Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

On Dec 10, 2:13 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

What does VC have to say about anticipating the mistakes of other road
users?

As with Duane, I can help you find a library if you like.

No thanks. Having studied the relevant material, I already know what
VC has to say about anticipating the mistakes of other road users:
Next to nothing.

On 12/10/2010 9:56 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 10, 8:55 am, Duane wrote:
On 12/10/2010 1:00 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Dec 9, 12:52 pm, Duane H wrote:
On 12/9/2010 12:37 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:

If that's the case, you are going to be ground meat whichever part of
the road you are using, since the truck will only have 9" each side in
the lane.

In which case I'm getting out of the way.

Onto the sidewalk again, eh?

Ground meat again eh? If those are the two choices,
I know which I will take.

Hmm. Given your fears, I suppose Quebec must have special Ground Meat
Crews to scrape away all the dead cyclists!


http://lh4.ggpht.com/_axqpEHbg3-w/SfOdgwE9JLI/AAAAAAAAJa4/xdDDes0sr74/IMG_0408.JPG

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 12/10/2010 9:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

That case was constructed so it didn't matter. There is no safe speed
for an 8.5 foot truck to pass a moving bicyclist in a ten foot wide
lane.

2.99792458 x 10^8 m/sec.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

"RobertH" wrote in message
...
On Dec 10, 2:13 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

What does VC have to say about anticipating the mistakes of other road
users?

As with Duane, I can help you find a library if you like.

No thanks. Having studied the relevant material, I already know what
VC has to say about anticipating the mistakes of other road users:
Next to nothing.

Your response was much more polite than mine. You must be new dealing with
this
guy.

On 12/10/2010 3:13 PM, Duane Hébert wrote:

I expect that if enough people ride like I was that day, the traffic
jams resulting would probably have the wrong result.

If enough cagers were on bicycles instead, traffic jams would not be a
problem.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 12/10/2010 1:45 PM, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/10/2010 2:31 PM, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:28 am, Duane wrote:
On 12/10/2010 12:53 PM, DirtRoadie wrote:
Just a further example of how foolish Frank is with his tunnel vision
and "control" obsession.

I'm getting pretty tired of his asinine insults anyway. He thinks that
everyone is his student and completely Fred-like.

Frank knows knows law better than lawyers or courts, trauma better
than ER doctors, bike racing better than bike racers, and statistical
studies better than their authors. And in each of these fields all the
"experts" agree with him (for that is what makes them experts). They
need not, of course, actually express their own opinions, Frank merely
adopts them as his supporters (whether they know it or not) and speaks
for them.

It amazing that he wastes any time relying on other authority at all.

+1


When is the marriage?

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 12/10/2010 3:20 PM, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/10/2010 4:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:18 am, wrote:
On Dec 9, 9:43 am, Frank wrote:

Vehicular Cycling pays minor lip service to 'looked but failed to see'
incidents but insists, contrary to all statistical evidence, that
merely following the basic rules of the road for drivers of vehicles
will bestow upon one all the tools reasonably necessary to avoid them.

Nope, that's a lie. We've been over this repeatedly.

If what you say were true, then the book _Effective Cycling_, the
pamphlet "Street Smarts" and the recognized cycling courses like Smart
Cycling by the LAB, the Florida Bicycle Association's "CycleSavvy"
course, Can-Bike's courses, and Franklin's _Cyclecraft_ wouldn't teach
things like instant turns, emergency braking and other crash avoidance
techniques.

Anticipation and crash avoidance (eg swerving and panic stops) are two
completely different animals.

If you're swerving or panic stopping, your anticipation has failed
you.

What does VC have to say about anticipating the mistakes of other road
users?

As with Duane, I can help you find a library if you like.

Your an idiot.

Correction: "You're an idiot".

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 12/10/2010 10:21 AM, RobertH Who? wrote:
On Dec 9, 2:56 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 12/9/2010 12:55 AM, RobertH wrote:

On Dec 8, 6:50 pm, T m Sherm n _""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 12/8/2010 10:26 AM, RobertH wrote:

On Dec 7, 7:35 pm, T m Sherm n _

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.

What is there in "defensive driving" useful to cyclists that is not
covered under vehicular/effective cycling?

Sure, Tom, I'll take that one.

Defensive driving emphasizes the specific ways that _lawful_ vehicle
operators are victimized in garden-variety collisions (In terms of
cycling, a 'looked-but-failed-to-see error' by a left-turning driver
has the most serious damage x frequency vector) and teaches strategies
to avoid them. Defensive driving emphasizes the need for awareness
above and beyond simply following the rules of the road. The
foundational assumptions of defensive driving are strongly supported
by factual evidence.

Vehicular Cycling pays minor lip service to 'looked but failed to see'
incidents but insists, contrary to all statistical evidence, that
merely following the basic rules of the road for drivers of vehicles
will bestow upon one all the tools reasonably necessary to avoid them.
Vehicular Cycling emphasizes assertiveness and rule-following over
defensiveness. In Vehicular Cycling, a defensive mindset is in fact
viewed as superfluous and unnecessary. Riders who express the
necessity for defensive posture in traffic are berated and ridiculed
until they go away shaking their heads in wonder and disgust at their
fellow man.

Which planet is it that you live on?

--
T m Sherm n - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Please honor the signature separator (i.e. "-- ").

If you have specific objections to my characterization, express them
so we can begin to dismantle your little belief system.

Correct, I am. Wrong, you are.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

"Tºm ShermªnT °_°" " wrote in
message ...
On 12/10/2010 3:13 PM, Duane Hébert wrote:

I expect that if enough people ride like I was that day, the traffic
jams resulting would probably have the wrong result.

If enough cagers were on bicycles instead, traffic jams would not be a
problem.


Yep. But that day is likely not coming soon. We need to figure out what to
do until then.

On 12/10/2010 10:00 AM, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/10/2010 10:48 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
[...]
Read the first two chapters of Mionske's _Bicycling& The Law_ for
discussion of rights to the road.

He doesn't seem to be offering a free copy at his website so why don't
you tell me what it says?[...]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.