Lauraspark

This letter was published last week in our local paper. I don't know anything about the incident the letter refers to, but imagine there was some sort of bike related accident. I'm thinking about writing a response, but would like to get your reactions.

"To the Editor:

I am a five-year resident of Boiling Spring Lakes and live on one of the two major thoroughfares in our city--Fifty Lakes Drive and Boiling Spring Road. I know the person who was driving the vehicle that passed (Gretchen Moore's) bicycle on the road. He told me he blew his horn to let the cicyclist know he was passing, then was surprised at what transpired next.

I did not witness the incident and cannot comment on that.

My comment is that people come to our community from one of the larger cities and think that things should be the same as where they are from.

Most major thoroughfares in these places have paved shoulders or bike paths. We have two lanes and no shoulders, so riding on our roads should alert bicyclists that going half the speed limit will create back-ups and the possibility of someone getting road rage.

Bikers may have the same rights as motor vehicles, but they also need to have common courtesy as to not impede traffic."

What do y'all think?

Pscyclepath

In many states, the "impeding traffic" statute applies only to motor vehicles, not human- or animal-powered vehicles, which have an equal right to use the road. As a corollary to that, the posted speed limit is a maximum limit, not a requirement that you have to be going that speed or a little bit more in order to use that stretch of roadway.

Sadly, everyone still believes in the tyranny of speed. That's a presumption that a bicyclist should never be in the way of a motorist, not even for a few seconds.

American traffic law, which embody everyone's right to use our roadways, embodies the principle of "right-of-way." Right-of-way is a “first come, first served” principle, where if you’re oper­ating a vehicle on a road, your right to continue on that road safely supersedes an overtaking vehicle operator’s right to pass you. That operator can only pass you when it’s safe to do so.

gcottay

I think maybe the writer is married to a horn-blowing road rager unable to tell the difference between speed limit and minimum speed.

ItsJustMe

People should realize that blowing their horn does not excuse them from the responsibility to wait until they can pass safely.

Minstrel

Classic blame the victim stance. It's not the person with road rage who is at fault, it's the cyclist's fault. They should have known that existing would cause road rage. They were asking for it.

As for the comment that cyclists should get out of the way and not impede traffic, I'm not sure how a cyclist would be expected to do that on a road with no shoulder. Are they to stop and climb into the weeds? Cyclists are slow and easy to pass in any location that it would be safe to pass any other vehicle, and in some places where it would would not be safe to pass a slow car.

cc_rider

What did transpire next?
Is there a link?

Lauraspark

Not sure, CC--the letter was in the paper Wednesday, May 19; I had not heard anything about the incident before the letter appeared. As far as I know, it wasn't reported, but I'll see what I can dig up. I would like to know if the cyclist was injured.

Seattle Forrest

I think it sounds like the defendant who said:

Seriously, it's the 21st century. We put folks on the moon before I was born. And we're still hung up on "Someone obeying the law caused me to fly into a fit of rage ... they shoulda known better?"

Roughstuff

American traffic law, which embody everyone's right to use our roadways, embodies the principle of "right-of-way." Right-of-way is a “first come, first served” principle, where if you’re oper*ating a vehicle on a road, your right to continue on that road safely supersedes an overtaking vehicle operator’s right to pass you. That operator can only pass you when it’s safe to do so.



There is the law, and there are the practical aspects of the law, as well. I do not view the speed limit as a minimum challenge, by any means...but at the same time, unless a bicycle is capable of maintaining the prevailing speed of traffic, I don't know a judge or jury who would feel compelled to 'dumb down' the speed of traffic to the bicycle speed. In fact I can't think of a faster way to get bikes banned from the damn roads entirely. Nor am I hypocritical in this philosophy. Fume belching buses---who enter and leave the lane of traffic with little or no concern for oncoming vehicles---are equally culpable.

"I may be slow but I am in front of you" will not last long as public policy.

The answer to the lady's comment, and it was a thoughtfully phrased one, not a road rage one, is plain and simple. Dollar for dollar, the best investment in roadway safety and ease of travel for motorized and non motorized users, is the proper installation and maintenance of shoulders.

roughstuff

ItsJustMe

The right to travel is a fundamental constitutional right (or very near). "banning bikes" would be easier said than done, legally. Muscle powered transport is a basic right, and can't even be excluded from expressways if there's no reasonable alternative.

Driving a car is an earned and revoke-able privilege.

If "they" really tried to ban bikes, they'd have to make major sweeping changes to basic rights in the US first. Otherwise the bans would just fall at the first legal challenge.

mattotoole

Traffic lights are the great equalizer. A lot of the time, even "50 MPH" traffic isn't moving any faster than the bicycle that drivers think is holding them up. When the traffic lights are figured in, everyone is averaging the same 15 MPH. I experience this on my bike almost every day -- passing and being passed by the same cars, over and over, on "50 MPH" roads.

DX-MAN

Here's an idea:

Since May is supposed to be National Bike Safety Month, the speed limit on EVERY road, highway, interstate, all of it, should be reduced to 25mph for that month; getting caught speeding is an automatic impound for the month.

Hey -- where did I say it was a GREAT idea...?

B. Carfree

I'm glad I've gotten old and slow. Twenty-five years ago that would have cost me many a bike lost to impound.

Lauraspark

You didn't...but I think it *is* a great idea! Thanks. And thanks to all other responding posters as well. I want to find out more specifics about this incident before responding publicly...but you've given me some wonderful talking points.

Dchiefransom

I don't know about where you're at, but here in California a car's horn is only supposed to be used in an emergency, anything else could be construed as road rage.
The letter writer sounds like they think they have a bubble around their community, and everyone from the rest of the country that comes near the bubble must abide by their behavior. Traffic laws come from the state, and the local community needs to get over it.

Digital_Cowboy

If you ask me that does sound like a great idea.

ItsJustMe

I dunno, as Carfree says, I exceed 25 MPH on my bike several times on a commute, in one place for a mile or so at a stretch.

Not sure what the point of reducing the speed limit to 25 on interstates, where bikes aren't allowed anyway, would be.

Seattle Forrest

In Connecticut ( where I mostly grew up, and learned to drive ) you're supposed to toot your horn before cresting a hill, or going around a blind corner. Nobody does, of course, and people on rural roads would have miserable lives if people did.

In Washington, bikes are allowed on I-90 and I-5, although certain urban sections are off limits. Every time I see a bike on the far right edge of the freeway, heading up the mountains toward Snoqualmie Pass, I suddenly feel a lot less proud of being able to climb any hill in Seattle...

Roughstuff

What *I* like about this proposal is it does make clear that the 'cyclist movement' has been captured by envirowhackos who want to dumb down our roadways to speed of the lowest vehicle. Any exceptions for ambulances carrying injured cyclists?

OOPS I forgot...they would be taking the bus, right?

roughstuff

The Human Car

This is how I read the letter:

To the Editor:

I am a five-year resident of Boiling Spring Lakes and live on one of the two major thoroughfares in our city where lots of car crashes occur --Fifty Lakes Drive and Boiling Spring Road. I know people who drive and they use a horn to let other people know they should just get the @#$% out of there way, that's what the horn is there for. I was surprised that the cyclists did not get out of the drivers way.

I did not witness the incident and cannot comment on that.

My comment is that people come to our community from other cities and think that that we are a nice and considerate people, the same as where they are from. We are not and new comers should know that!

Car drivers have a right to travel at high rates of speed and anyone that gets in their way is going to pay the price, that is simple physics. I partitioned the city to have the speed limit on my street changed to 60mph put they cited concerns for my neighbors bratty kids on bikes. Why should these brats impinge on my right to travel fast? And now they want to tell me that the major streets that surround my neighborhood also allow these brats to bike on, no way! Major streets are there to confine these nuisances to their houses so decent folks like me don't have to put up with these bratty kids, they should stay home in front of the TV like all normal American kids. And it is my God given right to insist that my right to travel fast is more important then other people who can't afford a car or who let their kids outside just to lallygag on main roads.

Bikers may have the right to exist but not in front of my car.

DX-MAN

I did it in the 70's too -- at least daily hitting 30! Could still bust 25 now, occasionally; but for the exposure it would give cycling, I'd back off some for that period of time... on the roads, anyway.

As for the interstates, it would just be for the p***-off factor.

Chicago Al 

I had the same reaction as 'Human Car,' to write a follow-up LTE.

I would have contrasted how, in my very big city, one would warn a visitor that there are certain places that it is simply not safe to go, because there are dangerous people like *muggers* there. In Boiling Springs Lake, they obviously have the same problem, but the unsafe place is *the roads* and the dangerous people are the *drivers*. Wow! If their drivers are that prone to road rage, I would not even feel safe in a car there. What if I slowed down to check an address or admire the beautiful Western North Carolina (like the rhodedendron in bloom about now)? Boiling Springs Lakes is obviously not a safe or welcoming place to visit, for cylists and maybe everyone else. Thanks for the warning!

No further information on what the original incident was, google search using the 'Gretchen Moore' name and that locality doesn't come up with any news of an accident. One can only hope that means it was not fatal.

Digital_Cowboy

I might be mistaken, but I think part of what DM is/was saying is to for that month open up all roads to bikes.

DX-MAN

Sorry, DC, just read #21.

ItsJustMe

Sorry to agree with the anti-bike crowd in any way, but reducing interstate speeds to 25 for a month would devastate inventory control systems that have finely tuned just in time numbers, and would vastly increase the costs of transporting goods for that time.