Posted on 07/29/2008 7:55:24 AM PDT by fightinJAG
You’re = your!
When I am going to make a right turn, I try to pull over to the right to make it obvious I am going to turn. But I have had cyclists blow by me anyway. That’s the most dangerous of all, because the last thing a driver turning right does is check LEFT one more time. They have already started into the turn before they look right again. If a cyclist pops out there, brother.
I’m sorry stop signs are inconvenient for cyclists, but life is not fair.
“There’s also no reason for police not to ticket cyclists for traffic infractions at least as readily as motorists. Heck, where I live the police-—not lifeguards-—police will whistle in and ticket a surfer who’s surfing out of the designated surf zones (”lanes”).
Cyclists are not special (and, yes, skateboarding can be a crime ;) ).”
What is happening in Portland re the Retro Bike Bastards is typical of that green commie facist controlled city. Normal law obeying citizens are the criminals versus these Retro Bike Bastards and their beloved green eco terrorists when the bastards cause an encounter.
First of all there has been basically no coverage in Portland fishwrap/papers of the Retro Bikers, who are causing the problem. I did a Yahool search and the only major article on these Retro Bike Bastards is the Newsweek Article you posted.
Up to this incident where my son’s friend was involved, the incident cited by the Newsweek article. Vehicle drivers have been held responsible even the Retro bikers attacked them first. My son’s friend lucked out as the event apparently was covered by at least one camera at the last intersection. Also, the car driver had several witnesses backing up that the bastard Retro Biker started the incident and had tried at several intersection.
Maybe Beckwith will post a link to what a sewer Portland has become in the last 10 years.
You need to read through some of the remarks here. Some of the absolute bile spewed about cyclists is rather startling. Some of the people here think cyclists shouldn’t be on the road and have no right to even be on the same road with a car.
I stand by my statement. I don’t see a whole lot of concern for cyclists, but I do see a lot of disdain to outright hatred.
Also, your case about a cyclist speeding by a car on the right side doesn’t necessarily hold. A lot of times, the cyclist is perfectly legal in doing so and the driver of the car is actually making a right turn across a lane of traffic.
That being said, I avoid that particular maneuver even in a clearly marked bike lane. That is just asking to get hit.
Okay, so what is your point? I was talking about myself, not other cyclists.
In my state, cyclists are considered to be just another vehicle on the road. Except for being able to drive on the freeway, they're no different from motorcycles or mopeds.
My state also allows lane sharing.
Personally, I have no problem with this arrangement as long as the cyclists are obeying the same laws that I'm supposed to obey.
In case you missed it. Beckwith replied with a picture of the current Portland Pride.
http://www.freedomsenemies.com/_more/portlandpride.htm
>>You mean, “fail to see a bike messenger who whips and weaves through traffic like a maniac on meth.” <<
Nope. That’s not what I was talking about, although it DOES happen. ;)
>>Your son needs to get a job...<<
He did. A real one that pays real money. He grew up.
>>I’ll say it again, 5 bicyclists died in Chicago proving their right of way. Maybe there should be a more sensible way to handle yourself on a bicycle.<<
This is really a no brainer for bikes OR cars. There was a safety TV commercial back in the late 60’s I believe. It ended with these words: “Yeah, he was right. Dead right.”
My safety is MY responsibility, not the responsibility of traffic lights, stop signs, etc. Defensive driving should always be the norm, but especially when on a two wheeled vehicle. Even in my car, when people notice I am not safety conscious regarding air bags, etc. (I drive a Scion xB), I say, “My goal is not accident survival. It is accident avoidance.”
Technically, you are correct. Unfortunately, the world of driving is not a binary computer program. In the case I brought up, if a policeman had seen what the girl had done, she was “technically” guilty of reckless driving. If you turn on your signal before changing lanes, check your mirror and blind spot, and then change lanes, only to strike a car that was reckless driving by passing at 30 mph over the limit and swerving around you, you are not at fault.
I should also mention that this is one thing I would always look out for at that hill. Often I would get behind cars and pass them on the left as they turned when they did this boneheaded move. In this case, she timed it perfectly. She got just behind me, then floored it and got far enough ahead of me for me to get nervous, but not far enough ahead for me to pull in behind her safely. She then SLAMMED on the brakes and took a hard right in front of me. Fortunately, my actions “predicting” what she would do led to no harm whatsoever to me, but some serious surface damage to her car.
Also, if you pass an intersection at 25 in a 35 zone, and a car going the opposite way decides to take a left there, causing you to broadside them, that is not due to your speed. Further, it is as predictable as what this girl did.
>>Is there any reason not to apply your logic to motor vehicle drivers, then? Should we all just rely on our fellow man to know when it’s appropriate to obey the law and when it’s not?<<
Sort of. It is why we have two lane hiways whith cars passing each other within a few feet at a combined speed of over 120 mph. It is why we have four way intersections with no signs whatsoever.
But rather than rely on them, we should be prepared for when they don’t, like when people try to occupy the same physical space as my motorcycle on the freeway. Ultimately my safety is MY responsibility.
>>Again, why shouldn’t cars also blow through stop signs when they judge it safe to do so?<<
I do if it is EXTREMELY clear that there are no cars coming and clearly no cops around. Again, it is a “spirit of the law” thing. Ensure safety and keep traffic flowing.
>>The “it’s okay until I get caught” attitude proves the point here.<<
That is one way to put it but I differ. I consider it ok even when I get caught. It is like a toll. And since I get caught on average of once every five years, it is a pretty cheap toll.
It used to frustrate my son no end when we would come up on a point in a road where I would slow down and say, this looks like an excellent place for a radar trap, and sure enough, there was one. You get a sort of sixth sense about these things as you drive longer.
Funny thing is, based on the “letter of the law” I am a “dangerous” driver/rider, but based on the “spirit of the law”, I am far safer than most. Last accident that I had that was my fault (a fender bender) was back in 1970. Results talk.
I ride the wrong way on sidewalks on rare occasion. I am also fully aware that cars pulling out have the right of way and if we collide it is my fault.
I ride accordingly.
If a car is pulling out, I will either turn left at the car and go around the back of them, or I will come to a complete stop and let them out of the lot.
"A guy on a motorcycle rode between cars and a semi. The driver of the car in front of the truck couldn’t see the motorcycle, changed lanes, and the biker ran into the car. Splat! "
I rode a bike to work on freeways for about fifteen years.
Out here it is legal to split lanes (ride the white line).
The ONLY time I'd ever do it was when traffic was stopped cold or rolling about ten MPH bumper to bumper - always with the mental image of a door being opened for no apparent reason.
Today we have diamond lanes and 'fast track' with superbikes running the yellow divider at will because it's illegal to change lanes.
You only have to get that one wrong one time.
I was replying to your statement, above. You're wrong on that, I think. I don't think it's a matter of "forgetting how exposed cyclists are." I think that's an integral part of the problem, as I set out in my initial reply.
I have read the remarks and I can see how you would think some people “hate” cyclists.
I’m just saying even if there is something approaching “hatred,” it’s not based on a deathwish or “lack of concern” for cyclists.
For some it’s quite the opposite: it’s based on cyclists doing dumb and arrogant stuff that makes it likely somebody in a motor vehicle, doing everything right, nevertheless might seriously hurt someone, including the cyclist.
So, you see “hatred” (founded on what, do you think?) and I see anger that cyclists unnecessarily put themselves and motorists in the position to harm someone.
Even if people “hate” cyclists, as is your thesis, do you believe that they developed that emotion for no reason? That it’s just a blind bigotry?
That’s not the case. You may disagree with the reasons people reach their conclusions, but I don’t think that gives you ground to label those conclusions as unfounded hatred. That’s all I’m saying.
This is a perfect example of when the truly new New Media should jump in.
I mean citizen bloggers, with camera phones and video, posting reports. It might start small, but I think it would get quite an audience through word-of-mouth. And you might accomplish something constructive for the city.
Find a few folks to get out there and document stuff for a blog. And ask readers to send in reports. You might be surprised at the good work you could get done!
Thanks.
I guess.
;)
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.