No, he was weaving from the right side to the middle of the road, almost smacking into cars. I gave him a friendly short honk, just to let him know I was there. Next thing I know....the finger.Moraff said:
Maybe I shouldve Bryanted his ass
Another cyclist dies
- Thread starter Don
- Start date
Maybe I shouldve Bryanted his ass
staggerspool said:
I've walked with cyclist friends who do that, and they usually force themselves into the predicament that has them banging the car. Ie they treat it as a showdown and lose, so they bang the car instead. Even if I have the right of way as a pedestrian, that doesn't mean I shouldn't be alert for drivers who don't see me, make a mistake, or don't care. When it happens, I don't know which case it is, so I assume they made a mistake and see what we can do to get past it.
Property damage isn't cool, by the way.
There is no regulation or law stipulating that a cyclist is not to ride close to parked cars. There is a law stipulating that a driver opening a car door must check to see that it is safe to do so. In the case of a cyclist colliding with an open door, the guy opening the door is going to get the fine, not the cyclist. So you can assign all the guilt you want to the cyclist, but the law doesn't agree with you.Moraff said:
jerk chicken said:
No they don't. They ticket cars for various infracitons, but I have never seen the police pull over a car for turning in front of a cyclist, passing a cyclist at an unsafe distance, opening a car door without checking, etc.
Maybe someone thought that would balance the stoplights that need the metal of a whole car to make the sensor in the road change them to green. If you're a cyclist you could wait forever.jerk chicken said:
S'pose we treat all the vehicles equally and make the drivers leave their cars and walk over to push the button. How many thousand of those car-only road sensors have cyclists paid for in their property taxes?
Yeah, I know, after a decade or more of inaction the city's begun to install some sensors for bikes. Car-favouritism's still just as bad as ever.
Angelo Persichilli column in The Star:
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/691298
Then we have the perceptions.
There is a mindset that the person in the car is automatically the bad guy for the simple reason that he is driving the car. The car is an expression of consumerism, this thinking has it, and does nothing but cause traffic. The car pollutes and the car is big. On the other hand, if you ride a bicycle it means that you cannot afford a car, so you must be poor and vulnerable, or you are an environmentalist or you just believe that it's the fastest way to move around. Furthermore, the car is big and the bicycle is small. Given this juxtaposition, the David and Goliath syndrome immediately kicks in.
Because of this incorrect perception, some cyclists have developed the conviction that they own the roads. They pass you on the right, the left and go through red lights. They cross the streets with cars or follow pedestrians. They slow down the traffic because it's hard to pass them on a narrow street and if you dare to swerve to avoid a pothole or a cat, they scream at you and/or violently bang on your car. I've heard of people who have had serious damage to their hoods and been verbally threatened.
Because they believe themselves to be morally right, some cyclists think they are above the law, seeing stop signs and stoplights as little more than ornamental.
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/691298
Then we have the perceptions.
There is a mindset that the person in the car is automatically the bad guy for the simple reason that he is driving the car. The car is an expression of consumerism, this thinking has it, and does nothing but cause traffic. The car pollutes and the car is big. On the other hand, if you ride a bicycle it means that you cannot afford a car, so you must be poor and vulnerable, or you are an environmentalist or you just believe that it's the fastest way to move around. Furthermore, the car is big and the bicycle is small. Given this juxtaposition, the David and Goliath syndrome immediately kicks in.
Because of this incorrect perception, some cyclists have developed the conviction that they own the roads. They pass you on the right, the left and go through red lights. They cross the streets with cars or follow pedestrians. They slow down the traffic because it's hard to pass them on a narrow street and if you dare to swerve to avoid a pothole or a cat, they scream at you and/or violently bang on your car. I've heard of people who have had serious damage to their hoods and been verbally threatened.
Because they believe themselves to be morally right, some cyclists think they are above the law, seeing stop signs and stoplights as little more than ornamental.
AP starts off okay, then goes into the metaphorical ditch: in effect, cyclists are in the wrong, first because some cyclists don't follow the law, then because for the driver of a car to obey the law is inconvenient. An unsafe lane change, or unsafe overtaking, is still illegal.Damondean said:
Cycleguy007
Banned
Damondean said:
And then there are those of us that have both a car AND a bike. I need a vehicle such as my truck for work, taxi the kids around, and to tow my camper, and I use my bike for fitness and pleasure.
When I am in my truck I obey most of the rules of the road (with the exception of speed limits like every one else INCLUDING the police), and I fully accept any penalties that may arise as a result of that... but when I am riding my bike on city streets I ride it as a vehicle and obey almost all the rules of the road. (With exception of stop signs on deserted roads, in which case I treat them as yield signs... if there is traffic around, I stop... it is THAT simple).
As I said in the other thread... MY SAFETY IS MY RESPONSIBILITY. When I am on a bike I automatically become a target simply because I cannot "argue" with a car and since I don't ride on the sidewalk it is extremely unlikely that I will ever injure anyone while riding.
But when I am in my truck, I am ALSO responsible for anything that may cross my path, so I am VERY AWARE of everything around me. In almost 30 years of driving I have never brought injury upon another person using this method. Yes, I have been in a few fender benders... but I have never brought harm to another person using this method.
Branding everyone who shares a characteristic because of the bad acts—or a personal opinion of the acts—of a few is the same stupid thought [sic] process as racism.
In this instance cyclists an drivers as a whole are each being slagged because some behave badly. All that does is poison the atmosphere. To fined answers and better ways of behaving requires that we stop with the preconceptions and stereotypes and look at the principles of good, safe road conductthat we all want.
In this instance cyclists an drivers as a whole are each being slagged because some behave badly. All that does is poison the atmosphere. To fined answers and better ways of behaving requires that we stop with the preconceptions and stereotypes and look at the principles of good, safe road conductthat we all want.
Questor said:
I don't think it is a case of common sense at all. Not when there is a couple of tons of moving steel on your left side. That space to the right beside the parked cars begins to look very tempting. Cyclists are not immune from making decisions that are not good for their long term health any more than other segments of the population. People die every day on our roads. Some are cyclists, some are pedestrians, but by far the most are drivers.Moraff said:
dcbogey said:
OK, here's your link:<http://www.research.utoronto.ca/behind_the_headlines/smart-cycling/>
From the article:
While there is a public perception that cyclists are usually the cause of accidents between cars and bikes, an analysis of Toronto police collision reports shows otherwise: The most common type of crash in this study involved a motorist entering an intersection and either failing to stop properly or proceeding before it was safe to do so. The second most common crash type involved a motorist overtaking unsafely. The third involved a motorist opening a door onto an oncoming cyclist. The study concluded that cyclists are the cause of less than 10 per cent of bike-car accidents in this study.
So then....
Turns out that a lot of perceptions noted here are now PROVEN WRONG.
Drivers are the big problem.
Somehow I doubt this will change a lot of minds, most here are closed.
I will start another thread to highlight this FACT, for those who want to discuss the reality of the situation.
Oh, missed this - the next sentence in the above quoted article, my caps:
THE AVAIABLE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS THAT COLLISIONS HAVE FAR MORE TO DO WITH AGRESSIVE DRIVING THAN AGGRESSIVE CYCLING.
THE AVAIABLE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS THAT COLLISIONS HAVE FAR MORE TO DO WITH AGRESSIVE DRIVING THAN AGGRESSIVE CYCLING.
benstt said:
I suggest that says something about your friends. It seems I am not like them.
And no, property damage ain't cool. But, if it is the only way I can make my point, letting the driver know that he is vulnerable too, after he threatened my life for his illegal convenience, it can happen. I see what we can do to get past it, but if I don't clearly hear that they understand that they have put my life at risk, they need to know that they are at risk too.
And why would you assume that I'm not alert? Clearly, from what I have written, I don't assume the law will protect me. So far, in 30 years, I've banged several cars that threatened me (none damaged), and survived lots of close calls because I pay attention and behave myself.
If a driver doesn't want to join me in a nice conversation to resolve the issue, and instead decides to pull the pre-rational ego bully attitude, it turns out that at least one cyclist is ready to get down there with them to make the point. If I find that my life is threatened by behavior that the perpetrator can't acknowedge, I speak a language even they can understand. So far, with me, no-one has needed to see the full demonstration of exactly how vulnerable they really are. And I'm a rational guy. You might just run into a cycle courier....
Needless to say, it is far preferable not to get anywhere near that situation. I point out again my favorite technique, and suggest other cyclists take it up: If a driver threatens you by their driving or any other behavior, start yelling their licence number as loud as you can. That way, they know you can track them down, and that others will also hear that information, and perhaps recall it should the incident eventually require the intervention of the police. I find that a lot of agression meeks right down when the driver realizes that they are no longer protected within their little ego bubble, and that their identity is now close to being revealed to all. Big man to scared little boy, like magic!
staggerspool said:
You sound exactly like them. You are going over the top. Otherwise rational people talking about making your point, showing someone is vulnerable, etc. I was in exactly the same bad spot as a pedestrian as my friends, and did not react the same way.
Look, just yesterday a guy in a car had his left turn signal on as he cleared through an orange light. Trouble is, I was turning left opposite him, and he didn't turn left, he went straight through. Had I believed his signal, he would have t-boned me likely, at a good clip. I was alert, and realized he wasn't making the turn. Defensive driving 101.
Did I go follow him and beat up and down on his hood? No. Do I go over and kick the spokes out on cyclists that nearly clip me when I'm walking? No.
benstt said:
To each his own. I do what I do, you do something else. I have seldom had to resort to banging on hoods, but I reserve the right to do it if I feel it is appropriate. If someone gets a thump from me, I have a good reason. It is all on a continuum of behaviour. When I do that stuff to anyone, they have done something much more threatening than I have. There can be cases in life where one will do things that aren't 'nice.'
Maybe I am like your friends, but previously I believe you stated that you thought your friends were looking for trouble in these situations. That ain't me. I'm out having a nice ride, I don't create issues. That was the problem the dead courier guy had.
Questor said:
I agree it is tempting to ride there instead of dealing with traffic.... but it is a false safety. One - someone may open their door in front of you (yes, illegal of them but that won't change how it hurts) and Two - you have reduce the room you have to maneuver between you and the traffic. If you are riding a proper distance in your lane and some numbnuts forces his car beside you, you have some room to move right. If you are already over to the right and the same thing happens you have nowhere to go.
