Hit and Run

Lioninoil_a T_n

>>>>>Baloney. If a cyclist continues to get himself in near
>>>>>miss situations with law breaking motorists on the same
>>>>>road, there's something wrong with the cyclist.
>>
>>The post quoted above blames the cyclist for _getting
>>himself_ in near-miss situations with law-breaking
>>motorists. How do you parse that into _not_ blaming the
>>cyclist??
>
> No blame stated, and no blame assigned.

If the phrase _there's something wrong with the cyclist_
is not an assignation of blame for _getting himself_ in
near-miss situations with law-breaking motorists, then
what is it??

--
It's not about anger -- it's about peace. It's not about
power -- it's about grace. It's not about knowing your enemy
-- it's about knowing yourself.

Terry Morse

Someone wrote:

> >>>>>Baloney. If a cyclist continues to get himself in
> >>>>>near miss situations with law breaking motorists on
> >>>>>the same road, there's something wrong with the
> >>>>>cyclist.
> >>
> >>The post quoted above blames the cyclist for _getting
> >>himself_ in near-miss situations with law-breaking
> >>motorists. How do you parse that into _not_ blaming the
> >>cyclist??
> >
> > No blame stated, and no blame assigned.
>
> If the phrase _there's something wrong with the cyclist_
> is not an assignation of blame for _getting himself_ in
> near-miss situations with law-breaking motorists, then
> what is it??

I'm going to stop answering these questions now. There
appears to be no possible benefit in doing so.

Regarding cycling, the Sequoia 200k today was a great ride.
Lots of quiet roads with redwood trees, blue skies and warm
air, and several really fun climbs. Almost no driver
misbehavior, except one pickup truck (driver, not the truck)
that blew its horn at length every time it passed a cyclist.
At least it passed safely and didn't throw anything.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Tom Keats

In article <40c7e253.61077747@news.individual.net>,
Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com> writes:
> Sat, 05 Jun 2004 11:06:42 -0400,
> <40c1df90$1@news.ysu.edu>, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@mousepotato.com> wrote:
>
>>How would you have the button in reach of a cyclist,
>>without having it be a collision hazard?
>>
>>What if a cyclist intended to make a left turn? Would he
>>push the button on the right side of the road, then drag
>>the bike over toward the left?
>
> Yes, or ignore the button altogether and trust the buried
> sensors to pick up the bike.

Earles & 45th, and 45th & Kerr are a couple of intersections
with both sensor-loop and push-button options; there are, of
course, others, but maybe not enough. I've spotted a few
places having almost /every/ kind of pavement cut: circle,
diamond and double-rectangle, all overlapping each other.
Generally it seems the double-rectangle is the real one.

> Unfortunately, they're most often stuck on a post at the
> curb. Some are on small diverter islands in the center of
> a traffic calmed street.

The one at 37th & Main is especially convenient for hanging
a left onto south-bound Main off east-bound 37th. Likewise
coming off of north-bound Ontario onto east-bound King
Edward. Ontario & 49th also springs to mind, as well as
Ontario & 16th.

> Many streets, especially around schools, that aren't
> yet specifically designated cycling routes are getting
> them too.
>
> I've not yet noticed any intersections with punch buttons
> accessible from both the left and right sides of the lane.

Of course those push-buttons on the little centre islands
can be treated as straight-through/left-turn lanes, while
the uncontrolled, un-islanded portion of the street to the
right is a sort of 'right- turn-only' lane. In fact,
according to the signage, it's /supposed/ to be for cars,
but many of 'em go straight through, and some even turn left
from there.

If the street you're riding on is fairly non-busy and wide
enough, it's generally no sweat to push the right-side
button and carefully & warily do an 0-turn and come up on
the left of your (unstriped) 'lane'. Although the light may
well change in your favour while you're busy going through
all that maneouvering. If it's a narrower unstriped street,
I'd just as well be rightward anyway, having been clobbered
once by someone hanging a left off the cross street and
cutting the corner -- right into me.

> There's only certain times of day at some intersections
> that I even bother to use them. I figure if I punch the
> button then I'd better wait for the light but there's
> often breaks in cross traffic sooner than the light cycle
> stops it. That and the sequence is usually far longer than
> it takes a bicycle to clear the intersection. Sure,
> they're handy sometimes but mostly I don't need them.

I'm very much the same way. On the more frequently used
routes there's often a rider coming the other way who pushes
the button on their side of the intersection anyway, or a
pedestrian, while you're waiting for a break in the traffic.
It's handy to keep a whether-eye open for that coming up,
when setting-up for a left turn.

Where sight-lines are particularly bad because of humps &
hills (like 23rd & Fraser), I /really/ appreciate push-
button lights. That's why I think there should be one at
Dumfries & King Edward/ Kingsway, if they're going to push a
bike route through there.

I'm loathe to push the button when there's just li'l ol' me
crossing the intersection. If I see anyone approaching from
a distance, ahead or behind, I'll wait for them and time my
button-push so we can all use the light. I especially give
that courtesy to huffing-&-puffing freds struggling to make
the light. I get a lot of 'Thank you-s,' doing that.

Funny thing is, the timing of some of these lights is
instantaneous (37th & Fraser), while others appear more
arbitrary (37th & Main). It's a real PITA to push the
button, wait for the light, and it finally changes in your
favour when there's nobody there and you've got a break in
the cross traffic anyway. Or, as you say, pass-up on
breaks in the traffic while waiting for your light, and
end up stopping a bunch of people when the light finally
does change.

I think just the fact that there are traffic light signals
at all at such intersections works in our favour, whether we
push the button or not. I think the traffic-light fixtures
hanging up there serve well, just by alerting the drivers to
be aware of cross traffic.

The City seems reluctant to put push-button lights on King
Edward, even though quite a number of our bike routes cross
it. Interesting, eh?

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Tom Keats

In article <h4n0ac.hh11.ln@bud.garden.local>,
tomk2003@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) writes:

> left onto south-bound Main off east-bound 37th.

I meant north-bound Main. I get a little dyslexic sometimes.

When I'm going there, I get it right -- I just sometimes
describe it wrong.

Towards the mountains, Windsor Meats, & Helen's Grille.
Y'know what i mean.

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Tom Keats

In article <tmorse-A7E900.08415805062004@news.covad.net>,
Terry Morse <tmorse@spamcop.net> writes:

> Thanks for stating what I was trying to, but with much
> more tact.

I think Eric Sande had the appropriate tact.

The rest is just a bunch of words blowin' in the wind.

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

dhinds

In ba.bicycles Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:

>> I don't remember: do these intersections have "cross
>> traffic does not stop" warning signs?

> What does it matter? A driver who can't tell whether cross
> traffic has to stop should not be driving.

Err well again in a perfect world it wouldn't matter. Do you
suggest that we abolish all such yellow warning signs? After
all a driver who can't recognize a hazardous situation
should not be driving.

Of course it is no excuse, but given that most streets in
the vicinity of Bryant have 4-way stops, drivers who are
accustomed to rolling through stops when they are the first
to reach an intersection, may use more caution if they see a
warning sign.

-- Dave

Lioninoil_a T_n

>>>>>>>Baloney. If a cyclist continues to get himself in
>>>>>>>near miss situations with law breaking motorists on
>>>>>>>the same road, there's something wrong with the
>>>>>>>cyclist.
>>>>
>>>>The post quoted above blames the cyclist for _getting
>>>>himself_ in near-miss situations with law-breaking
>>>>motorists. How do you parse that into _not_ blaming the
>>>>cyclist??
>>>
>>>No blame stated, and no blame assigned.
>>
>>If the phrase _there's something wrong with the cyclist_
>>is not an assignation of blame for _getting himself_ in
>>near-miss situations with law-breaking motorists, then
>>what is it??
>
> I'm going to stop answering these questions now.

Good idea.

--
It's not about anger -- it's about peace. It's not about
power -- it's about grace. It's not about knowing your enemy
-- it's about knowing yourself.