(Some) Cyclists, I am really getting sick of your shit

Mr. Miskatonic, since you have accused me of blaming cyclists in the most pedantic fashion possible, I feel like I should respond in kind.

Here in post #113 you opine:

Jesus fucking christ. Surely you don’t expect me or anyone else to say “Some cyclists, but not all of them” every fucking time. My statement was not “All the cyclists around here”. Clearly, my statement was fairly standard phrasing and almost everyone without a chip on their shoulder would interpret it as “some cyclists”.

My town is very bicycling friendly. I’d say Davis and Portland are the only friendlier towns that I’ve visited (I went to school at UCD). It’s the outlier behavior that causes problems, which you are treading dangerously close to, in attitude if not action. Aggressive drivers and asshole bicycle riders are both problematic. Without these behaviors, everything would be much much better.

Note that I was complaining about cyclists blowing past a stop sign turning left into traffic on a major highway challenging oncoming traffic (in both directions) to a rather one-sided game of chicken. This is A Number One Darwin Award behavior. It is not cool, it is idiotic and it makes me think these people have shit for brains. Surely you are not defending this behavior, right?

I ride illegally all the time, and I’m sure someone here will flame me for it. The deal is that people will rarely observe it because I do it without disrupting traffic or causing drivers to panic or even notice. There is a route that I take where I ride on the sidewalk for about 4 blocks. There is never a pedestrian on that sidewalk because there is a 20 foot cliff going up to the backyards of houses. I ride on the sidewalk because there is virtually no shoulder and it is a very busy major thoroughfare. I don’t stop for stop signs where there are clear sightlines in both directions and no traffic.

But on a windy narrow country road, I will slow down for a cyclist but try to pass as soon as possible. I sure as hell will try to do it safely. I expect that rider to be riding as far to the right as possible in order to allow cars to pass.

I was nearly ran over by some asshole in a car who refused to yield to my right of way. I was stopped in the bike lane to the left of the right turn lane. An asshole in a Mustang pulls up in the left lane and insists on turning right in front of me as the light turns green. We were staring each other down and I ended up yielding because he was in a 4000 pound convertible (with a wife and baby in the back seat no less). I came very close to just turning my brake lever into his car and leaving a 2 foot long scratch.

As a light turned green, I started to enter the intersection when a bicycle comes whizzing pass me blowing through the red light. I was in the rightmost lane on a 4 lane street with an island. I never leadfoot it off the line because I know that cars run red lights all the time. I locked up the brakes and missed the guy by inches.

I think Critical Mass brings a lot of visibility to the need for bike lanes. But it is patently assholish behavior and I don’t see it changing anyone’s minds. For as congested a city as it is, San Francisco is a remarkably bicycle friendly city. I would be pretty fucking pissed if I was stuck in an artificially created traffic jam on my commute home from work.

Asshole drivers and asshole cyclists need to start acting more considerately. In nearly every case, the cyclist is going to get the much worse end of the deal. I have little sympathy for cyclists who deliberately put themselves in deadly situations. Drivers need to realize that they have to share the road with cyclists.

I’ve learned to stay away from these threads because I don’t think I’ve had my arse actually handed to me in one, but they are wars of attrition and nobody seems to get very far.

I have two comments:

  1. As a vocal minority group, there is something about cyclists that annoys people. Maybe it’s bad experiences with inner-city couriers, or something like that. I don’t know. But I do know that for what is a relatively good cause, that most people can recognise as a good thing, cycling’s devotees have an uncanny ability to come off as assholes. I say this as neutrally as I can too, in a hope that it will be taken as constructive criticism rather than invective. Cycling as a movement seems to have an uncanny ability to shit in its own moral high ground. Pedestrians have lobby groups and politicised movements, and don’t seem to have that image. Motorcyclists likewise. Also public transport groups. I’m not sure whay it has worked out that the cycling lobby is so unlikeable, but it’s always been the impression I get. Cycling needs a PR man.

  2. I think cars and bicycles should not have the same rights. It is stupid and dangerous. If it were up to me, I’d ban the use of bicycles from many roads, and I would increase road tax to pay for an insanely wonderful network of cycleways. So, no you can’t block a lane on your treadley during the evening peak hour, but in return for giving up that right, you get some other cool stuff. I’d support this as both a cyclist and a motorist.

On the contrary, that is not clear at all. I’m not being pedantic, you wrote poorly and with hostility. There was no indication in your post whatsoever that you were referring to only ‘some cyclists’ contrary to the OP.

You can gussy it up all you want, its still segregation.

I have a dream, that some day people will be judged not by the number of their wheels, but by the content of their pannier.

Wait, cars run red lights? After reading this thread, I was under the impression that only bikes ran red lights and that was the problem.
:confused:

You seem to know perfectly well why you find cyclists annoying. You think cycling is a good thing in theory, but you don’t think people should be doing it on the roads we have now, according to the laws we have in place. People who insist on doing this “stupid and dangerous” act are assholes. Is that not what you implied?

…can’t… breath… laughing… too hard…

Umm, this is the pit. I believe it is de rigueur to write with hostility. Perhaps I do write poorly, but I disagree with your interpretation. Thanks for giving me insight into the minds of “some cyclists”. It ain’t pretty.

Like your mind wasn’t made up already.

Er… no. If I was taking that tack, I’d also include hat-wearing old men in Chryslers, white van man, pedestrians, trucks, you name it. But I’m not, and you’re putting words into my mouth. And you forget that I ride a bike myself!

I’m talking about the angry, cats-bottom-mouthed attitude that those other groups don’t seem to have - or have it in much lesser quantities, and it’s not just out there on the road, but whenever the topic comes up. Cyclists, as a group, definitely need an image makeover.

And Mr Miskatonic, damn straight it’s segregation I’m talking about. Not everywhere, but in certain places where it’s just straight out batshit crazy dangerous to have bikes and cars mixing. I have also noticed that these equal rights people are strangely quiet when cycleways are built. Can I drive a car down them?

Is that based on statistics, accident reports, or is it just your ‘gut feeling’?

You’re kidding, right? Have you ever heard a crowd of Forrester devotees when a bike lane or specially built ‘alternative to the road’ is proposed?

They don’t complain about the MUTs being built as as much, because those are MUTs. If you want to drive down them, knock yourself out. I’ll take bets on wether its the rollerbladers or the pram pushers kill you first.

You are advocating to take away our rights as cyclists, because it causes inconvenience to you, and you think (but do not prove) that it’s dangerous. And you’re surprised that we are angry??

Are you saying “equal rights” means there should be no bicycle-only paths? If so, I totally agree with that. Bike lanes cause car drivers to be careless, because they tend to see things outside their own lane as not being their problem. Bike paths have to cross roads too, and those intersections tend to be more dangerous than road intersections.

Mr. Histrionic, are sidewalks segregation?

I think it’s a perfectly fantastic idea to have bike lanes and car lanes. Why would you go over the top in response to an idea that would, seemingly, make everyone happy?

No, because pedestrians are not considered vehicles by legal definition.

I, as a certain class of vehicle, am already forbidden from plenty of roads as it stands. I’d prefer not to add more.

You are aware that there are very, very strong arguements that bike lanes might actually increase the danger to cyclists.

Mind you, I don’t buy those arguements 100%, or even 50%, but I’d say something that increases danger may not be what makes everyone happy.

BTW, you are also mixing terminology. Bike lanes are not true separate facilities, the reference was made to separate biking routes (not MUTs). That is logistically impossible to work in suburban and urban locations without stealing streets from cars. Think anyone will be happy with that?

And I’m projecting?! Mote, beam.

I wonder how this thread would go if we could readily punch each other in the face.

The day someone starts building Punch-O-Trons into computers is the day that the internet becomes a much friendlier place.

Gabe’s Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory pretty much covers this.

So let’s see if we’ve got this right.

Bicycles and cars are both vehicles, along with mopeds and scooters and motorcycles but probably not Segways because not even scooters are as dorky as Segways.

It is easier to kill someone on a bicycle because they’re slow, unenclosed, and small. It’s hard for any cyclist to follow the law AND keep himself alive.

Which, you know, I get. But I don’t see why this makes it reasonable to blow through stop signs and red lights, to split lanes, to weave through traffic. I don’t see why it’s reasonable to intentionally tangle up traffic (yeah, I’m looking at you, Critical Mass) because bike laws are unfair.

Bike lanes are (possibly, and I’ve always thought so) very dangerous. Dedicated bikeways are expensive and would not work with the infrastructure of most cities. They’re vehicles for a reason and therefore shouldn’t be on the sidewalks: dangerous to pedestrians. While the net inconvenience to drivers is relatively minimal, having bicycles going 20 mph in the middle of traffic lanes is going to irritate the snot out of the auto drivers behind them.

Modern city infrastructure is undeniably geared toward cars, and for a reason – they’re more numerous in American cities than bicycles, unless I miss my guess. We can’t all go to taking bicycles (I mean, I’d love to not have to pay $40/week for gas to get to work and school but I don’t intend to bike 80 miles a day. If I do, I’m going to make more money as an athlete). Around here, a good solution is taking a city bus through busy streets and cycling down more suburban areas, but our public transport infrastructure is not everywhere. When the council suggested turning Red River into a bicycle road, it wasn’t just auto commuters who revolted: the businesses along that street protested fiercely, since cars bring commerce.

So, cyclists: solution? Do you have a wonderful idea that will make everyone happy? I want to hear an idea. I hope it includes ponies. I like ponies. Maybe we could all ride horses! If I can get a Shire I can go grocery shopping on the way home.

Good god, why are you being angry now? I can think of at least a half dozen roads round me that just aren’t safe for cycling on, but I use out of necessity. If someone was to follow TLD’s proposal of building a cycle lane alongside them, then banning bikes from the road themselves, I’d be happy with that. Wouldn’t you?

I’ve got to agree with the guy. There’s a militant wing of cyclists that really do just look for any reason to claim persecution, and they really don’t help at all.

Now if you’ll excuse me I’m going to spend a fun few hours skidding about on rocks and tree roots, throwing myself over my handlebars into waist deep mud on a freezing cold, raining morning.