AutoBanter - View Single Post

**Nate Nagel[_2_]** · February 28th 08, 12:46 AM posted to rec.autos.driving,rec.bicycles.misc

wrote:
> On Feb 27, 3:15 pm, N8N > wrote:
>
>>On Feb 27, 2:56 pm, wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Cyclists should use lights and reflectors at night. Those laws should
>>>be respected.
>>
>>Agreed.
>>
>>
>>>But clothing that suits _your_ fancy is not a legal requirement, and
>>>should not be.
>>
>>Being visible is not "my fancy." If you have no lights, no
>>reflectors, and are wearing jeans and a dark shirt, I have no sympathy
>>for anything that might happen to you.
>
>
> Slow down and think about it again, Nate. The jeans and dark shirt
> should not be part of the equation. If it's night, a driver has a
> right to expect cyclists to have lights, and possibly reflectors.
> (That depends a bit on the jurisdiction.) But night or day, a
> motorist has no right to complain about jeans and a dark shirt. They
> are legal. It's up to you to watch for others on the road; how
> they're dressed should not matter.

It does if they have neither lights nor reflectors. If I can't
reasonably be expected to see them while I'm standing still, I'm
certainly not going to see them from my car either. I'm sick of the
attitude that the cyclist is always right and the motorist is always
wrong. I knew at a very young age if I were going to be walking along a
street at night that I should be wearing something that would be easily
visible to motorists, or else carrying a light. I don't see how any
cyclist could say with a straight face that he's somehow exempt from
this same common-sense rule.

>
>>>I wish police would enforce _all_ rules of the road, including against
>>>motorists who speed through neighborhoods, roll stop signs, run red
>>>lights, fail to yield to pedestrians, and all the rest. Yes, they
>>>should ticket cyclists - but it's a far lower priority for good
>>>reason.
>>
>>Why? If I hit another car because the driver did something illegal,
>>or hit a cyclist because he did something illegal, I still hit
>>something. I'm still inconvenienced...
>
>
> Sorry about that. But the world's been made too convenient for
> motorists, to the detriment of everyone else. Besides, I doubt you
> can cite five examples in the last five years where a motorist damaged
> his precious car due to avoiding a cyclist's illegal move.

Hell, I've probably *SEEN* five bent up bikes laying in the middle of
the road, with cops, ambulances, etc. in that time period. Most
recently just a couple months ago on Dolley Madison, a busy multi-lane
road, at the intersection with Anderson Road and the I-66 ramp. Which
is just stupidity to begin with; you'd have to have balls of brass to
ride a bike on Dolley Madison, especially when there's a much more
suitable parallel road less than half a mile away.

>
>>100% of cyclists blatantly ignore stop signs.
>
>
> Wrong.

Come ride with me someday. You'll see I'm right.

>
>>>Regarding "serious hazards to themselves and others," feel free to
>>>post documentation of the terrible carnage caused by bicyclists. We
>>>know there are roughly 40,000 people killed by motorists each year in
>>>America. How many are killed by bicyclists? Post the number, please.
>>
>>Mostly cyclists kill themselves.
>
>
> Mostly cyclists do just fine. Bike commuters live longer than car
> commuters. Cycling confers benefits which far outweigh its tiny
> risks. Cyclists kill essentially nobody. Perhaps one person per year
> in the US is killed by a cyclist. (Data are almost impossible to
> find, because the problem is too small to bother with.)
>
>
>>But my car will still be damaged.
>
>
> :-) Well, obviously, that's what the entire universe revolves
> around!

It does to me. If you're going to be a stupid asshole, fine, but don't
be surprised or offended when people call you a stupid asshole. And if
you cause damage to me or my property due to your own carelessness and
disregard for the law, I don't give a **** if you're on life support, I
still will have no sympathy for you and will sue for the damages you
rightfully owe me (not aimed directly at you, but at the dip****
cyclists I share the road with.)

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel