When Bicyclists Obey Traffic Laws...
August 3, 2015 6:51 PM Subscribe
Riders arrived at every stop sign in a single file, coming to a complete stop and filing through the intersection only once they were given the right-of-way. The law-abiding act of civil disobedience snarled traffic almost immediately. "The thing you say you want — every cyclist to stop at every stop sign — you really don't want that"
"There’s a big question of, ‘does [the law] make sense?'...I firmly believe we should enforce dangerous behaviors. But I don’t think enforcing behaviors that aren’t hurting anybody is a good use of resources."
"There’s a big question of, ‘does [the law] make sense?'...I firmly believe we should enforce dangerous behaviors. But I don’t think enforcing behaviors that aren’t hurting anybody is a good use of resources."
So instead of riding in parallel like we do between stops, and passing through stops together, the cyclists serialized and maximized the time at stops to say "fuck you, car drivers". Got it.
posted by kjs3 at 6:58 PM on August 3, 2015 [39 favorites]
posted by kjs3 at 6:58 PM on August 3, 2015 [39 favorites]
It seems more or less obvious that bicycles are not cars, and a traffic code that requires cyclists to behave like cars is going to run into a number of problems. But this doesn't sound like a practical demonstration of likely effects.
posted by weston at 7:02 PM on August 3, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by weston at 7:02 PM on August 3, 2015 [4 favorites]
Ok, yeah, the Idaho Stop is perfectly reasonable. Awareness raised.
But for fuck's sake, hundreds of cyclists are gonna impact traffic no matter what they do. Seems a little disingenuous and precious. "You got what you wanted"? What if I just wanted the average number of cyclists to be courteous vehicle operators, using eye contact to negotiate the intersection instead of daring me to run them over? Could we just have that? I don't care if they actually come to a full complete stop.
Minor annoyance, though. Good for them for calling the PD on the bullshit crackdown.
posted by ctmf at 7:02 PM on August 3, 2015 [22 favorites]
But for fuck's sake, hundreds of cyclists are gonna impact traffic no matter what they do. Seems a little disingenuous and precious. "You got what you wanted"? What if I just wanted the average number of cyclists to be courteous vehicle operators, using eye contact to negotiate the intersection instead of daring me to run them over? Could we just have that? I don't care if they actually come to a full complete stop.
Minor annoyance, though. Good for them for calling the PD on the bullshit crackdown.
posted by ctmf at 7:02 PM on August 3, 2015 [22 favorites]
As much as I support reasonable flexibility and awareness of context in applying traffic laws to bikers, I think this protest is really disingenuous. The traffic jam wasn't caused by the bikers stopping at the stop signs, it was caused by all of them deliberately congregating on the same route at the same time.
posted by Pfardentrott at 7:03 PM on August 3, 2015 [31 favorites]
posted by Pfardentrott at 7:03 PM on August 3, 2015 [31 favorites]
More photos and additional reporting, and a video of the event.
[Disclosure: self-links. But, I was there and I covered the protest, and I believe the links provide additional context.]
posted by toofuture at 7:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
[Disclosure: self-links. But, I was there and I covered the protest, and I believe the links provide additional context.]
posted by toofuture at 7:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
The traffic jam wasn't caused by the bikers stopping at the stop signs, it was caused by all of them deliberately congregating on the same route at the same time.
No, it was caused by both, as the organizers intended.
posted by kjs3 at 7:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
No, it was caused by both, as the organizers intended.
posted by kjs3 at 7:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
Hell, could we have bikers that just demonstrate awareness of PEDESTRIANS? I was trying to cross a street, WITH the light, mind, and a cluster of eight cyclists came rolling up, and TO A MAN they all looked right at me, gave me some sort of mock-apologetic little "whoopsie" look and kept right on coming, and I had to scramble back out of their way. One of them even thanked me for jumping out of the way so he wouldn't hit me as they all rolled through a red light and went on their merry way.
I really just want bikers not to do that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:06 PM on August 3, 2015 [114 favorites]
I really just want bikers not to do that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:06 PM on August 3, 2015 [114 favorites]
I'm a pedestrian so I'm not sure what I'm not supposed to like about this. No more playing "guess if this bike will stop"? Yes, please.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 7:07 PM on August 3, 2015 [39 favorites]
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 7:07 PM on August 3, 2015 [39 favorites]
And before anyone gets snarky I also bike, and I also always stop at traffic lights. And especially for pedestrians.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:07 PM on August 3, 2015 [18 favorites]
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:07 PM on August 3, 2015 [18 favorites]
And since we're posting mitigating experiences, on Sunday I had not one but two spandex clad bro-bikers run a stop sign I clearly had the right of way at and when I hit my horn stopped in the middle of the intersection to give me the tag-team middle-finger.
Keep it classy, bikers...
posted by kjs3 at 7:10 PM on August 3, 2015 [3 favorites]
Keep it classy, bikers...
posted by kjs3 at 7:10 PM on August 3, 2015 [3 favorites]
Stop signs: stop for cars, yield for bikes
Red light: red light for cars, stop for bikes
Yellow Light: red light imminent for cars, totally green for bikes
Yield sign: yield for cars, coast without the use of your hands for bikes while whistling
Railroad crossing: wait until train passes to go for cars, try to jump OVER THE TRAIN for bikes, you will need to built up speed
Do Not Enter: do not enter for cars, please come in for bikes, stay awhile
No Left Turn: no left turn for cars, you can totally do a left turn for bikes
One Way Street: one way for cars, all the ways for bikes
posted by ORthey at 7:13 PM on August 3, 2015 [42 favorites]
Red light: red light for cars, stop for bikes
Yellow Light: red light imminent for cars, totally green for bikes
Yield sign: yield for cars, coast without the use of your hands for bikes while whistling
Railroad crossing: wait until train passes to go for cars, try to jump OVER THE TRAIN for bikes, you will need to built up speed
Do Not Enter: do not enter for cars, please come in for bikes, stay awhile
No Left Turn: no left turn for cars, you can totally do a left turn for bikes
One Way Street: one way for cars, all the ways for bikes
posted by ORthey at 7:13 PM on August 3, 2015 [42 favorites]
hundreds of cyclists are gonna impact traffic no matter what they do
About the same impact as a thousand cars, I reckon. Funny how car drivers always think of cyclists holding them up, when it's the cars that take up way too much space and cause traffic problems for everyone. Drivers routinely run red lights, break the speed limit running around town while using their phones, and roll through stop signs faster than I would ever consider doing on a bike, all the while nominally in control of a potential deadly weapon.
The way I see it, bicyclists not only have the same right to the road as cars, they should have a superior right.
posted by exogenous at 7:14 PM on August 3, 2015 [55 favorites]
About the same impact as a thousand cars, I reckon. Funny how car drivers always think of cyclists holding them up, when it's the cars that take up way too much space and cause traffic problems for everyone. Drivers routinely run red lights, break the speed limit running around town while using their phones, and roll through stop signs faster than I would ever consider doing on a bike, all the while nominally in control of a potential deadly weapon.
The way I see it, bicyclists not only have the same right to the road as cars, they should have a superior right.
posted by exogenous at 7:14 PM on August 3, 2015 [55 favorites]
Right, so when hundreds of cars that wouldn't ordinarily be there show up to scrupulously follow the rules, I'll be annoyed at that too, promise.
posted by ctmf at 7:16 PM on August 3, 2015 [21 favorites]
posted by ctmf at 7:16 PM on August 3, 2015 [21 favorites]
It's called a parade and they're the worst.
posted by ftm at 7:18 PM on August 3, 2015 [33 favorites]
posted by ftm at 7:18 PM on August 3, 2015 [33 favorites]
I nearly hit a cyclist who blasted through a red light. I would have t-boned a cyclist with my car. He would not have won that fight.
This post is ridiculous advice. Traffic is traffic, whether bikes, people or cars. Don't go disobeying the rules of the road.
posted by St. Peepsburg at 7:18 PM on August 3, 2015 [7 favorites]
This post is ridiculous advice. Traffic is traffic, whether bikes, people or cars. Don't go disobeying the rules of the road.
posted by St. Peepsburg at 7:18 PM on August 3, 2015 [7 favorites]
As much as I support reasonable flexibility and awareness of context in applying traffic laws to bikers, I think this protest is really disingenuous. The traffic jam wasn't caused by the bikers stopping at the stop signs, it was caused by all of them deliberately congregating on the same route at the same time.
posted by Pfardentrott at 7:03 PM on August 3
This isn't just any old arbitrary route. This is San Francisco's wiggle which is basically the only real cycling route option if you want to cut through the hills defining the route's boundaries. You don't have to use it, but the cost is probably a few hundred feet of elevation. Traffic would have been snarled here with *the same number of cyclists as usual* if the only thing that changed was letter of the law stop sign behavior. More cyclists is not the cause of the traffic snarl - and if more cyclists did need to cycle through this area - this is the exact route they'd all take.
Over the years, there's been inconsistent enforcement of the stop sign laws along the wiggle. There's a conversation to be hand about what kinds of stops make sense for cyclists, and if this form of protest is what it takes to make people aware, so be it.
posted by NoRelationToLea at 7:20 PM on August 3, 2015 [23 favorites]
posted by Pfardentrott at 7:03 PM on August 3
This isn't just any old arbitrary route. This is San Francisco's wiggle which is basically the only real cycling route option if you want to cut through the hills defining the route's boundaries. You don't have to use it, but the cost is probably a few hundred feet of elevation. Traffic would have been snarled here with *the same number of cyclists as usual* if the only thing that changed was letter of the law stop sign behavior. More cyclists is not the cause of the traffic snarl - and if more cyclists did need to cycle through this area - this is the exact route they'd all take.
Over the years, there's been inconsistent enforcement of the stop sign laws along the wiggle. There's a conversation to be hand about what kinds of stops make sense for cyclists, and if this form of protest is what it takes to make people aware, so be it.
posted by NoRelationToLea at 7:20 PM on August 3, 2015 [23 favorites]
I HAVE AN IDEA LETS NOT BE ALL CARS BAD NO BIKES BAD NO CARS BAD JUST AN IDEA
posted by latkes at 7:21 PM on August 3, 2015 [10 favorites]
posted by latkes at 7:21 PM on August 3, 2015 [10 favorites]
Why is the outrage directed at the cyclists, and not the cops? There are tons of rarely-enforced traffic laws on the books. The police decided to do the equivalent of work-to-rule, singling out cyclists, writing bullshit tickets. Is is not fair, then, that cyclists similarly work to rule?
posted by indubitable at 7:25 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
posted by indubitable at 7:25 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
These days, whenever I see one of these cycling threads where everyone jumps in to talk about that time they saw a cyclist do something bad, I just replace "bicyclist" with "velociraptor."
I don't know why, but it amuses me.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 7:27 PM on August 3, 2015 [73 favorites]
I don't know why, but it amuses me.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 7:27 PM on August 3, 2015 [73 favorites]
The traffic jam wasn't caused by the bikers stopping at the stop signs, it was caused by all of them deliberately congregating on the same route at the same time.
Yeah, this.
I would love to share the road with velociraptors. But when they're riding on the lane dividers, ignoring signals, passing me in turn lanes—dude, I don't know how to share the road with that. Fuck every velociraptor who has ever appeared suddenly out of my blind spot, causing me to panic and think oh my god I'm about to kill this velociraptor, when they could have just obeyed the same laws as every other moving object on the road.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 7:28 PM on August 3, 2015 [25 favorites]
Yeah, this.
I would love to share the road with velociraptors. But when they're riding on the lane dividers, ignoring signals, passing me in turn lanes—dude, I don't know how to share the road with that. Fuck every velociraptor who has ever appeared suddenly out of my blind spot, causing me to panic and think oh my god I'm about to kill this velociraptor, when they could have just obeyed the same laws as every other moving object on the road.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 7:28 PM on August 3, 2015 [25 favorites]
Right, so when hundreds of cars that wouldn't ordinarily be there show up to scrupulously follow the rules, I'll be annoyed at that too.
This is usually called a parade, and traffic permits are required.
I completely agree that bikes are different from cars, and should be treated differently in the law and in the mind of the average person on the street. But I don't think this was an effective demonstration of how stop sign laws affect normal traffic patterns, because if that intersection saw a single file of dozens of bicyclists at one time on a regular basis, the city traffic engineers would put in a stop light anyway.
posted by muddgirl at 7:29 PM on August 3, 2015 [4 favorites]
This is usually called a parade, and traffic permits are required.
I completely agree that bikes are different from cars, and should be treated differently in the law and in the mind of the average person on the street. But I don't think this was an effective demonstration of how stop sign laws affect normal traffic patterns, because if that intersection saw a single file of dozens of bicyclists at one time on a regular basis, the city traffic engineers would put in a stop light anyway.
posted by muddgirl at 7:29 PM on August 3, 2015 [4 favorites]
Also, is it not legal for bicyclists to ride two abreast in California? That is a law that should be changed.
posted by muddgirl at 7:31 PM on August 3, 2015
posted by muddgirl at 7:31 PM on August 3, 2015
Mod note: Several comments deleted. kjs3, don't use the edit function to change content; it creates confusion when people reply to your pre-change version. Also everybody, it would be great if this thread didn't bog down in repetitive "all cyclists suck" vs "all drivers suck" stuff.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 7:33 PM on August 3, 2015
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 7:33 PM on August 3, 2015
Why is the outrage directed at the cyclists, and not the cops?
When you get mad at a cyclist, you don't end up dead in custody.
posted by Etrigan at 7:36 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
When you get mad at a cyclist, you don't end up dead in custody.
posted by Etrigan at 7:36 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
So a bunch of cyclists decided to obey all of the traffic rules for cars? That doesn't help the cause.
We need dedicated bicycle lanes, signals, and rules, in conjunction with other traffic. You know, like Holland.
posted by monospace at 7:37 PM on August 3, 2015 [13 favorites]
We need dedicated bicycle lanes, signals, and rules, in conjunction with other traffic. You know, like Holland.
posted by monospace at 7:37 PM on August 3, 2015 [13 favorites]
Next time: they will all stop at red lights. The horror!
posted by benzenedream at 7:38 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by benzenedream at 7:38 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
I totally empathize with some of the concerns about the habits of urban velociraptors. I myself often find myself winging out into an intersection and then saying to myself, "Oh crap, what was I thinking, that car is way closer than I thought..." I feel bad for the driver and scared for the survival of my pre-historic self.
I think this is a pretty clear example of a systems-problem: the more we re-design cities to be built for velociraptors, accommodating our wingspans, speed, and hunting habits, the better it will be for both us and for the cars that have to co-exist with us, not to mention the furry little mammals that have to make their way in this terrifying primordial jungle.
Just expecting velociraptors and mammals to adapt to a car-based environment will never be safe or functional.
posted by latkes at 7:40 PM on August 3, 2015 [25 favorites]
I think this is a pretty clear example of a systems-problem: the more we re-design cities to be built for velociraptors, accommodating our wingspans, speed, and hunting habits, the better it will be for both us and for the cars that have to co-exist with us, not to mention the furry little mammals that have to make their way in this terrifying primordial jungle.
Just expecting velociraptors and mammals to adapt to a car-based environment will never be safe or functional.
posted by latkes at 7:40 PM on August 3, 2015 [25 favorites]
Most infrastructure is biased against cyclists. Where I am right now the street lights won't change if you're on a bike.
To compound the problem, most drivers have no idea how to drive appropriately around bikes, since they're so much more maneuverable.
With a little more education on everybody's part, and a little bit of investment, this all goes away.
posted by pmv at 7:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
To compound the problem, most drivers have no idea how to drive appropriately around bikes, since they're so much more maneuverable.
But when they're riding on the lane dividers, ignoring signals, passing me in turn lanes—dude, I don't know how to share the road with that.Hug the curb when you're taking a right. Drive a bit slower.
With a little more education on everybody's part, and a little bit of investment, this all goes away.
posted by pmv at 7:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
Someone get me a bike-to-raptor greasemonkey script and it'll actually be possible for me to read these threads without wanting to stab like 80% of the people commenting
posted by RustyBrooks at 7:42 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
posted by RustyBrooks at 7:42 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
Ah, we did this one time in Denver, during critical mass, once the cops started to follow us and give us infractions for just about everything. Our route usually following a route where there were only stop lights, not stop signs, so this clusterf*ck never got to such proportions, but I think the takeaway is this:
(1 Car drivers are very, very, very used to being the dominant species on the streets and do feel threatened when they are not. The basic message of Critical Mass (IMHO) is, "We are traffic", NOT
"We are trying to work within a system of traffic that includes only cars"
(2 That #1 is not correct, nor should it be.
And that made sense to a much younger alex_skazat as it does now. The question you ask, when you give up cars in your daily life (as I had done, a do, 10+ years going) is, "Why have we given up so much of our public space for cars?"
When you get that perspective, you wonder why all these huge, ugly cars are scattered about. I mean, go outside: tell me how many cars do you see? That's what we've decided to do with our time, our money, or finite resources - that's what billions and billions of dollars are poured into for marketing to sell us these luxury items.
So, if a few dozen cyclists want to ride on the street, trying to follow the letter to the law, knowing full well how ridiculous that is?
Man, I say go for it. I see your perspective, because it's the life I live day in, and day out. Is it disruptive?
Are cars themselves disruptive?
posted by alex_skazat at 7:42 PM on August 3, 2015 [28 favorites]
(1 Car drivers are very, very, very used to being the dominant species on the streets and do feel threatened when they are not. The basic message of Critical Mass (IMHO) is, "We are traffic", NOT
"We are trying to work within a system of traffic that includes only cars"
(2 That #1 is not correct, nor should it be.
And that made sense to a much younger alex_skazat as it does now. The question you ask, when you give up cars in your daily life (as I had done, a do, 10+ years going) is, "Why have we given up so much of our public space for cars?"
When you get that perspective, you wonder why all these huge, ugly cars are scattered about. I mean, go outside: tell me how many cars do you see? That's what we've decided to do with our time, our money, or finite resources - that's what billions and billions of dollars are poured into for marketing to sell us these luxury items.
So, if a few dozen cyclists want to ride on the street, trying to follow the letter to the law, knowing full well how ridiculous that is?
Man, I say go for it. I see your perspective, because it's the life I live day in, and day out. Is it disruptive?
Are cars themselves disruptive?
posted by alex_skazat at 7:42 PM on August 3, 2015 [28 favorites]
I'm amused by the similarity to a work-to-rule strike.
posted by Wemmick at 7:44 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by Wemmick at 7:44 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
If you get scared and frustrated when cyclists are unpredictable on the road, the solution isn't telling cyclists to "just be more like cars because it's the law." Bicycles aren't cars. Anyone can see that. It's neither safe nor sensical for bicycles to be treated like cars. The laws don't make sense.
I stop at red lights on my bike, and the motorists behind me get frustrated because I'm significantly slower to get started when it turns green again. It's frustrating for them and dangerous for me, as people swerve closely around me to pass. It'd be safer and better if I could stop, check to make sure no cares are coming, and then go across the red to get back to speed before the cars catch up to me again. But that's illegal, so I guess I'm a bicyclist who just wants to flout the rules for my own benefit, in some peoples' eyes.
Instead of listing times you saw a cyclist do a bad thing, maybe join cyclists in supporting more sensical laws and infrastructure that will help everyone get safely where they're going in a sane manner.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 7:50 PM on August 3, 2015 [71 favorites]
I stop at red lights on my bike, and the motorists behind me get frustrated because I'm significantly slower to get started when it turns green again. It's frustrating for them and dangerous for me, as people swerve closely around me to pass. It'd be safer and better if I could stop, check to make sure no cares are coming, and then go across the red to get back to speed before the cars catch up to me again. But that's illegal, so I guess I'm a bicyclist who just wants to flout the rules for my own benefit, in some peoples' eyes.
Instead of listing times you saw a cyclist do a bad thing, maybe join cyclists in supporting more sensical laws and infrastructure that will help everyone get safely where they're going in a sane manner.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 7:50 PM on August 3, 2015 [71 favorites]
That equivalence never made sense to me. Cars that are commuting to work don't meet up ahead of time in a parking lot or at a specific intersection, and then set off together at the same time (the only cars I've seen do this, outside of a parade, are automated cars on a closed-course test drive). Neither do most bicyclists that commute to work, for that matter. Equating a group bike ride to a bike OR car commute is a false equivalence.
I think that bicyclists should stop at stop signs the same reason cars should - to give right-of-way to pedestrians or other cyclists they may not see while they're on the move. The more bicyclists that are on the road (in a normal traffic pattern, not a group ride), the more this is critical.
posted by muddgirl at 7:52 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
I think that bicyclists should stop at stop signs the same reason cars should - to give right-of-way to pedestrians or other cyclists they may not see while they're on the move. The more bicyclists that are on the road (in a normal traffic pattern, not a group ride), the more this is critical.
posted by muddgirl at 7:52 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
Well said, Solon and Thanks
posted by alex_skazat at 7:53 PM on August 3, 2015
posted by alex_skazat at 7:53 PM on August 3, 2015
"So instead of riding in parallel like we do between stops, and passing through stops together, the cyclists serialized and maximized the time at stops to say "fuck you, car drivers". Got it."
EXACTLY. Even when the bike lobby obeys traffic laws, they do it in a full-on dick way.
The "protest" wasn't even about an actual crackdown or other action, but merely the police saying "we plan to start enforcing laws", and the bicyclists getting upset about the idea they might get a ticket.
This is in San Francisco, a town where the bike lobby is really strong. They've had parking removed and streets redesigned, restriped, repaved, for bike lanes. And there are still bicyclists who avoid those expensive new dedicated lanes right next to them in favor of riding down the sidewalk.
It's not like the bicyclists here are being particularly persecuted -- it's about as bike-friendly a town as you're going to find.
San Francisco does have some real car problems, too -- red light running and all that, and yeah, it should be addressed. But bicyclists have it pretty easy so far, and their unwillingness to follow the law is a bit challenging.
Don't even get me started on the rolling riot that is Critical Mass, and how the city keeps looking the other way about that.
posted by Jinsai at 7:58 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
EXACTLY. Even when the bike lobby obeys traffic laws, they do it in a full-on dick way.
The "protest" wasn't even about an actual crackdown or other action, but merely the police saying "we plan to start enforcing laws", and the bicyclists getting upset about the idea they might get a ticket.
This is in San Francisco, a town where the bike lobby is really strong. They've had parking removed and streets redesigned, restriped, repaved, for bike lanes. And there are still bicyclists who avoid those expensive new dedicated lanes right next to them in favor of riding down the sidewalk.
It's not like the bicyclists here are being particularly persecuted -- it's about as bike-friendly a town as you're going to find.
San Francisco does have some real car problems, too -- red light running and all that, and yeah, it should be addressed. But bicyclists have it pretty easy so far, and their unwillingness to follow the law is a bit challenging.
Don't even get me started on the rolling riot that is Critical Mass, and how the city keeps looking the other way about that.
posted by Jinsai at 7:58 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
As a cyclist I am frequently endangered by cars because they don't seem to see me as a vehicle. For example. I live in Melbourne where there is actually a not-entirely-shitty cycling infrastructure, there are a lot of roads with cycle lanes, shared cycle/pedestrian paths, etc. I take one of those shared paths to and from work. It intersects at a couple of points with busy roads, and there are traffic lights at those points. It is amazing to me how many cars just blow through their red light at these intersections, seemingly not even noticing that there is a traffic light at all. I can only assume that they aren't expecting a light because the intersecting path doesn't carry cars - just heavy cycling traffic - and so they don't see it as an intersection at all. Or the multiple times I have had cars just start turning when I'm going straight and have right of way and damn near hitting me, and then just "oh, sorry, didn't see you". Or the SO MANY near dooring incidents because people are used to looking for cars before opening their doors but don't seem to feel the same need to check for bikes.
I mean, I certainly see plenty of bad behaviour from cyclists towards cars and other cyclists, and from cars towards other cars, too. But there's nothing quite so scary as the feeling that you're somehow totally invisible to the bulk of the traffic.
posted by lwb at 8:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
I mean, I certainly see plenty of bad behaviour from cyclists towards cars and other cyclists, and from cars towards other cars, too. But there's nothing quite so scary as the feeling that you're somehow totally invisible to the bulk of the traffic.
posted by lwb at 8:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
> Hug the curb when you're taking a right.
What?
Maybe this will help.
posted by toofuture at 8:09 PM on August 3, 2015 [13 favorites]
What?
Maybe this will help.
posted by toofuture at 8:09 PM on August 3, 2015 [13 favorites]
Hug the curb when you're taking a right.
What?
posted by srboisvert at 12:05 on August 4
I actually got dinged on a Japanese driving exam for making my turns too wide. When I explained that it's because I lived in constant fear of hitting a bicyclist in my blind spot (because they're much more common in Japanese cities but with a level of obliviousness that matches many capital-C Cyclists' sense of entitlement), I was told that it was my duty to properly signal and then move closer to the curb, and that it's the bicyclist's duty to not be an idiot and try to pass a turning car on the side it's turning toward.
posted by DoctorFedora at 8:11 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
What?
posted by srboisvert at 12:05 on August 4
I actually got dinged on a Japanese driving exam for making my turns too wide. When I explained that it's because I lived in constant fear of hitting a bicyclist in my blind spot (because they're much more common in Japanese cities but with a level of obliviousness that matches many capital-C Cyclists' sense of entitlement), I was told that it was my duty to properly signal and then move closer to the curb, and that it's the bicyclist's duty to not be an idiot and try to pass a turning car on the side it's turning toward.
posted by DoctorFedora at 8:11 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
Or the multiple times I have had cars just start turning when I'm going straight and have right of way and damn near hitting me, and then just "oh, sorry, didn't see you".
I've always wondered if a simple "Bicyclists Going Straight Have Right of Way" sign at these intersections on the right-hand light pole would do a lot to teach drivers to actually look around for cyclists.
As for blowing through lights - as a driver I see other drivers blow through stop signs and lights around bike lanes all the time with seemingly no repercussions. I guess red light cameras are too expensive? Or the drivers lobbies oppose them?
posted by muddgirl at 8:11 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
I've always wondered if a simple "Bicyclists Going Straight Have Right of Way" sign at these intersections on the right-hand light pole would do a lot to teach drivers to actually look around for cyclists.
As for blowing through lights - as a driver I see other drivers blow through stop signs and lights around bike lanes all the time with seemingly no repercussions. I guess red light cameras are too expensive? Or the drivers lobbies oppose them?
posted by muddgirl at 8:11 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Hug the curb when you're taking a right.
What?
This one is very counterintuitive, even to me as someone who bike commutes a lot. The right thing seems wrong.
If there is a bike lane on the right side of the road and you are turning right, you should treat the bike lane as an actual lane, get into it, and turn right (checking that it's clear behind you). This makes it impossible for you to smash into a cyclist going straight who does not realize you're going to turn.
The same applies when there's not a bike lane - if you get close to the curb while turning right, where a bike would usually go, you can be sure you won't collide with one when you turn.
posted by RustyBrooks at 8:11 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
What?
This one is very counterintuitive, even to me as someone who bike commutes a lot. The right thing seems wrong.
If there is a bike lane on the right side of the road and you are turning right, you should treat the bike lane as an actual lane, get into it, and turn right (checking that it's clear behind you). This makes it impossible for you to smash into a cyclist going straight who does not realize you're going to turn.
The same applies when there's not a bike lane - if you get close to the curb while turning right, where a bike would usually go, you can be sure you won't collide with one when you turn.
posted by RustyBrooks at 8:11 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
I guess red light cameras are too expensive?
The tickets are pretty unenforceable to be paid, except by a police officer literally delivering them to your door. At least in Colorado.
They say it's "taking a huge risk", but so is running a red in a car, yeah?
posted by alex_skazat at 8:16 PM on August 3, 2015
The tickets are pretty unenforceable to be paid, except by a police officer literally delivering them to your door. At least in Colorado.
They say it's "taking a huge risk", but so is running a red in a car, yeah?
posted by alex_skazat at 8:16 PM on August 3, 2015
Cars that are commuting to work don't meet up ahead of time in a parking lot or at a specific intersection, and then set off together at the same time
Um...this is literally what drivers do during rush hour, every day of the working week. They don't all know each other, but they're all going to the same places on the same schedule.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:32 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
Um...this is literally what drivers do during rush hour, every day of the working week. They don't all know each other, but they're all going to the same places on the same schedule.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:32 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
If there is a bike lane on the right side of the road and you are turning right, you should treat the bike lane as an actual lane, get into it, and turn right
FWIW, this is the law in DC.
posted by schmod at 8:35 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
FWIW, this is the law in DC.
posted by schmod at 8:35 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
The same applies when there's not a bike lane - if you get close to the curb while turning right, where a bike would usually go, you can be sure you won't collide with one when you turn.
Yes. Also, velociraptors- cut to the left behind a car that is already signalling when approaching an intersection. If you are behind them, and they signal, they have the right-of-way to turn ahead of you. By cutting left behind them instead of trying to undertake them, you proceed on through the intersection, and you avoid the right hook.
Drivers- if you don't signal before making a right, or you can't be arsed to look out your passenger-side window to make sure their isn't a cyclist already next to you before signalling and turning, go fuck yourselves.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:37 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
Yes. Also, velociraptors- cut to the left behind a car that is already signalling when approaching an intersection. If you are behind them, and they signal, they have the right-of-way to turn ahead of you. By cutting left behind them instead of trying to undertake them, you proceed on through the intersection, and you avoid the right hook.
Drivers- if you don't signal before making a right, or you can't be arsed to look out your passenger-side window to make sure their isn't a cyclist already next to you before signalling and turning, go fuck yourselves.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:37 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
Why can't we all just agree that everyone on the road kind of sucks at being safe? As a pedestrian I've been nearly run down by velociraptors, and as a velociraptor I've been nearly run down by cars. We just don't seem to have the infrastructure to accommodate safe raptoring.
posted by teponaztli at 8:40 PM on August 3, 2015 [11 favorites]
posted by teponaztli at 8:40 PM on August 3, 2015 [11 favorites]
"The thing you say you want — every cyclist to stop at every stop sign — you really don't want that"
Yes actually I do. The number of cars I've almost been run over by? Two or three. The number of bikes? I've lost count. Obey the fucking rules of the road. Pedestrians first.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 8:48 PM on August 3, 2015 [18 favorites]
Yes actually I do. The number of cars I've almost been run over by? Two or three. The number of bikes? I've lost count. Obey the fucking rules of the road. Pedestrians first.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 8:48 PM on August 3, 2015 [18 favorites]
And, if you are nervous about hitting a velociraptor in your blind spot, then check your blind spot.
In most places, velociraptors are required to be on your right. Drivers are required to check their blind spots before making a turn or a lane change. That's why it's called a "blind spot".
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:53 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
In most places, velociraptors are required to be on your right. Drivers are required to check their blind spots before making a turn or a lane change. That's why it's called a "blind spot".
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:53 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
Or the multiple times I have had cars just start turning when I'm going straight and have right of way and damn near hitting me
I want to clarify here that I mean cars turning from side streets onto the road I'm going straight on. I agree that bikes undercutting turning cars is a Bad Idea.
posted by lwb at 8:53 PM on August 3, 2015
I want to clarify here that I mean cars turning from side streets onto the road I'm going straight on. I agree that bikes undercutting turning cars is a Bad Idea.
posted by lwb at 8:53 PM on August 3, 2015
I want to really, really, second the idea that this not turn into yet another "maybe bikes/cars should learn to drive/ride sanely before I respect them on the road" gripefest. It's been done to death. And, I've come to learn, cyclist behavior is really cultural so everyone's experiences are local and not universal.
And bad road behavior is all over the place. Just today while biking into work I passed another cyclist going the wrong way (salmoning) in the bike lane. But I also saw a car attempt a three-point-turn in the middle of oncoming traffic. People can be stupid jerks.
But getting back to the general question, when I ditched my car and went to full-time bicycling for a few years (I'm back to having a car now) I started out with idealistic by-the-book riding behavior. It went about as poorly as this, no coordinated stunt protest necessary. Drivers really really don't like cyclists following the traffic laws, they just don't like us not following the traffic laws either. There's no pleasing some people.
posted by traveler_ at 9:13 PM on August 3, 2015 [19 favorites]
And bad road behavior is all over the place. Just today while biking into work I passed another cyclist going the wrong way (salmoning) in the bike lane. But I also saw a car attempt a three-point-turn in the middle of oncoming traffic. People can be stupid jerks.
But getting back to the general question, when I ditched my car and went to full-time bicycling for a few years (I'm back to having a car now) I started out with idealistic by-the-book riding behavior. It went about as poorly as this, no coordinated stunt protest necessary. Drivers really really don't like cyclists following the traffic laws, they just don't like us not following the traffic laws either. There's no pleasing some people.
posted by traveler_ at 9:13 PM on August 3, 2015 [19 favorites]
I'm a courteous velociraptor who always looks out for pedestrians (although I reserve the right to grumble about jaywalkers who blithely step off the curb without looking). I don't run down pedestrians, and I give them their full right of way at intersections and crosswalks. But if there are no pedestrians at a 2 way or 4 way stop, and there are no cars around, I'm more likely to slow down and give the area one more damn good look as I proceed with due caution than I am to stop completely.
Right turning cars and bike lanes are a bad, bad combo. If there is no bike lane, I usually shift into the middle of the curb lane before and during the intersection, easing back to my usual meter away from the curb after I exit. But if I am politely biking in the bike lane and arrive at the intersection first while the light is still green, an overtaking driver may initiate a right cross even though I didn't provoke it by undertaking it. If I wait in the bike lane during a red light, there's about a 20% chance that the car beside or just behind me will attempt a right turn as I start up again when the light turns green.
As far as I can see, my options are to stop a car's length back from the stop line when I'm in the bike lane at a red light (pissing off the cyclists behind me), or to pull into the curb lane proper and piss off any driver behind me who wants to make a right turn on red and who is furious that I'm not staying in the bike lane (which, BTW, I am not required to use at all in Toronto.)
posted by maudlin at 9:13 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
Right turning cars and bike lanes are a bad, bad combo. If there is no bike lane, I usually shift into the middle of the curb lane before and during the intersection, easing back to my usual meter away from the curb after I exit. But if I am politely biking in the bike lane and arrive at the intersection first while the light is still green, an overtaking driver may initiate a right cross even though I didn't provoke it by undertaking it. If I wait in the bike lane during a red light, there's about a 20% chance that the car beside or just behind me will attempt a right turn as I start up again when the light turns green.
As far as I can see, my options are to stop a car's length back from the stop line when I'm in the bike lane at a red light (pissing off the cyclists behind me), or to pull into the curb lane proper and piss off any driver behind me who wants to make a right turn on red and who is furious that I'm not staying in the bike lane (which, BTW, I am not required to use at all in Toronto.)
posted by maudlin at 9:13 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
"EXACTLY. Even when the bike lobby obeys traffic laws, they do it in a full-on dick way."
👶😭 NOT THE BIKE LOBBY
posted by klangklangston at 9:22 PM on August 3, 2015 [7 favorites]
👶😭 NOT THE BIKE LOBBY
posted by klangklangston at 9:22 PM on August 3, 2015 [7 favorites]
Add me to the list of pedestrians that love this. Please, come and do it in Melbourne. Do it so much that more bike lanes are created. Do it so much that even wussbags like me might consider cycling.
While you're doing it: stay the fuck off the footpath.
posted by pompomtom at 9:26 PM on August 3, 2015 [3 favorites]
While you're doing it: stay the fuck off the footpath.
posted by pompomtom at 9:26 PM on August 3, 2015 [3 favorites]
Seriously? Bicycle lobby?
That exists about as much as the rest of the "Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy" does.
I really wish there was a real bicycle lobby. As things currently stand, the best way to murder somebody is to put them on a bicycle before doing it. The prosecutor probably won't even bother investigating.
Keeping the above comments about cycling culture being fairly localized, maybe this is one thing where the people of DC are actually fairly great? I yield at red lights and to any pedestrians who have the right-of-way, and virtually all other cyclists I see seem to do the same. DC's bike culture seems pretty friendly.
Far more often, I see jaywalkers step in front of bikes without looking. Jaywalking is fine if you look and make sure that nobody is coming, but it's dangerous and selfish to assume that a bicycle is necessarily *that* much easier to stop or maneuver than a car. This is a bad assumption -- a bike's stopping distance is comparable to or greater than a car moving at the same speed.
posted by schmod at 9:27 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
That exists about as much as the rest of the "Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy" does.
I really wish there was a real bicycle lobby. As things currently stand, the best way to murder somebody is to put them on a bicycle before doing it. The prosecutor probably won't even bother investigating.
Keeping the above comments about cycling culture being fairly localized, maybe this is one thing where the people of DC are actually fairly great? I yield at red lights and to any pedestrians who have the right-of-way, and virtually all other cyclists I see seem to do the same. DC's bike culture seems pretty friendly.
Far more often, I see jaywalkers step in front of bikes without looking. Jaywalking is fine if you look and make sure that nobody is coming, but it's dangerous and selfish to assume that a bicycle is necessarily *that* much easier to stop or maneuver than a car. This is a bad assumption -- a bike's stopping distance is comparable to or greater than a car moving at the same speed.
posted by schmod at 9:27 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
So instead of riding in parallel like we do between stops, and passing through stops together, the cyclists serialized and maximized the time at stops to say "fuck you, car drivers". Got it.
This pretty much. You have the exact same right (in theory) to use the middle of the lane, but we can still share the road as we do almost every day. This is a disingenuous way of trying to make a bad point by being complete fucking jackasses.
Foothill Expressway (an incredibly popular route for cyclists as it turns into Junipero Serra Blvd at Page Mill Rd) can be a complete fucking nightmare at times. Cyclists will literally ignore a red light and go tearing across the San Antonio T-junction heading west (not safe like the east direction) because, well, fuck you it's Los Altos, they're rich and they're cyclists. Combined with the idiots who try to turn right into San Antonio from the left lane to skip the line at El Monte and I'm honestly surprised more cyclists haven't been killed there yet.
posted by Talez at 9:27 PM on August 3, 2015
This pretty much. You have the exact same right (in theory) to use the middle of the lane, but we can still share the road as we do almost every day. This is a disingenuous way of trying to make a bad point by being complete fucking jackasses.
Foothill Expressway (an incredibly popular route for cyclists as it turns into Junipero Serra Blvd at Page Mill Rd) can be a complete fucking nightmare at times. Cyclists will literally ignore a red light and go tearing across the San Antonio T-junction heading west (not safe like the east direction) because, well, fuck you it's Los Altos, they're rich and they're cyclists. Combined with the idiots who try to turn right into San Antonio from the left lane to skip the line at El Monte and I'm honestly surprised more cyclists haven't been killed there yet.
posted by Talez at 9:27 PM on August 3, 2015
Combined with the idiots who try to turn right into San Antonio from the left lane to skip the line at El Monte and I'm honestly surprised more cyclists haven't been killed there yet.
Forgive me if I'm misreading this because I'm not familiar with the area, but are you seriously insinuating that this is the cyclists' fault?
posted by schmod at 9:30 PM on August 3, 2015
Forgive me if I'm misreading this because I'm not familiar with the area, but are you seriously insinuating that this is the cyclists' fault?
posted by schmod at 9:30 PM on August 3, 2015
speaking of stupid traffic design:
I live in a lovely grid city: in addition to the main roads, we have parallel side streets going every way, such that you can get almost anywhere via the back streets.
Ideal for bikes, right? WRONG. In an effort to keep cars off the back streets, the one-way system has been specifically designed to funnel any traffic to the main (aka super busy) road within a block or two. You'll be riding down a side street, perfect for cycling and boom! legal direction change, you have to get off this road and find another route.
It makes perfect sense to funnel cars off small residential streets. What doesn't make sense is to include bikes. On bike, I cannot get anywhere in this city legally without using main roads, even though there are streets the whole way. Even official "cycle routes" are wrecked by these one-way switches - I can get to within 200m of my friend's house (I can SEE their building), but if I follow the traffic law, I have to ride 300m down to the main road, over the 200m and then up again.
Roads around here also have stop signs that are just about traffic calming, like an all-way stop for the main line of a t-junction. There is no safety reason to stop, but it slows the cars down. But I'm a bike, I'm already going 10k/hour! (I'm a slow rider).
posted by jb at 9:36 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
I live in a lovely grid city: in addition to the main roads, we have parallel side streets going every way, such that you can get almost anywhere via the back streets.
Ideal for bikes, right? WRONG. In an effort to keep cars off the back streets, the one-way system has been specifically designed to funnel any traffic to the main (aka super busy) road within a block or two. You'll be riding down a side street, perfect for cycling and boom! legal direction change, you have to get off this road and find another route.
It makes perfect sense to funnel cars off small residential streets. What doesn't make sense is to include bikes. On bike, I cannot get anywhere in this city legally without using main roads, even though there are streets the whole way. Even official "cycle routes" are wrecked by these one-way switches - I can get to within 200m of my friend's house (I can SEE their building), but if I follow the traffic law, I have to ride 300m down to the main road, over the 200m and then up again.
Roads around here also have stop signs that are just about traffic calming, like an all-way stop for the main line of a t-junction. There is no safety reason to stop, but it slows the cars down. But I'm a bike, I'm already going 10k/hour! (I'm a slow rider).
posted by jb at 9:36 PM on August 3, 2015 [8 favorites]
Forgive me if I'm misreading this because I'm not familiar with the area, but are you seriously insinuating that this is the cyclists' fault?
No, it's definitely the car's fault. When a jackass pushes in from the left to turn right the only place to evade to (if the car on the right is in said jackass's blind spot) is hard brake and onto the shoulder. If a cyclist is there they're going to get cleaned up. It's not a nice stretch of road for a cyclist by any means.
posted by Talez at 9:36 PM on August 3, 2015
No, it's definitely the car's fault. When a jackass pushes in from the left to turn right the only place to evade to (if the car on the right is in said jackass's blind spot) is hard brake and onto the shoulder. If a cyclist is there they're going to get cleaned up. It's not a nice stretch of road for a cyclist by any means.
posted by Talez at 9:36 PM on August 3, 2015
What doesn't make sense is to include bikes.
Except bikes doing 25mph (bike courier, delivery rider) can knock someone down and kill them.
posted by Talez at 9:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Except bikes doing 25mph (bike courier, delivery rider) can knock someone down and kill them.
posted by Talez at 9:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Drivers really really don't like cyclists following the traffic laws, they just don't like us not following the traffic laws either. There's no pleasing some people.
Fuck the drivers. Obey the laws for the sake of the pedestrians.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
Fuck the drivers. Obey the laws for the sake of the pedestrians.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
But for fuck's sake, hundreds of cyclists are gonna impact traffic no matter what they do.
I'm not trying to pick on anybody here, honestly, but have you ever heard the saying "You're not stuck in traffic, you ARE traffic"? The way we say things can shape our thinking in useful or not so useful ways.
Sometimes I see a sentence like the one above and I think it provides a bit of insight into our assumptions. Are we assuming, for example, that traffic consists only of motorized vehicles? Are we assuming that streets are for cars exclusively instead of vehicles generally? If people unconsciously define a street as "a place for cars" then there will always be conflict because every non-motorized vehicle looks like an intruder.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 9:43 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
I'm not trying to pick on anybody here, honestly, but have you ever heard the saying "You're not stuck in traffic, you ARE traffic"? The way we say things can shape our thinking in useful or not so useful ways.
Sometimes I see a sentence like the one above and I think it provides a bit of insight into our assumptions. Are we assuming, for example, that traffic consists only of motorized vehicles? Are we assuming that streets are for cars exclusively instead of vehicles generally? If people unconsciously define a street as "a place for cars" then there will always be conflict because every non-motorized vehicle looks like an intruder.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 9:43 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
Not at all. What's disingenuous about this, and mind it only bothers me in a 'someone doesn't understand logic or is willfully misrepresenting it' way, is the attempted cause-effect demonstration: we stopped at stop signs; traffic got bad --> stopping at stop signs makes traffic worse.
That's not the case. Putting a few hundred additional cyclists (or cars, if you like, doesn't matter) in the mix makes traffic worse.
posted by ctmf at 9:48 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
That's not the case. Putting a few hundred additional cyclists (or cars, if you like, doesn't matter) in the mix makes traffic worse.
posted by ctmf at 9:48 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
In the video on the SFWeekly page, is that a 4-way stop?
Because if it is, at least one, if not two, of those bike riders* cut off that minivan to the left in the beginning.
I'm assuming 4-way stops work the same in California as elsewhere, in that if vehicles that reach the stop at the same time, the order goes to the right.
(Maybe the minivan waved them on, it's hard to see.)
Also, several of the bikes are in the crosswalk when stopped, rather than stopping at the limit line.
None of which is to say the bicyclists protest is without merit, but if you're gonna "ride to rule", you'd better make sure you get the rule right.
*Also the second car.
posted by madajb at 9:50 PM on August 3, 2015
Because if it is, at least one, if not two, of those bike riders* cut off that minivan to the left in the beginning.
I'm assuming 4-way stops work the same in California as elsewhere, in that if vehicles that reach the stop at the same time, the order goes to the right.
(Maybe the minivan waved them on, it's hard to see.)
Also, several of the bikes are in the crosswalk when stopped, rather than stopping at the limit line.
None of which is to say the bicyclists protest is without merit, but if you're gonna "ride to rule", you'd better make sure you get the rule right.
*Also the second car.
posted by madajb at 9:50 PM on August 3, 2015
None of which is to say the bicyclists protest is without merit, but if you're gonna "ride to rule", you'd better make sure you get the rule right.
Not to mention the law in California is stay to the right or in the bike lane unless you have a damn good reason. And being a jackass making a point isn't a valid reason either.
posted by Talez at 9:52 PM on August 3, 2015
Not to mention the law in California is stay to the right or in the bike lane unless you have a damn good reason. And being a jackass making a point isn't a valid reason either.
posted by Talez at 9:52 PM on August 3, 2015
It's also kind of amplified by having a stop sign every block. If every one of those four way intersections was replaced with a roundabout with yield signs I guarantee this would not be an issue.
posted by Talez at 9:54 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Talez at 9:54 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Seriously? Bicycle lobby?
That exists about as much as the rest of the "Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy" does.
I have a non-profit license plate that contributes directly to my state's bicycle lobby.
But then, I'm also a AAA member, so I guess I'm sending mixed messages...
posted by madajb at 9:55 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
That exists about as much as the rest of the "Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy" does.
I have a non-profit license plate that contributes directly to my state's bicycle lobby.
But then, I'm also a AAA member, so I guess I'm sending mixed messages...
posted by madajb at 9:55 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
I actually got dinged on a Japanese driving exam for making my turns too wide. When I explained that it's because I lived in constant fear of hitting a bicyclist in my blind spot (because they're much more common in Japanese cities but with a level of obliviousness that matches many capital-C Cyclists' sense of entitlement), I was told that it was my duty to properly signal and then move closer to the curb, and that it's the bicyclist's duty to not be an idiot and try to pass a turning car on the side it's turning toward.
This was my exact same experience with my first American driving exam. I live in the Bike Friendly Capital of the US and thus made sure to take the driving exams in the next town over to avoid this kind of problem, and got automatically failed for this as well for the exact same logic. Fine, I guess, as long as there aren't any bikes around. But...
I do not bike, but I've been a pedestrian for a long time and a licensed driver for several years now. Everyone's an idiot on the streets at least sometimes and we all do stupid shit when bored, tired, in a rush, whatever. It happens. But when it's bikers, I keep thinking, "Dude, don't be such a daredevil doing this stuff. If a car hits you, YOU'RE THE ONE GONNA BE IN PAIN HERE." As a pedestrian I know darned well I'm gonna get damaged if someone hits me and I don't know how fast I can get out of the way to beat the car. I have the feeling that at least some bikers think they can beat the car and uh...maybe not.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:57 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
This was my exact same experience with my first American driving exam. I live in the Bike Friendly Capital of the US and thus made sure to take the driving exams in the next town over to avoid this kind of problem, and got automatically failed for this as well for the exact same logic. Fine, I guess, as long as there aren't any bikes around. But...
I do not bike, but I've been a pedestrian for a long time and a licensed driver for several years now. Everyone's an idiot on the streets at least sometimes and we all do stupid shit when bored, tired, in a rush, whatever. It happens. But when it's bikers, I keep thinking, "Dude, don't be such a daredevil doing this stuff. If a car hits you, YOU'RE THE ONE GONNA BE IN PAIN HERE." As a pedestrian I know darned well I'm gonna get damaged if someone hits me and I don't know how fast I can get out of the way to beat the car. I have the feeling that at least some bikers think they can beat the car and uh...maybe not.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:57 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
It doesn't help that nobody in the history of driving ever can use a slip lane correctly. Slow down to 5mph and turn from the middle of the lane, buddy!
posted by Talez at 10:06 PM on August 3, 2015
posted by Talez at 10:06 PM on August 3, 2015
Most infrastructure is biased against cyclists. Where I am right now the street lights won't change if you're on a bike.
Yeah, I've got the same issue with one light on my commute, pmv. Still trying to figure out how to get around this. As it happens, cops congregate near there (some sort of maintenance shop there or something), and they do not not like bikers going through red lights. Plus, it's actually dangerous to run that particular red because of fast traffic and poor visibility from my POV.
As I see it, I could: a) get off my bike, push it over the curb onto the sidewalk (not supposed to bike on the sidewalk), push the crossing button, push my bike back to the road, and remount in time for the light change; b) wait for a car to show up headed my way so that the light will change, or; c) take a right on red, which still gets me to work but with the additional danger of later needing to take a left turn on a busy street where drivers aren't accustomed to bikes being on the road.
So, for now, I sit and wait for a car to show up headed my way, sometimes with other cyclists. I sat there for 5 minutes once before someone finally showed up.
I reckon the light exists to teach me patience, but my favorite day dream to pass the time while I wait is a bunch of cars sitting at a light that won't change until a bicycle happens to show up.
posted by agog at 10:07 PM on August 3, 2015 [13 favorites]
Yeah, I've got the same issue with one light on my commute, pmv. Still trying to figure out how to get around this. As it happens, cops congregate near there (some sort of maintenance shop there or something), and they do not not like bikers going through red lights. Plus, it's actually dangerous to run that particular red because of fast traffic and poor visibility from my POV.
As I see it, I could: a) get off my bike, push it over the curb onto the sidewalk (not supposed to bike on the sidewalk), push the crossing button, push my bike back to the road, and remount in time for the light change; b) wait for a car to show up headed my way so that the light will change, or; c) take a right on red, which still gets me to work but with the additional danger of later needing to take a left turn on a busy street where drivers aren't accustomed to bikes being on the road.
So, for now, I sit and wait for a car to show up headed my way, sometimes with other cyclists. I sat there for 5 minutes once before someone finally showed up.
I reckon the light exists to teach me patience, but my favorite day dream to pass the time while I wait is a bunch of cars sitting at a light that won't change until a bicycle happens to show up.
posted by agog at 10:07 PM on August 3, 2015 [13 favorites]
So, for now, I sit and wait for a car to show up headed my way, sometimes with other cyclists. I sat there for 5 minutes once before someone finally showed up.
They seriously don't have those bike sensor location markings on the roads at the lights?
posted by Talez at 10:12 PM on August 3, 2015
They seriously don't have those bike sensor location markings on the roads at the lights?
posted by Talez at 10:12 PM on August 3, 2015
> Not to mention the law in California is stay to the right or in the bike lane unless you have a damn good reason.
Which reasons include:
"When to Take the Traffic Lane
A bicycle lane is a designated traffic lane for bicyclists, marked by a solid white line, and typically breaking into a dotted line at the corner. A bicycle lane is different from a simple white line showing the edge of the road because it follows specific width requirements and is clearly marked as a bike lane. Many roads do not have designated bicycle traffic lanes, so bicyclists share the traffic lane to the left of the white line. If there is no shoulder or bicycle lane and the traffic lane is narrow, ride closer to the center of the lane. This will prevent motorists from passing you when there is not enough room. Bicyclists can travel at speeds of 20 mph, or faster. You should also use the traffic lane when you are traveling at the same speed as the traffic around you. This will keep you out of motorists’ blind spots and reduce conflicts with right-turning traffic."
That last bold bit there courtesy of me; when I am driving in the city, traffic is nearly always pretty heavy and thus cyclists can easily be going my speed or faster. They are entitled to take the lane.
posted by rtha at 10:12 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
Which reasons include:
- When avoiding parked vehicles or road hazards.
- When a traffic lane is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side.
- When making a left turn so that vehicles going straight do not collide into you.
- To avoid conflicts with right–turning vehicles.
"When to Take the Traffic Lane
A bicycle lane is a designated traffic lane for bicyclists, marked by a solid white line, and typically breaking into a dotted line at the corner. A bicycle lane is different from a simple white line showing the edge of the road because it follows specific width requirements and is clearly marked as a bike lane. Many roads do not have designated bicycle traffic lanes, so bicyclists share the traffic lane to the left of the white line. If there is no shoulder or bicycle lane and the traffic lane is narrow, ride closer to the center of the lane. This will prevent motorists from passing you when there is not enough room. Bicyclists can travel at speeds of 20 mph, or faster. You should also use the traffic lane when you are traveling at the same speed as the traffic around you. This will keep you out of motorists’ blind spots and reduce conflicts with right-turning traffic."
That last bold bit there courtesy of me; when I am driving in the city, traffic is nearly always pretty heavy and thus cyclists can easily be going my speed or faster. They are entitled to take the lane.
posted by rtha at 10:12 PM on August 3, 2015 [14 favorites]
If people unconsciously define a street as "a place for cars" then there will always be conflict because every non-motorized vehicle looks like an intruder.
Something I find interesting is listening to drivers complain about other vehicles on the road. For years I've noticed that if a fellow car driver behaves badly - cutting someone off, for example - the complaints are always about that particular car driver, they're an idiot, they can't drive for shit, whatever. If a cyclist behaves badly, it suddenly becomes all about how cyclists are the worst, they never obey the road rules, etc. It reminds me a little of how differently crimes by white vs non-white people are treated in media rhetoric. Which is probably a bad analogy, and I'm not trying to equate racism with anti-cyclist sentiment. But I do think said anti-cyclist sentiment has a lot to do with how we perceive bad behaviour by those in the majority vs those in the minority (the latter being much more likely to be treated as representative of the group as a whole).
posted by lwb at 10:18 PM on August 3, 2015 [29 favorites]
Something I find interesting is listening to drivers complain about other vehicles on the road. For years I've noticed that if a fellow car driver behaves badly - cutting someone off, for example - the complaints are always about that particular car driver, they're an idiot, they can't drive for shit, whatever. If a cyclist behaves badly, it suddenly becomes all about how cyclists are the worst, they never obey the road rules, etc. It reminds me a little of how differently crimes by white vs non-white people are treated in media rhetoric. Which is probably a bad analogy, and I'm not trying to equate racism with anti-cyclist sentiment. But I do think said anti-cyclist sentiment has a lot to do with how we perceive bad behaviour by those in the majority vs those in the minority (the latter being much more likely to be treated as representative of the group as a whole).
posted by lwb at 10:18 PM on August 3, 2015 [29 favorites]
"Not to mention the law in California is stay to the right or in the bike lane unless you have a damn good reason."
Unless California is different from the states where I've lived, making a left turn is an excellent reason to take the lane at an intersection. It may even be mandatory, depending on how certain things are interpreted.
And for the sake of my blood pressure I avoided talking about pedestrians, which ties into my "traffic behavior is cultural and localized" thing -- I'll take people's word for it that bikes are almost crashing into people left and right in some places, but around here if it came down to "which mode of street movement is just the worst omg" I think pedestrians would lose by a wide margin. At least until cell phones were banned, 8-foot-tall anti-jaywalking barriers were erected, or bikes started routinely carrying airhorns.
Even when I am a pedestrian, while running, I hate pedestrians. I can see the conflicts and their future unpredictable movements a block away, but that doesn't make them not happen. I could try saying something, which results in a random explosion of arms, backpacks, shopping bags, small dogs, whatever; and just wait for that to settle down before passing. Or it doesn't because they have earbuds in. Or they just didn't hear me, "fixable" by yelling louder which startles them into the aforementioned explosion. Or I could do the stealth-pass, safest by far but they'll interpret it as "aggressive" because they weren't paying attention and I startled them by existing too close to their bubble.
posted by traveler_ at 10:21 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
Unless California is different from the states where I've lived, making a left turn is an excellent reason to take the lane at an intersection. It may even be mandatory, depending on how certain things are interpreted.
And for the sake of my blood pressure I avoided talking about pedestrians, which ties into my "traffic behavior is cultural and localized" thing -- I'll take people's word for it that bikes are almost crashing into people left and right in some places, but around here if it came down to "which mode of street movement is just the worst omg" I think pedestrians would lose by a wide margin. At least until cell phones were banned, 8-foot-tall anti-jaywalking barriers were erected, or bikes started routinely carrying airhorns.
Even when I am a pedestrian, while running, I hate pedestrians. I can see the conflicts and their future unpredictable movements a block away, but that doesn't make them not happen. I could try saying something, which results in a random explosion of arms, backpacks, shopping bags, small dogs, whatever; and just wait for that to settle down before passing. Or it doesn't because they have earbuds in. Or they just didn't hear me, "fixable" by yelling louder which startles them into the aforementioned explosion. Or I could do the stealth-pass, safest by far but they'll interpret it as "aggressive" because they weren't paying attention and I startled them by existing too close to their bubble.
posted by traveler_ at 10:21 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
That last bold bit there courtesy of me; when I am driving in the city, traffic is nearly always pretty heavy and thus cyclists can easily be going my speed or faster. They are entitled to take the lane.
But you're not going the same speed. You're going significantly slower until you get up to speed in an area where there the traffic lane isn't too narrow. Much like you can't hog a lane once you enter a 45mph expressway stretch just because you feeded in from a 25mph street, when you hit the intersection you should accommodate both the wider width of the lane at the corner and your lack of acceleration compared to other traffic.
Once the side space disappears after the intersection and you've gotten up to the same speed as 15-25mph SF street traffic you would be entitled to merge back into and take the lane.
posted by Talez at 10:21 PM on August 3, 2015
But you're not going the same speed. You're going significantly slower until you get up to speed in an area where there the traffic lane isn't too narrow. Much like you can't hog a lane once you enter a 45mph expressway stretch just because you feeded in from a 25mph street, when you hit the intersection you should accommodate both the wider width of the lane at the corner and your lack of acceleration compared to other traffic.
Once the side space disappears after the intersection and you've gotten up to the same speed as 15-25mph SF street traffic you would be entitled to merge back into and take the lane.
posted by Talez at 10:21 PM on August 3, 2015
Meanwhile, on the other end of town, 100 automobile drivers converged in single file at a stop sign, snarling traffic and thereby proving that you don't want automobiles to stop at stop signs.
posted by JackFlash at 10:24 PM on August 3, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 10:24 PM on August 3, 2015 [3 favorites]
> Once the side space disappears after the intersection and you've gotten up to the same speed as 15-25mph SF street traffic you would be entitled to merge back into and take the lane.
Well, unless the shoulder is covered in debris (never happens!), cars are double-parked (also never!), there is a bus stopping at a stop but not IN its stop (jesus I hate that), etc. There are a ton of reasons, legitimate, legal reasons, for cyclists to take and keep the lane. Those are just some.
Also, as a pedestrian, what I hate a lot is fucking drivers who fucking park their cars in driveways so that they fully obstruct the sidewalk, and not just cuz they're zipping in with groceries. Sure, just block where I need to walk and that guy needs to push his stroller and that lady needs to push her laundry cart. Clearly, this kind of thing is an indictment of all drivers everywhere, forever, because look how they can't even follow simple rules about not parking on a sidewalk.
posted by rtha at 10:28 PM on August 3, 2015 [19 favorites]
Well, unless the shoulder is covered in debris (never happens!), cars are double-parked (also never!), there is a bus stopping at a stop but not IN its stop (jesus I hate that), etc. There are a ton of reasons, legitimate, legal reasons, for cyclists to take and keep the lane. Those are just some.
Also, as a pedestrian, what I hate a lot is fucking drivers who fucking park their cars in driveways so that they fully obstruct the sidewalk, and not just cuz they're zipping in with groceries. Sure, just block where I need to walk and that guy needs to push his stroller and that lady needs to push her laundry cart. Clearly, this kind of thing is an indictment of all drivers everywhere, forever, because look how they can't even follow simple rules about not parking on a sidewalk.
posted by rtha at 10:28 PM on August 3, 2015 [19 favorites]
"Once the side space disappears after the intersection and you've gotten up to the same speed as 15-25mph SF street traffic you would be entitled to merge back into and take the lane."
I actually find that it's intersections where my high power-to-weight ratio equalizes things and I accelerate as quickly, or more quickly, than cars. Right about the far side of the intersection is where their engines can keep accelerating but mine can't. That's also where it's most appropriate to switch from direction-based lane positioning to speed-based lane positioning, and move over to the right.
"They seriously don't have those bike sensor location markings on the roads at the lights?"
I've never seen that before in my life, whether living in Minnesota or in Montana, or visiting anywhere else in the U.S. Must be new.
"It reminds me a little of how differently crimes by white vs non-white people are treated in media rhetoric. Which is probably a bad analogy, and I'm not trying to equate racism with anti-cyclist sentiment."
I've actually heard before, and it was definitely not universally accepted, but an analogy between cyclists in traffic and women in public: the power differential, the different expectations of "typical" or "normal", who gets hurt versus whose behavior gets blamed, and like you pointed out, the difference in assigning bad behavior to individuals vs. stereotype groups.
posted by traveler_ at 10:28 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
I actually find that it's intersections where my high power-to-weight ratio equalizes things and I accelerate as quickly, or more quickly, than cars. Right about the far side of the intersection is where their engines can keep accelerating but mine can't. That's also where it's most appropriate to switch from direction-based lane positioning to speed-based lane positioning, and move over to the right.
"They seriously don't have those bike sensor location markings on the roads at the lights?"
I've never seen that before in my life, whether living in Minnesota or in Montana, or visiting anywhere else in the U.S. Must be new.
"It reminds me a little of how differently crimes by white vs non-white people are treated in media rhetoric. Which is probably a bad analogy, and I'm not trying to equate racism with anti-cyclist sentiment."
I've actually heard before, and it was definitely not universally accepted, but an analogy between cyclists in traffic and women in public: the power differential, the different expectations of "typical" or "normal", who gets hurt versus whose behavior gets blamed, and like you pointed out, the difference in assigning bad behavior to individuals vs. stereotype groups.
posted by traveler_ at 10:28 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
the law in California is stay to the right or in the bike lane unless you have a damn good reason
This is false.
As with pretty much all state laws the code states that bikes must keep "as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway," with "practicable" not being defined; it is never defined. California, unlike many other states, exactly cites "approaching a place where a right turn is authorized" as an area where hugging the right side of the lane is not "practicable."
Bicycles have full use of the lane, with their position within it is based upon whether it is "practicable" or not. While CA cites specific examples of this, most state laws do not. Cyclists make that decision for themselves and the notion that they must stay as far to the right as possible is both incorrect and dangerous.
posted by Panjandrum at 10:30 PM on August 3, 2015 [9 favorites]
This is false.
As with pretty much all state laws the code states that bikes must keep "as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway," with "practicable" not being defined; it is never defined. California, unlike many other states, exactly cites "approaching a place where a right turn is authorized" as an area where hugging the right side of the lane is not "practicable."
Bicycles have full use of the lane, with their position within it is based upon whether it is "practicable" or not. While CA cites specific examples of this, most state laws do not. Cyclists make that decision for themselves and the notion that they must stay as far to the right as possible is both incorrect and dangerous.
posted by Panjandrum at 10:30 PM on August 3, 2015 [9 favorites]
Well, unless the shoulder is covered in debris (never happens!), cars are double-parked (also never!), there is a bus stopping at a stop but not IN its stop (jesus I hate that), etc. There are a ton of reasons, legitimate, legal reasons, for cyclists to take and keep the lane. Those are just some.
Funnily enough it still doesn't stop cyclists from working their way around a line when its convenient for them.
Also, as a pedestrian, what I hate a lot is fucking drivers who fucking park their cars in driveways so that they fully obstruct the sidewalk, and not just cuz they're zipping in with groceries. Sure, just block where I need to walk and that guy needs to push his stroller and that lady needs to push her laundry cart. Clearly, this kind of thing is an indictment of all drivers everywhere, forever, because look how they can't even follow simple rules about not parking on a sidewalk.
Call 311 and SFPD will happily tow their ass. I can't call 311 and have a bike impounded for zooming through a stop sign just as I'm about to pull into the intersection when I have the right of way.
posted by Talez at 10:32 PM on August 3, 2015
Funnily enough it still doesn't stop cyclists from working their way around a line when its convenient for them.
Also, as a pedestrian, what I hate a lot is fucking drivers who fucking park their cars in driveways so that they fully obstruct the sidewalk, and not just cuz they're zipping in with groceries. Sure, just block where I need to walk and that guy needs to push his stroller and that lady needs to push her laundry cart. Clearly, this kind of thing is an indictment of all drivers everywhere, forever, because look how they can't even follow simple rules about not parking on a sidewalk.
Call 311 and SFPD will happily tow their ass. I can't call 311 and have a bike impounded for zooming through a stop sign just as I'm about to pull into the intersection when I have the right of way.
posted by Talez at 10:32 PM on August 3, 2015
On not, preview, what rtha said. I have literally had police pull next to me and (while still driving) yell at me to move to the right, when I am turning left.
pedestrians
I appreciate that people here have strong feelings about this, but on my usual commutes to work, shopping, errands, etc., I am exceedingly unlikely to encounter any of these exotic creatures. Outside of a parking lot, anyways. It is rare enough that I see another cyclist. Most of us do not live in San Francisco, NYC, Portland, or other places where infrastructure is such that there is a mix of pedestrians, cyclists, and cars. For a lot of us, it's just one bike on the road, having to make up shit as we go along to stay safe.
posted by Panjandrum at 10:36 PM on August 3, 2015 [7 favorites]
pedestrians
I appreciate that people here have strong feelings about this, but on my usual commutes to work, shopping, errands, etc., I am exceedingly unlikely to encounter any of these exotic creatures. Outside of a parking lot, anyways. It is rare enough that I see another cyclist. Most of us do not live in San Francisco, NYC, Portland, or other places where infrastructure is such that there is a mix of pedestrians, cyclists, and cars. For a lot of us, it's just one bike on the road, having to make up shit as we go along to stay safe.
posted by Panjandrum at 10:36 PM on August 3, 2015 [7 favorites]
> Someone get me a bike-to-raptor greasemonkey script and it'll actually be possible for me to read these threads without wanting to stab like 80% of the people commenting
RustyBrooks: Long ago I wrote a script that changed occurrences of "best" to "beth" because I thought it was a hilarious thing to put on my girlfriend's computer. That didn't turn out as 100% great as I thought it would, but the upshot is I'm something of a digital hoarder and it should be a helpful starting point if you (or someone else) would like to tweak it for your purposes.
The only further commentary I will make on this script is it is nearly eight years old.
posted by cardioid at 10:38 PM on August 3, 2015
RustyBrooks: Long ago I wrote a script that changed occurrences of "best" to "beth" because I thought it was a hilarious thing to put on my girlfriend's computer. That didn't turn out as 100% great as I thought it would, but the upshot is I'm something of a digital hoarder and it should be a helpful starting point if you (or someone else) would like to tweak it for your purposes.
The only further commentary I will make on this script is it is nearly eight years old.
posted by cardioid at 10:38 PM on August 3, 2015
Bicycles have full use of the lane, with their position within it is based upon whether it is "practicable" or not. While CA cites specific examples of this, most state laws do not. Cyclists make that decision for themselves and the notion that they must stay as far to the right as possible is both incorrect and dangerous.
And people doing exactly the speed limit in the left lane are legally there but it doesn't make them any less of an inconsiderate asshole.
posted by Talez at 10:40 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
And people doing exactly the speed limit in the left lane are legally there but it doesn't make them any less of an inconsiderate asshole.
posted by Talez at 10:40 PM on August 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Talking about pedestrians really is the "butwhataboutthemens" of bicycle threads, isn't it?
It makes perfect sense to funnel cars off small residential streets. What doesn't make sense is to include bikes.
Which is why the vast majority of city centre one way streets in .nl are for motorised traffic only, with bikes & brommers legal to ride the other way.
posted by MartinWisse at 10:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
It makes perfect sense to funnel cars off small residential streets. What doesn't make sense is to include bikes.
Which is why the vast majority of city centre one way streets in .nl are for motorised traffic only, with bikes & brommers legal to ride the other way.
posted by MartinWisse at 10:41 PM on August 3, 2015 [5 favorites]
Talking about pedestrians really is the "butwhataboutthemens" of bicycle threads, isn't it?
What? Pedestrian safety isn't irrelevant. This demonstration was about whether or not it's practical to expect cyclists to stop at stop signs. If lots of people are saying they feel unsafe because cyclists don't stop at stop signs, it's not like mean drivers are trying to make the story all about them. Pedestrian safety is hugely impacted by traffic laws.
posted by teponaztli at 10:50 PM on August 3, 2015 [10 favorites]
What? Pedestrian safety isn't irrelevant. This demonstration was about whether or not it's practical to expect cyclists to stop at stop signs. If lots of people are saying they feel unsafe because cyclists don't stop at stop signs, it's not like mean drivers are trying to make the story all about them. Pedestrian safety is hugely impacted by traffic laws.
posted by teponaztli at 10:50 PM on August 3, 2015 [10 favorites]
Most infrastructure is biased against cyclists
And this is the fundamental flaw of "same road, same rules." We are not using the same roads. If we were, then considerations of cyclists would be built into the infrastructure. Grading is not designed with bikes in mind. Street cleaning is not performed with bikes in mind. Traffic calming measures are not done with bike in mind. The feasibility of literally getting from one place to another is often done with no concern with for anything other without an internal combustion engine. They are not the same roads.
posted by Panjandrum at 11:00 PM on August 3, 2015 [11 favorites]
And this is the fundamental flaw of "same road, same rules." We are not using the same roads. If we were, then considerations of cyclists would be built into the infrastructure. Grading is not designed with bikes in mind. Street cleaning is not performed with bikes in mind. Traffic calming measures are not done with bike in mind. The feasibility of literally getting from one place to another is often done with no concern with for anything other without an internal combustion engine. They are not the same roads.
posted by Panjandrum at 11:00 PM on August 3, 2015 [11 favorites]
Talking about pedestrians really is the "butwhataboutthemens" of bicycle threads, isn't it?
I don't think I like that analogy. This is a thread about whether bikes should follow traffic laws-- are you making an analogy to men shouting down a sexism discussion? Really?
Also, in that thread, I think a pedestrian pov is relevant as it goes to safety.
(I lived in Amsterdam for 17 years, and I have not owned a car in 20. I bike and I am a pedestrian. Bikes who run red lights and disobey traffic laws make me crazy. Spend a few weeks on crutches in Amsterdam, and you too will emerge with a different perspective on bikes and their laws.)
posted by frumiousb at 11:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
I don't think I like that analogy. This is a thread about whether bikes should follow traffic laws-- are you making an analogy to men shouting down a sexism discussion? Really?
Also, in that thread, I think a pedestrian pov is relevant as it goes to safety.
(I lived in Amsterdam for 17 years, and I have not owned a car in 20. I bike and I am a pedestrian. Bikes who run red lights and disobey traffic laws make me crazy. Spend a few weeks on crutches in Amsterdam, and you too will emerge with a different perspective on bikes and their laws.)
posted by frumiousb at 11:04 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
people doing exactly the speed limit in the left lane are legally there but it doesn't make them any less of an inconsiderate asshole
You say this -- implying that you think those people should break the law by driving above the speed limit -- yet you also say of cyclists cutting lanes that the road condition:
still doesn't stop cyclists from working their way around a line when its convenient for them
So which is it? Are cars supposed to break the law because it is convenient for other drivers, but cyclists should not?
posted by Panjandrum at 11:06 PM on August 3, 2015 [10 favorites]
You say this -- implying that you think those people should break the law by driving above the speed limit -- yet you also say of cyclists cutting lanes that the road condition:
still doesn't stop cyclists from working their way around a line when its convenient for them
So which is it? Are cars supposed to break the law because it is convenient for other drivers, but cyclists should not?
posted by Panjandrum at 11:06 PM on August 3, 2015 [10 favorites]
And people doing exactly the speed limit in the left lane are legally there but it doesn't make them any less of an inconsiderate asshole.
Don't you think that most cyclists (not the assholes who are convinced they are the immortal centre of the universe) are very aware that they can seriously annoy and inconvenience drivers around them by taking the lane? Most of us, when and if we do take the lane, do so when it's legal and the safest of all possible options. Most of us try to be courteous about it, too.
For example, train tracks really cut up my west end neighbourhood in Toronto. There are only a few spots -- on major streets -- where I can cross the tracks, so I have to spend at least some time on main roads with no bike lanes to get more than a block from my house. Most of the main roadways have a total of 4 lanes, with curb lanes that may or may not have parked cars scattered on them and a centre lane each way that is used for left turns and through traffic.
If things are backed up enough that we're all moving 20 km/hour or less, then I take the curb lane and we're all in this together. (The closest I ever came to ending up under a car was when I chose to be a gutter bunny on Rogers Rd. under exactly these circumstances. Never. Again.)
If traffic is moving faster but is still light enough so that cars can easily switch to the centre lane and back to the curb lane if needed, I take the curb lane again. The curb lanes here are too damn narrow to share. If I ride less than a metre from the curb, especially if I forget to take the lane at an intersection, some very big cars will pass me very closely at varying speeds.
If traffic is medium heavy and everyone is moving too fast for me to keep up, then I do my damnedest to find another route -- something with a bike lane, or a side street.
Am I approaching an underpass? Then I am taking the curb lane, even if it's the one and only lane going east or west because a streetcar has a dedicated right of way where the centre lane used to be. I can't think of anything more stupid and dangerous than hugging the right edge of a narrow, grate-ridden and filthy curb lane and letting cars move beside and past me in an underpass. I go through as quickly as I can and scoot to the right edge of the lane once I'm clear of the side wall and have open sidewalk beside me again.
I'm not making these choices because I'm an inconsiderate asshole. I make these decisions because it would really ruin both of our days if I put myself in a place on the road where you could easily run me down.
posted by maudlin at 11:22 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
Don't you think that most cyclists (not the assholes who are convinced they are the immortal centre of the universe) are very aware that they can seriously annoy and inconvenience drivers around them by taking the lane? Most of us, when and if we do take the lane, do so when it's legal and the safest of all possible options. Most of us try to be courteous about it, too.
For example, train tracks really cut up my west end neighbourhood in Toronto. There are only a few spots -- on major streets -- where I can cross the tracks, so I have to spend at least some time on main roads with no bike lanes to get more than a block from my house. Most of the main roadways have a total of 4 lanes, with curb lanes that may or may not have parked cars scattered on them and a centre lane each way that is used for left turns and through traffic.
If things are backed up enough that we're all moving 20 km/hour or less, then I take the curb lane and we're all in this together. (The closest I ever came to ending up under a car was when I chose to be a gutter bunny on Rogers Rd. under exactly these circumstances. Never. Again.)
If traffic is moving faster but is still light enough so that cars can easily switch to the centre lane and back to the curb lane if needed, I take the curb lane again. The curb lanes here are too damn narrow to share. If I ride less than a metre from the curb, especially if I forget to take the lane at an intersection, some very big cars will pass me very closely at varying speeds.
If traffic is medium heavy and everyone is moving too fast for me to keep up, then I do my damnedest to find another route -- something with a bike lane, or a side street.
Am I approaching an underpass? Then I am taking the curb lane, even if it's the one and only lane going east or west because a streetcar has a dedicated right of way where the centre lane used to be. I can't think of anything more stupid and dangerous than hugging the right edge of a narrow, grate-ridden and filthy curb lane and letting cars move beside and past me in an underpass. I go through as quickly as I can and scoot to the right edge of the lane once I'm clear of the side wall and have open sidewalk beside me again.
I'm not making these choices because I'm an inconsiderate asshole. I make these decisions because it would really ruin both of our days if I put myself in a place on the road where you could easily run me down.
posted by maudlin at 11:22 PM on August 3, 2015 [12 favorites]
If there is a bike lane on the right side of the road and you are turning right, you should treat the bike lane as an actual lane, get into it, and turn right (checking that it's clear behind you). This makes it impossible for you to smash into a cyclist going straight who does not realize you're going to turn.
Merging into the bikelane is illegal in Oregon. But mandatory in neighboring California. Fortunately a mountain range isolates the population centers of the two states fairly well.
But lets talk about the real scourge of the road: joggers using the bike lane.
posted by pwnguin at 11:24 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
Merging into the bikelane is illegal in Oregon. But mandatory in neighboring California. Fortunately a mountain range isolates the population centers of the two states fairly well.
But lets talk about the real scourge of the road: joggers using the bike lane.
posted by pwnguin at 11:24 PM on August 3, 2015 [6 favorites]
The wiggle is notorious for bikes blowing through four way stop signs at speed, even when there's traffic stopping at all stop signs. Even if there's pedestrians crossing. I've seen way way too many close calls caused by bikes ignoring the stop signs when there is traffic. This protest was disingenuous bullshit, and I say that as someone who thinks an Idaho stop makes perfect sense WHEN THERE IS NO CROSS TRAFFIC.
posted by aspo at 12:01 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by aspo at 12:01 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Riders arrived at every stop sign in a single file, coming to a complete stop and filing through the intersection only once they were given the right-of-way.
Yep, we talked a little about this event in this thread.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 12:29 AM on August 4, 2015
Yep, we talked a little about this event in this thread.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 12:29 AM on August 4, 2015
There's so much aggressiveness on both sides of the debate. Can't we agree that the status quo isn't working?
When cyclists skirt traffic laws when it's inconvenient to drivers, drivers get understandably frustrated. When cyclists obey traffic laws when its inconvenient to drivers, cyclists actually get in the way and drivers get angry.
Meanwhile many cyclists commonly obey traffic laws only when its convenient to themselves. This is not a tenable position, regardless if the laws make sense or not.
Isn't it obvious that the traffic regulations are part of the problem, if they're so unreasonable that everyone at one point or another hates it when they are followed?
From my admittably biased perspective as a cyclist, this is the entire point of the protest. It's not invalid because it's organized and therefore contrived (how is any grassroots action unplanned?), and the fact that many cyclists blow through intersections and cut drivers off is tangential at best.
Keep in mind that European cities with large numbers of cyclists don't have these problems in general. Maybe we should think about why that is. Cyclists obey traffic rules more or less, get tickets when they don't, and most of all, they don't steal the right of way from vehicles. But also, they don't have 4 way stop signs every city block.
The city started a campaign to ticket every cyclist who doesn't come to a complete stop at the end of every city block. I'd like to ask anyone who disapproves of this protest, what exactly do you want from cyclists? What could they do to make you happy?
posted by cotterpin at 1:11 AM on August 4, 2015 [12 favorites]
When cyclists skirt traffic laws when it's inconvenient to drivers, drivers get understandably frustrated. When cyclists obey traffic laws when its inconvenient to drivers, cyclists actually get in the way and drivers get angry.
Meanwhile many cyclists commonly obey traffic laws only when its convenient to themselves. This is not a tenable position, regardless if the laws make sense or not.
Isn't it obvious that the traffic regulations are part of the problem, if they're so unreasonable that everyone at one point or another hates it when they are followed?
From my admittably biased perspective as a cyclist, this is the entire point of the protest. It's not invalid because it's organized and therefore contrived (how is any grassroots action unplanned?), and the fact that many cyclists blow through intersections and cut drivers off is tangential at best.
Keep in mind that European cities with large numbers of cyclists don't have these problems in general. Maybe we should think about why that is. Cyclists obey traffic rules more or less, get tickets when they don't, and most of all, they don't steal the right of way from vehicles. But also, they don't have 4 way stop signs every city block.
The city started a campaign to ticket every cyclist who doesn't come to a complete stop at the end of every city block. I'd like to ask anyone who disapproves of this protest, what exactly do you want from cyclists? What could they do to make you happy?
posted by cotterpin at 1:11 AM on August 4, 2015 [12 favorites]
Jinsai: "[San Francisco is] about as bike-friendly a town as you're going to find"Uh, yeah.
Here's a few clips of rush hour in Copenhagen.
posted by brokkr at 1:37 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
"And people doing exactly the speed limit in the left lane are legally there but it doesn't make them any less of an inconsiderate asshole."
Yeah, yeah, when you're wrong about the law, that makes other people assholes, sure. Just suck it up, be wrong, and learn something instead of acting like all bikes are catching your nuts on the top tube.
Bikers breaking traffic laws:Mefi::Welfare cheats:Fox News.
posted by klangklangston at 3:01 AM on August 4, 2015 [15 favorites]
Yeah, yeah, when you're wrong about the law, that makes other people assholes, sure. Just suck it up, be wrong, and learn something instead of acting like all bikes are catching your nuts on the top tube.
Bikers breaking traffic laws:Mefi::Welfare cheats:Fox News.
posted by klangklangston at 3:01 AM on August 4, 2015 [15 favorites]
I think your motorcar biases are affecting how much space you think "hundreds of bicycles" would take up on the road.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:13 AM on August 4, 2015 [9 favorites]
Cyclist behaviour is not "cultural". It's the result of how desire lines interact with infrastructure. If you build safe infrastructure, your cycling "culture" may become 52% female with a higher representation of gradeschoolers. The real people at fault here are the ones who built those intersections with only cars in mind.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:18 AM on August 4, 2015 [15 favorites]
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:18 AM on August 4, 2015 [15 favorites]
talez, if you were so openly looking to justify your prejudices regarding any other group I trust you'd be questioning yourself more. Maybe everyone involved is a human, no more or less unreasonable as a body than the body of the general population. To think otherwise is fairly clear demonization and prejudice, and an anger that you are carrying whilst in charge of a lethal weapon.
If you think that cyclists are the problem (to pick an example point) because drivers might kill them at a certain intersection when the drivers break the law I don't really know what to say.
posted by jaduncan at 3:36 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
If you think that cyclists are the problem (to pick an example point) because drivers might kill them at a certain intersection when the drivers break the law I don't really know what to say.
posted by jaduncan at 3:36 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
Keeping the above comments about cycling culture being fairly localized, maybe this is one thing where the people of DC are actually fairly great? I yield at red lights and to any pedestrians who have the right-of-way, and virtually all other cyclists I see seem to do the same. DC's bike culture seems pretty friendly.
Only in certain parts (so, hyper local?). Downtown, where there are bike lanes or where they ride on the road, it's fine. But, there are lots of parts of DC where cyclists are allowed to ride on the sidewalks. They don't seem to understand how to share the sidewalk with pedestrians. Only 30% will say "on your right/left" when they are coming up behind you (only 5% have any kind of horn or bell - why don't the Capital Bikeshare bikes have them?). In small stretches of busy areas, where there are lots of shops, and therefore lots of people walking slower than usual, they don't seem to go with the flow of traffic and slow down (or get off their bikes and walk through). Instead, expecting pedestrians, in my neighborhood usually carrying a lot of bags/groceries, to jump out of the way. You can't ride on the sidewalk the way you ride on the road.
It's one of the chief reasons I donate a little to WABA every year. I'm hoping the bike lanes will make it into the more residential parts of the city, so we can get the bikes off the sidewalks. And, I agree with the thrust of this protest (perhaps not the execution). Better design of roads and laws for mixed traffic would help everybody.
posted by bluefly at 4:00 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Only in certain parts (so, hyper local?). Downtown, where there are bike lanes or where they ride on the road, it's fine. But, there are lots of parts of DC where cyclists are allowed to ride on the sidewalks. They don't seem to understand how to share the sidewalk with pedestrians. Only 30% will say "on your right/left" when they are coming up behind you (only 5% have any kind of horn or bell - why don't the Capital Bikeshare bikes have them?). In small stretches of busy areas, where there are lots of shops, and therefore lots of people walking slower than usual, they don't seem to go with the flow of traffic and slow down (or get off their bikes and walk through). Instead, expecting pedestrians, in my neighborhood usually carrying a lot of bags/groceries, to jump out of the way. You can't ride on the sidewalk the way you ride on the road.
It's one of the chief reasons I donate a little to WABA every year. I'm hoping the bike lanes will make it into the more residential parts of the city, so we can get the bikes off the sidewalks. And, I agree with the thrust of this protest (perhaps not the execution). Better design of roads and laws for mixed traffic would help everybody.
posted by bluefly at 4:00 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
It's impossible to overstate how flawed any generalizations of American cyclist behavior are.
I am a completely different biker on any trip longer than four miles. I simply can't pay attention that long, so standard road rules are a way to economize the effort I put into anticipating the behavior of those giant metal death cubes I share the road with. When I see spandex'ed bikers blowing threw the uncontrolled that spot some trail rides I wonder if they have eagle eyes, honey-badger courage or bird brains.
The drivers in each city have bizarrely different reactions to bikers. In Columbus OH people would yell at me for splitting lanes of an traffic that was backed up for about a third a mile up hill, or rolling stop in a traffic free neighborhood. In Chicago during my early 20's I routinely timed my speed to blow through six-way intersections on red without even braking (yeah, i know) and I don't think I ever saw a driver even make a weird face at me.
Biker skill is also all over the map. At one point when I was exclusively locomote by foot or pedal I would occasionally ride across Chicago with a friend who had a bikes 5 times more expensive than mine with twice as many gears, but he couldn't handle adjusting speed as traffic changed moving towards the lake. Similarly, as a weekend rider in Milwaukee I'm amazed at how my general fitness hasn't changed much but I am routinely scorched at intersections by Riverwest Fixie Hipsters.
And of course there's the variation in traffic, roads, conditions, speed everything else everyone mentioned. There's plenty of absurdities on both sides.
As with most of my post shift comments, I have no idea what the point here is. I think policing should have a light touch w/r/t biking for purely logistical reasons. Trying to write laws that apply for the wide wide wide range of bikes and roads and situations seems fool-hardy right now.
posted by midmarch snowman at 4:12 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
I am a completely different biker on any trip longer than four miles. I simply can't pay attention that long, so standard road rules are a way to economize the effort I put into anticipating the behavior of those giant metal death cubes I share the road with. When I see spandex'ed bikers blowing threw the uncontrolled that spot some trail rides I wonder if they have eagle eyes, honey-badger courage or bird brains.
The drivers in each city have bizarrely different reactions to bikers. In Columbus OH people would yell at me for splitting lanes of an traffic that was backed up for about a third a mile up hill, or rolling stop in a traffic free neighborhood. In Chicago during my early 20's I routinely timed my speed to blow through six-way intersections on red without even braking (yeah, i know) and I don't think I ever saw a driver even make a weird face at me.
Biker skill is also all over the map. At one point when I was exclusively locomote by foot or pedal I would occasionally ride across Chicago with a friend who had a bikes 5 times more expensive than mine with twice as many gears, but he couldn't handle adjusting speed as traffic changed moving towards the lake. Similarly, as a weekend rider in Milwaukee I'm amazed at how my general fitness hasn't changed much but I am routinely scorched at intersections by Riverwest Fixie Hipsters.
And of course there's the variation in traffic, roads, conditions, speed everything else everyone mentioned. There's plenty of absurdities on both sides.
As with most of my post shift comments, I have no idea what the point here is. I think policing should have a light touch w/r/t biking for purely logistical reasons. Trying to write laws that apply for the wide wide wide range of bikes and roads and situations seems fool-hardy right now.
posted by midmarch snowman at 4:12 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
We need dedicated bicycle lanes, signals, and rules, in conjunction with other traffic. You know, like Holland.
I'd be totally down with this as a biker and a pedestrian. Except then you need to find a way to keep the joggers out of the bike lanes, because I've run into that issue too...
Basically, what we need is for all people everywhere to just not ever suck.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:51 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
I'd be totally down with this as a biker and a pedestrian. Except then you need to find a way to keep the joggers out of the bike lanes, because I've run into that issue too...
Basically, what we need is for all people everywhere to just not ever suck.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:51 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
there are lots of parts of DC where cyclists are allowed to ride on the sidewalks. They don't seem to understand how to share the sidewalk with pedestrians.
That's because that is not actually a thing that can be done. And I say that as a cloggy, which inherently makes me an expert on biking.
The difference in speeds is just too great. You can't expect people on bikes to ride at 5 km/h. That's falling over speed, not riding speed.
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:11 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
That's because that is not actually a thing that can be done. And I say that as a cloggy, which inherently makes me an expert on biking.
The difference in speeds is just too great. You can't expect people on bikes to ride at 5 km/h. That's falling over speed, not riding speed.
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:11 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
As someone who drives, bikes, and walks I find it interesting to observe my own reactions when choosing one of those conveyances to people who are partaking of the others. In my car, pedestrians and cyclists almost never irritate me. Every so often a cyclist will do something that makes me feel like they are being unsafe or I will have to follow them for a long time going annoyingly slowly or a pedestrian will come out from behind something that obstructed my view, but for the most part I am happy to slow down and let these slower road users have a moment to get out of my way, which they generally do.
On my bike, I do not trust either pedestrians or cars. Cars will cut me off, merge into me, pull out across the bike lane without looking. But I know I am less visible, so this does not usually annoy me very much. While they are big and scary, cars are also generally predictable. And even if they are predictably being assholes, that's still something I can count on. I can compensate by being more flexible. Have to jump up on the curb to avoid getting hit? No problem. But pedestrians, they are kind of the worst, because they have no rules to follow. They walk or jog in the bike lanes, and when you overtake them, they freak out. You could give a group of pedestrians milling in the bike lane 20 seconds warning, and half would move right, half would move left, and one would stay right in the middle looking confused. As mentioned upthread, safest by far is not to let them know you are coming, because it's easy enough to move around them as long as they aren't scattering in random directions. But then they get scared and tell everyone how they were "almost hit by a crazy bike!"
When I am walking, I, like most people, feel competent navigating the urban landscape. Confident enough to look at my phone and to listen to music and to not really pay much attention at all. I stay off the roads unless I am crossing, but other than that, I don't pay nearly enough attention, and when a bike zooms around me, I am startled. But I understand: they saw me from 500 meters away, and planned their path around me. I was the one who was oblivious.
posted by Nothing at 5:25 AM on August 4, 2015 [16 favorites]
On my bike, I do not trust either pedestrians or cars. Cars will cut me off, merge into me, pull out across the bike lane without looking. But I know I am less visible, so this does not usually annoy me very much. While they are big and scary, cars are also generally predictable. And even if they are predictably being assholes, that's still something I can count on. I can compensate by being more flexible. Have to jump up on the curb to avoid getting hit? No problem. But pedestrians, they are kind of the worst, because they have no rules to follow. They walk or jog in the bike lanes, and when you overtake them, they freak out. You could give a group of pedestrians milling in the bike lane 20 seconds warning, and half would move right, half would move left, and one would stay right in the middle looking confused. As mentioned upthread, safest by far is not to let them know you are coming, because it's easy enough to move around them as long as they aren't scattering in random directions. But then they get scared and tell everyone how they were "almost hit by a crazy bike!"
When I am walking, I, like most people, feel competent navigating the urban landscape. Confident enough to look at my phone and to listen to music and to not really pay much attention at all. I stay off the roads unless I am crossing, but other than that, I don't pay nearly enough attention, and when a bike zooms around me, I am startled. But I understand: they saw me from 500 meters away, and planned their path around me. I was the one who was oblivious.
posted by Nothing at 5:25 AM on August 4, 2015 [16 favorites]
As a person who primarily gets around by bike or foot, I want more enforcement of some bike laws. I would like to see a concerted push to get cyclists to use lights after dark, for instance. I would like ticketing for riding against the flow of traffic. I don't think that it should be legal to ride a bike on the sidewalk if you're over the age of about ten or going more than about five miles an hour, and I would like to see enforcement of that. On the other hand, I would like to see much, much more enforcement of things like laws against cars double-parking and stopping in bike lanes, the requirement that turning cars yield to bikes and pedestrians (and that requirement exists in my town but is totally ignored), prohibitions on speeding through yellow lights, and other things that cars do that put me at risk. Finally, and I realize that this will be controversial, I think it would be nice if we could change the pedestrian culture a little bit towards obeying traffic rules. That's tough to do, though, because as with bikes, traffic rules aren't really set up for pedestrians here.
I mostly do obey all traffic laws on my bike, and I get yelled at for it a fair amount. I honestly don't think there's any way to ride a bike in contemporary America without pissing people off. The infrastructure isn't set up for us, and no matter what we do we're going to be annoying.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:30 AM on August 4, 2015 [13 favorites]
I mostly do obey all traffic laws on my bike, and I get yelled at for it a fair amount. I honestly don't think there's any way to ride a bike in contemporary America without pissing people off. The infrastructure isn't set up for us, and no matter what we do we're going to be annoying.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:30 AM on August 4, 2015 [13 favorites]
I am a pedestrian and a cyclist--we sold our car last year because where we live in Kingston, we don't need it--and I never understood how scary it can be being either of those things until now. I am flabbergasted that on a two-lane road that a car would rather come super close to me on a bike with no protective shell than get closer to the car in the opposite lane. I guess I understand because our brains are wired to avoid a car accident at all costs, but it's terrifying how I don't factor in the equation. I obey the traffic laws on my bike and I still get crap from drivers. I wish we were really set up better for everyone's preferred mode of transport in North America.
posted by Kitteh at 5:40 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 5:40 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
you should treat the bike lane as an actual lane, get into it, and turn right (checking that it's clear behind you).
I live in a town with a fair number of bike lanes on main streets and I am pretty sure moving into the bike lane part of the road like this, even if to prepare for a right turn, would get me screamed at for intruding into the bike lane, if there were a bike behind me somewhere. (But then when I do ride my bike around town I am the kind of super-cautious, stop-for-every-light-and-stop-sign, walk-your-bike-across-the-intersection, rider that the radder folks in this thread would have contempt for.)
Also, just this morning (!) while driving to work (car) I saw a bicyclist up ahead of me blow full speed through the stop sign at the end of our side street onto the busy major road, "merging" into traffic between cars going 40, and had a brief anxiety attack...
posted by aught at 5:42 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
I live in a town with a fair number of bike lanes on main streets and I am pretty sure moving into the bike lane part of the road like this, even if to prepare for a right turn, would get me screamed at for intruding into the bike lane, if there were a bike behind me somewhere. (But then when I do ride my bike around town I am the kind of super-cautious, stop-for-every-light-and-stop-sign, walk-your-bike-across-the-intersection, rider that the radder folks in this thread would have contempt for.)
Also, just this morning (!) while driving to work (car) I saw a bicyclist up ahead of me blow full speed through the stop sign at the end of our side street onto the busy major road, "merging" into traffic between cars going 40, and had a brief anxiety attack...
posted by aught at 5:42 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
monospace: We need dedicated bicycle lanes, signals, and rules, in conjunction with other traffic. You know, like Holland.
That's the Netherlands, please, if you don't mind. But yes, yes you do.
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:44 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
That's the Netherlands, please, if you don't mind. But yes, yes you do.
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:44 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
I got run over once when I stopped my bike at a stop sign and the car behind me did not. I also got hit once while I was in a crosswalk, and the FedEx driver who hit me then threatened me with a huge wrench.
Both incidents occurred when I was a courier for a couple of years. They are the only incidents in which I was involved, and neither was my fault.
Every car that crosses a double yellow line to pass a cyclist is breaking a traffic law.
posted by OmieWise at 6:38 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Both incidents occurred when I was a courier for a couple of years. They are the only incidents in which I was involved, and neither was my fault.
Every car that crosses a double yellow line to pass a cyclist is breaking a traffic law.
posted by OmieWise at 6:38 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
TheWhiteSkull, RustyBrooks : Would a Chrome extension do ?
Here it is : https://github.com/joachimesque/cyclist-to-velociraptor
The Firefox extension should come soon if there's interest.
posted by thatjoachim at 6:41 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Here it is : https://github.com/joachimesque/cyclist-to-velociraptor
The Firefox extension should come soon if there's interest.
posted by thatjoachim at 6:41 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
The Stevenage story
‘Build it and they will come’ may not always work for bicycles. This does not mean cycleways should not be built. The new protected bike paths in New York, Seville, Chicago and Vancouver show that cycle use can be increased after the creation of separated infrastructure but cycle infrastructure works best when part of a greater whole, and that usually means restricting car use. When cycling is the fastest, easiest and safest way to get around, cycle use can grow.posted by asok at 7:01 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
only 5% have any kind of horn or bell - why don't the Capital Bikeshare bikes have them?
Every Capital Bikeshare bike has a bell. It's on the left hand grip, you operate it with your thumb. But I have never hear a rider use one.
posted by peeedro at 7:02 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Every Capital Bikeshare bike has a bell. It's on the left hand grip, you operate it with your thumb. But I have never hear a rider use one.
posted by peeedro at 7:02 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
I have an actual serious question. I own a bike. I learned to ride my bike on rural roads with no traffic where cars go all the way into the opposing traffic lane to go around you because there is no opposing traffic.
Now I live in the suburbs of an urban area. How in the flying fuck do I learn to ride safely in this environment when I am, quite frankly, terrified by cars whizzing by my elbow? I'm not enough of a douche to ride on the sidewalk, but this thread is evidence that it's kind of a jungle out there, and probably one that you don't belong in if you don't know what you're doing. But, uh, how do you get from A to B?
This will become increasingly important in a few years when the kids are old enough for real bikes.
posted by telepanda at 7:11 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Now I live in the suburbs of an urban area. How in the flying fuck do I learn to ride safely in this environment when I am, quite frankly, terrified by cars whizzing by my elbow? I'm not enough of a douche to ride on the sidewalk, but this thread is evidence that it's kind of a jungle out there, and probably one that you don't belong in if you don't know what you're doing. But, uh, how do you get from A to B?
This will become increasingly important in a few years when the kids are old enough for real bikes.
posted by telepanda at 7:11 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
peeedro: "Every Capital Bikeshare bike has a bell. It's on the left hand grip, you operate it with your thumb. But I have never hear a rider use one."
Well, so they do! I guess I assumed they didn't have them, since riders will blow right past me without any attempt at signalling/warning (and I am NOT wearing headphones). It's a only a small quibble with CB riders, as I do think the program has increased biking and cyclist awareness in the city. But maybe a campaign with that 70s disco song "Ring My Bell" would be in order...
posted by bluefly at 7:12 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Well, so they do! I guess I assumed they didn't have them, since riders will blow right past me without any attempt at signalling/warning (and I am NOT wearing headphones). It's a only a small quibble with CB riders, as I do think the program has increased biking and cyclist awareness in the city. But maybe a campaign with that 70s disco song "Ring My Bell" would be in order...
posted by bluefly at 7:12 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Every car that crosses a double yellow line to pass a cyclist is breaking a traffic law.
This is not true. In fact:
This is not true. In fact:
11-305.Limitations on overtaking on the leftposted by Kirth Gerson at 7:14 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
No vehicle shall be driven to the left side of the center of the roadway in overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction unless such left side is clearly visible and is free of oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance ahead to permit such overtaking and passing to be completely made without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle overtaken.
RustyBrooks: If there is a bike lane on the right side of the road and you are turning right, you should treat the bike lane as an actual lane, get into it, and turn right (checking that it's clear behind you).
You're allowed to cross a bike lane in NYC at an intersection, but you're not allowed to drive into a bike lane, drive then turn.
This makes it impossible for you to smash into a cyclist going straight who does not realize you're going to turn.
By law, drivers are supposed to signal and indicate when they are turning. Unfortunately, they don't always. But those signals are for everyone around them, including cyclists.
peeedro: Every Capital Bikeshare bike has a bell.
So does every CitiBike. I've heard them used on the streets of NYC. Their volume makes them better for warning pedestrians than drivers, who may be driving with their windows closed and a/c & radios on.
posted by zarq at 7:18 AM on August 4, 2015
You're allowed to cross a bike lane in NYC at an intersection, but you're not allowed to drive into a bike lane, drive then turn.
This makes it impossible for you to smash into a cyclist going straight who does not realize you're going to turn.
By law, drivers are supposed to signal and indicate when they are turning. Unfortunately, they don't always. But those signals are for everyone around them, including cyclists.
peeedro: Every Capital Bikeshare bike has a bell.
So does every CitiBike. I've heard them used on the streets of NYC. Their volume makes them better for warning pedestrians than drivers, who may be driving with their windows closed and a/c & radios on.
posted by zarq at 7:18 AM on August 4, 2015
Countdown to what about the pedestrians derail: 15 minutes. Seems about par for the course. Every. single. time.
Pedestrian safety is relevant to the discussion, but it is really tired that it gets touted out in every single biking-related thread basically immediately in order to essentially scold bikers in general, usually with little substance other than THOSE MEAN BIKERS AMIRITE. (And bonus points when it's accompanied by a I-say-this-as-one-of-the-good-ones declaration.)
posted by likeatoaster at 7:21 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
Pedestrian safety is relevant to the discussion, but it is really tired that it gets touted out in every single biking-related thread basically immediately in order to essentially scold bikers in general, usually with little substance other than THOSE MEAN BIKERS AMIRITE. (And bonus points when it's accompanied by a I-say-this-as-one-of-the-good-ones declaration.)
posted by likeatoaster at 7:21 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
Cops are jerks to bikes, so bikes are jerks to everyone? Seems like a game of "who is the biggest bully".
posted by blue_beetle at 7:31 AM on August 4, 2015
posted by blue_beetle at 7:31 AM on August 4, 2015
Merging into the bikelane is illegal in Oregon. But mandatory in neighboring California.
Man, what the actual fuck. One of these laws has to be categorically wrong, right? I *think* here it's recommended but not mandatory, but I'm not sure.
And yeah, if you do it, cyclists are probably going to give you a dirty look or yell or whatever, because chances are, THEY DON'T KNOW EITHER. I didn't. I was bitching about it to someone and he was like, dude, he did what he was supposed to. I looked it up and he was right. I think we are well and truly fucked because of stuff like this - where neither party, even people who might consider themselves well informed, don't know what they're supposed to do.
Arguing that it shouldn't be necessary as long as the person turning signals is a little like saying that it should be OK to turn right from the 2nd-from-the-right-lane in a car as long as you signal, which is clearly crazy pants.
The bike lane is a lane of traffic and has to be treated as one. If there's not a bike lane, then there is an *implied* lane of traffic where bikes are going to be riding.
posted by RustyBrooks at 7:43 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
Man, what the actual fuck. One of these laws has to be categorically wrong, right? I *think* here it's recommended but not mandatory, but I'm not sure.
And yeah, if you do it, cyclists are probably going to give you a dirty look or yell or whatever, because chances are, THEY DON'T KNOW EITHER. I didn't. I was bitching about it to someone and he was like, dude, he did what he was supposed to. I looked it up and he was right. I think we are well and truly fucked because of stuff like this - where neither party, even people who might consider themselves well informed, don't know what they're supposed to do.
Arguing that it shouldn't be necessary as long as the person turning signals is a little like saying that it should be OK to turn right from the 2nd-from-the-right-lane in a car as long as you signal, which is clearly crazy pants.
The bike lane is a lane of traffic and has to be treated as one. If there's not a bike lane, then there is an *implied* lane of traffic where bikes are going to be riding.
posted by RustyBrooks at 7:43 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
This is not true.
Huh, I did not know that. Thanks.
posted by OmieWise at 7:48 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Huh, I did not know that. Thanks.
posted by OmieWise at 7:48 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Countdown to what about the pedestrians derail: 15 minutes
How is that a derail? Bicycle safety relates to both vehicle safety and pedestrian safety.
Blowing through a stop sign/red light looks a lot different to the person on the bike and the person in the crosswalk. Both EC & Bulgaroktonos' comments are definitely not THOSE MEAN BIKERS AMIRITE, they're pretty clearly "My right of way is an actual thing that bicyclists infringe upon with regularity." I'm sorry you feel bikes are being hated on - they often are, in lots of spaces - but I really don't think that's the case here.
I understand that bicyclists have to fight for their own rights, but mentioning unfriendly (& dangerous) cyclist behavior is not THOSE MEAN BIKERS AMIRITE.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 7:52 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
How is that a derail? Bicycle safety relates to both vehicle safety and pedestrian safety.
Blowing through a stop sign/red light looks a lot different to the person on the bike and the person in the crosswalk. Both EC & Bulgaroktonos' comments are definitely not THOSE MEAN BIKERS AMIRITE, they're pretty clearly "My right of way is an actual thing that bicyclists infringe upon with regularity." I'm sorry you feel bikes are being hated on - they often are, in lots of spaces - but I really don't think that's the case here.
I understand that bicyclists have to fight for their own rights, but mentioning unfriendly (& dangerous) cyclist behavior is not THOSE MEAN BIKERS AMIRITE.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 7:52 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Did somebody say "bicycle lobby?" (VAST TWO-WHEELED CONSPIRACY AHOY)
posted by entropicamericana at 8:12 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by entropicamericana at 8:12 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Arguing that it shouldn't be necessary as long as the person turning signals is a little like saying that it should be OK to turn right from the 2nd-from-the-right-lane in a car as long as you signal, which is clearly crazy pants.
Well, obviously there is a difference between turning to the right from the right lane than from a left or middle lane. Also, why shouldn't cyclists who share the road with cars have to pay attention to the signals those cars make? After all, drivers need to pay attention to the signals cyclists make. Ignoring signals increases the risk of an accident.
The problem with treating the bike lane like another lane of traffic that cars can enter under certain circumstances in crowded urban environments is that drivers will be more likely to drive into the bike lane even when they aren't crossing over it to get somewhere else.
Case in point: In NYC, we have bus lanes. Cars drive in them all the damned time simply because they're emptier and move faster than the car lanes. Violators frequently get stopped and ticketed. But man, they keep on ignoring the signs that say, "DON'T DRIVE IN THE BUS LANE" because they think they can get away with it.
And yeah, if you do it, cyclists are probably going to give you a dirty look or yell or whatever, because chances are, THEY DON'T KNOW EITHER.
I once honked at a cyclist to indicate that I was overtaking him on a tight side road in Queens near the Jackie Robinson. The cyclist yelled, shook his first and then tried to confront me when we both pulled up to a light a quarter of a mile down the road. I explained myself: "Man, I'm really sorry if I startled you, but a brief beep before I overtake you is the law. I have my little kids in the car and wouldn't want to put you or them in danger if you didn't hear me coming."
He got it. Calmed down. We shook hands and that was it. But I also wonder if most people know the law.
posted by zarq at 8:20 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Well, obviously there is a difference between turning to the right from the right lane than from a left or middle lane. Also, why shouldn't cyclists who share the road with cars have to pay attention to the signals those cars make? After all, drivers need to pay attention to the signals cyclists make. Ignoring signals increases the risk of an accident.
The problem with treating the bike lane like another lane of traffic that cars can enter under certain circumstances in crowded urban environments is that drivers will be more likely to drive into the bike lane even when they aren't crossing over it to get somewhere else.
Case in point: In NYC, we have bus lanes. Cars drive in them all the damned time simply because they're emptier and move faster than the car lanes. Violators frequently get stopped and ticketed. But man, they keep on ignoring the signs that say, "DON'T DRIVE IN THE BUS LANE" because they think they can get away with it.
And yeah, if you do it, cyclists are probably going to give you a dirty look or yell or whatever, because chances are, THEY DON'T KNOW EITHER.
I once honked at a cyclist to indicate that I was overtaking him on a tight side road in Queens near the Jackie Robinson. The cyclist yelled, shook his first and then tried to confront me when we both pulled up to a light a quarter of a mile down the road. I explained myself: "Man, I'm really sorry if I startled you, but a brief beep before I overtake you is the law. I have my little kids in the car and wouldn't want to put you or them in danger if you didn't hear me coming."
He got it. Calmed down. We shook hands and that was it. But I also wonder if most people know the law.
posted by zarq at 8:20 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Survey finds bicyclists and motorists ignore traffic laws at similar rates.
The study gathered similar rates of infraction — 8 percent to 9 percent for drivers, and 7 to 8 percent for cyclists. And when Marshall researched the reasons a cyclist might break a traffic law, it turns out they are doing it for nearly the same reasons that a driver would, but with one difference.
Drivers and pedestrians will drive through or walk against a red light to save time.
“They’re not trying to be reckless or rude,” Marshall said. “Cyclists, they’re doing it for their own personal safety or perceived safety. They felt like they’re more visible.”
posted by misskaz at 8:22 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
The study gathered similar rates of infraction — 8 percent to 9 percent for drivers, and 7 to 8 percent for cyclists. And when Marshall researched the reasons a cyclist might break a traffic law, it turns out they are doing it for nearly the same reasons that a driver would, but with one difference.
Drivers and pedestrians will drive through or walk against a red light to save time.
“They’re not trying to be reckless or rude,” Marshall said. “Cyclists, they’re doing it for their own personal safety or perceived safety. They felt like they’re more visible.”
posted by misskaz at 8:22 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
Well, obviously there is a difference between turning to the right from the right lane than from a left or middle lane. Also, why shouldn't cyclists who share the road with cars have to pay attention to the signals those cars make? After all, drivers need to pay attention to the signals cyclists make. Ignoring signals increases the risk of an accident.
Unfortunately it seems the norm in Chicago for drivers to turn on their turn signal (if at all) well after I'm already alongside them. And I have to admit, law or not, it seems odd for the structure to built in such a way that I, a cyclist with a green light travelling straight, should have to yield to a car turning. It sort of breaks the fundamental "turner always yields" structure of basically every other traffic law (save a 4-way stop).
posted by misskaz at 8:25 AM on August 4, 2015
Unfortunately it seems the norm in Chicago for drivers to turn on their turn signal (if at all) well after I'm already alongside them. And I have to admit, law or not, it seems odd for the structure to built in such a way that I, a cyclist with a green light travelling straight, should have to yield to a car turning. It sort of breaks the fundamental "turner always yields" structure of basically every other traffic law (save a 4-way stop).
posted by misskaz at 8:25 AM on August 4, 2015
Unfortunately it seems the norm in Chicago for drivers to turn on their turn signal (if at all) well after I'm already alongside them.
A large percentage of drivers in NYC treat their signals as optional, too. Makes sharing the road with them really dangerous. There were 20 cyclist fatalities here last year. More info here if you're interested.
And I have to admit, law or not, it seems odd for the structure to built in such a way that I, a cyclist with a green light travelling straight, should have to yield to a car turning
You definitely shouldn't. My understanding of NYS law is that the turner always yields in those situations.
posted by zarq at 8:38 AM on August 4, 2015
A large percentage of drivers in NYC treat their signals as optional, too. Makes sharing the road with them really dangerous. There were 20 cyclist fatalities here last year. More info here if you're interested.
And I have to admit, law or not, it seems odd for the structure to built in such a way that I, a cyclist with a green light travelling straight, should have to yield to a car turning
You definitely shouldn't. My understanding of NYS law is that the turner always yields in those situations.
posted by zarq at 8:38 AM on August 4, 2015
I would love to see a video of that intersection with bike and car traffic moving as it typically does.
posted by theora55 at 8:39 AM on August 4, 2015
posted by theora55 at 8:39 AM on August 4, 2015
So many of these problems come from laws assuming that a 2 ton, 6 foot wide piece of steel that can go from 0-60 in 8 seconds is legally the same as a skinny unpowered vehicle that weighs 1% as much. Thanks a lot, John Forester.
posted by Monochrome at 8:42 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by Monochrome at 8:42 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Comments on the the SF Weekly article were enlightening. Like this one:
posted by zarq at 8:47 AM on August 4, 2015 [9 favorites]
As an able bodied suburban grandmother that much prefers my bicycle to motorized transportation who is always lit like a christmas tree with blinking lights and reflective yellow and has been know to ride 5000+miles/yr, both solo and in small and VERY large groups (3K+) I have a few disorganized observations:
No, we can't get rid of cars -anyone who has taken 3 toddlers to the grocery store for 2 days of groceries, let a alone a week's worth; or taken an elderly wheelchair bound parent to the doctor; or had job where you have to look presentable with no workplace shower facilities and its pouring rain, or deep snow, or 95degrees outside, and the bus schedule doesn't match your hours or even come close to where you live or work -knows the necessity of cars.
The Idaho law is great! I utilize it even though it's not the law in my state. Pedestrians always have right of way. Yield is an easy concept - the other guy has right of way. If I approach a stop sign and there's no other vehicle, I don't stop. ( think merging on the freeway) If I approach the intersection and there's already a vehicle there, they have right of way. I stop. Even if I get there before them, I stop. I may have right of way but physics and driver's attitudes/awareness can still get me killed, so I stop. And red lights...ever try sitting at a red light that won't change until a car stops at the intersection to trip the light? Ridiculous.
I rode and drove in Germany some...I really appreciate that there, cyclists have right of way. If you're making a right turn in a car, you always look behind and to the right for bicycles!
To those who want cyclists to keep right: If there are parked cars, it is very dangerous to ride close to parked cars since one opened door can kill you. I always ride an open car door length away. Also, the edges of the roads and especially the bike lanes tend to be littered with road debris - metal, glass, gravel..and many times are much more dangerous than the regular traffic lanes where larger vehicles tend to keep the road surface clearer.
Cars are supposed to give 3 ft passing distance for cyclists - more for bad weather or bad road conditions. I've been knocked off my bike by water spray from a car driving too close/fast through a puddle. I've had bad scares trying to avoid a pot hole or a rock while being passed by inches.
To those who think we should stick to the recreation paths:
1) My worst crashes have been on rec paths...pet owners that walk to one side letting their pets on a long leash across the path. trying to get around a 10 ft leash and an unpredictable dog is very dangerous. Oh, and then there was being chased/tackled by a dog that was off leash.
2) Most folks are wearing ear buds and are oblivious to my bell or my yell "passing on your left"
3) the rec paths don't necessarily go where I'm going! My bike is my preferred transportation- not just recreation. Not to mention that rec paths tend to end at really inconvenient places.
4) speed limit is 15 Mph...takes way too long to get anywhere.
Don't even get me started on trying to ride bikes with my grandchildren and teach them traffic laws...they are the first ones to point out how very few drivers follow the law. Anytime I ride with the kids, I revert to full stops and walk lights at intersections. We usually ride two abreast with an adult on the outside, unless it's not possible/practical. And please tell me who honks at a 7 yr old giving turn signals?
Big group etiquette - we post a cyclist in the intersection to hold the right of way for the group to pass, break up groups into traffic light time sized groups not over a minute or two. For huge groups, we hire police to direct traffic.
As to this exercise, It's quite conceivable to get a long line of bike commuters. I see the potential in my city - if all the cyclists through intersections had to queue up and come to a full stop, it would cause problems. Even if it were just, say 5 or 10 unrelated riders, that's going to have a big impact on traffic flow.
Sorry so disjoint, off my soapbox.
posted by zarq at 8:47 AM on August 4, 2015 [9 favorites]
This is not true.
Huh, I did not know that. Thanks.
The "not true" is actually not true. While UVC 11-303 provides general guidelines on passing, further sections refine these parameters. 11-306 sets out specific hazards which would prohibit passing, and 11-307 specifically grants authorities the priviledge of establishing no passing zones so long as they are marked appropriately (i.e., with a double yellow line). The only relevant exception is if the passing is necessitated by an "obstruction." So it is only legal to cross a double yellow to pass a cyclist if you consider them an obstruction.
Some states have in place specific provisions to allow double yellow passing of bikes. This page has a collection of them, along with a great discussion on the history and practice. Colorado, for example, specifically waives no passing zone restrictions:
posted by Panjandrum at 8:58 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Huh, I did not know that. Thanks.
The "not true" is actually not true. While UVC 11-303 provides general guidelines on passing, further sections refine these parameters. 11-306 sets out specific hazards which would prohibit passing, and 11-307 specifically grants authorities the priviledge of establishing no passing zones so long as they are marked appropriately (i.e., with a double yellow line). The only relevant exception is if the passing is necessitated by an "obstruction." So it is only legal to cross a double yellow to pass a cyclist if you consider them an obstruction.
Some states have in place specific provisions to allow double yellow passing of bikes. This page has a collection of them, along with a great discussion on the history and practice. Colorado, for example, specifically waives no passing zone restrictions:
(d) To the driver of a vehicle passing a bicyclist moving the same direction and in the same lane when such movement can be made in safety and without interfering with, impeding, or endangering other traffic lawfully using the highway.California has no such provision.
posted by Panjandrum at 8:58 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Cars are increasingly large, literally well-insulated, with climate control and a big sound system. People are driving around in living rooms and believe that nothing should get in their way or inconvenience them. The mere idea of sharing the road does not compute.
posted by theora55 at 8:59 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
posted by theora55 at 8:59 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
Comments on the the SF Weekly article were enlightening
Huh, apparently I ride like an able bodied suburban grandmother.
posted by Panjandrum at 9:07 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Huh, apparently I ride like an able bodied suburban grandmother.
posted by Panjandrum at 9:07 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Virginia passed a "3 foot passing distance" rule last year. (I appreciate the effort, but I'm not sure anyone will pay any more attention to it than they did the previous "safe distance" rule.) Prior to 1 June, it was illegal here to cross a double-yellow to pass a pedestrian or bicyclist. They finally amended that law to account for what was the safe established practice.
posted by introp at 9:09 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by introp at 9:09 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
I once honked at a cyclist to indicate that I was overtaking him
Please, please, please don't ever do this. A lot of people don't know how loud their horns are, and it's not just an issue of being startled, it's also physically painful to me. This is not conducive to my being stable on the road in front of you (either emotionally or gyroscopically.) I kinda wish car horns were required to be as loud or louder in the passenger compartment as they are to the outside world.
Thank goodness a "brief beep" before overtaking isn't the law in my state. Though there are plenty of drivers, usually older ones, who seem to honk whenever they see any cyclist in any direction, which is just awful. They don't even seem to be doing it aggressively! I gather that at some point they were taught to honk whenever they see a cyclist.
I've got a nice big mirror. I don't wear headphones, and I do wear doodads to reduce wind noise. I am not going to have any trouble noticing you're there and reacting accordingly as long as you don't do weird things like accelerate too quickly and closely. Please don't honk at me!
posted by asperity at 9:13 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
Please, please, please don't ever do this. A lot of people don't know how loud their horns are, and it's not just an issue of being startled, it's also physically painful to me. This is not conducive to my being stable on the road in front of you (either emotionally or gyroscopically.) I kinda wish car horns were required to be as loud or louder in the passenger compartment as they are to the outside world.
Thank goodness a "brief beep" before overtaking isn't the law in my state. Though there are plenty of drivers, usually older ones, who seem to honk whenever they see any cyclist in any direction, which is just awful. They don't even seem to be doing it aggressively! I gather that at some point they were taught to honk whenever they see a cyclist.
I've got a nice big mirror. I don't wear headphones, and I do wear doodads to reduce wind noise. I am not going to have any trouble noticing you're there and reacting accordingly as long as you don't do weird things like accelerate too quickly and closely. Please don't honk at me!
posted by asperity at 9:13 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
Every Capital Bikeshare bike has a bell. It's on the left hand grip, you operate it with your thumb. But I have never hear a rider use one.
I use the bell but I've taken friends on CaBi rides and had to show them where the bell is, and how to operate it. It's not very intuitive or natural-feeling, as this conversation shows. For the reference of others, it's the black bump on the left and you have to push it with your thumb. I think design is more to blame, and people would actually use it if it were more like a typical bicycle bell.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 9:16 AM on August 4, 2015
I use the bell but I've taken friends on CaBi rides and had to show them where the bell is, and how to operate it. It's not very intuitive or natural-feeling, as this conversation shows. For the reference of others, it's the black bump on the left and you have to push it with your thumb. I think design is more to blame, and people would actually use it if it were more like a typical bicycle bell.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 9:16 AM on August 4, 2015
I hate it when any motorist honks, but it really kills me when freaking *bus drivers* honk at me when overtaking. I can hear your gigantic 40,000lb vehicle coming up behind me just fine, thanks.
posted by misskaz at 9:25 AM on August 4, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by misskaz at 9:25 AM on August 4, 2015 [6 favorites]
I think the problem overall is that both motor vehicles and bicycles are operated by hairless apes who tend to tribalism and identifying with their vehicle rather that with other people. The constant antiphonies of "but drivers all do this" and "but cyclists all do that" in these threads (and elsewhere) pretty much demonstrates that the problem is not the breed of the steed but the mien, sir of the teamster.
I've been a keen cyclist since the 1960s, done TOSRV (2500 to 6500 riders) almost 40 times, cycled across the USA, bike commuted in cites big and small from the 1970s through today. It seems pretty clear that this demo does not do what is sarcastically implied. Dozens of riders showing up simultaneously on a single street in what the article admits was a "parade of cyclists" and stopping one by one in sequence in a situation designed to block other traffic is not at all the same thing as all cyclists complying with a rule to stop at stop signs. The main thing it demonstrates to me is stubborn, blinkered narcissism.
(True: you need a bit of this just to brave riding a bicycle on public roads in the USA in the first place).
Organized rides of this size, such as TOSRV, typically feature police traffic control, communications, emergency medical teams. Even so, recently a local ride for charity featured a collision between a bicycle and a motor vehicle. The cyclist was hospitalized (and eventually released). The driver was cited for hit-skip and also for all the things he was trying to get away with that caused him to want to leave the scene of an accident (and avoid police contact) in the first place. It also turns out the driver was the one who called 911: then he left the scene.
And the rider he hit? There wasn't one. It was the bike that collided with the truck, not the other way around. The cyclist was found to be at fault in the collision and was cited for failure to stop at a four-way stop sign.
Also: I too have been rear-ended on a bike by a driver who assumed I was not going to stop at a stop sign. Funny: I guess she wasn't planning on stopping either.
Also: My friend Crazy Eddie got a speeding ticket on his bike once a long time ago. (Bottom of a hill, city limits, speed limit suddenly drops from 45 to 25). The cop was gonna let him off with a warning, but Ed insisted. He still has the framed ticket. Color: White Make: Schwinn. Model: UNK Year: UNK. . . .
Finally:
Metafilter: This is not true. Huh, I did not know that. Thanks.
posted by Herodios at 9:41 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
I've been a keen cyclist since the 1960s, done TOSRV (2500 to 6500 riders) almost 40 times, cycled across the USA, bike commuted in cites big and small from the 1970s through today. It seems pretty clear that this demo does not do what is sarcastically implied. Dozens of riders showing up simultaneously on a single street in what the article admits was a "parade of cyclists" and stopping one by one in sequence in a situation designed to block other traffic is not at all the same thing as all cyclists complying with a rule to stop at stop signs. The main thing it demonstrates to me is stubborn, blinkered narcissism.
(True: you need a bit of this just to brave riding a bicycle on public roads in the USA in the first place).
Organized rides of this size, such as TOSRV, typically feature police traffic control, communications, emergency medical teams. Even so, recently a local ride for charity featured a collision between a bicycle and a motor vehicle. The cyclist was hospitalized (and eventually released). The driver was cited for hit-skip and also for all the things he was trying to get away with that caused him to want to leave the scene of an accident (and avoid police contact) in the first place. It also turns out the driver was the one who called 911: then he left the scene.
And the rider he hit? There wasn't one. It was the bike that collided with the truck, not the other way around. The cyclist was found to be at fault in the collision and was cited for failure to stop at a four-way stop sign.
Also: I too have been rear-ended on a bike by a driver who assumed I was not going to stop at a stop sign. Funny: I guess she wasn't planning on stopping either.
Also: My friend Crazy Eddie got a speeding ticket on his bike once a long time ago. (Bottom of a hill, city limits, speed limit suddenly drops from 45 to 25). The cop was gonna let him off with a warning, but Ed insisted. He still has the framed ticket. Color: White Make: Schwinn. Model: UNK Year: UNK. . . .
Finally:
Metafilter: This is not true. Huh, I did not know that. Thanks.
posted by Herodios at 9:41 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
I've got a nice big mirror. I don't wear headphones, and I do wear doodads to reduce wind noise. I am not going to have any trouble noticing you're there and reacting accordingly as long as you don't do weird things like accelerate too quickly and closely. Please don't honk at me!
Good points. Honestly, I think I've done it twice the entire time I've been driving, and both times because the road was tight and I was nervous. But I'll keep it in mind, thanks. If it were dark enough for them to reflect, I'd flash my brights instead. Seems less intrusive.
posted by zarq at 10:30 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Good points. Honestly, I think I've done it twice the entire time I've been driving, and both times because the road was tight and I was nervous. But I'll keep it in mind, thanks. If it were dark enough for them to reflect, I'd flash my brights instead. Seems less intrusive.
posted by zarq at 10:30 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
So, look.
I think most people, cyclists and motorists alike, would like to share the road. Most cyclists aren't deliberately fucking with motorists (TFA notwithstanding), and most motorists aren't deliberately endangering cyclists.
It's kind of shitty for cyclists to sneeringly characterize all motorists as oblivious, entitled jerkasses in planet-destroying SUVs. (And it doesn't help cyclists' reputation for being snide and sanctimonious.)
I actually wonder whether some cyclists have ever driven a car with any regularity. Because what many cyclists don't seem to understand is that having cyclists on the road really does make things harder for motorists. Not because cyclists are terrible people, but because it's difficult enough to negotiate busy city streets with nothing but other cars on the road. At least motor vehicles are large, easily visible, move according to a predictable set of rules, and can withstand the occasional low-speed collision.
When you add cyclists to the mix, you've just complicated things enormously. Now the road also contains an entirely different class of traffic, interwoven with the first, which travels at different speeds, is smaller and harder to see, moves according to its own rules (which vary widely from cyclist to cyclist, and often seem to flagrantly disregard the established norms of the road), and must be given extra attention (because even a low-speed collision could mean a fatality, not a fender-bender).
If it sounds like I'm painting cyclists as the intruders on the motorists' world: that's just because I'm a motorist and a non-cyclist. I'm sure that cyclists see motorists as intruders on their world. Whichever perspective you prefer, the point is the same: putting two very different types of vehicle on the same road is going to make things harder for both.
I'm sure I could do better as a motorist. I've never received any kind of instruction on how to drive around cyclists. When I encounter someone on a bike, my complete coping strategy is "try not to hit them".
I know a set of basic rules that help me negotiate the roads alongside other cars: yield to oncoming traffic when making a turn; don't hang out in someone's blind spot; don't block the box; turn off your high beams for oncoming cars; etc. These rules make the behavior of other motorists more predictable, reduce risk, and generally make it possible for cars to share the road in an orderly fashion. But I don't know what the rules are for cyclists. I don't even know whether there are formally codified rules, or whether it's just a set of folk knowledge that I'm supposed to have absorbed through osmosis.
I'm willing to learn the rules—but, frankly, given the inconsistency of cyclists' behavior, I'm not sure I'd be willing to trust any given cyclist to obey the same norms. You never know who's an experienced cyclist who takes the road seriously, and who's just some yahoo who jumped on a bike and will cut corners just for the hell of it. (At least you have to take a class and pass an exam before you can drive a car on the road.) Guess wrong, and suddenly you're the asshole driver who ran down a cyclist.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 10:34 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
I think most people, cyclists and motorists alike, would like to share the road. Most cyclists aren't deliberately fucking with motorists (TFA notwithstanding), and most motorists aren't deliberately endangering cyclists.
It's kind of shitty for cyclists to sneeringly characterize all motorists as oblivious, entitled jerkasses in planet-destroying SUVs. (And it doesn't help cyclists' reputation for being snide and sanctimonious.)
I actually wonder whether some cyclists have ever driven a car with any regularity. Because what many cyclists don't seem to understand is that having cyclists on the road really does make things harder for motorists. Not because cyclists are terrible people, but because it's difficult enough to negotiate busy city streets with nothing but other cars on the road. At least motor vehicles are large, easily visible, move according to a predictable set of rules, and can withstand the occasional low-speed collision.
When you add cyclists to the mix, you've just complicated things enormously. Now the road also contains an entirely different class of traffic, interwoven with the first, which travels at different speeds, is smaller and harder to see, moves according to its own rules (which vary widely from cyclist to cyclist, and often seem to flagrantly disregard the established norms of the road), and must be given extra attention (because even a low-speed collision could mean a fatality, not a fender-bender).
If it sounds like I'm painting cyclists as the intruders on the motorists' world: that's just because I'm a motorist and a non-cyclist. I'm sure that cyclists see motorists as intruders on their world. Whichever perspective you prefer, the point is the same: putting two very different types of vehicle on the same road is going to make things harder for both.
I'm sure I could do better as a motorist. I've never received any kind of instruction on how to drive around cyclists. When I encounter someone on a bike, my complete coping strategy is "try not to hit them".
I know a set of basic rules that help me negotiate the roads alongside other cars: yield to oncoming traffic when making a turn; don't hang out in someone's blind spot; don't block the box; turn off your high beams for oncoming cars; etc. These rules make the behavior of other motorists more predictable, reduce risk, and generally make it possible for cars to share the road in an orderly fashion. But I don't know what the rules are for cyclists. I don't even know whether there are formally codified rules, or whether it's just a set of folk knowledge that I'm supposed to have absorbed through osmosis.
I'm willing to learn the rules—but, frankly, given the inconsistency of cyclists' behavior, I'm not sure I'd be willing to trust any given cyclist to obey the same norms. You never know who's an experienced cyclist who takes the road seriously, and who's just some yahoo who jumped on a bike and will cut corners just for the hell of it. (At least you have to take a class and pass an exam before you can drive a car on the road.) Guess wrong, and suddenly you're the asshole driver who ran down a cyclist.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 10:34 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
I don't even know whether there are formally codified rules, or whether it's just a set of folk knowledge that I'm supposed to have absorbed through osmosis.
When you took driver's ed, (assuming you did, anyway) did they not talk to you at length about cyclists? Because I learned to drive in 2007, and was taught how to share the road with bikes and pedestrians.
posted by zarq at 10:44 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
When you took driver's ed, (assuming you did, anyway) did they not talk to you at length about cyclists? Because I learned to drive in 2007, and was taught how to share the road with bikes and pedestrians.
posted by zarq at 10:44 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Roads are for people, not cars. The good roads movement was founded by cyclists. If motorists find it difficult to drive on a road with cyclists, they should either surrender their license or shut the fuck up. Also, getting (and keeping a driver's license) should be an order of magnitude more difficult than it is.
The facts are the motorists are responsible for an overwhelming super-majority of deaths on our roads and that cars ARE destroying our planet (as well as our cities). I'm sorry these objective, quantifiable truths are uncomfortable for you, but they cannot be denied.
Sincerely,
Sanctimonious Cyclist
posted by entropicamericana at 10:44 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
The facts are the motorists are responsible for an overwhelming super-majority of deaths on our roads and that cars ARE destroying our planet (as well as our cities). I'm sorry these objective, quantifiable truths are uncomfortable for you, but they cannot be denied.
Sincerely,
Sanctimonious Cyclist
posted by entropicamericana at 10:44 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
I actually wonder whether some cyclists have ever driven a car with any regularity. Because what many cyclists don't seem to understand is that having cyclists on the road really does make things harder for motorists. Not because cyclists are terrible people, but because it's difficult enough to negotiate busy city streets with nothing but other cars on the road. At least motor vehicles are large, easily visible, move according to a predictable set of rules, and can withstand the occasional low-speed collision.
I don't think anyone here has said they were never motorists. (People from sane countries like the Netherlands excepted.) Hell, I didn't stop owning a car until I was 37. I am aware of what driving is like with cyclists on the road. It's sometimes shitty, mostly fine. People contain multitudes.
Your comment comes off as particularly axe-grindy in an already tense thread. Someone mentioned upthread that cyclists are damned if they do, damned if they don't. Follow the traffic rules like a car? You suck. You do whatever you want on your bike? You suck. The only winners are motorists, apparently.
posted by Kitteh at 10:52 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
I don't think anyone here has said they were never motorists. (People from sane countries like the Netherlands excepted.) Hell, I didn't stop owning a car until I was 37. I am aware of what driving is like with cyclists on the road. It's sometimes shitty, mostly fine. People contain multitudes.
Your comment comes off as particularly axe-grindy in an already tense thread. Someone mentioned upthread that cyclists are damned if they do, damned if they don't. Follow the traffic rules like a car? You suck. You do whatever you want on your bike? You suck. The only winners are motorists, apparently.
posted by Kitteh at 10:52 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
When you took driver's ed, (assuming you did, anyway) did they not talk to you at length about cyclists?
Data point: Nope.
posted by Etrigan at 10:53 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
Data point: Nope.
posted by Etrigan at 10:53 AM on August 4, 2015 [4 favorites]
entropicamericana: If motorists find it difficult to drive on a road with cyclists, they should either surrender their license or shut the fuck up.
I've been cut off sharply by a bike while doing 25-30mph in a 30mph zone. Swerved, stood on the brakes to avoid an accident. Have had to slam on my brakes because a cyclist decided to roll through a red light without bothering to look for oncoming traffic. More than once in Manhattan, cyclists have leaned their bodies against my car while we were both stopped at a red light. Cyclists have tried to squeeze between my car and another while I was signalling to turn or change lanes. Once, a cyclist actually slammed into and broke my passenger side mirror because he didn't pay attention to my turn signal. I wasn't even moving! I had turned slightly into the intersection and was waiting to go. Literally waiting for him to go past me, and he hit me instead.
This isn't an either-or proposition.
Sometimes motorists have difficulty sharing the road with cyclists because those cyclists don't obey the rules.
Sometimes cyclists have difficulty sharing the road with motorists because those motorists don't obey the rules
What's needed here isn't an attitude of, "WELL IF THEY DON'T LIKE IT THEY CAN GTFO." It's people on both sides who are more considerate of others and more safety oriented.
posted by zarq at 10:53 AM on August 4, 2015 [7 favorites]
I've been cut off sharply by a bike while doing 25-30mph in a 30mph zone. Swerved, stood on the brakes to avoid an accident. Have had to slam on my brakes because a cyclist decided to roll through a red light without bothering to look for oncoming traffic. More than once in Manhattan, cyclists have leaned their bodies against my car while we were both stopped at a red light. Cyclists have tried to squeeze between my car and another while I was signalling to turn or change lanes. Once, a cyclist actually slammed into and broke my passenger side mirror because he didn't pay attention to my turn signal. I wasn't even moving! I had turned slightly into the intersection and was waiting to go. Literally waiting for him to go past me, and he hit me instead.
This isn't an either-or proposition.
Sometimes motorists have difficulty sharing the road with cyclists because those cyclists don't obey the rules.
Sometimes cyclists have difficulty sharing the road with motorists because those motorists don't obey the rules
What's needed here isn't an attitude of, "WELL IF THEY DON'T LIKE IT THEY CAN GTFO." It's people on both sides who are more considerate of others and more safety oriented.
posted by zarq at 10:53 AM on August 4, 2015 [7 favorites]
Etrigan: Data point: Nope.
That's nuts. Why wouldn't they do that?
I wonder if they focused more on cyclists and foot traffic because I was learning to drive in NYC?
posted by zarq at 10:58 AM on August 4, 2015
That's nuts. Why wouldn't they do that?
I wonder if they focused more on cyclists and foot traffic because I was learning to drive in NYC?
posted by zarq at 10:58 AM on August 4, 2015
The risks of a bad motorist and a bad cyclist are *completely* differently. A motorist is driving a two-ton hunk of metal that will kill motherfuckers dead. All the time. A bad cyclist is a dangerous to a pedestrian, but harmless to a motorist (unless the motorist swerves into a tree, off a cliff, into another car, granted.) The onus needs to be on motorists to be extremely skilled and vigilant defensive drivers.
But guess what! Here's the good news for motorists: You don't even need to worry about killing, much less hitting, a cyclist because chances are you will never be cited, much less prosecuted or convicted. So excuse me if I have a little bit of an "attitude problem."
posted by entropicamericana at 11:02 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
But guess what! Here's the good news for motorists: You don't even need to worry about killing, much less hitting, a cyclist because chances are you will never be cited, much less prosecuted or convicted. So excuse me if I have a little bit of an "attitude problem."
posted by entropicamericana at 11:02 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
When you took driver's ed, (assuming you did, anyway) did they not talk to you at length about cyclists?
No they did not. I got my license in Maryland sometime around 1995. Cyclists were probably mentioned, but only in passing. There wasn't a lot of concern about the issue then.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 11:06 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
No they did not. I got my license in Maryland sometime around 1995. Cyclists were probably mentioned, but only in passing. There wasn't a lot of concern about the issue then.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 11:06 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
When I was growing up, I was taught the "rules of yielding the trail." (It's relevant here, I swear.)
When you're hiking/riding/etc. on a narrow trail in the woods and come across someone else (usually going the other way), who steps aside?
The basic rule is simple: people with an easier time yield to people with a harder time. So if you're walking downhill, anyone walking uphill towards you has the right of way. If you're on a motorcycle and come across a horse, you yield to the horse because they have a harder time (what with maneuvering and being wary of close engine noises, etc.). If you're on a flat spot and come across someone hiking with kids or a cane, you yield. Etc.
Basically you ask yourself, "what are the consequences of me stopping / stepping aside / passing / backtracking until there's room to pass, etc.?" You also ask yourself that of the other party. It's usually incredibly obvious who should yield.
One of the reasons that bicycling around cars is because it is so immensely frustrating how certain solutions are trivial for cars, yet many drivers expect the cyclists to take a much more dangerous and/or difficult solution instead. If I'm taking up the lane, I have a really good reason; if you have to slow down and wait ten seconds to pass me, I'm sorry you've been delayed, but we both have a right to be here. Your ten second delay and then pressing your foot down a few inches is infinitely safer and easier than me pulling off into the loose gravel shoulder, letting you by, and then trying to get started again on this uphill.
You wouldn't buzz a horse and rider with one foot of passing clearance; don't do it to a bicyclist, either!
posted by introp at 11:08 AM on August 4, 2015 [14 favorites]
When you're hiking/riding/etc. on a narrow trail in the woods and come across someone else (usually going the other way), who steps aside?
The basic rule is simple: people with an easier time yield to people with a harder time. So if you're walking downhill, anyone walking uphill towards you has the right of way. If you're on a motorcycle and come across a horse, you yield to the horse because they have a harder time (what with maneuvering and being wary of close engine noises, etc.). If you're on a flat spot and come across someone hiking with kids or a cane, you yield. Etc.
Basically you ask yourself, "what are the consequences of me stopping / stepping aside / passing / backtracking until there's room to pass, etc.?" You also ask yourself that of the other party. It's usually incredibly obvious who should yield.
One of the reasons that bicycling around cars is because it is so immensely frustrating how certain solutions are trivial for cars, yet many drivers expect the cyclists to take a much more dangerous and/or difficult solution instead. If I'm taking up the lane, I have a really good reason; if you have to slow down and wait ten seconds to pass me, I'm sorry you've been delayed, but we both have a right to be here. Your ten second delay and then pressing your foot down a few inches is infinitely safer and easier than me pulling off into the loose gravel shoulder, letting you by, and then trying to get started again on this uphill.
You wouldn't buzz a horse and rider with one foot of passing clearance; don't do it to a bicyclist, either!
posted by introp at 11:08 AM on August 4, 2015 [14 favorites]
Etrigan: Data point: Nope.
That's nuts. Why wouldn't they do that?
I wonder if they focused more on cyclists and foot traffic because I was learning to drive in NYC?
Most likely. I learned to drive in Northern Nevada, where bicycling is something that Greg LeMond does on another continent.
posted by Etrigan at 11:09 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
That's nuts. Why wouldn't they do that?
I wonder if they focused more on cyclists and foot traffic because I was learning to drive in NYC?
Most likely. I learned to drive in Northern Nevada, where bicycling is something that Greg LeMond does on another continent.
posted by Etrigan at 11:09 AM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
entropicamericana: The risks of a bad motorist and a bad cyclist are *completely* differently.
Agreed.
A motorist is driving a two-ton hunk of metal that will kill motherfuckers dead. All the time. A bad cyclist is a dangerous to a pedestrian...
Since you mentioned pedestrians, it's also worth noting that cyclists who kill pedestrians (in this city at least) aren't always caught or charged. We've seen a rise in injuries / deaths in the last few years.
...but harmless to a motorist (unless the motorist swerves into a tree, off a cliff, into another car, granted.)
I wouldn't say it's necessarily harmless. How much danger a cyclist can pose to car passengers probably depends on the situation. But yes, for the most part if a cyclist and a car get into an accident, the cyclist will come away with worse injuries than the passengers -- assuming they survive at all. Personally, I'd be willing to hit pretty much anything else to avoid hitting a person on a bike or on foot. Swerving seems inevitable.
The onus needs to be on motorists to be extremely skilled and vigilant defensive drivers.
Sure. I didn't say otherwise. But that doesn't mean that cyclists should get a pass and be allowed to break rules or put others in danger, either.
posted by zarq at 11:17 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Agreed.
A motorist is driving a two-ton hunk of metal that will kill motherfuckers dead. All the time. A bad cyclist is a dangerous to a pedestrian...
Since you mentioned pedestrians, it's also worth noting that cyclists who kill pedestrians (in this city at least) aren't always caught or charged. We've seen a rise in injuries / deaths in the last few years.
...but harmless to a motorist (unless the motorist swerves into a tree, off a cliff, into another car, granted.)
I wouldn't say it's necessarily harmless. How much danger a cyclist can pose to car passengers probably depends on the situation. But yes, for the most part if a cyclist and a car get into an accident, the cyclist will come away with worse injuries than the passengers -- assuming they survive at all. Personally, I'd be willing to hit pretty much anything else to avoid hitting a person on a bike or on foot. Swerving seems inevitable.
The onus needs to be on motorists to be extremely skilled and vigilant defensive drivers.
Sure. I didn't say otherwise. But that doesn't mean that cyclists should get a pass and be allowed to break rules or put others in danger, either.
posted by zarq at 11:17 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Yes, introp, and I always give cyclists a wide berth and try to err on the side of caution. But that principle alone is not sufficient to solve the problem.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 11:28 AM on August 4, 2015
posted by escape from the potato planet at 11:28 AM on August 4, 2015
Since you mentioned pedestrians, it's also worth noting that cyclists who kill pedestrians (in this city at least) aren't always caught or charged. We've seen a rise in injuries / deaths in the last few years.
Please... Don't. Just don't. The figures are not even remotely comparable in any way.
that doesn't mean that cyclists should get a pass and be allowed to break rules or put others in danger, either.
Cyclists shouldn't get a pass, no, but they should be getting treated a lot better than they are now. They deserve equity in infrastructure and justice in the courts. Until then, their traffic infractions are the least of my concern.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:29 AM on August 4, 2015 [9 favorites]
Please... Don't. Just don't. The figures are not even remotely comparable in any way.
that doesn't mean that cyclists should get a pass and be allowed to break rules or put others in danger, either.
Cyclists shouldn't get a pass, no, but they should be getting treated a lot better than they are now. They deserve equity in infrastructure and justice in the courts. Until then, their traffic infractions are the least of my concern.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:29 AM on August 4, 2015 [9 favorites]
Sometimes motorists have difficulty sharing the road with cyclists because those cyclists don't obey the rules.I think the problem, though, is that the rules are really designed for cars, and sometimes everyone can be obeying the rules and cyclists can still be at risk. There's also widespread tolerance for certain kinds of rule-breaking by motorists that are really dangerous for cyclists, and drivers aren't always conscious that they even are breaking the rules. I would say that about half the time when I go to work, there's a delivery vehicle blocking the bike lane in front of the little grocery store, and nobody has any sympathy at all when I mention it, because how else is the grocery store supposed to get deliveries. It's just a given that the rules don't matter in that situation and that something else is more important than my safety.
Sometimes cyclists have difficulty sharing the road with motorists because those motorists don't obey the rules
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 11:40 AM on August 4, 2015 [10 favorites]
What people learn in United States driver's ed classes varies widely, what each state tests new drivers on varies widely, and most states have nearly no provision for retesting of drivers with existing licenses.
I got my first driver's license twenty years ago. I've been licensed in five states over that time. After my first license (which I actually didn't even have to take a real driving test for because my driver's ed class waived us out of having to do that with the regular testers at the DMV -- we just had to pass the driving test as given by our instructor) I have never had a test that asked questions more complicated than "which of these signs is a stop sign?" where I got to choose a picture from several options.
I've definitely never had to take a real practical driving exam again, and given how driver licensing works in every state I'm familiar with, I don't expect I'll ever have to unless I move overseas. And maybe not even then.
What this means is that you can't expect that anyone on the road has the knowledge you'd expect that every road user should, and there isn't any way to pass that knowledge on that isn't completely haphazard. Public service announcements and billboards? Those cost money and you don't see all that many of them, and they don't really have quite enough room to convey info more complicated than "wear your seatbelt/helmet." Education by law enforcement via warnings or tickets? Extremely variable in usefulness, often ends up being applied in an ugly discriminatory way.
Giving any teeth at all to continuing driver education and retesting in any state in the US is very difficult politically, since we've made our infrastructure so dependent on everyone being able to drive a car everywhere. It's damned near impossible to keep even repeat DUI offenders off the roads -- you think people will agree to let you suspend their licenses until they can explain how car/bicycle/pedestrian interactions ought to go? Not bloody likely.
It is a crappy situation we've gotten ourselves into, and I wish we had better fixes for it, but until people actually start to care that we lose thirty thousand people a year to automobile collisions, the best we can expect is improvement in very small increments.
posted by asperity at 11:42 AM on August 4, 2015 [6 favorites]
I got my first driver's license twenty years ago. I've been licensed in five states over that time. After my first license (which I actually didn't even have to take a real driving test for because my driver's ed class waived us out of having to do that with the regular testers at the DMV -- we just had to pass the driving test as given by our instructor) I have never had a test that asked questions more complicated than "which of these signs is a stop sign?" where I got to choose a picture from several options.
I've definitely never had to take a real practical driving exam again, and given how driver licensing works in every state I'm familiar with, I don't expect I'll ever have to unless I move overseas. And maybe not even then.
What this means is that you can't expect that anyone on the road has the knowledge you'd expect that every road user should, and there isn't any way to pass that knowledge on that isn't completely haphazard. Public service announcements and billboards? Those cost money and you don't see all that many of them, and they don't really have quite enough room to convey info more complicated than "wear your seatbelt/helmet." Education by law enforcement via warnings or tickets? Extremely variable in usefulness, often ends up being applied in an ugly discriminatory way.
Giving any teeth at all to continuing driver education and retesting in any state in the US is very difficult politically, since we've made our infrastructure so dependent on everyone being able to drive a car everywhere. It's damned near impossible to keep even repeat DUI offenders off the roads -- you think people will agree to let you suspend their licenses until they can explain how car/bicycle/pedestrian interactions ought to go? Not bloody likely.
It is a crappy situation we've gotten ourselves into, and I wish we had better fixes for it, but until people actually start to care that we lose thirty thousand people a year to automobile collisions, the best we can expect is improvement in very small increments.
posted by asperity at 11:42 AM on August 4, 2015 [6 favorites]
I would fully support driver's license retesting every few years. I am sure I am rusty on some stuff and a refresher course is never a bad thing.
Yeah, the repeat DUI offender problem was something I read about a lot when living in Quebec. It is horrifying.
posted by Kitteh at 11:45 AM on August 4, 2015
Yeah, the repeat DUI offender problem was something I read about a lot when living in Quebec. It is horrifying.
posted by Kitteh at 11:45 AM on August 4, 2015
Dozens of riders showing up simultaneously on a single street in what the article admits was a "parade of cyclists" and stopping one by one in sequence in a situation designed to block other traffic is not at all the same thing as all cyclists complying with a rule to stop at stop signs. The main thing it demonstrates to me is stubborn, blinkered narcissism.
The Wiggle is a major cycle commuting connection in San Francisco; literally hundreds of cyclists use it every day because they are going between home and work and it is the only flat connection between several high quality east/west facilities on the western half of the city and several high quality facilities going down Market Street and SoMa into the central business district.
The last counts showed over 1200 riders (count 26, Page & Scott) on an average weekday PM rush hour between 4:30-6:30. So it's not cyclists showing up simultaneously to make a point any more than the shitload of people showing up simultaneously to ride BART across the bay or the shitload of cars showing up simultaneously to drive across the Bay Bridge are. In fact, there are essentially as many cyclists through here during rush hour as there are cars - 1216 cyclists, 1278 cars. (514 pedestrians.)
This has been mentioned before, and took me 30 seconds to google. So I'm a little baffled by the pervading assumption here that this was something that involved cyclists converging on an area they otherwise would not have visited; the only difference from a typical day was that they obeyed the law. But I suppose it's easier to make the knee-jerk assumption that there could not possibly be a large number of cyclists typically present on any road anywhere in America without it being some nefarious action. If only I had a pithy three word description of what that assumption demonstrates to me.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 11:47 AM on August 4, 2015 [10 favorites]
The Wiggle is a major cycle commuting connection in San Francisco; literally hundreds of cyclists use it every day because they are going between home and work and it is the only flat connection between several high quality east/west facilities on the western half of the city and several high quality facilities going down Market Street and SoMa into the central business district.
The last counts showed over 1200 riders (count 26, Page & Scott) on an average weekday PM rush hour between 4:30-6:30. So it's not cyclists showing up simultaneously to make a point any more than the shitload of people showing up simultaneously to ride BART across the bay or the shitload of cars showing up simultaneously to drive across the Bay Bridge are. In fact, there are essentially as many cyclists through here during rush hour as there are cars - 1216 cyclists, 1278 cars. (514 pedestrians.)
This has been mentioned before, and took me 30 seconds to google. So I'm a little baffled by the pervading assumption here that this was something that involved cyclists converging on an area they otherwise would not have visited; the only difference from a typical day was that they obeyed the law. But I suppose it's easier to make the knee-jerk assumption that there could not possibly be a large number of cyclists typically present on any road anywhere in America without it being some nefarious action. If only I had a pithy three word description of what that assumption demonstrates to me.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 11:47 AM on August 4, 2015 [10 favorites]
Please... Don't. Just don't. The figures are not even remotely comparable in any way.
Again, I'm not comparing. I'm noting that this is a problem in my city and it's on the rise.
Would it be helpful to you to re-read my comments without assuming I'm defending motorists or trying to vilify cyclists? Because I'm not doing either and you seem to be trying to pick a fight with me for no good reason.
posted by zarq at 11:49 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Again, I'm not comparing. I'm noting that this is a problem in my city and it's on the rise.
Would it be helpful to you to re-read my comments without assuming I'm defending motorists or trying to vilify cyclists? Because I'm not doing either and you seem to be trying to pick a fight with me for no good reason.
posted by zarq at 11:49 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
If motorists find it difficult to drive on a road with cyclists, they should either surrender their license or shut up.
Interestingly, cyclists require no license at all, not even a written test of basic traffic rules.
posted by JackFlash at 11:54 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Interestingly, cyclists require no license at all, not even a written test of basic traffic rules.
posted by JackFlash at 11:54 AM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Interestingly, cyclists require no license at all, not even a written test of basic traffic rules.
Right! Because they are not driving a two-ton hunk of lethal killing machine! Also, because 1) It creates yet another barrier to cycling in a system which has been historically built to exclude cyclists, and 2) It is completely unnecessary, due to the fact that cyclists can (and are) routinely pulled over and cited by the police for vehicle code violations already. You don’t need a license to get a ticket for running a stoplight. And you still have to pay the fine regardless of whether you’re on four wheels or two.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:57 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
Right! Because they are not driving a two-ton hunk of lethal killing machine! Also, because 1) It creates yet another barrier to cycling in a system which has been historically built to exclude cyclists, and 2) It is completely unnecessary, due to the fact that cyclists can (and are) routinely pulled over and cited by the police for vehicle code violations already. You don’t need a license to get a ticket for running a stoplight. And you still have to pay the fine regardless of whether you’re on four wheels or two.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:57 AM on August 4, 2015 [11 favorites]
I'd have no problem being tested for a bicycle license. Maybe that is what we need to do.
Then again, police to enforce the laws would also help....(and I've given up on that because in my own neighborhood, the police at my local precinct are actually kind of notorious for parking their cruisers directly in the bike lanes).
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:58 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Then again, police to enforce the laws would also help....(and I've given up on that because in my own neighborhood, the police at my local precinct are actually kind of notorious for parking their cruisers directly in the bike lanes).
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:58 AM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
I think that there could be some practical issues with issuing licenses for bicyclists. You'd never know it from these discussions, but bikes are often used by the absolute most vulnerable and disenfranchised people in society, and getting a license would be a hardship for some of them. Are you going to require licenses of kids? Are you going to charge people who ride a bike because they're too poor to afford bus fare? What do you do about people who can't pass the written test because they can't read? I get that a lot of anti-bike people don't care about those folks, but I'm not sure that I think "tough luck: they can just starve" is good social policy. And I remain unconvinced that the benefits would outweigh the drawbacks, although I would like to see much better bike safety education for everyone, maybe starting with kids in school.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:07 PM on August 4, 2015 [15 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:07 PM on August 4, 2015 [15 favorites]
Fair points all.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:08 PM on August 4, 2015
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:08 PM on August 4, 2015
2) It is completely unnecessary, due to the fact that cyclists can (and are) routinely pulled over and cited by the police for vehicle code violations already.
Um, there have been two anecdotal incidents given in this thread alone about cyclists who were unaware of traffic rules. And a handful of commenters in this thread (who appear to be both drivers or riders that) have offered solutions without knowing or understanding how traffic laws applied in specific municipalities.
I don't think cyclists should be required to get a license to ride on city streets. That seems a bit ludicrous. But the situation does not appear to be as cut-and-dried as you indicate.
posted by zarq at 12:10 PM on August 4, 2015
Um, there have been two anecdotal incidents given in this thread alone about cyclists who were unaware of traffic rules. And a handful of commenters in this thread (who appear to be both drivers or riders that) have offered solutions without knowing or understanding how traffic laws applied in specific municipalities.
I don't think cyclists should be required to get a license to ride on city streets. That seems a bit ludicrous. But the situation does not appear to be as cut-and-dried as you indicate.
posted by zarq at 12:10 PM on August 4, 2015
Um, there have been at least two anecdotal incidents given in this thread alone about motorists who were unaware of traffic rules, too.
posted by entropicamericana at 12:27 PM on August 4, 2015
posted by entropicamericana at 12:27 PM on August 4, 2015
ArbitraryAndCapricious: I would like to see much better bike safety education for everyone, maybe starting with kids in school.
Wut.
Y'all don't have that? That... explains a thing or two, maybe. Over here, it's a standard part of the curriculum.
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:32 PM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Wut.
Y'all don't have that? That... explains a thing or two, maybe. Over here, it's a standard part of the curriculum.
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:32 PM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Mod note: Couple of comments deleted. entropicamericana and zarq, you guys have made your points, maybe step back a bit. As I said above, let's move away from "drivers suck" vs "bicyclists suck" stuff - there are so many other things to discuss here that maybe we haven't gone over a million times.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:33 PM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:33 PM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
People are driving around in living rooms and believe that nothing should get in their way or inconvenience them.
Everyone is so quick to assume one group or the other is malicious or entitled. Being a passenger in other peoples' cars has kind of made me realize that a lot of the asshole moves people do is really just shitty driving. It seems weird to me to exclaim that cars can't stand to share the road for whatever cultural reasons, when the reality is that most of them probably just suck at driving and don't realize they're putting people in danger. They probably think they are sharing the road (why, there's two whole feet of space between their bumper and your rear wheel!). God knows I've seen people do that with other cars and get confused when I said "why are you tailgating that guy?"
Yeah, there are drivers who do actually hake bikes, and yeah there are cyclists who like to lean on cars just to piss people off, but both groups become strawmen in this conversation because the much bigger issue isn't animosity, it's just that things aren't designed to accommodate safe cycling. I'd like to know, on a practical level, what kinds of infrastructure changes we can make that will make people safer. Bike lanes are great, but not when they're "shared bike lanes," like in Los Angeles. Dedicated bike lanes get clogged with joggers and are awful to bike on. I'd love to see changes in the law for pedal-powered vehicles, but what, specifically, would make things safer?
I was annoyed by this demonstration because it made it look like the problem with stopping at a stop sign was just inconvenience, and I'm less concerned about that than I am about bike safety. I used to bike everywhere, and I stopped when I moved to California because I felt so unsafe. I want to know what changes we can expect our cities to make (or hope for, at least) so that I won't have as many friends getting hit by cars. This thread seems to just be rehashing "bikes vs. cars," and I'm far more interested in knowing peoples' ideas for practical changes in law and infrastructure that will help everyone be safer (especially in cities that were originally built around cars).
posted by teponaztli at 1:15 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
Everyone is so quick to assume one group or the other is malicious or entitled. Being a passenger in other peoples' cars has kind of made me realize that a lot of the asshole moves people do is really just shitty driving. It seems weird to me to exclaim that cars can't stand to share the road for whatever cultural reasons, when the reality is that most of them probably just suck at driving and don't realize they're putting people in danger. They probably think they are sharing the road (why, there's two whole feet of space between their bumper and your rear wheel!). God knows I've seen people do that with other cars and get confused when I said "why are you tailgating that guy?"
Yeah, there are drivers who do actually hake bikes, and yeah there are cyclists who like to lean on cars just to piss people off, but both groups become strawmen in this conversation because the much bigger issue isn't animosity, it's just that things aren't designed to accommodate safe cycling. I'd like to know, on a practical level, what kinds of infrastructure changes we can make that will make people safer. Bike lanes are great, but not when they're "shared bike lanes," like in Los Angeles. Dedicated bike lanes get clogged with joggers and are awful to bike on. I'd love to see changes in the law for pedal-powered vehicles, but what, specifically, would make things safer?
I was annoyed by this demonstration because it made it look like the problem with stopping at a stop sign was just inconvenience, and I'm less concerned about that than I am about bike safety. I used to bike everywhere, and I stopped when I moved to California because I felt so unsafe. I want to know what changes we can expect our cities to make (or hope for, at least) so that I won't have as many friends getting hit by cars. This thread seems to just be rehashing "bikes vs. cars," and I'm far more interested in knowing peoples' ideas for practical changes in law and infrastructure that will help everyone be safer (especially in cities that were originally built around cars).
posted by teponaztli at 1:15 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
What is going to happen when self-driving cars take off? Will laws have changed by then? Will cyclists and pedestrians and drivers of old fashioned cars take advantage of AI cars' strict adherence to laws and programming and never give them the right of way? Maybe self-driving cars can also act as self-driving red-light cameras?
posted by hellphish at 2:11 PM on August 4, 2015
posted by hellphish at 2:11 PM on August 4, 2015
"I once honked at a cyclist to indicate that I was overtaking him on a tight side road in Queens near the Jackie Robinson. The cyclist yelled, shook his first and then tried to confront me when we both pulled up to a light a quarter of a mile down the road. I explained myself: "Man, I'm really sorry if I startled you, but a brief beep before I overtake you is the law. I have my little kids in the car and wouldn't want to put you or them in danger if you didn't hear me coming."
He got it. Calmed down. We shook hands and that was it. But I also wonder if most people know the law."
When I was working in WeHo, I'd ride my bike three or four times a week, driving the other couple days, down pretty much the exact same route (officially labeled as part of the bike infrastructure, but mostly just with sharrows, not lanes). The trade-off was that if I rode my bike, I could blow through the traffic jams but that pretty much every single day, I would have some asshole in a car fuck with me for riding not just where I was entitled to, but where I was specifically directed to by signage. Almost universally, these were young guys in beemers or benzos, who would almost always get as close as they could, then honk behind me, then usually pass unsafely. Out of a couple hundred rides, I can remember only twice where someone honked to either let me know they were passing safely or to warn off another car from doing something stupid. But because so many assholes do it, those freaked me out too, even though they were well meaning (I caught up with both of them at lights, since, again, part of the reason to ride was to bypass traffic).
I think that's something where you doing what I'd generally consider the right thing (a little toot to let me know you're overtaking or something similar) is so poisoned by all the assholes that I think it turns into a no-win situation.
I also kind of wonder if that's part of the divide: Drivers don't see all the just egregious, gratuitous harassment that cyclists get from what I think is a tiny minority of motorists. Most of the people who drove near me while I was riding were totally fine — respected my space, signaled, didn't try to run me off the road or anything. But almost every single day, sometimes more than once, some prick would do something that could literally have killed me and often did so intentionally out of some macho anti-bike bullshit. When I'd catch up with them at lights, I was literally steeling myself for physical violence because someone thought it would be funny or faster to try to kill me. More than once, drivers pissed off at getting the finger after nearly clipping me (usually trying to use the bike lane to get around someone turning left on a two-lane street) waited for me on the side of the road. Usually I was able to get past them (one who got in front of me and kept trying to get me to rear end him by pumping his brakes, I scared off by screaming "I WILL EAT YOUR FACE!"), but the thought was always, "This is someone who has taken risky actions that could have killed or crippled me. What am I going to do if he escalates? Can I get past him? Should I get my lock into my hand?"
I drive all the time — contra the silly comment above about whether cyclists even car bro — and have even been a delivery driver. There's a significant amount of road rage out there that's car-to-car. But in those situations, generally we both have equal amounts of protection and power, and the frequency is far, far, far lower.
This also has a secondary effect on transit discourse: Because of the anti-bike harassment that a lot of riders get, it decreases the number of women, kids and older people who are willing to ride. It selects for people who are aggressive enough to hold their own, and that means that those folks are the ones more likely to be seen as representative of bike culture. The arrogant cycling dicks? That's because a lot of other people who are less willing to get into almost daily, possibly deadly confrontations just don't do things like commute on bikes. People who tend to be more inclined to follow the rules and laws of traffic — designed for cars — tend to either be literally driven off or hurt. Drivers don't see that harassment, or see it rarely. Bikers see it all the time.
posted by klangklangston at 3:04 PM on August 4, 2015 [22 favorites]
He got it. Calmed down. We shook hands and that was it. But I also wonder if most people know the law."
When I was working in WeHo, I'd ride my bike three or four times a week, driving the other couple days, down pretty much the exact same route (officially labeled as part of the bike infrastructure, but mostly just with sharrows, not lanes). The trade-off was that if I rode my bike, I could blow through the traffic jams but that pretty much every single day, I would have some asshole in a car fuck with me for riding not just where I was entitled to, but where I was specifically directed to by signage. Almost universally, these were young guys in beemers or benzos, who would almost always get as close as they could, then honk behind me, then usually pass unsafely. Out of a couple hundred rides, I can remember only twice where someone honked to either let me know they were passing safely or to warn off another car from doing something stupid. But because so many assholes do it, those freaked me out too, even though they were well meaning (I caught up with both of them at lights, since, again, part of the reason to ride was to bypass traffic).
I think that's something where you doing what I'd generally consider the right thing (a little toot to let me know you're overtaking or something similar) is so poisoned by all the assholes that I think it turns into a no-win situation.
I also kind of wonder if that's part of the divide: Drivers don't see all the just egregious, gratuitous harassment that cyclists get from what I think is a tiny minority of motorists. Most of the people who drove near me while I was riding were totally fine — respected my space, signaled, didn't try to run me off the road or anything. But almost every single day, sometimes more than once, some prick would do something that could literally have killed me and often did so intentionally out of some macho anti-bike bullshit. When I'd catch up with them at lights, I was literally steeling myself for physical violence because someone thought it would be funny or faster to try to kill me. More than once, drivers pissed off at getting the finger after nearly clipping me (usually trying to use the bike lane to get around someone turning left on a two-lane street) waited for me on the side of the road. Usually I was able to get past them (one who got in front of me and kept trying to get me to rear end him by pumping his brakes, I scared off by screaming "I WILL EAT YOUR FACE!"), but the thought was always, "This is someone who has taken risky actions that could have killed or crippled me. What am I going to do if he escalates? Can I get past him? Should I get my lock into my hand?"
I drive all the time — contra the silly comment above about whether cyclists even car bro — and have even been a delivery driver. There's a significant amount of road rage out there that's car-to-car. But in those situations, generally we both have equal amounts of protection and power, and the frequency is far, far, far lower.
This also has a secondary effect on transit discourse: Because of the anti-bike harassment that a lot of riders get, it decreases the number of women, kids and older people who are willing to ride. It selects for people who are aggressive enough to hold their own, and that means that those folks are the ones more likely to be seen as representative of bike culture. The arrogant cycling dicks? That's because a lot of other people who are less willing to get into almost daily, possibly deadly confrontations just don't do things like commute on bikes. People who tend to be more inclined to follow the rules and laws of traffic — designed for cars — tend to either be literally driven off or hurt. Drivers don't see that harassment, or see it rarely. Bikers see it all the time.
posted by klangklangston at 3:04 PM on August 4, 2015 [22 favorites]
Out of a couple hundred rides, I can remember only twice where someone honked to either let me know they were passing safely or to warn off another car from doing something stupid. But because so many assholes do it, those freaked me out too, even though they were well meaning (I caught up with both of them at lights, since, again, part of the reason to ride was to bypass traffic).
I think that's something where you doing what I'd generally consider the right thing (a little toot to let me know you're overtaking or something similar) is so poisoned by all the assholes that I think it turns into a no-win situation.
That's really helpful to know, and not something that would have occurred to me. Thank you!
posted by zarq at 3:14 PM on August 4, 2015
I think that's something where you doing what I'd generally consider the right thing (a little toot to let me know you're overtaking or something similar) is so poisoned by all the assholes that I think it turns into a no-win situation.
That's really helpful to know, and not something that would have occurred to me. Thank you!
posted by zarq at 3:14 PM on August 4, 2015
I think that's something where you doing what I'd generally consider the right thing (a little toot to let me know you're overtaking or something similar) is so poisoned by all the assholes that I think it turns into a no-win situation.
Yeah honking is a tough one. There's sort of a general rule of thumb that if someone holds his horn down, he's pissed at you or about to crash into you. But if he beeps at you 1 time or a few times, he's saying hi or letting you know he's there.
Unfortunately when you start hearing a horn you don't know which it is. If it's the "I'm about to mow you over" beep then you better freak out and get out of the way. So every horn causes at least a millisecond of freak out. Also I experience either kind of beeping only very rarely so I never quite get used to it.
We just got a 3-foot-safety law here too (with 6 feet for commercial vehicles). Mooooost cars stay 3 feet away. I've never seen a commercial vehicle give me 6 feet though. I had a case where a bus buzzed me at most 1 foot away. I called the number on the back of the bus, told them what happened and which bus it was. The response I got was "it is the policy of cap metro to give cyclists the 6 feet of space required by law". Well. OK.
posted by RustyBrooks at 3:21 PM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Yeah honking is a tough one. There's sort of a general rule of thumb that if someone holds his horn down, he's pissed at you or about to crash into you. But if he beeps at you 1 time or a few times, he's saying hi or letting you know he's there.
Unfortunately when you start hearing a horn you don't know which it is. If it's the "I'm about to mow you over" beep then you better freak out and get out of the way. So every horn causes at least a millisecond of freak out. Also I experience either kind of beeping only very rarely so I never quite get used to it.
We just got a 3-foot-safety law here too (with 6 feet for commercial vehicles). Mooooost cars stay 3 feet away. I've never seen a commercial vehicle give me 6 feet though. I had a case where a bus buzzed me at most 1 foot away. I called the number on the back of the bus, told them what happened and which bus it was. The response I got was "it is the policy of cap metro to give cyclists the 6 feet of space required by law". Well. OK.
posted by RustyBrooks at 3:21 PM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
better bike safety education for everyone, maybe starting with kids in school.
...
Y'all don't have that?
It's getting a little better (thank you, Safe Routes to School!) but is still very limited, not part of standard curriculums, and the funding for these programs is extremely vulnerable. Kids might get a bike safety rodeo event once a year if they're lucky, and it's hard to remember something you only practice a week a year.
And it doesn't really help all the people on the roads and sidewalks who are already out there unsupervised with no clue what best practices are. Plus a lot of what education is out there doesn't address how to deal with our inadequate infrastructure as it actually is. The things that fit on billboards or bus advertisements: "wear a helmet" and "obey the law" are not enough guidance -- we've seen in this thread how the laws as written just don't provide enough information for safety or aren't clear enough, and they vary state to state anyway.
I have a hard time just getting the information that sidewalk bicycling is dangerous to bicyclists out there. A hell of a lot more people on bicycles are injured or killed doing that than there are pedestrians injured in collisions with people riding bicycles. Not to say that doesn't happen, but it's dangerously inaccurate to say that it's OK to ride on most sidewalks as long as there aren't any pedestrians. You'd also need to have no driveways or intersections to make it a sensible thing to do (and even then the pavement's got to be smooth enough for speed, and plenty of sidewalks fail hard on that point.) Or you could ride slowly enough that you could stop at each driveway, but nobody above the age of eight's gonna comply with that one.
posted by asperity at 3:25 PM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
...
Y'all don't have that?
It's getting a little better (thank you, Safe Routes to School!) but is still very limited, not part of standard curriculums, and the funding for these programs is extremely vulnerable. Kids might get a bike safety rodeo event once a year if they're lucky, and it's hard to remember something you only practice a week a year.
And it doesn't really help all the people on the roads and sidewalks who are already out there unsupervised with no clue what best practices are. Plus a lot of what education is out there doesn't address how to deal with our inadequate infrastructure as it actually is. The things that fit on billboards or bus advertisements: "wear a helmet" and "obey the law" are not enough guidance -- we've seen in this thread how the laws as written just don't provide enough information for safety or aren't clear enough, and they vary state to state anyway.
I have a hard time just getting the information that sidewalk bicycling is dangerous to bicyclists out there. A hell of a lot more people on bicycles are injured or killed doing that than there are pedestrians injured in collisions with people riding bicycles. Not to say that doesn't happen, but it's dangerously inaccurate to say that it's OK to ride on most sidewalks as long as there aren't any pedestrians. You'd also need to have no driveways or intersections to make it a sensible thing to do (and even then the pavement's got to be smooth enough for speed, and plenty of sidewalks fail hard on that point.) Or you could ride slowly enough that you could stop at each driveway, but nobody above the age of eight's gonna comply with that one.
posted by asperity at 3:25 PM on August 4, 2015 [3 favorites]
Approximately one hour ago, thanks to this very thread, I decided to engage politely with a driver parked in a bike lane rather than my usual selection of mutter curses under my breath, shake my head, &/or flip off the driver.
This particular bike lane is a "protected" lane, where the bike lane is right up against the curb and cars park to the left of that, protecting cyclists from the moving traffic on the other side of the parked cars. However, this particular car was parked in the lane right at the beginning of the protected lane, at an intersection that had recently been re-paved so the lane markings were not clear.
Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he may not have recognized this fairly recent kind of bike infrastructure, I (a tiny 38 year old lady) just stopped beside the open driver window and kindly, sweetly said, "Hey, not sure if you know but this is a bike lane--" and before I could even get the full sentence out, the driver snarled (this is a direct quote) "You best keep riding before I knock you the fuck out."
So much for that.
I know someone on Twitter who says he engages with motorists in as polite a manner as possible whenever he encounters them doing things harmful to cyclists. Mostly bike lane parking, because they're stopped and easiest to have a full conversation with. He claims he often gets good results, but man every time I have tried to talk to a driver about his/her behavior the result has been instant rage, defensiveness, and/or "yeah well bikes never stop at stop signs!!!1!!"
It makes it really hard to give the benefit of the doubt, to calm one's own rage after nearly being killed by inattentiveness (hello can I even tell you how many times I've caught up to a weirdly behaving car and looked in to see the driver looking down at a phone?) or malice on the regular. I really try to practice a state of calm when I'm riding, because getting angry never helps and just gets my own blood pressure up, and ruins one of the benefits of commuting by bike--that riding a bike is really fun! But man, it's so easy to get into the mindset that it's us against them, because frankly it usually feels that way.
(Oh, and yeah I own a car and drive too. Personally I think cycling has made me a much better driver, and driving makes me a slightly better cyclist.)
posted by misskaz at 3:26 PM on August 4, 2015 [18 favorites]
This particular bike lane is a "protected" lane, where the bike lane is right up against the curb and cars park to the left of that, protecting cyclists from the moving traffic on the other side of the parked cars. However, this particular car was parked in the lane right at the beginning of the protected lane, at an intersection that had recently been re-paved so the lane markings were not clear.
Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he may not have recognized this fairly recent kind of bike infrastructure, I (a tiny 38 year old lady) just stopped beside the open driver window and kindly, sweetly said, "Hey, not sure if you know but this is a bike lane--" and before I could even get the full sentence out, the driver snarled (this is a direct quote) "You best keep riding before I knock you the fuck out."
So much for that.
I know someone on Twitter who says he engages with motorists in as polite a manner as possible whenever he encounters them doing things harmful to cyclists. Mostly bike lane parking, because they're stopped and easiest to have a full conversation with. He claims he often gets good results, but man every time I have tried to talk to a driver about his/her behavior the result has been instant rage, defensiveness, and/or "yeah well bikes never stop at stop signs!!!1!!"
It makes it really hard to give the benefit of the doubt, to calm one's own rage after nearly being killed by inattentiveness (hello can I even tell you how many times I've caught up to a weirdly behaving car and looked in to see the driver looking down at a phone?) or malice on the regular. I really try to practice a state of calm when I'm riding, because getting angry never helps and just gets my own blood pressure up, and ruins one of the benefits of commuting by bike--that riding a bike is really fun! But man, it's so easy to get into the mindset that it's us against them, because frankly it usually feels that way.
(Oh, and yeah I own a car and drive too. Personally I think cycling has made me a much better driver, and driving makes me a slightly better cyclist.)
posted by misskaz at 3:26 PM on August 4, 2015 [18 favorites]
Just don't honk at velociraptors. We can hear you quite well without the need to honk, and because of experiences like those detailed above, we are likely to interpret it as aggression/rudeness.
Just pass us safely and be on your way.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 3:58 PM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Just pass us safely and be on your way.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 3:58 PM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
I Am A Cyclist, And I Am Here To Fuck You Up
posted by cobain_angel at 4:02 PM on August 4, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by cobain_angel at 4:02 PM on August 4, 2015 [6 favorites]
Plus a lot of what education is out there doesn't address how to deal with our inadequate infrastructure as it actually is. The things that fit on billboards or bus advertisements: "wear a helmet" and "obey the law" are not enough guidance -- we've seen in this thread how the laws as written just don't provide enough information for safety or aren't clear enough, and they vary state to state anyway.
And sometimes there are useful sources of information that disappear or mutate. For example, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation's web site used to have a great section on cycling that was clearly organized, comprehensively illustrated, and very easy to navigate. I went to look for it last night while writing my last mega-comment and found this sad little page instead. If you're looking for guidance on where to ride on a standard road, here's all that is clearly visible:
After a bit of hyper-ventilating, I found that the old section was now reborn as a PDF and available through a brief link at the top of the body copy (PDF). There's nothing about the colour or layout that draws your eye to this section of text with the link, and someone just browsing would think that awkwardly written sentence I quoted was the complete set of directives from the province.
In contrast, here's how the PDF version interprets the relevant bit of the Highway Traffic Act about positioning, which most drivers interpret as "ride as far to the right as possible under all conditions":
posted by maudlin at 4:07 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
And sometimes there are useful sources of information that disappear or mutate. For example, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation's web site used to have a great section on cycling that was clearly organized, comprehensively illustrated, and very easy to navigate. I went to look for it last night while writing my last mega-comment and found this sad little page instead. If you're looking for guidance on where to ride on a standard road, here's all that is clearly visible:
Riding on the right: You must stay as close to the right edge of the road whenever possible [sic], especially if you're slower than other traffic.Sounds like the province wants to shunt cyclists to the gutter, right? What happened to their old section all about positioning yourself on the road safely and legally by staying a meter from the curb or cars under most circumstances or just taking the lane when warranted?
After a bit of hyper-ventilating, I found that the old section was now reborn as a PDF and available through a brief link at the top of the body copy (PDF). There's nothing about the colour or layout that draws your eye to this section of text with the link, and someone just browsing would think that awkwardly written sentence I quoted was the complete set of directives from the province.
In contrast, here's how the PDF version interprets the relevant bit of the Highway Traffic Act about positioning, which most drivers interpret as "ride as far to the right as possible under all conditions":
HTA 147 - Slow moving traffic travel on right side - any vehicle moving slower than the normal traffic speed should drive in the right-hand lane, or as close as practicable to the right edge of the road except when preparing to turn left or when passing another vehicle. For cyclists, you must ride far enough out from the curb to maintain a straight line, clear of sewer grates, debris, potholes, and parked car doors. You may occupy any part of a lane when your safety warrants it. Never compromise your safety for the convenience of a motorist behind you. (p. 34)They emphasize this in a couple of other sections in the PDF:
... cyclists should ride one meter from the curb or close to the right hand edge of the road when there is no curb, unless they are turning left, going faster than other vehicles or if the lane is too narrow to share. ... In urban areas where a curb lane is too narrow to share safely with a motorist, it is legal to take the whole lane by riding in the centre of it. ... At intersections, it is usually better to take the lane before the intersection so that right-turning motorists stay behind you. (pp. 16-19)But this sensible interpretation and advice is only visible if you find the link and read the full PDF. The ungrammatical excerpt from the main page that I quoted (sorta) says "as far right as possible" which is just wrong. I may have to write a sternly worded email about this.
posted by maudlin at 4:07 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
Man, I take back what I said about malice - I had no idea bikers were getting so much shit. I biked all over DC and Chicago and never got the kind of treatment people are describing here. Every so often there would be someone trying to fuck with me, but I've gotten that in the car, too. But on a bike it was never regular.
Part of it might be that I worked retail and my shifts started at odd hours of the day, and part of it might be where I was (I did stop biking in LA because of how aggressive drivers there are). Anyway, while I still think a lot of asshole moves are just people being bad drivers, you all have convinced me that there's a bigger problem of aggression I didn't know about. That probably is people who just don't want to share the road or inconvenience themselves, and I don't know what to do about that.
posted by teponaztli at 4:44 PM on August 4, 2015
Part of it might be that I worked retail and my shifts started at odd hours of the day, and part of it might be where I was (I did stop biking in LA because of how aggressive drivers there are). Anyway, while I still think a lot of asshole moves are just people being bad drivers, you all have convinced me that there's a bigger problem of aggression I didn't know about. That probably is people who just don't want to share the road or inconvenience themselves, and I don't know what to do about that.
posted by teponaztli at 4:44 PM on August 4, 2015
"I Am A Cyclist, And I Am Here To Fuck You Up"
Hmm. Something between ThinkCatalog, AdblockPlus and Privacy Badger is preventing that page from scrolling properly. I think it's some buggy javascript (the console threw up 11 errors for me) but I don't know enough to fix it, so I guess fuck ThinkCatalog even though it was something I was likely interested in reading.
"Part of it might be that I worked retail and my shifts started at odd hours of the day, and part of it might be where I was (I did stop biking in LA because of how aggressive drivers there are)."
Yeah, I'm in LA. The only other place where I have real commuter riding experience is Ann Arbor, and I never had any real problems there.
I don't want LA to require cyclists to be aggro to ride, and I actually think people are much better drivers here than they get credit for being, but fuck, there's a sizable minority that just does not want bikes on the road at all and is totally willing to be blithe with shit that might kill me. I remember a small group ride (maybe 10 people) where we were heading down Fig past midnight and some assholes in an SUV followed us for blocks while honking and telling us to get onto the sidewalk DESPITE HAVING THREE ENTIRELY OPEN LANES TO PASS US. That he was with a girl who thought it was the funniest thing EVER was part of it, but come the fuck on man, just fucking pass us. Don't play like you're our Tour support vehicle and drive 10 feet behind us yelling at us about our "safety." Other drivers don't necessarily see shit like that, but every bike commuter has at least one story about it.
(And even drivers who pull shit don't understand it — a friend and I got run off the road by an AT&T truck trying to pass us on the turn and then two days later the same truck and driver showed up doing some line work a couple doors down from me. I'd written down the truck number and when I called AT&T they gave me a statement similar to the Metro one above: Their policy is to give safe clearance etc. Because I recognized the guy's mustache and I was willing to be confrontational about it, I knew it was the same driver. He denied it, gave a stream of bullshit, and only confessed because I got him on video shoving me while I was getting a shot of the numbers on his cab. Then he starts telling me about how he rides with his granddaughter every weekend in Long Beach and cares about bike safety! It's like, dude, don't you realize that if your granddaughter is out there, you'd want people to be careful around her because she could get killed? He got all tearful and it was weird, but still, like, goddamn. Until I had video proof of him doing something undeniably wrong, he knew there were no consequences and he didn't care about how he impacted other people.)
posted by klangklangston at 5:10 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
Hmm. Something between ThinkCatalog, AdblockPlus and Privacy Badger is preventing that page from scrolling properly. I think it's some buggy javascript (the console threw up 11 errors for me) but I don't know enough to fix it, so I guess fuck ThinkCatalog even though it was something I was likely interested in reading.
"Part of it might be that I worked retail and my shifts started at odd hours of the day, and part of it might be where I was (I did stop biking in LA because of how aggressive drivers there are)."
Yeah, I'm in LA. The only other place where I have real commuter riding experience is Ann Arbor, and I never had any real problems there.
I don't want LA to require cyclists to be aggro to ride, and I actually think people are much better drivers here than they get credit for being, but fuck, there's a sizable minority that just does not want bikes on the road at all and is totally willing to be blithe with shit that might kill me. I remember a small group ride (maybe 10 people) where we were heading down Fig past midnight and some assholes in an SUV followed us for blocks while honking and telling us to get onto the sidewalk DESPITE HAVING THREE ENTIRELY OPEN LANES TO PASS US. That he was with a girl who thought it was the funniest thing EVER was part of it, but come the fuck on man, just fucking pass us. Don't play like you're our Tour support vehicle and drive 10 feet behind us yelling at us about our "safety." Other drivers don't necessarily see shit like that, but every bike commuter has at least one story about it.
(And even drivers who pull shit don't understand it — a friend and I got run off the road by an AT&T truck trying to pass us on the turn and then two days later the same truck and driver showed up doing some line work a couple doors down from me. I'd written down the truck number and when I called AT&T they gave me a statement similar to the Metro one above: Their policy is to give safe clearance etc. Because I recognized the guy's mustache and I was willing to be confrontational about it, I knew it was the same driver. He denied it, gave a stream of bullshit, and only confessed because I got him on video shoving me while I was getting a shot of the numbers on his cab. Then he starts telling me about how he rides with his granddaughter every weekend in Long Beach and cares about bike safety! It's like, dude, don't you realize that if your granddaughter is out there, you'd want people to be careful around her because she could get killed? He got all tearful and it was weird, but still, like, goddamn. Until I had video proof of him doing something undeniably wrong, he knew there were no consequences and he didn't care about how he impacted other people.)
posted by klangklangston at 5:10 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
Oh yeah, I biked around Ann Arbor too, but I can't imagine there being any problems there.
But yeah, your experience with the truck driver seems to underline some kind of weird disconnect where people don't actually get what they're doing. One of the few bad encounters I had on a bike was when a jeep ran a stop sign and gunned the motor towards me while the people inside were laughing. "Oh, lulz, that guy thought we were going to kill him." They obviously didn't get why that was wrong, or they wouldn't have done it. I mean, maybe they were sociopaths, I don't know, but that AT&T driver doesn't really sound like one. I don't know what could make that kind of behavior OK in their minds unless they don't think of it in terms of "I'm risking someone's life right now."
posted by teponaztli at 5:36 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
But yeah, your experience with the truck driver seems to underline some kind of weird disconnect where people don't actually get what they're doing. One of the few bad encounters I had on a bike was when a jeep ran a stop sign and gunned the motor towards me while the people inside were laughing. "Oh, lulz, that guy thought we were going to kill him." They obviously didn't get why that was wrong, or they wouldn't have done it. I mean, maybe they were sociopaths, I don't know, but that AT&T driver doesn't really sound like one. I don't know what could make that kind of behavior OK in their minds unless they don't think of it in terms of "I'm risking someone's life right now."
posted by teponaztli at 5:36 PM on August 4, 2015 [5 favorites]
That probably is people who just don't want to share the road or inconvenience themselves, and I don't know what to do about that.
and
Until I had video proof of him doing something undeniably wrong, he knew there were no consequences and he didn't care about how he impacted other people.
I'm beginning to think video may be the way to go here. Doesn't directly help anyone without cameras, but perhaps if we get enough cameras on the roads that there's a decent likelihood of having to answer for your actions, things will change.
Or maybe they won't, but we'll still get some laughs.
posted by asperity at 5:39 PM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
and
Until I had video proof of him doing something undeniably wrong, he knew there were no consequences and he didn't care about how he impacted other people.
I'm beginning to think video may be the way to go here. Doesn't directly help anyone without cameras, but perhaps if we get enough cameras on the roads that there's a decent likelihood of having to answer for your actions, things will change.
Or maybe they won't, but we'll still get some laughs.
posted by asperity at 5:39 PM on August 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
While bicycles vs. cars continues unabated, elsewhere in the world these contraptions and these (more than a few motorized to varying degrees) and these and these and a bunch of damn hipsters who barely know how to balance on these are in my bike lines every day all day. So, I ride in traffic. It's impossible otherwise on most streets.
Please, transit authorities, rationalize my traffic. Try it. I dare you.
...
No? Just gonna stick to watching traffic tapes and sending automated tickets to drivers? Guess I can't blame you. You have an address attached to them, but if you try to ticket a cyclist or pedestrian you're pretty much gonna cause a traffic snarl when a hundred people gather round to see who's in trouble.
Can you at least fine the guy with the rickshaw robot who rides around the block every night?
THE ABOVE IS ALL TRUE.
posted by saysthis at 6:07 PM on August 4, 2015
Please, transit authorities, rationalize my traffic. Try it. I dare you.
...
No? Just gonna stick to watching traffic tapes and sending automated tickets to drivers? Guess I can't blame you. You have an address attached to them, but if you try to ticket a cyclist or pedestrian you're pretty much gonna cause a traffic snarl when a hundred people gather round to see who's in trouble.
Can you at least fine the guy with the rickshaw robot who rides around the block every night?
THE ABOVE IS ALL TRUE.
posted by saysthis at 6:07 PM on August 4, 2015
But then on the plus side, I don't see a lot of outright aggression in my neighborhood in Beijing, and I know I don't have many moments of it in traffic, usually because I've got 5 things coming at me at all times. Maybe the answer is increasing vehicle mix and cranking distraction to 11?
posted by saysthis at 6:21 PM on August 4, 2015
posted by saysthis at 6:21 PM on August 4, 2015
Well, I've mentioned noticing that LA drivers were much more aggressive, and that can't be unrelated to how few cyclists I saw there compared to other places I've lived.
posted by teponaztli at 6:26 PM on August 4, 2015
posted by teponaztli at 6:26 PM on August 4, 2015
The "not true" is actually not true.
Since my "this is not true" was a response to the assertion that every driver who crosses the center line is violating the law, most of the rest of your own comment demonstrates that mine was correct.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 7:05 PM on August 4, 2015
Since my "this is not true" was a response to the assertion that every driver who crosses the center line is violating the law, most of the rest of your own comment demonstrates that mine was correct.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 7:05 PM on August 4, 2015
LA drivers: I think we're essentially all under the influence of some degree of chronic stress from the mind-boggling traffic of rush hour and the surprise-bananapants traffic at off times, plus the aggressive behavior of everyone else under chronic stress. And I think the effect might be cumulative. Possibly magnified if you drive a luxury brand.
It's been a long time since I was on a bike in LA, but having been clipped by a bus at the time and having recently seen a another cyclist go through the same thing with a truck... I'd hesitate to do it again.
posted by weston at 7:09 PM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
It's been a long time since I was on a bike in LA, but having been clipped by a bus at the time and having recently seen a another cyclist go through the same thing with a truck... I'd hesitate to do it again.
posted by weston at 7:09 PM on August 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
Also LA streets seem really, really poorly designed from the pedestrian point of view to me, and I assume some of the issues like a surprising dearth of left turn signals and poor lighting make it rough for cyclists as well. I don't see that many cyclists when driving except on the PCH, which has its own set of infrastructure pitfalls, but having spent one summer biking in LA: never again. My commute is just not bike friendly, and I don't even know how much of it could be improved.
posted by jetlagaddict at 10:20 PM on August 4, 2015
posted by jetlagaddict at 10:20 PM on August 4, 2015
I biked around Ann Arbor too, but I can't imagine there being any problems there
HAH!! I spent almost ten years bike commuting in Ann Arbor. I can recount many many incidents of dangerous and inconsiderate behaviour by drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists. Failure to yield (all). Failure to even look (all). Acting as though they personally have the right-of-way at all times regardless of circumstances (all). Assuming everyone else is a scofflaw (all). The incident I mentioned above where I was rear-ended on my bike by a car at a stop sign was on Plymouth and Broadway in Ann Arbor.
I had no idea bikers were getting so much shit.
[Ctrl+F] nunchuks.
Nothing.
So far, it looks like I'm the only one here who's had someone lean out the side window of a Camaro and swing a set of nunchuks at 'em*.
He missed.
-------------------------------
*No this did not occur in Ann Arbor. But it wouldn't have surprised me.
posted by Herodios at 6:41 AM on August 5, 2015 [5 favorites]
HAH!! I spent almost ten years bike commuting in Ann Arbor. I can recount many many incidents of dangerous and inconsiderate behaviour by drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists. Failure to yield (all). Failure to even look (all). Acting as though they personally have the right-of-way at all times regardless of circumstances (all). Assuming everyone else is a scofflaw (all). The incident I mentioned above where I was rear-ended on my bike by a car at a stop sign was on Plymouth and Broadway in Ann Arbor.
I had no idea bikers were getting so much shit.
[Ctrl+F] nunchuks.
Nothing.
So far, it looks like I'm the only one here who's had someone lean out the side window of a Camaro and swing a set of nunchuks at 'em*.
He missed.
-------------------------------
*No this did not occur in Ann Arbor. But it wouldn't have surprised me.
posted by Herodios at 6:41 AM on August 5, 2015 [5 favorites]
To put it in terms a MeFite might better understand: Most motorists are blind to the extreme privilege that they operate under. Yes, traffic is difficult for everyone, but motorists are playing a video game under the "easy" setting while pedestrians and cyclists are playing under "hard." Pedestrians and cyclists are constantly under a barrage of bigotry, ranging from from hate-filled rants to microaggressions.
Example: I commuted by bicycle today, a simple four mile commute. Today's microaggressions included a DoT road construction sign and cone in the middle of the bike lane, bike lanes abruptly disappearing, and bike lanes filled with debris. Today's casual bigotry included a poorly-designed signalled intersection where I had a protected turn signal to turn west from a northbound traffic (not cycle) lane. The southbound right-turn lane had only a yield. An approaching motorist, so intent on not having to *gasp* slow down for a damned second, was looking so hard to the east for oncoming traffic that she didn't even see me making my lawful (and "protected" by signal) turn. I nearly got hit at probably 30-40 miles an hour. Today, I haven't had any hate-filled rants (yet), but one of the last times I rode home, I had a guy who jammed on his breaks in the middle of a street, turned around, followed me, and wanted to fight me. So, hooray.
posted by entropicamericana at 8:02 AM on August 5, 2015 [8 favorites]
Example: I commuted by bicycle today, a simple four mile commute. Today's microaggressions included a DoT road construction sign and cone in the middle of the bike lane, bike lanes abruptly disappearing, and bike lanes filled with debris. Today's casual bigotry included a poorly-designed signalled intersection where I had a protected turn signal to turn west from a northbound traffic (not cycle) lane. The southbound right-turn lane had only a yield. An approaching motorist, so intent on not having to *gasp* slow down for a damned second, was looking so hard to the east for oncoming traffic that she didn't even see me making my lawful (and "protected" by signal) turn. I nearly got hit at probably 30-40 miles an hour. Today, I haven't had any hate-filled rants (yet), but one of the last times I rode home, I had a guy who jammed on his breaks in the middle of a street, turned around, followed me, and wanted to fight me. So, hooray.
posted by entropicamericana at 8:02 AM on August 5, 2015 [8 favorites]
Today, I haven't had any hate-filled rants (yet), but one of the last times I rode home, I had a guy who jammed on his breaks in the middle of a street, turned around, followed me, and wanted to fight me.
What is the single factor that all of your encounters have in common?
posted by Herodios at 8:07 AM on August 5, 2015
What is the single factor that all of your encounters have in common?
posted by Herodios at 8:07 AM on August 5, 2015
Motorists? I was asking for it, right?
posted by entropicamericana at 8:09 AM on August 5, 2015 [8 favorites]
posted by entropicamericana at 8:09 AM on August 5, 2015 [8 favorites]
So far, it looks like I'm the only one here who's had someone lean out the side window of a Camaro and swing a set of nunchuks at 'em*.
I've had a lot of stuff thrown at me, but so far no one tried to hit me with something from the car itself.
posted by RustyBrooks at 8:14 AM on August 5, 2015
I've had a lot of stuff thrown at me, but so far no one tried to hit me with something from the car itself.
posted by RustyBrooks at 8:14 AM on August 5, 2015
What is the single factor that all of your encounters have in common?Could you be more specific about what you're trying to ask or imply here?
posted by introp at 8:18 AM on August 5, 2015 [3 favorites]
Given that he's the guy above who told the nunchuck story I kinda doubt he's implying it's the velociraptor's fault.
posted by RustyBrooks at 8:22 AM on August 5, 2015
posted by RustyBrooks at 8:22 AM on August 5, 2015
My morning commute was pretty pleasant today. I am gonna have to figure out how I can better handle passing the wobblier cyclists going up the new bike/ped bridge, though. My bell and "passing on your left?" from a fair distance just got a guy to stop where he was rather than wobble more to the right. Definitely not what I'd intended, since I know it must have been harder for him to restart uphill from a stop. And he apologized to me! Which was also not what I'd intended.
Good manners are hard sometimes.
posted by asperity at 8:24 AM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
Good manners are hard sometimes.
posted by asperity at 8:24 AM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
I hear you, asperity! The vast majority of my "passing on your LEFT" announcer calls are just to notify people so that I don't surprise them, not that I need them to move; nonetheless, about a quarter of folks scoot way off to the right and apologize. Since I call from way far back and I'm not blasting past them, I've taken to adding "you're okay, I just didn't want to surprise you" to my normal "thank you!"
Good manners are hard sometimes. I'm glad so many people are up to the challenge.
posted by introp at 8:59 AM on August 5, 2015 [1 favorite]
Good manners are hard sometimes. I'm glad so many people are up to the challenge.
posted by introp at 8:59 AM on August 5, 2015 [1 favorite]
I've had a lot of stuff thrown at me, but so far no one tried to hit me with something from the car itself.
Strangely, over the decades I've had things thrown at me while a pedestrian (a bottle once, which missed, and an egg once, which got me in the thigh and REALLY hurt, leaving a nasty welt), but never while riding a bike. Lucky (in terms of the latter), I guess.
posted by aught at 9:00 AM on August 5, 2015
Strangely, over the decades I've had things thrown at me while a pedestrian (a bottle once, which missed, and an egg once, which got me in the thigh and REALLY hurt, leaving a nasty welt), but never while riding a bike. Lucky (in terms of the latter), I guess.
posted by aught at 9:00 AM on August 5, 2015
One time, about 20 years ago, I was shot in the leg while riding my bike in an allegedly bicycle-friendly college town. (With a paintball gun at fairly close range.) That town was also the one place (so far) I've been struck by a car.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:10 AM on August 5, 2015
posted by entropicamericana at 9:10 AM on August 5, 2015
The "on your left!" thing was common in Seattle when I lived there. It was always enough of a remove from what I actually needed to do that I, too, stopped and thought about what was going on.
When the ride marshals for the LCC guided rides are coming up behind, they ask "Could you step right, please?" or "could you bear left, please?" That way the person doesn't need to stop and translate the warning into action in their head.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 12:51 PM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
When the ride marshals for the LCC guided rides are coming up behind, they ask "Could you step right, please?" or "could you bear left, please?" That way the person doesn't need to stop and translate the warning into action in their head.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 12:51 PM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
Whew, made it through my first cars vs. bikes mefi thread! The serious cars vs. bikes: FIGHT! part seems to have ended, but it seems worth mentioning that most of my interactions as a cyclist, with cars, have been fairly positive. I think the CA South Bay cars are used to driving with bikes around, my commute is fairly short, and half of it can happen on a shared-use bike/ped path, so those might all be mitigating factors.
I think cars are more polite when I make a point of respecting traffic laws. There's a 4-way stop where I usually have to wave cars on myself if they were there before me, since most of them are wary that I might not stop, but I always do. I wish everyone would turn on their blinkers whenever they're planning to turn, since if they really are going straight it's quicker for everyone, but I just assume they're turning left because everyone always turns left there. I guess my assuming a left is similar to their assuming a no-stop from me, so it evens out and we all get to wait and be cautious. (But note to drivers: signal for bikes too, not just other cars, thanks!)
I've had cars pass me a little too fast and close on this one stretch of road, since I was almost doored once and ride a safe distance from the parked cars (with no weaving back and forth between gutter and lane like many bikes I've seen; re-merging into traffic is no fun, so I don't like to give up ground). On that two-block stretch, which is off the main road and leads to a stop sign, I just take the lane now and go quickly. I'm not that much slower than the usual traffic there, and especially if I signal my upcoming left I've found cars get it and just wait their turn behind me.
I also do take the lane when I'm stopping at an intersection and going straight. Most of those in my town have that marked bike sensor, so yes, that is my spot! On one hand I've only had a single car (in my ~3 years of taking that route every workday) speed up at the red and edge me off that space in a bizarre game of chicken, which pissed me off, but it's realllly not worth trying to win that game of chicken. On the other hand, I've moved over before for cars turning right and had the driver smile and thank me. If I'm in the left lane, drivers understand what I'm doing without my signaling and treat me like another car in the queue.
Hopefully that gives some idea of what good car-velociraptor interactions can look like. It's not SF, and on the extremes of the urban-rural spectrum things are tougher. But my suburban/urban-ish town is fairly bike supportive, with adequate bike racks downtown, bike lanes, marked bicycle routes through side streets, the aforementioned sensors, and the recreation path. Those things can be yours too, and increased driver comfort with bikes can follow!
posted by j.r at 1:04 PM on August 5, 2015
I think cars are more polite when I make a point of respecting traffic laws. There's a 4-way stop where I usually have to wave cars on myself if they were there before me, since most of them are wary that I might not stop, but I always do. I wish everyone would turn on their blinkers whenever they're planning to turn, since if they really are going straight it's quicker for everyone, but I just assume they're turning left because everyone always turns left there. I guess my assuming a left is similar to their assuming a no-stop from me, so it evens out and we all get to wait and be cautious. (But note to drivers: signal for bikes too, not just other cars, thanks!)
I've had cars pass me a little too fast and close on this one stretch of road, since I was almost doored once and ride a safe distance from the parked cars (with no weaving back and forth between gutter and lane like many bikes I've seen; re-merging into traffic is no fun, so I don't like to give up ground). On that two-block stretch, which is off the main road and leads to a stop sign, I just take the lane now and go quickly. I'm not that much slower than the usual traffic there, and especially if I signal my upcoming left I've found cars get it and just wait their turn behind me.
I also do take the lane when I'm stopping at an intersection and going straight. Most of those in my town have that marked bike sensor, so yes, that is my spot! On one hand I've only had a single car (in my ~3 years of taking that route every workday) speed up at the red and edge me off that space in a bizarre game of chicken, which pissed me off, but it's realllly not worth trying to win that game of chicken. On the other hand, I've moved over before for cars turning right and had the driver smile and thank me. If I'm in the left lane, drivers understand what I'm doing without my signaling and treat me like another car in the queue.
Hopefully that gives some idea of what good car-velociraptor interactions can look like. It's not SF, and on the extremes of the urban-rural spectrum things are tougher. But my suburban/urban-ish town is fairly bike supportive, with adequate bike racks downtown, bike lanes, marked bicycle routes through side streets, the aforementioned sensors, and the recreation path. Those things can be yours too, and increased driver comfort with bikes can follow!
posted by j.r at 1:04 PM on August 5, 2015
"HAH!! I spent almost ten years bike commuting in Ann Arbor. I can recount many many incidents of dangerous and inconsiderate behaviour by drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists. Failure to yield (all). Failure to even look (all). Acting as though they personally have the right-of-way at all times regardless of circumstances (all). Assuming everyone else is a scofflaw (all). The incident I mentioned above where I was rear-ended on my bike by a car at a stop sign was on Plymouth and Broadway in Ann Arbor. "
Heh. In Ann Arbor, I was twice hit by cars and once had a biker hit the side of my car because he blew through a stop. But I think with the campus there, people are just more used to the idea that any of the proto-adults may just veer into traffic at any time for no reason at all, so you have to be more attentive. I definitely didn't have anyone enraged by my presence.
"When the ride marshals for the LCC guided rides are coming up behind, they ask "Could you step right, please?" or "could you bear left, please?" That way the person doesn't need to stop and translate the warning into action in their head."
I may give that a try — about half the time I yell "On your left!" the pedestrian or biker moves to the left.
posted by klangklangston at 3:14 PM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
Heh. In Ann Arbor, I was twice hit by cars and once had a biker hit the side of my car because he blew through a stop. But I think with the campus there, people are just more used to the idea that any of the proto-adults may just veer into traffic at any time for no reason at all, so you have to be more attentive. I definitely didn't have anyone enraged by my presence.
"When the ride marshals for the LCC guided rides are coming up behind, they ask "Could you step right, please?" or "could you bear left, please?" That way the person doesn't need to stop and translate the warning into action in their head."
I may give that a try — about half the time I yell "On your left!" the pedestrian or biker moves to the left.
posted by klangklangston at 3:14 PM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
I think most people in my area are sufficiently familiar with "on your left" that if I were to change it up it wouldn't help much. I generally try to make it a more complete sentence for clarity if it's not somebody in lycra: "I'm passing on your left."
posted by asperity at 4:56 PM on August 5, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by asperity at 4:56 PM on August 5, 2015 [1 favorite]
Could any of you fill this Dutch biker in on why (US?) people here feel that it's helpful to warn others that they're about to be overtaken? It's not something we do here, so it's not something I'm familiar with.
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:55 AM on August 6, 2015
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:55 AM on August 6, 2015
Also why would you say on which side? Isn't that obvious?
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:01 AM on August 6, 2015
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:01 AM on August 6, 2015
Too-Ticky: it's important because we force bikes to mix with pedestrians in too-narrow places, and the infrastructure is all shoddy and ad-hoc anyway. So people on bikes are always coming up behind people who probably don't even realise they're on a path that's allowed for cycling. And there's not enough room to just pass without comment.
Also, in the US most of the people on bikes are cyclists, and are trying to maintain some pro-grade wielrenner speeds.
That said, my experience of Dutch cycling is that people never use the bell, preferring instead to just call out and use their voices. I don't know enough Dutchy language to remember what it was I heard people say, but it wasn't all just "pardon".
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 1:09 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
Also, in the US most of the people on bikes are cyclists, and are trying to maintain some pro-grade wielrenner speeds.
That said, my experience of Dutch cycling is that people never use the bell, preferring instead to just call out and use their voices. I don't know enough Dutchy language to remember what it was I heard people say, but it wasn't all just "pardon".
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 1:09 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
If that was in Amsterdam, then that happened because tourists don't respond well to bicycle bells. Being called at in Dutch may not help but it will at least not make them swerve into your path more.
In the rest of the country people certainly use their bells.
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:14 AM on August 6, 2015
In the rest of the country people certainly use their bells.
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:14 AM on August 6, 2015
Also, people will walk three wide on paths with a lane dividing stripe in the middle and explicitly designated for mixed use, literally taking up 100% of the available width of both lanes. Or do the same with their dog on a long lead. Or a pair of strollers side-by-side. Etc. It's mystifying behavior, but it's just easiest to call "passing on your LEFT" when your approaching those folks.
Except when they have earbuds in and the music cranked up. :/ Nothing I can do about those people but come up at their pace and gently nudge them.
(There are even signs on the info/map boards at the ends of separated trails here; "announce 'ON YOUR LEFT' when passing" is displayed there. Of course, those boards also say you shouldn't take up your whole lane, etc., so probably a lot of those rules are ignored.)
posted by introp at 6:52 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
Except when they have earbuds in and the music cranked up. :/ Nothing I can do about those people but come up at their pace and gently nudge them.
(There are even signs on the info/map boards at the ends of separated trails here; "announce 'ON YOUR LEFT' when passing" is displayed there. Of course, those boards also say you shouldn't take up your whole lane, etc., so probably a lot of those rules are ignored.)
posted by introp at 6:52 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
Historical perspective: As far as I can recall, the "on your left" thing originated with organized group cycling events, where faster riders are constantly overtaking slower riders, and you might be the passing or passed cyclist yourself many times. In that confined context people quickly learn and adopt the protocol themselves. I first heard it -- apparently already in universal application by the pelotons of identically dressed club riders -- on organized rides such as TOSRV in the early 1970s.
I don't recall observing any cyclist using this on a pedestrian* until probably the 1990s. Absent cyclists on sidewalks, there just weren't that many mixed-mode bikeways, walkways, pathways, railtrails and such where this encounter would occur until fairly recently.
Lacking any existing protocol** cyclists then started warning "On your left" to pass pedestrians on these mixed-mode corridors.
Ah, but here, it's not so effective. Not everyone knows what it means, nor what to do, because they haven't had that concentrated experience.
As has been mentioned, some people learn and veer right because the bike will pass "on your left". Some hear the word "left" and move left. Note too, a pedestrian is likely to veer further and faster than a cyclist would, causing further travail.
Another reason it fails in mixed-mode rights-of-way: "On your left" arose out of, and is effective in, a context where the speed difference is relatively small.
A cyclist who expects the world to get out of their way at 20mph is shouting -- from a highly variable distance -- three syllables in English at the backs of people who cannot see them, may or may not hear them, may or may not interpret the words correctly, and may or may not know what to do.
All this at a relative speed of 16 - 20 MPH.
If I had time, it'd be interesting to calculate how far a bike travels at 20 MPH while shouting "On your left". How close do you have to be to be effective? How loud?
I say bring back the bike bell, teach it, enforce it.
--------------------------------
* By which I mean walkers, wheelers, skaters, boarders, equestrians, wildlife . . .anything moving that lacks steering and brakes.
** Sometime around 1970, the use of bells on bikes dropped off dramatically; I don't know why. By the 1980s few cyclists had one and few pedestrians would know what that sound meant.
posted by Herodios at 7:05 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
I don't recall observing any cyclist using this on a pedestrian* until probably the 1990s. Absent cyclists on sidewalks, there just weren't that many mixed-mode bikeways, walkways, pathways, railtrails and such where this encounter would occur until fairly recently.
Lacking any existing protocol** cyclists then started warning "On your left" to pass pedestrians on these mixed-mode corridors.
Ah, but here, it's not so effective. Not everyone knows what it means, nor what to do, because they haven't had that concentrated experience.
As has been mentioned, some people learn and veer right because the bike will pass "on your left". Some hear the word "left" and move left. Note too, a pedestrian is likely to veer further and faster than a cyclist would, causing further travail.
Another reason it fails in mixed-mode rights-of-way: "On your left" arose out of, and is effective in, a context where the speed difference is relatively small.
A cyclist who expects the world to get out of their way at 20mph is shouting -- from a highly variable distance -- three syllables in English at the backs of people who cannot see them, may or may not hear them, may or may not interpret the words correctly, and may or may not know what to do.
All this at a relative speed of 16 - 20 MPH.
If I had time, it'd be interesting to calculate how far a bike travels at 20 MPH while shouting "On your left". How close do you have to be to be effective? How loud?
I say bring back the bike bell, teach it, enforce it.
--------------------------------
* By which I mean walkers, wheelers, skaters, boarders, equestrians, wildlife . . .anything moving that lacks steering and brakes.
** Sometime around 1970, the use of bells on bikes dropped off dramatically; I don't know why. By the 1980s few cyclists had one and few pedestrians would know what that sound meant.
posted by Herodios at 7:05 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
in the US most of the people on bikes are cyclists
*snort* I liked your "I am not a cyclist" link, Space Hobo, even though I don't agree 100% with 100% of it.
Every time I hear a newscaster talk about 'motorists', I think, "Who worships motors"?
posted by Herodios at 7:15 AM on August 6, 2015 [2 favorites]
*snort* I liked your "I am not a cyclist" link, Space Hobo, even though I don't agree 100% with 100% of it.
Every time I hear a newscaster talk about 'motorists', I think, "Who worships motors"?
posted by Herodios at 7:15 AM on August 6, 2015 [2 favorites]
My primary interaction with bikers is while I'm running along trails with my (leashed) dog. There's a particular 2k stretch that gets a lot of bike traffic, when I'm on there I tend to keep looking over my shoulder. If I'm aware of a biker, I have my dog switch to my right side (he's on my left if I'm passing a pedestrian on their left), and run on the right edge of the trail, or in the grass. My dog will be running in the grass. As the trails are crowned if I'm not specifically avoiding a bike/pedestrian I tend to run in the center and my dog is usually right at my side, but there's enough leash slack that sometimes he'll move off the trail and run in the grass.
About 50% of the time I'll see a biker behind me over my shoulder in advance and take (obvious to them) action (I wouldn't expect a bell/call out when my actions make it obvious to them that I'm aware and facilitating the passing). About 10% of the time I hear a bell and then take action. I *always" say, "Thanks for the bell!" in a happy voice as they pass. About 40% of the time I'm surprised as a bike swooshes past me. About half of the time that I'm surprised the biker passes on the same side of me as my dog is, resulting in him barking and attempting to lunge at the bike. In those instances I call out "Please use your bell!" - but as they're biking fast, and past me, they might not hear me. A number of times that I've been passed by surprise I've noted that the biker does in fact have a bell. I don't notice if some of the non-bell passers when I'm in the center of the trail are repeat customers.
Perhaps it's the area, but I've never heard someone call out to me (other than possibly a "hi" if they're coming head on towards me instead of passing), it's a bell or nothing (or I just don't hear them). Often I'll barely hear someone if they call out a "Hi"/"Good Morning" coming towards me. I have no problems hearing a bell from about 50-100 feet away. Given how easily I hear a bell, and how easy that connects in my head with "bike coming up, I'll move right!" I suspect that bike bell/horn is way better than calling out.
When I call out in advance to pedestrians, it's usually when I'm about 10 seconds away and I typically try "Passing on your left." about 1/3 swerve left, about 1/3 stop, turn around and then move right, and about 1/3 stop, move to the middle, turn around and freeze until I pass. Usually if they're moving in a predictable path and don't have a dog I won't say anything and pass in the grass.
If they have a dog, I yell "Passing" from about 30 seconds away - that way if they've got those crappy extend-o leashes they can actually reel their dog in and get some control of it (or in the case of leash free jerk wads they have a chance to get their dog).
I've biked a few times to work this summer (about 10 miles during peak traffic times); my experience of annoyance with bikes whizzing past me has made me better with my bell, but it's really something that I have to work on. I also realize that there's a few tight curves on some trails I take which are obscured by plants that I should ring when I'm appoaching. So far I haven't had a bad experience, but I plotted my route so about 50% is trails and low-traffic roads (I'm fortunate that this is an option).
As a driver I think that I've always been fairly considerate to bikers and specifically look for them. Perhaps it's because when I was 8 I was t-boned by a car turning right who "didn't see" me despite having passed me 5 seconds before. I didn't get hurt, but was scared enough that I won't make that mistake. I don't think I've changed as a driver yet despite some bike commuting in rush hour.
On preview: 20mph is just shy of 30 feet per second. I typically around around 12-13 kph; 10-12 feet per second. Most people walk around 5 kph; 4.5 feet per second.
posted by nobeagle at 8:57 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
About 50% of the time I'll see a biker behind me over my shoulder in advance and take (obvious to them) action (I wouldn't expect a bell/call out when my actions make it obvious to them that I'm aware and facilitating the passing). About 10% of the time I hear a bell and then take action. I *always" say, "Thanks for the bell!" in a happy voice as they pass. About 40% of the time I'm surprised as a bike swooshes past me. About half of the time that I'm surprised the biker passes on the same side of me as my dog is, resulting in him barking and attempting to lunge at the bike. In those instances I call out "Please use your bell!" - but as they're biking fast, and past me, they might not hear me. A number of times that I've been passed by surprise I've noted that the biker does in fact have a bell. I don't notice if some of the non-bell passers when I'm in the center of the trail are repeat customers.
Perhaps it's the area, but I've never heard someone call out to me (other than possibly a "hi" if they're coming head on towards me instead of passing), it's a bell or nothing (or I just don't hear them). Often I'll barely hear someone if they call out a "Hi"/"Good Morning" coming towards me. I have no problems hearing a bell from about 50-100 feet away. Given how easily I hear a bell, and how easy that connects in my head with "bike coming up, I'll move right!" I suspect that bike bell/horn is way better than calling out.
When I call out in advance to pedestrians, it's usually when I'm about 10 seconds away and I typically try "Passing on your left." about 1/3 swerve left, about 1/3 stop, turn around and then move right, and about 1/3 stop, move to the middle, turn around and freeze until I pass. Usually if they're moving in a predictable path and don't have a dog I won't say anything and pass in the grass.
If they have a dog, I yell "Passing" from about 30 seconds away - that way if they've got those crappy extend-o leashes they can actually reel their dog in and get some control of it (or in the case of leash free jerk wads they have a chance to get their dog).
I've biked a few times to work this summer (about 10 miles during peak traffic times); my experience of annoyance with bikes whizzing past me has made me better with my bell, but it's really something that I have to work on. I also realize that there's a few tight curves on some trails I take which are obscured by plants that I should ring when I'm appoaching. So far I haven't had a bad experience, but I plotted my route so about 50% is trails and low-traffic roads (I'm fortunate that this is an option).
As a driver I think that I've always been fairly considerate to bikers and specifically look for them. Perhaps it's because when I was 8 I was t-boned by a car turning right who "didn't see" me despite having passed me 5 seconds before. I didn't get hurt, but was scared enough that I won't make that mistake. I don't think I've changed as a driver yet despite some bike commuting in rush hour.
On preview: 20mph is just shy of 30 feet per second. I typically around around 12-13 kph; 10-12 feet per second. Most people walk around 5 kph; 4.5 feet per second.
posted by nobeagle at 8:57 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
I call out "on your left" when passing other cyclists in tight bike lanes where there are cars whizzing by because it's safer than not doing so. If a cyclist knows I'm overtaking them, they can plan accordingly and not veer into my path, forcing me out into traffic. They know it's not the right time to overtake the cyclist in front of them. And, frankly, when you're used to biking in a car-dominated environment, you get used to being able to hear the vehicles approaching. So a silent cyclist can be really startling if she comes up behind you and passes closely (which I try never to do but sometimes is necessary because the bike lanes are only a few feet wide).
I used to ride on a mixed-use path to get to work and found that experienced path users totally knew how to behave when they heard "on your left." Typically it was only the tourists and the teens out of school for summer break walking to the beach who would kind of freak out and scatter in every direction instead of just staying to the right. And to be clear, I rarely call it out to expect people to move out of my way unless they're blocking the entire path--I just want them to stay where they are and not suddenly change direction. Joggers do that sometimes when they're at the end of their run and it's time to U-turn and there's no warning when that happens.
posted by misskaz at 9:14 AM on August 6, 2015 [2 favorites]
I used to ride on a mixed-use path to get to work and found that experienced path users totally knew how to behave when they heard "on your left." Typically it was only the tourists and the teens out of school for summer break walking to the beach who would kind of freak out and scatter in every direction instead of just staying to the right. And to be clear, I rarely call it out to expect people to move out of my way unless they're blocking the entire path--I just want them to stay where they are and not suddenly change direction. Joggers do that sometimes when they're at the end of their run and it's time to U-turn and there's no warning when that happens.
posted by misskaz at 9:14 AM on August 6, 2015 [2 favorites]
"Could any of you fill this Dutch biker in on why (US?) people here feel that it's helpful to warn others that they're about to be overtaken? It's not something we do here, so it's not something I'm familiar with."
Ha. I rented a bike for a week I spent in Amsterdam and while I didn't hear any calls that I remember, I heard tons and tons of bells.
posted by klangklangston at 9:48 AM on August 6, 2015
Ha. I rented a bike for a week I spent in Amsterdam and while I didn't hear any calls that I remember, I heard tons and tons of bells.
posted by klangklangston at 9:48 AM on August 6, 2015
It's kind of funny that I'm always arguing against being classified as a cyclist, and yet we have people in this thread referring to people on bicycles as bikers.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 9:58 AM on August 6, 2015
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 9:58 AM on August 6, 2015
It's quite simple, really:
If you ride a motorcycle, you're a biker.
If you ride a bike, your're a cyclist.
posted by Herodios at 10:36 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
If you ride a motorcycle, you're a biker.
If you ride a bike, your're a cyclist.
posted by Herodios at 10:36 AM on August 6, 2015 [1 favorite]
Although I should add that both, by and large, are mostly noted for riding a high-horse.
posted by Herodios at 10:37 AM on August 6, 2015
posted by Herodios at 10:37 AM on August 6, 2015
Ha. I rented a bike for a week I spent in Amsterdam and while I didn't hear any calls that I remember, I heard tons and tons of bells.
Probably most of them wielded by tourists on rented bikes, who enjoy the sound of the bell and don't care whether it means anything.
we have people in this thread referring to people on bicycles as bikers.
Well, sorry. I don't know all of your colloquialisms, and in a thread that seems to be all about the bikes, it seemed to make sense to call someone on a bike a biker. But if it helps, I'm both kinds of biker.
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:17 PM on August 6, 2015
Probably most of them wielded by tourists on rented bikes, who enjoy the sound of the bell and don't care whether it means anything.
we have people in this thread referring to people on bicycles as bikers.
Well, sorry. I don't know all of your colloquialisms, and in a thread that seems to be all about the bikes, it seemed to make sense to call someone on a bike a biker. But if it helps, I'm both kinds of biker.
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:17 PM on August 6, 2015
No, Herodios, I am not a cyclist. I'm just a person on a bike
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 2:40 PM on August 6, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 2:40 PM on August 6, 2015 [2 favorites]
klangklangston: ""Could any of you fill this Dutch biker in on why (US?) people here feel that it's helpful to warn others that they're about to be overtaken? It's not something we do here, so it's not something I'm familiar with."Danes also never use the bell for warning on overtaking. They do use it if somebody's in the way though, and if the Dutch are anything like us on this, chances are you were just Driving While Tourist.
Ha. I rented a bike for a week I spent in Amsterdam and while I didn't hear any calls that I remember, I heard tons and tons of bells."
posted by brokkr at 1:16 AM on August 7, 2015 [2 favorites]
Well, it seems that The SFPD are now more aggressively ticketing people who don't engage in this "protest".
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 6:33 AM on August 7, 2015
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 6:33 AM on August 7, 2015
Paris is now allowing cyclists to jump the red light under certain conditions.
posted by biffa at 2:32 AM on August 11, 2015
posted by biffa at 2:32 AM on August 11, 2015
« Older We go down to the indie disco every Thursday night | Learning to Speak Lingerie Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
You mean civil obedience?
posted by Rangi at 6:53 PM on August 3, 2015 [56 favorites]