Alleged Angeles Crest Road Rage Incident Involves Cyclists
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
It's because we really are in the way. It's really silly of us to expect vehicles with such different traits to "share" the same space. It's a failure of city/transportation planning and not appropriate to really blame motorists. They get used to one transportation flow that covers 99.9% of their time on the road and then all of a sudden they get thrown a curveball by coming upon a couple bikes. Of course it's going to trip them out a bit.
Do we really need to have so many cars on the road that most of them have just ONE occupant? There's another thread asking what would happen if Americans "woke up and realized" that they didn't NEED a new car. And instead went out and bought used cars.
Sadly the downside is how many car dealerships/factories would go out of business if that happened? And as a result of that how many people would be out of work?
#102
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Again: lots of things slow people down in the road. Bicyclists are just one of many. People accept the others. Why are bicycles different?
Why is it acceptable to move over for someone parallel parking and not acceptable to move over for a bicyclist?
Why is it acceptable to move over for a bus and not acceptable to move over for a bicyclist?
Why is it acceptable to move over for a garbage truck...
A cab picking up/dropping someone off...
A delivery truck...
A cop who has someone pulled over....
Road workers...
Emergency workers...
A heavily loaded 18 wheeler going up hill....
Bad weather...
Or just plain wait for train to go by.
I'm sure that if I put a small amount of effort into it I could think of several others. The point is that bicyclists are no worse than any of these other things and not nearly as bad as some of them but some people just won't accept that they have to suffer the trivial inconvenience. It's childish.
Why is it acceptable to move over for someone parallel parking and not acceptable to move over for a bicyclist?
Why is it acceptable to move over for a bus and not acceptable to move over for a bicyclist?
Why is it acceptable to move over for a garbage truck...
A cab picking up/dropping someone off...
A delivery truck...
A cop who has someone pulled over....
Road workers...
Emergency workers...
A heavily loaded 18 wheeler going up hill....
Bad weather...
Or just plain wait for train to go by.
I'm sure that if I put a small amount of effort into it I could think of several others. The point is that bicyclists are no worse than any of these other things and not nearly as bad as some of them but some people just won't accept that they have to suffer the trivial inconvenience. It's childish.
Those are all very good, and very valid questions.
#103
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
How does my wanting to protect my safety infer that I have some sort of "attitude?" As I said given that cyclists have the most to loose if an area that someone thinks is "safe" turns out not to be safe, how does that infer that a person has an "attitude?"
[btw, no one has claimed motorists will make the determination: i was just arguing against the idea that any particular cyclist alone has the "right" to determine what is a "safe" place to pull over or to move to the right side. A particular cyclist may be unreasonable in their opinion and be overruled by common sense, and the court system (when ticketed).]
Last edited by Digital_Cowboy; 07-05-11 at 12:39 AM.
#104
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
To be fair, it's a small minority of drivers who act like that. Even after all these years and miles, I'm still amazed that people will follow me in the right lane rather than move into the next lane. I've had people follow me for over a 1/4 mile rather than change lanes.
A bit more common is people who will pull up behind me when I'm in the middle of the lane and only then change lanes. They could easily change lanes earlier but for some reason they don't. I see people doing this to other motorists too. I don't understand it. Why wouldn't you change lanes early so that you don't have to slow down? What is so difficult about changing lanes?
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
My rule: behave, as much as possible, in such a manner that other people do not have to alter their lives to accommodate me. Pay attention, anticipate where/when someone is going, blend seamlessly, don't make others brake or swerve or anything like that to accommodate me. Sure, it requires me to consider the effects my actions will have on others, and then adjust them for the best outcome, but hey, like I said, I'm just the kind of guy who doesn't mind doing that. The rest of you all can stick to your selfish ways, but I will not ride with you.
Or do you really mean, that cyclists should accommodate motorists, but motorists are allowed to be selfish? That motorists are not being selfish when they harass a cyclists because the cyclist is in the way of the fast vehicle? I know it would be very accommodating of a cyclists to stop and start on a hill. I would rather keep any momentum I have then to start up again and again on a hill.
Maybe it's not a right. There is way too much talk about rights and not enough talk about what actually works best for us all. To me, a society in which people spend less time getting from A to B and more time doing whatever it is they want/need to do at point B, is a better society.
The last time I looked, the laws that are made to allow safe road travel to all users don't mention the speed of the vehicles when passing, except that they are not allowed to exceed the maximum speed limit. They could have easily have written that into the law instead of the first come, first serve model. They could have easily have made the law for the slow vehicle be responsible in making sure that the faster vehicle can pass safely. Instead, the made it the responsibility of passing vehicle to safely overtake the slower.
#106
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Most people move over just fine for these things ... and for cyclists. It's no big deal, it's part of driving.
A small number of people make a big stink when encountering cyclists ... or these things you've listed.
#107
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Or do you really mean, that cyclists should accommodate motorists, but motorists are allowed to be selfish? That motorists are not being selfish when they harass a cyclists because the cyclist is in the way of the fast vehicle? I know it would be very accommodating of a cyclists to stop and start on a hill. I would rather keep any momentum I have then to start up again and again on a hill.
What works best is following the laws. It sounds like the road in question, as stated above, is used by people driving sports cars and motorcyclists for the same reason that a cyclists wants to ride this road. So you want the users of the road that accommodates the other users to have a place to go. If I am on my way to work, does that trump someone going shoe shopping? Or does the faster vehicle still trump the slower vehicle. If I have to pull over to allow the faster vehicle pass, am I not spending more time getting from point a to point b than if I just keep riding?
The last time I looked, the laws that are made to allow safe road travel to all users don't mention the speed of the vehicles when passing, except that they are not allowed to exceed the maximum speed limit. They could have easily have written that into the law instead of the first come, first serve model. They could have easily have made the law for the slow vehicle be responsible in making sure that the faster vehicle can pass safely. Instead, the made it the responsibility of passing vehicle to safely overtake the slower.
#108
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Diego, CA USA
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You've highlighted a difference when there really isn't one.
Most people move over just fine for these things ... and for cyclists. It's no big deal, it's part of driving.
A small number of people make a big stink when encountering cyclists ... or these things you've listed.
Most people move over just fine for these things ... and for cyclists. It's no big deal, it's part of driving.
A small number of people make a big stink when encountering cyclists ... or these things you've listed.
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Besides, your argument wasn't that people said "those things shouldn't be permitted in the road" -- it was "why is X acceptable and not Y" when "Y" involved a bicycle. My point was that these things *are* acceptable to most people, and only a small number of people say that they're not -- at least not to the point where they start to do stupid/dangerous/illegal things as a result.
If you really want to know why individual Z feels that X is acceptable and Y isn't, you'll need to ask them. But don't go assuming that most people feel the way your question implies they do -- because most don't, or at least don't feel strongly enough about it to act upon it.
#110
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Diego, CA USA
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Did I say most people? Where did I say most people?
I'm talking about the people complaining that bicycles shouldn't be in the road. I'm talking about people who swerve at and threaten bicyclists for riding in the road. I'm even talking about people who insist that bicyclists should keep far right even in situations where the safety experts say that you are safer taking the lane.
I'm talking about the people complaining that bicycles shouldn't be in the road. I'm talking about people who swerve at and threaten bicyclists for riding in the road. I'm even talking about people who insist that bicyclists should keep far right even in situations where the safety experts say that you are safer taking the lane.
#111
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,788
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
who do you think taught him how to drive?
for this guy to essentially brag to the cop about what he did, obviously he thinks he's fully justified in doing it. very nice charges
as a (recovering) motorist with half a million miles behind the wheel (without accidents or tickets) i understand that my attitude towards driving came from my dad. i recall a trip, as a kid, out to dinner. we were "stuck" behind a large group of road racers on a training ride. my mom got all uppity and says "what are they doing?!?!?" my dad looked at the speedometer and calmly replied "about 25 mph." very chill. never in a hurry.
for this guy to essentially brag to the cop about what he did, obviously he thinks he's fully justified in doing it. very nice charges
as a (recovering) motorist with half a million miles behind the wheel (without accidents or tickets) i understand that my attitude towards driving came from my dad. i recall a trip, as a kid, out to dinner. we were "stuck" behind a large group of road racers on a training ride. my mom got all uppity and says "what are they doing?!?!?" my dad looked at the speedometer and calmly replied "about 25 mph." very chill. never in a hurry.
#112
Surf Bum
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pacifica, CA
Posts: 2,184
Bikes: Lapierre Pulsium 500 FdJ, Ritchey breakaway cyclocross, vintage trek mtb.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
3 Posts
I do it on my bike and I do it in my car. It's common courtesy! If the lane is too narrow for two cars to fit and therefore the second car would just have to wait, then so be it. But it is never too narrow to fit with me on my bicycle or motorcycle so of course I would position myself where it will allow someone to turn if they want to.
Your positioning is what made cars impatient with you. They wouldn't have been impatient waiting behind, say, a big truck at that light because they would look at the situation and realize that there isn't anything the truck could do to make the situation any better. It's the same reason people don't get mad at delivery vehicles, someone parallel parking, etc. But they look at you and go, "if that jackass would just move over a little...i could get on my way," and get impatient and since you didn't give them room to go by you on the right, they went by on the left. In other words, there was something you could do to improve the situation but you chose not to. That frustrates people. Don't be like that.
__________________
Thirst is stronger than the rules. - Stars and Watercarriers, 1974
Thirst is stronger than the rules. - Stars and Watercarriers, 1974
#114
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
If I understand your scenario correctly, there were two lanes going in your direction: one left turn lane, and one other lane from which people can either go straight or turn right. Correct? If so, and you were not positioned on the very far left of the straight/right-turn lane where anyone wishing to turn right could still come up and do so, then you were indeed being a jackass. How could you not know that someone may want to turn right and then maximize your positioning to allow them to do so?
I was traveling from the east headed west. I was stopped at the stop line where the white van is stopped, and the first of the two cars (the second one was hidden behind the first car and I couldn't see it) was stopped somewhere in line with the sign post between the neighborhood marker and the fire hydrant.
Also as I said on the off chance that there was a sensor somewhere that I couldn't see I had waved to the first car to move forward so that they could hopefully trip the sensor. And again, as I said before that first car DID NOT have their turn signal on, so how am I suppose to know that they want to make a right hand turn there? Am I suppose to be a mind reader and be able to divine that they wanted to turn right?
Hell for all I know they could have gone north on 4th St. a short distance made a U-Turn, come back to the intersection and made a right on to 77th Ave. I don't know as after they both proceed to make their illegal right turns the countdown timer finally started counting down and I was able to proceed through the intersection. I had even yelled at a couple of guys who had crossed on the far side of the intersection to please hit the crosswalk button, but they didn't.
If this is a strictly timed intersection (which it appears to be) it also appears that as I said that they increase the time that the light stays red for 77/78th Ave. N. (at this intersection on the east side of the intersection the cross street is 78th Ave. N. and on the west side it's 77th Ave. N.) As during the day IF I can't get over to the left hand turn lane early enough to make my left turn I'll make a right at the intersection, do a U-Turn and cross at 77/78th Ave. and I've never had a long wait in doing that. But last night it seemed to take "forever" before the light finally turned green for 77/78th Ave.
Again, NEITHER car had it's right turn signal on (not that I would have been able to see the turn signal of the second car as it was completely hidden by the first car. So with the distance that the first car stopped behind me, as well as NOT having turned on it's turn signal how am I suppose to know what they want to do, and how does that make me the "jackass?" Doesn't it make THEM the jackass for stopping so far behind me, and for NOT signalling their turn? And also please explain to me how their time is more important than my time.
I do it on my bike and I do it in my car. It's common courtesy! If the lane is too narrow for two cars to fit and therefore the second car would just have to wait, then so be it. But it is never too narrow to fit with me on my bicycle or motorcycle so of course I would position myself where it will allow someone to turn if they want to.
Your positioning is what made cars impatient with you. They wouldn't have been impatient waiting behind, say, a big truck at that light because they would look at the situation and realize that there isn't anything the truck could do to make the situation any better. It's the same reason people don't get mad at delivery vehicles, someone parallel parking, etc. But they look at you and go, "if that jackass would just move over a little...i could get on my way," and get impatient and since you didn't give them room to go by you on the right, they went by on the left. In other words, there was something you could do to improve the situation but you chose not to. That frustrates people. Don't be like that.
That first car behind me frustrated the hell out of me by not moving up behind me and helping to trip the sensor (if there is one at this intersection). In my book they were the one's being the jackass by stopping so far behind me.
If you can't see that I feel sorry for you.
And again why should we as cyclists have to be treated as second class citizens so as not to be thought bad of?
This is also occurred at 2230hrs or there abouts.
On another road that I frequent some days in order to trip the sensor I have to position myself either on the right or left side of the induction loop sensor. If I position myself in the center nothing happens. And at this intersection I've had motorists again stop a cars length or better behind me (at least well clear of the induction loop sensor) and I've had to wave them forward. Usually after both waving to them to move forward, pointing to the ground and telling them that there is an induction loop sensor they finally get the hint and move forward.
But I guess in your book because I am not attempting to make life easier on the motorist(s) that might come up behind me that I am again being a "jackass," huh?
And please as I asked before in this post explain why it is that a motorists time, destination or purpose on the road is more important that that of the cyclists? Shouldn't all of our time and destination be of equal importance regardless of the mode of transportation one chooses to use? Why is it that cyclists have to be the ones to make the sacrifice in the name of harmony? Why is it such an imposition to the motorist to be the one to make sacrifice?
Why is it that when a cyclist behaves exactly as a motorist in a given situation they're a jackass, or are being rude, or inconsiderate? Isn't that placing greater importance on the motorist, and lesser importance on the cyclist?
And again why can't people leave early enough so that if they encounter some sort of delay (I have NEVER said leave early and slow down) they can still make it to their destination on time? You do realize don't that if a person has say a doctor's appointment at say 1330hrs and it takes them a half-hour (under ideal circumstances) to get to their doctor's office from their home. That that is the cause of their being late as well as THAT is what leads to the road rage. And if they leave their home at 1305hrs, knowing that their appointment is at 1330hrs. How is it "my fault" if they encounter me on the road (a road with a substandard width lane) and I'm taking the lane for my safety, for their being late? How does that make me a "jackass?" IF they had left early enough they might never have encountered me (or another cyclist) on the road and they wouldn't have been delayed.
Even if they don't encounter me (or another cyclist) they could have a flat tire, they might find that the road that they're driving down has a tree down blocking their path. Whereas if they'd left earlier, guess what they would have been able to make a detour and still get to their appointment ON TIME.
Isn't that reasonable? Apparently not in your worldview. As you seem to be a very submissive person. Who seems to think that others rights come first.
Last edited by Digital_Cowboy; 07-06-11 at 02:14 AM.
#115
Surf Bum
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pacifica, CA
Posts: 2,184
Bikes: Lapierre Pulsium 500 FdJ, Ritchey breakaway cyclocross, vintage trek mtb.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
3 Posts
You win. Impressive strategy. No one can keep up with that volume of words.
__________________
Thirst is stronger than the rules. - Stars and Watercarriers, 1974
Thirst is stronger than the rules. - Stars and Watercarriers, 1974
#116
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
A couple of the questions that I asked you in the post that you deemed to be "too long" is why is a motorists time and destination of more importance than that of a cyclist? Why is it that when a cyclist is behaving in the exact same manner as a motorist that the cyclist is being "rude and/or inconsiderate" and the motorist isn't? Why can't people regardless of the mode of transportation leave early enough that if they encounter delay that they're still able to make it to their appointment on time? Why is it that people how have an appointment at say 1330hrs and it takes 30mins to get there. Leave at 1305hrs and than get upset when someone on the road causes them to be "delayed" in getting there?
You do know that that is the recipe for road rage, right?
#117
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Diego, CA USA
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
IYour positioning is what made cars impatient with you. They wouldn't have been impatient waiting behind, say, a big truck at that light because they would look at the situation and realize that there isn't anything the truck could do to make the situation any better. It's the same reason people don't get mad at delivery vehicles, someone parallel parking, etc. But they look at you and go, "if that jackass would just move over a little...i could get on my way," and get impatient and since you didn't give them room to go by you on the right, they went by on the left. In other words, there was something you could do to improve the situation but you chose not to. That frustrates people. Don't be like that.
A lot of motorists think that bicyclists can move out of the way when in fact they cannot do so safely.
#118
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,788
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Pacificaslim, I read bits and pieces of your exchange with Digital Cowboy (yeah, there was a long post there, and my time online is limited); but the impression I get is that you feel no loss at abrogating your own rights to the road as a courtesy -- AND, that you have some very WIDE lanes to work with! We don't all have that... I SURE DON'T.
He wasn't being a jackass. There is NO OBLIGATION to another road user beyond using the road responsibly. That does NOT include moving out of someone else's way at a red light.
The general rule of "moving to the right" (sometimes codified as FRAP) does NOT mean "get out of the car's way"; it does NOT require "hugging the fog line", or rolling with one pedal above the curb, in the storm gutter, or any similar act. Even FRAP allows the cyclist to choose what is safe to do FOR HIM/HERSELF. If an impatient driver doesn't like it, doesn't want to share the road AS REQUIRED BY LAW IN ALL 50, then the driver can resort to:
a.) passive-aggressive swearing/venting;
b.) rude behavior (honking, yelling out the window);
c.) dangerous and illegal behavior (buzzing, sideswiping, etc.).
Moving to the left edge of a straight/right turn lane SOUNDS like a courteous thing to do, and in some cases can be; but no one is a jackass for not doing so when their own safety and travel is interfered with by doing it. AND, MOST IMPORTANT, COURTESY IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT! NO ONE IS **OWED** THAT TYPE OF COURTESY!
Before you judge, ride a mile in another's paceline.............
He wasn't being a jackass. There is NO OBLIGATION to another road user beyond using the road responsibly. That does NOT include moving out of someone else's way at a red light.
The general rule of "moving to the right" (sometimes codified as FRAP) does NOT mean "get out of the car's way"; it does NOT require "hugging the fog line", or rolling with one pedal above the curb, in the storm gutter, or any similar act. Even FRAP allows the cyclist to choose what is safe to do FOR HIM/HERSELF. If an impatient driver doesn't like it, doesn't want to share the road AS REQUIRED BY LAW IN ALL 50, then the driver can resort to:
a.) passive-aggressive swearing/venting;
b.) rude behavior (honking, yelling out the window);
c.) dangerous and illegal behavior (buzzing, sideswiping, etc.).
Moving to the left edge of a straight/right turn lane SOUNDS like a courteous thing to do, and in some cases can be; but no one is a jackass for not doing so when their own safety and travel is interfered with by doing it. AND, MOST IMPORTANT, COURTESY IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT! NO ONE IS **OWED** THAT TYPE OF COURTESY!
Before you judge, ride a mile in another's paceline.............
#119
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
A cyclist is going 20 mph down the lane in a 40 mph zone -- he's a jerk.
A motorist is going 20 mph down the lane in a 40 mph zone -- he's a jerk.
Most drivers will cut the motorist some slack (maybe he's not really a jerk, maybe I will let him live) if it's a large farm implement that probably can't go faster, but then again ... most motorists will also cut the cyclist the same slack for the same reason.
#120
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Agreed, and sadly it's not just motorists that seem to think that cyclists can safely move out of the way.
#121
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Pacificaslim, I read bits and pieces of your exchange with Digital Cowboy (yeah, there was a long post there, and my time online is limited); but the impression I get is that you feel no loss at abrogating your own rights to the road as a courtesy -- AND, that you have some very WIDE lanes to work with! We don't all have that... I SURE DON'T.
He wasn't being a jackass. There is NO OBLIGATION to another road user beyond using the road responsibly. That does NOT include moving out of someone else's way at a red light.
The general rule of "moving to the right" (sometimes codified as FRAP) does NOT mean "get out of the car's way"; it does NOT require "hugging the fog line", or rolling with one pedal above the curb, in the storm gutter, or any similar act. Even FRAP allows the cyclist to choose what is safe to do FOR HIM/HERSELF. If an impatient driver doesn't like it, doesn't want to share the road AS REQUIRED BY LAW IN ALL 50, then the driver can resort to:
a.) passive-aggressive swearing/venting;
b.) rude behavior (honking, yelling out the window);
c.) dangerous and illegal behavior (buzzing, sideswiping, etc.).
Moving to the left edge of a straight/right turn lane SOUNDS like a courteous thing to do, and in some cases can be; but no one is a jackass for not doing so when their own safety and travel is interfered with by doing it. AND, MOST IMPORTANT, COURTESY IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT! NO ONE IS **OWED** THAT TYPE OF COURTESY!
Before you judge, ride a mile in another's paceline.............
He wasn't being a jackass. There is NO OBLIGATION to another road user beyond using the road responsibly. That does NOT include moving out of someone else's way at a red light.
The general rule of "moving to the right" (sometimes codified as FRAP) does NOT mean "get out of the car's way"; it does NOT require "hugging the fog line", or rolling with one pedal above the curb, in the storm gutter, or any similar act. Even FRAP allows the cyclist to choose what is safe to do FOR HIM/HERSELF. If an impatient driver doesn't like it, doesn't want to share the road AS REQUIRED BY LAW IN ALL 50, then the driver can resort to:
a.) passive-aggressive swearing/venting;
b.) rude behavior (honking, yelling out the window);
c.) dangerous and illegal behavior (buzzing, sideswiping, etc.).
Moving to the left edge of a straight/right turn lane SOUNDS like a courteous thing to do, and in some cases can be; but no one is a jackass for not doing so when their own safety and travel is interfered with by doing it. AND, MOST IMPORTANT, COURTESY IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT! NO ONE IS **OWED** THAT TYPE OF COURTESY!
Before you judge, ride a mile in another's paceline.............
Thank you, that was well said.
#122
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
But the motorist is, and other motorists will believe so. Or the cyclist isn't -- it all depends on who you ask.
A cyclist is going 20 mph down the lane in a 40 mph zone -- he's a jerk.
A motorist is going 20 mph down the lane in a 40 mph zone -- he's a jerk.
Most drivers will cut the motorist some slack (maybe he's not really a jerk, maybe I will let him live) if it's a large farm implement that probably can't go faster, but then again ... most motorists will also cut the cyclist the same slack for the same reason.
A cyclist is going 20 mph down the lane in a 40 mph zone -- he's a jerk.
A motorist is going 20 mph down the lane in a 40 mph zone -- he's a jerk.
Most drivers will cut the motorist some slack (maybe he's not really a jerk, maybe I will let him live) if it's a large farm implement that probably can't go faster, but then again ... most motorists will also cut the cyclist the same slack for the same reason.
The irony in that situation is that it isn't the other motorists that are causing the delay, but the LEO's or event security that is directing traffic and determining how much traffic is allowed to pass through a particular "pinch point" at a particular time.
Sadly, there are apparently those who think/feel that for whatever reason that the cyclist is the one with the greater responsibility not to behave in a rude or inconsiderate manner as well as protecting their safety or exercising their rights that they're a "jackass." That's sad.
#123
Bicikli Huszár
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,116
Bikes: '95 Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
True, BUT the key there is when it is SAFE to do so. And it is or should be up to the CYCLIST who get's to determine when/if it is safe for them to move aside to allow the cars that are stacking up behind them to pass. NOT the motorists who have a totally different view of the road in front of them. Cause as we know the road looks very different depending if one is in an 18-wheeler, pickup truck, car, motorcycle, or bicycle. And a section of road that looks "totally safe" from the cab of an 18-wheeler, pickup truck, or car can be very unsafe for a motorcycle or bicycle.
The truth is, the cyclist is practically the one who decides what riding position is safest for himself, because he is engaging in the activity; choosing his riding position. But that can always be challenged by authority, and to some degree that should exist. If a cyclist chooses to ride in the left tire track of a 30' lane because he feels unsafe, an officer should be able to challenge that opinion with his own (that he would be safe riding FRAP). The courtroom is where you have to actually defend your choice.
Regardless, my point really was that any vehicle can impede traffic and be cited for hindering flow, including bicycles. Thankfully, we have special laws and rulings that support our right to travel, but that doesn't mean we have no duty to facilitate roadway sharing when needed.
I agree, that it doesn't have to be a "war" between us and drivers. But at times it seems as if they're the one's who want a "war." By buzzing us, hurling insults, objects, etc. at us, as well as trying to force us off of the road.
SB,
That goes both ways you know. Just because a motorist can buzz us, force us off of the road, etc. doesn't mean that they should. If the road is unsafe to pass, AND there ISN'T a safe place for us to pull over they need to be patient and wait either for a safe opening to pass us. Or a safe area for us to pull over and allow them to pass. IS that asking too much? Apparently for some on both sides of the road it is.
That goes both ways you know. Just because a motorist can buzz us, force us off of the road, etc. doesn't mean that they should. If the road is unsafe to pass, AND there ISN'T a safe place for us to pull over they need to be patient and wait either for a safe opening to pass us. Or a safe area for us to pull over and allow them to pass. IS that asking too much? Apparently for some on both sides of the road it is.
Last edited by sudo bike; 07-07-11 at 01:17 AM.
#124
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I don't entirely agree that any one road user's opinion should be the end all and be all of what is safe. By that token, one could argue that it should be up to the motorist to decide what constitutes a safe pass, since they have a better view and are engaging in the passing. As we know, what they deem safe isn't always so.
The truth is, the cyclist is practically the one who decides what riding position is safest for himself, because he is engaging in the activity; choosing his riding position. But that can always be challenged by authority, and to some degree that should exist. If a cyclist chooses to ride in the left tire track of a 30' lane because he feels unsafe, an officer should be able to challenge that opinion with his own (that he would be safe riding FRAP). The courtroom is where you have to actually defend your choice.
Regardless, my point really was that any vehicle can impede traffic and be cited for hindering flow, including bicycles. Thankfully, we have special laws and rulings that support our right to travel, but that doesn't mean we have no duty to facilitate roadway sharing when needed.
My experience is that most people don't especially care, and generally don't even think about cyclists when they're not on the road. But there will always be a large share of jerks... that's no excuse for shirking our duty to share the road. Respect is a two-way street, as it were.
But if it's going to place my life or safety at risk than I'm sorry but by ass/safety takes priority over being respectful.
Yes they should be pateient, and no, they shouldn't be doing those things and I'm absolutely not defending that (and in my experience, they generally don't anyway, especially when a little courtesy is extended... I even get a wave now and again). I'm merely pointing out that as equal users of the road, we have as much duty to share it as anyone, as it seems to be the implication that we have a right to the roads with no legal duty to facilitate other traffic flow.
#125
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
This is a steep, twisting two lane mountain road. I've ridden it and driven it. A lone cyclist is easy to pass in a car, if the cyclist is over to the right. (Yes, I know that according to the A&S arithmeticians a cyclist's life is in danger if he's given less than 100 yards of passing space, but in reality, a few feet is fine and accepted by cyclists on mountain roads in SoCal.) A pair of cyclists, though, cannot be passed safely there unless the driver moves into the oncoming lane. There is rarely a safe opportunity for this, as there are few straight sections of any length. So cyclists "taking the lane" or riding two abreast are simply blocking traffic, regardless of what fancy word one might have for it.
Now, other road users block traffic up there too. Motorhomes, older drivers, even some of the Harley guys tend to go well below the posted limit, and other road users get stacked up behind them. This is annoying, especially when they refuse to use the turnouts. But the difference is that even a slow driver is going to be doing 30 or 40 MPH. The average cyclist will be doing something like 5 MPH. I know the hard-core A&Sers will refuse to see the difference, but in the real world, that kind of behavior is just not acceptable on our SHARED roads.
Now, other road users block traffic up there too. Motorhomes, older drivers, even some of the Harley guys tend to go well below the posted limit, and other road users get stacked up behind them. This is annoying, especially when they refuse to use the turnouts. But the difference is that even a slow driver is going to be doing 30 or 40 MPH. The average cyclist will be doing something like 5 MPH. I know the hard-core A&Sers will refuse to see the difference, but in the real world, that kind of behavior is just not acceptable on our SHARED roads.