zandoval 

Multi Use Path - Man - Had to look that one up...

Crowded MUPs just another problem of over population...

I know - Lights and Sirens...

the sci guy 

patheletes. i like that.
i call them gym class heroes.
we have some of them on the greenways here. i think for the most part, knoxville residents are pretty good about making the paths safe for everyone. i always call out "on your left" when passing, and if they aren't wearing headphones like a moron, they always shift to the right a bit to allow us to safely pass.

gerv 

And your point is? (And just to clarify, I have made it up to 15 mph... once or twice anyway )

longbeachgary

Any chance we can just ride our bikes and shut TFU?

CB HI

15 mph is quite a different speed than the OPs claimed warp 6.

Not to mention 15 mph is not all that fast anyway. The cycling speed limit on our narrow city sidewalks is 10 mph. Getting all excited and throwing stereo types out for a pointless rant in which no one was hit by a 15 mph cyclist is worth no more than a yawn.

As noted by another poster, the OP was riding the same average speed as those he derides, so it sounds more like he was upset simply because another cyclist passed him at some point on the MUP.

Did you also note that the OP did not refute my 15 mph guess.

gerv 

I disagree. The MUPs here have lots of people, little kids on bikes, people walking dogs, etc. You can do stretches at speed, but it is necessary to slow down for heavy traffic. This is something I don't always see and I feel it's likely to cause accidents. Hitting someone at 15mph is usually painful.

CB HI

So how many collisions have you seen on the MUP?

imi

Are we talking about v=w3c or v=w10/3c?

Simpletommy

Troof.

MarkvW

I'm reconciled to pedestrians. When I'm on a bike path, it's their world and I'm just riding in it. They've got the right of way and I respect it. Bike pathletes are another story. They're too stupid to be idiots.

bluegoatwoods

You bit the wrong guy's leg on this one; the one he was replying to starts fights for the sheer fun of it. I guess I don't really know the motivation. But I must be close to the truth.

But doesn't it seem as though the preponderance of traffic on an MUP --as opposed to a bicycle path-- must be of a leisurely nature? Walkers, people with children and dogs, users like that? Should they be subjected to the need to watch their steps very closely or run the risk of severe bodily damage? Count my vote in the "No, they should not" category. And that means that bicyclists should slow down a great deal and always, always be prepared to surrender right-of-way at a split-second's notice. Regardless of whether the ped was behaving stupidly or not. This is coming from a serious bicyclist, too.

I have a similar attitude toward our streets. I resent the fact that our children can play in the yard but run the risk of instant death or maiming if they cross that line out front. And since they're children, it's going to happen sometimes. And I dislike the fact that the little old ladies in our neighborhoods walking out to the mailbox have to tolerate the startling appearance of two tons of steel suddenly hurtling by just a few yards away. Yes, they know it's going to happen. But they shouldn't have to remind themselves. The streets should belong far more to the kids and the old ladies than the cars, who should be considered 'guests' tolerated as long as their behavior is acceptable.

MUPs should have similar rules. They really belong to walkers and families. Bikes are okay, but they should behave like guests.

CB HI

Right, anytime someone disagrees with your point of view they are trying to start a fight.

Most of these so called MUPs were built with significant amounts federal transportation dollars. That means the recreational users are in fact the guest.

If you want to start building them with park funds, then you can whine about the transportation folks.

Commodus

since you're so tough, maybe you should be having this conversation with them, instead of random strangers hiding behind your computer screen.

David Bierbaum

The recreational users paid the taxes that funded the Dept. of Transportation. They are the OWNERS rather than the guests! Also, bicyclists are recreational users as well.

CB HI

Please note, it is the OP telling others to get off the path.
And those others are tax payers, so they are the owners.

I take it you also insist that all cyclist and walkers get to use any freeway unrestricted as well, right?

agent pombero

A lot of FT commuters use MUPs around here. For a whole community in Portland the Springwater, for example, is the most direct and safest way into downtown Portland. These commuters, referred to as "pathletes" around on BF, are used to 9 months of the year of pretty empty MUPs (because the majority in Portland are fair weather exercisers; why even bother? Get off the MUP imo) and then all of the sudden, come spring and summer, a MUP full of idiots: walking 8 abreast; not moving to the right when bell/call out; zigzagging across the MUP; etc. I understand the frustration of wanting to get from A to B AFAP and then these fair weather exercising idiots, with their dogs, iPods, strollers, 4 year olds, are in the way.

bluefoxicy

"Infringing on others' rights" is such a loaded phrase. Every time I hear it, it's an argument from some small-brained animal that doesn't know wtf they're talking about.

Better terms:

• Abusing $whatever (Abusing the MUP)
• Being dickholes

The problem is people use the word "Rights" to refer to "Entitlement," i.e. they think they're entitled to something. Meanwhile the other guy thinks he's entitled to something that's kind of mutually exclusive with your entitlement. Both of these guys will argue about their so-called "Rights".

If we talk about "abuse", we start talking about rules--official, written rules and rules of etiquette. Notably, failure of rules of etiquette is called "Being a dickhole". More notably, you can continue to be a dickhole while exercising your rights where another person has none--for example, by throwing a severe tantrum because some kid walked on your lawn, calling his parents, make a federal case out of it why don't you.

Rules and entitlements and technical ownership and privilege make for a good beating stick if you want to be a jerk. I'd rather bypass all that and just go squarely to the heart of the matter, avoid all the political language.

David Bierbaum

Actually, I was agreeing with your position, by pointing out two logical flaws in CB HI's point of debate.

Flaw #1: Everyone who is a Federal taxpayer is a co-owner of all things paid for by said tax dollars. (This point is semi-void, since we spent more dollars than we pay in taxes, so in part, the MUP belongs to the Chinese Government! )

Flaw #2: If recreational users can be told to give right-of-way to others, then bicyclists, themselves being recreational users, must give right-of-way as well.

If at this point, you are thinking: "Okay, this Bierbaum idiot is just being snarky, and probably thinks he's being funny." Then I plead "Guilty, as charged!"

In seriouser mode: I tend to be in the "give others consideration before one's self, even when it's less than convenient for one's self" camp. When driving, this tendency toward extreme patience drives my passengers up a wall.

MarkvW

I just figure that the pedestrian always has the "right" of way, and try my best to act accordingly.

CB HI

I have proven in federal court and have established case law that many cyclist are not recreational users but commuters and utility cyclist. Odd that so many cyclist here fail to understand that fact, especially in the COMMUTER forum.

longbeachgary

EDIT

These are the kinds of people that you need to look out for - not those that are riding fast.

bluegoatwoods

There you go...

Making your point is legitimate. But you just can't resist throwing in insulting terms like "whining".

Then you claim that it's not you who starts fights.

You didn't realize that you were offering up a perfect example of your shoddy tactics, did you?

CB HI

Odd that you consider a description an insult.

You didn't realize that you were offering up a perfect example of your shoddy tactics, did you?

arsprod 

My son (a full time commuter too) calls them power rangers and they may be polite in your area but they're ******** here (and I'm generalizing). They almost never say hello or even recognize other cyclists and more importantly, give cyclists a bad rap. Just today I was stopped at an intersection (where the sign says mup users stop not car traffic) two guys came up from behind me and pulled into the street forcing cars to stop. I never see this behavior from any other users and it's flat out arrogant. It's a rite of spring and I know that come late fall they'll disappear. I like when it rains too because apparently they melt if wet. Rant over

DX-MAN

I will usually see a speed-demon rider on the MUP doing his thing ALONE. The one time I remember 'running afoul of a paceline' was on the road -- the group short-cut a left turn, just about taking my front wheel with them. One of them yelled something disagreeable, while I was bellowing, "WATCH THE F*** OUT!"

It's actually been almost a year since I had ANY MUP issues; the last one, though, was a doozy! It was an organized group ride, called "Trek the Trails", where the local 'Greenway Consortium' sponsored/led an open ride to familiarize the locals with where the MUP goes. I had my two youngest with me, and some ****** on a recumbent almost took my 10-y-o off the path with his careless riding!

As a result, my kids don't want to do any more 'Trek the Trails' rides.