RkFast

Yes.... except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." While were on the subject of laws, Id like you to post for the audience how you approach complainace with food handling and health code laws in your kitchen. It would also be beneficial if you post the most recent inspection report your kitchen recevied. You ARE a pro chef, right?

Im "outnumbered" only becuase the majority of people posting on this thread havent been on a bike in about a decade. From the get-go Ive stated that my opinion and manner in which I operate any one of my bikes has been one that follows TO THE LETTER how the original article spells it out. Direct from the article: Bikes occupy a gray area of the law. They're neither cars nor pedestrians. Most states do carve out special laws for bikes, but not enough to avoid confusion. Take this scenario: I'm approaching a stop sign on my bike. There are clearly no cars coming from either direction. Do I come to a complete stop? Can I cautiously slide through? The traffic laws say full stop. But in practice, few bikers hit the brake, put their foot on the ground, and then start pedaling again. Are they criminals? The D.C. Code recognizes the special status of bikes. Bikes shall follow all traffic laws, the code says, except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." The stop sign scenario above matches perfectly the one I described in my own experiences, too. Based on speaking to and following the lead of many fellow cyclists I ride often with, some as advanced and experienced as having rode under their home Country's National flag in the Olympics and Cycling National Championships, and having read this, and many many articles on the subject, and having logged close to 4,000 miles/year on my own, Im comfortable that how I operate anby of my bikes, on the road or off it is in line with A) traffic law as it is currently intepreted and enforced and B) with keeping my safety and the safety of others in mind and C) common courtesy. Ive NEVER in this thread advocated or excused stupid wrong-way riding, riding on sidewalks or ANY behavior that puts either the cyclists, the pedestrians or the driver's safety in ANY kind of jeopardy. Not once. The CLOSEST I came to that is tell inkman that he probably should of waited for the cyclist to pass him and even there, said that only becuase it was the cyclist, not inkman that was a selfish moron. If thats not good enough for ya, theres nothing I can do.

Let me get this right....I carefully watch where Im going, use proper signals, yield to traffic, etc...but becuase I run a red light or go through a stop sign ONLY after slowing and looking both ways and only at six in the morning and/or when there isnt a car or pedestrian around for miles, you cant stand my attitude and Im a "smug mother !@#$er." Youre either completely mindless...or pulling my leg. Which?

You come here not knowing **** about rules of the road of cycling..me, as someone who bikes THOUSANDS of miles a year is DESPERATLEY (and politely) trying to tell you how it all works and in response you write the above? And you call ME a "smug MFer"? You got !@#$ing nerve. Go !@#$ing read up and learn something for which youre spouting off about and then get back to me.

Youre right. They dont. They should in the right lane of traffic, off to the side as much as they can without going into the shoulder. On two lane roads, bikes, espeically groups larger than five, can (and should) take a full lane a lane of traffic and move to the side as needed to allow faster cars to pass as traffic and conditions permit.

DO NOT lump those morons in with legit cyclists. Please.

Now youre losing me. You implied that the mass of your truck somehow comes into play here and im trying to tell you that might not be the case. Ive been way over to the right, riding along, using my blinky, hand signals and making gramma Edie blush with how carefully Im obeying the rules, only to slide right into the back of a few backward hat wearing, trucknut hanging dipshits who decided to stop RIGHT NOW and hang a quick right into a fast food drivethru. So again...it plays both ways. Yield and play nice and nobody gets hurt. Drive and/or ride along like a selfish ass and everybody else caters to "ME", and there will be blood.

You just illustrated my point. You assumed "the other guy" was the one who needed to do the yielding. No, you werent wrong, per se..but you were not driving defensively. And not for nothing...a bike moving at 20MPH on tires with a half inch contact patch doesnt exactly stop on a dime. You lock up a road bike's rear wheel and you might as well be on roller skates. Again...you werent "wrong"....you just assumed that the other nimrod knew what he was doing. First rule of driving, right? Dont assume the other !@#$ isnt an !@#$.

What you did wrong was assume he was going to stop. You did have the ROW, but since you both got to the intersection at the same exact time, you, as well as the cyclist, assumed "the other guy" was going to yield.

Cycling and traffic laws are a weird dynamic. Cyclists do have to obey the rules, but UNLIKE when driving a car, to the extend you obey them is MUCH more dependenent on conditions and time of day. To use Tone's example, if youre riding through a nice quiet neigborhood on your way home, a cyclist is NOT going to come to a full stop for every stop sign. That would be pointless. A good cyclist will come to an intersection like this, look both ways, determine that the road is clear and keep going. If there is a car there, s/he may slow down and yield or keep going, depending on the action of the car. Its actually the same with red lights. Youll come to a light, slow down, look both ways and if traffic permits, go through it and if traffic doesnt permit, stop. To illustrate this...I go down a VERY busy road on my morning rides. At 530AM on my way out when the road is very very quiet, I wont stop for lights or stopsigns...just as I approach, make sure traffic is clear and keep right on going. But on the way back at 830AM in the middle of rush hour, its a whole different ballgame and Im MUCH more in tune with the cars and stop lights and Im very careful to "follow the traffic signal rules" and what not. I cant speak for the fools who ride on sidewalks, against traffic or just blow through lights without looking. Obviously, there is no place for that. But cyclist's rode rules are governed MUCH more by traffic conditions at the time and not as much by the rules automobiles are governed by. One thing thats a peeve of mine...this notion by cars that I have to get to the shoulder. No....share the road. I dont see you driving your car in the shoulder, dodging roadkill, tree blowdown, dirt and garbage. Dont expect me ride my bike in that crap.

Happy Birfday Ralph. SELL THE TEAM NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rot inb hell you redneck POS, Coleman....DIE.

How about this..... JUST GIVE IT TO THEM

Give me a fugging breaki...thats a damned catch

Im a forgiving Christian man and all, but if Walt Coleman was ass raped by a bull and then run over by a steamroller...I wouldnt shed a single !@#$ing tear.

Wow...they missed it...what a shock

I think the ONE saving grace in this whole mess is the fact that although the team stinks to high hell and has for a while, it STILL sells so many tickets each week. This blows the whole "WNY cant support a team" line of reasoning right out of the water.

What she said. But Im much more in the "heroic" camp. My only fear is that this will be one of those lynchpins/examples that will be used as "proof" that the team needs to be moved.

Oh stop.

Youre doing the same thing! Holy sh-.

Hate to break it to all the libs, but you might as well give up on being fans of the NFL RIGHT NOW, becuase as a whole, the NFL's ownership structure is DOMINATED by rich, white "old money" males and therefore, by extension, most likely Conservative/Republican. Thats right, the ownership of the league RIGHT NOW is made up of a bunch of Limbaughs, but without the microphones and painkillers. Well...maybe without the microphones. So buh-bye, libs....go have fun watching the "knitting and navel gazing" extravaganza on MSNBC next week, which youre more suited to anyway.

Care to pull out the line in ANY one of these health care bills being floated that says "Any and all claims submitted will be honored without dispute"?

I dont buy this premise at all. Edwards isnt getting killed back there and the running game has been faily effective. Wilson gave the "line play" excuse the other day too. It doesnt wash, not this year.

Im sorry. Youre right. Its only been a decade of futility. We should be more patient.