Horrible accident on the way to church

[Basil]

Illustrating one absurdity with another absurdity is, well, absurd.

 

[judow]

There are able bicyclists and then there are the not so able bicyclists. The not so able are generally the dead ones or maimed. I try to always give them a wide berth but that is not always possible. On Route 66 there are several of the same cyclists that do not stay on the shoulder of the road, ride side by side and almost seem to defy you to hit them. Some deliberately 'wiggle.' Then there are those that always ride single file and have mirrors to see the traffic behind them. Roads were designed for vehicles, not bicycles and only recently have they included bicycle lanes. I think bycyclists should remember this.

 

[3798j]

The majority of cyclists are also licensed motor vehicle operators. When that lack of consideration is shown while on their bicycle, remember that they are also probably the inconsiderate ones who frustrate you with their lack of courtesy or refusal to obey the law when they're behind the wheel of their auto.

 

[Basil]

There are able bicyclists and then there are the not so able bicyclists. The not so able are generally the dead ones or maimed. I try to always give them a wide berth but that is not always possible. On Route 66 there are several of the same cyclists that do not stay on the shoulder of the road, ride side by side and almost seem to defy you to hit them. Some deliberately 'wiggle.' Then there are those that always ride single file and have mirrors to see the traffic behind them. Roads were designed for vehicles, not bicycles and only recently have they included bicycle lanes. I think bycyclists should remember this.

When we finally did make it to church (a later service) I must have passed a dozen cyclists on old 66. Most of them were on the paved shoulder where they should be, but there were also several who were right on the white line and weaving from the shoulder to the road without a care in the world. I had to slow down several times and inch past them with great trepidation that one would swerve in front of me. At least in parts of Albuquerque proper they have proper bike paths for cyclists, which is a good thing!

 

[GregW]

but there were also several who were right on the white line and weaving from the shoulder to the road without a care in the world. I had to slow down several times and inch past them with great trepidation that one would swerve in front of me.

Maybe it is time to install an airhorn in the vette.

 

[Deleted member 8987]

The Act-Up bike lobby has been pushing for a three-foot rule here in Washington. That means, you cannot get closer than 3 feet to one of these wobblies.
I do not think they consider the reciprocal....they can't get within three feet of you. Even had one too lazy to unclip a shoe and hold onto your car at a stoplight? First I knew of "the push" for this was one particularly wobby moron, two lane road, median, and designated bike lanes. I went past, he yelled at me, thought it might be someone I know, slowed up, and he started yelling for me to give him three feet! I indicated exactly what state law is, that he must ride in the far right of the lane he is in, and that there IS no "three-foot-rule".

Got home and called the cops, just to make sure our Libe.......Legislature hadn't slipped one through, and they had not.

Apparently, the rabble-rousers talk to these folks at Bike Club Meetings, must convince them two and three abreast is okay, wobbling on the line if fine, and all that rot....including full ignoring of stop signs and red lights.

Going to take a lot more splatted bikers, I guess, until the local gummints decide this has gone far enough.
Probably not in our lifetime, tho.

 

[Banjo]

Law here in NY is that a bicyclist should yield to traffic, and otherwise obey all laws pertaining to motor vehicles. We have some nice bike paths here with the recent "Rails to Trails" push utilizing the many abandoned railroad beds around the area. While riding in town, I give to any traffic I encounter, and, unless the intersection is totally empty, I obey all traffic signs/ signals. One guy I used to ride with hated that I did that. he liked to swerve in and out, cut corners, and be a general nuisance. I tend to ride solo now.

 

[aerog]

The bikers where I live certainly act like THEY own the road sometimes (not all of them, but too many). It isn't a matter of who "owns the road" it's a matter of using common sense if you're riding a bike.

Biking is very popular here, to the point that the local bikers were lobbying to completely <span style="font-style: italic">close</span> the only secondary road I can take to work and to town. It's a moderately used road by cars, trucks, motorcycles - and bikes.

I'm ok with sharing the road and all that, but a lot of the bikers here just ignore the rules and do what they feel like. The guts of the biking laws requires bikers to stay "...as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway". They're allowed to ride two-wide, but "Persons riding two abreast shall not impede traffic when traveling at less than the normal speed of traffic..."

So what do a lot of (not all) the bikers do? They ride down the center of the road, sometimes literally on the yellow line. You'll see pairs riding together taking up an entire lane while a dozen cars and trucks are idling along behind them.

Then you have the biker groups that actively cause safety problems. Some of them flagrantly ignore the rules and ride 3-4 wide, making no effort to ride defensively. They peddle along and look back at the line of cars they're holding up and - I've actually seen this - <span style="font-style: italic">laugh</span>.

Other groups will ride single-file on their outings, but then it's not unusual for the last guy in line to watch for cars coming up behind them, then just as a car gets close he'll swerve way over to the left side of the lane. I think they're doing it to force cars to stay farther away from the "pack".

The first time that happened to me I panic-stopped because I thought the guy was going to wreck his bike or something. That's incredibly stupid and unsafe riding but I see it all the time.

For a long time I gave these guys the benefit of the doubt. One day I overheard a local guy talking on a ham radio repeater about biking. Turns out he's an avid biker...he was telling some friends about how he <span style="font-style: italic">always</span> stays as far to the <span style="font-style: italic">left</span> (near the yellow line) as he can so he can be seen better, and to force cars to go around him.

Bikes and cars have to coexist...and while the motorized vehicles also have to abide by laws about dealing with bikes, the fact remains that <span style="font-style: italic">not</span> riding defensively, riding with an attitude, ignoring the rules, and ignoring common sense sure don't help.

 

[lbcs_r_fun]

Illustrating one absurdity with another absurdity is, well, absurd.

<span style="font-weight: bold">BUT, I was under the impression that YOU established strict forum rules concerning topics, such as these, that are <span style="text-decoration: underline">KNOWN</span> to be very controversial!</span> And yet you were the one to initiate this discussion! Seems counter intuitive!

T

 

[judow]

Illustrating one absurdity with another absurdity is, well, absurd.

<span style="font-weight: bold">BUT, I was under the impression that YOU established strict forum rules concerning topics, such as these, that are <span style="text-decoration: underline">KNOWN</span> to be very controversial!</span> And yet you were the one to initiate this discussion! Seems counter intuitive!

T

I do believe you are wrong and judging by the number of your posts I understand this. My take is our esteemed leader has a very strict policy on politics and religion and use of bad language. Other than that we are free to express our views on everyday events. I don't believe that discussing the topic of bicyclists is controversial to the point of being out and out mean spirited. As to the boss initiating this topic I don't see a problem with it. Perhaps you need to rethink your belief? IMHO

 

[Basil]

Illustrating one absurdity with another absurdity is, well, absurd.

<span style="font-weight: bold">BUT, I was under the impression that YOU established strict forum rules concerning topics, such as these, that are <span style="text-decoration: underline">KNOWN</span> to be very controversial!</span> And yet you were the one to initiate this discussion! Seems counter intuitive!

T

I do believe you are wrong and judging by the number of your posts I understand this. My take is our esteemed leader has a very strict policy on politics and religion and use of bad language. Other than that we are free to express our views on everyday events. I don't believe that discussing the topic of bicyclists is controversial to the point of being out and out mean spirited. As to the boss initiating this topic I don't see a problem with it. Perhaps you need to rethink your belief? IMHO

What she said. And by the way, you have a PM (which is what you should use if you have an issue with how I run my forum).

 

[GregW]

And these Amish drivers are clogging my highways at an average less than 20mph.

Hazards for anyone willing to crest blind hills knowing they won't be able to stop if....

It wouldn't be such a problem if they just trained the horses not to stop and pose for photographs. :wink:

 

[Basil]

Speaking of bike safety, in two days I begin motorcycle rider training. This is just the intro course so I can get an endorsement on my license so I can test ride bikes. Have not decided for sure if I'm going to buy a motorcycle, but if I do, I plan to take the advanced riders course one I own one.

 

[jsfbond]

Same rules apply to big trucks,as well as motorcycles, always assume other don't see you, and leave yourself an out.

 

[AngliaGT]

Speaking of bike safety, in two days I begin motorcycle rider training. This is just the intro course so I can get an endorsement on my license so I can test ride bikes. Have not decided for sure if I'm going to buy a motorcycle, but if I do, I plan to take the advanced riders course one I own one.

Always remember the biigest rule of all in motorcycling-
"They ARE out to get you",& ride that way.

- Doug

 

[Basil]

Speaking of bike safety, in two days I begin motorcycle rider training. This is just the intro course so I can get an endorsement on my license so I can test ride bikes. Have not decided for sure if I'm going to buy a motorcycle, but if I do, I plan to take the advanced riders course one I own one.

Always remember the biigest rule of all in motorcycling-
"They ARE out to get you",& ride that way.

- Doug

If I do end up getting a cycle, that will be my on-going assumption.

 

[vagt6]

Excellent idea to take both the intro and advanced rider courses, Basil. In fact, these courses, and riding a motorcycle, will make you a safer driver of cars and bikes.

I took up riding at age 50, never thought I would. It's a feeling of freedom unlike driving a car. If you try hard to avoid the inherent risks, it's not as dangerous as many think.

Good luck with the classes, keep us informed.

 

[aeronca65t]

Our college has been offering courses like that for over 25 years. It's great way to get introduced to motorcycling. We even have about 20 small 125cc bikes (stored in trucking containers) on-site for students to use.

~Our course~

 

[John Turney]

I will say that since I've been a member of this forum, this is the first topic to raise my hackles, which is very good for an internet forum.

Always remember the biigest rule of all in motorcycling-
"They ARE out to get you",& ride that way.

- Doug

I think Greg’s quote of the rule for motorcycling also applies to bicycling. Cycling, like driving my Healey, is a joy, maybe more so since I get to do it more often. It has done wonders for my physical fitness. I don’t want anyone to take that right away due to law or intimidation. There are several older gentlemen in my neighborhood who would like to ride a bike but are too intimidated to ride on the streets.

So, everyone be courteous out there, pay attention and be safe.

 

[Basil]

I will say that since I've been a member of this forum, this is the first topic to raise my hackles, which is very good for an internet forum.

Always remember the biigest rule of all in motorcycling-
"They ARE out to get you",& ride that way.

- Doug

I think Greg’s quote of the rule for motorcycling also applies to bicycling. Cycling, like driving my Healey, is a joy, maybe more so since I get to do it more often. It has done wonders for my physical fitness. I don’t want anyone to take that right away due to law or intimidation. There are several older gentlemen in my neighborhood who would like to ride a bike but are too intimidated to ride on the streets.

So, everyone be courteous out there, pay attention and be safe.

I ride a bike too! Fortunately, in my little town, we have bike paths so I don't have to ride on the roads (much). I'm not suggesting anyone's rights should be taken away, I'm just suggesting exercising some common sense. Speaking for myself ONLY when I ride on Rt66 (as little as possible, but I sometimes have to) I stay as far away from traffic as possible. If there is a paved shoulder - that is where I ride because, not to put too fine a point on it, I don't have a death wish. It's not a matter of rights - it's a matter of the laws of Physics. I would love to see the entire length of Rt66 from Edgewood to Albuquerque have a pike path added like they have on many roads in Albuquerque because I really don't want to see any of my neighbors killed - it's really just that simple for me. (But as most who know me will tell you, I'm a pretty simple guy. My wife tells me so all the time "SIMPLETON!!"). Regardless, we agree that everyone should pay attention and be courteous - regardless of what your driving or riding!

PS: Sorry about the hackles - put a little Bengay on them and they'll be fine.