I caught this one yesterday on the morning run and am still thinking about it. What an incredible illustration of the damage unresolved volcanic anger can cause. Take the time to listen to it all (about 5 1/2 minutes).
I caught this one yesterday on the morning run and am still thinking about it. What an incredible illustration of the damage unresolved volcanic anger can cause. Take the time to listen to it all (about 5 1/2 minutes).
I’m glad that the disregard for the rules of the road by cyclists was also highlighted. In our Pittsburgh neighborhood, many cyclists appear to view themselves as unconstrained by four-way stops and enjoying the right to ride the wrong way down one-way streets (which is very scary if you’re a driver and are not expecting head-on traffic).
Compared with drivers, cyclists are much more vulnerable, but they can still do pedestrians – especially the very young and very old – considerable injury if they hit them.
Yes, Jeremy, some cyclists violate the rules of the road. Are you suggesting that no motorists violate the rules of the road? Many of the driver behaviors mentioned in this report also violate the rules of the road. Both are wrong. As a former League of American certified bicycle safety instructor, I taught cyclists that they should obey all rules of the road. They are operating vehicles and must obey the same rules as motorists.
Before I retired I commuted to work on my bicycle. It is not uncommon for drivers to start blowing their horns instead of rationally passing as they would any other sort of slow moving vehicle. It is not uncommon for drivers to attempt to pass unsafely forcing the cyclist into the gutter where there is all sorts of dangerous litter. And there are drivers who do all sorts of utterly unexcusable things. I’ve been hit by an empty milk carton thrown from a passing car. Here in Dallas we have had a cyclist seriously injured by a truck passing so close that he was struck by the right side mirror. If that driver had tried that stunt with a car or truck, he would have done major damage to both his and the other vehicle.
I was “amused” by the guy in this report who complained that when they pulled to the side of a cyclist and yelled at him, he got the finger. What the hell does that idiot driver think he’s doing yelling at the operator of another vehicle? Does he think that if he behaved in the same way toward another motorist, he would not get the finger.
I don’t recommend that cyclists give anyone the finger. When drivers honked or yelled, I recommend that the cyclist smile and wave–being sure that all five fingers are fully extended. But there is no excuse for the behavior of many motorists toward cyclists.
Spot on, Septuagenarian, as a frequent rider in Charleston, I’m fortunate that a lot of the drivers are courteous… but when talking to most drivers, the fact is that they are clueless… they forget that if they make a mistake they kill people. If I make a mistake… I am usually the one that gets hurt.
Septuagenarian,
No, of course the threat posed by a motorist to a cyclist is far greater (and I have great admiration for those who brave the roads with a greener form of transportation). And I quite agree that bad behavior by motorists (and for that matter pedestrians) should be criticized and, if necessary, penalized.
Perhaps because Squirrel Hill is that sort of neighborhood, we have more bikers than average and one naturally tends to take notice of bad behavior more than good. Before moving here, I had a somewhat elevated view of cycling courtesy and that has been rather shaken. For example, I sympathize with cyclists sometimes using pavements to avoid precisely the problems described, but have been astonished at how some will never consider getting off and walking the bike a block even in a heavily trafficked area.
[blockquote]have been astonished at how some will never consider getting off and walking the bike a block even in a heavily trafficked area.[/blockquote]
Maybe motorists should consider getting off and walking their car a block. 🙂
Most serious cyclists use pedals and cleats that lock their feet to the pedal; the cleats on the shoes make walking difficult.
I am reminded that a good cyclist can come to a stop sign and do what is known as a “track stand”, i.e., remain balance and motionless. It’s an essential skill for track racing and race sprints. (In a race it forces the other rider to move ahead, because the one who is behind has a slight advantage.) Someone who apparently didn’t like cyclists who did that at stop signs or did a “rolling stop” (something a lot of motorists do as well) proposed that cyclists be required to stop and place one foot on the ground. Great idea. Everyone who comes to a stop sign should be required to stop and put one foot on the ground! It would really be fun for drivers of eighteen wheelers and busses!
Just to clarify, I meant [b]foot[/b] traffic i.e. they insist on riding the bicycle on a crowded pavement forcing the elderly and mothers with pushchairs to give way.
I presume you agree that “no turn on red” applies to all vehicles, not just those with engines?
Of course, there are plenty of bad pedestrians also.
I misunderstood. My view is that cyclists should [b]not[/b] be riding on sidewalks. They are not pedestrians. And it is generally speaking more dangerous than riding properly on the road–even in heavy traffic.
Most bike-car collisions happen at intersections. (Most car-car collosions happen there, too.) The problem with riding on side walks is (among other things), motorists turning right are not looking for a bike moving on the sidewalk to their right; consequently, they will turn into the bike or the bike’s path.
While on the subject of bike safety, I would point out (as the side bar of the article does) that cyclists should [b]not[/b] ride against traffic. Unfortunately, many children are taught (and adults think) that it is “safer” to ride against traffic. Cyclists are not pedestrians. The reason that pedestrians are told to walk against traffic is that they can make an instant movement to their right when they see a car approaching. A bicyclist cannot. Further more the speed of the car and the bicycles are additive when they approach each other, which means both have less time and distance in which to stop safely. When the car and the bicycle are moving in the same direction, the car has more time and distance in which to react and stop–and the cyclist is moving away from the potential collision rather than toward it.
[blockquote]My view is that cyclists should not be riding on sidewalks. [/blockquote]
Agreed! In addition to the blind spot you mention there’s also the speed differential… I’m riding at 18-20mph… v a kid going 2-4mph that’s dangerous for everyone!
And… in Charleston, it’s illegal for Bicycles to be on the sidewalk.
Well, I live on a farm reached by a rather narrow, hilly and curvy road and I loath the numerous recreational cyclists who infest it. Among the other hazards they pose, they almost never have a pennant flying to give a motorist the slightest warning that they may be just over the crest of the hill the motorist is approaching at over twice the speed of the cyclist. They even seem to enjoy travelling abreast, which is very rude considering the scarcity of safe passing places. At least when I’m riding my horse along the road, my head is a good 9 feet above the roadway so I can be seen more readily and I routinely ride onto the shoulder to allow vehicles to pass without their having to either come to a creeping crawl or swing out into the oncoming lane. When I was a boy and lived in town, I rode a bicycle everywhere without incident (other than the time I had a head-on collision with a car – my fault) and my son rode a bike when he was at the university. Still, I think they have no place on small, farm-to-market country roads.
Evan, that’s just silly. If there’s farm equipment on the road, it often takes more than and entire lane and goes even slower than a Bicycle. Also, riding two abreast is legal in most jurisdictions… Treat Bicycle’s like traffic and go around them like you would other slower traffic. Bicycles can’t get into the gutter… there’s glass and other junk over there…
#10
Farm equipment needs to travel on the country roads. Doing so is essential to the farmers’ livelihood, not optional. Not the case with the recreational cyclists. I realize the cyclist cannot safely get off the road to allow autos to pass. That’s why they have no business being there in the first place.
#11 – For many (MANY) poor people the only way to get somewhere is on a bicycle. And, for me, it’s the only way I choose to get most places because of the economic factor. Cyclists pay taxes and have every right to those roads.
(Before anyone “goes off” on taxes… here: http://streetsblog.net/2008/12/24/cyclists-subsidize-motorists/
And here: http://www.examiner.com/x-2429-Bicycle-Transportation-Examiner~y2009m8d28-Do-cyclists-pay-their-fair-share-to-use-the-roads)
#11
There are virtually no poor people riding bicycles on the country roads around us. They are all on expensive bicycles and decked out in the latest Tour de France fashions. They are recreational cyclists. On the very rare occassions when I encounter what is obviously a non-recreational rider who is apparantly using a bicycle to get to/from work, I treat him just as do the slow moving farm machine, as a necessary inconvenience. The recreational cyclists are an unnecessary inconvenience and a safety hazard.
By state law in California, bicycles are vehicles with a right to travel on any roadway other than a freeway. They must follow the same rules that motor vehicles use. Unless passing, they are restricted to the right hand side of the road: two abreast, therefore, is illegal. In addition, riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is against the law. The sidewalk is for pedestrians, not vehicles.
The Texas law provides:
[blockquote]Stipulations in the Texas Traffic Laws that bicyclists should be familiar with include:
Cyclists have all the rights and the duties that apply to drivers of vehicles. This statement includes stopping at signs and signals, yielding the right of way and obeying posted speed limits and one-way street signs.
No bicycle shall carry more persons at one time than the number for which it is designed.
A bicyclist moving below the speed of other traffic shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, except when:
â– The person is overtaking and passing another vehicle going in the same direction;
â– The person is preparing to turn left at an intersection or onto a private road or driveway;
â– Conditions of the roadway, including fixed or moving objects or vehicles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or substandard lanes, make it unsafe to ride next to the right curb or edge of the roadway.
â– The person is operating a bicycle in an outside lane that is less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that lane, or it is too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side.
For night use, a bicycle shall have a lamp on the front with a white light visible from a stance of at least 500 feet to the front and with a red reflector on the rear that is of a type approved by the Department of Public Safety, and visible when directly in front of lawful upper beams of motor vehicle headlamps from all distances from 50 – 300 feet to the rear of the bicycle, or a lamp that emits a red light visible from a distance of 500 feet to the rear of the bicycle.
Violation of the law is a misdemeanor offense and could result in a Justice of the Peace Citation.[/blockquote]
As far as I know there is no prohibition for two bicycles to ride side by side. The Texas law is pretty standard through out the country; it probably is part of the federal uniform vehicle law which is required for states to receive federal highway money. There are some other local rules–notably that bicycles are generally prohibited on Interstate Highways, expressways and toll roads. Here, bicycles and motorcycles must go around Addison Airport because they are forbidden to use the tunnel that goes under the runways.
Having done a lot of recreational (club) cycling I know our practice was to ride two abreast (often in a pace line, which increases the speed of the group). The person at the end could hear a motor vehicle approaching and would call out “car back” and we would get into single file as quickly as practical.
I would make the observation that a dozen cyclists travelling in a tight single file is roughly 120 feet long, whereas the same group travelling two abreast will be 60 feet long–which would actually make passing easier. The reality is that on a narrow road a car is going to need to be able to see a long distance ahead even to pass a group riding single file.
#14, Not to nitpick, but I don’t think you’re generally right about riding on sidewalks in California. There is a law against *parking* them on sidewalks. (See below.) I’m not aware of any against riding (except locally.)
This actually came up when I actually knocked a lady’s bicycle down a few years ago while riding my own, but it appeared she was in the wrong because she parked it in my way across the sidewalk.
Parking. VC 21210
No person shall leave a bicycle lying on its side on any sidewalk, or shall park a bicycle on a sidewalk in any other position, so that there is not an adequate path for pedestrian traffic. Local authorities may prohibit bicycle parking in designated areas of the public highway, provided appropriate signs are erected.
Sidney, then perhaps I should go back and attempt to appeal the ticket I received for riding my bike on the sidewalk.
I do remember the prohibition from the state drivers manual, but that was quite a while ago.
The core story here is rage. I remain completely puzzled as to why people are so angry. Being in a motor vehicle seems to exacerbate the problem. In Virginia recently, it was reported that a motorist exchanged words with a bicyclist over the latter’s use of a child seat on the rear of the bike. The motorist apparently felt (perhaps correctly) that the practice endangered the child. Apparently concluding that the cyclist had not received the criticism in the proper spirit, the motorist shot the cyclist in the head. The latter’s bike helmet stopped the bullet. The motorist was given an amazingly light sentence (4 months is what I remember, but I could be wrong – in any event it was less than a year).
What things are appropriate for us to be enraged about, inwardly or outwardly? If our rage is appropriate, what does that rage entitle us to do to others?