Fu*king Cyclists

did realise there was so many first class pussies and d bags on TGR

heres a video of some fun bike riding, reminds me of days gone by, getting door'd, getting into it with drivers, being fucked over by cars and taking it out with a u lock and a chain

any of you cock suckers wanna fuck with me while I'm riding my bike bring it on, I'm sure your a pussy once you get out of your car, you might feel uncomfortable or think I'm a homo wearing tight fitting clothes but I"m sure my fist in your face will leave a different impression


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7a4_1173478371

they left out the bowl smoking in central park and the finish at battery city

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BmillsSkier

---

Did you post that while you were incompetently attempting to drive your luxury suv?

You must have me confused with someone else. I don't have a luxury SUV anymore. I only post from YouTube while holding a Starbucks in between gear shifts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

Well, OK. It seems we probably agree. However, if I recall correctly, this thread was originally about cyclists who seem oblivious to their impact (or are intentionally trying to be aggravating) to motorists. And I've definitely seen that, along with bad behavior by drivers toward otherwise unobjectionable cyclists (which is probably worse in the sense that it's generally a greater danger). If there are cyclists who decide that their desire to ride alongside each other (for example) is more important than the ability of everyone else to pass quickly and safely, then that's wrong. Likewise if a cyclist rides on the road when a bike path is available just because they prefer not being occasionally slowed by other bike path users, that seems wrong. Obviously if there is some safety issue that 'forces' a cyclist onto the road instead of a bike path I would have no problem with that, and yeah, drivers may misinterpret that decision sometimes. But my original impression of the thread was that the impetus was cyclists who were just being difficult to prove a point or something. And whoever posted about cyclists choosing the road just so they don't have to (sometimes) bike slower I think makes the point about whining about being inconvenienced. There's no reason cyclists should be exempt from inconvenience (especially when they insist others need to endure the same inconvenience that they are causing).

---

How do you know this thread was ever about cyclists just being difficult? I see people complaining about the actions they observed, attributing motives to those actions and generalizing those motives to an entire class of people. I've also seen a lot of people try to explain why the actions cited may be driven by motives that aren't readily apparent to the non-cycling motorist. But I have yet to spot that smoking gun post where cyclists are confirmed to just be assholes like the angry motorists are claiming.

When you cite people going the wrong way in traffic and try to connect that with other behaviors that may have safety-related reasons it makes you sound like any simple bigot who's looking to explain others' actions by vilifying what he doesn't understand. I've been run off the road by drivers who chose my (oncoming) lane just because they saw I was there, too, but I think that falls in the .01% of passes with truly homicidal potential rather than the 10% of drivers that are just too accident prone. We don't usually manage this many pages just to talk about outliers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

Oblivious people without sense. Obviously this doesn't exist in a lot of places since people don't walk in cities in the U.S., but you get this on the sidewalk all the time. I think sidewalk rage is much more common here than road rage. Oblivious people (sometimes tourists, sometimes not) just stopping to look at something, or walking slowly alongside each other blocking those behind them. Kind of like cyclists, now that I think about it. I think it got so bad in Times Square they've designated walking 'lanes' for people. Not sure how it worked.

---

We were in the Netherlands for Queen's Day a few years ago--combination of Mardi Gras and the 4th of July and a few other holidays thrown in. 3 million Dutch show up in Amsterdam on top of the 900,000 who live there. The trams don't run because the main streets are too crowded with walkers. The Dutch publish maps that tell people which direction to walk in on which side of the street and people actually do it. (The queen had the good sense to stay in the Hague. [Why the "the".])

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jono

How do you know this thread was ever about cyclists just being difficult? I see people complaining about the actions they observed, attributing motives to those actions and generalizing those motives to an entire class of people. I've also seen a lot of people try to explain why the actions cited may be driven by motives that aren't readily apparent to the non-cycling motorist. But I have yet to spot that smoking gun post where cyclists are confirmed to just be assholes like the angry motorists are claiming.

When you cite people going the wrong way in traffic and try to connect that with other behaviors that may have safety-related reasons it makes you sound like any simple bigot who's looking to explain others' actions by vilifying what he doesn't understand. I've been run off the road by drivers who chose my (oncoming) lane just because they saw I was there, too, but I think that falls in the .01% of passes with truly homicidal potential rather than the 10% of drivers that are just too accident prone. We don't usually manage this many pages just to talk about outliers.

---

Yeah, not sure what you're getting at. I pointed out the majority of cyclists who don't really follow any traffic rules at all because that is a simple fact (around here). This AM I had a cyclist buzz me in a crosswalk (along with about five other people)--he was probably doing 15-20 and came within 15" of my front foot (not sure if you've ever experienced this, but at that range it felt like the guy was doing 30+). And I routinely experience/see just as close or closer. I could easily reach out and touch these guys on a daily basis. And I only thought about it due to this thread (such encounters are so common as to escape notic--as a pedestrian you need to watch for cars and cyclists, in my experience--as I noted earlier, I have two friends who were seriously injured by cyclists). In a ten minute walk I probably saw a dozen (or more) cyclists going against traffic, and twice as many blowing through lights. How this makes me sound like a bigot is beyond me. Those are obvious facts (if you don't like them, I don't know what to tell you). This isn't vilifying what I 'don't understand' (what there is to understand you'll have to explain). These situations aren't outliers--the majority of cyclists (in NYC) routinely break traffic laws that would result in drivers losing their licenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fastfred

I'm a homo wearing tight fitting clothes

---

Your words, no argument here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

These situations aren't outliers--the majority of cyclists (in NYC) routinely break traffic laws that would result in drivers losing their licenses.

---

Cyclists have a moral responsibility to break unjust laws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stfu&gbtw

We're growing a lot of pricks in this country who have nothing better to do that obstruct the rest of the population... That's what we get for more fully criminalizing simple assault.

---

Obstruct the rest of the population....like allowing horses in National Parks and not Mountain bikes....which is the most retarded and backward and loses so much revenue for the National parks....stupid old assholes like Dex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

Cyclists have a moral responsibility to break unjust laws.

---

Exactly....end of thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

How this makes me sound like a bigot is beyond me.

---

I said this earlier, but maybe you missed it:

"When you cite people going the wrong way in traffic and try to connect that with other behaviors that may have safety-related reasons it makes you sound like any simple bigot..."

I'm not sure what the rest of your post had to do with this point, but I was referring to your characterization of other posts in this thread and your dive into the bike path discussion. I take it for granted that you can cite genuinely dangerous behavior just like I can. What takes that from boring recitation to bigoted nonsense is the attempt to conflate other behavior you dislike with a few things that are actually dangerous. That's about as clear as I can make it, hopefully it's adequate.

No, I still don't get what that has to do with what I posted. What things do you think I'm trying to connect? There has been more than one thing going on in this thread. The fact that most cyclists ignore traffic rules is one thing that has been discussed, the use of bike paths is another (possibly related) issue. Didn't miss what you posted about sounding like a simple bigot, I just have no idea what you're getting at, and you're unwilling to be specific (repeating that sentence is not a help). There is still nothing bigoted about pointing out what I've pointed out. I haven't conflated any behavior that I 'dislike' (this seems like a strange way to put it) with things that are actually dangerous (I can't tell if you're disputing what actually is dangerous).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dromontana

http://media.galaxant.com/000/121/20...g-own-tail.gif

---

No shit! Dexter, you may want to check into a firmware upgrade for your sarcasm meter, they're getting a lot more sophisticated these days. For example, spotting "you might have missed x" when you are discussing x and it was only mentioned once can now be identified as a sarcastic remark meaning "you should read x for understanding." The damn things are still way overpriced for the non-dentist denizen of the PR but if you can snag a used one and get that firmware patch it's totally worth it. I hear sometimes a busted one will even get the warranty updates for free if you pay the shipping.

I got the sarcasm, it's your meaning that's obscure. Not sure why you aren't understanding that.

I think running over the dog is allowed, as long as you stay three feet away from the bike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

If there are cyclists who decide that their desire to ride alongside each other (for example) is more important than the ability of everyone else to pass quickly and safely, then that's wrong.

---

Dex, if it's written into the laws that riding two up is legal, why should riders pull over to let someone by when passing space is available?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

I got the sarcasm, it's your meaning that's obscure. Not sure why you aren't understanding that.

---

If the sarcasm came through after the second reading/reply I'm sure the meaning will surface with a little effort as well.

Spancership for those meters can be difficult to obtain, but I believe DD has hooked up a couple of his goons, or so the rumor has it. GL dude!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

Thing that stands out for me in this thread is the person (or people) saying cyclists can't use the shared bike path because too many other people are going too slow for them. So cyclists can't be expected to do exactly what the cyclists are saying the cars must do? The cyclists could just deal with the traffic and go slower, which is what they're saying drivers have to do. But even with a separate roadway the world still needs to cater to the cyclist. Sorry, that makes no sense. If there's a separate path the bikes should be on it--too bad if you can't bike as fast as you want. Slow down to a safe speed like you insist drivers have to. If someone is walking in front of you and you need to slow down, well, it's just a few seconds out of your life, right? What are you in such a hurry about? Your need to get a quality ride in actually isn't more important than what every other person in the world is doing.

I do acknowledge that in other places cyclists are more respectful of traffic rules (I've noticed this is the case), but based on many of the posts in this thread that hardly seems universal.

---

You, like others in this thread, are sensible, respectful people who, nevertheless, get annoyed by the inconvenience of having to navigate around bikes.
But pretending that there is some moral obligation for bikes to get out of the way is silly and makes you look ignorant of the laws in place and the rights afforded to road users.

The reason bikers in this thread keep harping on all this is exactly because of the notion that bikes should just get out of the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

Your need to get a quality ride in actually isn't more important than what every other person in the world is doing.

---

Nor is your need to get to your desk job (or wherever) any more important than anything else going on on the road. Emergency vehicles aside, why someone is on the road is of zero consequence. Within the rules in place, they can chat; they can train; they can commute. I'm sorry it's annoying, but it's entirely reasonable.


Bikes are legal on the road.
They are obligated to make room IF there is no safe passing AND they are holding up traffic, just like cars. There is no obligation to go ride somewhere else. There is no obligation to pull over just because someone is behind them.

If there's a parallel MUP (multi-use path, not "bike path" [exclusive use paved bike paths are unicorns and don't actually exist to my knowledge]), the cyclist gets to decide which is appropriate based on his speed, environmental conditions, and sense of personal safety.

When the biker chooses the path, they need to respect the rules of that path. MUPs have a hierarchy of users just like trails where the most vulnerable users get right of way. So, it's not appropriate for high speeds if it's used by other folks not on bikes. Bikes are not appropriate on sidewalks. Bikers should walk their bikes on sidewalks.

And, of course, when the biker chooses the road, they need to respect the rules of the road.

This is part of our world. Cyclists have been growing in numbers and the number of interactions with drivers has gone up and seems like that will continue based on the interest and growing participation. Everyone using the road should understand the rights and responsibilities of the various types of users.



BTW, studies have shown that cyclists and drivers tend to break the law in equal percentages (around 9% of each)...kinda makes sense in that most cyclists are drivers too.

From today's blog at the Official Intergalactic Surly Regional HQ:
Written by Sov
I'm Done
"You win, cars. I don't go for long road rides anymore because I'm scared shitless that you're going to kill me. I've got a kid now, and I can't bear the thought of leaving the Earth before he graduates from something, or whatever. You don't stop for school busses with stop signs out. You wouldn't know a crosswalk if it was licking your earlobe. Every other goddamn one of you is on your phone - talking, texting, penning masturbatory tomes - who knows? You just get bigger, too. People are afraid of crashing, so they buy a bigger car so the crash doesn't hurt. Gas prices are back down. Hooray! I'm getting an Escalade! There's no money for roads, so the shoulders are for shit. There's no way to get away from you. People don't watch what they're doing behind the wheel. They don't know how to use goddamn turn signals, or follow the rules. They drive slow in the left lane. They gawk at accidents thinking, "That poor dumb sonofabitch! I'm glad that'll never happen to me in my big car!" People think they're owed something. They're owed the road because they pay all them damn high taxes - and who the hell are YOU to slow me down - even for a second. I see billboards whose sole purpose is to remind drivers that people on bikes are, well, people. THEY HAVE TO BE REMINDED! "Mother, steel worker, person, please don't hit her." That's great, but the fact that it has to be said is fucking horrible. So, I'm not riding out there anymore. My revolution is over. I quit. I'm turning in my messenger bag with ironic patches and I'm sticking to the path, or dirt, or somewhere else. I don't know. Why can't we see each other as people? Just like us. Nobody put us down and said, "You're it. Everyone else out there is working for you, so just do whatever the hell you want." It doesn't work that way. You win, cars. The cities are all built around your needs. TGI Friday's has shitloads of parking - some of it is even pretty close to Olive Garden, so I guess decisions will have to be made. Cars are safer now, too. Airbags all over the damn things. Crumple zones! It works. Fewer people are pulled in pieces out of mangled cars. Bike riders don't have that shit. We're just as Jell-0-ey as we used to be. Helmets are better looking, but they won't do dick against that F350. So nice work out there, cars. Way to go. Life is easier now. We can live 50 miles from work and be just fine - what's a couple of wars and the destruction of our planet? Chicken feed. Cars can do anything.

The problem is, I have a car too. We're all the problem. We have to start with us. Put the phone down. Don't get drunk and get in your dethwagon. Try not to be a dick. That's all I got."


Just saw a post that a rider was run off the road in Emigration Canyon 30min ago. Possibly by the same large black Ford truck that was documented buzzing and harassing people 2 weeks ago in Emi and Dimple Dell. They were wearing camo, likely bow hunters out scoping things from their trucks based on the locations. I don't have anything against bow hunters, just these guys...so I'm gonna go see if I can find their truck in the Bengal Smith's lot or on Wasatch.
B44 3UB license is a good match from the incidents on 8/23. 2006 Ford F350 Superduty, Lariat Crew Cab, black for those keeping their eyes out in SLC.

I would think that many of the urban drivers in this thread would prefer more cyclists on the road because they actually ease congestion because each bike commuting removes a potential vehicle.

http://www.citymetric.com/sites/defa...s%20latvia.jpg


and they take up less space parking too

http://www.citymetric.com/sites/defa...ike%20hoop.jpg

That, and the Surly blogpost too.

Bad drivers are such the suck. I flip them all off
:the_finge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

That, and the Surly blogpost too.

---

This was my favorite part: "You win, cars. The cities are all built around your needs. TGI Friday's has shitloads of parking - some of it is even pretty close to Olive Garden, so I guess decisions will have to be made."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

I think running over the dog is allowed, as long as you stay three feet away from the bike.

---

heh, I laughed