How to **** Off an Arrogant Pedalcyclist

On Sat, 14 May 2005 22:39:49 -0700, Zoot Katz , said the following in
rec.autos.driving...


I **** _on_ your scuds every day.

Keep your sexual fantasies to your self, you worthless faggot!

** P * L * O * N * K **

In article , Scott en Aztlán wrote:
My wife and I went for a walk this afternoon. The sidewalk was very
narrow - only wide enough for my wife and I to walk side by side. As
we walked, our son (who is away at college) called, so she took the
call and was talking to him, not really paying attention to what was
ahead. Presently, an older gentleman riding a bicycle approached from
ahead of us. When he saw that my wife wasn't paying attention (and
thus was not going to step aside to let him ride past) he came to a
stop, then stood there glaring at us. As we passed by, he very
petulantly began to ring his little thumb-bell repeatedly, as if to
express his outrage that we didn't get out of his way. I turned to him
and said "use the bike lane, ****head." Then we walked on, shaking our
heads in disbelief.

If I was walking faster from behind, I would not have been pleased with
your wife's LLB behavior.

Why do supposedly mature adults think it's OK to ride their bikes on
the sidewalk?

I always use the road, but drivers keep yelling at me to ride on the
sidewalk. Even when I am going uphill and into the wind I can manage at
least 16mph, totally unsuitable for a sidewalk. Usually when I am yelled
at I am doing between 18 and 30mph.

http://tinypic.com/539poy

There's a perfectly good bike lane (or shoulder, as Brent likes to
call them) not five feet from these lard-asses, yet they feel the need
to endanger pedestrians on the sidewalk. Why?!?!?!?

If you think a bike lane makes drivers any friendlier, you are mistaken.
IME it makes them worse.

You should look up your local laws and/or local bike _path_ map. Usually
adults are forbiden from using the sidewalk unless that sidewalk is
desginated a bike path. Often there is no significant signage, so you
have to know which sidewalks are and aren't from the map. Provided he was
legally able to use the sidewalk, he was in the right considering he was
going ped speeds by your description. Check your local laws and get back
to us.

In article , Cathy Kearns wrote:

Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is against California law. There are
no exceptions for "safety reasons."

Well, then scott, you were in the right.

Yet police are not shy about inviting children to ride on the sidewalk on
some routes close to schools to keep them out of danger. I've seen it done
in person in my little town. In a Palo Alto there are many road signs in
similar neighborhoods that say "Bicyclist may use sidewalks". I expect these
are directed at the younger riders.

Most no-riding on the sidewalk laws have exceptions for children.
Sometimes they define an age or a bicycle wheel size.

In article , John David Galt wrote:
Those signs used to say "must" instead of may, until the state overturned
them.

And rightfully so.

Alma St. and Embarcadero Rd. are both exactly the kind of street
where bikes should not be allowed -- narrow lanes, no shoulder, normal
traffic goes about 50, and plenty of parallel streets bikers can easily
use (including the dedicated Bike Boulevard on Bryant St. near Alma).

You can use those roads too. As a bicyclist, going out of my way and
conditions that cause delay often outweigh a less friendly road. Just
as it does to you behind the wheel of your car.

That law needs to be put back the way it was.

Heaven forbid you have to have some minor driving skill.

In article , Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:

21208(a) Failure to ride in a bicycle lane.

Interesting, I always described bicycle lanes as bicycle restrictions,
but only effectively. Seems they are legally too. Just another reason to
oppose them.

Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:
"Ferris" wrote in message
...

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2005 19:56:14 -0400, "WeatherGuy"
wrote:



This behaviour by the cyclist was unacceptable. The "****head" was
unacceptable as well. There are times when it is necessary for safety
reasons to ride on a sidewalk


Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is against California law. There are
no exceptions for "safety reasons."


Can you cite the specific law that covers this? A quick search on Google
showed that in California it is illegal to park a bike laying down on
the sidewalk, and that local communities may have laws regarding
sidewalk riding. But I didn't see anything at the state level making
this illegal.


http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/lov/lovd11.htm

See especially the following *infractions*:

21202(a) Bicyclist, failure to use right edge of roadway.
21208(a) Failure to ride in a bicycle lane.
21208(b) Bicyclist shall not leave bike lane until reasonably safe.
21952 Sidewalk, failure to yield to pedestrian on.


I think you should re-interpret the first three items in your list. They
have to do with operating a bicycle while *on the road* (and
with/without a bike lane). There's nothing in the code you listed that
says it's illegal to operate a bicycle on the sidewalk.


I would regard your and your wife's behavior as extremely rude, in any
case. If the two of you were taking up the entire width of the sidewalk,
as you said in your original post, then at least one of you should have
been paying attention so you could accomodate others on the sidewalk.
Did you see the biker on the sidewalk? If not, then I doubt either of
you would have paid attention to another pedestrian.



Based on CVC 21952, while the use of "****head" might have been especially
rude, calling out the bicyclists traffic infraction was, IMHO, correct.

Having the right of way doesn't give you the right to take up the entire
road/path/whatever. They were purposely being asses to this poor guy on
the bike because the could. And, he was certainly not breaking a
California law by riding on the sidewalk.

Brent P wrote:
In article , Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:


21208(a) Failure to ride in a bicycle lane.


Interesting, I always described bicycle lanes as bicycle restrictions,
but only effectively. Seems they are legally too. Just another reason to
oppose them.



I would interpret this as meaning if you're riding on the road, and
there is a bicycle lane, you need to be in it. There's nothing in the
code that prohibits riding on a sidewalk.

Ferris wrote in :

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2005 19:56:14 -0400, "WeatherGuy"
wrote:


This behaviour by the cyclist was unacceptable. The "****head" was
unacceptable as well. There are times when it is necessary for safety
reasons to ride on a sidewalk


Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is against California law. There are
no exceptions for "safety reasons."


Can you cite the specific law that covers this? A quick search on Google
showed that in California it is illegal to park a bike laying down on
the sidewalk, and that local communities may have laws regarding
sidewalk riding. But I didn't see anything at the state level making
this illegal.

I would regard your and your wife's behavior as extremely rude, in any
case. If the two of you were taking up the entire width of the sidewalk,
as you said in your original post, then at least one of you should have
been paying attention so you could accomodate others on the sidewalk.
Did you see the biker on the sidewalk? If not, then I doubt either of
you would have paid attention to another pedestrian.



What is the difference between a cyclist and say a roller-blade skater?
Move for one but not the other?
What if it were a child biking on the sidewalk?
I guess they would rather the child ride out in traffic.

Myself,when I've encountered people cycling on the sidewalk,I stepped
aside;it's no big deal.Easier for me to move than for them to stop.
It's a courtesy.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Arif Khokar wrote in
:

Cathy Kearns wrote:

"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:

Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is against California law. There are
no exceptions for "safety reasons."

Yet police are not shy about inviting children to ride on the
sidewalk on some routes close to schools to keep them out of danger.

Children are not licensed drivers. A licensed driver is supposed to
know the rules of the road and follow them regardless of what type of
vehicle he's using. If he's riding a bicycle, he's to ride on the
road in the same direction as traffic.

Bicycles ridden by adults go too fast to safely mix with pedestrians
on a sidewalk.

You must have never seen any kids riding their bicycles."go too fast",LMAO.


Pedestrians, unlike vehicles, don't follow rules of
the road or stay within "lanes" on a sidewalk. This is why you can't
have someone moving 20 mph amongst those walking 3 mph.


But it's somehow OK to have a slow bicycle among faster moving autos

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Arif Khokar wrote in
:



Since when do cars have to slow down?

I see that frequently.

If the cyclist is in the right
lane, the car can easily pass in the left lane without having to slow
down.

Only IF there IS a "left lane".


The key difference between cyclists vs. pedestrians and cars vs.
cyclists is that the latter two are restricted by rules of the road.
Each of them must remain within lane markings and they are supposed to
signal when changing lanes or direction.

Pedestrians on a sidewalk do not have to stay within a "lane" on the
sidewalk, and they are not required to signal before changing
direction.

That difference is why cars going 20 to 40 mph faster than cyclists is
safe (assuming separate lanes, of course), but cyclists going 15 mph
faster than pedestrians is unsafe.


But a bicycle going 15 mph slower than the auto traffic is somehow safe?
No.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net