To the ass I almost ran over today



On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:54:12 -0700, "Bartow W. Riggs"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"2WheelR" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> You thought it would be cool to pass me again on the right as I was
>
>Was the light green? Was it a stop sign? If it was a green light did you
>forget that the cyclist was overtaking you? Did you signal that you were
>turning right?
>The reason I ask this is because in my personal experience I have noticed
>that drivers forget that "serious" (for lack of a better word) cyclists
>travel at significant speed.

When traveling at "significant speed", one should NOT overtake on
the right. Damn the law and do what's safe.

Note: After writing the rest of the message, but before sending, I
looked at the rest of the thread; apparently the cyclist intended to
fly right through the stop sign...there should be NO overtaking of a
vehicle that's stopping at a stop sign, regardless of transportation
device. You wait in line like everybody else, even if on a bicycle.

>The most common accident I have been in is a
>car passing and then turning right without signaling.

Are you in lots of accidents?

>Not acceptable. Understandable though if the light was green. After all,
>if the light was green the cyclist did nothing wrong and you could have
>killed the guy.

>Someone made a mistake here. If the light was green and the cyclist was
>overtaking you on the right (In California, simplistically, cyclists are
>required to ride as far to the right as is safe) it is your responsibility
>to make sure the cyclist is clear.

I'm not entirely familiar with CA law, but I doubt that cyclists are
REQUIRED to ride to the right unless they are holding up traffic. If
I can take the lane here in boring old Rhode Island, I'm sure that
progressive, environmentally friendly California would allow even
more for bicyclists.

I really, really doubt that cyclists are required, or even allowed,
to _pass_ on the right. Further, "as far to the right as is safe",
in the situation where you're passing a car, quite obviously lands
somewhere to the left of said car, since it's not safe to pass
somebody where they don't expect you to pass them, especially if
that somebody is in a vehicle weighing 200x as much as your vehicle
weighs.
--
Rick Onanian
 
Bartow W. Riggs;
> If the light wasn't green. (There was no light) The cyclist was in the
> wrong.
>
> Yes, nothing illegal with a cyclist passing on the right, at least in my
> state. Cyclists are are required to do so. Unless they are turning.

No state ever _requires_ any vehicle to overtake another, period.

In your state, a bicycle is a vehicle, or has all the rights,
responsibilities, and priveleges of a vehicle. I challenge you to show
where your state code _requires_ bicyclists to pass at all, never mind pass
on the right.

No state allows vehicles, including bicycles, to pass on the right, with two
exceptions. Those two exceptions are multi-lane roads (some, but not all,
states allow this) and when overtaking a left-turning vehicle. Here in
Minnesota, passing a left-tunring vehicle on the right is only allowed if
there are two or more lanes.

Austin
 
AustinMN wrote:

>
> Yes, everyone gets at least 15 minutes as an idiot. Most of us, even those
> who might be considered more intelligent, get a lot more than 15 minutes.
> I'd like to say it's there to counteract the 15 minutes of fame we're all
> entitled to...

Hmmm. I think it's more likely to counteract the 15 minutes of apparent
intelligence we eventually, through random chance, display.

"Conservation of smartness"? ;-)


--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com.
Substitute cc dot ysu dot
edu]
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Bartow W. Riggs;
> > If the light wasn't green. (There was no light) The cyclist was in the
> > wrong.
> >
> > Yes, nothing illegal with a cyclist passing on the right, at least in my
> > state. Cyclists are are required to do so. Unless they are turning.
>
> No state ever _requires_ any vehicle to overtake another, period.
>
> In your state, a bicycle is a vehicle, or has all the rights,
> responsibilities, and priveleges of a vehicle. I challenge you to show
> where your state code _requires_ bicyclists to pass at all, never mind pass
> on the right.
>
> No state allows vehicles, including bicycles, to pass on the right, with two
> exceptions. Those two exceptions are multi-lane roads (some, but not all,
> states allow this) and when overtaking a left-turning vehicle. Here in
> Minnesota, passing a left-tunring vehicle on the right is only allowed if
> there are two or more lanes.

In RI, you can pass a left-turner on a paved shoulder.


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

>
> No state allows vehicles, including bicycles, to pass on the right, with two
> exceptions. Those two exceptions are multi-lane roads (some, but not all,
> states allow this) and when overtaking a left-turning vehicle. Here in
> Minnesota, passing a left-tunring vehicle on the right is only allowed if
> there are two or more lanes.

I know the norm is overtaking on the left, but I think that for
bicycles, this isn't always appropriate.

If a lane is sufficiently wide, motorists are expected to overtake the
cyclist in the same lane. Obviously, they pass on the left.

But in some stop-and-go situations -- or some slow-down-and-speed-up
situations -- you could have a car barely exceed the cyclist's speed,
slowly pass him, then suddenly have to slow down. Certainly we can't
expect the cyclist to drop back, merge left, pass on the left, and merge
back right every time that happens?

Sure, the cyclist "isn't forced to pass" as Austin suggests. But then
the cyclist would be ratcheted back in traffic every time such a thing
occurred. He'd get further and further behind where he would have been,
despite plenty of clear, empty rideable space in front of him. That
seems silly.

Of course, I recognize the dangers in passing on the right. But I think
there are plenty of times when it's a reasonable thing to do.



--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com.
Substitute cc dot ysu dot
edu]

------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
Do your users want the best web-email gateway? Don't let your
customers drift off to free webmail services install your own
web gateway!
-- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_webmail.htm ----
 
In article <[email protected]>,
David Kerber <ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > Bartow W. Riggs;
> > > If the light wasn't green. (There was no light) The cyclist was in the
> > > wrong.
> > >
> > > Yes, nothing illegal with a cyclist passing on the right, at least in my
> > > state. Cyclists are are required to do so. Unless they are turning.
> >
> > No state ever _requires_ any vehicle to overtake another, period.
> >
> > In your state, a bicycle is a vehicle, or has all the rights,
> > responsibilities, and priveleges of a vehicle. I challenge you to show
> > where your state code _requires_ bicyclists to pass at all, never mind pass
> > on the right.
> >
> > No state allows vehicles, including bicycles, to pass on the right, with two
> > exceptions. Those two exceptions are multi-lane roads (some, but not all,
> > states allow this) and when overtaking a left-turning vehicle. Here in
> > Minnesota, passing a left-tunring vehicle on the right is only allowed if
> > there are two or more lanes.
>
> In RI, you can pass a left-turner on a paved shoulder.

In MA you can drive on the shoulder at certain times. Makes for interesting
operations. New Bedford, of course, has the worlds nicest people, and the worlds
worst drivers.....:)

HAND

--
³Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness³

- Tomb of the unknown - American Revolution
 
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:56:37 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Certainly we can't
>expect the cyclist to drop back, merge left, pass on the left, and merge
>back right every time that happens?

No, but we can expect the bicyclist to recognize the danger and take
the responsibility for bending the rules. You can't bend the rules
because it is convenient and then put it on the other person for not
accomodating your infraction.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
 
2WheelR wrote:


> You make every cyclist look bad by your behavior. It would be a service
> to cyclists everywhere, I think, if you stopped being such an ass.

I ride a lot, I also drive. I applaud your post here, especially the
fact that you came back to continue the discussion. I have encountered
cyclist who are not very well behaved, while on my bike and in my car.
More often, I have encountered badly behaving motorists.

No real need to comment on the incident, it is difficult to determine
who was at fault, from my POV, the important thing is that you thought
about it enough to post here and discuss the issue.

Thanks, being a thoughtful motorist is about all any of us can ask. That
and don't get impatient because a biker holds you up for 10 seconds
because of their riding. I guess that is the same as being thoughtful.

--
Craig Brossman, Durango Colorado
(remove ".nospam" to reply)
 
2WheelR wrote:
> I passed you on my way home from work today. with 1/4 mile to the
> corner, I pulled into the next lane to pass you safely. When I got to
> the corner, I pulled back into the right line to make a right turn and
> stopped for oncoming traffic.
>
> You thought it would be cool to pass me again on the right as I was
> pulling out, and I almost crushed you to death. If you were a little
> kid, I would have felt awful, as I'd assume you didn't know better.
> Instead you were an ass. A grown man, on an expensive bike, and a jerky
> attitude.

No worries, 2WheelR. A cyclist that passes to the right of a right-turning car will
not be long for this world. To discourage such behavior from mentally-challenged
"cyclists" in the future, be sure always to move to the very right edge of the
roadway before turning. This will block the "cyclist's" path, forcing him to wait or
pass on the left (as he should do normallyt). And use your turn signal, of course.
Both of these actions are spelled out in the Vehicle Code (California, at least).
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/
 
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:56:37 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
>But in some stop-and-go situations -- or some slow-down-and-speed-up
>situations -- you could have a car barely exceed the cyclist's speed,
>slowly pass him, then suddenly have to slow down. Certainly we can't
>expect the cyclist to drop back, merge left, pass on the left, and merge
>back right every time that happens?

The cyclist should take the lane. Isn't that obvious? Why not take
the lane if going the same speed as the rest of the traffic?

It would seem obvious to me that it's unsafe to pass on the right in
most situations, including the one you mention, which would probably
be in the context of short city blocks (and the accompanying
intersections).

Maybe there's something I missed here.
--
Rick Onanian
 
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 16:14:05 GMT, "H. M. Leary"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> In RI, you can pass a left-turner on a paved shoulder.
>
>In MA you can drive on the shoulder at certain times. Makes for interesting

More than just the rush-hour permission to travel in the freeway
breakdown lane?

>operations. New Bedford, of course, has the worlds nicest people, and the worlds
>worst drivers.....:)

Try saying that after running a jobsite in New Bedford. The adults
may or may not be nice, but the kids are real troublemakers. They'll
scale a fence to hotwire a 24,000 pound forklift just to wreak
havoc...
--
Rick Onanian
 
2WheelR wrote:

> Bartow W. Riggs wrote:
>
>> Was the light green? Was it a stop sign? If it was a green light did
>> you forget that the cyclist was overtaking you? Did you signal that
>> you were turning right?
>
> Stop sign, one way street into traffic circle, nowhere to go but right.

Not that it's important to anyone that I determine guilt here, but...
did the cyclist observe the stop sign? Did he slop into your lane? Did
you slop into his?

--
-------- Scott Eiler B{D> -------- http://www.eilertech.com/ --------

"It seemed an unlikely spot for a sensitive songwriter from Greenwich
Village... She ordered the 20-ounce steak."
-- Lin Brehmer, Chicago DJ, describing his meeting in a steakhouse
with Suzanne Vega.
 
Craig Brossman wrote:

> 2WheelR wrote:
>
>
>> You make every cyclist look bad by your behavior. It would be a
>> service to cyclists everywhere, I think, if you stopped being such an
>> ass.
>
>
> I ride a lot, I also drive. I applaud your post here, especially the
> fact that you came back to continue the discussion. I have encountered
> cyclist who are not very well behaved, while on my bike and in my car.
> More often, I have encountered badly behaving motorists.
>
> No real need to comment on the incident, it is difficult to determine
> who was at fault, from my POV, the important thing is that you thought
> about it enough to post here and discuss the issue.
>
> Thanks, being a thoughtful motorist is about all any of us can ask. That
> and don't get impatient because a biker holds you up for 10 seconds
> because of their riding. I guess that is the same as being thoughtful.

Truth be told, I am very sympathetic to cyclists (and motorcyclists, and
pedestrians, for that matter) and try always to be cognizant of the
challenges they face navigating streets ruled by cars.

I _am_ a cyclist (really) 3 double centuries,6 centuries, a 45 mile
commute when I can, 300 or so recreational miles a week on the bike(s),
which I (don't mind saying) *lovingly* built myself. I love bikes, and I
love the comraderie of fellow cyclists.

I'm the guy who calls out to folks waiting with their bikes on the
roadside to see if they a hand, whether I'm driving,cycling, or going by
on the motorcycle. I once ferried a guy on the back of my motorcycle
while he held onto his mangled frame. He had fallen of the back of his
group and was miles from their next stop,walking in cleats with blood
running down his leg; he felt like superman, tho when we passed his
group doing 80. Fastest he'd ever gone wearing lycra.

I do it for others, as others have done for me.

Yeah, I've had folks yell get 'off the road', or throw stuff (big stuff)
at me, frankly I have a pretty thick skin. Sometimes they honk to pass
when they are right on me, and I may or may not be yielding the lane
depending on whether I can do so safely. I assert my right to as much of
the lane as I need, no more, no less.

They honk when I'm at the first at the light going straight, and they
want to turn right on red. In the same situation, they wouldn't dream of
honking at a car to let they get by. But I'm just a cyclist. They
squeeze by me in my lane, even though it's a 4 lane road, and they could
just as easily shift over with a power steering assisted flick of the
wrist. But I'm just a cyclist.

I once was on a motorcycle, stopped at a red light when I heard
screaming tires from behind me. a car swerved around me and shot into
the intersection at about 25 MPH, coming to a stop. The driver looked
terrified as she rolled down her window and said "I didn't see you
there, at all" This was broad daylight, my taillight is about a foot
wide (no joke), and I'm not a small guy. I understand something about
the lack of cognition most 2 wheelers face from motorists.

I spend *A LOT* of time considering how a vulnerable
person(cyclist,motorcyclist) can utilize things like lane position to
mitigate risks and maximize visibility. If anyone cares to ask, I'd be
happy to share.

I didn't identify myself as a cyclist when I posted, partly because I
didn't want to spend 'privilege' on this thread. Common courtesy isn't
just for exchanges between cyclists. It hardly mattered the the jerk
cyclist that I was myself a cyclist.

When I told him (through his rant) that I put more miles on my bike than
I do on my car, he replied "Then you spent too much money on your
bike!", as if I had boasted of how expensive my bike was. weird.

Frankly, I think the guy had a huge chip on his shoulder, and had it in
for me from the second we almost (physically) crossed paths. I wasn't
anything to him other than a collection of his prejudices about guys in
cars (heaven forbid, a nice car). Yeah, it cuts both ways, motorists are
jerks to cyclists, and vice versa. I've probably even been that guy at
one time or another, though I hope not recently. I never expected to be
on the receiving end of ..... what... the balkanization of the roadway?

In my fantasy, the jerk would have seen my message in this group, and
maybe something would have clicked. Naive and unlikely, I'm sure, but I
needed to say something. I fully expected to be set upon by folks here
for being a bad car guy and a bicycle hater, and fat (THE GUY CALLED ME
FAT! ouch. Can I help it if ice cream is like cyclist rocket fuel, and
I've been on the launchpad all winter). Oh, I left out yuppie and vain
and _fill in the blank_

Instead I pretty much got reason and discourse, some support and
sympathy. You folks are a credit to the bike and yourselves. Thanks for
renewing my somewhat shaken faith.

Now I'm going to go for a ride (after I fuel up)

see ya, and thanks,
R
 
Rick Onanian wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:56:37 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>But in some stop-and-go situations -- or some slow-down-and-speed-up
>>situations -- you could have a car barely exceed the cyclist's speed,
>>slowly pass him, then suddenly have to slow down. Certainly we can't
>>expect the cyclist to drop back, merge left, pass on the left, and merge
>>back right every time that happens?
>
>
> The cyclist should take the lane. Isn't that obvious? Why not take
> the lane if going the same speed as the rest of the traffic?
>
> It would seem obvious to me that it's unsafe to pass on the right in
> most situations, including the one you mention, which would probably
> be in the context of short city blocks (and the accompanying
> intersections).

Actually, it's been more likely to happen to me on the congested four
lane near my home. There are plenty of spots where there's noplace for
cars to turn right.

>
> Maybe there's something I missed here.

Probably the dynamics of the transient situation. I've had it develop
like this:

Wide lane, traffic's moving (say) 30 mph, I'm doing 20 mph, they're
passing me. Suddenly a clot forms ahead. The car alongside me, who'd
just been passing me, hits his brakes and drops to 15, then maybe to 10.
Then the clot loosens, and he's back up to 25 and 30.

Should I really be obligated to hit my brakes and never gain any ground
on him, despite the fact that _my_ travel space is clear and
unobstructed? He won't have forgotten about me, and he can probably see
my every move. I'm in no danger at all from him, unless he's purposely
malicious.

I'm perhaps in very slight danger if I pass the _next_ car on the right;
but if there are no drives, etc. for him to turn right, even that is
minimal.

This is not a common occurrence for me, but I think the letter of the
law is uselessly restrictive in this situation. Taking the lane is,
strictly speaking, of questionable legality anyway, given that they may
be up to 30 mph in a second or two. And I can't sprint that fast any
more. (Well, not for long.)

I think what it comes down to is, a wide lane functions pretty much as
two lanes when a car and a bike are side by side, or when the car's
passing the bike. I think there are plenty of times it's reasonable to
treat it as two lanes when the bike's passing a car. You've got to be
careful, but I think it shouldn't be illegal.


--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com.
Substitute cc dot ysu dot
edu]
 
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> spake thusly on or about Tue, 27
Apr 2004 14:56:37 UTC

-> ut in some stop-and-go situations -- or some slow-down-and-speed-up
-> situations -- you could have a car barely exceed the cyclist's speed,
-> slowly pass him, then suddenly have to slow down. Certainly we can't
-> expect the cyclist to drop back, merge left, pass on the left, and merge
-> back right every time that happens?
->

I would, as the cyclist, take the lane and be part of traffic which would
offend a driver because it could not be 6" from the bumper of the car in
front of me. this is assuming that there is no horrific thing like a bike
lane whivch would permit me to carry on up the right side of the stalled
traffic flow.


--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head
start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[email protected]
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:

> Sure, the cyclist "isn't forced to pass" as Austin suggests. But then
> the cyclist would be ratcheted back in traffic every time such a thing
> occurred. He'd get further and further behind where he would have been,
> despite plenty of clear, empty rideable space in front of him. That
> seems silly.
>
> Of course, I recognize the dangers in passing on the right. But I think
> there are plenty of times when it's a reasonable thing to do.

Yeow! Folk Transportation! :)

Of course, if there were parked cars to the right, and the
possibility of the car traffic stopping and passengers bailing
out on the left, that makes a rather scary gauntlet with door
zones on either side to ride through. But on a wide boulevard
with no parked cars and long stretches between intersections,
I can see it.

Actually, the Folk Transportation approach would probably be
to take to the sidewalk. And if a right turn at the next
intersection is desired, cut through the gas station on the
corner.

I guess the Good Cycling Ambassador thing to do would be to
get in line with cars, and suffer along with the drivers,
while breathing their fumes. And their car exhaust.

I'd just look for an uncluttered parallel street route to
bypass the traffic clot.


- Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
2WheelR wrote:
>
> I once was on a motorcycle, stopped at a red light when I heard
> screaming tires from behind me. a car swerved around me and shot into
> the intersection at about 25 MPH, coming to a stop. The driver looked
> terrified as she rolled down her window and said "I didn't see you
> there, at all"

She also didn't see the red light there, not at all?
It must be hard to apply mascara and drive at the same time.

Reminds me of a friend who was about 26 years old before he owned
a car. He'd become rather set in his driving style, which was
more attuned to cycling. He was about to start slowing for a
red light when it turned green, so he kept going. (doing 50 in
the Rabbit instead of 25 on the Raleigh) When he got to the light,
the two cars there were just starting out, and he didn't realize
they weren't going to outrun him until it was too late to stop.
Rabbits are narrow, so he went between them. Much honking and
finger waving.
After that, he started thinking farther ahead than he did on the bike.
Mitch.
 
>Should I really be obligated to hit my brakes and never gain any ground
>on him, despite the fact that _my_ travel space is clear and
>unobstructed? He won't have forgotten about me, and he can probably see
>my every move. I'm in no danger at all from him, unless he's purposely
>malicious.

Not in my case, I'm running on four lane one ways in the city.

Typically the curb lanes are dead zones, too many delivery vans
and commuter drop offs going on there. So I'm usually found in
the main left lane, going at traffic speed.

I've seen too many near accidents to put myself in a maneuver duel
with driveway cowboys, Fedex vans and "I'm on the cell phone, honey."

It really helps that the average traffic speed is comfortably around
20 mph, I can sustain that and still do acceleration and braking to
take care of the random individual.

This morning I got trapped behind a Nissan who didn't know where he
was, the guy was straddling lanes, slowing down, and clearly had no
clue.

He totally screwed my trip down M Street, causing me to miss lights
that I normally would have sailed through on the green.

But it was all OK, the delay allowed me to meet the new guy who parks
at my rack, he seems to be OK as he takes the middle place on the
S-rack and doesn't steal my coveted end spot.

The new semi-evil scooter person has the other end spot, haven't met
him yet. He displaced the chick who now locks to the signpost.

Spring is definitely the battle of the commuter parking spaces,
the closer to the coffee shop the better, with a clear understanding
that the messengers park at one rack and the commuters at another.

This is largely due to the fact that the commuters bogart the rack
all day.

Nobody except the health club people park at the corner rack, it's
sun-exposed and if a car goes off the road it would most likely be
at the corner.

But they mostly park inside the health club.

As a year 'round rider I see a lot of interesting things in the
spring, the basic cycling dynamic ramps up with a lot of new or
seasonal riders on the road.

--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>[email protected]__________
 
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:07:11 GMT, 2WheelR <[email protected]>
wrote:
>and fat (THE GUY CALLED ME
>FAT! ouch. Can I help it if ice cream is like cyclist rocket fuel, and
>I've been on the launchpad all winter).

Oy! Tell me about it...it's been cake for me. I think my aerobelly
may have exceeded 'aero'. As happy as I usually am with my weight,
my aerobelly, and my eating habits, I'm skipping supper tonight.

>Instead I pretty much got reason and discourse, some support and
>sympathy. You folks are a credit to the bike and yourselves. Thanks for
>renewing my somewhat shaken faith.

It was close. Recent posts like yours but containing less of their
own reason gathered many reason-free responses.

>Now I'm going to go for a ride (after I fuel up)

No fuel for me. Had too much for lunch. No time after fooling with a
tire that refused to seat properly for way too long, anyway...gotta
get some sleep.
--
Rick Onanian
 
2WheelR wrote:


> I didn't identify myself as a cyclist when I posted, partly because I
> didn't want to spend 'privilege' on this thread. Common courtesy isn't
> just for exchanges between cyclists. It hardly mattered the the jerk
> cyclist that I was myself a cyclist.
>
>
> Instead I pretty much got reason and discourse, some support and
> sympathy. You folks are a credit to the bike and yourselves. Thanks for
> renewing my somewhat shaken faith.
>
> Now I'm going to go for a ride (after I fuel up)
>
> see ya, and thanks,
> R

Ride hard and be careful. I can't imagine a "FAT" guy riding a double :)
--
Craig Brossman, Durango Colorado
(remove ".nospam" to reply)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back