Why do you hate bicyclists?

[nietzsche]

I block motorcycles at stop signs so they can't pass me and get to the front at stop lights.

You let them think they will easily pass and then right when they've committed to that lane between you and the other car, you get close to the other car so they can't pass. The trick is doing this when the car behind them is close enough so they can't go back and try to use another lane.

[BigBallinStalin]

How is running a stop sign dangerous where there's no cars around?

If you construe that as dangerous, then it's not worth engaging you on the other points.

Well I've said the same thing as the driver of a car, so I feel for you.

How is running a stop sign dangerous when there's nobody else around? It's the cars you don't see. It's the bikes you don't see. It's the pedestrian you don't see. It's the kid that goes darting into the street you don't see. It's the habit. Once you admit it's bad in a car, you understand why it's even worse on a bike.

Oh egad! Thank God I use my eyeballs to see. And if I can't see around corners, I can slow down as a I see farther down the corner, and then decide to go or not.

Granted, some people can't use their brain as quickly, but hey, I don't see any good reason why I should be brought down to the levels of the Lesser Competent by forcing me to adhere laws which needlessly apply to me.

A bike weighs.... 25 pounds on average? A car weighs... one to two tons? And somehow, cautiously rolling through stop signs is more dangerous with a bike than with a two-ton car? Yeahh...

[bedub1]

How is running a stop sign dangerous where there's no cars around?

If you construe that as dangerous, then it's not worth engaging you on the other points.

Well I've said the same thing as the driver of a car, so I feel for you.

How is running a stop sign dangerous when there's nobody else around? It's the cars you don't see. It's the bikes you don't see. It's the pedestrian you don't see. It's the kid that goes darting into the street you don't see. It's the habit. Once you admit it's bad in a car, you understand why it's even worse on a bike.

Oh egad! Thank God I use my eyeballs to see. And if I can't see around corners, I can slow down as a I see farther down the corner, and then decide to go or not.

Granted, some people can't use their brain as quickly, but hey, I don't see any good reason why I should be brought down to the levels of the Lesser Competent by forcing me to adhere laws which needlessly apply to me.

A bike weighs.... 25 pounds on average? A car weighs... one to two tons? And somehow, cautiously rolling through stop signs is more dangerous with a bike than with a two-ton car? Yeahh...

See my edit. And it's more dangerous to you the biker. If I in my two-ton car get t-boned by a semi it's one thing. If you get t-boned by a semi you are called a bug and he just wipes you off with his windshield wipers.

I also think that bikers think they are better than drivers. They are smug and arrogant.

[notyou2]

Every possible option could just as easily be said about cars and some drivers.

[BigBallinStalin]

That's a good point, bedub, but the slippery slope argument of being t-boned doesn't apply to me because I know how to ride a bike. Furthermore, I know how to create and modify my own informal rules regarding stop signs, red lights, etc. in order to arrive to some optimal outcome.

That ability explains why I don't view most of the list of complaints as applicable or worthy. Of course, some bicyclists are idiots, and if they're breaking a law and get hit, ideally the court should throw out their claim to any damages, but that's another topic.

[bedub1]

That's a good point, bedub, but the slippery slope argument of being t-boned doesn't apply to me because I know how to ride a bike. Furthermore, I know how to create and modify my own informal rules regarding stop signs, red lights, etc. in order to arrive to some optimal outcome.

That ability explains why I don't view most of the list of complaints as applicable or worthy. Of course, some bicyclists are idiots, and if they're breaking a law and get hit, ideally the court should throw out their claim to any damages, but that's another topic.

I'm sorry. I didn't mean you personally. I meant if a bike rider get's hit.

[maxfaraday]

That's a good point, bedub, but the slippery slope argument of being t-boned doesn't apply to me because I know how to ride a bike. Furthermore, I know how to create and modify my own informal rules regarding stop signs, red lights, etc. in order to arrive to some optimal outcome.

That ability explains why I don't view most of the list of complaints as applicable or worthy. Of course, some bicyclists are idiots, and if they're breaking a law and get hit, ideally the court should throw out their claim to any damages, but that's another topic.

I'm sorry. I didn't mean you personally. I meant if a bike rider get's hit.

I'm a bike rider.
I got hit (like I said, 2 broken ribs).
The car driver fled, because he had broken the law.
I'm a grown-up, so I didn't die, but had it be be a child...
And your bitching about bicyclicsts breaking the law?
I mean, when a bicyclist breaks the law, some car driver will have a reason to blame bicyclists.
When car drivers break the law, bicyclists get killed.

[maxfaraday]

And fyi, I'm not the one obstructing the traffic you care drivers are.

[thegreekdog]

They obstruct vehicle traffic
By riding on the road where we're suppose to? For one who complains about people not following laws, in this instance, you conveniently withhold the complaint for following the law. Derp derp derp!

You need to drive on the side of the road. Not in a car lane. Not in the middle of the road. Until riders ride on the side of the road rather than the middle, I will continue to complain.

They run stop signs
If there's no one coming, then it's inefficient to stop for no one, and then go. If there's someone coming, but you're way closer to the stop sign then he is, then it makes sense to go. Otherwise, you'd have to stop, then he stops, then you go. That would be pointless.

The first part "[i]f there's no one coming" seems to be important. How does a cyclist determine if no one is coming? By looking both ways, right? How does a cyclist look both ways when he/she zooms through the stop sign or stop light?

They weave in and out of traffic
Yeah, if the cars are going slow, I'll pass you up. Sorry if you're jealous.

Define slow. Is 25 mph slow? How about 15 mph?

They are oblivious to the world around them
Some are, most aren't; otherwise, they'd get hit and significantly hurt. If you're surrounded in a frame of steel, how much do you fear being hit--compared to a bicyclist?

I fear law suits and jail time.

Are there cyclists that are careful and obey the law? Yes. I may encouter one such person once a week. I encounter cyclists who are not careful and don't obey the law on a daily basis.

[keiths31]

Roads weren't designed to handle both cars/trucks and bikes. My city has put in bike lanes, but not by winding the roads, but squeezing them in. I am nervous as hell driving by a person on a bike as there is not much room. They lose control or swerve in front of me by accident...my van wins. I do agree though that many cyclists ignore many rules of the road with no repercussions. Motorists blows a red light, they get a ticket. Cyclists blows one, it is accepted. Cyclists argue they deserve their share of the road, and I agree that they do, but they also need to follow the rules of the road.

[BigBallinStalin]

They obstruct vehicle traffic
By riding on the road where we're suppose to? For one who complains about people not following laws, in this instance, you conveniently withhold the complaint for following the law. Derp derp derp!

You need to drive on the side of the road. Not in a car lane. Not in the middle of the road. Until riders ride on the side of the road rather than the middle, I will continue to complain.

And if there's no side of the road? Then what?

Riding on sidewalks is dangerous for pedestrians and dangerous for bicycles when using 'pedestrian' walkways at intersections.


And I'll drive in the middle of a lane in areas where people park their cars and frequently open their doors without looking. You seem to imply that I should sacrifice my health so that you can arrive to work about 1 minute earlier. That perspective is cruel, selfish, and dumb. Hopefully, that's not your perspective, but demanding that bicyclists ride in area X ignores the risks which bicyclists may incur in area X. Other risks include running over debris (which is common in the shoulder on roads), and there's problems of people stepping to quickly into the street from the sidewalk without looking, etc.

They run stop signs
If there's no one coming, then it's inefficient to stop for no one, and then go. If there's someone coming, but you're way closer to the stop sign then he is, then it makes sense to go. Otherwise, you'd have to stop, then he stops, then you go. That would be pointless.

The first part "[i]f there's no one coming" seems to be important. How does a cyclist determine if no one is coming? By looking both ways, right? How does a cyclist look both ways when he/she zooms through the stop sign or stop light?

If you ever rode a bike, you'd realize that going 10-15mph while being 2 feet from the front of your vehicle makes a huge difference in being able to look around corners and respond accordingly. Therefore, your questions are leading yourself to an imagined scenario. Of course, some bicyclists zoom through with little regard to the "who got there first" order, but in that case, it would be wrong of the bicyclist.

In my informal rules, timing of arrival to stop signs and stop times matter. Of course, that isn't worth expanding on ITT, but it all operates as I view each situation. Granted, there are some bicyclists who roll through stop signs when cars arrived first at the sign. That would be wrong. In circumstances where the bicyclist would arrive first or would have to stop first, then it's correct for him or her to roll through the stop sign.

They weave in and out of traffic
Yeah, if the cars are going slow, I'll pass you up. Sorry if you're jealous.

Define slow. Is 25 mph slow? How about 15 mph?

I dunno, TGD. On the flat streets, I can get up to 25mph (maybe 30?), but that's pushing it for me. Usually in heavily congested areas, cars are going about 10-15, which is a speed I can easily push through and weave in and out of traffic. Somehow that's wrong? No, it isn't. I'm not posing a threat to anyone, and I know how to change lanes while incurring minimal risks to my own life.

They are oblivious to the world around them
Some are, most aren't; otherwise, they'd get hit and significantly hurt. If you're surrounded in a frame of steel, how much do you fear being hit--compared to a bicyclist?

I fear hitting

Good for you, but don't you think bedub's characterization of all bicyclists is pretty absurd?

I've noticed that when people are surrounded in a frame of steel, they tend to be more likely to be oblivious, e.g. changing CDs or radio stations, texting, talking on phone, fiddling with their seats/electronics, looking at the GPS, singing, etc.



I guess you had no problem with the other ones?

[BigBallinStalin]

Roads weren't designed to handle both cars/trucks and bikes. My city has put in bike lanes, but not by winding the roads, but squeezing them in. I am nervous as hell driving by a person on a bike as there is not much room. They lose control or swerve in front of me by accident...my van wins. I do agree though that many cyclists ignore many rules of the road with no repercussions. Motorists blows a red light, they get a ticket. Cyclists blows one, it is accepted. Cyclists argue they deserve their share of the road, and I agree that they do, but they also need to follow the rules of the road.

When the rules impose wasteful and unnecessary restrictions on me and provide no benefit to others, then I'll disregard them and create my own rules.

[thegreekdog]

And if there's no side of the road? Then what?

Riding on sidewalks is dangerous for pedestrians and dangerous for bicycles when using 'pedestrian' walkways at intersections.


And I'll drive in the middle of a lane in areas where people park their cars and frequently open their doors without looking. You seem to imply that I should sacrifice my health so that you can arrive to work about 1 minute earlier. That perspective is cruel, selfish, and dumb. Hopefully, that's not your perspective, but demanding that bicyclists ride in area X ignores the risks which bicyclists may incur in area X. Other risks include running over debris (which is common in the shoulder on roads), and there's problems of people stepping to quickly into the street from the sidewalk without looking, etc.

I did not indicate there was no side of the road. There most certainly are sides of the road, at least where I drive in Philadelphia. I can't say the same for whever you ride your unmotorized death vehicle. I'm certainly not suggesting you sacrifice your health so that I can arrive to work (or home) approximately 5 minutes earlier. I didn't force you to ride a bicycle. I also didn't force you to ride your bike in the middle of a car lane when there are perfectly good sides of the road. Perhaps if you weren't in such a hurry to get to the next emo concert or home from your art class, you would pull the cuffs of your skinny jeans up and ride on the side of the road.

If you ever rode a bike, you'd realize that going 10-15mph while being 2 feet from the front of your vehicle makes a huge difference in being able to look around corners and respond accordingly. Therefore, your questions are leading yourself to an imagined scenario. Of course, some bicyclists zoom through with little regard to the "who got there first" order, but in that case, it would be wrong of the bicyclist.

In my informal rules, timing of arrival to stop signs and stop times matter. Of course, that isn't worth expanding on ITT, but it all operates as I view each situation. Granted, there are some bicyclists who roll through stop signs when cars arrived first at the sign. That would be wrong. In circumstances where the bicyclist would arrive first or would have to stop first, then it's correct for him or her to roll through the stop sign.

Why would I have an issue with a cyclist rolling through a stop sign or stop light when it's safe or when there is no one there first? That would be weird. I envision (really, I saw one of these today) the following two scenarios:

Scenario One: Traffic light on a busy intersection in a major metropolitan area. The light for the northbound lane turns green. The light for the westbound lane is red. The vehicle traffic begins to drive northbound, obeying all traffic laws. A bike travelling westbound rides through the red light it has and causes all cars travelling northbound to stop suddenly, nearly causing an accident. It happens regularly and it happened today.

Scenario Two: Stop sign on a not busy intersection in a major metropolitan area. A car arrives at the stop sign, stops, the driver looks both ways, and then proceeds into the intersection. A bike blows by, nearly causing the driver to crash into it.

I dunno, TGD. On the flat streets, I can get up to 25mph (maybe 30?), but that's pushing it for me. Usually in heavily congested areas, cars are going about 10-15, which is a speed I can easily push through and weave in and out of traffic. Somehow that's wrong? No, it isn't. I'm not posing a threat to anyone, and I know how to change lanes while incurring minimal risks to my own life.

You may not be posing a threat of physical harm to someone, but you're certianly threatening drivers. This happened last week - One way, two lane road in a major metrpolitan area. Traffic light turns green and traffic begins moving north. I go to switch lanes (from left lane to right lane) and a bike weaves around me to my right such that I almost hit the cyclist. What if I had hit the cyclist? No physical harm to me, right? But there may be harm to my property (car) and to my livelihood (law suit, court proceedings). Wait with the rest of us or assume the risk and lose in court.

Good for you, but don't you think bedub's characterization of all bicyclists is pretty absurd?

I've noticed that when people are surrounded in a frame of steel, they tend to be more likely to be oblivious, e.g. changing CDs or radio stations, texting, talking on phone, fiddling with their seats/electronics, looking at the GPS, singing, etc.

I have a major problem with drivers such as these as well. I'm one of those very pleasant individuals who honks the horn repeatedly when I find someone talking on their cell phone. But this thread is about cyclists, not drivers. Why don't you create a thread about the annoying habits of drivers?

I only have my personal experience to rely upon with respect to cyclists. I would like to say that most cyclists obey traffic laws and use the roads courteously. But in my experience, 9 out of 10 don't obey traffic laws and use the roads irresponsibly. I have witnessed two accidents with cyclists in seven years working in a major metropolitan area. I have witnessed numerous near accidents with cyclists in those seven years (possibly hundreds). In all cases, the cyclist was at fault for not obeying traffic laws and not using the road responsibly.

[Timminz]

I runned over 3 bicyclists this week. Fuckers acted like they was cars, but they didn't handle a bumper-nudge like one.

[Funkyterrance]

Am I allowed to post since I ride a bicycle frequently and there is no "non hater" option?
When I am driving I get irritated by cyclists who ride like they are driving a car in the road as they can't effectively take part in the regular flow of traffic and create a dangerous situation. For this reason when I ride my bike I get either in the breakdown lane or off the road when a car is passing me. I only ride on the sidewalk when it's empty and traffic makes riding in the road dangerous. As far as obeying stop signs, I agree that the worst that is going to happen is the cyclist is going to get him or herself killed. Riding your bike is a calculated risk but I like to reduce that risk as much as possible.
I actually had a high school friend who struck and killed a priest who was riding his moped in the city. My friend, while feeling rather guilty, was cleared of all charges since it was undeniably the priest's fault for not obeying traffic rules.

[BigBallinStalin]

And if there's no side of the road? Then what?

Riding on sidewalks is dangerous for pedestrians and dangerous for bicycles when using 'pedestrian' walkways at intersections.


And I'll drive in the middle of a lane in areas where people park their cars and frequently open their doors without looking. You seem to imply that I should sacrifice my health so that you can arrive to work about 1 minute earlier. That perspective is cruel, selfish, and dumb. Hopefully, that's not your perspective, but demanding that bicyclists ride in area X ignores the risks which bicyclists may incur in area X. Other risks include running over debris (which is common in the shoulder on roads), and there's problems of people stepping to quickly into the street from the sidewalk without looking, etc.

I did not indicate there was no side of the road. There most certainly are sides of the road, at least where I drive in Philadelphia. I can't say the same for whever you ride your unmotorized death vehicle. I'm certainly not suggesting you sacrifice your health so that I can arrive to work (or home) approximately 5 minutes earlier. I didn't force you to ride a bicycle. I also didn't force you to ride your bike in the middle of a car lane when there are perfectly good sides of the road. Perhaps if you weren't in such a hurry to get to the next emo concert or home from your art class, you would pull the cuffs of your skinny jeans up and ride on the side of the road.

And I likewise am unaware of the intricate problems you face with bicyclists in Philadelphia. Please note that I don't take kindly upon a large number of bicyclists because they drive like idiots, but so do many motorists, so there's that for you. Nevertheless, I won't risk injury or death in order to please some motorist by not riding in the middle of the road intermittently.

Sure, riding my bike is my choice, just as driving your car is your choice; however, we both have a right to most roads, so you can just... deal with it.jpg

My concern is that there's many motorists such as yourself who have no idea of the risks which bicyclists face. This lack of knowing the other fails to deter such motorists from demanding that bicyclists do stupid things. Call it an unintended consequence which you're hopefully aware of by now.

If you ever rode a bike, you'd realize that going 10-15mph while being 2 feet from the front of your vehicle makes a huge difference in being able to look around corners and respond accordingly. Therefore, your questions are leading yourself to an imagined scenario. Of course, some bicyclists zoom through with little regard to the "who got there first" order, but in that case, it would be wrong of the bicyclist.

In my informal rules, timing of arrival to stop signs and stop times matter. Of course, that isn't worth expanding on ITT, but it all operates as I view each situation. Granted, there are some bicyclists who roll through stop signs when cars arrived first at the sign. That would be wrong. In circumstances where the bicyclist would arrive first or would have to stop first, then it's correct for him or her to roll through the stop sign.

Why would I have an issue with a cyclist rolling through a stop sign or stop light when it's safe or when there is no one there first? That would be weird. I envision (really, I saw one of these today) the following two scenarios:

Scenario One: Traffic light on a busy intersection in a major metropolitan area. The light for the northbound lane turns green. The light for the westbound lane is red. The vehicle traffic begins to drive northbound, obeying all traffic laws. A bike travelling westbound rides through the red light it has and causes all cars travelling northbound to stop suddenly, nearly causing an accident. It happens regularly and it happened today.

Yeah that bicyclist is an asshole.

Scenario Two: Stop sign on a not busy intersection in a major metropolitan area. A car arrives at the stop sign, stops, the driver looks both ways, and then proceeds into the intersection. A bike blows by, nearly causing the driver to crash into it.

And that bicyclist is an asshole.

Obviously, we're in agreement here.

I dunno, TGD. On the flat streets, I can get up to 25mph (maybe 30?), but that's pushing it for me. Usually in heavily congested areas, cars are going about 10-15, which is a speed I can easily push through and weave in and out of traffic. Somehow that's wrong? No, it isn't. I'm not posing a threat to anyone, and I know how to change lanes while incurring minimal risks to my own life.

You may not be posing a threat of physical harm to someone, but you're certianly threatening drivers. This happened last week - One way, two lane road in a major metrpolitan area. Traffic light turns green and traffic begins moving north. I go to switch lanes (from left lane to right lane) and a bike weaves around me to my right such that I almost hit the cyclist. What if I had hit the cyclist? No physical harm to me, right? But there may be harm to my property (car) and to my livelihood (law suit, court proceedings). Wait with the rest of us or assume the risk and lose in court.

So switching lanes without being perceptive enough is your right? Because that's what seems to be your case here.

While I'm moving through traffic, if the motorist pays attention to their side view mirrors, they should see me. At higher speeds, I hardly swerve around cars and come up right alongside them... maybe the bicyclist was switching behind you--starting from your left side and moving toward your right side--and came up right alongside you?

If that was the case, then that was an unnecessarily risky move for the bicyclist, and so I understand your concern here.

Good for you, but don't you think bedub's characterization of all bicyclists is pretty absurd?

I've noticed that when people are surrounded in a frame of steel, they tend to be more likely to be oblivious, e.g. changing CDs or radio stations, texting, talking on phone, fiddling with their seats/electronics, looking at the GPS, singing, etc.

I have a major problem with drivers such as these as well. I'm one of those very pleasant individuals who honks the horn repeatedly when I find someone talking on their cell phone. But this thread is about cyclists, not drivers. Why don't you create a thread about the annoying habits of drivers?

I only mention it in regard to bedub's silly comment. Comparing the risks of oblivion seemed useful.

I only have my personal experience to rely upon with respect to cyclists. I would like to say that most cyclists obey traffic laws and use the roads courteously. But in my experience, 9 out of 10 don't obey traffic laws and use the roads irresponsibly. I have witnessed two accidents with cyclists in seven years working in a major metropolitan area. I have witnessed numerous near accidents with cyclists in those seven years (possibly hundreds). In all cases, the cyclist was at fault for not obeying traffic laws and not using the road responsibly.

Haha, live and learn, I guess. If some bicyclist is driving like an idiot and gets nailed, then I feel bad for the driver for being put through that situation. For the bicyclist, I don't feel much empathy. They get punished for making poor decisions.

[Funkyterrance]

I think partly what may be going on here is that those people who hate bicyclists are in fact envious of the cyclists. Here they are riding to their dead end jobs in their stinky cars listening to political talk shows(they're already annoyed). The cyclists, on the other hand, are enjoying the fresh air with the wind in their hair, happy as clams in the sand.

[fadedpsychosis]

you think bicycles are bad? try mopeds in F'ing naples! try all of the above, but add in the law that if you hit them and they're wearing a helmet you're at fault regardless of how they're driving... oh, and the locals learn to drive on their mopeds... so they drive their cars the EXACT SAME WAY. stop lights/signs and street lines are an illusion here my friend

That sounds terrible.

driving in naples is absolutely terrifying for me to be honest... it's why I've started carpooling as much as possible. I don't mind paying for someone else's gas if I'm not the one driving

[deathcomesrippin]

I dont ever post in these forums, but I feel strongly about bikers.

I mainly hate bikers because biking looks stupid. No one looks good biking except hot chicks who already look good. It's goofy, people wear goofy clothes, and the gear looks goofy too. That's all I have to say on the matter. I don't drive and I don't bike, so I have no opinion on that part of it. Bikers just look stupid.

[maxfaraday]

I dont ever post in these forums, but I feel strongly about bikers.

I mainly hate bikers because biking looks stupid. No one looks good biking except hot chicks who already look good. It's goofy, people wear goofy clothes, and the gear looks goofy too. That's all I have to say on the matter. I don't drive and I don't bike, so I have no opinion on that part of it. Bikers just look stupid.

Foed.

[deathcomesrippin]

I dont ever post in these forums, but I feel strongly about bikers.

I mainly hate bikers because biking looks stupid. No one looks good biking except hot chicks who already look good. It's goofy, people wear goofy clothes, and the gear looks goofy too. That's all I have to say on the matter. I don't drive and I don't bike, so I have no opinion on that part of it. Bikers just look stupid.

Foed.

Damn shame.

[Symmetry]

I dont ever post in these forums, but I feel strongly about bikers.

I mainly hate bikers because biking looks stupid. No one looks good biking except hot chicks who already look good. It's goofy, people wear goofy clothes, and the gear looks goofy too. That's all I have to say on the matter. I don't drive and I don't bike, so I have no opinion on that part of it. Bikers just look stupid.

Because they're too awesome?

Shamelessly reposted.

[deathcomesrippin]

I dont ever post in these forums, but I feel strongly about bikers.

I mainly hate bikers because biking looks stupid. No one looks good biking except hot chicks who already look good. It's goofy, people wear goofy clothes, and the gear looks goofy too. That's all I have to say on the matter. I don't drive and I don't bike, so I have no opinion on that part of it. Bikers just look stupid.

Because they're too awesome?

Shamelessly reposted.

Those guys don't look so bad I suppose. But, on the whole, most bikers you see cruising the streets are not doing that.

[Symmetry]

I dont ever post in these forums, but I feel strongly about bikers.

I mainly hate bikers because biking looks stupid. No one looks good biking except hot chicks who already look good. It's goofy, people wear goofy clothes, and the gear looks goofy too. That's all I have to say on the matter. I don't drive and I don't bike, so I have no opinion on that part of it. Bikers just look stupid.

Because they're too awesome?

Shamelessly reposted.

Those guys don't look so bad I suppose. But, on the whole, most bikers you see cruising the streets are not doing that.

I would hope not.

[Funkyterrance]

I dont ever post in these forums, but I feel strongly about bikers.

I mainly hate bikers because biking looks stupid. No one looks good biking except hot chicks who already look good. It's goofy, people wear goofy clothes, and the gear looks goofy too. That's all I have to say on the matter. I don't drive and I don't bike, so I have no opinion on that part of it. Bikers just look stupid.

This is sooo not true..
I bike either in my street clothes or in the nude. I don't believe in all that fancy gear, It cramps my style (wheelies, standing on my seat no hands, riding backwards, etc.).