Fu*king Cyclists

[DBdude]

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.

move to the middle of no where, USA

problem solved

[joetron]

move to the middle of no where, USA

problem solved

Sov, the guy who wrote that Surly blog, lives in Decorah, Iowa

[Dantheman]

move to the middle of no where, USA

problem solved

Not necessarily. A few years back CalTrans installed a bunch of "Share the Road" signs along Highway 3 in northern CA between Weaverville and Yreka, which is a relatively remote area. Someone came through and spray painted a red "X" through the bike symbol on every single one. We're talking dozens of signs spread across ~100 miles of road. CalTrans came back through sometime later and cleaned off the Xs, only to have them tagged again shortly thereafter.

[Buster Highmen]

Try not to be a dick. That's all I got.".

Reiterative Ibid. Op Cit. Encore. Ditto, dittarae, dittui, dittitus.

I quit road riding after getting run off the road twice, once clipped.

Still, being an asshole on the bike won't fix the assholes in the cars.

[DBdude]

Not necessarily. A few years back CalTrans installed a bunch of "Share the Road" signs along Highway 3 in northern CA between Weaverville and Yreka, which is a relatively remote area. Someone came through and spray painted a red "X" through the bike symbol on every single one. We're talking dozens of signs spread across ~100 miles of road. CalTrans came back through sometime later and cleaned off the Xs, only to have them tagged again shortly thereafter.

it's still safer riding

[Flea]

Reiterative Ibid. Op Cit. Encore. Ditto, dittarae, dittui, dittitus.

I quit road riding after getting run off the road twice, once clipped.

Still, being an asshole on the bike won't fix the assholes in the cars.

How exactly did you get run off the road?

[narc]

[Dexter Rutecki]

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!

Yeah, I don't think so. But continue being obscure if you like.

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.

No, I don't get annoyed by that inconvenience--I rarely get annoyed by cyclists at all, but others here certainly do, and some of that is because of possibly deliberately aggravating behavior. On the rare occasions when I've experienced similar I have found it annoying as well. I am aware of the laws, but some of this isn't related to what is or isn't legal.[quote]

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.



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.

Again, there is a difference between what might be absolutely legally allowed, and what should be done.

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.

But that's exactly what we're talking about here--and to some degree, if someone is behind them, then they are usually holding up traffic.

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.

Sure, no one (I don't think) is disputing that. It's when cyclists decide that they are not going to use the path and inconvenience others simply to avoid an inconvenience to themselves that I think it reveals a fundamental selfishness and causes problems--again, regardless of what technically may be allowed.

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.

Well, bikers should do a lot of things that many of them rarely do. This sounds like unicorn land again.

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

Heh, sure.

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.

I don't know anything about those studies, but I can absolutely say that if you're talking about red lights and crosswalks, I would guess that in NYC 80% of cyclists rarely observe those laws, but 99% of drivers do (and they often receive tickets if they don't, which is probably a reason that most do).

edit: 99% of drivers observe those laws in ways cyclists don't. Yes, there are too many drivers who will push the limits (and break them) with red lights, but they never blow through a light that's been red for 20 seconds at full speed and blindly enter traffic expecting everyone else to look out for them, nor do they fly through crosswalks against the light within inches of pedestrians, which is SOP for many cyclists. But cyclists don't really have to worry about tickets, so they keep doing it.

[jono]

I hope you weren't complaining about my being obscure because I didn't hook you up with sarcasm meter spancership directly but if so, pm digitaldeath.

With respect to trading inconvenience, if it were a simple zero sum game of my convenience vs. yours then you could call someone out for not being altruistic enough to simply give up their rights. Or if the inconvenience were far greater for cars, sure. But the whole point you missed many pages ago was that the cyclist choosing the road has to weigh both convenience and safety and therefore it is never a zero sum game. That doesn't mean they'll always get it right, but it makes me disinclined to second guess their assessment of conditions.

[::: :::]

Again, there is a difference between what might be absolutely legally allowed, and what should be done.

who do you propose determines that?




you seem to be quite thoughtful in other threads, but i think you've got flies in your eyes with this one

[Dexter Rutecki]

There isn't an absolute in this, so I don't have anything in mind in terms of it being 'determined' by someone. I guess I'm with Buster in his apparently crazy suggestion that people just do what is best for themselves while also taking into account how others feel. Basically, don't be a dick (if you're a motorist, be patient and pass safely, if you're a cyclist don't block traffic simply because you think you're entitled to).

Look, this is pretty academic for me. Over the past ten years of driving in NYC and all over New England (and random periods of a week or so driving out west), I can recall one time that I had an interaction with a cyclist (and yes, it was a guy who decided he should block a street while riding slowly so he could converse with his GF riding alongside him). And as I've also said, I have no issue with cyclists choosing to use the road if there is something legitimately unsafe about a bike path.

One of the things I like about NYC is we generally don't sweat the small stuff like this (whereas in a lot of places it seems people get really invested in this shit)--sure, people honk their horns and make gestures if they're pissed, but compared to road rage I've seen, experienced, and heard about in other places there isn't a lot going on here (I once had a driver in CA follow me and do all sorts of crazy shit because of how I changed lanes ahead of him (I signaled to change and he tried to accelerate to block me from the space and got pissed when I beat him to it), whereas the worst you get here is flipped off or yelled at). I drive most days with cyclists all around me and they generally don't bother me and I think I don't bother them. I don't really care that cyclists routinely break every traffic law imaginable and put themselves in danger by doing so (but when they endanger pedestrians or actually injure them it does piss me off). And like I said, I am very much against drivers putting cyclists in danger. But I also am in favor of cyclists being courteous and considerate, even if they aren't legally obligated to do so. I think that's really the extent of my point here, so...without a real dog in this fight I'll probably leave it at that.

edit: realized I'm probably not being true to TGR form, so to keep this going: cyclists are all dicks, they should be treated like Dascunt, take their innertubes and strangle them all, hit them with your F-150, roll some coal, blah blah blah.

[muted]

...without a real dog in this fight I'll probably leave it at that.

You are just going to leave this thread without going into detail????

So abrupt.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Ha, pretty sure the meter was operational for that one. Good.

[ex-powderbroker]

One of the things I like about NYC is we generally don't sweat the small stuff like this

Except everything you have said is a much bigger deal to a biker, especially the part where you compare the damage caused by car and bike and declare it a tie when it's inconvenience vs. life+death.

Literally, are you only in this thread to mouth-breathe to yourself?

[mcski]

Sov, the guy who wrote that Surly blog, lives in Decorah, Iowa

Funny - my sister in law owns a restaurant in decorah. I prob have met this guy. Decorah has a decent single track lap in the hills near her house.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Except everything you have said is a much bigger deal to a biker, especially the part where you compare the damage caused by car and bike and declare it a tie when it's inconvenience vs. life+death.

Literally, are you only in this thread to mouth-breathe to yourself?

Literally, what you're saying has nothing to do with what I posted. I never said anything close to that. In fact, I basically said the opposite. Literally.

And what you quoted, about small stuff, also had nothing to do with what might be a big deal to a biker (as in the damage caused by car vs. bike--that's an obvious fact which would be stupid to contest).

[old goat]

It occurs to me that I've spent a lot more time driving stuck behind slow drivers than behind cyclists. It also occurs to me that I'm a lot more concerned about cars that blow stop signs and red lights than about bicycles that do it.
I've also noticed that when I'm riding my bike and I get to a 4 way stop after a car, the car almost always waits for me to go and usually waves me through. If that happens to you when you're cycling, wave thanks to the car; don't accept it as your god-given right, because god doesn't care; he's too busy helping some football player score a touchdown. (grammar police--can I use two semicolons in the same sentence?)

[adrenalated]

[Flea]

OMG I GOT HONKED AT ON MY 40 MILE BIKE COMMUTE TODAY! I QUIT!!!!!!!!!!!

[kevin267]

I like how you can post about this subject absolutely anywhere and get people super worked up over it

[Flea]

Fish in a barrel. Hmmm think i need to head back over to tech talk.........

[old goat]

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.



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.

First of all, no one is arguing that bikes should go away or ride somewhere else, we're just arguing that cyclist do what you say they should do --not block traffic unnecessarily. You're making up arguments that no one is making. Second--at least in CA, right of way on bike paths goes to the bike--pedestrians are supposed to step off the path if there is room.

[jono]

First of all, no one is arguing that bikes should go away or ride somewhere else, we're just arguing that cyclist do what you say they should do --not block traffic unnecessarily.

Would you like to define "unnecessarily?" Seems to be the crux of the thread, or about 23 pages of it, anyway.

[highangle]

OMG I GOT HONKED AT ON MY 40 MILE BIKE COMMUTE TODAY! I QUIT!!!!!!!!!!!

In my village, we have a section that has a concrete sidewalk and asphalt bike path, as well as a gravel foot/bike path. The road also has a shoulder along the waterfront park wide enough to parallel park a bus. I'll be damned if I can drive a half mile along the waterfront park without having to creep behind some tourist on a skinny bike in the fkn road. Worse, it's never a hot chick.

Dipshits need to pay a road tax.

[Flea]

Shit the worlds gone soft. Cyclists have gone soft and scared. In the 70's/80's my mom was commuting/riding upwards of 250 miles a week at least 6 months of the year and towing my ass all over gods creation in the original hard plastic bugger cart. There was no "share the road" or special bike lanes or a 3' passing rule. You rode cuz it's what you did and you respected cars cuz they were bigger than you, and that road you were on was built with cars in mind. Not you. Sure there were asshole drivers, that will never change. My mom had incidinces where a couple times guys would roll up in a vehicle and smack her on the ass which one time thru her into a ditch. You think she thru her arms up and yelled, "boo hoo I quit road riding I'm gonna die!!!" Nope, she got right back to it cuz she's a cyclist and it's what she does. I've been hit, but riding is what I do. I'm way more likely to get fucked up getting hit by some asshole while driving my car than riding my bike.