Screw You, You Self-Entitled Arrogant Asshole Car Drivers

[wguy123]

I live in a very car friendly city. Cool. Lots of road lanes and shit. But you asshole jerk-offs are fucking up the whole program. You are supposed to obey the rules of the road like people on bicycles.

That means stopping at red lights and stop signs. Not blasting through a red light while I am turning you stupid fuck. Not turning in front of me like you don't see me. Not turning without using your turn signals you stupid fucks. And if I am at a light, don't fucking ease up beside me and cruise on through like you don't have to get in line.

I fantasize about breaking your fucking mirror off when you illegally pass me on a solid yellow.

You do not get to selectively obey traffic laws.

I will probably get run over and killed by one of you dumbass morons one day and guess what, it will be your fault.

[Kimstu]

Originally Posted by wguy123

That means stopping at red lights and stop signs. Not blasting through a red light while I am turning you stupid fuck. Not turning in front of me like you don't see me. Not turning without using your turn signals you stupid fucks.

Can't tell if you meant this to be pointless parody or not, but yeah, there are plenty of cars that fail to stop at red lights and stop signs. And turning without signaling is endemic.

[wguy123]

Ripping on a recent pitting about bicyclists.

Someone posted about how bicyclists were inconveniencing them while they are tooling along in their automobile. I commute by bike and from my experience there are far more cars breaking laws than bicyclists (sheer number of autos guarantees this) but the cars almost always have a more deadly result than a bicycle. I won't look up a cite but if anyone can prove that bicyclists cause more: wrecks, injuries, deaths, etc, I'll eat crow. Nearly every day I have to evade some idiot in a car while I am on my bike. Conversely, when I am on my motorized vehicle (motorcycle) I rarely have to evade a bicycle.

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

I think it's people who are the problem.

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan

I think it's people who are the problem.

Even my dogs like to jaywalk. And I have seen plenty of squirrels that seem to have a deathwish...running out in the road with no crosswalk in sight.

[Kimstu]

Originally Posted by wguy123

Someone posted about how bicyclists were inconveniencing them while they are tooling along in their automobile. I commute by bike and from my experience there are far more cars breaking laws than bicyclists (sheer number of autos guarantees this) but the cars almost always have a more deadly result than a bicycle. I won't look up a cite but if anyone can prove that bicyclists cause more: wrecks, injuries, deaths, etc, I'll eat crow.

I think you're certainly right about the absolute numbers, but I'd be willing to believe that the percentage of egregious scofflaws is significantly higher among cyclists than among drivers.

Although I think that this phenomenon may mask a different phenomenon: namely, that a lot of those clueless-dick cyclists started out as clueless-dick drivers and had their driver's licenses revoked for illegal behavior.

In my experience, the guys who ride bikes because they're prohibited from driving due to a DUI conviction are absolutely the worst and stupidest assholes on the road, perhaps with the exception of those drivers who are currently practicing illegal behavior such as DUI but haven't yet been caught at it.

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by Kimstu

I think you're certainly right about the absolute numbers, but I'd be willing to believe that the percentage of egregious scofflaws is significantly higher among cyclists than among drivers.

Depends on your definition of egregious when related to the road. I would speculate that a higher percentage of cars break traffic laws due simply to the speed limit. I speed from time to time in motorized and non-motorized vehicles. I break the law on my bicycle for valid reasons from time to time (ever try to trip a magnetized traffic sensor on a bicycle?). How much of bad behavior (motorized versus non-motorized) is due to revocation of license is beyond me. Idiots seem to travel by all means.

[Snowboarder Bo]

Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan

I think it's people who are the problem.

I blame society.

[Beware of Doug]

Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo

I blame society.

All right, we'll arrest them instead.

wguy, I kinda don't get the term "car friendly." The more cars in a place, the less friendly it is, even for cars.

[DHMO]

It just seems to me that, if you're in a car, you have quite a bit of metal to absorb the impact in an accident. On a bike, you become a red smear on the pavement.

Outrageous idiocy is endemic to both classes of road denizens, but the negative consequences to boorish behavior fall disproportionately of the cyclist. That is one reason why motorists are so incensed by stupid bicyclists—they don't want to be responsible for being the unwitting executioner of some doucherag on wheels with a death wish.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Originally Posted by DHMO

It just seems to me that, if you're in a car, you have quite a bit of metal to absorb the impact in an accident. On a bike, you become a red smear on the pavement.

Outrageous idiocy is endemic to both classes of road denizens, but the negative consequences to boorish behavior fall disproportionately of the cyclist. That is one reason why motorists are so incensed by stupid bicyclists—they don't want to be responsible for being the unwitting executioner of some doucherag on wheels with a death wish.

It might be one reason to some, but not to most. I ride legally, and I have found that a large number of drivers tend to actually be more annoyed with my existence when I do so. Don't misunderstand me: I am much safer by riding legally but I tend to get more horns blasted at me and more deliberate (and illegal) actions taken by drivers - such as going straight on a turn-only lane to pass me, crossing double-yellow lines into traffic, passing much too close, etc.

The simple fact is this: while many drivers say they want cyclists to ride legally, what they really want is the cyclists to be gone.

[enipla]

Originally Posted by Kimstu

Can't tell if you meant this to be pointless parody or not, but yeah, there are plenty of cars that fail to stop at red lights and stop signs. And turning without signaling is endemic.

I always hear people complaining about such things. But where I live it just does not seem to happen. Oh, an occasional blast through a yellow/orange light, and some folks don't use their turn signals but most (95%) do.

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by enipla

I always hear people complaining about such things. But where I live it just does not seem to happen. Oh, an occasional blast through a yellow/orange light, and some folks don't use their turn signals but most (95%) do.

Have you never heard of red-light camera enforcement? I don't think they are installing these for the occasional blast through a yellow. Oh wait...maybe they are installing them to catch all the hooligan bike riders. Those assholes love to run red lights.

[enipla]

Originally Posted by Mr. Miskatonic

It might be one reason to some, but not to most. I ride legally, and I have found that a large number of drivers tend to actually be more annoyed with my existence when I do so. Don't misunderstand me: I am much safer by riding legally but I tend to get more horns blasted at me and more deliberate (and illegal) actions taken by drivers - such as going straight on a turn-only lane to pass me, crossing double-yellow lines into traffic, passing much too close, etc.

The simple fact is this: while many drivers say they want cyclists to ride legally, what they really want is the cyclists to be gone.

Going straight in a turn only lane to pass you? Are you not keeping right? And I believe it is legal for a car to cross the double yellow to pass a bike. At least in Colorado it is.

My Wife is an Iron Man. She does a LOT of bike riding. What bugs me is when a cyclist will ride on a two lane highway with no shoulders when there is a perfectly good paved swept recreational trail that is right next to it.

Yes, there are walkers and joggers on it. It does cause problems. But it beats the hell out of getting hit by a truck. My Wife understands this, and trains on the path.

Riding on the highway may be legal, but it is just nuts.

She did have an accident once on the path because of an inattentive bike rider. Got scraped up pretty good. I would much rather see that than having her come up against an inattentive driver.

[casdave]

Seems to come down to mere bullying, if there was a backhoe trundling along the road, the average car driver would never think about cutting it up, and yet its moving at around the same sort of speed as a bicycle and is a far greater obstruction.

The car driver might get frustrated, but they are most unlikely to be shouting abuse as they overtake the slow moving vehicle, so why is it so common that cyclists receive this treatment?

How often do you see cyclists speeding? I'll bet you broke the speed limit on your way to work in your car today - seems motorists are happy to point out the misdeeds of others but not look too closely at themselves.

Even a 5mph breach of the speed limit can have devastating consequences in a crash, and car drivers can hardly say they are not aware since there are so many public information notices on tv.

[enipla]

Originally Posted by wguy123

Have you never heard of red-light camera enforcement? I don't think they are installing these for the occasional blast through a yellow. Oh wait...maybe they are installing them to catch all the hooligan bike riders. Those assholes love to run red lights.

Huh? Just saying that where I live, most folks seem to obey the traffic laws. We don't have red light cameras that I know of.

Oh, and the only folks that run red lights where I live seem to be bike riders. And I'm mostly OK with it if it's safe.

[Joey P]

Originally Posted by wguy123

I break the law on my bicycle for valid reasons from time to time (ever try to trip a magnetized traffic sensor on a bicycle?).

That's probably not illegal. At least in Wisconsin and at least for motorcycles there's a specific set of circumstances that come together to allow motorcycles to run a red light, I use it all the time in intersections where I know I can't make the light flip. I'd would guess it would apply to bikes...but since you think you're breaking the law, you probably aren't aware of the law and you probably are breaking it.
For example, part of it requires that there aren't any cars coming up behind me that can trip the sensor for me. If I see a car behind me, I'll pull up far enough so that the car can land on the induction coil and wait for the next cycle so I can get the light/arrow. Do you do that?

Actually, I see only a handful of states have adopted this law, so you might not even be allowed to use it anyways.

[Joey P]

Originally Posted by enipla

Huh? Just saying that where I live, most folks seem to obey the traffic laws. We don't have red light cameras that I know of.

Oh, and the only folks that run red lights where I live seem to be bike riders. And I'm mostly OK with it if it's safe.

My problem isn't with bikers that run red lights, it's with the ones that ride though red lights like there isn't even an intersection there...and then have the nerve to get mad at ME when I honk and slam on my brakes.

Also, I think there's a world of difference between the casual/sport rider and the bike couriers that I deal with in the downtown areas.
The only time I have a problem with sport type riders is when they're riding 4 wide and waaay out out of the bike lane and I'm stuck behind them until I can pass them. The city was nice enough to give them a big wide bike line, but they're still so far into the driving lane that they have 15 cars piled up behind them because they want to be able to ride next to each other instead of two in front and two in back. But that's not as big of a problem.

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by enipla

Huh? Just saying that where I live, most folks seem to obey the traffic laws. We don't have red light cameras that I know of.

Oh, and the only folks that run red lights where I live seem to be bike riders. And I'm mostly OK with it if it's safe.

Where is this mythical city where car drivers abide by all laws and it's only bicyclists breaking them?

I also don't understand all the talk of bikes running red lights. Where I live, I only do it when I don't trip the sensor and it's on my very early morning commute to work. No cars coming. If I were to try this on my commute home when the roads are busy, I wouldn't live much longer. Are you all really saying these bicyclists are darting out into busy intersections?

Joey P: Illegal in my state. Recent attempts to change this by the motorcycle community but it never gets past the state govt.

[enipla]

Originally Posted by casdave

Seems to come down to mere bullying, if there was a backhoe trundling along the road, the average car driver would never think about cutting it up, and yet its moving at around the same sort of speed as a bicycle and is a far greater obstruction.

The car driver might get frustrated, but they are most unlikely to be shouting abuse as they overtake the slow moving vehicle, so why is it so common that cyclists receive this treatment?

How often do you see cyclists speeding? I'll bet you broke the speed limit on your way to work in your car today - seems motorists are happy to point out the misdeeds of others but not look too closely at themselves.

Even a 5mph breach of the speed limit can have devastating consequences in a crash, and car drivers can hardly say they are not aware since there are so many public information notices on tv.

The opposite is true where I live. It’s a very recreational community. I would rather that bikes not ride on the highway when they don’t have to though.

Can’t find the link at the moment, but I believe that slow moving vehicles such as backhoes are required to pull over if five or more vehicles are backed up behind it. It’s not always practical, and I understand that. The drivers that get our ire are the ones that have a string of 10 or 20 cars behind them all the way up a hill and don’t pull over to let them by.

Bikes are easy to pass, and we can legally cross the double yellow to do so.

[enipla]

Originally Posted by wguy123

Where is this mythical city where car drivers abide by all laws and it's only bicyclists breaking them?

Breckenridge Colorado.

I did not say that car drivers abide by all laws. Don't put words in my mouth.

We only have about 15-20 stoplights in the entire county. It's pretty rare but I have seen bikes blow through them. Other than a very yellow light, I have never seen a car driver blow through a red. YMMV.

Hey, I agree that bicyclists need to be given a break sometimes. Traffic laws are mostly geared towards cars.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Originally Posted by enipla

Going straight in a turn only lane to pass you? Are you not keeping right?

If the lane is too small to handle both car an cycle, I am not going to be keeping to the right.

And I believe it is legal for a car to cross the double yellow to pass a bike. At least in Colorado it is.

I should have added: into oncoming traffic. i.e. not passing safely.

My Wife is an Iron Man. She does a LOT of bike riding. What bugs me is when a cyclist will ride on a two lane highway with no shoulders when there is a perfectly good paved swept recreational trail that is right next to it.

In my experience there is no such thing as a 'perfectly good' recreational trail.

Yes, there are walkers and joggers on it. It does cause problems.

Q.E.D.

But it beats the hell out of getting hit by a truck. My Wife understands this, and trains on the path.

How many cyclists are actually hit by trucks on that road? Now compare that to the number of accidents that happen on the trail with bike vs. pedestrian. Then factor in the slowdowns and other things that happen on such trails.

Riding on the highway may be legal, but it is just nuts.

Translation: they are in your way.

She did have an accident once on the path because of an inattentive bike rider. Got scraped up pretty good. I would much rather see that than having her come up against an inattentive driver.

I have had plenty of incidents with drivers in my career of biking, but I still don't think MUTs are anywhere near a good substitute. The two I have on the way to work are either a) way overcrowded or b) neglected and chopped up like hell.

[enipla]

Mr. Miskatonic

If the lane is too small to handle both car an cycle, I am not going to be keeping to the right.

Not the case where I live. And I believe that the law allows for bikes to move forward to the intersection as long as they keep to the right. That’s fine. Putting yourself in font of a car that can go is not. YMMV.

In my experience there is no such thing as a 'perfectly good' recreational trail.

And in my experience, bikes on the road make the road more dangerous for everyone. If there is a good alternative, I think it’s a good idea to take it. Lets face facts, roads, and in particular 2 lane mountain highways are built for cars and trucks. If there is a good alternative, I think they should use it. It’s plenty good for my Wife (and I hate to keep bringing this up, but she’s an Iron Man she rides a LOT).

Translation: they are in your way.

Please. I’m talking about safety. I don’t drive my car down the rec path do I? It would be unsafe.

I have to say that some bike riders are very arrogant about the use of roads. I don’t deny that drivers can be the same way. I’m glad that things are changing. I really am. But roads and rules for driving on them where designed for cars. It’s not good to have 30 and 40 mph speed differences. Speed difference between vehicles is one of the greatest causes of accidents.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by wguy123

Ripping on a recent pitting about bicyclists.

It's currently just 3 threads below this one.

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan

I think it's people who are the problem.

Yes. People on bicycles.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by enipla

Going straight in a turn only lane to pass you? Are you not keeping right?

In California a bicycle is a vehicle. If the bike rider were to stay all the way right at an intersection with a right turn only lane when he was planning on riding straight ahead he could be cited for that AND it is quite likely a car coming up from behind him would hit him.
The proper way to handle such an intersection is for the bike to stop at the right side of the rightmost lane that continues straight. This will allow right turners to turn while he is stopped.
My cite is how the bike lanes are painted on the streets in Los Angeles. Pics available upon request.

[The Tao's Revenge]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

Yes. People on bicycles.

Yes drivers never cause problems. You never see a driver do something dangerous.


Reasons people bike:

Need for transportation
Health\Exercise
Enjoyment
The environment
Religious observance (the Amish love them some bikes)


Which group is the problem?

[The Tao's Revenge]

Originally Posted by enipla

Going straight in a turn only lane to pass you? Are you not keeping right?

Bikes are legally vehicular traffic pretty much everywhere. It's like the reverse of the illegal to drive barefoot myth. Everyone seems to think bikers are pedestrians and should stay in pedestrian areas, but they're not. They're legally, and actually, operating a vehicle.

Which includes full use of the lane. Assuming you're a good driver, it should never matter where in the lane the biker is when you pass them.


Further, keeping right has almost got me whacked with a passenger side mirror a couple of times. Keeping right seems to encourage motorists to pass you too close for comfort.

[Emtar KronJonDerSohn]

I live in a very car, bicycle, and pedestrian friendly city. Cool. Lots of road lanes and sidewalks and shit. But you asshole jerk-offs are fucking up the whole program. You are supposed to obey the rules of the road like people in tractor-trailers.

That means stopping at red lights and stop signs. Not blasting through a red light while I am turning you stupid fuck. Not speeding up to cut me off and then slowing down. Not taking a leisurely stroll in front of me in a parking lot completely oblivious to the 30 tons shaking the earth behind you and everything else besides the text you're sending. Not matching my speed and snuggling into my blind spot/emergency maneuvering space you stupid fucks. And if I am at a light, don't fucking try to direct me to turn on red just because someone on a streetbike might have time or space to.

I fantasize about vegetablizing you as you try to get around me while I'm parallel parking.

You do not get to selectively obey common sense.

I will probably kill one of you dumbass morons one day and guess what, it will be your fault but I will still lose my livelihood.

[jasg]

Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan

I think it's people who are the problem.

True, we need a thread pitting pedestrians... and motorcyclists... and truckers.... and worst of all, those idiots who land their planes on the interstates!

[Eonwe]

Originally Posted by The Tao's Revenge

Keeping right seems to encourage motorists to pass you too close for comfort.

This. The one thing I learned very quickly when I became a semi-regular bike commuter is to not feel obligated to "be nice" to drivers by squeezing over to the gravely, torn-up curb at all costs so they can pass me. I legally have use of the lane, and I'll ride to the side when it's safe, but I'll also use whole lane when I feel it's safer.

There are few things as terrifying as a large car passing me on my left as I'm riding on a 2ft strip between them and the cars parked along the curb, and there's a sewage drain/pothole dead ahead.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Well, we've fulfilled our annual quota of pro and anti cycling pit threads, so see you next year!

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Originally Posted by enipla

Mr. Miskatonic

Not the case where I live. And I believe that the law allows for bikes to move forward to the intersection as long as they keep to the right. That’s fine. Putting yourself in font of a car that can go is not. YMMV.

I doubt that.

And in my experience, bikes on the road make the road more dangerous for everyone. If there is a good alternative, I think it’s a good idea to take it. Lets face facts, roads, and in particular 2 lane mountain highways are built for cars and trucks. If there is a good alternative, I think they should use it. It’s plenty good for my Wife (and I hate to keep bringing this up, but she’s an Iron Man she rides a LOT).

*sigh* Why is it that "cyclist safety" coming from the mouths of drivers invariably leads to getting cyclists off their roads and onto shitty sidepaths and muts?

Please. I’m talking about safety. I don’t drive my car down the rec path do I? It would be unsafe.

Of course you are...just like all other "for their own good" suggestions.

I have to say that some bike riders are very arrogant about the use of roads. I don’t deny that drivers can be the same way. I’m glad that things are changing. I really am. But roads and rules for driving on them where designed for cars. It’s not good to have 30 and 40 mph speed differences. Speed difference between vehicles is one of the greatest causes of accidents.

"very arrogant about using roads". How dare they. Using those roads and stuff. Let's get them out of my way...I mean off the road for their own safety.

[Duckster]

Originally Posted by wguy123

I won't look up a cite but if anyone can prove that bicyclists cause more: wrecks, injuries, deaths, etc, I'll eat crow.

Portland, Oregon, must the capitol of self-righteous bicycle drivers. They get hit and die frequently.

[Beware of Doug]

Originally Posted by Duckster

Portland, Oregon, must the capitol of self-righteous bicycle drivers. They get hit and die frequently.

Are they martyred by the bicycling public? Maybe there should be a monument. They could pay for it selling license tags.

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by Beware of Doug

Are they martyred by the bicycling public? Maybe there should be a monument. They could pay for it selling license tags.

Ha Ha!!! Selling tags to mow down dumbshit bicyclists!

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by enipla

Breckenridge Colorado.

Not jealous here in the least. It would suck to have to live there.

Maybe you should mosey over to the loud motorcyclist rant. That seems like something that someone from Breckenridge could get behind.

[Cumberdale]

Originally Posted by The Tao's Revenge

Yes drivers never cause problems. You never see a driver do something dangerous.


Which group is the problem?

I've never heard of bicyclists throwing cans and junk at cars while going down the road, or getting behind a car and ringing their bell, or yelling for them to "get off the road".

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by Cumberdale

I've never heard of bicyclists throwing cans and junk at cars while going down the road, or getting behind a car and ringing their bell, or yelling for them to "get off the road".

As a pedestrian, I have had bike riders do two out of three of those things to me. While I was on a sidewalk and so were they, even tho there was a bike lane. I have also seen in SF a bike rider ride past several cars who had edged into bike lane (to make a right turn) and scratch their car doors as he went past.

You have heard about what packs of bike riders have done to driver sin SF, have you not?

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

As a pedestrian, I have had bike riders do two out of three of those things to me. While I was on a sidewalk and so were they, even tho there was a bike lane. I have also seen in SF a bike rider ride past several cars who had edged into bike lane (to make a right turn) and scratch their car doors as he went past.

You have heard about what packs of bike riders have done to driver sin SF, have you not?

automobiles > bicycles > pedestrians

As a pedestrian, go to the bbq about bicyclists. This is about asshole automobile drivers. I'm sure they teach reading comprehension in SF.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by wguy123

automobiles > bicycles > pedestrians

As a pedestrian, go to the bbq about bicyclists. This is about asshole automobile drivers. I'm sure they teach reading comprehension in SF.

I can post what I want to. Don't like it? Hit "report this post". Then be prepared to wait for a bit.

The PIT has a tendency to come back around and bite self-rightous OP's in the ass.

[Rick]

Speaking of asshole car drivers, look at the position of this car.

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

I can post what I want to. Don't like it? Hit "report this post". Then be prepared to wait for a bit.

The PIT has a tendency to come back around and bite self-rightous OP's in the ass.

Consider this self-rightous (sic) ass bitten!

Grow a funny bone doc.

[fumster]

I'm amazed at the denialists. I live in Portland as well, and there is an incredibly high percentage of asshole bicyclists. I can't remember the last time I've seen a car completely ignore a stop sign, intentionally drive the wrong way down a one-way street, drive at night without lights, refuse to put brakes on their car, or drive on a sidewalk. I see all of those done by bicyclists EVERY SINGLE DAY. Yesterday there was the hipster on his fixie that wobbled into my lane when he lost inertia as a bus pulled out. He was just too fucking cool to have gears on his bike. Many bicyclists don't even obey stop signs when there are pedestrians crossing the street. A few weeks ago I saw a bicyclist riding in the sidewalk the wrong way on a one way street and just blow through the intersection. I don't know how I missed him.

I commuted by bike in Boston 35 years ago and done my share of cross country riding here and in Europe, so I fully support bicycles sharing the road with cars. But a large proportion of bicyclists are fucking it up for everyone.

And yes, I've had bottles thrown at me when I was riding and had someone try and run me off the road, but those people are few and far between here in Portland. Assholes on bikes are as ubiquitous as Starbucks.

[fumster]

Originally Posted by wguy123

As a pedestrian, go to the bbq about bicyclists. This is about asshole automobile drivers. I'm sure they teach reading comprehension in SF.

No it's not, it's a lame attempt of parody. Don't be surprised when someone tells you to suck their tu quoque.

[wguy123]

Originally Posted by fumster

No it's not, it's a lame attempt of parody. Don't be surprised when someone tells you to suck their tu quoque.

Only a person from Portland would throw out that Latin phrase (I'm guessing your pinkie was sticking out when you typed it). And yes, I hear that town is filled with menacing hipsters on fixies threatening slow-moving hypermilage hybrid cars. Portland exists in a bubble not seen anywhere else.

[enipla]

Originally Posted by The Tao's Revenge

Bikes are legally vehicular traffic pretty much everywhere. It's like the reverse of the illegal to drive barefoot myth. Everyone seems to think bikers are pedestrians and should stay in pedestrian areas, but they're not. They're legally, and actually, operating a vehicle.

Which includes full use of the lane. Assuming you're a good driver, it should never matter where in the lane the biker is when you pass them.


Further, keeping right has almost got me whacked with a passenger side mirror a couple of times. Keeping right seems to encourage motorists to pass you too close for comfort.

From here - http://www.trailsandopenspaces.org/bicycle-rules.html

Summary of Colorado State Bicycle Law. As a bicyclist you must ride in the right lane except:

--When overtaking another bicycle or other vehicle.

--When preparing for a left turn.

--When necessary to avoid hazardous conditions.

Ride as close to the right side of the right lane as is practicable when being overtaken by another vehicle.

Ride on the paved shoulder whenever a paved shoulder suitable for bicycle riding is present.

[Kimstu]

Originally Posted by enipla

From here - http://www.trailsandopenspaces.org/bicycle-rules.html

That doesn't actually contradict Tao's Revenge's policy of taking the lane. The law you quote tells cyclists to keep as far to the right "as is practicable" when being overtaken. If moving towards the shoulder will result in the cyclist's being passed dangerously close by an overtaking car, then it is not practicable for the cyclist to keep to the right of the lane.

Why this happens, IME, is that cars will frequently try to pass a cyclist in the right lane even when there's another car in the left lane, so the passing car is "squeezing through" between two other vehicles (a bike to the right and a car to the left) in two lanes. That's dangerously crowded if you're moving at normal city driving speeds (as opposed to, say, creeping slowly up to a stoplight).

That's when it makes sense for the cyclist to keep their lane instead of moving towards the shoulder, so the overtaking car will have to wait for a clear space in the left lane and change lanes in order to pass the bike, instead of trying to squeeze through on the right of left-lane traffic.

[fumster]

Originally Posted by wguy123

Only a person from Portland would throw out that Latin phrase (I'm guessing your pinkie was sticking out when you typed it). And yes, I hear that town is filled with menacing hipsters on fixies threatening slow-moving hypermilage hybrid cars. Portland exists in a bubble not seen anywhere else.

I guess we must be in a bubble. Is that your city's best characterization of effeteness? Pinkies sticking out? Maybe you should turn your calendar ahead a decade or so. Hell, we are soy latte swilling, pork pie hat wearing, gluten free granola gobbling, public transit loving, underemployed socialist anarchists, etc. (hope that last bit isn't too much Latin for you).

If you live in some cow town in flyover land that has a people in pickup trucks running an occasional bicyclist off the road, then the thread on asshole bicylists probably doesn't make much sense to you. Real cities like Boston, NY, Seattle, San Francisco have a problem with scofflaw bicyclists that is eroding support for bike lanes and endangering riders and pedestrians.

[enipla]

Originally Posted by Kimstu

That doesn't actually contradict Tao's Revenge's policy of taking the lane. The law you quote tells cyclists to keep as far to the right "as is practicable" when being overtaken. If moving towards the shoulder will result in the cyclist's being passed dangerously close by an overtaking car, then it is not practicable for the cyclist to keep to the right of the lane.

Why this happens, IME, is that cars will frequently try to pass a cyclist in the right lane even when there's another car in the left lane, so the passing car is "squeezing through" between two other vehicles (a bike to the right and a car to the left) in two lanes. That's dangerously crowded if you're moving at normal city driving speeds (as opposed to, say, creeping slowly up to a stoplight).

That's when it makes sense for the cyclist to keep their lane instead of moving towards the shoulder, so the overtaking car will have to wait for a clear space in the left lane and change lanes in order to pass the bike, instead of trying to squeeze through on the right of left-lane traffic.

I don't disagree with you.

But there is always a 'but'. My Wife and I live in a very bike friendly community. We've spent millions on recreational paths. Yes, there are walkers on it.

The road I drive every day is a two lane mountain highway. I have zero problems with bikes using the portion of that road when there is no alternative. They do have the good sense to keep as far right as possible. It is legal to cross a solid yellow line in Colorado to pass a bike. If the bike keeps far right, it's much easier and safer to pass as the car does not need to get to the other lane for nearly as long.

This provides many more opertunites to pass. Slow moving vehicles also follow this simple common courtesy. Usually.

My Wife, trains and rides a lot (triathlete). She follows this common sense and interestling enough, has never complained about cars to me.