Skip to comments.Old dude runs down bicyclist
Posted on 08/17/2012 3:49:13 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Police are looking for an elderly, white, gray-haired man who, in an apparent fit of road rage, chased a bicyclist onto a golf course in Santa Rosa and ran him down.
The bicyclist told Santa Rosa police he was cycling down Pythian Road at about 5 p.m. Wednesday when the driver began yelling at him and tried to hit him.
To get the angry motorist off his tail, the cyclist told police he raced onto the nearby Oakmont Golf Course. But the driver steered onto the course and continued chasing him, eventually hitting him before speeding away.
The cyclist had moderate injuries and was transported to a local hospital. He described the driver as an elderly man with gray hair, and the car as a gold or beige sedan similar to a Toyota Corolla.
The sedan may have a broken passenger side mirror, police said.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.sfgate.com ...
She might be hot under the fatsuit she’s wearing.
The idiots are in cars playing with their expensive electronic toys.
You can’t fight idiots. My local university has learned and has paved the shortcuts
What makes you think we don't? You think cyclists don't own cars? I have seven bikes in my garage. I also have two cars. I pay every tax you do, and probably more of each; gasoline taxes, property taxes, automobile registration and more. But you apparently believe that only your desires for transportation infrastructure be addressed with those tax dollars.
Sometimes you just get trapped, or surprised. I avoid the main roads whenever possible. But when I go out for a ride, I generally go exploring -- looping around the city, exploring the parks, or looking for pleasant streets and attractive neighborhoods. Or I'll be heading out to a destination. In other words, I don't just ride a regular loop to get my miles in.
So it happens with some frequency that I'm peddling along, and suddenly ... a BARRIER. It's an arterial road. Suddenly there's no sidewalk. The nearest crossing is a three mile uphill backtrack. There's just no good way to get from A to B, so I suck it up and dodge cars, and never go that way again.
Two of the worst times I've been caught in this way were when I took my car in to be serviced, and threw my bike on back to ride home (the dealerships not being metro accessible). Two different cars, two different dealership, several years apart. Anyhow, homeward I go, and suddenly there's no good way forward. Sheesh ... this is in the near suburbs, heavily urbanized areas, and there's no way to get across the street. Stupid design. Neighborhoods that get these kinds of arterial roads shoved through them are blighted for years, perhaps permanently, because neighborhood traffic and pedestrians are also inconvenienced.
Suburbanites tend to be oblivious to this because they generally won't move more than 50 feet without getting into a car, and because they rarely explore the neighborhoods across which they drive. They don't realize the costs they impose on other people.
Well, there is a pic that will give the spandex haters a thrill up their legs...........
Well then, you’ll be happy to learn of Obamalamadingdong and his crew’s efforts in killing the suburbs. I have no doubt it’s YOU who’s the Sierra Club member. Listen to yourself and all your “they should give us” talk. You’d be right at home with Occupy crowd.
I’m with so many other posters who have had it with this nonsensical “share the road” crap. I’ve been flipped off, slowed down, and damn near had to run into oncoming traffic because some spandex-covered ass was busy asserting his “right” to try and commit suicide. Roads built for cars ARE BUILT FOR CARS. Get it?? If you want something else take it up with your locals. If you have enough cyclists paying taxes where you live, have at it. Not enough do-gooders in your town, then gee, just do what others like you do and whine to some commie judge about how UNFAIR it all is, maybe that’ll work like it does for so many other libs — roads for cars are unconsitutional!!
“...But Im an observer. I have yet to see a single bicyclist signal their intentions before turning or stopping,...”
I don’t think I ever see automobile drivers signal their intention to stop before they actually apply their breaks. This is what you seem to be asking bicyclists to do.
If you have ever ridden a road bike, you would know that they have front and rear hand breaks which require both hand to operate. When they must stop, how do you expect them to signal their intention to stop when both hands must be operating the breaks? This is a completely unreasonable complaint.
When you apply the breaks in your car, *you* do not signal your prior-intention to stop. You just hit the breaks and the car’s break lights are automatically activated.
In regard to signaling for a turn, it is often dangerous to take one’s hand off the handlebars and attempt a signal, especially while on the dropped handlebars. This is because the area of road close to the curb (where the cyclist is riding) is often rough, has stones, glass, sewer grates. I have also noticed that it is fairly evident, just by observing the biker’s posture when he or she is preparing for a turn. pay attention!
Most people here are also generalizing a great deal about bicyclist’s behavior, perhaps from a few incidents, you generalize about all bikers.
Give these people on bikes a break. they are working much harder than you to get where they’re going, they are in harm’s way and they’re not hurting anybody.
In many newer suburban areas, each little subdivision is its own little world, one from which you cannot get to any other.
So you can’t travel any distance except on the main roads.
This could easily be solved simply by mandating each subdivision connect to the adjacent ones with a sidewalk, not a street. Cars are still restricted from taking shortcuts through the neighborhood, but pedestrians and cyclists can get around without riding the highway.
All I am saying is that roads in urban areas should have sidewalks and frequent crossings. Roads in suburban and rural areas should be designed with sidewalks or adequate shoulders. What is radical about that?
When I say mandate I mean at the local level when a developer applies for permitting for his subdivision.
I agree. Heck, in Northern Virginia, the blasted parking lots don't connect to each other. You have to get back on the blankety-blank highway, jammed and stalled, to get from the Arby's to the gas station next door.
I sometimes think the real reason suburbanites don't like bicyclists is that the cyclists go zipping by while the lard-butts in their cars are wasting most of the day sitting in traffic. It's resentment, pure and simple.
The more local (and private in many cases) the better.
Would you believe that the people mover in Detroit is rider funded at the rate of around 7%. That means that 93% is funded by local, state, and federal taxes in some form or another. From what I’ve read 25% rider funding is pretty much considered a successful average for urban public transportation systems.
A few years back, Karl Levin was seeking some $2 million in transportation funds to save the old Tiger stadium in Detroit. His justification for seeking transportation money was that a bus stop would be included in the design.
It cracks me up when I see urban people complain about contract disputes with their taxpayer funded trash pick up service. We use private services out here and have better than a half dozen different companies to choose from with dozens of different service plans.
OK. You said it. You are actually farther gone than I thought.
Seven, huh? If you have < 7 people to use them, you’re a glutton. Worse, you expect me to think more highly of you because of your seven bikes. Bully for you. And good luck continuing to find ways to drain others as you go though life. After a while, people start to resist.
To be fair, roads are generally funded with taxes, although much of it comes from taxes on fuel.
I’ve seen some comparisons of cost of funding transportation between public transport and auto, by person/mile, etc.
Public transport is way more expensive, but not as much so as is commonly claimed.
Don’t remember where I saw the comparisons. Also lots of arguing about what comparisons are valid.
Everybody wants their taxes cut but few can find anything that they’re personally willing to give up. Its easy to yammer on about entitlements but until we ourselves find ways of cutting taxes on our end, it doesn’t mean a thing.
I think my township should drop their contract with the county to plow snow here within the village and hire a local farmer with a big tractor. I think we should drop our contact with the sheriff’s department for patrols and call them as needed. I also think we should drop the 6 figures we pay for the dozen or so street lights within the township. We don’t have a fire department so I’m OK contracting with surrounding townships for that. Right there is a couple million dollars in cuts for my township alone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.