S/D: bicyclists who impatiently wave you around them on narrow winding country roads

jealous of dudes riding pleasantly on narrow winding country roads.

As a pedestrian and bicyclist, I often get somewhat annoyed at drivers who will, say, pause a long time to let me cross an intersection when it would have been much faster for both of us if they had just gone when they were supposed to. I don't mean busy intersections where if a car won't stop I'll never cross; I mean residential intersections, where if the car just acted like cars normally do it would be across the intersection and gone before I even made it to the intersection.

I appreciate that you are happy to slow down or wait for the bicyclist, but it would make everyone's life easier if you were to make yourself no longer a threat to the bicyclist by just passing already.

(PS I do not drive)

also: why can't i hold onto trucks and trams? it's fun, and gets me to work/school faster!

xpost, but those are always bumpy and slow!

If you're biking to work, ok, you get a break even though it's a pain in everyone else's ass. If you're just taking a joyride or working off ass-fat, I hope a thousand pigeons crap on you.

In my books any person who chooses to ride a car even if she has a more sustainable alternative is more selfish than any biker, period.

OTMFM

GO TO HELL, HIPPIE

now, living somewhere where i drive for the first time in a million years, i just hate everyone. i've never seen so many bad drivers in my life. i don't know if it is just crazy island where Beth and I live, but I have NEVER EVER EVER seen so many people drive on the wrong side of the road. it's nuts. people drifting over the line left and right. there is nothing scarier than driving behind someone who keeps drifting over onto the other side of the road. maybe its the narrow roads here. maybe people are used to virtually no traffic in the winter and they get lazy? maybe everyone is drunk? this is my best guess.

as far as people waving you around them, this happens to me with mopeds all the time and i always wonder what they are thinking when they do this on a corner! when i can't actually see what is coming in the other direction. why would they want me to pass them when i can't see the truck coming that will kill us all?

Physical fitness is right-on, but come the FUCK ON, get one biking trail instead of putting everyone on the road in mortal danger when there’s so many blind curves and so much traffic

Because, yeah, a car hovering behind you is a bit like the fabled sword of that guy, you know, the one who was eating dinner?

"we have buildings that are OVER. ONE. HUNDRED. YEARS. OLD!"

1. driver pulling out of gas station parking lot, looked right but not left, hit me head on (somehow neither I nor my bike were hurt, I yelled at the dude who said "I'm sorry" in a way that made me think he might have been mentally handicapped, at which point I wondered how he got a drivers' license)

2. and 3. drivers midway through attempting to pass realized they needed to turn right, directly in front of me (one time I was thrown over the back of their car, the next time I somehow managed to come to a complete stop AND yell "motherfucker!" AND kick their car)

4. A car came flying (like, tires skidding, 35 mph) around a semi-blind corner, bumped my handlebars, I hit the curb and was flipped over said handlebars, slid along concrete, somehow still made it to class, bleeding profusely...my professor called me a "trooper".

Trayce OTM about cyclists running red lights. THEY ARE THERE FOR A REASON. If one tries it these days, I tend to try and look them in the eye and let them know they're evil/utterly stupid.

http://wolf.netwerk-x.com/archives/cipollini.jpg

in civilized places like where i grew up drivers had to LEARN to DEAL with BIKES. now course red-running eco-cunt cyclists can FARK ORF but in general it would be better, SPEAKING AS A PEDESTRIAN if london bike-people learnt to grow one (1) pair and cycle where they oughta. and the petrolheads would have to jolly well get over it.

the bendy-bus issue interferes with this analysis: bendy buses should be BANNED obv.

There are some really WTF signal timings in London, it feels like things have been buggered around especially to annoy car drivers - except they haven't realised it screws things up for buses and cyclists too.

I'm mildly terrified of riding near moving cars. Or parked cars. I am probably a dangerous street biker because I'm too skeered, although I'm very good at "taking my lane" now, mostly because I'm afraid of being doored.

As a pedestrian, it is irritating to get buzzed by bike messengers, but at the same time, I admire their pluck and total disregard for bodily safety. Yesterday, I was crossing the street at a marked, legitimate crosswalk and I and a be-spandexed, designer water bottle type woman on a bike approached the same quadrant of space at the same time and she looked right at me and then cut me off, so that I had to jump back to avoid getting creamed. I don't admire her at all.

This is OTM, as is whoever said that suburban riding is more terrifying than city riding. I'm a lot more concerned about getting clipped or cutoff here in small town MT than I was in Chicago.

And, I will confess to being a stop-sign and red-light runner (got pulled over for it a few weeks ago), but only when it's totally clear (ie - same conditions as when a pedestrian would walk against the "don't walk" sign).

I think that aggressive, surly bikers get that way because (a) it's cool to be an aggressive, surly biker and (b) they've been clipped, brushed, cut-off, or straight-up hit by jack-offs who think that bikes shouldn't be on the road, period. Biking defensively means assuming that the other cars on the road are driven by idiots, and looking out for yourself. "If you're honking, you can see me, etc."

But yeah, a lot of them are cunts, and you should always ding or shout when you're passing pedestrians on the path....but not on the sidewalk. Anyone that bikes on the sidewalk that's over the age of, say, 11, should be punched in the face.

haha! yay!

or soemthing.

you have never, say, rode on the sidewalk for a block to avoid some weird construction or something?

I am sure karma will prove its point soon when one of these fuckers doesn't spot the bus, but still. Assbutts.

Yeah, what is it with people who a) haven't learnt the signal timings on a route they surely cycle every day, and are always surprised when the light goes green; and ii) don't seem to know how gears work, or that it's a good idea to change down before stopping, and hence they heave away in their highest gear at a snails pace. Even hardcore lycrad couriers and road cyclists do this - do they think changing gears is too much hassle?

maybe three days out of the week he'd be wearing this tshirt reading [b]BEHOLD THE POWER OF CHEESE![/b]

at first he was a bit much - but over time i came to appreciate his nerdly not-fuck-giving ways. he cheered me up with his recumbent bike and dumb tshirt.

like where's BEHOLD THE POWER OF CHEESE!? when i didn't see him on my way to work.

And nearly nail pedestrians in cross walks who didn't think they'd have to worry about some douche going the wrong way! aghhhhhh

c.f. lakefront path in chicago -- the single most frightening place to ride a bike, period.

also: to whoever mentioned the know your lights thing -- OTM. If I'm coming up to a red light, I just slow down, so that the light goes green by the time I'm coming up to the intersection. Sometimes the light is red longer than that, but those are usually at intersections where you'd have to be batshit -- courier or not -- to blithely wade into traffic.

then again, dudes, biking with a total disregard for the law and personal safety IS 100% solid-gold fun, just so long as you don't take out unwitting pedestrians, or do it all day every day.

Riding at night is less crowded, but then you enounter people who don't use lights. On an unlighted path. In the dark. And by "encounter" I mean, "swerve to avoid when they are sudden within the aura of your personal bike light."

FUNCITY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZVNXeJTzk8

this is probably the greatest road-safety slogan ever.

He was in a sporty BMW, hanging everybody up while he inched timidly out of his parking space.

ah, but beth: was he reversing out or driving out? ;)

really, just wait. wtf is the hurry?

gbx otm, esp last paragraph - there's a time and a place for everything

When' the right time and place for taking out unwitting pedestrians, Robbo? ;)

p.s. Ambrose, the lights on the intersection of The Mall and the road that leads down from St James's Palace are 90 secs if you want to turn right - I timed them :)

RLY? this is a great fact. i'm SURE that i confront lights what take longer though, at least at pedestrian crossings.

I wasn't there for the initial backing-out phase. It probably started hours before my arrival. By the time I got there he was struggling with the "now we go forward and exit the parking lot" bit.

srsly, what i said about montreal... pedestrians are often cockier than bike riders! standing on the sidewalk to wait for light to turn?! jamais! jaywalking? toujours! yet i think bike riders just get used to it, whatever city you live in - it's like levels in a video game (except i keep score by who/what i don't hit) - victoria was beginner, vancouver was beginner-intermediate, montreal is intermediate, i don't know what advanced is - rome? paris? london seems pretty manageable, actually!

As others have pointed out, they naturally become congested with other uses. I think more crucially, they're by nature disconnected from the actual transportation grid except at a few points maybe - so you might use them as some sort of commuter line, but they're useless if you're making any kind of local trip. Let alone making a left turn. If the paths are right by the street (separated by landscaping, like a sidewalk) then they bring all the risks of sidewalk biking, mainly: drivers aren't looking for you when they pull in/out of lots.

Her: "[My boyfriend] did a really cool thing today! He was cycling to work, and some tosser of a car-driver cut in front of him - so he caught up with him at the next lights and smashed his window in! I told everyone at work and they were really impressed!"

Us: "Ummm... OK...." *make mental note to avoid him in future*

So lovely cyclist whoever you are - thanx.

Anyway where's the thread for lorry drivers who are complete maniacs driving too fast on single track roads?

But what if you CAN'T pass them because they're not close enough to the curb, and passing would entail going into the oncoming traffic lane?

This is my one huge beef with bikers, when I'm forced to trail behind at their speed because they're in the middle of the road.

I understand that it is uncomfortable for bikers to have someone trailing them but some of you need to move the hell over instead of expecting drivers to swerve into the other side of traffic to get around you. If the road is so jacked up with parked cars and narrowness that you're now creating a third lane maybe you should consider an alternate route--I mean I don't make a habit of walking down streets without sidewalks.

(oh NB: FWIW on this thread I do not own a bike and I do not know how to drive a car so I'm not pro or con either one wholesale)

This is my one huge beef with bikers, when I'm forced to trail behind at their speed because they're in the middle of the road."

oh so otm.

I think they allow bikes, mopeds and horse-drawn carriages but that's it!

I definitely take alternate routes to avoid narrow roads/traffic/insane people but sometimes that would involve going farther out of my way than I am ultimately traveling. So sometimes you've got to annoy a few people in cars behind you. Such is life.

YOU ARE NOT SPECIAL. FUCK OFF AND GET OUT OF MY WAY.

I had an asshole bang on my window because he decided he could ride his bike down the side of my lane in stop-and-go traffic; NO, YOU CANNOT DO THAT AND IT IS NOT MY FAULT IF YOU RIDE INTO MY BLIND SPOT THREE INCHES AWAY FROM MY VEHICLE. FUCK YOU.

Seriously, the entitlement and self-absorption is incredibly frustrating, particularly since I'm the one who's going to have to explain why I couldn't make my huge evil car stop when you zoomed into my lane from the right-hand side and cut me off as I was attempting to make what should have been a clear, unimpeded left turn.

(Okay, back to your regularly-scheduled breast-riding.)

No worries; there's no time for that. I'm too busy willing said car not to run over me.

Just as many car drivers have this problem. Hell, just as many *anybody*s.

He then said "I can't just have this argument on the street"

So I said "You're right, come on into this pub we'll have a pint".

Anyway this story proves all cyclists are unmitigated assholes.

I don't condone people who can't drive their cars on the road with other people; I don't condone people who can't drive their bikes on the road with other people; I don't condone people who can't cross the street sensibly on foot. All of them make traffic worse and more dangerous. The rolling through red lights thing REALLY pisses me off because cyclists can almost always get away with it and cars almost never can. (Or maybe this just DWB paranoia talking, I don't know.)

(xpost: haha Ronan is awesome)

Tho I sometimes get this as a pedestrian too.

Aren't you ever standing waiting to cross the road in the rain, for a long time, when you think "THESE ARE OUR ROADS, FUCK OFF YOU ASSHOLES AND EVERYONE COULD JUST WALK HOME TO PUBLIC TRANSPORT MORE QUICKLY".

Tho I drive also so it's bare faced hypocrisy.

the city encourages people to take a bus or bike instead of a car. (one of the ways to do this: if you drive a car, you'll easily end up out of the city but have a hard time staying in. most of the streets are for example only one way for cars.) the crap thing is that almost every street is two way for bikes. crap why? because the streets are narrow and it's hell with a car coming from the other way and BLOODY TOURISTS CROSSING THE STREET WITHOUT LOOKING. you ring your bell but will they go on the pavement? oh no, they bloody don't,they'll happily remain in the middle of the street to take their pictures or look at their map. BLOODY FUCKING TOURISTS, PISS OFF. uh yeah, so search everyone besides tourists. ;-)

AND STUDENTS

AND PRETTY MUCH EVERYONE

DRIVING GENERATES HATE

UHHHH

You were indicating a left turn, right? Right?

Meet a bike messenger.

The rolling through red lights thing REALLY pisses me off because cyclists can almost always get away with it and cars almost never can.

Deal with it. Seriously, I can totally understand getting pissed off at zippy guys tailgating and appearing where you least expect it and generally engaging in unsafe behavior, but getting actually angry when someone blithely -- but safely -- rolls through a stop light or stop sign is sorta weird. Yeah, they're breaking the law; so is everyone you've evern known that's smoked pot. I'm assuming you're annoyed because it's a "if he/she can do it, why can't I??" And that, my friend, is a question for your local constable.

FWIW: I got pulled over a few weeks ago because I ran two lights RIGHT IN FRONT OF A COP, which would never have gotten me in trouble in Chicago. Here, they're bored. Also, I was breaking the law. Got a warning, don't do it as much anywhere. Also(2): there is a noizer among us who got in bigtime trubble with cops because of red-light running. So, don't think the cops aren't paying attention.

Also(3): it's easier to seethe and bitch about drivers when you've actually been hit/doored/cut-off, whatever. I got knocked clean off my bike at an intersection when I was taking the lane in order to make(a clearly signaled) left-hand turn. Dude passed me on the LEFT, just as I made my turn, and floored me.

Yes, I was. I never switch lanes or make turns without using my indicators because I know how to drive.

I got pulled over a few weeks ago because I ran two lights RIGHT IN FRONT OF A COP

Haha nice! Dude, you grew up in a town with bored cops, what were you thinking???????

I drove into work this morning because I thought I was going to have band practice tonight (we practice at a dude's house in a town 35 minutes south of Boston; I could take the commuter rail to a spot about 15 minutes away from his house by cab but I couldn't catch the commuter rail back into town when rehearsal was over, so public transportation is not an option). There was a woman on a bike going through Harvard Square who had no business being on a bike on a closed-off, empty course, let alone one of rush hour's busiest streets; she was wobbling all over the place, riding up on people, cutting across lanes without signalling, driving down the wrong side of the road, etc. Basically, had there not been road construction someone would have run her over; as it was, she almost rode directly into someone going the opposite way because she was being an oblivious tool.

I don't think that bike messenger point can be stressed enough, really.

im desperately tryign to remmeber my source, maybe i misheard in a lecture. I'll email my lecturer.

as for passing cyclists, ideally a car driver would give as much room to overtaking a cyclist as a car, ie, a lane's width. therefore it doesn't really matter whether a cyclisty is in the middle of the lane. if its not safe to pass, dont overtake. anything else is an attempt to squeeze past when both of you are in the same lane, or jutting out into the oncoming traffic. frequently these judgements are not well made (generally far too close to the cyclist) (see here)

oh i doubt you have a better view, maybe, and this is from a bicyclist who pulls off to the edge of the road/dirt so cars can pass by in a squeeze.

All the messengers I have met (mind you, this is in bicycle stores, not in bicycle hangouts) at least give lip service to the ideal of being a responsible cyclist, sharing the road, wearing the proper gear, etc. Maybe they just want to sell me stuff, or maybe it's another instance of mellow hippie ideology vs. angry control-freak reality.

I guess that depends on which way the road is curving, doesn't it?

Full disclosure: I have been on a bike being passed by cars, way too close. When I first ventured out on the road with my kids I was appalled at how aggressive drivers were. I would yell at them.
There's so much free-floating rage here in the summer. People trying (and failing) to enjoy their measly two-week vacations, working people full of envy and resentment, drunks of all social strata.
I feel like people shouldn't let their kids ride bikes on the roads, period. Too dangerous. We need a comprehensive network of bike-paths. They get all gung-ho and lay down a few miles of them, and then it fizzles. Property owners can be obstructions, which is stupid. Would they rather have a bike path impinging on their precious turf or A BUNCH OF DEAD BODIES!!!!

...

Is it just the dead bodies or do they come in a container?

That's kind of a bullshit comparison, though. There isn't usually a need to pass a car on a one-lane-each-way street, because CARS GO FAST. FASTER THAN BIKES.

Or like if I'm in the right lane and I can't get into the left lane to pass because I'm going much slower than the flow of traffic, BECAUSE BIKES ARE SLOW.

This is completely wrong. There is almost ALWAYS a need to pass cars in front of you because the person driving said car is invariably going TOO FUCKING SLOWLY.

When I cycled I used to jump red lights occasionally but only if I had full visibility that nothing was coming.

Traffic at the intersection slowed down tremendously, as you might expect.

Their point was that the laws could use to be a bit more nuanced -- bikes are not quite cars and in some situation it is a bit absurd for them to follow exactly the same laws. The drivers who were stuck in the traffic snarl weren't terribly pleased with it all, but there were some cops at the scene who basically agreed that yes, this is how it should be, there is nothing ridiculous going on here.

LESS POT, MORE SCIENCE

Traffic at the intersection slowed down tremendously, as you might expect.

While Dan's got a point, this reminds me of those douchebaggy southern hipsters that staged a demonstration on the interstate by driving EXACTLY the speed limit. As expected, traffic knotted up, and people went insane with rage.

Traffic laws, almost by definition, are broken far more often than they are obeyed.

What the cyclist sees: one of those blinky intersections, where one axis of traffic has a flashing yellow, and the other a blinking red. The minor axis has to stop and can go if it's safe, the major axis should be advised that they're coming into an intersection, and an unsafe person might be pulling out. There's no reason that basically every intersection on the planet (outside of major cities) shouldn't be like this after 10pm at night.

I would like to have seen the result of all of those bikers just riding through the intersection; I suspect it would have been the exact same traffic slowdown with added car-running-over-cyclist hijinks.

one of those blinky intersections, where one axis of traffic has a flashing yellow, and the other a blinking red. The minor axis has to stop and can go if it's safe, the major axis should be advised that they're coming into an intersection, and an unsafe person might be pulling out. There's no reason that basically every intersection on the planet (outside of major cities) shouldn't be like this after 10pm at night.

This is completely, totally OTM.

skot, i drove on the island when i was up there with friends (i think i was 16 or 17). it is nuts how congested the roads get with tourists (speaking as a biker and driver there once).

but get this, in gay head, this old woman was riding her bike in front of my car. i turned to the passenger and said "it'd be funny if it was jackie", and sure enough it was JACKIE FUCKING O.

no, i think they do. i'm not saying i never speed, and i'm not saying there aren't bits of road where i don't think, for instance: "50? FFS, why?" but a) urban speed limits make a lot of sense, and b) given that so many people (esp young men under 25) drive so fucking badly anyway, i'd be a little concerned if some of them were actually ALLOWED to go even faster.

I stopped my car without pulling over to the side, about 100 feet before a stop sign, because I wanted to take some ibuprofen. I had to count out the pills and grope around on the floor for a water bottle. The driver behind me honked. I took my time, then slowly proceeded through the intersection, flipping them the bird. Fuck them. I had a HEADACHE.

in future i shall try to remember that the driver in front of me who's just banged on the brakes for no reason in the middle of the road isn't just a selfish tit, but might have a life-threatening headache.

jesus, beth!

anyway, yes. i guess what i'm saying is that speed limits are vital BUT that the upper ones, in the UK at least, could do with being reviewed.

the fact is that the UK has one of the best road safety records in the world. given that currently there has been a spate of outraged articles claiming that the levels of accidents/fatalities are unacceptable shows that there seems to be some demand for yet more improvement. as driver styles are difficult to influence (and the driving test is both pretty touch and getting progressively harder), the only other routes are through physical changes to road layouts, and enforcement mechanisms eg speed cameras.

furthermore, implementing measures to improve road safety frequently brings about a clash with another objective - eg reducing congestion or pollution, so some compromise is inevitable.

finally, dont think that speed limits are set arbitrarily and by dumb asses. the need for them is assessed and measured and a decision made based on various factors. it is NOT done just by some cackling traffic engineer going "haha THIS'll piss em off" and whacking a 40 sign in the ground on a stretch of clear open road.

Please to explain the bit on the M9 where you go down a stonking great steep hill for about a mile in a 70mph zone, then it becomes a 50mph zone for about 100 yards next to the speed camera, then it goes up to 70mph again for the next climb.

Is that like the bit on the M9 where it meets the A8, where there's a speed camera right at the bottom of the dip under the roundabout, in both directions?

at the moment in the UK you never see a traffic cop; just fucking cameras, which are a complete menace to all concerned

The one force which seems to rely on traffic police (in unmarked cars) more than cameras still, in my experience, is South Yorkshire. Few cameras about, but you'll often see drivers on the hard-shoulder having been pulled over for speeding.

Yes, FP, I think that's the bit I'm thinking of. I got flashed (oo-er) heading northbound but never got a fine.

(Not that I would run her down or anything, but I don't think I should have to slow, or stop, or apologize for not giving her a wider berth. Hmmph.) Do I need a bell? I saw a guy yesterday whistle loudly as he blitzed through a crossing, but I can't do that.

or toucan puffin

i saw a pegasus for the first time last time i was in london! it was nr st james park i think. or on the mall.

In slow/stopped traffic, I have absolutely no problem with a cyclist taking his/her lane. I would much rather have a bicycle in front of me or a bicycle behind me as opposed to a bicycle in my blind spot; it does not make sense to me that someone on a bicycle would feel comfortable drafting in one of the spots where drivers are almost guaranteed NOT to see you.

The first time I saw a puffin crossing my exact thoughts were "What the hell have they put the light there for, now I can't watch the lights and the traffic at the same time.

This is, like, the whole main single advantage of and reason for using a bike in the city!

This is the biker disregard for others on the road/massive self-importance issue in a nutshell. You're a vehicle on the road; act like one.

in the same way that cars expect to pass bikes without having to pull into opposing traffic.

xpost

therefore, cyclists should act like any other vehicles at all times. (if cyclists can jumop red lights when no one is around, how come Cars cannot do the same, or rather, rarely do? the answer is (in the UK) cyclists MUST not cross a red light- this is a law). deviations from this behaviour ultimately undermine cyclists ability to be taken seriously as road users.

XP

NONE OF YOU CAN DRIVE AND YOU ARE ALL MENACES.

(xpost: hi Laurel plz read one (1) thread cuz I already covered that)

No. As I said, it was used to suggest, visually and repeatedly, that the laws for cars are not entirely appropriate for bikes. It's not that cyclists don't need to follow traffic laws, it's that they need their own set of laws.

Also, Chris OTM.

i dont get that line of argument really.

lets keep it simple.

Cyclists CAN and DO overtake slow traffic on both sides
Cyclists CAN and DO jump red lights when no one is about.

that is a practical argument.

however you are on a losing streak if you try and argue that Cyclist SHOULD BE ALLOWED to do either of the above
a) cos in the UK they are not
b) cos it is not a safe method of cycling on roads

NB "It seems safe to me, i think this is a safe thing to do" does not always equal "this is safe"

Yes. Traffic rules are designed with the knowledge that they will be exceeded by 10% by 80% of drivers [I'm pulling these numbers out of my ass but you see the idea] and that this is fine; exceeded by 20% by a further 15% of drivers, and this is sort of OK but will be a good source of income for the traffic cops; etc., etc. So speed limits are intentionally lowballed.

I rode a bike for three years in college, actually.

as these are criminal offences, we can treat them much as other criminal offences, e.g burglary

just because a v small percentage of the population commit burglary compared to a large number of the driving population committing eg speeding offences, doesnt make the latter "more acceptable".

to bring the practical decisions of traffic engineers in setting speed limits as evidence that legally binding regulations are somehow less illegal, or less defensible is a bit disingenuous.

xpost cool, i couldnt find that in the highway code

all roads have, in reality, a de facto bike lane

hmm. most roads in glasgow are full of roadworks/buses/collapsing buildings (well, okay: one of the main arteries from my house into town is right now). i think this is pushing it slightly.

i've always thought (some) cyclists had an attitude problem, and some of the posts in this thread sum it up perfectly: "ha, we're not driving evil cars, therefore we're better than everybody else and get to do what the fuck we like." er, no, dudes. you are road-users, like it or not.

ambrose, basically, is OTM about everything.

my father was seriously injured and my uncle was killed in two separate but near-identical motorcycle accidents: drivers turning right in front of them, having somehow "not seen them". they were on motorbikes, wearing helmets and leathers and protection, and were riding in the middle of the road, perfectly safely.

think about this, cyclists, the next time you "zip in and out of traffic" or run red lights or assume that somehow you're completely invulnerable. many drivers out there are total and utter cunts, yes: you might be nicer people than them, but that doesn't give you immunity to death. many more drivers - such as myself and dan, for instance - respect your right to be on the road ... but is our sole duty to protect you? should i ASSUME, as the default position, that a cyclist is in my blind spot? (actually, as an IAM member - yawn, zzz, fuck off grimly, you twat - i do drive defensively and pretty much do assume the unexpected at all times. but come on: if you're not playing by the rules, HOW THE FUCK IS IT MY FAULT WHEN YOU GET HIT?)

i don't cycle, basically because i've got a morbid fear of two-wheeled vehicles after what happened to my uncle and my old man. but i admire the ethos of getting around under your own pedal power, and i think cycling is a wonderful mode of transport. but being a nice person with a social consience does not make you a special case on the road. many of the cyclists on this thread are doing themselves no favours at all.

(I am specifically htinking of my riding style. I occasionally cut it a bit fine squeezing through spaces etc but am vastly careful when it comes to anything where speed or other people's safety is involved)

The reason, btw, that cyclists go through red lights is that every time they are forced to slow down and stop they need to exert a lot of energy getting back up to speed - an example that motorised vehicle drivers can never use.

Cyclist who think they're above car drivers are twats, yes, I agree. I applaud people who use non-polluting methods of transport but it desn't make them a better person or give them any more rights.

* Because my bike handles better at cruising speed than while I'm cranking on it to get away from a stop, but motorists can accelerate faster than I can -- so I'd rather already be up to speed when all those cars pass me (that way my behavior as a cyclist is also more predictable, with no wobbles or distraction).

* Because I can see that people across the intersection have double-parked leaving less than a full lane for driving, and I want to pass them before the traffic behind me needs to get by (happens ALL THE TIME on the back streets of Brooklyn, especially around churches/basketball courts/moving day).

* To exempt me from worrying about whether cars in front of me are turning left or right because they might not signal at all (common), or they may block the bike lane when they pull left and stop there (sadly also common), or any number of things.

These three are just off-top-of-head, and all of them ULTIMATELY contribute to the steady flow of traffic and convenience of other drivers, which is why I think Chris is right about bikes really needing another set of laws.

I'm also holding out for any advantage bikes can chisel away because, despite the bike lanes painted on MILES of Brooklyn streets, drivers regularly pull over RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME and block my lane to stop at the deli/let out passengers/talk to someone on the sidewalk, not to mention all the auto body shops that use the street as a parking lot for their clients (also results in broken window glass everywhere). I'd rather bike in heavy moving traffic than on a slow residential street where people act like it's their private driveway (but alas, getting around Bklyn means lots of side-streets).

I slip right down the gears if i'm waiting at lights, then when i start peddling at the off i just keep clicking the gears up as i pick up speed so there's virtually no effort in peddling = no wobbling side to side.

xpost

This is, like, the whole main single advantage of and reason for using a bike in the city!

Seriously. Zipping and weaving in MOVING traffic (ie -- crossing moving intersections, courier-style) is dangerous and irritating. Shooting up the middle, between cars stopped at a light is

A) not that dangerous (safer than doing it between stopped cars and parked cars, since you won't get doored)

B) the reason my commute home on Friday nights was 15 minutes instead of 45 minutes.

I rode a bike to work all winter not just because it was fun, but because in bad weather, while you suckers were stuck in traffic, I was passing you on either side, my commute no longer than it was in the summer.

OH COME ON, Dave, there's NO way to force cars to treat you equally, and I can guarantee that lots of them won't. In fact probably the only cars who'll accept the burden of looking out for you are the ones driven by other cyclists. And bikes, not being heavy/dangerous/threatening, can't enforce it!

What I do when they give me the "slow down!" up-and-down wave:
Return their gesture with an enthusiastic "hello" wave, leaving them thinking that I misinterpreted their rude gesture! HA! MINDFUCK!!!!
I still seeth. BUT THEY DON'T KNOW.

GREETINGS, YOU HORSEY FUCKERS!!

I wonder why they bring very nervous horses out onto the roads, especially at rush hour times (even little country roads get rush hour traffic) in the first place - if they're liable to bolt at the sight/sound of cars, they should stick to bridleways.

Beep! Beep!

this is my new favourite way to thin out the population. plus all of dan's other punishable-by-death decrees, of course.

Ha, I knew the moment when I crossed from "young" to "old" was when I lectured some kids for biking on the wrong side of the road when I passed them on a bike. (in ri)

Not if your name is Dan you don't.

slowing down for lights expending energy - if this is a consideration, the same decelerating/accelerating is costly in fuel terms for drivers, however they seem to manage to do it

cyclists arent 'owed' some sort of advantages like the ability to flount the rules of the road because they are saving the planet and drivers are horrible to them.

im not convinced about the highway codes interpretation of cyclists skipping queues of traffic anyway. te passage quoted was for general drivers and refers to changing lanes to skip queues. whether a cyclist riding a foot away from traffic constitutes a lane or not is a bit open to intepretation.

re: mixed use of roads. currently roads are generally configured to favour motorised traffic. this means that pedestrians and other vunerable users should be mindful of the dominance of cars etc. to use the road with a care for this fact is simply to endanger yourself. however i dont think this is the optimum scenario, and the car-centric layout and reguilations of roads is changing very slightly. dutch investigations into full on road sharing (stripping roads of all markings, pavments etc), the introduction of "home zones/woonerf" (eg the metheleys in leeds) are faltering attempts to try and equalise the position of all road users. the latter are designed to make car drivers feel unwelcome as it were, or at least that kids playing the street (beths nightmare) have an equal right to be doing that as a car rat running through the same residential road.

however in britain road design is still very segregated, removing pedestrian movements from cars, forcing pedestrians to use subways, crossings, footbridges, which makes concrete those divisions in road users.

not to say "everyone is equal" - there is obviously a big difference between the vunerability of someone walking, someone on a moped and someone in a humvee, but this is more about a supposed "right" to the road.

even groupings of transport are open to intepretation, in britian we think of pedestrians, cyclists, and anything motorised, but i noticed in holland the split is pedestrians, 2 wheeled transport, and other traffic - the mixing of mopeds and cyclists interested and surprised me.

Um Ambrose, I mean physical exertion - if you are riding quickly on a long journey and you're having to slow down every 400 yards for lights, zebra crossings etc, it gets hugely tiring having to accelerate back up to full speed. So if you can avoid it, you do, as long as you're not endangering anyone else in the process.

I've only ever ridden through towns and countryside, never in a city streets. So I guess it would be tedious that way, yes.

The only people I know who have ever been hit by cars (while not being in a car themselves) are cyclists, but I must know of at least 100 "pedestrian hit by bike" stories.

Just sayin' that the more I read a bunch of people who are insisting they are responsible cyclists (how many people in the world, incidentally, will actually admit they are a bad driver? Not very many, yet so many exist) go on and on about weaving through cars' blind spots and coming straight at pedestrians (even if you have the right of way), the less sympathy I have for your position and the more I wish someone would just go ahead and ban cars AND bikes.

BIKE RIDERS: STOP THINKING ABOUT WHAT YOU "SHOULD" BE ALLOWED TO DO ON BASIS OF SAVING ENVIRONMENT/BEING SMALLER/WHATEVER. IT'S NOT LIKE DRIVING A MINICOOPER ALLOWS YOU TO FLAUNT THE LAWS OF TRAFFIC AND SIDEWALK JUMP A LINE OF SUVS SO FOLLOW LAWS OF TRAFFIC. BE JUDICIOUS IN YOUR DECISIONS TO BREAK THEM FOR CONVENIENCE. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS GOING TO DIE IN THE ACCIDENT, NOT DAN PERRY AND NOT BURLY GENTLEMAN WHO PROBABLY PUNCHED THAT BIKE RIDER THIS MORNING. SAFETY FIRST AND I HOPE THE MAJORITY OF YOU REALLY DIDN'T NEED TO BE TOLD THIS.

CAR DRIVERS: STOP DRIVING IN CITIES FFS. THIS IS RETARDED, UNLESS YOU ARE LEAVING THE CITY TO GO ON A LONG JOURNEY AND/OR GOING TO HOME DEPOT OR A MAJOR GROCERY STORE EXCURSION (EVEN THEN IT DEPENDS ON THE CITY IN QUESTION BECAUSE IN SOME YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS WITHOUT A CAR). PUSH FOR PUBLIC TRANSIT. USE IT. WALK AROUND. BREAK THE CYCLE OF CAR FUMES AND ANNOYING THE CRAP OUT OF ME HALF THE TIME.

EVERYONE: WALK PLACES. OR RIDE ONE (1) SCOOTER, THAT APPEARS TO HAVE NO LAWS APPLICABLE TO IT WHATSOEVER AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYONE GET HIT BY ONE.

There's something in the fact that if you do cause an accident on a bike, the consequences for you and your victims are likely to be much less bad than if you cause an accident in a car - so there probably are more asshole cyclists than drivers, just 'cause they think they can get away with it.

everyone everywhere should have to learn proper defensive road skills, not just for safety aspect but b/c part of that is letting your ego go. b/c it seems like going fast of one's own volition is a set up for big ego tripping.

i was going to say this anyway, but in light of that mildly woeful story it becomes even more apposite: cyclists keep saying they jump red lights "when it's safe to do so" or "when nothing's coming". did i miss the bit where riding a bike gives you x-ray vision/bat-like hearing/the power to see round corners/the power to see into the future and know exactly what's going to happen in the next ten seconds?

basically, saying "these red lights don't apply to me" is wrong and potentially highly dangerous, whether you're a car, a bike or a pedestrian at a crossing.

I do - I bought one when I got my current job, because it's unreachable by public transport. I wouldn't give it up now because of the side benefits - being able to go wherever I want for the weekend, mainly.

I don't think I'm a very good driver. Driving home last night, I got half-way round a roundabout before thinking "shit, I'm not signalling". I also veer between being much too timid, and being carelessly arrogant.

well, i was only really meaning the kind of arsehole pedestrian who goes running out into the road just as the lights are changing ... or the kind of drunken bastard you find here all the time who staggers about and then tries to flick the Vs at your car. it's a little different for pedestrians because - unless they're phenomenally stupid - they're not usually trying to cross the road against the lights at junctions.

it's difficult to evangelise about the IAM without sounding like a twat, however.

I did manage to hit one of those, once. Some drunk twat was staggering about in the middle of the road, and when he saw me coming, stood facing me deliberately blocking the road. I just called his bluff, and trundled on. When I started getting A Bit Close he bent down, so I kept on going, slowly, expecting that he wasn't *too* drunk to give in eventually - until I suddenly felt his head go *clunk* on my bumper. A not-quite-as-drunk bloke who, I assume, he was with, started shouting at me and pulling him out of the way, so I zoomed off. He was still moving around under his own steam, as best he could being completely pissed, so I assume he was fine. The car wasn't dented, at least.

did i miss the bit where riding a bike gives you x-ray vision/bat-like hearing/the power to see round corners/the power to see into the future and know exactly what's going to happen in the next ten seconds?

Huh? It goes without saying that none of the above applies. Everything is safe - everything - so you go through the red light or whatever. If there are blind corners which affect you then YOU DON'T DO IT. As for the rest, what the fuck are you talking about? YOU CAN SEE what's going to happen (and hear when relevant though I'm struggling to think of a situation - when an emergency vehicle's nearby maybe? Yeah, I can usually hear them fine thanks), that's the point. Get back to your cogent arguments of before thx.

This is demented! Are you saying there are no situations where it is safe to run a red light without posession of superhero powers? Mark C OTM.

er, yes. the red light stops YOU from crossing the path of SOMEONE ELSE - a car, a pedestrian, whatever - who has the RIGHT OF WAY. so if a pedestrian comes out from behind a parked car - silly, maybe, but they have the right of way - or ANOTHER CYCLIST comes whizzing across at the speed of light, making no sound at all, then you're on a collision course. and it's your fault, innit?

i'm sorry, but running red lights is the height of selfishness and dickery. there is no excuse. typical bloody cyclists' superiority complex :) :)

and mark, as for listening: umm, i was taught on my driving L-test, never mind the advanced course, that listening for oncoming traffic at junctions, especially when there are parked cars obstructing the view, is vitally important. i still wind down my window to hear better at a lot of junctions! i'd have thought that most cyclists would utilise this skill as a matter of course.

however, i forget that the additional superpower all you reckless cyclists have is invulnerability, so i guess you're all okay then!

For the record, I NEVER go through red lights at road junctions under any circumstances because - hell - even if all the lights are red you could be hit by a joyrider or, as you rightly point out, another law-breaking cyclist.

yes, exactly. look after yourself, mark! you're a good bloke. i don't want you to get squashed. it's just that upthread you said:

I have also started going through red lights when there are no pedestrians, no crossroads, no cars turning onto the road from sidestreets etc

which looked, to these eyes at least, a little more of a qualified approach :)

This is totally...besides being certifiably insane, have you never been to any major North Eastern city??? I've heard that people don't jaywalk in California but I find that a bit hard to believe. PEOPLE CROSS ALL THE TIME, EVERYWHERE. Pedestrians in NYC, in fact, appear as a body to believe they own THE WORLD.

if I want to, that is

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that (at least, in most US states), homeowners & renters' insurance policies have a personal liability coverage built in that actually DOES cover things like this.

Yes everyone should obey laws of traffic, even when it's inconvenient! Cyclists don't run through red lights! Drivers stay out of bikelanes and signal for fuck's sake.

But the laws of physics always makes me lean towards cyclists in any argument. A simple GIS for ghost bike... I mean seiously.

I've been hit by careless drivers repeatedly, while observing traffic laws to totally insane degrees. (I got run over once at a crosswalk where I hopped off my bike and walked it across the intersection WTF?) I've only hit a pedestrian once, when they decided to jaywalk directly into my bike lane.

Cyclists are not inherently assholes. They tend to get a little amped up when they are chased by the grim reaper EVERYDAY on their daily commute. FACT. Adrenaline will do that. And if there's a questionable incident, a cyclist can't really speed away with their anger.

That cyclist that's impatiently waving you through has no idea if you are a semi-sane driver or just like the asshole from five minutes ago going 55mph that clipped his handlebar. Sorry to inconvenience you. It's a life or death situation, really. The fact that you would slow down out of spite from feeling slighted by this gesture and risk others on the road... This is totally insane and DANGEROUS. It's not a funny thing to do.

this thread is beginning to remind me of that Are People Who Obey the Rules Suckers thread. that is, brits in being suckers shocker :D

not me. i've just come in from my third near-miss of the day involving a kamikaze cyclist, this one speeding the wrong way down the middle of fifth avenue.

I give motorcycles a huge lead in highway driving for this same reason; it just seems like a good thing to do.

WHERE ARE OUR HOVERBAORDS?

Do you cyclists also think cars should be able to run red lights if their driver finds themself at such an intersection? I sort of agree with grimly in that the only way to be totally safe is to follow the lights (though I think he's overstating the need for it somewhat), but, yeah, there are plenty places where you can know that there are no vehicles in any direction and you want to go but you're bound into being stationary until the lights change because them's the rules. I still don't see why cyclists get out of this.

(OK, when I was a cyclist, I used to get off my bike and push it across the pedestrian crossing then get back on and pedal off again, mostly because it was quicker without breaking the law)

The amount of nonsympathy for cyclists on this thread kind of amazes me.

i have tremendous sympathy for law-abiding cyclists, as i said above. it's when they start risking life and limb (and not just their own) that i start to lose it.

laurel: i'm not saying pedestrians don't zoom across the road like knobs. but they rarely do it at major junctions. i mean, i don't often see people trying to walk across a bloody great crossroads against the lights, whereas a frightening number of cyclists seem to.

SUCKER.

Just so you know, cyclists DON'T get out of this. As I said before, I've been pulled over for running red lights, as have other ILXors. You are totally free to run a red light in your car in the middle of the night, when no one's around -- just be prepared for the consequences if/when you get caught. If a cop pulls me over on my bike for breaking the law, I know I don't have a leg to stand on. It's just that cops are too busy with REAL CRIMES to chastise cyclists for crossing intersections against the signals (except in NYC and Bozeman, MT). OH WELL.

Honestly, most of the moaning about cyclists safely denting the law just sounds like sour grapes. Yeah, so we don't get busted like you drivers. Fucking deal with it.

yes, but doing so would make me a dick because if i hit something - a cyclist, for instance - it would fucking hurt.

okay, a bike isn't likely to kill a pedestrian. but, as ally has pointed out, being hit by them is a fucking pain in the ass.

dude, it's not sour grapes! it's just ... i dunno. i don't see why we can't all live together in peace and harmony, just ALL STOPPING AT THE FUCKING RED LIGHTS TOO, OKAY?

:)

for the record i don't think i've ever waved a car past me. i've often gestured a hovering pedestrian across a zebra crossing. they always look a bit bewildered and distrustful like "why are you stopping for me? is it a trick?". if it's the middle of the night and there's no one around - no pedestrians, no cars, nothing - sure i'll go through a red light. i use the same routes a lot so i know the traffic patterns the lights etc send everyone in. i hate those 4-way intersections where *everything else* stops when it's the pedestrians' turn to cross. wtf, open 2 corners at a time for each group. that one just south of soutwark bridge is a mess. i have had 3 vehicles try to squish me into the pavement this week argh.

I might take my camera out on my next cycle and take photos of the road ahead of what I consider to be acceptable red lights to go through. Or, better, videos so you'll be able to hear the situation too.

i blithely ran through every single stop sign because, dudes, they're all in quiet residential neighborhoods, ffs.

I'm scared of this thread so I don't want to join it properly -- I've never been pissed off by a cyclist (while driving) and I don't think I've ever pissed one off -- but that quote needs a double WTF. "I was hungry, so I stopped in the middle of the road and fucked around opening my sandwiches. Fuck you, I was HUNGRY". Jesus!

I just read somewhere (where? OH HOW I WISH I COULD REMEMBER) that a recent study of jaywalking in NYC found that judicious use of illegal crossings actually facilitated an even rate of pedestrian traffic and kept crowds from building up. Which is also good for drivers because if you need to TURN at an intersection you don't want to spend the whole green light waiting for a huge glob of walkers to clear the street you're turning onto. So you see, if all works out! Also, and you may or may not like this part because I can see how it would be annoying, the study decided that jaywalking keeps DRIVERS on their toes because they can't blithely assume that there won't be anyone in the vicinity so they have to look more carefully. YMMV!

AHAHAH XP TO BETH.

oh, damn. time for driver retraining, i think.

same with crossing roads. leaning against the traffic light pole and waiting for the light gives one a bit of time out to do precisely nothing.

y'all should slow down a little. whats the fucking hurry anyways?

So I just finished a song about recumbent bikes that was kind of inspired by this thread. It's called "King of the Road" and you can hear it at www.myspace.com/thenewdebris