Bike's and the legal right to the road

[GT Fanatic]

lol. You lost one argument so now you're trying to start another. It won't work.

Double FAIL this time.

You have flown FAIL AIR once AGAIN. All I did was state the obvious. What you've done is not only jump to conclusions, but you've assumed I want to argue with you.

Arguing with mentally handicapped children would not be satisfying in any way, shape, or form.

On Monday, try not to eat the cigarette butts off the floor or lick the windows of the short bus while on your way to school.

Look, I even found a photo of Tony...

http://jacknifedakilla.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/tupac.jpg

 

[frenchyge]

Because other road users are not required to be licensed (and that tacitly means this right cannot be revoked) their right to use the roads is in fact superior to that of the motorist.

The roadways are either going to be respectfully shared by all parties, or they're not. Attempting to tie cyclists' road-use rights to our unlicensed status essentially puts us on par with those travelling the roads on greased skis being towed by teams of swine and other forms of "unlicensed travel."

Claiming that our unlicensed status grants us the superior right to the roadways simply creates prideful cyclists as a counterpoint to the ignorant motorists who claim that their right is superior because of their greater size and speed.

 

[frenchyge]

Before getting into cycling, yeah, I admit it, I'd get annoyed by the "Lance wanna-be" huffing and puffing up a hill at rush-hour, holding up a line of 100+ cars at 2 mph, but it is what it is. Not once have I ever had the urge to "buzz" the guy by doing a 3-inch fly-by from their handlebars, startle them by honking the horn, swerving towards them, or even throwing things at them. There's just no rhyme or reason...

I can understand that frustration, but the motorists' reactions are far different towards the cyclist than say, a farmer pulling a load of hay and blocking the entire lane at 15mph in a tractor (which I'm sure anyone who lives in a rural area has encountered at least once). My only explaination for that difference of reaction is that the motorists perceive a greater sense of physical or legal danger resulting from an inadvertant collision with the tractor vis a vis the cyclist, which is really just sick if you ask me. It's as if they accept being held up by the tractor because of it's size, whereas the cyclist taking 2 feet on the side of the road (and requiring just the slightest degree of patience and caution while passing) is somehow intolerable.

 

[alienator]

The roadways are either going to be respectfully shared by all parties, or they're not. Attempting to tie cyclists' road-use rights to our unlicensed status essentially puts us on par with those travelling the roads on greased skis being towed by teams of swine and other forms of "unlicensed travel."

Claiming that our unlicensed status grants us the superior right to the roadways simply creates prideful cyclists as a counterpoint to the ignorant motorists who claim that their right is superior because of their greater size and speed.

Mionske was making a legal point, not one about human behavior or changes to human behavior, and I think it's a good point to consider. It's not extreme, it certainly doesn't put us on par with the extreme forms of travel you mention. After all, cyclists are already common road users, users drivers are accustomed to (but not always happy about) seeing.

I don't buy that his argument creates "prideful cyclists" at all. Sure there will always be a minority that takes the wrong tack, but such is the nature of man. Prideful? I don't know if prideful is a wrong tack or not.

I supposed we should just choose to do nothing at all, to say nothing at all, for fear of becoming too prideful. We shouldn't stand up for our right and instead, I guess, we should only be happy for what motorists and governments give us. Or not.

Meanwhile, yesterday, doing some errands on my bike, I had quite the chuckle. As I pulled up to a light, in the left turn lane, a ******** in his souped up car, stuck his head out of his car and yelled really loudly as he passed by me, in an effort to scare me. Of course, he paid no attention to how fast he was going and how quickly he was approaching the ass end of the car ahead of him. When he finally looked forward, he locked up the brakes, swerved to avoid the car, slinging his car nearly full sideways. Somehow he slid between two cars without hitting anything. What an idiot. Karma can be a real *****. I'd say that the motorist in question was a bit too "prideful."

 

[GT Fanatic]

Meanwhile, yesterday, doing some errands on my bike, I had quite the chuckle. As I pulled up to a light, in the left turn lane, a ******** in his souped up car, stuck his head out of his car and yelled really loudly as he passed by me, in an effort to scare me. Of course, he paid no attention to how fast he was going and how quickly he was approaching the ass end of the car ahead of him. When he finally looked forward, he locked up the brakes, swerved to avoid the car, slinging his car nearly full sideways. Somehow he slid between two cars without hitting anything. What an idiot. Karma can be a real *****. I'd say that the motorist in question was a bit too "prideful."

Yeah, sure he did. Everybody in the hotrod goes out of their way to scare the cyclist. Then, I'm sure all eyes were on you.

Nice story. I'm sure if I had never mentioned being a fan of loud cars, this would have never gotten posted. Sounds like BS to me.

 

[frenchyge]

I don't buy that his argument creates "prideful cyclists" at all. Sure there will always be a minority that takes the wrong tack, but such is the nature of man. Prideful? I don't know if prideful is a wrong tack or not.

It turns an ignorant "we're right" into an equally erroneous "no we're right" and thus fuels the debate instead of seeking a sharing mentality. Good stuff to read in a cycling rag, though.