Just Jack Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 People on bikes have to follow the rules of the road, like not going the wrong way down a one way street, like the one I almost hit last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted August 27, 2009 Author Share Posted August 27, 2009 So let's say there is a slow moving car in front of you and you are wanting to make a right turn ahead. Do you get to pass the car on left swerve in front of the slow moving car to make your turn and have an appropriate expectation that the other driver should come to a stop to allow you to turn without colliding? Just because you elect to drive faster does not make your actions in this scenario proper nor legal. The same holds true for the spandex army. You have no right to improperly pass them and cut them off because you think they should stop simply because it is more convenient for you. So you're saying if a car is going down a 40MPH road at 40 and passes cyclists going 15, he should wait at the intersection until the spandex clad mob passes him on the inside? Or should he slow down to 15 every time he sees a bike? Or should he just buy some spandex and a bike and ditch the car? If the car is ahead of the bike, or another car, its driver has the right of way to turn it and should turn. If the biker runs into him, the biker should be ticketed and pay for the damages to the auto. If enough people turn, then idiot bicyclists will learn to actually follow the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 So you're saying if a car is going down a 40MPH road at 40 and passes cyclists going 15, he should wait at the intersection until the spandex clad mob passes him on the inside? Yes, while I am not a lawyer that would be my interpretation of the law I posted earlier (and frankly, common sense would suggest that the law generally favors the least protected individual in the situation). I go back to - if you are in effect "cutting off" the spandex mob (rider) you are in the wrong. If the car is ahead of the bike, or another car, its driver has the right of way to turn it and should turn. If the biker runs into him, the biker should be ticketed and pay for the damages to the auto. If enough people turn, then idiot bicyclists will learn to actually follow the rules. It's a free country so feel free to test your theory out. Let me know how it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 There are always arguments about whether certain things are rights. Most times people contrast "right" with privelege. Voting is seen by some as a right and by others as a privelege. This privelege can be lost by committing a crime unless you are Kobe Bryant or someone else famous. Other times people think something is a right whereas others simply do not. Health care is an example of this. Some think everyone should get it while others thinnk it has to be bought in one way or another. My question for you is slightly different. It has to do whether something is a right or a responsibility. There are probably many examples like mine but to me it is the best illustration. Let's say you are driving down a street in your car and approaching either a single bicyclist or mupltiple bicyclists wearing spandex and dumb looking streamline helmets. You need to take a right turn at the next intersection. By the time you reach the intersection you have passed the bike but if you turn you will impede its progress as the cyclist intends on going straight. Here is where the question comes into play. Probably 50% of people would say it is your right to turn anyway and force the cyclist to either stop or plow headlong into your car depending on distance and speed. The other 50% would say it is your responsibility as a citizen to turn. I am not torn because I don't like to see people hurt, but at the same time I guess if pressed I would agree it is a responsibility. Spandex does not give a person superior rights on the road. If a car was behind me when I was turning right, it would not try to cut inside me as I turned. Neither would a regular non-spandexed kid on a bike. It is usually the Lance Armstrong wannabes that do this crap. If people continue to defer to these morons they will get worse and worse. I say if these people know they are going to get hurt, they will start following the rules of the road and use logic in deciding where they travel. Think about it. If you plowed into a car, projectiled over it into the street, smashed up your bike, cracked your precious helmet, tore your yellow spandex, got hurt and had to pay for a dented car door, you would not do the same obnoxious thing the next time. If you witnessed your biking buddy doing the same thing, you might also learn a lesson. By not excercizing your right as a motorist you are making the roads more dangerous as the bicyclists get more bold. That is why I think it is your responsibility to enforce the rules of the road. Don't get me wrong, I don't think you should go out of your way to hit anyone, but you also shouldn't empower them. If you avoid hitting a rule breaker to "give them a break", you are actually hurting yourself, the bicyclist and to a degree society. What do you think? Are they Canadian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBud Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Do you stop at STOP signs? Call me a liar, but yes I do thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Call me a liar, but yes I do thank you. Then you are my hero! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBud Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Then you are my hero! Being a former first responder I've picked up and mopped up a few before. I don't care to be one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Being a former first responder I've picked up and mopped up a few before. Was Crayonz in the area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBud Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Was Crayonz in the area? Not sure, I just kept going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted August 27, 2009 Author Share Posted August 27, 2009 Yes, while I am not a lawyer that would be my interpretation of the law I posted earlier (and frankly, common sense would suggest that the law generally favors the least protected individual in the situation). I go back to - if you are in effect "cutting off" the spandex mob (rider) you are in the wrong. It's a free country so feel free to test your theory out. Let me know how it goes. Common sense would dictate stopping the bike before running into the side of a car. It is this kind of bicycling mentality that has our country reeling. Me me me. I can't go on a road that is less traveled. I can't just go out and have some fun, I have to dress up like a dork and show off for God knows who. I can't be on equal terms with a car even though if there were no cars there would be no road. I have to be a superior bicyclist. I can't stop just because there is a car in front of me. I will sue everyone to protect my spandex. Give me a break. It's a road. follow the rules. If there were a car I had passed a safe distance back and I went to take a right and the car came up on the inside of me and hit me, THAT driver would be in trouble. But a bike dude who is even more stupid gets a free pass and I'm in trouble? Let's try this one: I'm in a long line of cars stopped at a light. I am first in line. I want to take a right and right on reds are allowed. I begin my right safely but did not notice that spandex boy was riding along the shoulder quickly passing the cars stopped in line. He also wants to take a right but does not want to act like a civilized human and wait in line. Naturally his right is wider than mine because he is going faster. He sideswipes me before I was even able to see him because my view was blocked my the other cars. He flies 14 feet in the air and rips his shirt on the asphalt. I suppose because I'm in a car it was my fault right? How about this one: A spandex clad moron is riding along the road on a metal bike in a thunderstorm. He is struck by lightning. I suppose this one is God's fault or maybe the weatherman who had predicted the storm would start 30 minutes later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted August 27, 2009 Author Share Posted August 27, 2009 Are they Canadian? Amazingly, in some ways they are even dumber if you can imagine that level of dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 What the hell - I'll continue to play along Common sense would dictate stopping the bike before running into the side of a car. Yes, assuming the individual on the bike had ample time to stop. Again, my response is based on the assumption there is not sufficient time for the rider to stop. I went through this exact scenario once when some stupid @##! woman came up from behind me in a car and turned right immediately in front of me leaving me no choice but to go off the side of the road and to ditch my bike. I was fortunate to have only suffered road rash. I know another guy who had to have a leg amputated becuse a driver did the same thing and left him in the ditch bleeding with a compound fracture of the leg. How's that for the mentality of selfish drivers? There are aZZh0les on both sides of the equation. It is this kind of bicycling mentality that has our country reeling. Me me me. I can't go on a road that is less traveled. I can't just go out and have some fun, I have to dress up like a dork and show off for God knows who. I can't be on equal terms with a car even though if there were no cars there would be no road. I have to be a superior bicyclist. I can't stop just because there is a car in front of me. I will sue everyone to protect my spandex. Give me a break. It's a road. follow the rules. If there were a car I had passed a safe distance back and I went to take a right and the car came up on the inside of me and hit me, THAT driver would be in trouble. But a bike dude who is even more stupid gets a free pass and I'm in trouble? While I agree that if the cyclist is careless and arguably reckless they are asking for trouble and should be accountable for their actions. However, you have no more "right" to the road than does the cyclist or pedestrian or anyone else. If the other party is using the road responsibly and you do not then you should be accountable. Let's try this one: I'm in a long line of cars stopped at a light. I am first in line. I want to take a right and right on reds are allowed. I begin my right safely but did not notice that spandex boy was riding along the shoulder quickly passing the cars stopped in line. He also wants to take a right but does not want to act like a civilized human and wait in line. Naturally his right is wider than mine because he is going faster. He sideswipes me before I was even able to see him because my view was blocked my the other cars. He flies 14 feet in the air and rips his shirt on the asphalt. I suppose because I'm in a car it was my fault right? I agree that technically and perhaps legally (again, I am not a lawyer) you are right. However, I would not want to be in your shoes if the spandex dude sues you. How about this one: A spandex clad moron is riding along the road on a metal bike in a thunderstorm. He is struck by lightning. I suppose this one is God's fault or maybe the weatherman who had predicted the storm would start 30 minutes later? If you happen to pray ask God yourself. However, it clearly fits the description of "an act of God." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 What the hell - I'll continue to play along Yes, assuming the individual on the bike had ample time to stop. Again, my response is based on the assumption there is not sufficient time for the rider to stop. When we were kids of 8 to 12, and we were riding along a "main" road, we knew where cars were at all times. If a car was approaching us as we approach an intersection, we either sped up or slowed down depending on the positioning of the car. We did it as soon as we saw the car. We never just kept going along at the same speed assuming the car would adjust to us. The "main" road was considered to be for cars, at least by us. I guess we assumed that because the width of the lanes was suspiciously well matched to the width of a car. The non-spandexed kids I see riding on the road still behave in this manner. Add a few years and a little spandex and you suddenly have people that continue to travel at the same speed regardless of the car situation. They know the car is there, they know some drivers will need to turn right, but they don't want to disrupt getting their personal best time I suppose. While I agree that if the cyclist is careless and arguably reckless they are asking for trouble and should be accountable for their actions. However, you have no more "right" to the road than does the cyclist or pedestrian or anyone else. If the other party is using the road responsibly and you do not then you should be accountable. Using a 40 MPH road responsibly involves going more than 15 MPH, not having six bikes side to side blocking a lane and being aware of your surroundings. If you are not going a sufficient speed, responsibility involves deferring to people using the road for its constructed purpose and/or using different roads that are more suited for bicyclng purposes. I agree that technically and perhaps legally (again, I am not a lawyer) you are right. However, I would not want to be in your shoes if the spandex dude sues you. Perhaps legally? A complete idiot that I could not possibly have seen runs into me while I'm behaving properly and perhaps the law is on my side? Are there any laws cyclists need to follow? Are they required to stop at a red light behind the last car in line? If you happen to pray ask God yourself. However, it clearly fits the description of "an act of God." The lightning itself is "an act of God". Getting a bike out of a garage and riding it while a thunderstorm is approaching is "an act of an idiot". Given the stuff these people do on sunny days though, it isn't surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBud Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Are there any laws cyclists need to follow? Are they required to stop at a red light behind the last car in line? To answer your questions, yes, there are laws that govern the rules and rights for cyclists for each state. Just like motor vehicles. I consider myself a piece of the traffic "equation". Thus, I do not squeeze myself between the line of cars and whatever is on the right to get to the front of the line of traffic. I put myself in the last in line. Now, I do not appreciate the vehicle behind me riding up my bung hole just because he feels like I should be off in the pea patch somewhere and not slowing him down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 To answer your questions, yes, there are laws that govern the rules and rights for cyclists for each state. Just like motor vehicles. I consider myself a piece of the traffic "equation". Thus, I do not squeeze myself between the line of cars and whatever is on the right to get to the front of the line of traffic. I put myself in the last in line. Now, I do not appreciate the vehicle behind me riding up my bung hole just because he feels like I should be off in the pea patch somewhere and not slowing him down. You shouldn't be off in a pea patch but you should be on a road more apprpriate for bikes. You know, one without a lot of auto traffic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBud Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 You shouldn't be off in a pea patch but you should be on a road more apprpriate for bikes. You know, one without a lot of auto traffic. Sorry friend, don't agree. State of Ohio law allows me to be on roadways as long as I obey the traffic regulations as defined, except where it is prohibited (ex: multilane freeway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted August 29, 2009 Author Share Posted August 29, 2009 Sorry friend, don't agree. State of Ohio law allows me to be on roadways as long as I obey the traffic regulations as defined, except where it is prohibited (ex: multilane freeway). It's wonderful that some people have been able to influence Ohio law but it does not change the FACT that physics and logic dictate bicyclists should stay off main roads, spandex or no spandex. That is the point of my original post. As citizens, it is our responsibility to demonstrate this until lawmakers see the logic. I realize it may take a while. Bicyles simply do not belong on main roads unless their operators realize they are secondary to the use of the road and defer to cars. It is for their own good as wwll as society's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBud Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 I'll leave this topic by agreeing to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts