bluefoxicy

Seriously.

I was coming home from floatation-REST therapy for primary insomnia and nearly took some guy off his bike. I thought, for a brief 0.28 seconds, that I'd have to swerve and take out his back wheel; but my brakes are high-performance copper-impregnated-ceramic and I use high-end summer tires up front, and my Mazda 3 is a fantastic car besides, so I managed to prevent the collision.

I stop at stop signs when I'm on my bike. I stop at red lights when I'm on my bike--I wish we'd implement Idaho stops everywhere, though, for bicycles and motorcycles, and possibly convertibles, thanks to the superior visibility reducing risk.

Can we do something about this? Can we get some sort of combined state education program going, explaining to everyone the importance and legality of cycling with traffic, following traffic control devices (signs, signals), passing cyclists safely (three ****ing feet!), cycling in a safe zone (out in the middle of the lane if there's parked cars, not right up against the row of cars), and so on?

I am tired of dealing with cyclists running around all stupid half the time, drivers trying to run me over when I'm on my bike, other cyclists trying to knock over my bike running red lights coming the wrong way down a one-way street, and other drivers driving all stupid when I safely share the road with cyclists. We have a problem here.

Bicycles, pedestrians, and EPMADs are part of the road. They're things you will encounter when driving. I get that we don't have bicycle licenses; but safe coutility of the road with cars, motorcycles, bicycles, pedestrians, EPMADs, and the occasional jackass is an integral part of operating a motor vehicle, and we should teach this as part of driver's ed.

At least the information would trickle down, since most cyclists are also drivers or motorcyclists. Even the police get licensed; they'd know to tell a cyclist to turn around and go the right way down a one-way street.

Looigi

I'm all for education and continuing awareness programs (billboards, TV and radio spots...). IMO, the money would provide much greater and universal benefit spent on this rather than on a 1/2 mile bike lane here and a disconnected 2 mile MUP there.

bluefoxicy

No billboards.

We should ban billboards. Completely.

What moron decided to institutionalize distracted driving?

FBinNY 

+1 in terms of bang for buck, education (not formal classes) and awareness programs do more to reduce accidents than any infrastructure changes could achieve.

However, let's not expect sea changes in conduct. Many people are fully aware of the implications of their actions and do what they do anyway. Where education would have the most impact is when about hidden and not well understood issues, such as passing trucks on the right, railroad/trolley tracks, metal gratings, slab seams on concrete roads, and the like.

Any awareness campaign should also include motorists, and review their side of the car/bicycle equation.

spare_wheel

Thanks so much for making us all safer!!!1!!!!

achoo

The reason roads are anywhere near safe to ride on at all is because most people follow the rules.

Any arrogant jackass who plays, "I'm better and more important than you!" and flouts the rules that allow the safe flow of traffic makes riding less safe for all.

mikeybikes

I'm not so certain how much education will help.

As a former instructor of a three hour class on safety and basic mechanics, the vast majority of my students were already aware of cyclists' responsibilities on the road. It's difficult to abide by the laws when none of the other cyclists abide by them.

I myself sit at red lights and wait for them to change, but it's rare another cyclist will queue up behind me. Most of the other cyclists blow through the lights. It's definitely frustrating, but I avoid any emotional responses.

I love the GIF, by the way. You don't happen to have the original source for it, do you? I kinda want to use it for something but like to give credit where credit is due.

JameB

I see many cyclists break the rules (almost 1 in 2). Every time I see one, it pisses me off. If I can, I'll yell some choice words to the arsehat running the light.

EDIT: On the other hand, since I've begun riding a bike two months ago, I've been passed by thousands of cars. Only 3 cars have given me less than a meter of clearance. Two of the three cars that passed me within a meter were going ~ 30 km/h; intentionally slow to avoid any accidents with me.

howsteepisit

What is the obsession with how other people ride. Getting upset will do no good. Folks will make their own determination about what rules they follow and what risks they take. One hopes that they accept the consequences of their actions with a minimum of complaining and hand ringing.

FBinNY 

How does anybody else's actions have an impact on your decision making. As Mom used to say "if everybody jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you do jump off too?".

I do understand the effects of peer pressure, and understand how you mighe not want to be a "goody two shoes" and wait at a red, while your friends are pedaling away. I'm also not a a red light waiter, and will proceed when I feel it's safe (law be dammed), but that's different than running a light, or entering an intersection where crossing traffic has the right of way.

IMO, bicyclists don't need traffic lights or stop signs if they simply follow the basic rule of the road (that was in place long before the first traffic light was installed) and slow, look for and yield to crossing traffic with the right of way.

BTW- traffic lights weren't invented to make drivers stop as much as to increase traffic flow through intersections, by giving one direction clear right of way, so they didn't have to stop and check at every corner. Long cycle N/S flow, alternating with long cycle E/W flow has greater throughput than one car at a time alternating N/S-E/W flow, so the real role isn't to slow or stop anybody, but to speed them up.

genec

what the heck is an EPMAD?

genec

So the OP should have just creamed the cyclist... rather than locking up his "high-performance copper-impregnated-ceramic brakes"?

SpecialX

In case you didn't Google it, it stands for something like electronic personal mobility assistance device.
In other words the only usual one you see is a Segway.
But it can also stand for an electronic wheelchair.
on a side note, I believe Segway all lobbied to actually create that acronym and had used as a legal term for use in most states statutes.

JameB

Because the actions of these riders affect the whole cycling community. If some guy decided to run a light and that caused a driver to brake hard, that driver will be pissed at the next cyclist as if he was the same person who ran the light... I don't want to be that next cyclist.

People hate cyclists because many cyclists think they're above the law. The community wants the same rights as a car driver but not all cyclists follow the same laws that car drivers have to follow.

spare_wheel

Signaling lane changes? Signaling turns? Stopping for pedestrians? Driving *BELOW* the speed limit? Rolling stop signs? Flooring it through a stale red?

mikeybikes

My point was basically, "if it's alright for the other cyclists to run red lights, then it's alright for me," is the attitude of most of the students I taught. No amount of education will stop people from running red lights, IMO, until cyclists change their attitudes on them.

I completely understand this argument and other arguments for running red lights.

BTW, no where do I advocate for or against waiting at red lights. I leave that up to the individual to make a decision. When I taught safety courses, I pointed out the law, what is considered safest by curriculum (waiting at red lights), and then always had the addendum that if you do run red lights, do so in a safe manner. Any collision as a result of you not abiding the red light will be your fault. It was always classes of adults who were capable of making their own decisions.

mikeybikes

And a little research answers my own question:


It's clearly from Top Gear. I find the video hilarious regardless of if I agree with the sentiment.

spare_wheel

I do think I'm above safety-irrelevant motorist-centric laws that are designed to inconvenience active transport users or shove active transport users out of "the way". Moreover, I routinely violate these laws and see virtually no evidence that anyone cares. I even routinely "run" lights right in front of the Portland Police Headquarters without any issue.

If you care about these laws you are free to move to Portland and work to elect politicians that will make jaybiking and jaywalking a law enforcement priority.

and fat chance.

I want different but equitable rights. Unfortunately many safety-irrelevant car-centric traffic statutes are a roadblock to this kind of equity.

spare_wheel

mikeybikes

Put that quote into context. I'm not actually stating that's my attitude or that the attitude is valid.

I edited my previous post to emphasize the above.

achoo

That the best you can do in reply to a statement that safety on roads comes from everyone predictably following the rules?

I'm underwhelmed.

And read this, if you can:

Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

achoo

Oooh, you soooo speshul.

You "want different but equitable rights" by your definition and you proudly flout traffic laws, but expect others to "work to elect politicians".

Why don't you "work to elect politicians"? Too speshul?

genec

Try googling it... you don't get what you think you get... certainly nothing that points to "electronic personal mobility assistance device."

rumrunn6

+1 especially for the one for a "men's club" on 84 in CT. not this one but it's kinda like that

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...dvertising.jpg

mikeybikes

I had the same question and Googled it as well. All I got was some video game player.