Vote for Peace: Ride a Bicycle!!!

[Brent P]

In article <[email protected]>, Scott in Aztlan wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 15:01:56 GMT, [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>Bicycle lanes exist due an irrational fear of hit-from-behind. Somehow people feel that the
>>painted line will keep motorists further away from them. In practice it doesn't.

> Maybe that's because there are so many arrogant cyclists who will ride ON TOP OF the white line
> instead of cenetered in the bike line like they're supposed to.

They are riding where they should. It's not their fault some dumbass painted a line there. As I
stated before often bike lane stripes are painted in the place where cyclists would ordinarly ride.

>>With many setups it will bring the motorist CLOSER to the cyclist. After all, if they don't cross
>>the line it's ok to pass within a 1/4 of an inch. Riding in the same spot without the line the
>>typical driver would move over to pass.

> Sure, I've been known to "buzz" an arrogant cyclist. But if a cyclist is obeying the rules, I'll
> give him as wide a berth as possible; I'll even cross the double-yellow line to do it (if oncoming
> traffic permits).

Bike lanes are bicycle restrictions a cyclist can still use the right most regular traffic lane.
Thanks for proving my point about how bicycle lanes make things worse for cycling and only serve for
the convience of motorists.

> I play nice with people who play nice. People with a "me first" attitude neither desrerve nor get
> nice treatment.

You seem to be projecting your attitude on others with no understanding of how to properly use
a vehicle known as a bicycle in traffic. Much like the morons who design the bike lanes I've
come across.

 

[Brent P]

In article <[email protected]>, Brent P wrote:
>
> Bike lanes *not* are bicycle restrictions a cyclist can still use the right most regular traffic
> lane. Thanks for proving my point about how bicycle lanes make things worse for cycling and only
> serve for the convience of motorists.

See correction above. Also note I am refering to the law, effectively however because of drivers
such as the one I was replying too, bicycle lanes can become bicycle restrictions.

 

[Scott In Aztlan]

On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 08:35:26 -0800, [email protected] (Tom Keats) wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Scott in Aztlan <[email protected]> writes:
>> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 15:01:56 GMT, [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
>>
>>>Bicycle lanes exist due an irrational fear of hit-from-behind. Somehow people feel that the
>>>painted line will keep motorists further away from them. In practice it doesn't.
>>
>> Maybe that's because there are so many arrogant cyclists who will ride ON TOP OF the white line
>> instead of cenetered in the bike line like they're supposed to.
>
>Where does it say cyclists are *compelled* to ride inside the line?

Common sense. Riding on top of the white line means the arrogant cyclist's ass is half hanging out
in the automobile traffic lane.

>> Sure, I've been known to "buzz" an arrogant cyclist.
>
>What appears to be arrogance could just be safety-tactical -- enhancing visibility, or avoiding
>hazards such as broken pavement or debris in the bike lane.

I ride a bike, too - sometimes on the very same streets where I see this stripe-riding. When I ride,
I ride as far to the right as possible, not with my ass hanging out into the traffic lane.

--
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a
place of honor with all that's good."
- George Washington, Father of our Country

 

[Scott In Aztlan]

On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 11:59:33 -0500, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:

>Scott in Aztlan wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 15:01:56 GMT, [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
>>
>> >Bicycle lanes exist due an irrational fear of hit-from-behind. Somehow people feel that the
>> >painted line will keep motorists further away from them. In practice it doesn't.
>>
>> Maybe that's because there are so many arrogant cyclists who will ride ON TOP OF the white line
>> instead of cenetered in the bike line like they're supposed to.
>
>My experience with bike lanes has indicated that, very frequently, the center of the bike lane is
>unrideable. Why? Because it's filled with gravel, broken glass and parts shed by junker cars.

********. The street sweepers sweep the bike lane, too. When I ride my bike, I never have problems
with all this horrible debris you claim is there.

>We'll archive your post, should it be needed in a court case.

LOL!!!

"Um, your honor, I wouldlike to introduce Exhibit A, which is a printout of a USENET post from a guy
whose name might be Scott and who might live somewhere in the southwestern United States in which he
claims that he likes to "buzz" arrogant bicyclists."

I would love to see the look on your face as the judge laughes your ass out of the courtroom.

--
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a
place of honor with all that's good."
- George Washington, Father of our Country

 

[Scott In Aztlan]

On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 02:22:54 GMT, Erik Freitag <[email protected]> wrote:

>Permitted Movements from Bicycle Lanes. VC 21208
> a) Whenever a bicycle lane has been established on a roadway, any person operating a bicycle upon
> the roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction shall
> ride in the bicycle lane

That's right - it says "IN" the bike lane, not "half in, half out" straddling the separation line.
Try driving your car right down the center of a dashed white lane line and watch how quickly you
get a ticket.

I have no problem with cyclists who ocasionally swerve to avoid debris, but there's absolutely no
reason to constantly ride on top of the line.

--
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a
place of honor with all that's good."
- George Washington, Father of our Country

 

[Brent P]

In article <[email protected]>, Erik Freitag wrote:

> I don't think this is true in California (relevant vehicle code quoted below).

And like I used to post repeatedly when I subscribed to the bicycle newsgroups, california isn't
the world.

There is no requirement in IL, nor most states.

 

[Brent P]

In article <[email protected]>, Scott in Aztlan wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 02:22:54 GMT, Erik Freitag <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have no problem with cyclists who ocasionally swerve to avoid debris, but there's absolutely no
> reason to constantly ride on top of the line.

Swerving in and out is a great way to get hit.

and like I posted previously, often the place to ride is right where someone (who obviously has no
experience riding in traffic) decides to paint the line. I won't ride in an unsafe manner because
some morons decided to paint a line on the road.

 

[Brent P]

In article <[email protected]>, Scott in Aztlan wrote:

> I ride a bike, too - sometimes on the very same streets where I see this stripe-riding. When I
> ride, I ride as far to the right as possible, not with my ass hanging out into the traffic lane.

Those of us who have advanced beyond the child level of riding skill and speed know the problems of
gutter riding.

 

[Frank Krygowski]

Scott in Aztlan wrote:
>
> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 11:59:33 -0500, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Scott in Aztlan wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 15:01:56 GMT, [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Bicycle lanes exist due an irrational fear of hit-from-behind. Somehow people feel that the
> >> >painted line will keep motorists further away from them. In practice it doesn't.
> >>
> >> Maybe that's because there are so many arrogant cyclists who will ride ON TOP OF the white line
> >> instead of cenetered in the bike line like they're supposed to.
> >
> >My experience with bike lanes has indicated that, very frequently, the center of the bike lane is
> >unrideable. Why? Because it's filled with gravel, broken glass and parts shed by junker cars.
>
> ********. The street sweepers sweep the bike lane, too. When I ride my bike, I never have problems
> with all this horrible debris you claim is there.

For all we know, the "********" is that you ever ride a bike. My guess is that your cycling consists
of a cruise around your neighborhood residential block twice a year. That would account for your
never having problems with debris. (Suppose you could tell us how many thousands of miles you
bicycle in the course of a year, and in how many different cities you've ridden?)

I've ridden in cities with formal programs where cyclists could send in pre-paid post cards to
request sweeping or removal of trash. Yet I've _still_ had to leave the bike lanes to avoid things
like broken-off tailpipes or collections of broken glass. And in areas with leaner road maintenance
budgets, things are much worse.

> >We'll archive your post, should it be needed in a court case.
>
> LOL!!!
>
> "Um, your honor, I wouldlike to introduce Exhibit A, which is a printout of a USENET post from a
> guy whose name might be Scott and who might live somewhere in the southwestern United States in
> which he claims that he likes to "buzz" arrogant bicyclists."
>
> I would love to see the look on your face as the judge laughes your ass out of the courtroom.

Whatever, Scott. It's worked before.

--
Frank Krygowski [email protected]

 

[Matthew Russott]

In article <[email protected]>, Don Quijote
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] (Matthew Russotto) wrote in message
>news:<[email protected]>...
>> In article <[email protected]>, Brent P
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >Come to chicago with the winter wind chill and go for a ride in the snow and freezing rain.
>> >You'll change your tune on that. I've done it, other than in gentle snow falls it's miserable.
>> >People do it, but it's not something the general population is going to be up for.
>>
>> Yeah. I rode twice in freezing rain. Not for long in either time, as it simply didn't work; the
>> traction wasn't there and the ice made the bike fail. In the worse case (where we ended up with
>> 1/4" of ice on the ground) the bicycle was completely coated in a sheet of ice before I got
>> back home.
>
>How many days like that you get in Chicago? Besides European cities offer good public transit...
>Any problem with it too?

Good public transit is a contradiction in terms.
--
Matthew T. Russotto [email protected] "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and
moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue." But extreme restriction of liberty in pursuit of a
modicum of security is a very expensive vice.

 

[Matthew Russott]

In article <[email protected]>, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Given that situation, the cyclist is under no obligation to ride through the center of the bike
>lane. Cyclists _do_ have a legal right to the road, and therefore are free to ride not only ON TOP
>of the white line, but to the left of the white line if necessary.

Bicyclists arrogance: We get the whole bike lane, PLUS any space to the left we care to take.

And you wonder why drivers don't treat bicyclists nicely.
--
Matthew T. Russotto [email protected] "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and
moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue." But extreme restriction of liberty in pursuit of a
modicum of security is a very expensive vice.

 

[Brent P]

In article <[email protected]>, Matthew Russotto wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:

>>Given that situation, the cyclist is under no obligation to ride through the center of the bike
>>lane. Cyclists _do_ have a legal right to the road, and therefore are free to ride not only ON TOP
>>of the white line, but to the left of the white line if necessary.

> Bicyclists arrogance: We get the whole bike lane, PLUS any space to the left we care to take.

There are conditions where taking the lane is the safest thing to do and is allowed under the
traffic code of most states. Just because someone decided to paint a line on the road at some
arbitary lateral location doesn't make that go away. The safest lateral location remains unchanged.
Bicycle lanes are IMO the second worst thing for cycling after street parallel paths. Separate is
rarely equal.

> And you wonder why drivers don't treat bicyclists nicely.

You mean like the guy who was behind me in a traffic jam, attacked me with his car and told me to
"drive car"? As if me driving the car would make the vehicles stopped in front of me dissappear.
This man acted as if he were willing to kill me to move up 5 feet.

 

[Don Quijote]

"P e t e F a g e r l i n" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Don Quijote" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> | "P e t e F a g e r l i n" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> | > "Claire Petersky" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> | > news:[email protected]...
> | > | "P e t e F a g e r l i n" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> | > | > "Frank Krygowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> | > | > news:[email protected]...
> | > | > | P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > Not everyone is forced to drive in rush hour traffic and even if they are,
> there
> | > are many
> | > | > | > opprotunities to drive where/when traffic isn't an issue.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | I've got to say, the idea of an "opportunity to drive" is foreign to
> | > | > | me. It's not that I never drive - but it's like having an "opportunity" to take out the
> | > | > | garbage. I'm not interested in doing it any more than I have to.
> | > | >
> | > | > Some folks can't grasp the concept of driving for fun, or for pleasure, or to >
> get to a place that offers much better riding than their local areas.
> | > |

> | > | is like, and while I could see how it could be fun for them, it doesn't melt my butter.
> | >
> | > You "anti-car,, bikes are the only solution" loons crack me up.
> |
> | It crack me up too --besides pissing me up-- the 'car only solution' that's dominated America in
> | the last decades... How about separation of cars and bicycles?
>
> "car only solution" loon?
>
> Explain my bikes then. Explain me riding my bikes to work, and to shop.
>
> "How about separation of cars and bicycles?"
>
> Bike paths are less safe than the road. No thanks.

Hey, Mr. Death Row Prisoner, I respect your right to die, but, sorry, most people consider it
INHUMANE...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

 

[Don Quijote]

Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> > Some folks live sheltered lives, or have an ingrained fear of autos.
>
> Oh, doubtlessly! But in America, the ones living the most sheltered lives are those who fear going
> anywhere but in their cars. (Somehow, the auto enthusiasts don't notice that close link between
> them and the fearful, frail lady down the street.)
>
> BTW, I've never met anyone who considered my life sheltered. I've encountered some wistful envy
> instead.

The near sighted ladies whose only idea of real life is through gossiping, do their share of
driving. Ain't they brave?

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

 

[Don Quijote]

"P e t e F a g e r l i n" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> What qualities does your life have that would make one wistfully envious? Especially if they don't
> know the first thing about your life, other than what you reveal via your mutterings in this
> thread and vague recollections of past threads involving helmet nazis?

I don't see anything nazi in riding anything else but a car... Remember Volks-Wagen... (the
people's car?)

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

 

[Don Quijote]

"Cory Dunkle" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> > Who wants to drive an almost forty year old POS car anywhere? In east

> >
>
> Certainly not me, much less in Floriduh (no offense meant to anyone here). It's the land of tolls
> and old folk! *shudder*
>
> Cory

They are pretty harmless, provided they don't use their "license to kill"...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

 

[Brandon Sommerv]

On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 12:11:40 -0800, "P e t e F a g e r l i n" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"car only solution" loon?
>
>Explain my bikes then. Explain me riding my bikes to work, and to shop.
>
>"How about separation of cars and bicycles?"
>
>Bike paths are less safe than the road. No thanks.

Is that rumbling the Four Horsemen? Pete and Brent stand in solid agreement on a topic!
--
Brandon Sommerville remove ".gov" to e-mail

Give a man fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.

 

[Don Quijote]

Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> I've found that if you reduce your use of motor vehicles and television, life gets much, much more
> interesting. (I know that's an anti-American statement, but there it is.)

Yeap, I'm afraid it can be taken for that... Actually when I think about America I picture a big,
fat SUV, with tinted windows, proudly showing an oversized stars and stripes flag...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

 

[Don Quijote]

"Pete Fagerlin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> I find that I agree with you about most TV but life can be very, very interesting when using a
> motor vehicle, especially when you usually get 25-26 mpg on the highway and you spends hours in
> the 4-5 mpg zone (I know that will bunch the panties of the anti-car freaks, but there it is).

I know, it sounds so exciting as an old lady taking her panties down...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

 

[P E T E F A G E]

"Don Quijote" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

| > | > You "anti-car,, bikes are the only solution" loons crack me up.
| > |
| > | It crack me up too --besides pissing me up-- the 'car only solution' that's dominated America
| > | in the last decades... How about separation of cars and bicycles?
| >
| > "car only solution" loon?
| >
| > Explain my bikes then. Explain me riding my bikes to work, and to shop.
| >
| > "How about separation of cars and bicycles?"
| >
| > Bike paths are less safe than the road. No thanks.
|
| Hey, Mr. Death Row Prisoner, I respect your right to die, but, sorry, most people consider it
| INHUMANE...

Congrats!

I've read a bunch of stupid stuff on usenet this month but your response was the absolute worst.

Get back to me when you grow a spine that enables you to answer my question.

Cheers.