How to **** Off an Arrogant Pedalcyclist

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> On 15 May 2005 00:50:14 -0700, "Bob" > wrote:
>
>> Adult cyclists should almost never ride on sidewalks but having said
>> that what pedestrians is this particular pair endangering, the
>> photographer? If so, that cameraman must have amazing reflexes to be
>> able to narrowly escape being run over and still be able to whip out
>> his trusty camera in time to capture that photograph as the pair...
>> ummmm... "sped" away.
>
> Actually, the camera was already out, taking pictures of the
> landscaping in the right hand side of the photograph (I can post the
> others if you'd like). My wife saw an unusual type of plant which she
> thought might look good in our back yard, so I took some pictures of
> it for her. Then these two chumps brushed by on their bicycles, so I
> snapped them, too.

I'm guessing it's really hard to get past your wife on an airport runway,
much less a wide sidewalk.

STOP HOGGING THE PATHWAY WITH YOUR SIDE-BY-SIDE WADDLING!!!

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail
> From: Scott en Aztlán >
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,rec.bicycles.misc
> Subject: How to **** Off an Arrogant Pedalcyclist
> Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 16:15:55 -0700
> Organization: USENET Users Anonymous
> Message-ID: >
> Reply-To: newsgroup
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
> X-No-Archive: yes
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Complaints-To:
> Lines: 28
> Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.autos.driving:554731 rec.bicycles.misc:374779
> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0519-2, 12/05/2005), Inbound message
> X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
>
> My wife and I went for a walk this afternoon. The sidewalk was very
> narrow - only wide enough for my wife and I to walk side by side. As
> we walked, our son (who is away at college) called, so she took the
> call and was talking to him, not really paying attention to what was
> ahead. Presently, an older gentleman riding a bicycle approached from
> ahead of us. When he saw that my wife wasn't paying attention (and
> thus was not going to step aside to let him ride past) he came to a
> stop, then stood there glaring at us. As we passed by, he very
> petulantly began to ring his little thumb-bell repeatedly, as if to
> express his outrage that we didn't get out of his way. I turned to him
> and said "use the bike lane, ****head." Then we walked on, shaking our
> heads in disbelief.
>
> Why do supposedly mature adults think it's OK to ride their bikes on
> the sidewalk? Here's another couple we saw today on our walk:
>
> http://tinypic.com/539poy
>
> There's a perfectly good bike lane (or shoulder, as Brent likes to
> call them) not five feet from these lard-asses, yet they feel the need
> to endanger pedestrians on the sidewalk. Why?!?!?!?
>
> People like these give good, courteous, law-abiding pedalcyclists a
> bad name.
>
> --
> Life is short - drive fast!
> http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/

Saved for the archives due to the "X-No-Archive: yes" in original post.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> I turned to him
> and said "use the bike lane, ****head." Then we walked on, shaking our
> heads in disbelief.
>
> Why do supposedly mature adults think it's OK to ride their bikes on
> the sidewalk?

Why do supposedly mature adults think it's OK to say things like, "use the
bike lane, ****head"?

However, I do agree that not enough cyclists realize the need to be in the
street - Yesterday while I was out riding I saw a cyclist barreling along on
the sidewalk going against traffic. He came to an intersection, cut off an
unsuspecting driver making a right turn, got honked at, and proceeded to
stand over his bike performing a one-fingered salute as the car drove off.


Even my computer has better manners! :-)
Not In Dictionary: ****head
Change To: hothead

--
Scott Ehardt
http://www.scehardt.com

Ok, I'm outa this one.

Scottie started yet another flame war.

Let the cycling community drop this one and take the high road.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 14 May 2005 19:56:14 -0400, "WeatherGuy"
> > wrote:
>
> >This behaviour by the cyclist was unacceptable. The "****head" was
> >unacceptable as well. There are times when it is necessary for safety
> >reasons to ride on a sidewalk
>
> Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is against California law. There are
> no exceptions for "safety reasons."

Yet police are not shy about inviting children to ride on the sidewalk on
some routes close to schools to keep them out of danger. I've seen it done
in person in my little town. In a Palo Alto there are many road signs in
similar neighborhoods that say "Bicyclist may use sidewalks". I expect these
are directed at the younger riders.

Last time I took my 10 year old daughter on a 10 mile odyssey I had pulled
out my beater hybrid and she was on her mountain bike and we were heading
along at a decent pace on the local MUP, slowing to carefully pass
pedistrians when two guys on road bikes in full kits screamed by us. She
was very surprised (I saw them coming in my mirror.) I explained that
apparently they were very lost.

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:47:39 -0400, Joe Canuck
> > wrote:
>
>
>>>>http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/
>>>
>>>Your website says it all, you are the asshole, everyone is supposed to
>>>behave as you think they should.
>>
>>Wow, I missed that on my first pass of his post.
>>
>>Ok, so we now know why he carries the camera... to collect "evidence" to
>>support his hate-on website.
>
>
> Let me guess: you're one of those assholes who takes up multiple
> parking spaces, or regularly blocks traffic by parking in no-parking
> zones?

That would be difficult, sinc I don't own a car.

> If not, then what, exactly, do you find objectionable about my
> web site? I only hate what every reasonable person hates: people who

It is a negative site, with little to nothing to offer in a positive way.

> think that the rules don't apply to them and that they should be
> allowed to do whatever the hell they want - like ride their bicycle on
> the sidewalk.

Of course, you have verified this with every single person who you claim
to be an idiot?

I suspect you take every single incident like this very personally and
figure the person has made a point to be at that particular location of
the sidewalk at the same time as you... just to **** you off.

Right.

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> On Sat, 14 May 2005 21:02:59 -0400, Joe Canuck
> > wrote:
>
>
>>How to ****-off Scottie...
>
>
> Pretty good, but you forgot the part where you drive 15 MPH below the
> speed limit in a no-passing zone with 20 cars stacked up behind you
> yet you refuse to use the turnouts. You also forgot to mention how you
> are so busy digging **** out of your glovebox that you miss the left
> turn arrow, even though I'm leaning on the horn behind you. And don't
> forget how you find it a personal challenge to maximize the number of
> parking spaces you can occupy - I think you said your personal best
> was 8. Oh, and be sure to tell us how you zoom up in the lane that is
> closing and then force your way into the through lane only when your
> right front fender hits a cone.
>

Although I currently do not own a vehicle, my next one will be a Hummer.
I plan on running over slow drivers like you.

"Joe Canuck" > wrote in message
...
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:47:39 -0400, Joe Canuck
>> > wrote:

>> If not, then what, exactly, do you find objectionable about my
>> web site? I only hate what every reasonable person hates: people who
>
> It is a negative site, with little to nothing to offer in a positive way.
>
Oh no! Not a negative site, how horrible, that Scott should
have anything less than positive to say about mouth-breathers
who make the rest of us go out of our way to accomidate
thier laziness.

Boo-Hoo.

Bernard

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2005 19:56:14 -0400, "WeatherGuy"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>This behaviour by the cyclist was unacceptable. The "****head" was
>>unacceptable as well. There are times when it is necessary for safety
>>reasons to ride on a sidewalk
>
>
> Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is against California law. There are
> no exceptions for "safety reasons."
>

Can you cite the specific law that covers this? A quick search on Google
showed that in California it is illegal to park a bike laying down on
the sidewalk, and that local communities may have laws regarding
sidewalk riding. But I didn't see anything at the state level making
this illegal.

I would regard your and your wife's behavior as extremely rude, in any
case. If the two of you were taking up the entire width of the sidewalk,
as you said in your original post, then at least one of you should have
been paying attention so you could accomodate others on the sidewalk.
Did you see the biker on the sidewalk? If not, then I doubt either of
you would have paid attention to another pedestrian.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 14 May 2005 19:34:22 -0500, "di" > wrote:
>
>
> Heh heh - looks like I've managed to **** off a few MORE arrogant
> pedalcyclists.


Careful, you'll break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back, It'll
take a lot more than a little nobody with a big out of control ego to ****
me off. I've seen jerks like you come and go all my life, I can tell
you a lot more of them go than come.