Why Cycling will never be accepted by road users PERIOD

[Jeytown]

Good Morning or afternoon to anybody who reads this

this is more of a gathered opinion by people i have talked to

taxi drivers

bus drivers

physios

my wife ?

as a cyclist myself i am fairly curteous and safe i adopted an idea i saw from another cyclist i kittesd my bike out in what i could afford in lights and reflective vests

my question arises from teh idiots that possess a bike but choose not make themselves identifiable on teh road and then have the gaul to get upset when they almost get killed.

my statement is this

" when you cycle on the road is it the responsibility on the cyclists to provide his own safety gear or is the responsibility of the bike shop"

my answer to this is that it falls squarely at the bike shops feet

imagine buying a car and being told that for you to be safe it is your responsibily to go and buy the lights, doors and, seat belt ?


i might be wrong i just wanted to say that of all the bike shops ive been at they havent presented me with an option to get myself kitted out with safety gear.


the argument that i might not use the road all that often is spurious at best when do you not use any part of the road when getting to the park or the cycling track?

has any cycling website ever offered any deals to promote safety ?

look my intention is not anger or infuriate i simply am asking whenever cyclists myself included talk about safety we expect that cars will see us why is it not time we looked at ourselves and provided a working party on this issue.

that we could take to our bike shops and online stores and bike outlets

thanks

JEYTOWN

 

[Ike90]

I think you make a decent point, but it comes down to a matter of legality, doesn't it? In most countries, automobiles are required to be equipped with lights, safety belts, a horn, turn signals, etc.

Where I live, bicycles are required to have a white front reflector and a red rear one, and bike shops can't sell them without the reflectors installed.

Helmet laws vary where I live (Washington State) so it doesn't seem logical to require that bicycles be sold with helmets. Besides, Washington DOES have a motorcycle helmet law, but you can purchase a motorcycle without purchasing a helmet.

I think the real reason bicycles aren't take seriously, and that so many bicyclists don't wear proper safety equipment or obey traffic laws is this:

Particularly in the US, we've created a culture in which bicycles are kid's toys. We buy them for our kids as playthings. We don't teach them that bikes are serious forms of transportation. So they grow up scoffing at traffic laws, and eventually they buy their kids bicycles as playthings, and the wheel goes around.

When my two daughters learned to ride, the were taught to obey traffic laws, to use hand signals, and were required to wear helmets. When they became teenagers, they both quit riding their bicycles.

To them bicycles ARE a serious form of transportation ... a seriously geeky one. I don't know that I did any better than other parents, but at least my kids aren't out there flaunting the rules on their bicycles.

 

[LeojVS]

Jeytown, you make a very good point. I passed a cyclist the other night, at 1840. Here in Oz, its pretty damn dark at that time. It was pi$$ing down with rain, and foggy. I did not see him. I was right behind him. Only when a car passed us both, I saw him. He would have been 100m ahead. Idiot.
He should have had reflectors, flashers, a damn helmet, or something reflective.

In terms of safety, it should be up to the rider me thinks. If old mate gets mowed down because I did not see him in my car, in the above conditions, yes, I would be charged with Neg driving amongst othes, but I wouldnt be able to sue the bike shop for failng to make old mate wear his bright stuff. Its his choice. I have 2 bikes. When I got my roadie, no I was not asked to buy lights, they were given to me. Having spent near $2K there might have helped that, but some shops are responsible enough.

The way I see it, a bike shop is selling a mode of transport. Thats as far as they go. If the buyer wants to be safe, a package should be offered. If they have gear already, then fine.

end of the day, its the riders choice. The shop keep cannot hold your hand all the way.

Good topic!

 

[Jeytown]

soory about my late reply


thanks for your thoughts guys

its strange you know when you get a bike and start riding around town you start to see and look out for more cyclists on the road you start to become aware of all the cyclists who arent taking the safety part seriously.

while i advocate the use of cycling as a serious form of transprot i also feel that its an issue that gets looked over when people argue that cars are against us

perhaps there should be more involovemnet with bicycle groups to push for safety items as an package at LBS and even at cycling meets.

my thoughts

thanks for your thoughts guys

 

[bigpedaler]

it is NOT the reponsibility of the shop to keep you safe! the shop SHOULD do the repsonsible thing and recommend safety gear, but it is on YOU -- the adult rider -- to use COMMON SENSE and make sure you're visible. any and all rights that you have -- including the right to the road (which IS limited) -- depend on your practice of the responsibilities that go hand-in-hand with those rights. it's that simple.

now, i know -- stupid riders reflect badly on us all, and some people are so shallow that they think you're destitute if you ride -- but hey -- drivers are just as bad, or worse! beyond the obvious, follow the law of the road when on it, remember these three:

1. make sure you're visible, both by lights and conduct while riding;
2. assume you're not, because most drivers don't look more than 10 feet beyond thier hood;
3. never forget that your life is in your hands when you're out there.

 

[jbrownfield]

If common sense were so common then everyone would have it.

Some people think its the responsibility of others to see them even in the dark with dark clothing. Survival of the fittest i say,lol

 

[steve_18798]

I would believe its up to your own decision. If you want to get creamed be my guess. If you want to live get a good reflective vest or good lighting on your bike. I ride with 2 rear lights always on flash and 2 five L.E.D headlights, one on flash and the other on steady beam so i can see to. My headlights are good to see brightly up to 500 feet and so are the taillights. Im pretty lite up on my bike and safe.

 

[RedHotIron]

Most people do not get their bikes at an LBS, & have not been educated to ride. I will say as a utility cyclist (but an informed one) that we among the worst offenders.

But there has to be some outreach to urban folks, often immigrants, who are not riding in proper form.

Wearing lights & reflectors at night might seem common sense, but many riders probably just assume that drivers will see them in their lights.

 

[bigpedaler]

If common sense were so common then everyone would have it.

Some people think its the responsibility of others to see them even in the dark with dark clothing. Survival of the fittest i say,lol

i agree w/ point 2 here, for sure...it's sad what people will do. people in my town WALK in the middle of the street wearing black clothes (because they're COOL, they're BAD), and will cuss out a driver that has to swerve to miss & honks at them!

common sense USED TO BE...started to disappear about the time the gov't became super-nanny, big brother, and all the rest rolled into one ugly entity.

 

[RedHotIron]

i agree w/ point 2 here, for sure...it's sad what people will do. people in my town WALK in the middle of the street wearing black clothes (because they're COOL, they're BAD), and will cuss out a driver that has to swerve to miss & honks at them!

common sense USED TO BE...started to disappear about the time the gov't became super-nanny, big brother, and all the rest rolled into one ugly entity.

Sorry, not the govt., the Corporate State (big business & govt combined, like the Bush Oil cabinet,, or McDonnel Douglas & Halliburton in Iraq. War is great business! Altho neither has to do with people walking in black clothes at night in the street, sorry.

 

[Elkhound]

Sorry, not the govt., the Corporate State (big business & govt combined, like the Bush Oil cabinet,, or McDonnel Douglas & Halliburton in Iraq. War is great business! Altho neither has to do with people walking in black clothes at night in the street, sorry.

The law of all 50 US states, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico all state that a bicycle has as much right to be on the road (except where specifically forbidden on limited access highways and the like) as a car or truck.

However, these same laws also state that cyclists have the same duties and responsibilities as motorists. We are supposed to obey the Rules of the Road.

I see so many cyclists riding against traffic, on sidewalks, at night without lights, the wrong way on one-way streets, etc.; I'm a responsible cyclist who obeys all the rules, and I know that--although most drivers here are fairly civilized with respect to cyclists--that the idiots I see must sorely provoke drivers.

Not so long ago I was riding along the bike path by the river at about 9:00 pm; I crossed the bridge over the Elk River and was going into the underpass beneath the Interstate when this man on a bike with no lights, no reflectors, wearing dark clothing came flying out of the shadows. Fortunately, I had my headlamp on so I avoided a crash, but it was a near thing. And he wasn't some kid or teenager; he was a fully adult man who should have known better.

 

[janiejones]

I was riding to work the other day, foggy wintery morning in my black knicks with matching leg armers and dark green jacket, I matched the trees in the background, also I was on my white bike with black components, perfectly matched to the road - then I nearly got run over by some guy in his 4wd - and he reckons he didn't see me -

This is actually a true story and it did make me think about what I wear on my bike.

 

[Elkhound]

I was riding to work the other day, foggy wintery morning in my black knicks with matching leg armers and dark green jacket, I matched the trees in the background, also I was on my white bike with black components, perfectly matched to the road - then I nearly got run over by some guy in his 4wd - and he reckons he didn't see me -

This is actually a true story and it did make me think about what I wear on my bike.

I am very sorry to say that in this instance you were like the boy in the CS Lewis story called Eustance Clarence Scrubb. (If you don't know what I mean, read the first paragraph of Voyage of the Dawn Treader.)

 

[NickInNC]

Whats soo funny about this is that every bike shop I go into they are so very interested in making me pay out of the butt for everything, even junk I really don't need or want they try to force fit on me.

I come from a retail background in both fine Men's Clothing and Mid-end home furninshings, and well from my experience I have learned the more you expose to the guest in your store in product and variety the more they buy. So why then do bike store owners/employees not show off and "sell" actual usable goods. They are missing out on a huge part of business.

But at the end of the day the cyclist is responsible for making himself visable and as safe as they can from 2-ton fossil burner beasts of death and destructio.

 

[e0richt]

Good Morning or afternoon to anybody who reads this

this is more of a gathered opinion by people i have talked to

taxi drivers

bus drivers

physios

my wife ?

as a cyclist myself i am fairly curteous and safe i adopted an idea i saw from another cyclist i kittesd my bike out in what i could afford in lights and reflective vests

my question arises from teh idiots that possess a bike but choose not make themselves identifiable on teh road and then have the gaul to get upset when they almost get killed.

my statement is this

" when you cycle on the road is it the responsibility on the cyclists to provide his own safety gear or is the responsibility of the bike shop"

my answer to this is that it falls squarely at the bike shops feet

imagine buying a car and being told that for you to be safe it is your responsibily to go and buy the lights, doors and, seat belt ?


i might be wrong i just wanted to say that of all the bike shops ive been at they havent presented me with an option to get myself kitted out with safety gear.


the argument that i might not use the road all that often is spurious at best when do you not use any part of the road when getting to the park or the cycling track?

has any cycling website ever offered any deals to promote safety ?

look my intention is not anger or infuriate i simply am asking whenever cyclists myself included talk about safety we expect that cars will see us why is it not time we looked at ourselves and provided a working party on this issue.

that we could take to our bike shops and online stores and bike outlets

thanks

JEYTOWN

I dont agree. If one were to buy a dirt motorcycle, and use it on the road you would have to buy a "road kit" that would make it street legal...

since you are buying a bike that might be used for "racing" which wouldn't require having a "road kit" to make it street legal. also, if you package the lights etc, that would preclude competition... what happens if the bike shop gives you a headlight of a certain type and you might have wanted either a longer run time or more lumens for visibility?

 

[NORECUMYET]

Good Morning or afternoon to anybody who reads this

this is more of a gathered opinion by people i have talked to

taxi drivers

bus drivers

physios

my wife ?

as a cyclist myself i am fairly curteous and safe i adopted an idea i saw from another cyclist i kittesd my bike out in what i could afford in lights and reflective vests

my question arises from teh idiots that possess a bike but choose not make themselves identifiable on teh road and then have the gaul to get upset when they almost get killed.

my statement is this

" when you cycle on the road is it the responsibility on the cyclists to provide his own safety gear or is the responsibility of the bike shop"

my answer to this is that it falls squarely at the bike shops feet

imagine buying a car and being told that for you to be safe it is your responsibily to go and buy the lights, doors and, seat belt ?


i might be wrong i just wanted to say that of all the bike shops ive been at they havent presented me with an option to get myself kitted out with safety gear.


the argument that i might not use the road all that often is spurious at best when do you not use any part of the road when getting to the park or the cycling track?

has any cycling website ever offered any deals to promote safety ?

look my intention is not anger or infuriate i simply am asking whenever cyclists myself included talk about safety we expect that cars will see us why is it not time we looked at ourselves and provided a working party on this issue.

that we could take to our bike shops and online stores and bike outlets

thanks

JEYTOWN

Sorry buddy. You're dead wrong. Lights are your responsibility. What If I buy a road bike with the intent of NEVER riding after dark because I think it's too dangerous? If we go with your idea then I'd have to pay extra to have a bike outfitted with equipment that I don't want or use. Not to mention the added weight. Your car's seatbelts don't work automatically. There used to be some cars that had automatic seat belts but they were a flop.

I do agree with you that the illegal aliens I always see around here (So Cal) riding down the street, at night, with no lights, no reflectors, wearing dark clothing, and to top it all off riding on the wrong side of the street give the safe bikers a bad name. But demanding that the bike shop be held liable for putting lights on bikes. No way Jose. What if I don't like the light/battery/dynamo combination he's set up my bike with?

Personal responsibility is where it's at. Expecting government to take care of us is what has this country in such a mess. (The US)

You're right about the fact that our safety is up to us. We have to make certain that we are seen at night. I myself am ready to buy an H.I.D. and Lithium Ion setup for my bent that's about as bright as a car headllight. It's well worth the money to greatly increase the odds of being seen. Now the setups I'm looking at are anywhere between three and seven hundred dollars. Would you expect the dealer to put a rig like that on a bike that may not even cost that much? How do you decide what lights are bright enough? Who decides this?

 

[Edudbor]

I'm not a cyclist (not yet anyway). I've clocked exactly *zero* minutes on my bicycle so far (bought it today). So, I feel I'm a good candidate to give the 'drivers' perspective; or at least my own views on the issue....

The reason I didn't like (and still don't like) people on bicycles isn't because they don't follow certain safety rules. I rarely drive at night, and I even more rarely, see someone on a bike without appropriate safety gear. The simple truth is, I don't like cyclists because they are fairly annoying.

Really, I don't mean that to be offensive. But, look at it from the perspective of a driver. The law says bicycles and cars are supposed to share the same roadways and follow pretty much the same laws. If I'm driving down a 1 lane road, with no bike path or shoulder - with a speed limit of 55mph and a cyclist is in front of me doing 15mph that's annoying. I'd be equally annoyed if another car was doing 15mph in front of me. Passing the biker often means crossing over into oncoming traffic and is just generally a minor annoyance.

Now, I *fully* understand (now more than ever) that in most places (like where I live) the cyclist doesn't particularly WANT to be on that stretch of road. He'd rather be in a bike lane, or on a street with a speed limit of 25. He's worried that I'm not going to see him, or worse, *WANT* to hurt him; and he'd much rather have me going a mere 10 mphs faster than him instead of 30mph.

I could be wrong, but that's my take on it. If the bicycle could keep up with the flow of traffic, I wouldn't mind it at all. And, yes, I realize I'll now be riding my bike to work and pissing off other people who feel the same way as me...but there is no possible route that will let me avoid these types of roads. I don't like it anymore than they do. And while they will be annoyed with me, I'll now be annoyed with them. Because now cars are a headache for me.

 

[NORECUMYET]

I'm not a cyclist (not yet anyway). I've clocked exactly *zero* minutes on my bicycle so far (bought it today). So, I feel I'm a good candidate to give the 'drivers' perspective; or at least my own views on the issue....

The reason I didn't like (and still don't like) people on bicycles isn't because they don't follow certain safety rules. I rarely drive at night, and I even more rarely, see someone on a bike without appropriate safety gear. The simple truth is, I don't like cyclists because they are fairly annoying.

Really, I don't mean that to be offensive. But, look at it from the perspective of a driver. The law says bicycles and cars are supposed to share the same roadways and follow pretty much the same laws. If I'm driving down a 1 lane road, with no bike path or shoulder - with a speed limit of 55mph and a cyclist is in front of me doing 15mph that's annoying. I'd be equally annoyed if another car was doing 15mph in front of me. Passing the biker often means crossing over into oncoming traffic and is just generally a minor annoyance.

Now, I *fully* understand (now more than ever) that in most places (like where I live) the cyclist doesn't particularly WANT to be on that stretch of road. He'd rather be in a bike lane, or on a street with a speed limit of 25. He's worried that I'm not going to see him, or worse, *WANT* to hurt him; and he'd much rather have me going a mere 10 mphs faster than him instead of 30mph.

I could be wrong, but that's my take on it. If the bicycle could keep up with the flow of traffic, I wouldn't mind it at all. And, yes, I realize I'll now be riding my bike to work and pissing off other people who feel the same way as me...but there is no possible route that will let me avoid these types of roads. I don't like it anymore than they do. And while they will be annoyed with me, I'll now be annoyed with them. Because now cars are a headache for me.

Common. What's the most amount of time you've ever had to wait in order to get around a bicycle? If it was more than one minute I would be very surprised, and I bet it wasn't more than a few seconds. The law states that the bicycle has the right of way in your particular situation. No matter how slow he's going. Just like when you get stuck behind a tractor on a rural road. He's not doing anything wrong.

If you get that annoyed by a thirty second delay, hell even five minutes, then you're simply not allowing yourself enough time to reach your destination. That's not the fault of the bicyclist. That's your own inability to plan a simple trip. I just hope you don't show your annoyance by swerving toward the bike, or honking, or yelling out the window, cause if I'm the guy in front of you on the bike and you get too rambunctious for my tastes, you're going to end up with a face full of bear repellent.

 

[masi rider]

In my town, there is a few cycling groups who ride as if it were a real peleton, 3 or 4 wide on a 2 way street w/o a bike lane. That is why i get flack when i ride, by motorists,,, not that i'm doing anything wrong, but because of the "Peleton" riding like it's le Tour! Also, they need to start following the rules of the road, I use hand signals, stop at stop signs, yield at cross walks, etc., they don't. Not to many cyclists around my area do, and it reflects on us how do the right thing on the road. Until they start riding with a little respect for others(not just cars), cyclists in my area will never be accepted by road users.

 

[Edudbor]

Common. What's the most amount of time you've ever had to wait in order to get around a bicycle? If it was more than one minute I would be very surprised, and I bet it wasn't more than a few seconds. The law states that the bicycle has the right of way in your particular situation. No matter how slow he's going. Just like when you get stuck behind a tractor on a rural road. He's not doing anything wrong.

If you get that annoyed by a thirty second delay, hell even five minutes, then you're simply not allowing yourself enough time to reach your destination. That's not the fault of the bicyclist. That's your own inability to plan a simple trip. I just hope you don't show your annoyance by swerving toward the bike, or honking, or yelling out the window, cause if I'm the guy in front of you on the bike and you get too rambunctious for my tastes, you're going to end up with a face full of bear repellent.

Like I said; I wasn't trying to offend anyone - but that is the feeling I have. Looking at it logically, from the perspective of the driver...

A bicycle on the road causes me to slow down/have to pass into oncoming traffic. A bicycle on the road gives me *no* benefit. Anytime you have something that causes problems (even minor ones) and gives no tangible benefits - people are going to dislike it.

Legally, a bicycle has the same rights to the road as a car. But, if you drove down a 55mph road at 20mph I promise you, you'd run into a lot of problems. Even if there is not posted minimum speed limit; it won't be long before a cop pulls you over. And you can explain to him how you are going the same speed you do on your bicycle and the car and the bicycle follow the same laws...yadda, yadda, yadda; but odds are you'd be driving away with a ticket.

I'd never honk or yell at the bicycle rider; but I find it pretty....pathetic...that you'd first point out what the law has to say about bicycle riders and cars - and then, in the same breath, threaten to physically assault me for getting 'too rambunctious'. If someone yells at you, or honks at you; you have no legal right to spray them with bear repelant. Besides which, I drive with my windows up (I wear contacts and the wind will dry out my eyes); so your bear spray would be pretty ineffective.