Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
On May 23, 2010, at 3:30 AM, William Robb wrote: There is no justification for refusing to share the road, but that is a two way street, so to speak. A cyclist who is operating his vehicle in such a way as to be a danger to others deserves some consequences. A danger to others? Who exactly would that be? For myself, if I have to make the choice of going up on a sidewalk or crashing into a building to avoid an adult cyclist who is being an ass, I'll take the path that does the least damage to my vehicle and puts someone other than me clearly at fault. And you may end up in all sorts of shit if they find out you deliberately chose that course of action. Damaging some property isn't in the same league as maiming or killing someone. I can understand if your choice is between running down one person or a whole family though. I do cut young children a lot of slack, but about the time they hit puberty I figure they should be showing some sense. If that means playing Whack-A-Mole with an idiot who wants to be a fatality, then I'm not going to argue with the dork. If I run into a parked car to avoid a cyclist, I'm the one who has run into a parked car, and I'll also be the one who get's nicked for doing it, since the cyclist is unlikely to wait around to admit fault. It's easier on my insurance that way. You'd kill someone to avoid a bit of hassle? What the fuck kind of misguided ethics do you live by? Would you then return your vehicle to the dealer for a refund? Our police are taking it pretty seriously though. A few weeks ago a cyclist ran a stop sign and got knocked over by a truck. The police made the effort to go to the hospital and ticket him for failing to stop, and I believe operating a vehicle without due care and attention. He obviously deserved it for being stupid... even though the ticket was probably the least of his worries. Down here the law is that if you could have stopped but chose not to, you bear responsibility. This applies regardless of how stupidly the person you hit was behaving. If you think about that for a few seconds you'll realise it makes sense in the context of road safety. Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
On 5/23/10, David Mann d...@multisport.net.nz wrote: You'd kill someone to avoid a bit of hassle? What the fuck kind of misguided ethics do you live by? Would you then return your vehicle to the dealer for a refund? David, Cut Bill a little slack would you. From what I read, he would at least tell the dealer how the vehicle was damaged. ;-) :-))) Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
- Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not On May 23, 2010, at 3:30 AM, William Robb wrote: There is no justification for refusing to share the road, but that is a two way street, so to speak. A cyclist who is operating his vehicle in such a way as to be a danger to others deserves some consequences. A danger to others? Who exactly would that be? Anyone else on the road. Avoiding an idiot on a bike may well put an innocent pedestrian into the path of a vehicle, or may cause me to take out another cyclist. For myself, if I have to make the choice of going up on a sidewalk or crashing into a building to avoid an adult cyclist who is being an ass, I'll take the path that does the least damage to my vehicle and puts someone other than me clearly at fault. And you may end up in all sorts of shit if they find out you deliberately chose that course of action. Damaging some property isn't in the same league as maiming or killing someone. I can understand if your choice is between running down one person or a whole family though. I have a right to self preservation. Since motor vehicle collisions are unpredictable, smashing into a parked car at speed may well cause me injury. You put yourself in a situation where I have to choose between potentially hurting myself and definitely hurting you, and you are going to get hurt. If you don't like it, then obey the rules of the road. It's a pretty simple concept to follow. I'm not out there hunting bike riders, I'm just expecting them to drive their vehicles in a safe and sane manner and obey the rules. If they aren't going to do that, they are going to be someone's hood ornament eventually. I do cut young children a lot of slack, but about the time they hit puberty I figure they should be showing some sense. If that means playing Whack-A-Mole with an idiot who wants to be a fatality, then I'm not going to argue with the dork. If I run into a parked car to avoid a cyclist, I'm the one who has run into a parked car, and I'll also be the one who get's nicked for doing it, since the cyclist is unlikely to wait around to admit fault. It's easier on my insurance that way. You'd kill someone to avoid a bit of hassle? What the fuck kind of misguided ethics do you live by? Would you then return your vehicle to the dealer for a refund? No, I'd return my vehicle to the dealer to have the grill replaced. Our police are taking it pretty seriously though. A few weeks ago a cyclist ran a stop sign and got knocked over by a truck. The police made the effort to go to the hospital and ticket him for failing to stop, and I believe operating a vehicle without due care and attention. He obviously deserved it for being stupid... even though the ticket was probably the least of his worries. Down here the law is that if you could have stopped but chose not to, you bear responsibility. This applies regardless of how stupidly the person you hit was behaving. If you think about that for a few seconds you'll realise it makes sense in the context of road safety. If it's just a matter of stopping, then fine. If it's a matter of choosing what I am going to hit, I'll hit whatever is going to cause me the least harm. If that is a fool on a bicycle who is creating havoc on the street, well, he should have thought things through a little more carefully. Why should I take a head on with a bus because a moron cyclist ran a stop, failed to yield or swerved into my path? You want me to respect your right to the road, then you need to show me the same respect and operate your vehicle properly. At the end of the day, a bike colliding with a motor vehicle is going to hurt the cyclist more than the car driver, so it behoves the cyclist to obey the rules and not presume that he has carte blanche to pretend that he owns the road and everyone else can bloody well drive into the ditch. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not Cut Bill a little slack would you. From what I read, he would at least tell the dealer how the vehicle was damaged. ;-) :-))) And I'd be treating it as an insurance issue. I wouldn't try to pretend that my truck was delivered with someones brains embedded in the radiator. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
On 5/23/2010 12:01 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Tom C
Subject: Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,
not
Cut Bill a little slack would you. From what I read, he would at
least tell the dealer how the vehicle was damaged. ;-) :-)))
And I'd be treating it as an insurance issue. I wouldn't try to
pretend that my truck was delivered with someones brains embedded in
the radiator.
William Robb
Boy, that's giving the cycles the benefit of doubt.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
On May 22, 2010, at 5:47 AM, William Robb wrote: Consequently, we also have a lot of car/ bicycle accidents where the car driver simply refuses to give up his right of way to an errant cyclist and takes him out instead. That is absolutely disgusting. There's no justification for that kind of behaviour and I hope such drivers are being hauled into court. If they could have stopped but chose not to then they've committed assault, regardless of provocation. Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
[...] I put on a helmet when it rains. It keeps the hood of my rain jacket on my head. That increases the chance of you having an accident. When you're wearing a hood and turn round to see if there are any juggernauts bearing down on you, the hood obscures most of your vision. To get it out of the way you have to take one hand off the handlebar. I recommend wearing a traditional cycling cap made from a water-repellent material,such as this: http://www.rapha.cc/rapha-cap/ It may also help keep your scalp attached to your skull when you slide along the blacktop on your head. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 3:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: snip Most cyclists are not idiots. It's just the idiots who get all the attention. Same with drivers and pedestrians. Most are kind and courteous. It's the minority of fools that we all see and hear about. They should set up a special place where they can all be gathered together and kept away from the rest of us. No, wait, isn't that London...? Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
Such studies have been done, of course. But all they can measure is the accident rate in the jurisdiction; they can't compare the accident rate with helmets to the rate for the same area without helmet use. But they can. Studies from a period before mandatory helmet wearing can be compared to a period immediately after helmet mandation. Provided other factors haven't significantly changed, and the study periods encompass the same cycling population in the same place and in the same seasons, then the results can be fairly compared. Provided other factors haven't significantly changed, There's the rub. It also would require the correct figures to have been gathered correctly. The stuff I've read about it all seems to show that there are no uncontroversial like-for-like figures available. It's probably better if we go back to discussing the definition of Art - it's an easier matter to settle. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
It's tempting to point to statistics that show a (slightly) lower rate of injury amongst helmet wearers. But this is a self-selecting population; it's quite plausible that the sort of person who elects to wear a helmet is less likely to engage in risky activities, and thus would have a lower chance of an accident even without the helmet. The stats would probably be more meaningful from jurisdictions such as mine where it's illegal to ride sans helmet (though of course many do, one the spot fines are regularly dispensed). The figures from Aus show that although the number of serious injuries declined, so did the number of miles cycled, so the rate of injury increased. The health of the whole population also declined because the people who didn't cycle but who would have done previously did not get the health gains of cycling. So society as a whole lost out by make helmet-wearing compulsory - mandatory helmets saved some people, but more people died because instead of cycling they were slumped in front of Neighbours with a tube of the amber nectar. There are various problems with the before after stats which can be quite hotly contested, but similar results appear to found wherever the 'experiment' is carried out. Here are some stats for GB, where helmets are not compulsory and where helmet use has increased as the number of miles cycled has increased. http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1071.html. In London it seems there is safety in numbers, and that the more cyclists there are on the roads, the safer cycling becomes regardless of helmet use - although it is not at all unsafe compared with other activities. Most cycling deaths here are the result of left-turning lorries crushing the cyclist against the pavement barrier - something which helmets could not prevent. The answer to that one lies in cyclist and driver training, and the replacement of barriers with other means of keeping traffic off the pavement. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
2010/5/22 Bob W p...@web-options.com: [...] I put on a helmet when it rains. It keeps the hood of my rain jacket on my head. I have a reflective GoreTex helmet cover, keeps rain and wind out and surface friction is enough to hold a Petzl TacTikka XP LED headlamp which can be used as both a headlight or a taillight with slip-in color screens That increases the chance of you having an accident. When you're wearing a hood and turn round to see if there are any juggernauts bearing down on you, the hood obscures most of your vision. To get it out of the way you have to take one hand off the handlebar. Totally, tried the cobra hood of my ecwcs parka before and while it was a nice fit, I didn't see a thing turning my head. And I find most bicycle mirrors to be useless. I recommend wearing a traditional cycling cap made from a water-repellent material,such as this: http://www.rapha.cc/rapha-cap/ It may also help keep your scalp attached to your skull when you slide along the blacktop on your head. I doubt that. Same as with motorcycle gear, if it isn't securely attached, either to you or to another piece of gear, it will simply come sliding right off on impact or shortly thereafter... =( -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 01:38:51PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote: From: Christian Skofteland It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). The Washington Post had an article about the conflicts between cars and bikes that was slanted against bikes. The writer kept going back to the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs argument but only briefly touched on the drivers that go out of their way to intimidated and assault bicyclists. I have seen plenty of the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs. It's a self correcting problem as far as I'm concerned. I've never witnessed motorists go out of their way to intimidate cyclists. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I have never seen it. I've been on the receiving end several times in one ride, in fact. I live in a fairly rural area and a lot of the people, especially 20-something males, find it sporting to brush as close to a cyclist as possible, yell obsenities, throw objects (cans, bottles, etc) from their vehicles, brake-check following cyclists, deliberately swerving into or in front of bikes... the list goes on. Every one of those things has happened to me. I ride sanely, keep to the right as much as possible, mind my own business and go out of my way to help cars pass me on blind hills or corners. As much as I've experienced the one thing I try to remember is to keep the middle finger firmly on the handlebar... -- Christian - http://404notfound.blogspot.com http://birdofthemoment.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely not
Bob W wrote: Drivers in the UK are generally fairly considerate towards cyclists. Not as good as the French, but not bad. And the BBC is normally fairly even-handed in its treatment of most subjects. But have a look at this video for an extreme anti-bike bias. It beggars belief: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UiWji4osR0feature=player_embedded Can't argue about the gobbiness. But the incident is interesting. He seems to come out of his lane much further into the road, far earlier than I would expect. All very difficult to evaluate clearly from one poxy helmetcam but it seems, on first perusal, that there was fault on both sides. My personal style, when in heavy traffic, is to wobble like a five-year-old on their first ride without stabilisers. It generates quite a lot of vituperative comment but, so far, no collisions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
- Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not On May 22, 2010, at 5:47 AM, William Robb wrote: Consequently, we also have a lot of car/ bicycle accidents where the car driver simply refuses to give up his right of way to an errant cyclist and takes him out instead. That is absolutely disgusting. There's no justification for that kind of behaviour and I hope such drivers are being hauled into court. If they could have stopped but chose not to then they've committed assault, regardless of provocation. There is no justification for refusing to share the road, but that is a two way street, so to speak. A cyclist who is operating his vehicle in such a way as to be a danger to others deserves some consequences. For myself, if I have to make the choice of going up on a sidewalk or crashing into a building to avoid an adult cyclist who is being an ass, I'll take the path that does the least damage to my vehicle and puts someone other than me clearly at fault. I do cut young children a lot of slack, but about the time they hit puberty I figure they should be showing some sense. If that means playing Whack-A-Mole with an idiot who wants to be a fatality, then I'm not going to argue with the dork. If I run into a parked car to avoid a cyclist, I'm the one who has run into a parked car, and I'll also be the one who get's nicked for doing it, since the cyclist is unlikely to wait around to admit fault. It's easier on my insurance that way. Our police are taking it pretty seriously though. A few weeks ago a cyclist ran a stop sign and got knocked over by a truck. The police made the effort to go to the hospital and ticket him for failing to stop, and I believe operating a vehicle without due care and attention. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
I've been on the receiving end several times in one ride, in fact. I live in a fairly rural area and a lot of the people, especially 20-something males, find it sporting to brush as close to a cyclist as possible, yell obsenities, throw objects (cans, bottles, etc) from their vehicles, brake-check following cyclists, deliberately swerving into or in front of bikes... the list goes on. Every one of those things has happened to me. I ride sanely, keep to the right as much as possible, mind my own business and go out of my way to help cars pass me on blind hills or corners. As much as I've experienced the one thing I try to remember is to keep the middle finger firmly on the handlebar... I had a near miss this morning. I needed to turn right across oncoming traffic to get to my street. I positioned myself correctly and waited for a gap in the traffic. While I was waiting, an oncoming car needed to do a left turn just after me. There was a van behind him driven by a young man who rather than slow down pulled out at speed to go round him and came straight at me. I could see the young man looking at and cursing the left-turning car in front of him, so I know he had not seen me. I had to make a sharp jump to my left to get out of his way. I knew there was no traffic coming behind me, so I was safe, but if there had been I would have been lucky to escape. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely not
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UiWji4osR0feature=player_embedded Can't argue about the gobbiness. But the incident is interesting. He seems to come out of his lane much further into the road, far earlier than I would expect. I think he has come out at the right time, and in the right position. I'd say he is cycling as advocated by the likes of John Franklin in Cyclecraft. That is, he's taking the line justifiably. All very difficult to evaluate clearly from one poxy helmetcam but it seems, on first perusal, that there was fault on both sides. Can't agree with you. As I see it the driver deliberately knocked him off the bike. The cyclist was not at fault at all. My personal style, when in heavy traffic, is to wobble like a five-year-old on their first ride without stabilisers. It generates quite a lot of vituperative comment but, so far, no collisions. You are remarkably wise for one so young, my child. It seems that drivers give more space to cyclists who are NOT wearing a helmet than to people who are. This is thought to be because they assume that people wearing a helmet know what they are doing, and people like me do not. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely not
Bob W wrote: the driver deliberately knocked him off Far too big a step, not just in this scenario but many others. No doubt it does happen but you couldn't get away with it more than two or three times. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely not
On 2010-05-21 09:45 , Christian Skofteland wrote: It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). i didn't know there was a national day; Denver's bike to work day is 23 June this year -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely not
Drivers in the UK are generally fairly considerate towards cyclists. Not as good as the French, but not bad. And the BBC is normally fairly even-handed in its treatment of most subjects. But have a look at this video for an extreme anti-bike bias. It beggars belief: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UiWji4osR0feature=player_embedded -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely not
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 04:02:08PM +0100, Bob W wrote: Drivers in the UK are generally fairly considerate towards cyclists. Not as good as the French, but not bad. And the BBC is normally fairly even-handed in its treatment of most subjects. But have a look at this video for an extreme anti-bike bias. It beggars belief: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UiWji4osR0feature=player_embedded It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). The Washington Post had an article about the conflicts between cars and bikes that was slanted against bikes. The writer kept going back to the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs argument but only briefly touched on the drivers that go out of their way to intimidated and assault bicyclists. -- Christian - http://404notfound.blogspot.com http://birdofthemoment.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
From: Christian Skofteland It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). The Washington Post had an article about the conflicts between cars and bikes that was slanted against bikes. The writer kept going back to the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs argument but only briefly touched on the drivers that go out of their way to intimidated and assault bicyclists. I have seen plenty of the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs. It's a self correcting problem as far as I'm concerned. I've never witnessed motorists go out of their way to intimidate cyclists. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I have never seen it. I have been hit (brushed) by motorists twice when I was on a bicycle. Both times I was knocked down, but otherwise uninjured. In neither case, one a city bus, did the driver stop and inquire if I was OK. I don't even know if they were aware they had knocked me down. I have twice had cyclists crash into me in my automobile. Once from the rear, once from the passenger side. In both cases I checked that they were OK. In neither case did the cyclist inquire as to possible damage done to my vehicle ... the side hit DID require body work to repair. I try to be vigilant whenever cyclists are on the road. Given the disparity in road weights momentum, I don't ever want to hit one. But, it's not going to be my fault if it happens. It will be in spite of my having done everything I could to share the road. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
- Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not From: Christian Skofteland It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). The Washington Post had an article about the conflicts between cars and bikes that was slanted against bikes. The writer kept going back to the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs argument but only briefly touched on the drivers that go out of their way to intimidated and assault bicyclists. I have seen plenty of the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs. It's a self correcting problem as far as I'm concerned. I've never witnessed motorists go out of their way to intimidate cyclists. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I have never seen it. I have been hit (brushed) by motorists twice when I was on a bicycle. Both times I was knocked down, but otherwise uninjured. In neither case, one a city bus, did the driver stop and inquire if I was OK. I don't even know if they were aware they had knocked me down. I have twice had cyclists crash into me in my automobile. Once from the rear, once from the passenger side. In both cases I checked that they were OK. In neither case did the cyclist inquire as to possible damage done to my vehicle ... the side hit DID require body work to repair. I try to be vigilant whenever cyclists are on the road. Given the disparity in road weights momentum, I don't ever want to hit one. But, it's not going to be my fault if it happens. It will be in spite of my having done everything I could to share the road. I don't know what the bike laws are in your part of the world, but here a bicycle is considered to be a motor vehicle, and as such is required to be operated in accordance with local laws. We have such a huge problem here with cyclists operating with a holier than thou I'm entitled attitude that there is a growing sentiment growing among drivers that cyclists really don't have a right to be there since they abuse the privledge so frequently. Consequently, we also have a lot of car/ bicycle accidents where the car driver simply refuses to give up his right of way to an errant cyclist and takes him out instead. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
On 5/21/2010 10:47 AM, William Robb wrote: I don't know what the bike laws are in your part of the world, but here a bicycle is considered to be a motor vehicle, and as such is required to be operated in accordance with local laws. Same here. We have such a huge problem here with cyclists operating with a holier than thou I'm entitled attitude that there is a growing sentiment growing among drivers that cyclists really don't have a right to be there since they abuse the privledge so frequently. Same here. Not to mention the Critical Massholes that do far more to piss people off than they do to promote cycling. The problem is that often times the safest thing to do on a bicycle is not to come to a complete stop, but to slow down enough to check for traffic, and come to a stop if necessary. When you're at a stop on a bike, you're dead in the water and have no way to get out of the way of anything. I hear that Idaho recognizes this and allows bicyclists to come to a safe rolling stop. Consequently, we also have a lot of car/ bicycle accidents where the car driver simply refuses to give up his right of way to an errant cyclist and takes him out instead. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
- Original Message - From: Larry Colen Subject: Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not The problem is that often times the safest thing to do on a bicycle is not to come to a complete stop, but to slow down enough to check for traffic, and come to a stop if necessary. When you're at a stop on a bike, you're dead in the water and have no way to get out of the way of anything. I hear that Idaho recognizes this and allows bicyclists to come to a safe rolling stop. We don't recognize rolling stops as anything other than what they are, which is not stopping. It doesn't bother me unless it's my turn to go at a 4 way stop and I'm halfway through the intersection and a 10 speed zips by my grill with the driver doing a Brewer at me. Thats when I tend to floor it. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely, not
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:38 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Christian Skofteland It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). The Washington Post had an article about the conflicts between cars and bikes that was slanted against bikes. The writer kept going back to the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs argument but only briefly touched on the drivers that go out of their way to intimidated and assault bicyclists. I have seen plenty of the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs. It's a self correcting problem as far as I'm concerned. I've never witnessed motorists go out of their way to intimidate cyclists. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I have never seen it. I have been hit (brushed) by motorists twice when I was on a bicycle. Both times I was knocked down, but otherwise uninjured. In neither case, one a city bus, did the driver stop and inquire if I was OK. I don't even know if they were aware they had knocked me down. I have twice had cyclists crash into me in my automobile. Once from the rear, once from the passenger side. In both cases I checked that they were OK. In neither case did the cyclist inquire as to possible damage done to my vehicle ... the side hit DID require body work to repair. I try to be vigilant whenever cyclists are on the road. Given the disparity in road weights momentum, I don't ever want to hit one. But, it's not going to be my fault if it happens. It will be in spite of my having done everything I could to share the road. My experience, as a cyclist, is that cyclists are most of the problem in the city, but also the least dangerous portion. Unfortunately when somewhere between 50 and 70% of the cyclists commuting flagrantly ignore little things like traffic lights or traffic direction on one way streets, it's a little hard to justify cracking down on the 5-10% of drivers who drive in a fashion that's unsafe to cyclists. I've been hit by more cyclists than I have drivers (1 car hit, in a school zone, on a school day right before class almost 20 years ago, about 1 hit by another cyclist per year in the 6-7 years of commuting in Toronto, 1 total hit as a pedestrian by a cyclist riding illegally on the sidewalk through a construction awning). Thankfully no injuries yet. Most of my hits by other cyclists have come when I'm stopped for a light next to a car and they try and force themselves through too small a gap. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
From: William Robb From: John Sessoms From: Christian Skofteland It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). The Washington Post had an article about the conflicts between cars and bikes that was slanted against bikes. The writer kept going back to the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs argument but only briefly touched on the drivers that go out of their way to intimidated and assault bicyclists. I have seen plenty of the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs. It's a self correcting problem as far as I'm concerned. I've never witnessed motorists go out of their way to intimidate cyclists. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I have never seen it. I have been hit (brushed) by motorists twice when I was on a bicycle. Both times I was knocked down, but otherwise uninjured. In neither case, one a city bus, did the driver stop and inquire if I was OK. I don't even know if they were aware they had knocked me down. I have twice had cyclists crash into me in my automobile. Once from the rear, once from the passenger side. In both cases I checked that they were OK. In neither case did the cyclist inquire as to possible damage done to my vehicle ... the side hit DID require body work to repair. I try to be vigilant whenever cyclists are on the road. Given the disparity in road weights momentum, I don't ever want to hit one. But, it's not going to be my fault if it happens. It will be in spite of my having done everything I could to share the road. I don't know what the bike laws are in your part of the world, but here a bicycle is considered to be a motor vehicle, and as such is required to be operated in accordance with local laws. In North Carolina, a bicycle is not a motor vehicle, but IS subject to follow the same rules of the road, aka traffic laws as motor vehicles; i.e. stop signs, one-way streets, right-turn on red after stop, red means stop, green means go and yellow means floor it to get through before it turns red. As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... We have such a huge problem here with cyclists operating with a holier than thou I'm entitled attitude that there is a growing sentiment growing among drivers that cyclists really don't have a right to be there since they abuse the privledge so frequently. Bicycles are governed by additional rules off road on such as bike/pedestrian pathways. We call them greenways. And that's where I see a lot more discourtesy and just plain bad manners from cyclists. Cyclist-pedestrian collisions are as harmful to pedestrians as automobile-cyclist collisions are to cyclists. It doesn't take a collision to injure a pedestrian forced to take evasive action to avoid being run down by a cyclist. But I see cyclists on the greenways acting the same way towards pedestrians as they accuse motorists of acting towards cyclists. Consequently, we also have a lot of car/ bicycle accidents where the car driver simply refuses to give up his right of way to an errant cyclist and takes him out instead. I won't swerve into the path of another motor vehicle and cause an accident to avoid a cyclist who is failing to obey traffic laws. I will slow down, even brake hard ... change lanes IF POSSIBLE, but I recognize there are limits to what I can safely do to avoid the idiots. Most cyclists are not idiots. It's just the idiots who get all the attention. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... But they forget almost immediately. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
Friday, May 21, 2010, 12:54:54 PM, you wrote: TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... TC But they forget almost immediately. TC Tom C. It's those darn helmets...squeezes the brain so all the memories spill out. :) -- Bruce -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
Is this the kind of humor you teach your kids at home? ;-) Tom On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: Friday, May 21, 2010, 12:54:54 PM, you wrote: TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... TC But they forget almost immediately. TC Tom C. It's those darn helmets...squeezes the brain so all the memories spill out. :) -- Bruce -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On 5/21/2010 12:57 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Friday, May 21, 2010, 12:54:54 PM, you wrote: TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:42 PM, John Sessomsjsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... TC But they forget almost immediately. TC Tom C. It's those darn helmets...squeezes the brain so all the memories spill out. :) One of the things that I've learned from racing is that fiberglass (or even carbon fiber) and nomex create a field that dampen brain waves. The proof is the way that when people get into their racecar and put on their helmets, their IQ immediately drops by 15-30 points. -- Bruce -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
I hadn't thought about teaching them humor...will have to think about that. I am an avid cyclist and ride about 15 miles each day. I drag my kids along as often as I can get them to. I do always wear a helmet and require them to as well. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, May 21, 2010, 1:00:01 PM, you wrote: TC Is this the kind of humor you teach your kids at home? ;-) TC Tom TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Bruce Dayton TC bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: Friday, May 21, 2010, 12:54:54 PM, you wrote: TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... TC But they forget almost immediately. TC Tom C. It's those darn helmets...squeezes the brain so all the memories spill out. :) -- Bruce -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
Just yanking your chain. Helmets are certainly smart. How'd we survive? On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: I hadn't thought about teaching them humor...will have to think about that. I am an avid cyclist and ride about 15 miles each day. I drag my kids along as often as I can get them to. I do always wear a helmet and require them to as well. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, May 21, 2010, 1:00:01 PM, you wrote: TC Is this the kind of humor you teach your kids at home? ;-) TC Tom TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Bruce Dayton TC bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: Friday, May 21, 2010, 12:54:54 PM, you wrote: TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... TC But they forget almost immediately. TC Tom C. It's those darn helmets...squeezes the brain so all the memories spill out. :) -- Bruce -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
I don't think it's as clear-cut as some folks would have you beleive. Helmets do seem to prevent (or at least reduce) one class of injury. But as far as I can see there are some pretty credible studies that suggest there is no causative link, or even correlation, between wearing helmets and reducing the frequency or severity of injuries. It's tempting to point to statistics that show a (slightly) lower rate of injury amongst helmet wearers. But this is a self-selecting population; it's quite plausible that the sort of person who elects to wear a helmet is less likely to engage in risky activities, and thus would have a lower chance of an accident even without the helmet. Al that being said, though, I still wear a helmet when I ride my bike. On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 02:34:52PM -0600, Tom C wrote: Just yanking your chain. Helmets are certainly smart. How'd we survive? On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: I hadn't thought about teaching them humor...will have to think about that. I am an avid cyclist and ride about 15 miles each day. ?I drag my kids along as often as I can get them to. ?I do always wear a helmet and require them to as well. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, May 21, 2010, 1:00:01 PM, you wrote: TC Is this the kind of humor you teach your kids at home? ;-) TC Tom TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Bruce Dayton TC bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: Friday, May 21, 2010, 12:54:54 PM, you wrote: TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: As I said before, bad attitude, scoff-law cyclists on streets, roads and highways are a self correcting problem. The ones who live, learn. The ones who won't learn ... TC But they forget almost immediately. TC Tom C. It's those darn helmets...squeezes the brain so all the memories spill out. ?:) -- Bruce -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely not
On 22/05/2010, Christian Skofteland pterali...@aim.com wrote: It's Bike to work Week in the US (Bike to work day was today). The Washington Post had an article about the conflicts between cars and bikes that was slanted against bikes. The writer kept going back to the bikers blowing through red lights and stop signs argument but only briefly touched on the drivers that go out of their way to intimidated and assault bicyclists. Some people just don't help themselves, twice this rainy week at night I've been surprised to see a cyclist in front of me, sans lights, helmet or reflective clothing. Generally I'm pretty careful and there is very good visibility from my car but these ones were a complete surprise, out of nowhere. The other morning a cyclist shot through a red light just as my green turn arrow ok'd me to cross his path. Sydney is a hideous place to cycle as transport. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On 22/05/2010, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote: It's tempting to point to statistics that show a (slightly) lower rate of injury amongst helmet wearers. But this is a self-selecting population; it's quite plausible that the sort of person who elects to wear a helmet is less likely to engage in risky activities, and thus would have a lower chance of an accident even without the helmet. The stats would probably be more meaningful from jurisdictions such as mine where it's illegal to ride sans helmet (though of course many do, one the spot fines are regularly dispensed). -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 11:30:57AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: On 22/05/2010, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote: It's tempting to point to statistics that show a (slightly) lower rate of injury amongst helmet wearers. But this is a self-selecting population; it's quite plausible that the sort of person who elects to wear a helmet is less likely to engage in risky activities, and thus would have a lower chance of an accident even without the helmet. The stats would probably be more meaningful from jurisdictions such as mine where it's illegal to ride sans helmet (though of course many do, one the spot fines are regularly dispensed). Such studies have been done, of course. But all they can measure is the accident rate in the jurisdiction; they can't compare the accident rate with helmets to the rate for the same area without helmet use. The statistics strongly suggest that helmet use itself has at best a negligible contribution to rider safety. By far the most significant contribution is the average number of miles cycled per road user; the more general awareness of cyclists there is, the safer it is to cycle. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On 22 May 2010 12:00, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote: Such studies have been done, of course. But all they can measure is the accident rate in the jurisdiction; they can't compare the accident rate with helmets to the rate for the same area without helmet use. But they can. Studies from a period before mandatory helmet wearing can be compared to a period immediately after helmet mandation. Provided other factors haven't significantly changed, and the study periods encompass the same cycling population in the same place and in the same seasons, then the results can be fairly compared. regards, Anthony Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight (Anon) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 3:42 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: snip Most cyclists are not idiots. It's just the idiots who get all the attention. Same with drivers and pedestrians. Most are kind and courteous. It's the minority of fools that we all see and hear about. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: VeryOT: no anti-bike bias here at all, oh no, absolutely,, not
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 5:53 PM, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote: It's tempting to point to statistics that show a (slightly) lower rate of injury amongst helmet wearers. But this is a self-selecting population; it's quite plausible that the sort of person who elects to wear a helmet is less likely to engage in risky activities, and thus would have a lower chance of an accident even without the helmet. You have the self-selecting part right, though I'm not convinced the pro-helmet crowd takes fewer risks. Rather, the folks who insist on wearing a helmet are probably more concerned about a bump on the noggin, and therefore more likely to seek medical treatment. Whereas people who wouldn't go to see a doctor for any but the most serious head injuries are likely among those who refuse to wear a helmet. I put on a helmet when it rains. It keeps the hood of my rain jacket on my head. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ __o _'\,_ (*)/ (*) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
