Subject: Biker radicals

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 1995 19:12:40 UTC

I've been reading a bit in the rec.bicycles.soc group for a bit now and
you won't believe what some of those guys (and it's all guys, women have
too much common sense) seem to believe.  Look I love bikes, I support
bike paths, and I sometimes go out biking.  When I ride I use a bike
path or the sidewalk when ever I can and when I do use the road I know
well enough that I should stay out of the way of cars.  I mean it's just
common sense and, I thought, the law (the cops never hassle me about
it).

Anyway, these guys in rec.bicycles.soc seem to think that they should be
treated just like a car and boy do they get pissed-off when you point
out the obvious fact that they aren't.  Unfortunately, it seems that
these radical bikers have got the law changed from what it used to be.
I know when I was a kid the cops used to tell you to ride on the
sidewalk and if you had to use the road to ride on the left side so that
you could get off the road if you saw a car coming.  If there had been
bike paths I know they would have told you to ride there.  Now it seems
that bikes don't have to ride on the sidewalk (they aren't even supposed
to!) or the bike path and they are not even supposed to ride on the
left.  Hell, it even seems to be legal for them to make a left turn from
the left lane (go figure)!

What's really wacky about this is that I know some real car hating
eco-freaks and they agree with me about these guys, they're nuts.  They
know that cars and bikes don't mix and that's why they're big on bike
paths.  These radical bikers seem to hate bike paths and say that they
are more dangerous than mixing it with cars (well I guess they might be
more dangerous if you're going to wear those stirrup things and ride
like Greg LaMode).  What's a real hoot is that these radical bikers get
as pissed-off with the car hating eco-freaks as they do with drivers.
When I ask my car hating eco-freak friends why should the government
spend my tax money on bike paths if bikers don't even have to use them,
all they can do is shrug their shoulders.  I mean what's the point to
bike paths if they don't get bikes off the road?!

I spent a week in Holland and I'll tell you they don't put up with any
of that crap there.  Bikes have their paths and the law says that they
have to use them and you sure as hell don't see any bikes on the roads
(at least the main ones).  If you could have American roads (Dutch ones
are too crowded) and Dutch bike paths and Dutch bike laws it would be
great.  Of course you'll never see that here with the sort of egghead
politicians we get and with every minority group whining about their
rights.

So what do we do about it?  Well if they want to be treated like drivers
then we treat them like drivers, by the book.  Nothing illegal but no
slack either, treat them just like you'd treat any car.  No more letting
them pass you on the right when you are making a right turn.  No more
yielding to them when they're in the cross walk or on the sidewalk, if
they aren't supposed to be there you don't yield to them.  If they ride
at night without lights you don't see them and they're not there.  If
they want to make a left turn they can just wait till there's a gap, I'm
not giving it to them.  And if they have a stop or yield sign I'm just
going to assume that they are going to stop, no more waving them
through.  If they're riding on the wrong side of the road, fuck em, I'm
not moving over.  Let's see how they really like it when we all stop
being Mr. Niceguy.  Let them see that the real world of driving isn't as
nice as they seem to think it is.

One other thing, I had always thought that if you hit a biker you were
always at fault, like hitting a pedestrian, but according to a cop I was
talking to it's not so.  If a biker runs a stop light and you hit him
he's at fault, in fact if your car is damaged you can sue him.  Gee,
some of the those changes in the law aren't so bad!

---

From: [email-masked] (Kevin Stateman)
Date: 17 Jul 1995 01:06:21 GMT

>nice as they seem to think it is.

I know this wasn't the reaction you WANTED from us "radicals" who live by
1995 law instead of 1950 law...but.....

Sounds good to me.

I agree that if cyclists want to be treated as vehicles, we must obey 
vehicular laws. NO problem. When i teach a biking class here at the 
university, this is one thing i stress to the students. When I see a 
youngster cycling to school...on the wrong side... i ride beside him and
*gently* explain to him that what he is doing isn't safe, and say "follow 
me!"

The reason the law is changed, BTW, is because of research. Bikes used to 
be treated as toys, and thus followed pedestrian law. It was discovered 
(and you can see for yourself if you try it) that it is more dangerous 
for bikes to be on sidewalks, crosswalks, etc than in the lanes with traffic.
Cyclists need to learn how to ride like a vehicle, and how to keep safe 
but give automobiles the chance to pass when it is safe. I think every 
"radical" here tries to do this

>some of the those changes in the law aren't so bad!
I guess the part of your post/theory i don't agree with is your attitude 
toward the coexistence of bikes and cars. YOu seem to be saying: fine, we 
have to be together, then I'll do my damndest to get you hurt, even killed.
Is this what you meant? I'd like a real answer on this one. It's one 
thing to assuage your tender ego with a threat.. is that what people 
should really think?
Why not do your best to let bikers know what YOU< the driver, want in 
this situation, assuming we are going to be sharing the road. I'm all ears.

Kev Statema
[email-masked]
 
(not anonymous, you notice)

---

From: [email-masked] (Kevin Meaney)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 11:02:11 -0800

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] wrote:
A lot of ranting and raving deleted

> nice as they seem to think it is.

Funny this is how I expect to be treated, I don't ride on the sidewalk,
so nobody has to yield to me their, I ride with lights at night, though
some cars seem to forget to switch theirs on, I stop at stop signs, lights
and give way at yield signs, I don't expect to be waved through and if
somebody tries to wave me through and they have right of way I'll
make sure they take their right of way, I don't ride on the wrong side
of the road, I'll wait in the queue of cars at traffic lights unless
the lanes are really wide(which means cars have no trouble passing
me and I have plenty of room to ride up beside them). However if you
want to kill all those cyclists who are breaking the law then have it
on your head, I see car drivers in large numbers breaking the law
every day so does that mean I can take a baseball bat and hit them
in the head with it(I don't think so)!!!

> some of the those changes in the law aren't so bad!

I have third party insurance for my bike so like a car driver if I do
make a mistake which is my fault(Like car drivers and cyclists do every
day)then my insurance will cover property damage and medical expenses.
I behave like a vehicle on the road and expect to be treated like a
vehicle on the road. Hopefully I won't have to claim against my
insurance and won't do anything so stupid as to endanger my life,
and hopefully cars won't do something so stupid as to endanger my
life either. If the road is single lane each way I'll stay close
to the kerb, if a multi lane road has wide lanes I'll stay near
the kerb, if however I'm riding on a road with two lanes each way
which are narrow I'll ride near to the centre of the kerbside lane.

Kevin

-- 
Kevin Meaney       E-mail: [email-masked]
Organization       CSIRO Division of Petroleum Resources
pho 61(0)398811296 mail PO Box 3000 Glen Waverley 3150 VIC Australia
fax 61(0)398032052 Address Kinoull Grove Glen Waverley 3150 VIC Australia

---

From: [email-masked] (Kevin Meaney)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 11:27:01 -0800

> common sense and, I thought, the law (the cops never hassle me about

Bike paths and side walks are dangerous, Bike paths are usually pedestrian
paths with people walking their dogs without a leash, sidewalks are just
plain dangerous, a large number of car/cycling accidents occur when
somebody riding on the sidewalk crosses a road without looking out
properly this is because he/she has to cross so many roads to go
anywhere. It is just not practical for somebody like myself who
commutes 40km a day by bike to do that on a sidewalk or along a bike
path, I did try the bike path for a while since their is a fairly
direct connection between where I live and where I work, however the
number of times each trip that I would come to a screaming halt
because of dogs or lovers kissing on the bike path or a group of
people having a chat in the middle of the path makes it a dangerous
and a slow way of commuting. Bike paths can only be used by cyclists
if they do not ride faster than 15km/hr. I average around 25km/hr
commuting and that includes a considerable amount of time spent at
traffic lights and waiting in traffic, my average road speed must be
approaching 35km/hr.

Kevin

A whole lot of other dribble deleted:

---

From: [email-masked] (Chris Malcolm)
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 15:07:42 GMT

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] writes:

>you could get off the road if you saw a car coming.

That explains a lot about American cyclists. In Britain the police
(and the Govt) were never so stupid: bikes have *always* been subject
to the same rules as other vehicular traffic, except where there was a
special bicycle rule (e.g. the hand signs indicating intention to be
given to police controlling traffic differ for cars and bikes).

>If there had been
>left.

In Britain (and the rest of Europe) cycling on sidewalks has always
been illegal, and it has always been *compulsory* to ride on the same
side of the road as cars.

>Hell, it even seems to be legal for them to make a left turn from

This has *always* been the law in Britain & the rest of Europe -- not
only is it legal, it is *compulsory* to make both left and right turns
out of the ipsilateral lanes.

>eco-freaks and they agree with me about these guys, they're nuts.

What's wacky is that the US, unlike Europe (and proabably the rest of
the world) never developed a strong transportation bicycling culture,
including having plenty of *police* cyclists, and sensible laws about
how to integrate the various kinds of road vehicles. You guys started
off seeing bikes as toys and recreational devices, and lots of you,
having passed the age at which alcohol consumption renders the brain
incapable of further learning, can't get the nonsense you learned as
kids out of your heads.

>I mean what's the point to

Exactly.

>(at least the main ones).

What do you mean by main roads? Their cities are full of bikes, using
the same roads as the cars.

>If you could have American roads (Dutch ones
>great.

Of course you mean to include the Dutch law which says that in any
coliision between a cyclist and a car the car is automatically at
fault?

>Of course you'll never see that here with the sort of egghead

Of course, you're quite right, American car drivers would never stand
for it. They never stop whining about being delayed precious seconds
by cyclists, they'd bust a blood vessel if they were automatically at
fault after running the bastard into the ditch.
-- 
Chris Malcolm    [email-masked]         +44 (0)131 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
"The mind reigns, but does not govern" -- Paul Valery

---

From: [email-masked] (Tom Revay)
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 16:33:55

>fault after running the bastard into the ditch.

Yeah, tell me 'bout it.  You should have heard the hue and cry when
they debated raising the Federal gasoline tax a whole nickel -- that's
five cents, $0.05, or about 3p at $1.60/£1.00 exchange rate -- per
four-quart -gallon-.  That would have brought said petrol up to maybe
$1.30 per gallon (87p to you), at the time (in 1992).

I recall the first time I visited Ireland, and computed what they were
paying for a gallon over there (of course, it's sold by the liter in Yurp).
It was around $4.50.  Basically, if you have a car there, you don't drive
by yourself -- you ask if anyone needs a lift (and please, avoid asking
if somebody would like a "ride," it has a different cultural connotation 8-)).

(Some Irish girls I met on Martha's Vineyard this past summer saw a
commuter parking area, from which shuttle bus service would take passengers
into town.  The area was signposted, "Park And Ride."  Their response
was, "Wha'?  Stop an' shift?  Jayzzz ...!" 8-) )

Until we cut down on the number of cars, relative to the number of bikes,
I don't expect major progress in bikes being treated as vehicles, though we
might score a few victories around the fringes.  Our town has put three
cops on mountain bikes -- that's marginallly significant.  And sales of bikes
are brisk, and have been for a decade or so.

There was a fat guy who screamed out the window at me in Framingham, Mass
on Sunday evening, cigarette hanging from his mouth, because I had the 
unmitigated gall to move to the center lane as we were approaching a red light 
that he had to stop at, anyway.  I didn't cut him off, but I moved into that 
lane because the right lane was turning-traffic only, and the traffic was
permitted to turn right on red there.  So I didn't want to block the lane,
since I was going forward -- I was doing the right thing, in other words.

But he didn't like that I was "out in the road."  Well, too bad.  I didn't
slow him down, I didn't run the light, I just did what he was doing, only
I wasn't assaulting anyone while doing it.

And if he could be "encouraged" or "compelled" to come out 
and ride with me, and see the kind of guff that we who are obeying
the law have to put up with from the likes o' him, I think behavior
might change.

But he's has his pickup, he has his cheap gas and oil, he has his butts, he 
has his obnoxious behavior.  So what's the problem, right? 8-/

>Chris Malcolm    [email-masked]         +44 (0)131 650 3085

...................Tom
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Falstaff sweats to death.
    And lards the lean earth as he walks along.
        -- _Henry IV_, part 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------