How best to respond to dangerously belligerant bikers (bicyclists)

On 08/07/2011 08:34 AM, aemeijers wrote:
> On 8/7/2011 7:46 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family went to
>>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she
>>> was
>>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind
>>> corner.
>>> Takes brains...
>>>
>>
>> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
>> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good thing I
>> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot driver
>> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming the
>> other way...
>>
>> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
>> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
>> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with either
>> no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems sadly all
>> to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up quite often
>> there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to get out of
>> the way in emergencies...
>>
>> nate
>>
>>
> I hear you about 'no good roads' and all. And while I do feel sorry for
> the cyclists, my statement remains valid- if there are no safe roads to
> ride on to get from where you live, to someplace safe to ride, well, you
> need a car with a bike rack, or you need to find a safer way to get
> exercise. And add 'bicycle friendly roads' to your list for
> house/apartment picking criteria for next time you move. Getting healthy
> is a stupid reason to get killed.
>

Ummm... what if you're using your bicycle as transportation? Fairly
common around here, both among those who apparently are doing it for
exercise, because they feel the need to be "green," or just enjoy
cycling, and also those who apparently either can't afford a car and/or
possibly could but only barely and therefore made a choice not to have
one. Surely you don't want especially the latter to "get off the road"
because that likely means onto welfare.

Our transportation infrastructure has become quite
motor-vehicle-centric, even where it doesn't have to be, or where it
would make a hell of a lot of sense (densely populated areas) for it not
to be.

I personally would be very happy if our roads were made better for mixed
cycle and vehicle traffic - and I don't mean any dedicated bike lanes or
silly crap like that. Just simply make the right lane wider or provide
a narrow paved shoulder, and for the love of Pete, please don't put a
damn CURB right up next to the white line on a main road.

New residential developments are another little circle of hell for both
cyclists and motorists... tons of "can't get there from here" type
scenarios where you either have to ride way out of your way and hop on a
busy high-speed main road, or else cut through someone's back yard to
get out.

As for choosing to live in a bike-friendly area... not always possible.
I just moved from one, but without a second income, I simply couldn't
afford to remain there. Mortgage on a modest home would approach 75% of
my take home per month.

nate

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

On 8/7/2011 10:30 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
> On 08/07/2011 08:34 AM, aemeijers wrote:
>> On 8/7/2011 7:46 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family
>>>>> went to
>>>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she
>>>> was
>>>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind
>>>> corner.
>>>> Takes brains...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
>>> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good thing I
>>> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot driver
>>> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming the
>>> other way...
>>>
>>> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
>>> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
>>> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with either
>>> no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems sadly all
>>> to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up quite often
>>> there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to get out of
>>> the way in emergencies...
>>>
>>> nate
>>>
>>>
>> I hear you about 'no good roads' and all. And while I do feel sorry for
>> the cyclists, my statement remains valid- if there are no safe roads to
>> ride on to get from where you live, to someplace safe to ride, well, you
>> need a car with a bike rack, or you need to find a safer way to get
>> exercise. And add 'bicycle friendly roads' to your list for
>> house/apartment picking criteria for next time you move. Getting healthy
>> is a stupid reason to get killed.
>>
>
> Ummm... what if you're using your bicycle as transportation? Fairly
> common around here, both among those who apparently are doing it for
> exercise, because they feel the need to be "green," or just enjoy
> cycling, and also those who apparently either can't afford a car and/or
> possibly could but only barely and therefore made a choice not to have
> one. Surely you don't want especially the latter to "get off the road"
> because that likely means onto welfare.
>
> Our transportation infrastructure has become quite
> motor-vehicle-centric, even where it doesn't have to be, or where it
> would make a hell of a lot of sense (densely populated areas) for it not
> to be.
>
> I personally would be very happy if our roads were made better for mixed
> cycle and vehicle traffic - and I don't mean any dedicated bike lanes or
> silly crap like that. Just simply make the right lane wider or provide a
> narrow paved shoulder, and for the love of Pete, please don't put a damn
> CURB right up next to the white line on a main road.
>
> New residential developments are another little circle of hell for both
> cyclists and motorists... tons of "can't get there from here" type
> scenarios where you either have to ride way out of your way and hop on a
> busy high-speed main road, or else cut through someone's back yard to
> get out.
>
> As for choosing to live in a bike-friendly area... not always possible.
> I just moved from one, but without a second income, I simply couldn't
> afford to remain there. Mortgage on a modest home would approach 75% of
> my take home per month.
>
> nate
>
(Sorry for the direct reply- Thunderbird 5 keeps sending direct, even
when I highlight 'reply to group'.)

What can I say? Reality sucks sometimes, but it is still reality. If
biking is THAT important to you, and you don't want to be road kill, you
will have to find a way to fine-tune reality to make it possible. It may
mean making major compromises in another area of your life. Only you can
decide if playing the odds is worth the wind in your face.

People who can't afford even an old beater car, should not move to areas
so distant from their jobs, or at least not to areas without public
transportation. (which I realize sucks in this country, mainly because
people are so spread out, there is no way to make it cost-effective.)
And in most of the country, even if the roads are bike-friendly, you can
only use a bike as transportation part of the year. So unless you are
willing to live in an older urban area where work and the bare
necessities are within walking distance (which was quite common until
WWII), you need access to something with 4 or more wheels and a motor,
or have a room-mate who does.

--
aem sends...

On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 07:46:25 -0400, Nate Nagel wrote:

> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>
>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family went to
>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>
>>
>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she was
>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind corner.
>> Takes brains...
>>
>
> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good thing I
> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot driver
> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming
> the other way...
>
> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with
> either no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems
> sadly all to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up
> quite often there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to
> get out of the way in emergencies...
>
> nate


This is true, but if they had been riding single file near the white line,
neither of us would have had an issue...

On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 08:34:04 -0400, aemeijers wrote:

> On 8/7/2011 7:46 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family went to
>>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she
>>> was
>>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind
>>> corner.
>>> Takes brains...
>>>
>>
>> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
>> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good thing I
>> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot driver
>> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming the
>> other way...
>>
>> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
>> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
>> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with either
>> no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems sadly all
>> to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up quite often
>> there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to get out of
>> the way in emergencies...
>>
>> nate
>>
>>
> I hear you about 'no good roads' and all. And while I do feel sorry for
> the cyclists, my statement remains valid- if there are no safe roads to
> ride on to get from where you live, to someplace safe to ride, well, you
> need a car with a bike rack, or you need to find a safer way to get
> exercise. And add 'bicycle friendly roads' to your list for
> house/apartment picking criteria for next time you move. Getting healthy
> is a stupid reason to get killed.


LOL! There is a 12 mile "rail trail" near here, and there's another 8 mile
one even closer.

On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 02:43:39 -0400, aemeijers wrote:

> On 8/7/2011 1:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>
>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family went to
>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>
>>
>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she was
>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind corner.
>> Takes brains...
>>
>>
>
> I should note- I'm not against cyclists, and think it can be a great
> form of exercise. (Especially for folks whose feet, knees and ankles are
> no longer up to the impact loads of running, or extended walking on
> pavement.) In fact, I have a rather nice vintage 10-speed sitting in
> basement, because my middle-age ass can no longer take an old-style road
> bike seat without annoying side effects, and I simply have never gotten
> around to buying a different one. But it is a pastime for residential
> side streets, bucolic country lanes, and improved trails in parks or
> converted railroad ROWs. It is not a plausible way to commute to work
> (unless you live in a small flat town), or a pastime for major traffic
> arteries.


I love bicycling! But I also realize in an 'arguement' between me and 2400
pounds of metal, I'm probably going to be the loser...

"Hachiroku" > wrote in message
eb.com...
> On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 07:46:25 -0400, Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family went to
>>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she
>>> was
>>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind
>>> corner.
>>> Takes brains...
>>>
>>
>> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
>> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good thing I
>> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot driver
>> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming
>> the other way...
>>
>> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
>> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
>> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with
>> either no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems
>> sadly all to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up
>> quite often there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to
>> get out of the way in emergencies...
>>
>> nate
>
>
> This is true, but if they had been riding single file near the white line,
> neither of us would have had an issue...
>

That is what I was thinking. As best I remember, that was the instruction
for
riding motorcycles during the very very brief time I had one. If the
cyclist knows
that there is a problem and works to co-exist with the other road traffic,
surely
we could all get get along together.

On 08/07/2011 12:59 PM, aemeijers wrote:
> On 8/7/2011 10:30 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>> On 08/07/2011 08:34 AM, aemeijers wrote:
>>> On 8/7/2011 7:46 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>>>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family
>>>>>> went to
>>>>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>>>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she
>>>>> was
>>>>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind
>>>>> corner.
>>>>> Takes brains...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
>>>> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good
>>>> thing I
>>>> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot driver
>>>> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming
>>>> the
>>>> other way...
>>>>
>>>> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
>>>> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
>>>> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with
>>>> either
>>>> no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems sadly all
>>>> to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up quite often
>>>> there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to get out of
>>>> the way in emergencies...
>>>>
>>>> nate
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I hear you about 'no good roads' and all. And while I do feel sorry for
>>> the cyclists, my statement remains valid- if there are no safe roads to
>>> ride on to get from where you live, to someplace safe to ride, well, you
>>> need a car with a bike rack, or you need to find a safer way to get
>>> exercise. And add 'bicycle friendly roads' to your list for
>>> house/apartment picking criteria for next time you move. Getting healthy
>>> is a stupid reason to get killed.
>>>
>>
>> Ummm... what if you're using your bicycle as transportation? Fairly
>> common around here, both among those who apparently are doing it for
>> exercise, because they feel the need to be "green," or just enjoy
>> cycling, and also those who apparently either can't afford a car and/or
>> possibly could but only barely and therefore made a choice not to have
>> one. Surely you don't want especially the latter to "get off the road"
>> because that likely means onto welfare.
>>
>> Our transportation infrastructure has become quite
>> motor-vehicle-centric, even where it doesn't have to be, or where it
>> would make a hell of a lot of sense (densely populated areas) for it not
>> to be.
>>
>> I personally would be very happy if our roads were made better for mixed
>> cycle and vehicle traffic - and I don't mean any dedicated bike lanes or
>> silly crap like that. Just simply make the right lane wider or provide a
>> narrow paved shoulder, and for the love of Pete, please don't put a damn
>> CURB right up next to the white line on a main road.
>>
>> New residential developments are another little circle of hell for both
>> cyclists and motorists... tons of "can't get there from here" type
>> scenarios where you either have to ride way out of your way and hop on a
>> busy high-speed main road, or else cut through someone's back yard to
>> get out.
>>
>> As for choosing to live in a bike-friendly area... not always possible.
>> I just moved from one, but without a second income, I simply couldn't
>> afford to remain there. Mortgage on a modest home would approach 75% of
>> my take home per month.
>>
>> nate
>>
> (Sorry for the direct reply- Thunderbird 5 keeps sending direct, even
> when I highlight 'reply to group'.)
>
> What can I say? Reality sucks sometimes, but it is still reality. If
> biking is THAT important to you, and you don't want to be road kill, you
> will have to find a way to fine-tune reality to make it possible. It may
> mean making major compromises in another area of your life. Only you can
> decide if playing the odds is worth the wind in your face.
>
> People who can't afford even an old beater car, should not move to areas
> so distant from their jobs, or at least not to areas without public
> transportation. (which I realize sucks in this country, mainly because
> people are so spread out, there is no way to make it cost-effective.)
> And in most of the country, even if the roads are bike-friendly, you can
> only use a bike as transportation part of the year. So unless you are
> willing to live in an older urban area where work and the bare
> necessities are within walking distance (which was quite common until
> WWII), you need access to something with 4 or more wheels and a motor,
> or have a room-mate who does.
>


I disagree. I despise the arrogant cyclists who think that they are
more important than motorists, but at the same time, motorists who think
they are more important than (reasonable, courteous) cyclists are just
as bad.

There is no legal priority of one over the other, save on limited access
highways. So there's no real basis for such an opinion. Rather than
saying "move somewhere that you can't afford" how about "don't be in
such a hurry that you have to pass every cyclist that you see RIGHT NOW."

nate

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

On 08/07/2011 02:53 PM, Hachiroku wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 08:34:04 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>
>> On 8/7/2011 7:46 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family went to
>>>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy she
>>>> was
>>>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind
>>>> corner.
>>>> Takes brains...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
>>> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good thing I
>>> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot driver
>>> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming the
>>> other way...
>>>
>>> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
>>> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
>>> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with either
>>> no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems sadly all
>>> to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up quite often
>>> there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to get out of
>>> the way in emergencies...
>>>
>>> nate
>>>
>>>
>> I hear you about 'no good roads' and all. And while I do feel sorry for
>> the cyclists, my statement remains valid- if there are no safe roads to
>> ride on to get from where you live, to someplace safe to ride, well, you
>> need a car with a bike rack, or you need to find a safer way to get
>> exercise. And add 'bicycle friendly roads' to your list for
>> house/apartment picking criteria for next time you move. Getting healthy
>> is a stupid reason to get killed.
>
>
> LOL! There is a 12 mile "rail trail" near here, and there's another 8 mile
> one even closer.
>

Do they take you to your office? the grocery store? I doubt it...

not that "rail trails" are bad... we have one here and it's more useful
than you'd expect, but it won't take you everywhere you want to go.
Really, it seems to be most used recreationally rather than as an
alternate to riding on a road to get to a specific destination. (and
there's lots of dog-walkers, just plain walkers, etc. so often you have
to ride slower than you would on the road.) Even though it exists, you
have to get on it first. That means either riding on the road, or else
driving to the trail, which defeats the whole purpose of cycling in the
first place. (and do you have a car already placed at the point of the
trail closest to your destination as well?)

nate

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

Drill and tap a hole in the tailpipe (behind the catalytic converter) of
your vehicle.Rig a container of used motor oil and a valve.Next time
they give you a problem, 'Smoke' them off the road.

George Hayduke's Book of Dirty Tricks.

Don't get mad.Get even.
cuhulin

On 8/7/2011 4:12 PM, Nate Nagel wrote:
> On 08/07/2011 12:59 PM, aemeijers wrote:
>> On 8/7/2011 10:30 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2011 08:34 AM, aemeijers wrote:
>>>> On 8/7/2011 7:46 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>> On 08/07/2011 01:04 AM, Hachiroku wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:10:52 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see those guys a lot when
>>>>>>> I visit my sister who still lives in the town most of my family
>>>>>>> went to
>>>>>>> college in- insisting on taking their daily rides side-by-side on
>>>>>>> winding hilly country roads with lots of blind corners, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some woman in a spandex bike suit was doing that. Here and the guy
>>>>>> she
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> with were riding side by side in the middle of the lane on a blind
>>>>>> corner.
>>>>>> Takes brains...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not limited to cyclists. I was once run off the road - actually had
>>>>> scratches on the side of my car from some hedges afterward, good
>>>>> thing I
>>>>> didn't have a particularly pristine paint job - because an idiot
>>>>> driver
>>>>> decided to pass a cyclist around a blind curve. Guess who was coming
>>>>> the
>>>>> other way...
>>>>>
>>>>> Before questioning the cyclist's judgement as to riding on that
>>>>> particular road, there really aren't any good roads to ride on in the
>>>>> area... to get anywhere useful you're still limited to roads with
>>>>> either
>>>>> no shoulders or else curbs right up on the white line. Seems sadly all
>>>>> to prevalent these days... even in rural PA where I grew up quite
>>>>> often
>>>>> there'd be shoulders, albeit gravel, that you could use to get out of
>>>>> the way in emergencies...
>>>>>
>>>>> nate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I hear you about 'no good roads' and all. And while I do feel sorry for
>>>> the cyclists, my statement remains valid- if there are no safe roads to
>>>> ride on to get from where you live, to someplace safe to ride, well,
>>>> you
>>>> need a car with a bike rack, or you need to find a safer way to get
>>>> exercise. And add 'bicycle friendly roads' to your list for
>>>> house/apartment picking criteria for next time you move. Getting
>>>> healthy
>>>> is a stupid reason to get killed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ummm... what if you're using your bicycle as transportation? Fairly
>>> common around here, both among those who apparently are doing it for
>>> exercise, because they feel the need to be "green," or just enjoy
>>> cycling, and also those who apparently either can't afford a car and/or
>>> possibly could but only barely and therefore made a choice not to have
>>> one. Surely you don't want especially the latter to "get off the road"
>>> because that likely means onto welfare.
>>>
>>> Our transportation infrastructure has become quite
>>> motor-vehicle-centric, even where it doesn't have to be, or where it
>>> would make a hell of a lot of sense (densely populated areas) for it not
>>> to be.
>>>
>>> I personally would be very happy if our roads were made better for mixed
>>> cycle and vehicle traffic - and I don't mean any dedicated bike lanes or
>>> silly crap like that. Just simply make the right lane wider or provide a
>>> narrow paved shoulder, and for the love of Pete, please don't put a damn
>>> CURB right up next to the white line on a main road.
>>>
>>> New residential developments are another little circle of hell for both
>>> cyclists and motorists... tons of "can't get there from here" type
>>> scenarios where you either have to ride way out of your way and hop on a
>>> busy high-speed main road, or else cut through someone's back yard to
>>> get out.
>>>
>>> As for choosing to live in a bike-friendly area... not always possible.
>>> I just moved from one, but without a second income, I simply couldn't
>>> afford to remain there. Mortgage on a modest home would approach 75% of
>>> my take home per month.
>>>
>>> nate
>>>
>> (Sorry for the direct reply- Thunderbird 5 keeps sending direct, even
>> when I highlight 'reply to group'.)
>>
>> What can I say? Reality sucks sometimes, but it is still reality. If
>> biking is THAT important to you, and you don't want to be road kill, you
>> will have to find a way to fine-tune reality to make it possible. It may
>> mean making major compromises in another area of your life. Only you can
>> decide if playing the odds is worth the wind in your face.
>>
>> People who can't afford even an old beater car, should not move to areas
>> so distant from their jobs, or at least not to areas without public
>> transportation. (which I realize sucks in this country, mainly because
>> people are so spread out, there is no way to make it cost-effective.)
>> And in most of the country, even if the roads are bike-friendly, you can
>> only use a bike as transportation part of the year. So unless you are
>> willing to live in an older urban area where work and the bare
>> necessities are within walking distance (which was quite common until
>> WWII), you need access to something with 4 or more wheels and a motor,
>> or have a room-mate who does.
>>
>
>
> I disagree. I despise the arrogant cyclists who think that they are more
> important than motorists, but at the same time, motorists who think they
> are more important than (reasonable, courteous) cyclists are just as bad.
>
> There is no legal priority of one over the other, save on limited access
> highways. So there's no real basis for such an opinion. Rather than
> saying "move somewhere that you can't afford" how about "don't be in
> such a hurry that you have to pass every cyclist that you see RIGHT NOW."
>
> nate
>

See my comment upstream where I said I liked cyclists, and went out of
my way to give them room. But most drivers aren't as nice as me about it.

And yes, most states DO have an 'impeding the flow of traffic' law. In
Indiana, if more than 3 cars were backed up behind you (no matter what
vehicle you were in or on), you were obligated to pull off at the next
plausible opportunity, and let them go by.

--
aem sends...