koolerb

This was a pretty minor incident to be making such a big deal of. I think Hallux was just trying to make the point that cyclist are part of the equation when it comes to sharing the road; and without input from the two cyclists in question we're only speculating regarding their actions and reactions.

I see guys in groups hogging the road unnecessarily every once in while, and that's the kind of thing that promotes negative feelings towards cyclists with some drivers. I believe that the point the initial post was trying to make, but thanks for all the education on motor vehicle statutes in NYS.

wphamilton

Yes, that's exactly what the law says. His judgement has to be reasonable, and he may possibly be called to justify it to a law enforcement official or court, but it depends on the cyclist's judgement. His, not your's.

Out of curiosity, how much have you ridden on roads since you started up again? No offense intended, but some of your opinions and ideas about the laws regarding cycling are typical of inexperienced riders or non-cycling motorists.

gcottay

In many years and thousands of miles I've not found any war between drivers and cyclists. I know war and this is not it. Not even close. I sincerely hope cyclists who are using the "war" and "battle" language never experience the real thing.

hallux

And yet I'd put money on the fact that a cop would more likely caution the cyclists to ride single file on the wide shoulder while being overtaken (I consider "overtaking" the approach to the pass as well as the pass) than warn a motorist not to use their horn to warn 2-abreast cyclists that a vehicle is approaching if they were to see this unfold.

I said it before, SHARE THE ROAD goes both ways. Motorists should be aware of cyclists (I was as evidenced by my intent to alert but not alarm them). Cyclists should be aware of, and move right for, motorists when possible (and it was in this case, they just chose to be a$$holes).

BTW, I consider a cyclist in the travel lane to be a "collision imminent" situation, no matter the speed or attentiveness of the driver. I also was not directly behind the cyclists when honking, I gave them a good distance to fall in line together.

What if (and this wasn't the case, but what if it was) I was a volunteer fireman approaching on my way to the firehouse down the road to respond to a call? A honk on the horn would be warranted (firefighter responding to a call is an emergency situation, no? though I DO understand they can't speed excessively), and their choice to obstruct the lane would delay arrival to the house.

CB HI

You have repeatedly shown you do not understand safe driving and the law.

You are a lost cause.

It is also not legal for volunteer fireman to go around blasting their horn. If they do not have lights and siren, they cannot run around as an emergency vehicle.

hallux

I can't tell if this was intended to be facetious or sincere.

0.0 miles. There's a local MUP that has suited my needs perfectly thus far, but I'll soon need to locate longer routes. However, I put enough road miles on when I was younger to know how I treated riding on the road, and how I expected to be treated as a rider, and I NEVER rode 2 abreast unless it was on a low-speed subdivision road (30 MPH limit, no marked shoulder) and that wasn't even that often. One of my childhood friends was struck while riding on one of those very roads and was seriously injured as a result.

The motorist has the obligation to slow down and avoid striking the cyclist(s). Yes, if that means they follow at 20 MPH they should. However, the cyclist(s) should be on the shoulder, if it's suitable. In the street view posted, there's a 20 foot section that may not have been suitable but the rest should have been perfectly safe and wide enough to utilize rather than blocking the lane.

CB HI

Another MUP cyclist telling long time cycle commuters how they should ride in todays world.

hallux

Spoken like one of the "I own the road because I'm on a bicycle" types. The only time I've honked at cyclists were the occasions noted, because they were riding 2 abreast. I also slowed and waited for an opportunity to pass them, which could have been expedited by the cyclists following the law to ride single file while being overtaken. And if the shoulder wasn't safe due to "obstruction", how could one be on the shoulder and not the other?

I didn't say they'd be blasting their horn, but volunteer firefighters around here have blue lights in the front window. It's an option to yield to them as another motorist but I'm sure they'd appreciate it and the same would apply to cyclists.

Maybe my definition of "blast" is different from yours. This was a tap with the side of the fist to chirp the horn, not a full-palm press on the horn button for 1-5 seconds.

I can understand the need to make yourself as visible as possible, but at what point is it going too far? On that road, even for a vehicle going the 45 MPH limit, if cyclists were 2 abreast in the wrong spot of that curve as the car is coming it can spell disaster.

wphamilton

I'm a relative newby at 6,000-7,000 miles per year, only about 5 years. Honestly, the experience has altered my perspective. Sure I'd still be annoyed with a group hogging the road, but as far as safety goes, and smoothly integrating with traffic, you get a totally different understanding when you put some miles in as an adult. Any driver should realize though that almost no one is out there daring you to run over them. Kids or racer types running reds maybe, but mostly we're maximizing our safety even though a non-cyclist (non-road cyclist) might see the same practice as dangerous.

hallux

Maybe I won't ride on the road then. I guess my idea of riding safely (ride the shoulder where possible, single file, signal turns) really isn't riding safely

CB HI

It would actually be better if you stopped motoring on the roads.

benjdm

Fellow Clifton Park cyclist and motorist checking in!

If the curve was difficult to see around, there is no reason for the cyclists to single up on the shoulder. It's not a safe place for you to pass even if they were on the shoulder and you were in the travel lane. Where are you going to go when someone comes around the curve edging over the double yellow because they took the turn too fast? You would have to move right and hit the cyclists.

Moreover, cyclists are never required to use the shoulder in NY. Even if you wanted them to single up in response to your horn they could have singled up in the travel lane. Two cyclists one in front of the other are more difficult to pass than two cyclists side by side.

That is not an 'own the road' attitude. It is a 'I can occupy the road' attitude that you are perceiving as an 'I own the road' attitude. They were no more owning the road by traveling in the traffic lane than cars are when driving. A car ahead of me that is traveling slower than I might like them to is not owning the road; neither is a cyclist.

True, but there was no safe or legal overtaking there.

I believe this is the intersection? The shoulder looks a little narrow to me, but maybe wide enough. If you follow the road up a little further though there is a side road entering from the right. Traffic turning from there would have a much more difficult time seeing cyclists on the shoulder through the metal guardrail as compared to cyclists in the lane. That would be sufficient reason to ride in the lane as opposed to on the shoulder - to be seen by traffic entering from the side roads whose view would otherwise be impeded by the guardrail.

FWIW, this Clifton Park blind corner on a road with a 40 mph speed limit and a narrow shoulder is the bane of my existence.

FBinNY 

This is what happens when you raise a possible "cyclists were in the wrong" issue on a forum populated by "cyclists are victims folks.

IMO, there was wrong on both sides. Based on the aerial photo, the bend isn't sharp enough for the cyclists to justify taking the lane to prevent an unsafe pass. OTOH they were nearing an intersection, and passing there would be illegal. I suspect that this was simply a case of two cyclists riding abreast and resenting being honked at by a passing motorist.

But, that doesn't make you right.

In NYS the right of way is with the passed, not the passing vehicle, and it was incumbent on you to wait until an opportunity to pass safely, ie. not on a bend, or approaching an intersection. Also the same argument that says the riders were wrong about the blind curve issue applies to you. If the curve had decent enough sight lines for the cyclists not to worry about protecting their rears, so did you, and the argument that you or another motorist were endangered if you had to slow to 20mph doesn't hold water.

Nobody likes to be held up or delayed by cyclists, who maybe could be more courteous and move over, but this is a fact of life to be born along with all the other frustrations. Picture how you'd handle the exactly same situation, if instead of cyclists, the land ahead had a farmer moving along at 20mph on his tractor.

Traffic law is only a foundation, it's up to drivers to muddle through the various conflicts of rights and responsibilities using common sense and courtesy. The easiest way to have an accident is insist on your rights in muddy situations, even if you're 100% in the right.

gcottay

Just a quote with appreciation.

hallux

Intersection 1, yes but going the other way with that wide shoulder, clearly seen in that street view. Intersection 2, I've ridden that also on my way to the nature preserve. I live further North now but go past intersection 1 ALL the time

Apparently there are several interpretations of how that law reads, I interpret "Persons riding bicycles or skating or gliding on in-line skates upon a shoulder, bicycle or in-line skates lane, or bicycle or in-line skates path, intended for the use of bicycles or in-line skates may ride two or more abreast if sufficient space is available, except that when passing a vehicle, bicycle or person on in-line skates, or pedestrian, standing or proceeding along such shoulder, lane or path, persons riding bicycles or skating or gliding on in-line skates shall ride, skate, or glide single file. Persons riding bicycles or skating or gliding on in-line skates upon a roadway shall ride, skate, or glide single file when being overtaken by a vehicle." as "ride the shoulder single file if possible when a vehicle wishes to pass but you can double-up in the travel lane if safe to do so." In this case, they didn't and if they wished to turn left, they should have used an appropriate hand signal (they didn't).

Hi fellow CP-er, right now I'm riding the Zim Smith (the paved portions) and the MHB along the river, which may become my primary route once the Rte. 5 bridge construction is done.

hallux

Until this thread, I wasn't aware that a brief toot of the horn was an invitation to hog the road by a cyclist. I'll take that under advisement as I start riding on the road more Note the wink of sarcasm...

Otherwise, I somewhat agree with you. It's up to each individual to interpret the rules of the road within the letter of the law, though proper education of ALL parties (cyclists too) could clear up "skirmishes" such as this. A prime example of this happened recently while driving. A cement truck and I were next to each other at a light with two left turn lanes, he in the left, me in the right. We get the green, proceed into the turn and he takes the right lane during the turn, his interpretation was that because of the lane closure 1/2 mile up he had to move to the right even though you're supposed to maintain your lane during the turn when there are 2 turn lanes. I honked to warn him that I was in the area he was trying to occupy. He stared me down after the construction and upon rolling down my window he asked me why I honked.

plustax

Ive had people throw things at me, pass far to close and yes hit me. I also notice no one pays attention to the road when I'm at a stop light. Texters are everywhere.

You may not be entering a war when you get on your bike, but you are damn sure going into a minefield.

FBinNY 

I said the riders might have resented the horn and responded accordingly. I'm not saying that the resentment was justified.

I have mixed feelings about drivers behind me using their horns. On the one hand I resent those who honk as if to say " Get the f*ck out of my way" . But I appreciate those who give me a quick tap from 50 yards back as if to say "just letting you know there's a car approaching?

Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference. On a narrow, twisty, hilly section of my daily commute with bad pavement, I often have to move left and block traffic, sometimes because of the pavement, other times to prevent passing in blind situations. Most drivers are very courteous and patient for the 5-10 seconds involved but far and away the best are the professionals, inc. Fedex, UPS, Con Ed, and amazingly the cops.

As for the ones that aren't, nothing I say or do will change their attitudes, so I don't let them spoil my day.

Don in Austin

I never said or even hinted any such thing. I was pointing out that you can't have it both ways. You go on and on about the cyclists breaking the law but rationalize doing so yourself.


That the cyclist doesn't feel its safe is an excellent reason in my opinion. Whether or not the cyclist was correct in this example is impossible for me to know without having traveled that road.


If the motorist makes the decision on whether or not to pass in error they end up with damaged sheet metal and a slap on the wrist from the court system. The cyclist could well end up dead. The cyclist has way too much at stake to trust the motorist. This is why "take the lane" in certain situations is universally taught in cycling safety classes. If you spend some time cycling on the road you drive your car on perhaps you will understand someday.


I misunderstood you. I thought you were talking about the noise of the doorlocks themselves, not the sounding of the horn when the door locks are used. As somebody else pointed out, the cyclists already knew you were there. Sounding the horn at cyclists did nothing to promote cooperation and served no useful purpose in this case and almost never does.

REGARDLESS OF THE LAW IT WAS A BAD IDEA! You are very self righteous about the law when it suits you, but have already stated that you break the speed limit. Do I need to go on and on about driving 46mph in a 45mph zone is illegal?


Really! Were the cyclists at a complete stop?

Don in Austin

FBinNY 

Hallux, you're clearly in the wrong about the use of the horn. Sounding a warning is legal when necessary, but necessity implies that the other options are limited and the risk of collision is high. There was no dangerous situation here, as you had the simple and safe option to wait for a safer time to pass.

You keep mentioning the shoulder, but in NYS the road is defined by the white stripe at the right edge (if any) and the shoulder is not considered the roadway.

I know you feel the cyclists were rude, and you're probably right, but there was no danger involved until or unless you created some by passing in an unsafe manner.

As I said earlier, you would probably not have been at all upset or discomfitted by a farmer on a tractor, but because you feel these cyclists unnecessarily robbed you of 5-10 seconds of precious time, you're now here trying to sell this to a crowd not well disposed to hear it.

Put this in perspective, it's a non-event among bigger non-events, and if these were the worst thing that happened that day, then you had a very good day.

UberGeek

3 years of commuting by bike, and I've yet to encounter this motorist who is at war with cyclists. Two instances of ignorant drivers, but they impacted the other cars on the road at the time, and not just me.

Not saying there's no moron drivers. I've seen them on the highways and while driving. None openly hostile to cyclists, however. But, I'm sure there are some, I just doubt it's very widespread. Either that, or I just lucked out with where I'm living.

UberGeek

Possibly, but I can see his point as well. As a road user, I also see fit to move AFRAP, and ride as close to the right as possible. Yes, I take the turn lanes when needed. Yes, I move to the travel lane as needed (To clear the turn only lanes). And, yes, I move to the should when I note vehicles approaching behind me, if practical.

Even if the law says I can take the full lane, and cyclists can ride two abreast. I just consider it a courtesy, and it keeps me from looking like a jackass.

UberGeek

Two golden nuggets of wisdom.

Sometimes, the cyclists are in the wrong. And, yes, while laws are laws, it's better to be alive than technically right and dead.

wphamilton

I think he has a point also, or at least enough benefit of the doubt since his description is unclear. But his explanations about it give me pause.

genec

Did it ever occur to you that they are speaking metaphorically... just as sports announcers use war terms to describe the play on the field?