Fu*king Cyclists

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joetron

Whatever you do, don't read the comments.

A fine sample:
"Psycholists are just oh so special, rules are for others, never for them.

They’re righteous holy ones who are cutting down on carbon footprints, y’see?

They look oh so splendid in their ‘look at me!’ costumes, the sweep-back spaceman hats, the bug-eye goggles and those spandex body stockings; aren’t they just swell!

And as far as they’re concerned, citizens who are driving because they have to be someplace can just drop dead.

Psycholists have earned every bit of the rotten reputation they own.

Prediction: should Trump actually beat the vote-stealing and become president, this will stop.

The psycholists are being encouraged from on high to ‘get out there and get their faces’.

And drivers caught on to the psycholists’ penchant for setting them up, and many cars now carry dash-cams to record the antagonistic, reckless behavior of these leftist emotional problem children"
Apparently this was on the front page of the Druge Report

---

In many cases it's more fun to read the comments and skip the article itself.

Cyclists are pricks. Was just driving over Squaw Pass the other day and a group of cyclists decided to stop on the side of the road where there's about 12' of shoulder. So it made a lot of sense when they decided to park their toys on the shoulder line and stand around in the traffic lane for their water break. I honk as I go by and they flip me off.

Whenever I see those "Share the Road" signs, I'd like to say "here, you toy riding, spandex clad turd.. have some road."

I drive and I ride a bike on the road. As a driver I see plenty of asshole drivers (and suspect plenty of them see me that way). I also see plenty of asshole cyclists--mainly riding multiple abreast. As a cyclist I have to say that at least around here the average driver is far more considerate of cyclists than cyclists are of drivers. The law in CA is cyclists are to ride as far to the right as possible--that means single file unless you are both in a bike lane. Don't like the law--get it changed. You assholes who deliberately block traffic are making up your own rules--the very definition of egotism and self absorption. More importantly, by proving to drivers that cyclists are jerks, you are making it more dangerous for me to ride my bike.

Around here the big problem is Donner Pass Rd between the lake and the summit. Increasingly crowded going uphill with people who think they are racing up the Alpe d'Huez, at 2 MPH, literally. No shoulder in parts, double yellow with blind turns for 3 miles. So if I wait behind a cyclist, or cyclists my 10 min drive becomes one and a half hours, without exaggeration. Tough situation--I wish they would put some big parabolic mirrors on the outsides of the corners the way they do on mountain roads in Europe, so you could see when it was safe to pass the cyclists. (Coming down the bikes are often faster than the cars--couple years ago one of them hit a crack in the road and died.)

The funny thing about the video that started this post is that she's not the kind of cyclist most of us are thinking about.

"All (fill in make) drivers are assholes. How do I know this? 3 times in the last week I saw them roll a stop sign. They all do it. They also drive slowly on narrow roads, ruin my drive and make me late. They shouldn't be on the road."

I hear this sort of rant about:

Cyclists
The Elderly
Asians
Teenagers
Landscapers
Delivery trucks
Disabled

Lots of rage and projection going on. Carry on...

We should just stop creating special rules to protect people when they act like assholes and far fewer people would act like assholes. No more than one or two cyclists who decided to picnic in the road would get flattened before the cycling community would decide to picnic elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by narc

I regularly have to watch getting run over by them crossing the road at pedestrian crossings in London. Apparently they think red lights don't apply to bikes, one got his just desserts recently when I stepped out and he went over the bars as he anchored on.

Some roads really cannot take bikes and cars safely which is a real problem. Country roads with blind corners are the worst, it is ridiculous to expect cars to crawl along a 60mph road at 15mph in case there is a bike half way around the corner and an oncoming car in the other direction.

---

I think it's more ridiculous to assume you can go 60 round a blind corner on a country road and that there won't be an obstruction. Doesn't have to be a bike - could be a horse, fallen tree, random road works etc

I live in the epicenter of Boston based bikers and have to endure their asinine behavior daily. It's so dangerous on our narrow winding streets, but these douche bags insist on riding side by side, or right down the middle of the street.

I drive a Tahoe, so it's always stressful getting by them. Sometimes I'll say, "Single file please!" as I pass, but that's usually met with a raging roid enhanced response.

I respect the rights of cyclists, but cringe when I think of how poorly people drive and all the texting you see. Like most of us, I know people who were killed... just last week I saw a biker who was hit, lying on the side of the road and being attended to. It's a bad and dangerous mix in such a heavily populated area.

I subscribe to the "yield to the larger vehicle" rule. My list:

Big wheel<bicycle<motorcycle<Prius<Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat<Chevy Tahoe LT Z71<Hino box truck<Freightliner tractor going bob<Freightliner tractor w/trailer<M1A1 Abrams tank

There may be something else at play in that video...

You caint fix stupid but sometimes stupid fixes itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigDaddy

I live in the epicenter of Boston based bikers and have to endure their asinine behavior daily. It's so dangerous on our narrow winding streets, but these douche bags insist on riding side by side, or right down the middle of the street.

I drive a Tahoe, so it's always stressful getting by them. Sometimes I'll say, "Single file please!" as I pass, but that's usually met with a raging roid enhanced response.

I respect the rights of cyclists, but cringe when I think of how poorly people drive and all the texting you see. Like most of us, I know people who were killed... just last week I saw a biker who was hit, lying on the side of the road and being attended to. It's a bad and dangerous mix in such a heavily populated area.

---

To all the people that insist that they follow the rules of the road: cyclists should then be treated as a moving vehicle and taking up the entire lane should not be a problem no matter how you're inconvenienced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timberridge

I subscribe to the "yield to the larger vehicle" rule. My list:

Big wheel<bicycle<motorcycle<Prius<Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat<Chevy Tahoe LT Z71<Hino box truck<Freightliner tractor going bob<Freightliner tractor w/trailer<M1A1 Abrams tank

There may be something else at play in that video...

---

I shudder to think of the "Big wheel" "M1A1 Abrams tank" combo.

Those asshole kids on BigWheels never stop at the intersection. Fucking annoying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BmillsSkier

SHARE THE ROAD MOTHERFUCKERS!

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/08/...ks-man-in-car/

I'm starting to see shit like this in my nape of the way. I'm convinced cyclists are rageaholics in spandex.

---

Guy who lost his glasses is a douche. He honks the lady because she's going through a red light?

Also, why didn't they use the video where they allegedly crossed on Roebling? I don't see her do anything wrong making that weird turn from broadway to s5th.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

To all the people that insist that they follow the rules of the road: cyclists should then be treated as a moving vehicle and taking up the entire lane should not be a problem no matter how you're inconvenienced.

---

So if I want to drive 5 mph up the long hill near my house and impede the flow of traffic that should be fine? For a car that would be illegal, why is it acceptable for a bike?

Yeah that would be unsafe not only for the biker but for the other vehicles, but mostly for the bikers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by huckbucket

I shudder to think of the "Big wheel" "M1A1 Abrams tank" combo.

---

like dis

Attachment 186851

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

So if I want to drive 5 mph up the long hill near my house and impede the flow of traffic that should be fine? For a car that would be illegal, why is it acceptable for a bike?

---

That's why demanding "cyclists follow the rules of the road" is pretty stupid.

But it isn't illegal to be slow, I got stuck behind an old winnebago on a curvy and hilly road yesterday, dude could barely push ten up hills.

Should I have:

A) called the cops,
B) honked my horn,
C) fired a handgun into the air
D) showed 115 seconds of patience until I could pass

Highways have minimum speeds and prohibit cyclists... I think anyone who really thinks bicyclists are a problem should pedal a few miles in their shoes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

To all the people that insist that they follow the rules of the road: cyclists should then be treated as a moving vehicle and taking up the entire lane should not be a problem no matter how you're inconvenienced.

---

Rules of the road dictate bikes stay as far right as possible, and single file!

We have a couple of guys in town who insist they are "equal" with other "vehicles" on the road and take middle lanes in busy traffic and other crazy stuff. I'm not sure when common bicycle law got it's start- maybe in the 1970s, but bicycles are NOT equal to other vehicles.

The closest I've ever been to killing a cyclist was when a prominent JH goofy guy was riding in a lane of traffic on a recumbent tricycle- in a lane of traffic- in front of the art museum- at dusk. I almost steamrolled this guy, I couldn't see him at all. It was a close one. Sure he was legally equal to me, but physics dictated otherwise.

I can't help but think bicycle law has been way off course for the last thirty years- I ride a lot and I don't want to be treated as a vehicle, but rather as a glorified toy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

To all the people that insist that they follow the rules of the road: cyclists should then be treated as a moving vehicle and taking up the entire lane should not be a problem no matter how you're inconvenienced.

---

I drive these roads all day, every day... super slowly and carefully. Last thing I ever want, is to hit someone. I treat every blind corner as if I will find a biker and/or dog walker half way in the street. Sometimes I'm right, but I do not mind taking it down a notch on these roads, so that bikers can enjoy them, too.

What I find so completely infuriating, is their treating these roads like they're bike paths. I'd appreciate the same sort of respect and for them to at least hug the right side when I pass. I'm on the roads working, going from job to job. Most of the bikers are off work and out for a pleasure cruise. We have many parks and designated recreation areas nearby, so why do I have to endure this complete disregard of commerce? I've encountered two side by sides already today... I'd start taking some pictures, but not sure how safe that would be.

Unfortunately, it's a fact of life here, but that doesn't mean I can't bitch about it... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

Guy who lost his glasses is a douche. He honks the lady because she's going through a red light?

Also, why didn't they use the video where they allegedly crossed on Roebling? I don't see her do anything wrong making that weird turn from broadway to s5th.

---

This. Carefully edited rolling interaction that led to honking and this is the most damning footage he had? He's a pussy who hid in his cage and was shocked when the person whose life was on the line got disproportionately pissed. She's pissed in proportion to her risk, Lochte. That happens when someone is in a heightened state of alert because of the way you're interacting for five blocks. Tends to get real when that interaction has the potential to kill them and you're driving indicates you might "act out" with your vehicle. Apparently it didn't get real for him until the glasses got pulled off his face.

It's hard to drive a big vehicle, though. Worrying about other people's safety is stressful. Just not remotely as stressful as it is for the people who are worrying about their own.

More food for thought. What happens when driverless cars start to become commonplace?

While I was in grad school, on a daily basis, I used to ride one of the busiest roads in Vermont between Burlington and Winooski. I was commuting on my MTB so my top end speed on a flat was less than 30mph. The layout of the traffic lanes meant that I had to ride in a middle lane across a bridge into a large stoplighted intersection. I knew that I had to HAMMER across that bridge to prevent impeding traffic. I was always successful and I think the drivers appreciated it. I never got honked at or otherwise harassed. I also never tried to run the red light. After the red light is a long steep hill with roadside parallel parking. There was no way to keep from impeding traffic on that hill so I opted to ride up the sidewalk. It all worked out well and I never had an incident (other than me gently rear ending and old shitty truck that had non-functioning brake lights on the bridge).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joetron

-Speed limits in town need to be lowered. The difference between 20 miles per hour and 35 mph is huge for the safety of kids and adults, on foot, on bike and in cars. Lower speeds make places quieter and more appealing for everyone. We just need to accept that driving inside city limits on most (but not all) roads is going to take a little longer. The tradeoffs are more than worth it.

---

That is just asinine rationalization backed by a massive sense of entitlement.

"Cut speed limits virtually in half so that I can ride my bike! Fuck everyone else's time. It isn't as valuable as my biking."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capulin overdrive

Rules of the road dictate bikes stay as far right as possible, and single file!

---

I'm not a lawyer or advocate but I don't think that's the law in most places or where i'm from. Not saying that bikers should take up a lane, but the bad apple drivers that want to "teach someone a lesson" or get impatient is not in proportion with the crime of someone minding their business on two wheels. That's all.

After about 30 years of commuting a shit ton in all kinds of weather and on some pretty congested crazy roads, I stay as far to the right as possible whether it's a bike specific lane or not. Cars are big and heavy. Ya I've been hit a couple of times, but I've been hurt way worse crashing on my MTB. This is common sense shit. STAY OUT OF THE ROAD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

That is just asinine rationalization backed by a massive sense of entitlement.

"Cut speed limits virtually in half so that I can ride my bike! Fuck everyone else's time. It isn't as valuable as my biking."

---

depends on the town and place but lowering the speed limit in towns absolutely saves lives and makes streets a more pleasant place to walk and live.

Bicycles as a form of travel are literally 1% of trips in the US. So yea, when we talk about entitled cyclists blocking traffic, this is literally the 1% crapping on the 99%. When we are talking about bikers on mountain passes and the like, we are almost certainly talking about people using public roadways for exercise rather than travel.

I'm all for bike lanes and bike paths. I have plenty of friends and family who have been hit on the roads. Riding on roads scares me. I feel safer on dirt.

But the statistics are that bike and ped fatalities are DECREASING! 720 deaths in 2014.

There is one cyclist killed per yer per 450,000 Americans... or rather cyclist deaths are 0.028% of all deaths in the US per year.

Is it a coincidence that 77% of cyclist deaths are males 20 years and older?

Is it a coincence that 50% of cyclist deaths occur between the hours of 6pm and 6am?

Those numbers include all types of cyclists (Mtb). I guarantee you that the majority of people ride their bikes during the day, not at night. I guarantee you there are statistically insignificant number of night mtbers.

Most road cyclist deaths are men biking in the dark. I'd bet anyone $100 that alcohol is a major factor in cyclist deaths.

You want to cut half the fatalities out, how about banning biking at night. Eliminating say 10% of bike trips will cut fatalities in half, far more effective than cutting the speed limit in half for 99% of road users. I'm not actually advocating such a silly notion, but illustrating to those who want to cut speed limits that these discussions aren't about evidence and effective intervention. They are about entitlement and personal interests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

So if I want to drive 5 mph up the long hill near my house and impede the flow of traffic that should be fine? For a car that would be illegal, why is it acceptable for a bike?

---

I'm pretty sure that's not illegal and it is done regularly by farm and construction equipment, people towing trailers, the mailman or ups truck, etc. etc. etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sirshredalot

I'm pretty sure that's not illegal and it is done regularly by farm and construction equipment, people towing trailers, the mailman or ups truck, etc. etc. etc.

---

You'd be wrong
http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.427

^^fuckin mail carriers

Isnt this supposed to be a winter enthusiast site....What about the snowboarders??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_tELkI0vbU

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

depends on the town and place but lowering the speed limit in towns absolutely saves lives and makes streets a more pleasant place to walk and live.

---

35mph is generally found on major streets without major pedestrian traffic with fewer residences. Why do you want to turn traffic arteries into pedestrian thoroughfares?

Dropping the speed limit 43% will also reduce the traffic capacity of the road by 20%, so even in light traffic it takes longer longer to drive, but you will have far more frequent traffic jams. How is that for "pleasant to walk and live?" Also, you are going to shunt traffic onto small residential streets... but to hell with those people right? At least the cars jammed up in front of your SoDoSoPa Loft will be going slower.

Also, fuel economy drops 15-40% when you drive 20mph instead of 35mph.

Attachment 186852

So we are going to burn more gas, waste more time, have more traffic jams, all in order to make major roads more pleasant for bikes and pedestrians?

Similarly, if bikes are forcing cars to putter along at 5m/h on a rural/mountain road, the cars are literally getting about 5mpg. The cyclists are causing a net increase in greenhouse emissions vs if they were driving a car instead of biking!

This thread just warms my soul. Can't wait to get out and do some miles!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

That is just asinine rationalization backed by a massive sense of entitlement.

"Cut speed limits virtually in half so that I can ride my bike! Fuck everyone else's time. It isn't as valuable as my biking."

---

People for Bikes is not advocating for wholesale reduction in speed limits in all urban or residential areas. I'm sure they'd acknowledge the need and utility of high speed arterial streets and highways. Part of what they are advocating for is safe and complete bicycle infrastructure in urban areas. Sometimes that includes lower speed limits on streets that parallel arterials to create safe cycling routes while also increasing the overall safety and quality of life in those neighborhoods.

Salt Lake City is full of streets that IMO should have lower speed limits. They are narrow, full of driveways and crosswalks and were never intended to carry the traffic loads or speeds that have evolved as the city has sprawled and grown more crowded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joetron

Part of what they are advocating for is safe and complete bicycle infrastructure in urban areas. Sometimes that includes lower speed limits on streets that parallel arterials

---

These streets do not typically have 35mph speed limits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml242

I'm not a lawyer or advocate

---

We can tell, IMO you have weak logic and questionable points. Entitled bikers with poor logic like you make other bikers, like me, look bad.

As for reducing speed limits, they have done this on some SLC streets. From 35-40 to 20, and added bike lanes that are separated by curbs from traffic. The lanes are pretty much empty, and while I enjoy them a lot while biking, it has to piss off all the drivers who got their commuting streets go from two lanes to one, and a big drop in speed, for a non-existant bike commuting community.

Making a few streets like this in every city (some cities need more than a few) would be beneficial, but "most" streets like this???? It's a laughable concept to please the 1% of commuters, while the drivers pay probably 90% for the construction fees in taxes. That People for Bikes guy is a kook.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joetron

People for Bikes is not advocating for wholesale reduction in speed limits in all urban or residential areas. I'm sure they'd acknowledge the need and utility of high speed arterial streets and highways. Part of what they are advocating for is safe and complete bicycle infrastructure in urban areas. Sometimes that includes lower speed limits on streets that parallel arterials to create safe cycling routes while also increasing the overall safety and quality of life in those neighborhoods.

Salt Lake City is full of streets that IMO should have lower speed limits. They are narrow, full of driveways and crosswalks and were never intended to carry the traffic loads or speeds that have evolved as the city has sprawled and grown more crowded.

---

Now I can't take you seriously because SLC has probably the widest streets in the country. Something about pulling U turns with teams of oxen or some prophet told them so, but still, come on man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdironRider

Now I can't take you seriously because SLC has probably the widest streets in the country. Something about pulling U turns with teams of oxen or some prophet told them so, but still, come on man.

---

They are like this downtown for sure. Near downtown though the roads are known for being narrow, built in the 50s and beyond, some don't even have sidewalks so we have pedestrians in the street in neighborhoods, like mine. I'm two houses from being in SLC.

Developing areas and infrastructure to optimize automobile usage while neglecting pedestrian, cyclist and other forms of transportation, particularly in urban and suburban area results in teh suck.