Braking the Fixie

[N8N]

On Jul 24, 7:22 am, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
> > Peter Cole wrote:
> >> Sorry to snip all that, but I think it amounts to a long winded
> >> rationalization. You're the one who's adamant about the law being the
> >> law, yet you'll give a pass for speeding.
>
> > I'm not "giving a pass" or even admitting to doing it myself - as I
> > posted before, I've become one law-abiding mofo since a particularly
> > Draconian law went into effect here. The real question is, though, why
> > are speed limits not set at the optimum level for safety for motorists?
>
> So you don't agree with the law, and presume lots of others don't
> either, so you get much less irate about speeding scofflaws than cyclist
> ROW scofflaws?

Absolutely. They are far less of a threat to me. Sure, in a bike/car
incident, if I am in the car, I will "win" but I'll still probably get
a ticket, have to live with the memory if injuring another human
being, and probably lose my job (due to various stringent internal
regulations regarding company vehicles.)

>
> >> I don't particularly get upset by highway speeding as much as
> >> residential speeding, which is at least as common.
>
> > I don't see that quite so much... certainly literally everyone speeds on
> > the highway, while most people tend to keep it down to a reasonable
> > velocity in residential neighborhoods, although a lot tend to push it to
> > 30 in a 25 or so.
>
> Yes, but that's equivalent to 78 in a 65 zone, something that would get
> you a ticket almost every time.

Around here that's called "going with the flow." Assuming you can
find a 65 zone.

>
> >> In view of actual safety statistics and liability downsides I see it
> >> as much more socially costly than bicycle ROW scofflaws.
>
> > Only because of the large numbers of motorists compared to bicyclists.
> > Again, I'm not advocating it or admitting to doing it, but I'd feel a
> > lot more comfortable safety-wise doing 30 in a 25 in my car than I would
> > sailing past a stop sign at full speed on a bicycle. Maybe statistics
> > prove me wrong, I don't know, but blowing stops just seems to be
> > ludicrously dangerous for little benefit. Yeah, I know, you have to
> > work to get up to speed, but isn't exercise one of the benefits of
> > riding a bike?
>
> Well, bottom line is your "hatred" for cyclist scofflaws is very
> different than your tolerance for speeders, not based on your respect
> for the law but your own sense of priorities -- which are far from
> universal.

My priorities are based on what I percieve as a threat to me.
Speeders generally don't bother me, unless they're the aggressive,
traffic-weaver types. Bicyclists that blow stop signs definitely are
a threat to me, and I'm always hyper-alert when driving on roads that
I know bicyclists frequent as a result.

nate

 

[N8N]

On Jul 24, 7:36 am, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
> A Muzi wrote:
> >>>> Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> (shrugs and gives up. I've learned to hate most of the cyclists in
> >>>>> my area because of their habit of blowing stop signs right in front
> >>>>> of cross traffic.)
>
> >>> Tim McNamara wrote:
> >>>> Some do. But I see, on a percentage basis, just as many drivers
> >>>> ignoring the law as do cyclists.
>
> >> Nate Nagel wrote:
> >>> Discounting speed limits, I disagree heartily. 100% of the cyclists
> >>> that I see are breaking some law or another (95% of them blow stop
> >>> signs, and I don't mean a "california stop" either.) The number of
> >>> drivers I see doing things like that is much, much smaller.
> >>> If you count the speed limit, of course, then 100% of both groups are
> >>> breaking at least one law.
>
> > Peter Cole wrote:
> >> Why wouldn't you count that?
>
> > Because unlike stop lights, stop signs, etc, speed limits are commonly
> > viewed as inappropriate, unreasonable and apparently capriciously
> > designated. When a specific limited zone is posted at a reasonable
> > speed, that's largely ignored like all the others.
>
> Well then this is just another case of people not following a law that
> they find unreasonable, something I claim happens all the time.
>
> Given that so many (100% by Nate's estimate) of cyclists don't fully
> comply with ROW laws, I'd say it means that most find them unreasonable.

But is that because they really are unreasonable, or because they have
little respect for the law after racking up a few speeding tickets
just for keeping up with the flow of traffic? I don't know what their
real thought process is, but at least a token effort to comply with
the ROW laws is not only not unreasonable IMHO but a very sensible
thing to do.

nate

 

[N8N]

On Jul 24, 10:17 am, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Tim McNamara wrote:
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> > >>> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>>> Most people don't follow laws they consider unreasonable, I
> > >>>> think that's a good thing.
> > >>> That's a rather slippery slope.
> > >> Maybe, but I don't think red light running leads to armed robbery.
>
> > > Probably not, but you didn't restrict your statement to stopping at
> > > red lights. Lots of people think it's unreasonable that they can't
> > > help themselves to the contents of your house or use your credit
> > > card or empty out your bank account. They don't follow those laws
> > > and in general I don;t think that's a good thing.
>
> > But that's a small minority, if it were anything else civilization
> > would be hopeless.
>
> Given that the US has a higher percentage of its population in jail than
> any other country, and yet persists in having some of if not the highest
> crime rates, an argument could be made that our particular manifestation
> of civilization is flawed.
>
> > When you have a law that the majority don't follow, I think there may
> > be something wrong with the law.
>
> Perhaps. Or something wrong with society's attitude towards its own
> laws.
>
>
>
>
>
> > >> An interesting question: What do you think would happen if a day
> > >> was declared to be no-penalty for moving & ROW violations? Do you
> > >> think everyone would drive differently? Many people? Would you
> > >> change the way you drive? I wouldn't and I'd guess most people
> > >> wouldn't. That tells me people obey the laws for the most part
> > >> because they agree with them.
>
> > > I'd probably stay home that day. I see way to many numbskull
> > > maneuvers on a daily basis, including crossing four lanes in late
> > > rush hour traffic at the last possible moment to get to an exit
> > > while talking on a cell phone with three children in the car (I saw
> > > this about 10 minutes ago). I se such things at least daily. The
> > > average level of driving safety has plummeted in the past few years
> > > locally. It's actually scary to be on the road pretty often.
>
> > Highway fatalities/mile driven have been going down for decades.
> > Skeptics point out that thus is from safer, better and even larger
> > cars, while driving speeds and dangerous behavior have gone up, but
> > not enough to offset, so you're perhaps actually a bit safer with
> > today's cars even with today's drivers.
>
> And those safety measures have been fought every step of the way by the
> Big Three automakers.
>
> > It may be that drivers have responded to better cars by pushing the
> > envelope.
>
> There is evidence that this is the case vis-a-vis modern cars handling
> better than older cars. I can't remember where I read the study, might
> have been Car and Driver several years ago. People are likelier to
> drive closer to the limits of cornering traction because there is
> virtually no body roll to cue them that they are pushing the envelope.

We're getting real OT here, but there's also the factor that cars
really do handle (and stop!) better than the ones in common use when
traffic engineering became a real field. Remember that a lot of
guidelines were laid down when the average vehicle was rolling on
6.70-15 bias plys and had four wheel drum brakes.

nate

 

[N8N]

On Jul 24, 2:16 pm, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
> A Muzi wrote:
> > Peter Cole wrote:
> >> Well then this is just another case of people not following a law that
> >> they find unreasonable, something I claim happens all the time.
> >> Given that so many (100% by Nate's estimate) of cyclists don't fully
> >> comply with ROW laws, I'd say it means that most find them unreasonable.
>
> > Yes, hence the conflict. I assume you're right. What to do about it?
>
> Change the laws.
>
> If speed limits are set to 85% compliance, why not have the same
> philosophy with ROW? Either de jure or de facto, I don't care.

It's irrelevant, because speed limits are not set to 85% compliance.
More like somewhere between zero and 25 percent, depending.
Jurisdictions may pay lip service to the 85th percentile rule, but I
don't see it actually in effect.

nate

 

[Rev. Bob 'Bob' Crispen]

The kindly Rev. overheard Lobby Dosser
<[email protected]> saying on Tue 24 Jul 2007
01:58:36a:

>> So long as there's a risk that your choices may adversely affect
>> other folks and their lives, health, and propery, those other
>> folks have got a perfect right to tell you how to equip your bike
>> - if not how to live your life.
>
> While playing the "Jackbooted Thuggery Rag".
>
> Typical lefty and Bureaucratic Swine

That's actually a little better, Lobby. It's insanely off the mark,
but you're putting your words together a little bit better.
--
Rev. Bob "Bob" Crispen
revbob at crispen dot org
Ex Cathedra weblog: http://blog.crispen.org/

I Wandered Lonely As a Cloud (rewritten as a limerick)
There once was a poet named Will
Who tramped his way over a hill
And was speechless for hours
Over some stupid flowers
This was years before TV, but still.

 

[Rev. Bob 'Bob' Crispen]

The kindly Rev. overheard Steven <[email protected]>
saying on Tue 24 Jul 2007 06:34:35a:

> On Jul 24, 5:29 am, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Why is this even a subject?

Hey, you broke it, you gotta fix it.
--
Rev. Bob "Bob" Crispen
revbob at crispen dot org
Ex Cathedra weblog: http://blog.crispen.org/

I Wandered Lonely As a Cloud (rewritten as a limerick)
There once was a poet named Will
Who tramped his way over a hill
And was speechless for hours
Over some stupid flowers
This was years before TV, but still.

 

[Rev. Bob 'Bob' Crispen]

The kindly Rev. overheard Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net>
saying on Tue 24 Jul 2007 08:07:32a:

>>Ask the NRA and they will tell you that your right to bear arms
>>has been stomped all over....
>
> And immediately thereafter ask you for money -- which is The basic
> point of the exercise.

And to vote Republican. Which isn't the point, but most of their
likely victims aren't real good at congnitive dissonance. One of
these days somebody like Cheney is gonna tell them, "OK, put your
guns in a big pile over here," and they'll line right up going "Uh
yup, uh yup."

I mean, Jesus, they had this vendetta against Smith and Wesson! And
nobody said a goddamn thing! So you know sanity isn't real high on
their list of priorities.

Kind of a pity. I used to be an NRA Hunter Safety instructor before
the NRA turned into a branch of the RNC and became really, really
stupid.
--
Rev. Bob "Bob" Crispen
revbob at crispen dot org
Ex Cathedra weblog: http://blog.crispen.org/

I Wandered Lonely As a Cloud (rewritten as a limerick)
There once was a poet named Will
Who tramped his way over a hill
And was speechless for hours
Over some stupid flowers
This was years before TV, but still.

 

[Dane Buson]

In rec.bicycles.misc Steven <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 10:59 am, Dane Buson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In rec.bicycles.misc Steven <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > I can still outrun you with one speed at 5' 8" 280 myself. Shall I
>> > drop the glove?
>>
>> If it makes you happy, though I think your post is a bit of a
>> non-sequitor since I don't see anywhere in the thread where I claim to
>> be fast as greased lightning.
>>
>> I'm based in Seattle, though I'll be swinging through Philadelphia and
>> Cincinnati next month. I don't know if I'll have access to a bike in
>> Ohio though.
>
> Are you cycling over 10 states to get to Oregon?

http://www.mapmsg.com/games/statetris/usa/

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
Somewhere, there was a rich vein of power in OS/2... But no easy way to tap it.
Unix presents you with dozens of rich veins and dozens of different types of
needles to use on it. -- Shal'Nath

 

[Dane Buson]

In rec.bicycles.misc Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> If you say so. I thought it was clearly if indirectly answered.
> I'll spell it out for you, since you insist. I think that if you
> suspended traffic laws for a day, the highways would be filled with
> carnage. That's why I'd stay home that day. I wouldn't drive, I
> wouldn't ride my bike, I'd stay the hell off the roads. The standard
> skill set of the average American driver is so pathetically low that
> they can barely control their cars when they do feel inhibited by
> laws.

I don't have quite as pessimistic a vision as you. But I admit I might
be tempted to stay home with my Lil' Abner BB gun and mutant repellent
to keep me safe.

> Incompetence behind the wheel is the norm. Being distracted while
> driving by the cell phone, text messaging, eating, reading, etc. is
> considered acceptable. Driving under the influence is endemic.
> Driver's education is a cursory introduction to driving at best.
> Driver's licenses are given out to people who are far too young and
> the standards for obtaining one are laughably low. Incompetent
> driving costs thousands of lives, millions of injuries and billions of
> dollars every year.

Hear hear.

That pretty much echoes my feelings that better testing and education
would help everyone. Yes, that includes car drivers. Wouldn't it be
nice if the bottom 2% were forced to actually become competent at
driving before they were allowed to have their license back?

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
My uncle was the town drunk -- and we lived in Chicago.
-- George Gobel

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:43:07 -0700, Dane Buson <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Wouldn't it be
>nice if the bottom 2% were forced to actually become competent at
>driving before they were allowed to have their license back?

Coastal Cascadian drivers are probably all equally inept at driving
on snow given they don't get as much experience as drivers living in
harsher climates. Drivers moving here from the snowbelt become angry
and frustrated with the others who figure "all season" tires are
adequate under "real" winter conditions that happen infrequently.

When it snows here it just makes drivers' incompetence more visible.
I try to never forget that they are exactly that incompetent all the
rest of the year too.
--
zk

 

[Nate Nagel]

Dane Buson wrote:
> In rec.bicycles.misc Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>If you say so. I thought it was clearly if indirectly answered.
>>I'll spell it out for you, since you insist. I think that if you
>>suspended traffic laws for a day, the highways would be filled with
>>carnage. That's why I'd stay home that day. I wouldn't drive, I
>>wouldn't ride my bike, I'd stay the hell off the roads. The standard
>>skill set of the average American driver is so pathetically low that
>>they can barely control their cars when they do feel inhibited by
>>laws.
>
>
> I don't have quite as pessimistic a vision as you. But I admit I might
> be tempted to stay home with my Lil' Abner BB gun and mutant repellent
> to keep me safe.
>
>
>>Incompetence behind the wheel is the norm. Being distracted while
>>driving by the cell phone, text messaging, eating, reading, etc. is
>>considered acceptable. Driving under the influence is endemic.
>>Driver's education is a cursory introduction to driving at best.
>>Driver's licenses are given out to people who are far too young and
>>the standards for obtaining one are laughably low. Incompetent
>>driving costs thousands of lives, millions of injuries and billions of
>>dollars every year.
>
>
> Hear hear.
>
> That pretty much echoes my feelings that better testing and education
> would help everyone. Yes, that includes car drivers. Wouldn't it be
> nice if the bottom 2% were forced to actually become competent at
> driving before they were allowed to have their license back?
>

2 percent hell, how about 20 percent? for a start at least.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

 

[John Thompson]

On 2007-07-24, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:

> That's why fixed gear riders have to justify their lack of control by
> making themselves believe that they can see into the future and
> anticipate what will happen- the "zen" of fixed gear.

Replace the phrase "fixed gear" with "brakeless" and I'll be more
inclinded to agree with you.

--

John ([email protected])

 

[still me]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:14:48 -0700, N8N <[email protected]> wrote:

> Remember that a lot of
>guidelines were laid down when the average vehicle was rolling on
>6.70-15 bias plys and had four wheel drum brakes.

But remember also that most people have been driving 20 feet off the
rear bumper of other cars at 70mph on the highway since the bias ply
days and still do. In an emergency, that's the difference between dead
and deader.

While stopping distances and such have decreased, most people don't
know, never did, and never will drive within whatever the handling
limits of their vehicle are. Most of them don't even understand what a
"good handling" car is compared to a "poor handling" car unless you
have them drive the two back to back. The only thing better handling
and smaller, faster stopping cars have done for the average joe is to
help him out when he panics and maybe save his butt with superior
performance for a few seconds when it counts - but it has nothing to
do with average joe realizing what the car will do.

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:30:40 GMT, still me <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:14:48 -0700, N8N <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Remember that a lot of
>>guidelines were laid down when the average vehicle was rolling on
>>6.70-15 bias plys and had four wheel drum brakes.
>
>But remember also that most people have been driving 20 feet off the
>rear bumper of other cars at 70mph on the highway since the bias ply
>days and still do. In an emergency, that's the difference between dead
>and deader.
>
>While stopping distances and such have decreased, most people don't
>know, never did, and never will drive within whatever the handling
>limits of their vehicle are. Most of them don't even understand what a
>"good handling" car is compared to a "poor handling" car unless you
>have them drive the two back to back. The only thing better handling
>and smaller, faster stopping cars have done for the average joe is to
>help him out when he panics and maybe save his butt with superior
>performance for a few seconds when it counts - but it has nothing to
>do with average joe realizing what the car will do.

The average joe counts on his air bags to save his butt these days.

"Road Safety" to cagers is all about their own post-crash survival.
--
zk

 

[Curt]

"Rev. Bob 'Bob' Crispen" <[email protected]> wrote in message

> Kind of a pity. I used to be an NRA Hunter Safety instructor before
> the NRA turned into a branch of the RNC and became really, really
> stupid.

Bush The Greater did the same sort of thing back in the 90s -- dumped his
life NRA membership. He was mad about their anti-american militia stuff.

Curt

 

[G.T.]

Peter Cole wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>> The ability to stop a bicycle with a rear brake for aggressive riding
>> is ludicrous.
>>
>
> And yet it was standard issue when we were kids.

And how fast did you go on your Stingray in urban traffic?

Greg

--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html

Dethink to survive - Mclusky

 

[Steven]

On Jul 24, 4:17 pm, "Rev. Bob 'Bob' Crispen" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> The kindly Rev. overheard Steven <[email protected]>
> saying on Tue 24 Jul 2007 06:34:35a:
>
> > On Jul 24, 5:29 am, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why is this even a subject?
>
> Hey, you broke it, you gotta fix it.

Hush. I own two lugged steel 26" cruisers, fully brakeable.

 

[Steven]

On Jul 24, 4:38 pm, Dane Buson <[email protected]> wrote:
> In rec.bicycles.misc Steven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 23, 10:59 am, Dane Buson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> In rec.bicycles.misc Steven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> > I can still outrun you with one speed at 5' 8" 280 myself. Shall I
> >> > drop the glove?
>
> >> If it makes you happy, though I think your post is a bit of a
> >> non-sequitor since I don't see anywhere in the thread where I claim to
> >> be fast as greased lightning.
>
> >> I'm based in Seattle, though I'll be swinging through Philadelphia and
> >> Cincinnati next month. I don't know if I'll have access to a bike in
> >> Ohio though.
>
> > Are you cycling over 10 states to get to Oregon?
>
> http://www.mapmsg.com/games/statetris/usa/
>
> --
> Dane Buson - [email protected]
> Somewhere, there was a rich vein of power in OS/2... But no easy way to tap it.
> Unix presents you with dozens of rich veins and dozens of different types of
> needles to use on it. -- Shal'Nath

I don't need the map, you're closer to Cleveland than Burns...

 

[Dane Buson]

In rec.bicycles.misc Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:43:07 -0700, Dane Buson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>Wouldn't it be
>>nice if the bottom 2% were forced to actually become competent at
>>driving before they were allowed to have their license back?
>
> Coastal Cascadian drivers are probably all equally inept at driving
> on snow given they don't get as much experience as drivers living in
> harsher climates.

Completely true.

> Drivers moving here from the snowbelt become angry and frustrated with the
> others who figure "all season" tires are adequate under "real" winter
> conditions that happen infrequently.

I took the bus for a couple days when we actually had snow and ice on
the ground. I was flabbergasted by the people I saw out driving. A few
of them had chains, but some of them were sliding all over the road.

If you don't have the right equipment for the conditions, stay the hell
home! Don't put other people in danger because you're an idiot.

> When it snows here it just makes drivers' incompetence more visible. I try
> to never forget that they are exactly that incompetent all the rest of the
> year too.

*eep*

Well, at least they're slower and less aggressive than other places I've
lived.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
"I prefer the wicked rather than the foolish. The wicked
sometimes rest." -Alexandre Dumas

 

[Dane Buson]

In rec.bicycles.misc Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dane Buson wrote:
>>
>> That pretty much echoes my feelings that better testing and education
>> would help everyone. Yes, that includes car drivers. Wouldn't it be
>> nice if the bottom 2% were forced to actually become competent at
>> driving before they were allowed to have their license back?
>>
>
> 2 percent hell, how about 20 percent? for a start at least.

Well, you have to start somewhere. I think if you restricted the bottom
2% or 5% they would have a disproportionate (positive impact). I'm
guessing that the poorest drivers get in and cause the most accidents.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
When we jumped into Sicily, the units became separated, and I couldn't find
anyone. Eventually I stumbled across two colonels, a major, three captains,
two lieutenants, and one rifleman, and we secured the bridge. Never in the
history of war have so few been led by so many.
-- General James Gavin