kickstart

Unfortunately it sometimes seems that those who are uncoordinated and/or have poor situational awareness are most often the ones wearing earphones.

Wearing them is in a way like DUI, the more often one does it the better they are at compensating for their diminished capacity, but their capacity is still diminished.
If a person is following the rules of the road it really isnt that big of a deal because their behavior is still relatively predictable. The problem is those who wear them, and also don't obey the rules of the road or meander aimlessly on MUTs, their diminished capacity, the inability of others to communicate with them, and their random behavior does indeed make them a problem.

I'm not really a "there-aught-to-be-a-law" type, but if they banned earphones on roads and MUTs by all users I wouldn't complain.

I-Like-To-Bike

If "they" banned all bicyclists who dress or looked like they were entered in the TdF from the roads and MUTs would you complain? After all, some of them ride like jackasses.

kickstart

I don't see the connection between the two, dressing up in racer costume doesn't inhibit the ability of the wearer to perceive their environment.

I-Like-To-Bike

Maybe not, but unfortunately it sometimes seems that those who act like jackasses as they train on the MUP/roads and/or have poor situational awareness of others on same are most often the ones wearing racer costume. Sound familiar?

kickstart

It's been my personal experience that "racers" in training types are rude and goal oriented without consideration for others but typically maintain control and direction. The same can't be said for those who walk, run, or cycle in their own little isolated world without consistent behavior.

jputnam

But if you're being overtaken, and the overtaking vehicle gives proper notice, your obligation goes beyond that general duty -- you're required to give way to the right, and not move left until the overtaking vehicle has passed.

If you're riding along and there's an obstacle in your way, if there's no oncoming traffic, you can veer left around the obstacle.

In the same situation, however, if someone behind you has signaled that they're passing, you're *not* allowed to veer left to avoid the obstacle. That's a special duty to facilitate the pass, which goes beyond your general duty of care.

prathmann

I was driving on a local freeway one day when traffic in my lane came to a standstill. The adjoining lane had a different destination and was still zipping along at 60+ mph. When the driver directly in front of me saw that there was 'an obstacle in the way', i.e. all the stopped traffic, he did an abrupt lane change (veer) without checking for traffic from behind. Needless to say, the passing traffic was unable to instantly drop their speed and there was a collision. The police conclusion, with which I agree, was that the driver in front of me did have a duty 'to facilitate the pass' of the traffic in the next lane and should not have changed lanes without checking behind despite there having been no audible signal of the intent to pass. And given that cars were passing us every few seconds I hate to think of the racket that would be created if every one of them felt a need to signal an impending pass by blowing their horn - a racket that would not have contributed to safety in any way.

kickstart

Typically the requirement for an audible signal is only when on 2 lane roads.

italktocats

isnt it more inconsiderate to make that assumption based on.. well nothing?

italktocats

do you blast your horn overtaking cars on the freeway? or is this some special rule just for cyclists, and only cyclists?


in reality, i can hear my tires on the road, im sure i can hear your ego all the far from here...

italktocats

even IF so, so what? or do you posses a certain device that creates a magical reality for all of us based on your assumptions?

italktocats

yes, and not a single **** was given about the headphones

you dont have the same rights as a car, cars dont have rights; cyclists do.

italktocats

how do you signal to someone thats in front of you, aka CANNOT SEE YOU

what is this magical way of cycling that ive never experienced


lemme just picture how this goes

X is cycling along

Y is creeping up X

suddenly Y screams HEYA MATE IM BEHIND YOU

X panics and starts pedalling faster and faster, trying to get rid of this creeper

now Y is speeding up too, to overtake X

italktocats

you should have seem em witouth the license

Cyclist0383

Socially adjusted people generally just ring their bell. Likewise, the socially adjusted people in front of them move over a bit to let them pass. If, of course, they can actually hear them.....

italktocats

so why are these so called social people riding the **** in front of me, preventing me to pass?


is that social accepted in latvia?!


i rather be a social ****** (wich by your definition i already was, so care..) and ride on the right side so anyone faster (yeah right! ) can pass

Cyclist0383

On narrow cycle roads it can be difficult to pass if someone is weaving or riding in the center of the lane. A quick ring of a bell solves the problem. Simple problems, simple solutions. Being aware of those around you when in public is basic stuff.

italktocats

are those smaller than in amsterdam?

howsteepisit

Having no bell, and on occasion riding wearing ear phones, I guess I am not socially adjusted. Suppose Ziemas would like to send me to a re-eduaction camp for a few decades?

wphamilton

FWIW I ride sometimes with an earbud, sometimes with two, usually without, and there is no impairment whatsoever. My awareness is not impacted. On those occasions where I am passed, I am aware of them before they alert me, and it makes no difference whether they do or do not alert me.

I ding my bell at pedestrians and other cyclists prior to passing them. I see it as a courtesy however, and it doesn't seem to have an appreciable impact on my safety either way. I don't really care if the guy with his head wired hears me or not - if it doesn't bother him, I'm fine with it.

It just seems like everything goes more smoothly when we stop worrying about how other people do things.

italktocats

or makes you work for a gossip magazine

kickstart

Most folks believe that of themselves, but several years ago I did a professional drivers safety course and some of the simulator exercises were to demonstrate how much seemingly benign distractions can diminish ones perceptions.
Its an eye opener when demonstrated in an empirical way.

wphamilton

I am one of those who can concentrate in any environment. That's the point: you can't know anyone's capabilities from generalizations. Basing our reactions on similarly inappropriate generalizations - rather than observation - is a lapse in judgement. I'd rather someone be oblivious than exercise bad judgment.

Better policy is to mind our own business. Be cautious if someone's profile triggers a stereotype, but it's fruitless and counterproductive to try to alter that person's behavior, especially if it's all based on generalities.

howsteepisit

Seems to me like riding a bicycle is nowhere near the complexity nor responsibility of driving a commercial vehicle or piloting an airplane, or rocket ship. So a professional drivers course in nice, but hardy needed nor exemplary for bicycling.

keyven

That's the problem - you may think you're good by some personal metrics that you've define. Generalizations are there because we cannot get into one another's heads. People overestimate themselves ALL THE TIME. That's why accidents happen more often than they should.

So instead of following a universally agreed-upon definition, most asshat riders/drivers' response will more or less be in the realm of "I drive fine, it's the rest of the world that sucks". Almost every idiot driver is constantly justifying their actions - not by the law or common courtesy - but by some unseen, self-written code that no one else knows about.

Fact is, most of them are not out to kill others, but harbor the mentality that their driving/cycling is fine, and everyone else is wrong. So this 'illusion' only ends when they maim or kill someone.

For example, my dad tailgates - CONSTANTLY. At 60mph, he's less than 10 feet from the front car more often than not. In over 40 years of driving, he's never been in a major accident before - none involving injury or death - so his confidence level is obviously high. He believes as long as he can tell the traffic conditions ahead, there is no danger of an accident. Of course, that ignores the low chance a stray animal might jump out of the bushes and cause the front car to slam their brakes.