Me versus the American Automobile Association

On 27 May 2004 17:25:27 GMT, Lars Lehtonen <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Always ride with the traffic -- as close as
possible to the right side of the road."

Interesting how they rephrased this. California law uses the
'practible,' not 'possible.' I wonder if the word
'practible' has a legal meaning distinct from 'possible.'

21202. (a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at
a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the
same direction at that time shall ride as close as
practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway
except under any of the following situations:
(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or
vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or
into a private road or driveway.
(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions
(including, but not limited to, fixed or moving
objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals,
surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that
make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand
curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section
21656. For purposes of this section, a "substandard
width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a
bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side
within the lane.

leginfo.ca.govcgiOpen ↗
bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=21001-
22000&file=21200-21212

In article <[email hidden]>,

Lars Lehtonen said:

The annual LA River Ride sponsored by Los Angeles Bicycle
Coalition was on Sunday. I'm of the opinion that laying poorly-
engineered asphalt between a drainage ditch and the freeway
is a waste of time and money, especially when it is closed
at night and during rainstorms.

I don't generally use the river route myself because it
isn't useful to me, but I can appreciate the fact that it
adds a new route without removing any old ones. There are
some trips that the path supports well in the sense of
providing an express route between some points that are not
as well served by the existing streets. In that sense I
don't think it's all bad. I do wish they would spend money
to improve city streets for cyclists instead of building
bike paths, but even so I don't wish for them to take away
that path.

Quoted message said:

Bike advocates here have been happy to take money from
Bikes Belong for the purpose of completing the river path
to the ocean. I distributed a flyer as to out the
connection between Bikes Belong and the American
Automobile Association, as well as call for saner advocacy
that looks for law enforcement to do its job and start
citing motorists for the chronic cyclist-harassment found
on LA streets.

Just citing motorists for dangerous driving in LA is the
bottom line, shouldn't matter who they are menacing. This is
a dangerous place to be a driver as well as a cyclist.
However this is a problem that has proved highly resistant
to advocacy and change. They majority is on the wrong side
of the issue especially with respect to bikes and their lack
of rights on the road in reality if not law.

Quoted message said:

Here's the flyer in PDF:

csupomona.eduflyer3.pdfOpen ↗

I was surprised upon arrival to find that the AAA is no
longer just greenwashing money through organizations like
Bikes Belong, it is now overtly sponsoring cycling events.
The AAA distributed a flyer of "Bicycle Rider's Tips" that
included:

"Walk your bike across busy intersections."

"Always ride with the traffic -- as close as
possible to the right side of the road."

This one is essentially what the California vehicle code
says, have to change the law if you don't like it.

--Paul

Quoted message said:

"Use the safest route to your destination. Avoid
busy streets and intersections."

Dismal.

---
Lars Lehtonen

According to Paul Southworth <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Always ride with the traffic -- as close as
possible to the right side of the road."

This one is essentially what the California vehicle code
says, have to change the law if you don't like it.

Practicable is not the same as possible. It is possible to
ride right down the gutter, but that obviously isn't safe.
Same goes for riding right against parked cars. Possible,
but not practicable.

---
Lars Lehtonen

In article <[email hidden]>, Lars Lehtonen

Quoted message said:

I was surprised upon arrival to find that the AAA is no
longer just greenwashing money through organizations like
Bikes Belong, it is now overtly sponsoring cycling events.
The AAA distributed a flyer of "Bicycle Rider's Tips" that
included:

"Walk your bike across busy intersections."

"Always ride with the traffic -- as close as
possible to the right side of the road."

"Use the safest route to your destination. Avoid
busy streets and intersections."

Dismal.

---
Lars Lehtonen

A serious rider was hit and killed by a car near UCI here in
Orange County this week. The newspaper reported that he had
accidently veered from the right shoulder.

This is the third murder by car this month here in Orange
County, CA that I'm aware of. From the area I know two
appear to have been in the bike lane when hit.

On 27 May 2004 17:25:27 GMT, Lars Lehtonen <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The AAA distributed a flyer of "Bicycle Rider's Tips" that
included:

"Walk your bike across busy intersections."

Sound advice for somebody not comfortable with
vehicular cycling.

Quoted message said:

"Always ride with the traffic

It's a step in the right direction; or should I say a ride
in the right direction. I see too many wrong-way riders.

Quoted message said:

-- as close as possible to the right side of the road."

"Use the safest route to your destination. Avoid
busy streets and intersections."

Quoted message said:

Dismal.

Not dismal for many common non-vehicular cyclists that are
entirely afraid to ride on the road at all. The only
terrible thing is "as close as possible to the right side"
which could put them in the door zone, or make them think
they should be on a sidewalk.

You don't think that it's all good advice for a cyclist who
is so uneducated that they would follow directions
distributed by AAA?
--
Rick Onanian

Wait a minute, Ace, the rider "accidentally veered" from his
path on the shoulder into a car and you call that a murder?
Sounds like he/she hit the car and not vice versa. An
accident, yes. Sad consequence, yes. To call it a murder,
though, is utter nonsense.

--

- GRL

"It's good to want things."

Steve Barr (philosopher, poet,
humorist, chemist, Visual Basic
programmer) "whinds"
<[email hidden]> wrote in
messagenews:20040527180353.22212.00000143@mb-
m20.aol.com...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Lars Lehtonen

Quoted message said:

I was surprised upon arrival to find that the AAA is no
longer just greenwashing money through organizations like
Bikes Belong, it is now overtly sponsoring cycling
events. The AAA distributed a flyer of "Bicycle Rider's
Tips" that included:

"Walk your bike across busy intersections."

"Always ride with the traffic -- as close as possible to
the right side of the road."

"Use the safest route to your destination. Avoid busy
streets and intersections."

Dismal.

---
Lars Lehtonen

A serious rider was hit and killed by a car near UCI here
in Orange County

this

Quoted message said:

week. The newspaper reported that he had accidently veered
from the right shoulder.

This is the third murder by car this month here in Orange
County, CA that

I'm

Quoted message said:

aware of. From the area I know two appear to have been in
the bike lane

when

Quoted message said:

hit.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Rick Onanian said:

You don't think that it's all good advice for a cyclist
who is so uneducated that they would follow directions
distributed by AAA?

Problem is, non-cycling drivers will read that stuff, and
believe it should apply to /all/ cyclists, at all times,
regardless of traffic circumstances or riders' skill. Many
drivers will simplistically think in terms of the gist of
all that advice, which basically says: "stay out of the way
of cars". I think it just serves to encourage and perpetuate
anti-cyclism (anti-cycling?).

cheers, Tom

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

Lars Lehtonen said:

The annual LA River Ride sponsored by Los Angeles Bicycle
Coalition was on Sunday. I'm of the opinion that laying
poorly-engineered asphalt between a drainage ditch and the
freeway is a waste of time and money, especially when it
is closed at night and during rainstorms.

I have no love for bike paths or especially the AAA, but
the LA River deserves more than to be written off as a
drainage ditch.

If you ever get a chance to go on one of the river walks run
by Friends of the LA River (www.folar.org) with Lewis
MacAdams, co-founder of FoLAR, do it. It is one of my
favorite memories of the time I lived in LA.

Quoted message said:

Practicable is not the same as possible. It is possible to
ride right down the gutter, but that obviously isn't safe.
Same goes for riding right against parked cars. Possible,
but not practicable.

I don't think it's that insidious. In all truthfulness, the
word "practicable" isn't commonly used and I'll bet more
people than you'd think wouldn't know its meaning.

Better would have been "as close to the right side of the
road as it's safe to do, taking into consideration road
hazards, pavement conditions, etc."

Sorry I don't have more faith in the reading comprehension
of the average person-

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
chainreactionbicycles.comchainreactionbicycles.comOpen ↗

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Practicable is not the same as possible. It is possible
to ride right down the gutter, but that obviously isn't
safe. Same goes for riding right against parked cars.
Possible, but not practicable.

I don't think it's that insidious. In all truthfulness, the
word "practicable" isn't commonly used and I'll bet more
people than you'd think wouldn't know its meaning.

Well, may not insidious, but from a legal standpoint the
words are different. Unfortunately, the attempt last year to
re-write that part of the CVC, taking out the word
practicable for more understandable English (AB-1408) was
watered down and basically killed, and AAA groups were one
of the two main opponents of the change (CPOE was the
other). If they fight to keep the work practicable in the
law, then they should use it in their literature IMHO.

- rick

According to Rick Onanian <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Not dismal for many common non-vehicular cyclists that are
entirely afraid to ride on the road at all. The only
terrible thing is "as close as possible to the right side"
which could put them in the door zone, or make them think
they should be on a sidewalk.

I think the same goes for the directive to walk across busy
intersections.

Quoted message said:

You don't think that it's all good advice for a cyclist who
is so uneducated that they would follow directions
distributed by AAA?

It would be better if cyclists behaved more predictably
within the law. As for experience level, this *was* the
annual ride of the Los Angeles Bicycle Coalition.

The scandal is that bicycle advocates gave the AAA this
podium to distribute this [censored] at a bicycle event.

Actually, the scandal is that bike advocates took the
sponsorship money and effectively *sold* the auto lobby the
chance to distribute unsafe anti-cycling garbage.
Unfortunately, As a member of Bikes Belong, the AAA is
acting according to the 1999 BB mandate:

Bikes Belong Coalition, other industry
organizations, and bicycle advocates must work
cooperatively to meet the needs of the industry
<http://www.gis.net/~olken/Report1999.htm>

----
Lars Lehtonen

GRL said:

Wait a minute, Ace, the rider "accidentally veered" from
his path on the shoulder into a car and you call that a
murder? Sounds like he/she hit the car and not vice versa.
An accident, yes. Sad consequence, yes. To call it

a

Quoted message said:

murder, though, is utter nonsense.

There are some in this group who are convinced that no
serious cyclist ever did anything wrong or made a mistake.

OTOH, if all we have is motor vehicle operator's report
of what happened, it could well be murder and we would
never know.

Austin

On 27 May 2004 17:25:27 GMT, Lars Lehtonen <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Walk your bike across busy intersections."

"Always ride with the traffic -- as close as
possible to the right side of the road."

"Use the safest route to your destination. Avoid
busy streets and intersections."

In other words, avoid interacting with cars. What else would
one expect of the American Automobile Association?

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net
home.earthlink.net~jeverett3Open ↗

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Practicable is not the same as possible. It is possible
to ride right down the gutter, but that obviously isn't
safe. Same goes for riding right against parked cars.
Possible, but not practicable.

I don't think it's that insidious. In all truthfulness, the
word "practicable" isn't commonly used and I'll bet more
people than you'd think wouldn't know its meaning.

Unfortunately "practicable" is used all too often, but
usually in legal documents. Fellow pilots will be familiar
with the word since it's sprinkled liberally in the FARs
(Federal Air Regulations). :-(

I also think you'll find it in most state regulations
regarding bicycle use of public roads.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net
home.earthlink.net~jeverett3Open ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Practicable is not the same as possible.

I don't think it's that insidious. In all truthfulness,
the word "practicable" isn't commonly used and I'll bet
more people than you'd think wouldn't know its meaning.

=v= There's a much bigger issue. Everybody already knows
that bicyclists are supposed to stay to the right, but I
suspect that a small minority of motorists knows the
circumstances under which we may and should take the lane.

=v= As a reminder, the AAA text says:

"Always ride with the traffic -- as close as possible to
the right side of the road."

That "always" is fine for "ride with traffic," but oughtn't
be in any sentence, however fragmented, about keeping to the
right. <_Jym_

According to John Everett <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

In other words, avoid interacting with cars. What else
would one expect of the American Automobile Association?

Nothing, but it's a shame when cycling advocates allow
themselves to be coopted like that. I can't imagine that the
Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition was under any duress to
take AAA money and distribute such [censored].

---
Lars Lehtonen

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "GRL"

Quoted message said:

Wait a minute, Ace, the rider "accidentally veered" from
his path on the shoulder into a car and you call that a
murder? Sounds like he/she hit the car and not vice
versa. An accident, yes. Sad consequence, yes. To call it
a murder, though, is utter nonsense.

This was the driver's version of the incident. There were
no witnesses. I take his version with a grain of salt. I'm
not saying it was deliberate. Maybe the driver didn't mean
to do it. As a former L.A. prosecutor, Vincent Bugliosi,
once said in a discussion of police involved shootings
"...manslaughter can be committed where there's only
criminal negligence.". This my point. To me death by
negligence is murder.

No, it's manslaughter, not murder. They are not the same
thing, either legally or morally.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).