Being **** off at a cyclist I almost ran over!

"AmericanFlyer64" wrote in message
oups.com...
That wasn't a cyclist, it was a person riding a bike

Who exactly, then, is a cyclist.....

Somebody who knows how to ride a bike. That doesn't have to do with the
things you mention. You are correct with your disagreement about your below
statements - all those are cyclists - as long as they *know* how to ride a
bike. Riding unlit against traffic is a major cause for bike/car
collissions.

bjorn


Some people say that if you don't finish a century, you're not a
cyclist.

Some people say that if you don't shave your legs, you're not a
cyclist.

Some people say that if you ride a 'discount store' bike, you're not a
cyclist.

Some people say that if you wear sweatpants and a t-shirt or
sweatshirt, you're
not a cyclist.

Some people say if you don't ride year round, you're not a cyclist.

Well, to all of that, I say BULLS**T!! Those who think along those
lines, are
in my opinion, cycling snobs. If you can pedal a bike, you're a
cyclist.

Okay, maybe you're not an "elite" cyclist in the caliber of Lance
Armstrong,
but you're a cyclist nonetheless. It doesn't matter if you pedal across
town,
across your state, or even across the country; you're a cyclist.

If you have a desire to ride, no matter what type of bike it is, you're
a
cyclist. If you look forward to climbing on your bike and hitting the
road,
bike path, or trail, you're a cyclist.

It doesn't matter if you're underweight, right at your goal weight, or
a few
pounds (or more) overweight, if you love to ride, you're a cyclist.

To me, it isn't about how far you ride, what you wear, what type of
bike you
ride, or even how many seasons you ride in. No, none of that matters.
What make
you a cyclist is the love of the ride!!

*************************************

Now, everytime I post the above, I get a lot of flack, and I expect
this time to be no different. I have my flack jacket on, as well as my
flame retardent suit, so faire away :-)

all those are cyclists - as long as they *know* how to ride a
bike.

Okay, point taken :-)

AmericanFlyer64 wrote:
That wasn't a cyclist, it was a person riding a bike

Who exactly, then, is a cyclist.....

....

If you have a desire to ride, no matter what type of bike it is, you're
a
cyclist. If you look forward to climbing on your bike and hitting the
road,
bike path, or trail, you're a cyclist.

It doesn't matter if you're underweight, right at your goal weight, or
a few
pounds (or more) overweight, if you love to ride, you're a cyclist.

To me, it isn't about how far you ride, what you wear, what type of
bike you
ride, or even how many seasons you ride in. No, none of that matters.
What make
you a cyclist is the love of the ride!!

*************************************

What I retained is a good start.

"A person on a bike" as opposed to a cyclist is usually someone riding
because they HAVE to. They probably don't have a car of their own. They
are usually wearing only street clothes. And most importantly, are not
riding their bike in accordance, more or less, with the rules of the
road. They're behaving as a pedestrian on wheels, or a car without a motor.

There are times I'm a person-on-a-bike. I might putter to the store
three blocks away without the helmet, pushing my clipless pedals with
street shoes, sticking to the sidewalks, riding slowly. But I don't have
a problem with you calling me not-a-cyclist when I do that.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"You American workers haven't seen an increase in real wages since the
1970s... But are you rioting? No. You're voting for Republican
candidates who give people like me tax cuts. You know what? I think
that's your way of saying 'Thank you.'" - Stephen Colbert

In article , Bjorn
wrote:

"Luke" wrote in message
...

He also happen to be cheerfully cycling not with traffic but facing it!

Where it concerns visibility, one wonders why 'bicycle-safety
education' is required where one simple sentence is sufficient in

Because wrong-way riding, sidewalk riding, sudden swerves and weaving in and
out behind parked cars are a high percentage of bike/car collissions. I am
always amazed that some people don't know that it's not safe to always be in
the bike lane. Education really helps.


All you say is quite fine, but since my posts concerned enhancing
visibility by lighting and clothing, your argument is less of a
rebuttal, than an a supplement. If your point is that haphazard and
reckless habits can be deterred through education, be it formal or
otherwise, I don't argue it.

But, to reiterate, the advantages of lights and light clothing are
self-evident. Did you ever require formal instruction on the merits of
turning on a light when entering a darkened room?

Luke

"Luke" wrote in message
...

He also happen to be cheerfully cycling not with traffic but facing
it!


All you say is quite fine, but since my posts concerned enhancing
visibility by lighting and clothing, your argument is less of a

I fully agree with your point about lighting and visibible clothing. I do
think however that limiting visibility to those two is just not enough and
is part of the reason why eduaction is necessary. When car drivers pull out
to make a right, they rarely look to the right. Granted, you argue that a
very strong light will get their attention and this is quite true. But this
doesn't work at daytime and then visibility has to be accomplished by proper
riding. Most people think it's safer to ride on sidewalks and against
traffic when that is clearly not the case.

LED blinkies, reflective strips and reflectors can be had around here for
less than the cost of a pack of smokes.
These will not help when a car drivers makes a right and encounters a wrong
way cyclist. The reflectors will not be hit by their light beam and the
blinkie wouldn't catch the attention of the driver even if worn at the
front.

rebuttal, than an a supplement. If your point is that haphazard and
True, I am not trying to diminish your point as you are absolutely right - I
just think it's not complete and the enhanced part about visibility is a
matter of education.

reckless habits can be deterred through education, be it formal or
otherwise, I don't argue it.
Well, sometimes even the seemingly right thing to do can be deadly. I heard
about a case ( I believe in Boston) where a woman was riding in the bike
lane. There were parked cars on the right. A car door opened, the woman
swerved to the left and she got killed by a bus driver. This could have
easily been prevented by knowing how to ride. I rode in San Francisco last
weekend, and had a similar setup: three lane one-way street, the right lane
very narrow and parked cars to the right. So I rode in the middle of the
right lane as not to be too close to the parked cars (door zone). This
worked fine. One car did honk at me and I explained to him at the next light
why what I did was safe and necessary. He understood. If I would have ridden
all the way to the right cars could have passed me in that lane with a few
inches to spare. But what if a car door would have opened then?


But, to reiterate, the advantages of lights and light clothing are

So again, I agree with you concerning these points and you are right, they
should be self-evident. But when it comes to Visibility, Predictability and
Safe Cycling, most people have a lack of knowledge. I have tried to give
this to people in one sentence, but it hasn't worked...

Happy Riding, bjorn