Eyc headlight problem

On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 9:20:43 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/13/2021 11:48 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 12, 2021 at 9:15:56 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/11/2021 7:17 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, April 11, 2021 at 11:40:31 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

As I have to emphasize time and time again, I'm not telling people not
to use a DRL, not to wear a helmet, not to wear day-glo clothing and so
on. What troubles me are the claims that "anyone with a brain" will make
those currently fashionable choices. Imposing ever-increasing "safety"
recommendations adds to the perceived danger of bicycling. That's the
opposite of promoting cycling.

Will the sky someday fall, in Jay's words? More realistically, will laws
mandate those measures? Well, helmets are mandatory for essentially
everyone in at least two countries, with fines up near $400 in some
areas. They're mandatory for kids in many U.S. states and for adults in
some areas. Day-glo vests must be carried by cyclists in France and be
worn under certain conditions. Blinking taillights are required by at
least some bike clubs for daytime riding.

The Oregon under 16 MHL is the source of the prohibition on offering evidence of the non-wearing of helmet as evidence of comparative fault. Assuming there were some law mandating a DRL on bicycles (there isn't one for cars in Oregon), it is reasonable to assume that it would protect cyclists from claims of comparative fault based on the using of a DRL.
Your point seems to be that if a law mandating helmets or DRLs (or
day-glo vests or safety flags or electric horns?) has a comparative
fault exception, it's just fine. I disagree strongly. There are many
other detriments to such laws, and even to promotions of those measures.

My point is that every time we add an item to the list of things "you
really need to be safe on a bike" we increase the perception of
bicycling's danger. Not only are most of those things ineffective wastes
of money, they add to the image of bicycling as an extreme activity, one
that normally prudent people should avoid. That imposes all sorts of
societal costs.
Also, what you are proposing is a ban on DRLs to avoid them becoming the "standard of care."
Bull****. I never once proposed banning those things. I said precisely
the opposite. But I'd prefer an (unattainable) ideal world in which
promotional propaganda was actually factual, accurate and given in
proper context.
My defense against getting hit is avoiding skulking in the gutter. I
almost always ride where motorists are looking, as specifically allowed
by state law. I also stay aware of traffic interactions and potential
conflicts. Those tactics have worked perfectly for almost 50 years now,
in dozens of states and nearly a dozen foreign countries.

Gutter bunnies get right hooked and left crossed because they are
inconspicuous, then they buy talismans for protection - DRLs, bike
flags, electric horns, day-glo vests and more.

WTF is "skulking in the gutter"? How do you even ride in the gutter? Are you saying AFRAP is skulking in the gutter -- even though it is required by law?
Get serious. You're a lawyer. You know the "P" stands for "practicable"
not "possible." "Practicable" includes the ability to do it without
endangering oneself.

Endangering oneself how? Riding toward the right? If there are no obstacles, why not let traffic flow around? One does not need to be in the middle of the road all the time. If cars can pass safely, I let them pass -- why not?
You should be careful to argue against what I've actually said, not what
you've imagined I've said. (Admittedly, that's a common problem here.)

When a lane is wide enough to safely share, I share that lane. I've said
so many times. Please check your notes.
And unless your riding universe is completely different from mine, you
will have seen plenty of cyclists literally riding in the gutter. You'll
have seen even more skimming the very edge of a 10 foot lane to let an 8
foot truck squeeze by with inches to spare. You'll have seen countless
cyclists riding in the door zone.

Take the lane when you need it -- and be careful if you are riding in the door zone. Pre-plague, I did that all the time to avoid stopped traffic. It's harder these days with blacked-out windows, but I'm not going to sit around behind a line of stopped traffic.
I disagree strongly with "be careful if you are riding in the door
zone." It's much better to just stay out of the door zone. Because what
does "be careful" mean? Hit the brakes and swerve if the driver's door
opens when you're at the taillight? Sorry, physics makes that impossible.

As I've mentioned, Chicago began keeping track of doorings, whereas most
areas don't record them since they are not collisions "between vehicles
in transport." Chicago found something like a quarter of its car-bike
collisions were doorings.
BTW, the gutter is like 8" wide with a curb. Try actually riding in a gutter. Most of our roads don't even have gutters. There is just a curb or nothing. The only times I see cyclists in actual gutters is when they're trying to squeeze around cars and other obstacles.
Of course it's necessary to strictly use exactly proper language when in
a discussion with a lawyer! But:

Most of our gutters (actually "gutter pans," cast in one piece with the
curb) are closer to a foot wide. But yes, I actually do see cyclists
riding in them. And generalizing the concept, I see many cyclists riding
at the very edge of a paved road that lacks curbs or (by your
definition) well-defined gutters. On certain roads I see people riding
dirt tracks they've worn in the grass just a few inches off the
pavement. And a few years ago I described the incident where a road
bicyclist in full kit on a rural road rode off onto the grass rather
than obstruct a pickup approaching behind him.
This is basic! It's probably covered in this online course:
https://cyclingsavvy.org/courses/ess...-short-course/

I learned that stuff when I was seven years old in a mandatory education class after being busted for riding my bike the wrong way down the road in front of the police station. Even at the time, I knew I was breaking the law, and I learned an important lesson. Don't break the law in front of the police station.
You know this stuff. Would you say your level of intelligence and
expertise is typical?

Keep in mind that half the people in America are of below average
intelligence.
As a couple of data points, I've been hit maybe a half-dozen times and never while skulking in the gutter. I was lane center riding the speed of traffic when someone turned in front of me. Nice ride to the hospital in an ambulance. I was doing the same thing when some one pulled out from my right for no reason. I got hooked by a mail truck. I got rear-ended by a bus while in the middle of the f****** lane. People do stupid sh**.
People do stupid ****. But people do less stupid **** to riders who are
positioned so they are visible. You improve your odds when you move away
from the edge - assuming, as on most roads, that there is not room to
safely share the lane.

Can you picture two normal curves? Each one representing the probability
of a rider's car-bike crash. Neither one has absolute zero probability
(the far left tail of the curve). But the curves are shifted laterally
from each other. The rider who hugs the edge has more chance of getting
hit, and the reasons should be obvious to a person who can visualize
lines of sight and lane dimensions.

Hit how? If I had been hugging the edge of the road and riding in the door-handle zone, that bus may have missed me. Riding lane center may increase the chance of getting hit depending on the road and type of collision. I ascend to the far right on this road because it is the other side of a blind turn and being far right makes me more visible...

??? What? I'd say the opposite is true.
-- and I can bail out if some idiot comes drifting around the corner
from either direction.
How often do they run into an oncoming car in the lane you ride in?
They're idiots, but they're even less likely to run into you. Try to not
let your imagination run away.

My imagination? You're such a condescending f***. On that road, cars cross the center line with great regularity because its not hard to do. A sensible motorcyclist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NPq...annel=leveloff A not sensible urban racer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fzw...nel=DonutMedia I haven't encountered one of those guys, but their pin-head amateur cousins . . . yes. And you hope not to encounter them in the part of the descent where moving right puts you off a cliff.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 4/13/2021 4:57 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 9:20:43 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/13/2021 11:48 AM, jbeattie wrote:
I ascend to the far right on this road because it is the other side of a blind turn and being far right makes me more visible...

??? What? I'd say the opposite is true.
-- and I can bail out if some idiot comes drifting around the corner
from either direction.
How often do they run into an oncoming car in the lane you ride in?
They're idiots, but they're even less likely to run into you. Try to not
let your imagination run away.

My imagination? You're such a condescending f***. On that road, cars cross the center line with great regularity because its not hard to do. A sensible motorcyclist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NPq...annel=leveloff A not sensible urban racer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fzw...nel=DonutMedia I haven't encountered one of those guys, but their pin-head amateur cousins . . . yes. And you hope not to encounter them in the part of the descent where moving right puts you off a cliff.

Get quantitative, please. Is that a road you drive? If not, others
obviously do. How often have there been head-on collisions caused by
cars going into the oncoming lane? How big is this bugaboo?

Sure, there are a few idiots like the one in the video. But if they
regularly used the oncoming lane on truly blind curves the carnage would
cause police to stop that behavior. From what I could see, that idiot
was crossing the yellow line only when he could see it was clear. If
you're away from the road's edge you're making it more obvious that the
lane is _not_ clear. You're visible from farther around the curve, and
you'd cause the driver to begin moving away from you sooner.

That should be a fairly simple geometry problem for you. Draw a sketch
and think about it. I can do the numbers if you want.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/13/2021 12:45 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:

snip

For sure. I did that too, but I’m under no illusion that I could do RF or
digital design nowadays. And even though I’m a power systems guy, I
couldn’t do insulation coordination, a transient stability study, or spec
an SF6 circuit breaker. The field is just too damn wide.

I spent a good percentage of my digital career dealing with two issues:
EMI/RFI and thermal management. Having basic knowledge of these
disciplines is vital.

The best reference on thermal design in electronics that I've found is
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0791800741.

For RFI/EMI, nearly everything you do to manage thermals will make
RFI/EMI worse and vice-versa.

sms wrote:
On 4/13/2021 12:45 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:

snip

For sure. I did that too, but I’m under no illusion that I could do RF or
digital design nowadays. And even though I’m a power systems guy, I
couldn’t do insulation coordination, a transient stability study, or spec
an SF6 circuit breaker. The field is just too damn wide.

I spent a good percentage of my digital career dealing with two issues:
EMI/RFI and thermal management. Having basic knowledge of these
disciplines is vital.

The best reference on thermal design in electronics that I've found is
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0791800741.

Looks like a good book. Maybe when I start my next career.

For RFI/EMI, nearly everything you do to manage thermals will make
RFI/EMI worse and vice-versa.

Sounds about right. You fix EMI radiation problems by making loops smaller
and you cure thermal issues by moving stuff further apart.

On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 2:08:25 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/13/2021 1:51 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 11:20:43 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Keep in mind that half the people in America are of below average
intelligence.

True, if you are using median as equal to average. *Tom/Trump, this is math, so you will want to run away and scream the antifa communist radical right Qanon deniers are out to get you. If you are equating mean to equal average, then it could go either way. 50% above or 50% below average intelligence. Probably using standard deviations and bell curves is a better way to talk about intelligence. I would surmise everyone within one standard deviation of mean has enough intelligence to get by just fine. Maybe even two standard deviations. Its the outliers where the problems occur. As usual. Take the attempted coup of the USA orchestrated by Trump on Jan 6. It was only the far far far outliers who were there and invaded the capitol wearing viking helmets and ended up killing five people.

That was not an insurrection. Mob action is wrong, a crime,
and bad enough but it was not an insurrection.

Alright, I'll not use coup anymore. But I think riot is appropriate. Very similar if not identical to the BLM riots Fox News always reported about. A few of them had destruction, identical to the destruction of the Capitol.. Probably similar in dollar damage since I am guessing everything inside DC is very expensive. Of course Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin, Wisconsin, claimed there wasn't any violence and the rioters were all law abiding people who respected law officers and he would have been fearful if they were BLM or antifa rioters.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/20/polit...y-6/index.html





Did you listen to the President's speech that day? I did,
live, all of it (WBAP suspended regular programming for it
and I was filing/sanding all though it). There's no
'incitement' in it. You can read the transcript any time you
like. You won't, but you could.

I watched all 70 minutes of Trump ranting and raving. See link below for the WSJ video.
https://www.wsj.com/video/trump-full...432D07030.html
At 70:10 to 70:50 he encourages, tells the crowd to walk, march down Pennsylvania Ave to make sure the weak Republicans vote the correct way on overturning the electoral college results from the states. Incitement? He did encourage, make his patrons invade, break into the Capitol and do damage.





With 150,000+ people, yes there were deaths. Heart attacks,
strokes, the usual in a crowd skewing older. Conflating
homicide with overexcited geezers dropping dead doesn't
advance clarity or truth.

150,000? All of the articles I saw on the size of the Trump rally on Jan 6 said "thousands". I even read one about a guy who estimates crowd sizes. He said maybe up to 10k. But its very difficult to estimate crowd sizes without overhead pictures and there were none at this rally since drones are forbidden near the White House. Now Trump himself did say hundreds of thousands near the beginning of the speech. But we have prior experience with Trump over estimating crowd sizes at his inauguration. At 67:20 he says 250k crowd size.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/u...ng-attack.html
5 people died at the Jan 6 riot.
1. Brian Sicknick Capitol police officer. He died the day after he was overpowered and beaten by rioters from the mob at the Capitol. 42 years old..
2. Ashli Babbitt Air Force veteran from Southern California, was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer. 35 years old.
3. Kevin Greeson Standing in a throng of fellow Trump loyalists on the west side of the Capitol when he suffered a heart attack and fell to the sidewalk. 55 years old.
4. Rosanne Boyland Ms. Boyland appears to have been killed in a crush of fellow rioters during their attempt to fight through a police line. 34 years old.
5. Benjamin Philips Mr. Philips died of a stroke in Washington. 50 years old.
OK. I will give you the fact only two people were killed in the riot directly. Beaten to death by the rioters or shot by the police, guards. Two died of heart attacks, strokes, and one died from being crushed by the mob. So only two I would connect directly to the riot itself. About on average with the numbers killed at the BLM riots over the summer. The kid from Illinois gunned down two rioters in Wisconsin.

Almost all of the speech was a recitement of his usual election lies. Stolen election, Democrats cheated, false voting, laws changed to his disadvantage, dead people voting, more votes than population of state. bragging about how great he is in Iraq, Wisconsin Madison and Milwaukee cheating, Georgia Atlanta cheating, lots of cheating in Georgia, telling the VP to reject the vote results, voting machine corruption, voting laws to change.





Tom has his own hills to climb every day. You might show
some gratitude for your own health instead of trying to
outdo his symptoms.
I know I have not made any comments on Tom's health issues. I have read many other posts by others commenting on Tom's medications and some of his wrecks and injuries. Whether that is good or bad, I don't know. But I don't believe any of the other posts were actively mocking Tom for these ailments. Just mentioning his health conditions and/or citing him to take his medications. Nothing mocking in the other posts.

As for Tom's health conditions, I have my own to deal with. From the various posts, it appears his ailments are fairly recent and will be cured in somewhat short order with medication. They are not life changing conditions. And will be gone before death. I am more familiar with lifelong diseases that have an effect every minute of the day up until death. Can be treated with medication, but never cured.




--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:52:19 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/13/2021 1:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:31:49 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/12/2021 9:37 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:47:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Taking your response from bottom to top: I have certainly NOT ignored
that half of bike crashes are cyclists' fault. I've agreed many times.
That's one reason I'm such a proponent of cycling education.

Well, I looked it up and in 2021 it is estimated that some 70% of the
U.S. population has, or will have, a auto driver's license and as
these people have to, I believe in all states, be tested in the
traffic code as well as the ability to drive it would seem that most
people do know the traffic code. But cyclists require further
training?

I'd say so. Licenses or no, far too many people think they can do
whatever they want on a bike - that rules don't apply.

After all, you're the one whose most frequently said half of deaths are
the cyclists' fault. Be careful not to argue against yourself.

I don't believe that I am.
The most common reason for bicycle caused collisions in the L.S. study
was riding the wrong way. Does one require a master's degree in
bicycle riding to know that it is bad joss to ride the wrong way ?

Choosing the proper side of the road involves just the most basic
knowledge, not a master's degree. But it's still quite common to see
wrong way cyclists. It's common enough that the behavior has a nickname:
"Salmon riding." I've certainly seen plenty of it, and can give many
interesting anecdotes, if you like.

So... even though cyclists know that they are doing wrong the persist
in doing it? And education is going to correct this?



To illustrate: Many years ago I and several other members of our bike
club arranged to do Bike Safety talks at some middle school assemblies.
After the very first one, we had an outraged parent come up to us and
angrily chew us out, saying "Don't you dare tell my kid to ride on the
right side of the road! He's supposed to ride where he can see the cars
coming!"

Or I can tell about the young engineer (one of my former students)
commuting to work who was stopped by a cop and forced to ride facing
traffic. Or the young punk who turned around and chased me on his bike
after I chewed him out for riding wrong way straight at me... and more.
We've gotten enough argument on that point that our club has a handout
explaining _why_ bicyclists are supposed to ride with traffic, not
facing it.

But about education - This popped up in my news feed today:
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapo...sts-as-part-of

Ah yes, Singapore. Well they do have laws regarding bicycle riding and
they do enforce them. See
https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL/RTA1961-R3
and
https://mothership.sg/2018/12/cyclin...ore-rules-law/
As I mention, they do enforce the laws in Singapore.
Fines for ignoring the law, in the case of bicycles, is in the S$75
range. As a comparison, minimum salary in Singapore are in the S$1,000
per month range so $75 is, roughly, 2 days pay.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On 4/13/2021 8:45 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 2:08:25 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/13/2021 1:51 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 11:20:43 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Keep in mind that half the people in America are of below average
intelligence.

True, if you are using median as equal to average. *Tom/Trump, this is math, so you will want to run away and scream the antifa communist radical right Qanon deniers are out to get you. If you are equating mean to equal average, then it could go either way. 50% above or 50% below average intelligence. Probably using standard deviations and bell curves is a better way to talk about intelligence. I would surmise everyone within one standard deviation of mean has enough intelligence to get by just fine. Maybe even two standard deviations. Its the outliers where the problems occur. As usual. Take the attempted coup of the USA orchestrated by Trump on Jan 6. It was only the far far far outliers who were there and invaded the capitol wearing viking helmets and ended up killing five people.

That was not an insurrection. Mob action is wrong, a crime,
and bad enough but it was not an insurrection.

Alright, I'll not use coup anymore. But I think riot is appropriate. Very similar if not identical to the BLM riots Fox News always reported about. A few of them had destruction, identical to the destruction of the Capitol. Probably similar in dollar damage since I am guessing everything inside DC is very expensive. Of course Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin, Wisconsin, claimed there wasn't any violence and the rioters were all law abiding people who respected law officers and he would have been fearful if they were BLM or antifa rioters.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/20/polit...y-6/index.html





Did you listen to the President's speech that day? I did,
live, all of it (WBAP suspended regular programming for it
and I was filing/sanding all though it). There's no
'incitement' in it. You can read the transcript any time you
like. You won't, but you could.

I watched all 70 minutes of Trump ranting and raving. See link below for the WSJ video.
https://www.wsj.com/video/trump-full...432D07030.html
At 70:10 to 70:50 he encourages, tells the crowd to walk, march down Pennsylvania Ave to make sure the weak Republicans vote the correct way on overturning the electoral college results from the states. Incitement? He did encourage, make his patrons invade, break into the Capitol and do damage.





With 150,000+ people, yes there were deaths. Heart attacks,
strokes, the usual in a crowd skewing older. Conflating
homicide with overexcited geezers dropping dead doesn't
advance clarity or truth.

150,000? All of the articles I saw on the size of the Trump rally on Jan 6 said "thousands". I even read one about a guy who estimates crowd sizes. He said maybe up to 10k. But its very difficult to estimate crowd sizes without overhead pictures and there were none at this rally since drones are forbidden near the White House. Now Trump himself did say hundreds of thousands near the beginning of the speech. But we have prior experience with Trump over estimating crowd sizes at his inauguration. At 67:20 he says 250k crowd size.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/u...ng-attack.html
5 people died at the Jan 6 riot.
1. Brian Sicknick Capitol police officer. He died the day after he was overpowered and beaten by rioters from the mob at the Capitol. 42 years old.
2. Ashli Babbitt Air Force veteran from Southern California, was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer. 35 years old.
3. Kevin Greeson Standing in a throng of fellow Trump loyalists on the west side of the Capitol when he suffered a heart attack and fell to the sidewalk. 55 years old.
4. Rosanne Boyland Ms. Boyland appears to have been killed in a crush of fellow rioters during their attempt to fight through a police line. 34 years old.
5. Benjamin Philips Mr. Philips died of a stroke in Washington. 50 years old.
OK. I will give you the fact only two people were killed in the riot directly. Beaten to death by the rioters or shot by the police, guards. Two died of heart attacks, strokes, and one died from being crushed by the mob. So only two I would connect directly to the riot itself. About on average with the numbers killed at the BLM riots over the summer. The kid from Illinois gunned down two rioters in Wisconsin.

Almost all of the speech was a recitement of his usual election lies. Stolen election, Democrats cheated, false voting, laws changed to his disadvantage, dead people voting, more votes than population of state. bragging about how great he is in Iraq, Wisconsin Madison and Milwaukee cheating, Georgia Atlanta cheating, lots of cheating in Georgia, telling the VP to reject the vote results, voting machine corruption, voting laws to change.





Tom has his own hills to climb every day. You might show
some gratitude for your own health instead of trying to
outdo his symptoms.
I know I have not made any comments on Tom's health issues. I have read many other posts by others commenting on Tom's medications and some of his wrecks and injuries. Whether that is good or bad, I don't know. But I don't believe any of the other posts were actively mocking Tom for these ailments. Just mentioning his health conditions and/or citing him to take his medications. Nothing mocking in the other posts.

As for Tom's health conditions, I have my own to deal with. From the various posts, it appears his ailments are fairly recent and will be cured in somewhat short order with medication. They are not life changing conditions. And will be gone before death. I am more familiar with lifelong diseases that have an effect every minute of the day up until death. Can be treated with medication, but never cured.





Officer Sicknick was not beaten. The man at whom a fire
extinguisher was thrown is a different person. Doesn't make
mob action OK, but Sicknik's death was not precipitated by a
'beating'.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 08:18:30 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 9:52:23 a.m. UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/13/2021 1:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:31:49 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/12/2021 9:37 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:47:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Taking your response from bottom to top: I have certainly NOT ignored
that half of bike crashes are cyclists' fault. I've agreed many times.
That's one reason I'm such a proponent of cycling education.

Well, I looked it up and in 2021 it is estimated that some 70% of the
U.S. population has, or will have, a auto driver's license and as
these people have to, I believe in all states, be tested in the
traffic code as well as the ability to drive it would seem that most
people do know the traffic code. But cyclists require further
training?

I'd say so. Licenses or no, far too many people think they can do
whatever they want on a bike - that rules don't apply.

After all, you're the one whose most frequently said half of deaths are
the cyclists' fault. Be careful not to argue against yourself.

I don't believe that I am.
The most common reason for bicycle caused collisions in the L.S. study
was riding the wrong way. Does one require a master's degree in
bicycle riding to know that it is bad joss to ride the wrong way ?
Choosing the proper side of the road involves just the most basic
knowledge, not a master's degree. But it's still quite common to see
wrong way cyclists. It's common enough that the behavior has a nickname:
"Salmon riding." I've certainly seen plenty of it, and can give many
interesting anecdotes, if you like.

To illustrate: Many years ago I and several other members of our bike
club arranged to do Bike Safety talks at some middle school assemblies.
After the very first one, we had an outraged parent come up to us and
angrily chew us out, saying "Don't you dare tell my kid to ride on the
right side of the road! He's supposed to ride where he can see the cars
coming!"

Or I can tell about the young engineer (one of my former students)
commuting to work who was stopped by a cop and forced to ride facing
traffic. Or the young punk who turned around and chased me on his bike
after I chewed him out for riding wrong way straight at me... and more.
We've gotten enough argument on that point that our club has a handout
explaining _why_ bicyclists are supposed to ride with traffic, not
facing it.

But about education - This popped up in my news feed today:
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapo...sts-as-part-of

--
- Frank Krygowski

In the fall of 1989 I moved to the city where I lived. In the time since then I have seen TWO bicyclists riding on the wrong side of the road.

Even on the road that's posted ONE WAY, BICYCLISTS EXCEPTED, I have yet to see a bicyclist riding counter to the traffic.

Cheers

We get as lot of it here as most major roads in Bangkok are divided
highways with long distances between "U" turn openings so it is either
2 km that-a-way to a U turn and the same distance back or just scoot
down the wrong side of the road two blocks to your street.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 4/13/2021 10:11 PM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:52:19 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/13/2021 1:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:31:49 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/12/2021 9:37 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:47:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Taking your response from bottom to top: I have certainly NOT ignored
that half of bike crashes are cyclists' fault. I've agreed many times.
That's one reason I'm such a proponent of cycling education.

Well, I looked it up and in 2021 it is estimated that some 70% of the
U.S. population has, or will have, a auto driver's license and as
these people have to, I believe in all states, be tested in the
traffic code as well as the ability to drive it would seem that most
people do know the traffic code. But cyclists require further
training?

I'd say so. Licenses or no, far too many people think they can do
whatever they want on a bike - that rules don't apply.

After all, you're the one whose most frequently said half of deaths are
the cyclists' fault. Be careful not to argue against yourself.

I don't believe that I am.
The most common reason for bicycle caused collisions in the L.S. study
was riding the wrong way. Does one require a master's degree in
bicycle riding to know that it is bad joss to ride the wrong way ?

Choosing the proper side of the road involves just the most basic
knowledge, not a master's degree. But it's still quite common to see
wrong way cyclists. It's common enough that the behavior has a nickname:
"Salmon riding." I've certainly seen plenty of it, and can give many
interesting anecdotes, if you like.

So... even though cyclists know that they are doing wrong the persist
in doing it? And education is going to correct this?

No, they _don't_ know they are doing it wrong. They generally think
they're safer riding facing traffic. That's why our club has a handout
explaining why it's actually more dangerous.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/13/2021 10:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 08:18:30 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote:


In the fall of 1989 I moved to the city where I lived. In the time since then I have seen TWO bicyclists riding on the wrong side of the road.

Even on the road that's posted ONE WAY, BICYCLISTS EXCEPTED, I have yet to see a bicyclist riding counter to the traffic.

Cheers

We get as lot of it here as most major roads in Bangkok are divided
highways with long distances between "U" turn openings so it is either
2 km that-a-way to a U turn and the same distance back or just scoot
down the wrong side of the road two blocks to your street.

I think that's an unfortunate consequence of (re)designing cities for
maximum throughput of motor vehicles, and ignoring anybody traveling
otherwise.

--
- Frank Krygowski