|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On 1/28/2018 1:22 PM, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 11:14:12 +0700, John B. wrote: Personally I ride in groups of one as it eliminates the necessity of paying attention to all the problems of riding in a peloton and just roll along smelling the roses and watching the birds :-) I ride in groups of one because nobody else in the county is both able to ride twenty miles and content to do so at an average speed of 5 mph. Riding more slowly than one's natural speed is almost as tiring as riding faster than one is able. On foot, walking slowly is even more tiring than walking fast, as anyone who has taken a toddler for a walk can attest. Well, it probably depends on the speed differential. We have one dear friend who is reluctant to ride with us because, she says, she can't ride as fast as we do. I try hard to convince her that I'm capable of riding very slow. I'd guess her typical average speed is about 10 mph. Mine is probably 15 these days. But I still enjoy our rides together. And I think there's great fun in riding with a 5-year-old grandkid who's on a 12" wheel bike, spinning well over 150 rpm! -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/28/2018 7:19 AM, Sepp Ruf wrote: But first, instead of having the victim's family pay inefficient lawyers to operate in sh*thole Boston, why not instantly auction off a killer truck, proceeds going to the victim's heirs? An excellent idea! But in a greedy world full of spiteful couples and unconscionable clans, it's totally impractical: The amount of "lihop / mihop" incidents involving expensive vehicles would just skyrocket. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On 1/27/2018 11:14 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:26:26 -0800 (PST), jbeattie wrote: On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 4:54:33 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 14:37:26 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/27/2018 1:09 AM, John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 22:27:31 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 7:24 PM, John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:01:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. And yet we have people here saying a cyclist should always stay far right, that controlling a lane is dangerous. If she had been in front of the trucker, he'd have seen her and slowed. But if a cyclist can't bring himself/herself to do that, at least NEVER put yourself to the right of a vehicle that might turn right. Especially a large vehicle like a truck or bus. Right hooks are deadly. (Left hooks in drive-on-left countries.) A few years ago there was a huge outrage about cyclist deaths in London (even though, as usual, far more pedestrians died). It came out that most of those deaths were left hooks, usually women, who pulled up along big lorries. Some said the women were too "polite" to avoid the curb and get in the traffic lane. I am a bit puzzled with these right/left hooked accidents. Don't people turn their heads to look and see what is creeping up beside them? I certainly do - every driveway turning onto "my street"; every corner, every junction, I look to see what is coming. Shoot, I even look back over my shoulder to see what is coming up behind me. Don't other people? See if you can get a chance to sit in a big truck's cab. The blind spots are huge. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9E1_1M-qhU http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...-about-trucks/ I'm not a truck driver but I did maintain them up to about 35 ton dump trucks so I'm fairly aware of the view from the cab. But the fact that a vehicle has blind spots should, to a knowledgeable cyclist, cause the cyclist to treat them with even more caution than a more conventional vehicle. In fact one might even say that a cyclist who isn't aware of the limited vision from the cab of many large motor vehicles, I include buses and most trucks, is probably lacking the necessary skills to ride on the public highways. Well, I'm all in favor of education. But education doesn't get much attention from "bicycling advocates" in the U.S. These days they're all about "protected cycle tracks." In other words, if you were in a "protected cycle track" just before you rode into that intersection, the right turning truck would not have run you over. Perhaps the solution is some form of limited access bikeway. No walkers, no dogs, just bicycles all traveling in the same direction at the same speed. I could even envision one where tunnels existed under all intersections where larger vehicles crossed the bikeway The "same speed" part is vexing -- speaking as someone who rides in a city with a high bike mode share and dopey facilities. I hate conga lines. I preferred it when I was just dodging cars, and it was me and maybe five other guys on bikes. https://bikeportland.org/2016/05/04/...o-essay-182506 -- Jay Beattie. I threw that in as I've, so often, read cyclists complaining about multi speed people and things invading "their" MUP. Personally I ride in groups of one as it eliminates the necessity of paying attention to all the problems of riding in a peloton and just roll along smelling the roses and watching the birds :-) My wife and I both get great pleasure out of riding with friends. I think that's where our friends and we have our best conversations. And there are folks who fear riding alone! They think it's safer being in a bigger and more visible group, and perhaps having supportive witnesses if idiots attack. Many also like the possibility of help in case of a mechanical problem. (I'm amazed by people who can't fix their own flat.) And it's often nice to have someone lead you on a new and especially pleasant route. But there's no denying that riding in groups complicates things. I recall some data from the 1980s, at least, that said serious injuries from bike-bike collisions are as common as from car-bike collisions. Then there are the problems of getting multiple riders through traffic, for example left turns, or traffic lights with short green cycles. I've seen club riders stop when only the front half of their group made it though on green; then after ten seconds of antsy waiting, decide to crash the red. That despite the lead group waiting up ahead at the next red light. But all in all, I think the benefits of riding with (compatible) others outweigh the detriments. - Frank Krygowski |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:01:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. And yet we have people here saying a cyclist should always stay far right, that controlling a lane is dangerous. If she had been in front of the trucker, he'd have seen her and slowed. Since she was clealy visible to the driver for 16 seconds before he killed her, I don't know that what you say is true. He might have still run her over. The interesting thing is that while the driver was celarly and obviously at fault and broke multiple laws, 100% of the blame has been put on the cyclist. Apparently hit and run is legal, leaving the scene, etc., is now legal. "I didn't see her" holds up as a valid defense in a court of law (or to the cop who declines to write a ticket, make an arrest, etc., and it never goes to court). |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:42:11 -0600, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/27/2018 11:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:23 PM, John B. wrote: On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 02:04:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf wrote: John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:07:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/26/2018 6:24 PM, John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:01:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. The ignoramus police, too. Certainly Sir. The logical answer is simply to eliminate the police force. Think of the tax savings, why the New York police force costs the tax payer in the neighborhood of $130,769 annually https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...b_7659496.html Think of how happy "Mr. Average Man" will be without the ignoramus police and the horrendous tax bill. I strongly support police when they're correct and competent. I can't support a system that provides no serious punishment when a motorist takes another's life. At a bare minimum, the trucker should never again operate a motor vehicle on a public road. pffft. How in the hell would that be enforced? http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3783246 Well, one of the proven ways of reducing illegal acts is by an active police presence..... The old fashioned cop on the beat is an often mentioned example. Of course this results in a large number of "ignoramus police" comments. You know, "The stupid cop. He gave me a ticket and I was only going 15 miles over the speed limit". It appears that there are two forms, and effects from, law enforcement systems. A strict system where all laws are vigorously enforced and penalties imposed for law breakers and, secondly, a layed back legal system where law enforcement is lax and legal codes are loosely applied... "Come on Herb... he only ran over two bicycles and you want to put him in Jail?" Take your choice. In one the public feels safe and secure and has confidence in their law enforcement system. in the other they don't. -- Cheers, John B. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 14:27:04 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 1/28/2018 10:42 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:23 PM, John B. wrote: On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 02:04:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf wrote: John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:07:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/26/2018 6:24 PM, John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:01:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. The ignoramus police, too. Certainly Sir. The logical answer is simply to eliminate the police force. Think of the tax savings, why the New York police force costs the tax payer in the neighborhood of $130,769 annually https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...b_7659496.html Think of how happy "Mr. Average Man" will be without the ignoramus police and the horrendous tax bill. I strongly support police when they're correct and competent. I can't support a system that provides no serious punishment when a motorist takes another's life. At a bare minimum, the trucker should never again operate a motor vehicle on a public road. pffft. How in the hell would that be enforced? http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3783246 As a first step, I can envision laws imposing crushing fines on a company that hires a driver who has no valid license. I can't comment on New York but in most countries I have lived in a trucking company who employed an unqualified drivers would be responsibility for anything said driver did while employed as well as additional charges for employing an illegal driver. I remember a friend who had a small trucking company in California once saying something about a company could loose their operating license for using unlicensed drivers. Beyond that, well, driving a motor vehicle usually requires working hands and one working foot... -- Cheers, John B. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On 1/28/2018 8:32 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:42:11 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:23 PM, John B. wrote: On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 02:04:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf wrote: John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:07:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/26/2018 6:24 PM, John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:01:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. The ignoramus police, too. Certainly Sir. The logical answer is simply to eliminate the police force. Think of the tax savings, why the New York police force costs the tax payer in the neighborhood of $130,769 annually https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...b_7659496.html Think of how happy "Mr. Average Man" will be without the ignoramus police and the horrendous tax bill. I strongly support police when they're correct and competent. I can't support a system that provides no serious punishment when a motorist takes another's life. At a bare minimum, the trucker should never again operate a motor vehicle on a public road. pffft. How in the hell would that be enforced? http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3783246 Well, one of the proven ways of reducing illegal acts is by an active police presence..... The old fashioned cop on the beat is an often mentioned example. Of course this results in a large number of "ignoramus police" comments. You know, "The stupid cop. He gave me a ticket and I was only going 15 miles over the speed limit". It appears that there are two forms, and effects from, law enforcement systems. A strict system where all laws are vigorously enforced and penalties imposed for law breakers and, secondly, a layed back legal system where law enforcement is lax and legal codes are loosely applied... "Come on Herb... he only ran over two bicycles and you want to put him in Jail?" Take your choice. In one the public feels safe and secure and has confidence in their law enforcement system. in the other they don't. My post a few days ago mentioned that, regarding bike share schemes in Australia vs. Singapore. Apparently Singaporeans expect a strict system. Australians take the laws as vague suggestions. I'd say America is about the same as Australia. I've been told Italy is worse, although we didn't notice when we were there. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 19:15:26 -0600, Tim McNamara
wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:01:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. And yet we have people here saying a cyclist should always stay far right, that controlling a lane is dangerous. If she had been in front of the trucker, he'd have seen her and slowed. Since she was clealy visible to the driver for 16 seconds before he killed her, I don't know that what you say is true. He might have still run her over. The interesting thing is that while the driver was celarly and obviously at fault and broke multiple laws, 100% of the blame has been put on the cyclist. Apparently hit and run is legal, leaving the scene, etc., is now legal. "I didn't see her" holds up as a valid defense in a court of law (or to the cop who declines to write a ticket, make an arrest, etc., and it never goes to court). https://itstillruns.com/massachusett...t-6405256.html In Massachusetts, there are a few instances when passing on the right is permitted. Left Turn If the car in front of you is making a left turn and is clearly stopped and signaling as such, you are permitted to pass it on the right. It is not possible at that point to pass the car on the left (as it is turning), so passing on the right is allowed. One-Way Street If you are driving on a one-way street, and the car in front of you is in the left lane, you are permitted to pass on the right. As always, it is important to clearly signal and obey speed limits when doing this. Restricted Passage If traffic is restricted in a left lane, forcing cars to pass on the right, then passing on the right-hand side is permitted. Please pay careful attention to any instructions posted in such situations and keep in mind that safety comes first. Safety First and Obey the Law Keep in mind that safety always comes first. If hazardous conditions on the road leave no other option than to pass on right, then you are allowed to do so. Also, if there is clear, official signage expressing The permission to pass on right, then you are allowed to do so. by Taboola link Mass.gov: Rules of the Road link The Unofficial DMV Guide link Massachusetts Institute of Technology: State "Keep Right" Laws -- Cheers, John B. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 22:57:18 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 1/28/2018 8:32 PM, John B. wrote: On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:42:11 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:23 PM, John B. wrote: On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 02:04:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf wrote: John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:07:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/26/2018 6:24 PM, John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:01:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. The ignoramus police, too. Certainly Sir. The logical answer is simply to eliminate the police force. Think of the tax savings, why the New York police force costs the tax payer in the neighborhood of $130,769 annually https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...b_7659496.html Think of how happy "Mr. Average Man" will be without the ignoramus police and the horrendous tax bill. I strongly support police when they're correct and competent. I can't support a system that provides no serious punishment when a motorist takes another's life. At a bare minimum, the trucker should never again operate a motor vehicle on a public road. pffft. How in the hell would that be enforced? http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3783246 Well, one of the proven ways of reducing illegal acts is by an active police presence..... The old fashioned cop on the beat is an often mentioned example. Of course this results in a large number of "ignoramus police" comments. You know, "The stupid cop. He gave me a ticket and I was only going 15 miles over the speed limit". It appears that there are two forms, and effects from, law enforcement systems. A strict system where all laws are vigorously enforced and penalties imposed for law breakers and, secondly, a layed back legal system where law enforcement is lax and legal codes are loosely applied... "Come on Herb... he only ran over two bicycles and you want to put him in Jail?" Take your choice. In one the public feels safe and secure and has confidence in their law enforcement system. in the other they don't. My post a few days ago mentioned that, regarding bike share schemes in Australia vs. Singapore. Apparently Singaporeans expect a strict system. Australians take the laws as vague suggestions. I'd say America is about the same as Australia. I've been told Italy is worse, although we didn't notice when we were there. As they say, you lays your money and you takes you choice. In Singapore with it's strict legal system the society apparently has considerable faith in its law enforcement system: See https://tinyurl.com/ybp45edf for details of what Singapore calls the "Community-based policing strategy through the Neighborhood Police Post (NPP) system in 1983 and the shift towards community-focused policing through the creation of Neighborhood Police Centers", which make law enforcement practically a part of the neighborhood and http://news.gallup.com/poll/183704/c...est-years.aspx which contrasts Singapore with the U.S. system. It is probably difficult, to say the least, to develop a group of law abiding group who adhere to traffic laws and follow save riding practices in a society that doesn't trust their own law enforcement agency. And it follows that it is probably very difficult to effect safe riding practices in a group that sees no reason to obey the law. -- Cheers, John B. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Some lives matter. Some don't
John B. wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:42:11 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/27/2018 11:23 PM, John B. wrote: On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 02:04:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf wrote: John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:07:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote: On 1/26/2018 6:24 PM, John B. wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo Yes, horrific. The ignoramus police, too. Certainly Sir. The logical answer is simply to eliminate the police force. Think of the tax savings, why the New York police force costs the tax payer in the neighborhood of $130,769 annually https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...b_7659496.html Think of how happy "Mr. Average Man" will be without the ignoramus police and the horrendous tax bill. I strongly support police when they're correct and competent. I can't support a system that provides no serious punishment when a motorist takes another's life. At a bare minimum, the trucker should never again operate a motor vehicle on a public road. pffft. How in the hell would that be enforced? http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3783246 Well, one of the proven ways of reducing illegal acts is by an active police presence..... The old fashioned cop on the beat is an often mentioned example. Of course this results Your phantasies and examples prove no causation. in a large number of "ignoramus police" comments. You know, "The stupid cop. He gave me a ticket and I was only going 15 miles over the speed limit". You are hallucinating, aren't you? You think rbt readers don't notice your misrepresentation of the context of "ignoramus police?" You think rbt readers do not comprehend that you only quote the part of the Mass. law that pertains to the cyclist's behavior, but not the trucker's? Traffic rules are mostly constructed in a way that allows one party to make a mistake, but an accident still getting avoided by the other party not making a mistake. Even the legislators in Mass. understand that the burden of extra diligence is upon the operator of dangerous motorized machinery, thus truckers need a license, not cyclists lured into deadly traps by territory-demarcating bicycle activists and dangerously contradictory legislation from one province to another. After the homicide, did the behavior of Boston police and DA indicate any of this is understood by them and demonstrated by impartial "law enforcement?" I don't think so. It appears that there are two forms, and effects from, law enforcement systems. A strict system where all laws are vigorously enforced and penalties imposed for law breakers and, secondly, a layed back legal system where law enforcement is lax and legal codes are loosely applied... "Come on Herb... he only ran over two bicycles and you want to put him in Jail?" Take your choice. In one the public feels safe and secure and has confidence in their law enforcement system. in the other they don't. Someone obviously needs to simplify reality by resorting to false dichotomies. You might have forgotten during your unamericanizing Asian adventures, King Longhorn's Johnny, but the public's trust in government is to be earned by control by the public and government being held accountable. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
how much does frame matter? | dan[_3_] | Racing | 2 | September 2nd 12 05:55 PM |
What's the matter with her? | Danny Colyer | UK | 7 | May 18th 07 06:19 PM |
does weight matter in uni? | onelesscar | Unicycling | 0 | November 26th 06 10:15 PM |
Does the truth matter? | crit PRO | Racing | 8 | August 24th 05 05:45 PM |
Why Doping does Matter | Bill C | Racing | 7 | August 18th 05 12:06 AM |