On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:36:56 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
<
[email protected]> wrote:
>On Feb 27, 7:14 pm, Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:30:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > Come ride with me someday. You'll see I'm right.
>>
>> >> Sorry, but according to the rules of logic, it takes only one
>> >> counterexample to prove you wrong.
>>
>> >Yes. Now prove that he has ever seen one bicyclist stop. Go ahead,
>> >it's *your* proposal, after all.
>>
>> >From some of the biking behavior I've seen, it's not outside the realm
>> >of possiblity that he has never actually seen a bicyclist stop at a
>> >light or a sign. Unlikely, but not impossible.
>>
>> If some cyclists' behaviour gets your attention it should make you
>> more cautious around other cyclists and that's okay with me.
>
>As a former vehicular cyclist, I am always careful. And not just
>around bicyclists.
>
>> The most likely explanation is that normal drivers (not you clowns in
>> r.a.d) don't notice cyclists obeying the rules to the letter of the
>> law.
>
>What about we clown who used to ride bikes, and now pay very close
>attention to all traffic, just out of habit?
I didn't really learn to drive until after taking a motorcycle safety
course. I'd already had a license for ten years, owned two cars,
three motorcycles and three road bikes. An evasive driving course
later in life was rehashing most of what I already knew and threw in
a few twists suited to 4 wheels and more mass. Rarely am I required
to drive these days but the survival habits are ingrained. As a
passenger I'm usually uncomfortable as the driver's skill and
attention level is comparably lower than mine.
Face it; any idiot can drive. . . and they usually do.*
>
>> They're processed as regular traffic and forgotten. It's the
>> same as I quickly forget the attentive attuned motorists playing by
>> the rules.
>
>Except that seeing bicycles riding correctly on the roads is a rare,
>noteworthy event.
You're kidding. As a cyclist riding daily throughout the city the
rarest observation is riders riding counterflow. Completely unlit
cyclists averages less than 10%. Most of them have tail lights.
Rolling stop signs is commonly observed by both cars and bicyclists.
Whether or not they have the prescribed bell, most bikes are not in
compliance with that law. Helmet use, mandatory here, is about 60%.
I probably only stop and dab for fewer than ten percent of the stop
signs along my usual routes. I and most cyclists I know approach
intersections with restricted vision prepared to stop not trusting
the stop sign to stop the cross-traffic. I've done my usual
momentary semi-stop in front of cops without hassle. They don't
hassle drivers for that move either. If the traffic is backed up,
I'll filter forward and cross with a car at a four way stop or red
light and I guess that's what really pisses off the caged stooges.
They're envious.
>
>> It's the stunned or belligerent scud jockeys who get my attention
>> though few of them are memorable except by their sheer numbers.
>
>Which is it - there are so many you can't keep track, or they are
>rare? You are being contradictory.
>
I mean that individually they're entirely forgettable because there
are too many idiots pulling the same stunned stunts or selfishly
applying the laws of gross tonnage instead of normal ROW rules.
You can't keep track of them all and they're best forgotten though
always anticipated.
>> The typical scud slave exhibiting their typically less than lawful
>> conduct is usually predictable, rarely disappoints me, and quickly
>> forgotten so I'm ready for the inevitable next one.
>
>And the lawful one, in their rarity, is not noticed at all.
>
>Uh -huh - you're making a whole lot of sense now. (not)
The attentive attuned driver causes no conflict, is quickly processed
and forgotten. The next driver is still an unknown quantity but
initially regarded as a potential threat.
>
>> Mostly they're all regarded as potentially dangerous, self-absorbed
>> idiots who may well be asleep, zonked on drugs, talking on phones,
>> putting on make-up, shaving or diverted by their electronic toys.
>
>Just like fools on bikes who can't be bothered to make themselves even
>partially visible at night, or who ignore traffic control devices.
>Got it.
Traffic control devices? You're making me gag now.
If the cops could write 100 citations per hour they'd write 350
between 3pm and six thirty, five days per week for drivers making
prohibited turns at just one intersection I cross daily.
What part of "except bicycles" appended to signs restricting
automobile entry you clowns not understand? Surely driving over the
diverter curbs and swerving around the signs must have gotten your
attention.
Quit touching yourself.
>
>E.P.
* meaning they're too stupid or lazy to figure out how to get around
without their motorised carapace. The genuinely handicapped are a
minority compared to those who have handicapped themselves by their
devoted dependance on their plastic lined cages.
--
zk
