down the road in your vehicle, the principles of defensive driving apply, whether you're being passed or not, because you have to be ready for encroachment from the wings, watch the road surface, etc. While you're being passed these principles of defensive driving are even more important.. Furthermore, when you're being passed, in any vehicle, the principles of defensive driving should be applied to your relationship with that anonymous driver to the extent that it is practicable to apply those principles. Obviously in passing situations the operator of the vehicle being passed must rely at least somewhat on the faculties of the passing driver. So, Robert: *Of course, I know you'd be ever alert, well prepared, extremely skillful and always taking responsibility for your own safety, etc. But in a 10 foot lane, curb at the right, with an 8.5 foot truck behind you, where exactly would you ride? Probably the same place he always rides, being that very few people shift their position in the lane based on vehicles approaching from the rear. *"Oh, look, its an Escalade, better get left." *"No, its just a Prius, I should ride further right." *"But wait, its a Kenworth, better go down the center." *Really, I'm riding a bike, not a yoyo. Your hypothetical also assumes that the truck is going to try to pass you in your own lane rather than cross the centerline and pass at a safe (and legally required) distance. *You can make that assumption sometimes, but not all the time. *And if there is a place where everyone always tries to pass too closely (I admit, there are such places), then taking the road may be the safe thing to do. *It also requires you to pull off when there are cars piled up behind you to let them pass. In that case, you are no different than the slow moving lawn tractor driving down the road. The fact that you are on a bike does not make you special and immune from the "slow moving vehicle must yield" laws. Are you aware of the Trotwood vs. Selz case, and what Bob Mionske and of course Steve Magas have explained regarding that? http://ohiobikelawyer.com/bike-law-1...ase-revisited/ http://velonews.competitor.com/2006/...aking-with-bob... AFAIK, most states do not have a "slow moving vehicle must yield" law. *A few do have one, but it's restricted to situations where there are (typically) five vehicles held behind _and_ there is a safe place to pull over. *If slow moving vehicles had to yield all the time, we would have no right to the road, motorhomes would never make it out of the flatlands, and commerce would become severely limited. I'm pushing the "where would you ride" question because certain posters were exaggerating the danger of bicycling, implying that one can't trust motorists not to smash you. I'm trying to see who really dives into the gutter or onto the sidewalk whenever a vehicle approaches. *I chose those dimensions because they're common in my area, and there's no rational way to try to share that lane - at least, not in my view nor according to any cycling instructional material I know of. Based on that, I would control that lane and not try to share the lane to let the truck squeeze by. *Do you agree? By the way, Frank, I don't necessarily disagree with your proposition that sometimes the only safe thing to do is take the lane -- or a larger part of it. I DO take a larger portion of the lane to prevent busses from passing me in certain places because they will squeeze me in to the curb, and probably with great satisfaction. There is also a down hill, off camber turn out of down town where cars tend to hug the inside curb, and I ride out in the lane there, although I'm usually going about the speed of traffic. In your truck scenario, I might ride farther out in the road if I were approaching a turn where the truck likely would cut the curve, if only innocently. On one lane roads, I just ride to the right but not in the gutter, and cars and trucks seem to get by without scaring me too often. I would never take the whole road just because some people might pass me too closely. -- Jay Beattie. |
#1059
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
On Dec 8, 5:01 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 8, 4:02 pm, Duane Hébert wrote: On 12/8/2010 3:41 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: I was trying to clarify what this meant: "And when I do ride with cars, what I will do in any given circumstance depends." Did it mean "If I get nervous about cars, I ride the sidewalk"? If you don't really "get that" WTF makes you say that? It's damned insulting. Do you not remember that one of your supporters in this discussion has frequently bragged about riding sidewalks? When he said he does, and you said "what I do depends..." then it certainly sounded to me like you might ride sidewalks as well. What is there to clarify about that statement anyway? You say that you.... Hold the phone, man - coincidence is not an association... unless you are a statistics nut or something :-) snip |
#1060
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
On Dec 8, 6:00 pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Dec 8, 4:38 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Dec 8, 4:54 pm, Jay Beattie wrote: snip Probably the same place he always rides, being that very few people shift their position in the lane based on vehicles approaching from the rear. "Oh, look, its an Escalade, better get left." "No, its just a Prius, I should ride further right." "But wait, its a Kenworth, better go down the center." Really, I'm riding a bike, not a yoyo. Your hypothetical also assumes that the truck is going to try to pass you in your own lane rather than cross the centerline and pass at a safe (and legally required) distance. You can make that assumption sometimes, but not all the time. And if there is a place where everyone always tries to pass too closely (I admit, there are such places), then taking the road may be the safe thing to do. It also requires you to pull off when there are cars piled up behind you to let them pass. In that case, you are no different than the slow moving lawn tractor driving down the road. The fact that you are on a bike does not make you special and immune from the "slow moving vehicle must yield" laws. Are you aware of the Trotwood vs. Selz case, and what Bob Mionske and of course Steve Magas have explained regarding that? http://ohiobikelawyer.com/bike-law-1...ase-revisited/ http://velonews.competitor.com/2006/...aking-with-bob... Yes, they're wrong -- at least in Oregon. I know that because of this: "Evidence was sufficient to support conviction for impeding traffic, even though defendant's conviction involved his use of bicycle and definition of offense referred only to motor vehicles; nothing in vehicle code provided that such offense be applied only to motor vehicles. ORS 811.130(1), 814.400. State v. Potter (2002) 57 P.3d 944, 185 Or.App. 81." So, go ahead and impede traffic in Ohio, but not here. You'll get busted. Also, if you want bicycles to be treated like vehicles, then you can't cherry pick. That simply endorses the view of most motorists that bicyclists see them self as the chosen ones. In fact, I ride a bike with the arc of the covenant in a front pannier to part traffic. That's how chosen I am. I carry a little picture of some holy lady that they gave me at the bookstore - right next to my ziplock bag of bandaids. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Reduce fatalities or danger rates instead? | Doug[_3_] | UK | 3 | September 19th 10 08:05 AM |
Three cycling fatalities in London last month. | Daniel Barlow | UK | 4 | July 7th 09 12:58 PM |
Child cyclist fatalities in London | Tom Crispin | UK | 13 | October 11th 08 05:12 PM |
Car washes for cyclist fatalities | Bobby | Social Issues | 4 | October 11th 04 07:13 PM |
web-site on road fatalities | cfsmtb | Australia | 4 | April 23rd 04 09:21 AM |