Paul Barnard

Let me see if I can break this down for you.

This is a safety and advocacy forum. Let's start with some definitions.

Advocacy is the act or process of supporting a cause

Safety is the condition of being protected from or unlikely to cause danger, risk, or injury.

The circumstances were this. The road is a narrow 2 lane 35 mph road marked with a double yellow line. A rail crossing that had been closed for 10 minutes is opening. There is a line of cars in each lane perhaps a quarter mile long coming up to speed following the opening. There is anywhere from 4-7 feet of space between the cars in each of the lanes. There are a number of parking lots that cars may be entering or exiting. It's not uncommon for motorists to let other motorists into or through traffic in such circumstances. Motorists are not expecting a cyclists to be passing them in these circumstances, so they are very unlikely to check the rear view mirror before turning. There is an intersection a few hundred feet down the road.

The cyclist has a number of options. Keep his place in traffic and remain on the high traffic road. Keep his place in traffic and turn onto the nearby side-street. Remove himself from traffic until the congestion subsides. Pass as much of the traffic as possible on a double yellow until traffic comes up to his speed, then reenter traffic, forcing those he just passed to be stuck behind him at 20MPH on a 35MPH road.

The cyclist exercised the latter option. Revisiting the word safety, his illegal actions eliminated NONE of the safety threats and introduced more into the traffic scenario. The area is a no passing zone during ideal visibility and traffic conditions for a reason. The 3 foot (or more) rule is in effect in most states because moving autos and bicycles passing each other at that distance is unsafe. There was less than 3 feet between him and the cars he was passing.

From an advocacy standpoint, his actions had a detrimental effect. Nobody likes getting caught by long trains. It is rude for a cyclist to illegally pass a line of cars that are coming up to speed only to force those drivers he just passed to be stuck behind him at 20 MPH on a 35 MPH road. Motorists often have a negative perception of cyclists for no legitimate reason. Giving them a legitimate reason serves to further that negative perception and can build a negative attitude. Negative attitudes can and do foster dangerous behaviors and interactions. Cutting in line because you think you are more important than the people you cut in front of is frowned upon in our society. If you don't think it is, and don't think it's rude, cut in line next time you go to the grocery store, a sports event or movie.

Now with the obvious out of the way, I'll give our members the opportunity to change my mind on the subject rider being a rude idiot.

Explain to me how the riders choice made him safer. Explain to me how his actions were not discourteous.

The purpose of this post is to highlight how the rider's unsafe actions had a detrimental effect on advocacy.