|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
recycled schrieb:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Jens Müller wrote: Bill Z. schrieb: Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_? When they are holding a mobile phone in one hand and a Big Mac in the other, yes. When they are screaming at the brats in the back seat while holding a cup of coffee, yes. And sharrows open their eyes? Or when they simply do not realize the far side of their vehicle is _that_ close to the cyclist. Why is the stupid cyclist driving on the edge of the carriageway? |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
bluezfolk schrieb:
On Jul 26, 5:13 am, Jens Müller wrote: Bill Z. schrieb: Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_? It's damn obvious when a lane it too narrow for two vehicles side by side. In my area (Suffolk Co. NY) I see green signs with white cycles posted on the roadsides. They always make me wonder, where the hell is a bike supposed to ride on this little roadway? Oh, it's even too narrow for bikes? How do cars fit there? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
Tom Sherman schrieb:
Indeed. I used to live in a city that had little bicycle icons and a white dividing stripe painted on the wider sidewalks as a "bicycle path". Needless to say, riding on these sidewalks is more dangerous than riding vehicular style in the street. However, where they exist, cagers (motorists) will often point at the cycling farcility (sic) and yell at the cyclist to get off the road. And why doesn't the DMV just revoke their licenses? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
"Jens Müller" wrote in message ... recycled schrieb: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Jens Müller wrote: Bill Z. schrieb: Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_? When they are holding a mobile phone in one hand and a Big Mac in the other, yes. When they are screaming at the brats in the back seat while holding a cup of coffee, yes. And sharrows open their eyes? It might. Then again it might not. Some may not pay attention to stop signs, yet we have them. Or when they simply do not realize the far side of their vehicle is _that_ close to the cyclist. Why is the stupid cyclist driving on the edge of the carriageway? Why do you assume the cyclist - stupid or otherwise - is on 'edge' of the carriageway? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
Jens Müller wrote:
recycled schrieb: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Jens Müller wrote: Bill Z. schrieb: Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_? When they are holding a mobile phone in one hand and a Big Mac in the other, yes. When they are screaming at the brats in the back seat while holding a cup of coffee, yes. And sharrows open their eyes? The reality in the US is that there are funds dedicated to "bicycle facilities", and sharrows are certainly better than the "bicycle ghetto" bike lanes; since the bicycle lanes put the cyclists at more risk from right turning motorists and when the cyclist has to leave the lane to make a left turn. Or when they simply do not realize the far side of their vehicle is _that_ close to the cyclist. Why is the stupid cyclist driving on the edge of the carriageway? Even if the cyclist is riding in the left hand normal motor vehicle wheel track, the incompetent "cagers" may pass to closely. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "People who had no mercy will find none." - Anon. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
Jens Müller wrote:
Tom Sherman schrieb: Indeed. I used to live in a city that had little bicycle icons and a white dividing stripe painted on the wider sidewalks as a "bicycle path". Needless to say, riding on these sidewalks is more dangerous than riding vehicular style in the street. However, where they exist, cagers (motorists) will often point at the cycling farcility (sic) and yell at the cyclist to get off the road. And why doesn't the DMV just revoke their licenses? Actually, the DMV can not only revoke licences - that requires the police to write a citation, the district attorney to prosecute and the court to revoke. In almost all of the US, these parties will be motor vehicle centric, and ignore such behavior. As an example, Google "Boub v. Wayne" - the Illinois State Supreme Court decided that cyclists are "allowed" but not "intended" users of the road. Therefore, if the government body in charge of the roadway decided to install full width drainage grates with openings wide enough to trap normal bicycle wheels, the government would NOT be liable for injuries to cyclists and damages to bicycles caused by these grates. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "People who had no mercy will find none." - Anon. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
On Jul 26, 9:50*am, Tom Sherman
wrote: Jens Müller wrote: recycled schrieb: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Jens Müller wrote: Bill Z. schrieb: Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_? When they are holding a mobile phone in one hand and a Big Mac in the other, yes. When they are screaming at the brats in the back seat while holding a cup of coffee, yes. And sharrows open their eyes? The reality in the US is that there are funds dedicated to "bicycle facilities", and sharrows are certainly better than the "bicycle ghetto" bike lanes; since the bicycle lanes put the cyclists at more risk from right turning motorists and when the cyclist has to leave the lane to make a left turn. Or when they simply do not realize the far side of their vehicle is _that_ close to the cyclist. Why is the stupid cyclist driving on the edge of the carriageway? Even if the cyclist is riding in the left hand normal motor vehicle wheel track, the incompetent "cagers" may pass to closely. If you ride a bit left (say, in the center of the lane) and a cager passes too closely, you have some room to move away. A mirror helps gauge whether that's necessary. But if a cyclist does take the lane that way, almost all motorists give plenty of clearance once they can pass. Not that I _always_ take the lane. I share when it's safe to share, and take the lane when it's not safe to share. - Frank Krygowski |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
On Jul 26, 7:03*am, Tom Sherman
wrote: Jens Müller wrote: Bill Z. schrieb: Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. * . . . It's damn obvious when a lane it too narrow for two vehicles side by side. Herr Müller over-estimates the abilities of the average cager. If they were really that bad, they would be banging into each other all the time. Oh, whoops. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
Jens Müller writes:
Bill Z. schrieb: Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_? It's damn obvious when a lane it too narrow for two vehicles side by side. You mean like it's "damn obvious" where too lanes merge, so we shouldn't put those arrows on the road indicating that one is approaching a point where too lanes join? It's not "damn obvious" to a lot of people that a lane is too narrow for a bike and car to procede safely side by side unless passing is completely impossible. If it were that obvious, we wouldn't see cars passing bicycles with 1.5 feet of clearance, and we wouldn't see bicyclists hugging the curb when they should use the full lane. Also, lanes frequently narrow at intersections to squeeze in a turn lane. Putting a sharrow there is as sensible as putting up a sign or pavement marking indicating that two lanes merge. -- My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Sharrows
Sharrows are intended to indicate that a lane is too narrow
for a car and a bicycle to procede side by side. Are people (bike _and_ car drivers) too stupid even to _see_? =v= Many motorists are blinded by their sense of entitlement. I've had some yell at me to ride on the sidewalk, in which case the sharrows are handy to point at: "See that, right there? That's where I'm supposed to be riding." =v= They do indeed look on with wonderment, as if they've never noticed such a thing before. Dunno wheter it actually changes their behavior, though. _Jym_ P.S.: Note followups. Why is r.b.rides even in this thread? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sharrows (was: Ride your bike) | Tom Sherman[_2_] | General | 32 | August 1st 08 08:33 PM |
One more argument for Sharrows over Lanes? | [email protected] | Techniques | 9 | June 23rd 08 06:36 AM |
Bike Ride Pictures: Club ride to Half Moon Bay, CA, June 2005 | Bill Bushnell | Rides | 0 | June 28th 05 07:05 AM |
Most beautiful Bike Ride is ....Mongolian bike ride | [email protected] | General | 6 | February 12th 05 06:07 AM |
[Texas] Bridgewood Farms "Ride From the Heart" Charity Bike Ride | Greg Bretting | Rides | 0 | January 15th 04 05:38 AM |