thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote: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.
thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote: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.
thegreekdog wrote: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.
thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote: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.
thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote: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.
thegreekdog wrote: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.