There ARE more adults riding bikes [Archive]

Roger Zoul

October 13th 08, 01:25 AM

"PatTX" > wrote in message
...
>
> :: "PatTX" > wrote
> ::: I just wish they'd get off of the sidewalks!
> ::
> :: Leave them be. It takes time to get used to riding. Don't expect
> :: them take to the streets on the first ride.
>
> Oh, I haven't said anything to them about that, but I do wonder if they
> will have a second time...after all, it's tough to ride with your chin
> getting hit by your knee each time it comes up, not to mention grinding it
> out in a high gear. I saw a woman yesterday that fit that description,
> and as I went by, I said to her "Put it in a lower gear." (in a nice way).
> I didn't get all of her answer, but most of it was "I can do that?"
>
> I just noticed that all of the people I see riding the sidewalks are
> adults in their 40's and above. None have mirrors, either.
>

Well, when I started riding I rode down a main thorough fair to get to the
parking lots. Then I would ride loops in the parking lots. Then back to the
side walk to ride the wrong way to get back home.

Then one day I learned that one of my neighbors was a long-time cyclist.
So, he took me out on my first road ride. I just followed him and did what
he did. I found it was basically a matter of driving a bike like driving a
car. That's what got me over my fear of riding on the road.

BTW, this nieghbor just passed way two days ago due to cancer.

[email protected]

October 13th 08, 03:33 AM

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:07:11 -0500, "PatTX" >
wrote:

>Oh, I haven't said anything to them about that, but I do wonder if they will
>have a second time...after all, it's tough to ride with your chin getting
>hit by your knee each time it comes up, not to mention grinding it out in a
>high gear. I saw a woman yesterday that fit that description, and as I went
>by, I said to her "Put it in a lower gear." (in a nice way). I didn't get
>all of her answer, but most of it was "I can do that?"
>
>I just noticed that all of the people I see riding the sidewalks are adults
>in their 40's and above. None have mirrors, either.

I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. There's
about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. It's
rare that anyone actually uses it for walking, and on the rare
occasion that I do see someone, I yield to them. I'm not a novice
cyclist, and I've read some of Forester's stuff, but I've picked
myself out of ditches a couple times to avoid getting creamed. The
roadway is not wide enough to share a lane, and if you take it, the
driver's will pass close enough to scare the hell out of you just to
make a point.

Dave Clary
Corpus Christi, TX

Tom Keats

October 13th 08, 07:19 AM

PatTX

October 13th 08, 02:50 PM

:::
::
:: Well, when I started riding I rode down a main thorough fair to get
:: to the parking lots. Then I would ride loops in the parking lots.
:: Then back to the side walk to ride the wrong way to get back home.
::
:: Then one day I learned that one of my neighbors was a long-time
:: cyclist. So, he took me out on my first road ride. I just followed
:: him and did what he did. I found it was basically a matter of
:: driving a bike like driving a car. That's what got me over my fear
:: of riding on the road.
::
:: BTW, this nieghbor just passed way two days ago due to cancer.

People will live forever so long as one person remembers....

PatTX

October 13th 08, 02:55 PM

::
:: I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. There's
:: about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. It's
:: rare that anyone actually uses it for walking, and on the rare
:: occasion that I do see someone, I yield to them. I'm not a novice
:: cyclist, and I've read some of Forester's stuff, but I've picked
:: myself out of ditches a couple times to avoid getting creamed. The
:: roadway is not wide enough to share a lane, and if you take it, the
:: driver's will pass close enough to scare the hell out of you just to
:: make a point.
::
:: Dave Clary
:: Corpus Christi, TX

I hope this doesn't devolve into one of those "I break the rules of the road
because I feel threatened!" threads, because everyone has to make up his own
mind when breaking the traffic rules is necessary. I am talking about
people who are riding the sidewalks when there is a bike lane right
alongside them! Or when the street is so deserted that a bike could have the
entire lane with cars passing by in one of the other two lanes going that
direction. Yesterday, I saw a woman riding her bike on the sidewalk, and
with this particular sidewalk, there are stretches where no sidewalk exists.
So, she would be riding on the grass and rocks until she could get back on
the sidewalk, whereas I was riding in my bike lane right beside her! When I
went by, she looked up, startled. I got the impression from her face that
she was thinking, "You're allowed to ride on the street surface?"

Pat in TX

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 13th 08, 03:41 PM

On Oct 13, 9:55*am, "PatTX" > wrote:
> ::
> :: I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. *There's
> :: about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. *It's
> :: rare that anyone actually uses it for walking, and on the rare
> :: occasion that I do see someone, I yield to them. *I'm not a novice
> :: cyclist, and I've read some of Forester's stuff, but I've picked
> :: myself out of ditches a couple times to avoid getting creamed. *The
> :: roadway is not wide enough to share a lane, and if you take it, the
> :: driver's will pass close enough to scare the hell out of you just to
> :: make a point.
> ::
> :: Dave Clary
> :: Corpus Christi, TX
>
> I hope this doesn't devolve into one of those "I break the rules of the road
> because I feel threatened!" threads, because everyone has to make up his own
> mind when breaking the traffic rules is necessary. *I am talking about
> people who are riding the sidewalks when there is a bike lane right
> alongside them! Or when the street is so deserted that a bike could have the
> entire lane with cars passing by in one of the other two lanes going that
> direction. Yesterday, I saw a woman riding her bike on the sidewalk, and
> with this particular sidewalk, there are stretches where no sidewalk exists.
> So, she would be riding on the grass and rocks until she could get back on
> the sidewalk, whereas I was riding in my bike lane right beside her! When I
> went by, she looked up, startled. I got the impression from her face that
> she was thinking, "You're allowed to ride on the street surface?"

Based on my experience, everything Pat says is also true without bike
lanes. They are not a requirement, whether the street is deserted or
no. Ordinary roads are fine.

And regarding Dave Clary's post: We've gotten dozens of similar posts
over the years, with about half of them coming from one colorful
individual. The general idea is always "You don't know how dangerous
it is to ride HERE! If you were here, you'd [ride on the sidewalk /
ride facing traffic / run traffic lights / stop every time a car gets
near / etc.]"

From what I see, over 99% of people who do those things are riding in
places where competent cyclists ride normally and safely. I suppose
it's not absolutely impossible that they're in some amazingly unusual
situation. But I strongly doubt it.

- Frank Krygowski

Art Harris

October 13th 08, 04:39 PM

Tom Keats wrote:
> I guess it's good when people ride bicycles at all. *I'm
> all for that, and supportive of anyone who wants to ride.
>
> Being meddlingly officious at people often just makes 'em
> dig-in their heels and stubbornly adhere to their
> preconceived ways.
>
> Live and let live.
>

Up to a point, but not when their wrong-way riding puts me in
jeopardy.

Another thing is that many new cyclists tend to travel the same main
roads on which they would normally drive a car instead of looking for
more bike friendly parallel routes.

Art Harris

Tom Keats

October 13th 08, 07:34 PM

In article >,
Art Harris > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>> I guess it's good when people ride bicycles at all. *I'm
>> all for that, and supportive of anyone who wants to ride.
>>
>> Being meddlingly officious at people often just makes 'em
>> dig-in their heels and stubbornly adhere to their
>> preconceived ways.
>>
>> Live and let live.
>>
> Up to a point, but not when their wrong-way riding puts me in
> jeopardy.

Nevertheless, verbally censuring such folx while
en passant hardly ever seems to be effective,
except for evoking a rather vulgar response
from them. I've had conversations with people
who are adamantly convinced that WW riding is
appropriate and correct; they've expressed appalled
amazement and doubted my sanity when I've tried to
convince them otherwise.

We have a local publication (free for the taking at
auto insurance offices) called: BikeSense.
The online version is available here:

http://www.bccc.bc.ca/bikesafety/index.htm

I show it to WW riders, and they say the booklet is
all wrong. We're dealing with a stone wall of denial.

I think one of the worst situations is where a bike
lane exists only on one side of a bi-directional
road or street. Some riders will assume the single
bike lane is also bi-directional.

On a number of Vancouver's bridges, riding on the
sidewalks is actually encouraged and mandated, to
get riders off the roadway portion of the bridge.
Etiquette dictates riders should ride on the side
of the bridge appropriate to their direction. But
of course one always encounters riders coming the
other way. I'm going the "right" way, but I always
seem to be the guy who lets the the wrong way people
by. I'm such a wimp, but I'm leery of bridges anyway.
Especially when my saddle is higher than the guardrail.

> Another thing is that many new cyclists tend to travel the same main
> roads on which they would normally drive a car instead of looking for
> more bike friendly parallel routes.

A lot of people just have to learn the hard way.
In fact, they insist upon it. I guess that's
their right.

I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
in my line, too. The ones I usually encounter
are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
conversing with imaginary companions, and their
bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
depot. It doesn't take much to set some of these
folks off on an irrational tirade.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Art Harris

October 13th 08, 08:30 PM

Tom Keats wrote:
> >> Live and let live.
>
> > Up to a point, but not when their wrong-way riding puts me in
> > jeopardy.
>
> Nevertheless, verbally censuring such folx while
> en passant hardly ever seems to be effective,
>

Years ago many people were taught that they should ride facing traffic
(same as walking against traffic) because it was safer (you can see
the cars coming). It's hard to change long held beliefs.

Since I only have their ear for a few seconds, I try to nicely say,
"You're riding on the wrong side. You're going to cause an accident."
I doubt that it makes a difference, but you never know. If every
cyclist they passed said that, they might eventually get the message.

Also, some folks who normally ride on the right will cut over the left
side to make a left turn. I don't get the logic of this, but it's a
pretty popular gambit. Maybe they're afraid of dealing with an
intersection, or maybe it's a way to avoid stopping for a red light.

> I think one of the worst situations is where a bike
> lane exists only on one side of a bi-directional
> road or street. *Some riders will assume the single
> bike lane is also bi-directional.
>

I agree. There's a road near me with good bike lanes. Once there was
construction that closed the bike lane on the side I was using. There
was actually a sign saying to use the opposite bike lane as a detour.
One of the construction guys yelled at me to use the other bike lane.
I ignored him and am glad I did as I saw several cyclists riding the
other way on it.

There's another road I ride on that only has a bike lane on one side,
and cyclists are expected to use it regardless of their direction of
travel. And there are some blind curves!

Art Harris

Luigi de Guzman

October 13th 08, 09:54 PM

On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:30:24 -0700, Art Harris wrote:

> Since I only have their ear for a few seconds, I try to nicely say,
> "You're riding on the wrong side. You're going to cause an accident." I
> doubt that it makes a difference, but you never know. If every cyclist
> they passed said that, they might eventually get the message.

A traffic ticket and actual police enforcement would be far more
effective at getting the word out. As would a number of fatal accidents
in which news reports prominently highlighted the fact that "the cyclist
was riding opposite the flow of traffic, and thus was struck and killed."

It's only too bad that contributory negligence is on its way out as a
legal doctrine, as well, because having an automobile driver claim that
the cyclist he struck was riding the wrong way would have immunized the
car driver from liability--since, by riding the wrong way, the cyclist
would have been deemed to have 'contributed' to his injury, and thus
would be legally barred from the 'profits' of that contribution.

People don't learn until they get hurt. People don't cycle until driving
is impossible or prohibitively expensive.

--Luigi

--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com

Tom Sherman[_2_]

October 14th 08, 01:34 AM

Tom Keats wrote:
> [...]
> I think one of the worst situations is where a bike
> lane exists only on one side of a bi-directional
> road or street. Some riders will assume the single
> bike lane is also bi-directional.
>
Riding against traffic in one of these "bicycle lanes" is a great way to
get run over by left turning motorists.

> On a number of Vancouver's bridges, riding on the
> sidewalks is actually encouraged and mandated, to
> get riders off the roadway portion of the bridge.
> Etiquette dictates riders should ride on the side
> of the bridge appropriate to their direction. But
> of course one always encounters riders coming the
> other way. I'm going the "right" way, but I always
> seem to be the guy who lets the the wrong way people
> by. I'm such a wimp, but I'm leery of bridges anyway.
> Especially when my saddle is higher than the guardrail.
>
Wear a PFD or get 'bent. ;) [1]

>> Another thing is that many new cyclists tend to travel the same main
>> roads on which they would normally drive a car instead of looking for
>> more bike friendly parallel routes.
>
> A lot of people just have to learn the hard way.
> In fact, they insist upon it. I guess that's
> their right.[...]

I find the main arterials more bicycle friendly in many cases, or at
least street with enough traffic that intersections with arterials are
controlled by traffic signals. Crossing multiple lanes of higher speed
traffic at low speed is not my idea of bicycle friendly. Riding on the
major streets also lessens the number of motorists that pull out in
front of you.

[1] "It's a joke, son."

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

John Thompson

October 14th 08, 01:45 AM

On 2008-10-13, Tom Keats > wrote:

> In article >,
> John Thompson > writes:
>>
>> I yell out "welcome to America! We ride *with* the traffic here!"

> I guess it's good when people ride bicycles at all. I'm
> all for that, and supportive of anyone who wants to ride.
>
> Being meddlingly officious at people often just makes 'em
> dig-in their heels and stubbornly adhere to their
> preconceived ways.

I don't consider it to be "meddlingly officious;" I think it's a safety
issue -- theirs *and mine!*

--

John )
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[email protected]

October 14th 08, 02:30 AM

On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 07:41:48 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
> wrote:

>And regarding Dave Clary's post: We've gotten dozens of similar posts
>over the years, with about half of them coming from one colorful
>individual. The general idea is always "You don't know how dangerous
>it is to ride HERE! If you were here, you'd [ride on the sidewalk /
>ride facing traffic / run traffic lights / stop every time a car gets
>near / etc.]"
>
>From what I see, over 99% of people who do those things are riding in
>places where competent cyclists ride normally and safely. I suppose
>it's not absolutely impossible that they're in some amazingly unusual
>situation. But I strongly doubt it.
>
>- Frank Krygowski

Believe what you want but I've ridden extensively in Las Vegas, raced
and trained in Berlin for three years, toured in Denmark and the
Netherlands, and was a bike club president for two years in west
Texas. I never felt like I was doing something dangerous in those
settings. That changed when I moved here. Once I was taking a right
turn when a car turning left cut the corner and was coming right at
me. I literally had to dive into a roadside ditch to avoid getting
hit. And the guy yelled at me as I was lying there with my bike on
top of me.

I do ride in the street the vast majority of the time here, but I
several incidents coming home when traffic was heavy, where drivers
had to wait to pass me, and they cut it very close and blasted their
horns as they went by. They probably never would hit me, but it still
makes for a very uncomfortable ride. So for that short stretch, where
the sidewalk goes mainly by undeveloped property, I use it.

Dave Clary
Corpus Christi, TX

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 14th 08, 02:51 AM

On Oct 13, 2:34*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
>
> I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
> in my line, too. *The ones I usually encounter
> are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
> conversing with imaginary companions, and their
> bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
> of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
> depot.

And they probably post a lot on Usenet, too!

>*It doesn't take much to set some of these
> folks off on an irrational tirade.

Q.E.D.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 14th 08, 02:56 AM

On Oct 13, 4:54*pm, Luigi de Guzman > wrote:
>
> A traffic ticket and actual police enforcement would be far more
> effective at getting the word out. *As would a number of fatal accidents
> in which news reports prominently highlighted the fact that "the cyclist
> was riding opposite the flow of traffic, and thus was struck and killed."

The problem, of course, is that it's a rare journalist who will
understand the connection. And cops who understand are only a little
less rare.

The last guy I talked to about wrong way riding was on a quiet street
just a block from my house. We were going the same direction on
opposite sides of the street. I was friendly, and tried to engage him
in conversation, but he said "No way! I'm an ex-cop, I was a cop for
20 years, and I know the law! Bikes have to ride facing traffic!"

Likewise, when our village got its first bike cop, I saw him riding
wrong way, and very, very carefully mentioned it - something like "Um,
you realize you were violating the law there, right?" He said
"Really? You know, I've had people ask me which side of the road a
bike's supposed to ride on, and I didn't know what to tell them."

<sigh>

- Frank Krygowski

Tom Keats

October 14th 08, 03:09 AM

In article >,
John Thompson > writes:
> On 2008-10-13, Tom Keats > wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> John Thompson > writes:
>>>
>>> I yell out "welcome to America! We ride *with* the traffic here!"
>
>> I guess it's good when people ride bicycles at all. I'm
>> all for that, and supportive of anyone who wants to ride.
>>
>> Being meddlingly officious at people often just makes 'em
>> dig-in their heels and stubbornly adhere to their
>> preconceived ways.
>
> I don't consider it to be "meddlingly officious;" I think it's a safety
> issue -- theirs *and mine!*

Well, at least yelling: "welcome to America! We ride *with*
the traffic here!" isn't too provocative. It's a pretty
mild way of informing wrong-way riders of the errors of
their ways. That's not really being meddlingly officious,
but it could readily be construed as such by the person
being addressed.

I'm not saying we shouldn't say anything when we're directly
and detrimentally affected by poor judgment and poor practice
on the parts of others. I'm saying that when we do, it
usually doesn't accomplish much anyway.

Yelling at drivers who pull boneheaded manoeuvers doesn't
enlighten them, either. At best, it's an opportunity
to vent.

It would be nice if /all/ riders were open to reason and
rational, informative discussion. But that's not always
the case. Most of the wrong way riders I encounter
appear to be teetering on the brink of beligerance, and
I usually don't have the time to engage in vain arguments,
let alone public spectacles with people who think the
Mother Ship orbiting above is planting evil thoughts in
their minds.

So all I'm saying is: ya can't win.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Tom Keats

October 14th 08, 04:07 AM

In article >,
Frank Krygowski > writes:
> On Oct 13, 2:34*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>>
>>
>> I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
>> in my line, too. *The ones I usually encounter
>> are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
>> conversing with imaginary companions, and their
>> bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
>> of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
>> depot.
> And they probably post a lot on Usenet, too!
>>*It doesn't take much to set some of these
>> folks off on an irrational tirade.
> Q.E.D.

I seem to stand accused of poor-bashing.
Perhaps some context will vindicate me:

http://tinyurl.com/4s8yau
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4s8yau

in full: <http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=12d1dfbd-1395-490c-836e-4ba794c7167f>

Past & present Provincial governments here have
seen fit to severely cut back needed support of
mentally distressed individuals.

Back in the '70s we had all kinds of mental health
safety net, but that went by the wayside since the
Recession of the early '80s and the "downsizing"
trend of the early-mid '90s. These fellow citizens
find themselves unemployable and unhousable, and out
on the streets, trying to eke by as best they can, often
by collecting returnable cans & bottles (we have
deposits on returnable cans & bottles here.) There's
a /lot/ of these so-called "street people" here, and
cans & bottles are often their main sources of income.
You'd be hard pressed to find an empty beer or pop can
on the streets of Vancouver.

I'm neither mocking nor criticizing these people.
I'm acknowledging their presence. Bicycles and often
some quite ingenious homemade trailer rigs facilitate
their bottle-collecting rounds. These are the local
people who tend to be wrong way riders. Vancouver has
a vast ridership, and it's easy for any rational person
to determine the appropriate side of the street to ride
on, simply by following the examples of so many fellow
riders. But not all the riders here are so rational.

In Vancouver, wrong way riding is irrational and
abherrent behaviour. It's not "stupid" behaviour,
it's not misled behaviour and it's not really
malicious behaviour.

As I've previously said, I don't particularly like
encountering wrong way riders in my line, but I'm
prepared to have a heart and as much understanding
as I can muster for the people I encounter.

I heartily recommend this approach.

For what it's worth, a lot of street people with
mental issues find themselves suspected of having
addled their brains with drugs, when in reality
they've sustained on-the-job brain injuries that
have rendered them unable to continue with the
only kind of work they've ever known.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Tom Keats

October 14th 08, 04:40 AM

In article >,
Tom Sherman > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>> [...]
>> I think one of the worst situations is where a bike
>> lane exists only on one side of a bi-directional
>> road or street. Some riders will assume the single
>> bike lane is also bi-directional.
>>
> Riding against traffic in one of these "bicycle lanes" is a great way to
> get run over by left turning motorists.

I suppose if one is heads-up enough, one could
pull it off in a pinch. If there's nobody around
to be predictable to, it doesn't matter.

>> On a number of Vancouver's bridges, riding on the
>> sidewalks is actually encouraged and mandated, to
>> get riders off the roadway portion of the bridge.
>> Etiquette dictates riders should ride on the side
>> of the bridge appropriate to their direction. But
>> of course one always encounters riders coming the
>> other way. I'm going the "right" way, but I always
>> seem to be the guy who lets the the wrong way people
>> by. I'm such a wimp, but I'm leery of bridges anyway.
>> Especially when my saddle is higher than the guardrail.
>>
> Wear a PFD or get 'bent. ;) [1]

I can swim, but my bike can't.
Maybe I should stick airbags on it.

>>> Another thing is that many new cyclists tend to travel the same main
>>> roads on which they would normally drive a car instead of looking for
>>> more bike friendly parallel routes.
>>
>> A lot of people just have to learn the hard way.
>> In fact, they insist upon it. I guess that's
>> their right.[...]
>
> I find the main arterials more bicycle friendly in many cases, or at
> least street with enough traffic that intersections with arterials are
> controlled by traffic signals. Crossing multiple lanes of higher speed
> traffic at low speed is not my idea of bicycle friendly. Riding on the
> major streets also lessens the number of motorists that pull out in
> front of you.

In Vancouver the main arterials have become fraught with
so many traffic lights. The major intersections have
timed lights, and the less major intersections have
loop-detector or push-button lights. There are traffic lights
every second block. Riding on the arterials often means
dealing with red light after red light after red light ...

So here it's better not to seek out not the main arterials nor
the parallel bike routes, but the diagonals that swiftly get
you from one section of town to another, disassociated one.
The trick is to avoid as many timed traffic lights as possible.

We have a great number of intersections with cyclists'
traffic light push-buttons that aren't on designated/official
bike routes. You just have to know where they are.
You don't always have to push the button.

The diagonals will set you free.

cheers,
Tom

> [1] "It's a joke, son."
I know. It's okay.

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Tom Sherman[_2_]

October 14th 08, 10:30 AM

Tom Keats wrote:
> In article >,
> Frank Krygowski > writes:
>> On Oct 13, 2:34 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>>>
>>> I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
>>> in my line, too. The ones I usually encounter
>>> are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
>>> conversing with imaginary companions, and their
>>> bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
>>> of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
>>> depot.
>> And they probably post a lot on Usenet, too!
>>> It doesn't take much to set some of these
>>> folks off on an irrational tirade.
>> Q.E.D.
>
> I seem to stand accused of poor-bashing.
> Perhaps some context will vindicate me:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4s8yau
> http://preview.tinyurl.com/4s8yau
>
> in full: <http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=12d1dfbd-1395-490c-836e-4ba794c7167f>
>
> Past & present Provincial governments here have
> seen fit to severely cut back needed support of
> mentally distressed individuals.
>
That is what you get for imitating the US.

> Back in the '70s we had all kinds of mental health
> safety net, but that went by the wayside since the
> Recession of the early '80s and the "downsizing"
> trend of the early-mid '90s. These fellow citizens
> find themselves unemployable and unhousable, and out
> on the streets, trying to eke by as best they can, often
> by collecting returnable cans & bottles (we have
> deposits on returnable cans & bottles here.) There's
> a /lot/ of these so-called "street people" here, and
> cans & bottles are often their main sources of income.
> You'd be hard pressed to find an empty beer or pop can
> on the streets of Vancouver.
>
"Social Darwinism" in action.

> [...]
> For what it's worth, a lot of street people with
> mental issues find themselves suspected of having
> addled their brains with drugs, when in reality
> they've sustained on-the-job brain injuries that
> have rendered them unable to continue with the
> only kind of work they've ever known.
>
They should have chosen to be born economically independent. No mercy
for those who do not choose to have rich parents. <end sarcasm>

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

Roger Zoul

October 14th 08, 12:19 PM

"Luigi de Guzman" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:30:24 -0700, Art Harris wrote:
>
>
>> Since I only have their ear for a few seconds, I try to nicely say,
>> "You're riding on the wrong side. You're going to cause an accident." I
>> doubt that it makes a difference, but you never know. If every cyclist
>> they passed said that, they might eventually get the message.
>
> A traffic ticket and actual police enforcement would be far more
> effective at getting the word out. As would a number of fatal accidents
> in which news reports prominently highlighted the fact that "the cyclist
> was riding opposite the flow of traffic, and thus was struck and killed."
>
> It's only too bad that contributory negligence is on its way out as a
> legal doctrine, as well, because having an automobile driver claim that
> the cyclist he struck was riding the wrong way would have immunized the
> car driver from liability--since, by riding the wrong way, the cyclist
> would have been deemed to have 'contributed' to his injury, and thus
> would be legally barred from the 'profits' of that contribution.
>
> People don't learn until they get hurt. People don't cycle until driving
> is impossible or prohibitively expensive.

Well, exactly how many accidents are caused by people riding the wrong way
on a road?
Sure, it is not safe, but I think this is one of the least threatening
things people can do, which is one reason
why most police don't ticket these people.

>
>
>
> --
> Luigi de Guzman
> http://ouij.livejournal.com
>
>

Roger Zoul

October 14th 08, 12:22 PM

"Tom Keats" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> John Thompson > writes:
>> On 2008-10-13, Tom Keats > wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> John Thompson > writes:
>>>>
>>>> I yell out "welcome to America! We ride *with* the traffic here!"
>>
>>> I guess it's good when people ride bicycles at all. I'm
>>> all for that, and supportive of anyone who wants to ride.
>>>
>>> Being meddlingly officious at people often just makes 'em
>>> dig-in their heels and stubbornly adhere to their
>>> preconceived ways.
>>
>> I don't consider it to be "meddlingly officious;" I think it's a safety
>> issue -- theirs *and mine!*
>
> Well, at least yelling: "welcome to America! We ride *with*
> the traffic here!" isn't too provocative. It's a pretty
> mild way of informing wrong-way riders of the errors of
> their ways. That's not really being meddlingly officious,
> but it could readily be construed as such by the person
> being addressed.
>
> I'm not saying we shouldn't say anything when we're directly
> and detrimentally affected by poor judgment and poor practice
> on the parts of others. I'm saying that when we do, it
> usually doesn't accomplish much anyway.
>
> Yelling at drivers who pull boneheaded manoeuvers doesn't
> enlighten them, either. At best, it's an opportunity
> to vent.
>
> It would be nice if /all/ riders were open to reason and
> rational, informative discussion. But that's not always
> the case. Most of the wrong way riders I encounter
> appear to be teetering on the brink of beligerance, and
> I usually don't have the time to engage in vain arguments,
> let alone public spectacles with people who think the
> Mother Ship orbiting above is planting evil thoughts in
> their minds.
>
> So all I'm saying is: ya can't win.
>

I find your arguments on this matter very convincing, Tom.

PatTX

October 14th 08, 02:20 PM

::
:: Well, exactly how many accidents are caused by people riding the
:: wrong way on a road?
:: Sure, it is not safe, but I think this is one of the least
:: threatening things people can do, which is one reason
:: why most police don't ticket these people.

I have never seen a police officer ticket ANY bike riders! People are always
upset over H()*&t laws, but, realistically, if a law isn't enforced, it's
just a hollow gesture.

Pat

Roger Zoul

October 14th 08, 02:48 PM

"PatTX" > wrote

>
> I have never seen a police officer ticket ANY bike riders! People are
> always upset over H()*&t laws, but, realistically, if a law isn't
> enforced, it's just a hollow gesture.
>

I've never seen it either, come to think of it. But I have heard various
accounts (here and in other forums) of cyclists getting tickets for things
like busting a stop sign or light. I think those are the two things that
cyclist mostly get in trouble for. More rare are bank robbers escaping on a
bike.

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 14th 08, 03:37 PM

On Oct 14, 9:48*am, "Roger Zoul" > wrote:
> "PatTX" > wrote
>
>
>
> > I have never seen a police officer ticket ANY bike riders! People are
> > always upset over H()*&t laws, but, realistically, if a law isn't
> > enforced, it's just a hollow gesture.
>
> I've never seen it either, come to think of it. But I have heard various
> accounts (here and in other forums) of cyclists getting tickets for things
> like busting a stop sign or light. I think those are the two things that
> cyclist mostly get in trouble for. *More rare are bank robbers escaping on a
> bike.

In another forum, I recently read a post where someone told a bike cop
that they'd seen a teenager crash a red light while riding without
lights at night and without his mandatory helmet.

According to the guy's post, the bike cop said he wouldn't do anything
about crashing the red light. But he would either lecture or ticket
the kid about the helmet.

Priorities?

- Frank Krygowski

PatTX

October 14th 08, 04:35 PM

:
: In another forum, I recently read a post where someone told a bike cop
: that they'd seen a teenager crash a red light while riding without
: lights at night and without his mandatory helmet.
:
: According to the guy's post, the bike cop said he wouldn't do anything
: about crashing the red light. But he would either lecture or ticket
: the kid about the helmet.
:
: Priorities?
:
: - Frank Krygowski

No, not priorities. A cop can't give somebody a ticket because of hearsay.
He has to SEE the kid run the red light. "Oh, officer! I saw Frank run a
red light in his car. Go over and give him a ticket!" Yeah, right.
Priorities? Gossip? Rumor?

Pat in TX

Ryan Cousineau

October 14th 08, 04:59 PM

In article >,
"Roger Zoul" > wrote:

> "Luigi de Guzman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:30:24 -0700, Art Harris wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Since I only have their ear for a few seconds, I try to nicely say,
> >> "You're riding on the wrong side. You're going to cause an accident." I
> >> doubt that it makes a difference, but you never know. If every cyclist
> >> they passed said that, they might eventually get the message.
> >
> > A traffic ticket and actual police enforcement would be far more
> > effective at getting the word out. As would a number of fatal accidents
> > in which news reports prominently highlighted the fact that "the cyclist
> > was riding opposite the flow of traffic, and thus was struck and killed."
> >
> > It's only too bad that contributory negligence is on its way out as a
> > legal doctrine, as well, because having an automobile driver claim that
> > the cyclist he struck was riding the wrong way would have immunized the
> > car driver from liability--since, by riding the wrong way, the cyclist
> > would have been deemed to have 'contributed' to his injury, and thus
> > would be legally barred from the 'profits' of that contribution.
> >
> > People don't learn until they get hurt. People don't cycle until driving
> > is impossible or prohibitively expensive.
>
> Well, exactly how many accidents are caused by people riding the wrong way
> on a road?
> Sure, it is not safe, but I think this is one of the least threatening
> things people can do, which is one reason
> why most police don't ticket these people.

Seriously? Because the last time I bothered to do research, wrong-way
riding was a seriously predisposing factor for a cyclist to get into a
crash.

The probable reason it's so dangerous is because the cyclist is in such
an unexpected location and with a completely unexpected vector.

Just as one example, it exposes you to a grave hazard from drivers
turning right* onto the street our example wrong-way-cyclist is riding
on. The ideal driver would typically check the sidewalk for pedestrians,
then look left for oncoming traffic. As they pull out, our friend
wrong-way will be riding into the car's right-front wheel.

There's all kinds of similar hazards. The one from left-turning cars
exiting the road may be even graver, given how completely out of normal
danger zones the rider is coming from.

Yeah, I know, this is mostly a self-punishing infraction, but bike-dents
are hell to get off of most cars, and if that doesn't stir your
sentiments, there are pedestrians, motorcyclists, and other cyclists who
would be just as surprised by the cyclist and considerably more
vulnerable to personal injury than the car's occupants.

*right-side driving example. Backward-driving Britons et al, please
mirror priorities.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

Ryan Cousineau

October 14th 08, 05:23 PM

In article >,
(Tom Keats) wrote:

> In article >,
> Tom Sherman > writes:

> > I find the main arterials more bicycle friendly in many cases, or at
> > least street with enough traffic that intersections with arterials are
> > controlled by traffic signals. Crossing multiple lanes of higher speed
> > traffic at low speed is not my idea of bicycle friendly. Riding on the
> > major streets also lessens the number of motorists that pull out in
> > front of you.
>
> In Vancouver the main arterials have become fraught with
> so many traffic lights. The major intersections have
> timed lights, and the less major intersections have
> loop-detector or push-button lights. There are traffic lights
> every second block. Riding on the arterials often means
> dealing with red light after red light after red light ...

In my experience, some of the bike routes in Vancouver are very good
indeed. I'm pretty familiar with the routes around West Broadway, and in
particular the Off-Broadway route (one of the busiest bike routes in the
city) seems configured so that the bike route has priority over almost
all of the lesser crossing streets, and there's fast-acting crosswalk
signals (with curbside road-facing buttons for cyclists) at most of the
major crossings. (They use "no-cars" road furniture every ten blocks or
so to prevent drivers from treating the route as a thoroughfare; it is
otherwise a fairly normal-looking residential street).

In my experience, Broadway may be a bit faster for an especially fast
cyclist (sometimes), but Off-Broadway is a calmer, more consistent
route, and may actually be quicker for average cyclists.

> So here it's better not to seek out not the main arterials nor
> the parallel bike routes, but the diagonals that swiftly get
> you from one section of town to another, disassociated one.
> The trick is to avoid as many timed traffic lights as possible.
>
> We have a great number of intersections with cyclists'
> traffic light push-buttons that aren't on designated/official
> bike routes. You just have to know where they are.
> You don't always have to push the button.
>
> The diagonals will set you free.

Interesting theory. I'll try it.

Not all local bike routes are so humanely designed. I can think of
several suburban routes that are either useless or downright dangerous.
The very street that I live on is a bike route, and it parallels a major
road (one block off). About five blocks from my house, the major road
remains nearly flat while the road the bike route is on gains about 23m
in a half-block, and gives nearly all of it back by the end of the block.

I'm not making that up: there is an ENORMOUS hump in the land there, and
the road (and houses) go up and over, while the main route has almost no
change.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

Art Harris

October 14th 08, 06:22 PM

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > Well, exactly how many accidents are caused by people riding the wrong way
> > on a road?
> > Sure, it is not safe, but I think this is one of the least threatening
> > things people can do, which is one reason
> > why most police don't ticket these people.
>
> Seriously? Because the last time I bothered to do research, wrong-way
> riding was a seriously predisposing factor for a cyclist to get into a
> crash.
>

Yeah, and not just for the wrong way rider. My only collision in 30+
years of riding occurred when one of two kids riding together on the
the wrong side ran into me.

Art Harris

Roger Zoul

October 14th 08, 08:53 PM

"Art Harris" > wrote in message
...
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> > Well, exactly how many accidents are caused by people riding the wrong
>> > way
>> > on a road?
>> > Sure, it is not safe, but I think this is one of the least threatening
>> > things people can do, which is one reason
>> > why most police don't ticket these people.
>>
>> Seriously? Because the last time I bothered to do research, wrong-way
>> riding was a seriously predisposing factor for a cyclist to get into a
>> crash.
>>
>
> Yeah, and not just for the wrong way rider. My only collision in 30+
> years of riding occurred when one of two kids riding together on the
> the wrong side ran into me.
>
> Art Harris

Not to lessen the incident, Art. But in 30+ years of riding you only had one
collision. So, WWR were only a problem for you once in 30 years.

Perhaps we're playing a game of picking the biggest of the tiny.

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 14th 08, 09:36 PM

On Oct 14, 11:35*am, "PatTX" > wrote:
> :
> : In another forum, I recently read a post where someone told a bike cop
> : that they'd seen a teenager crash a red light while riding without
> : lights at night and without his mandatory helmet.
> :
> : According to the guy's post, the bike cop said he wouldn't do anything
> : about crashing the red light. *But he would either lecture or ticket
> : the kid about the helmet.
> :
> : Priorities?
> :
> : - Frank Krygowski
>
> No, not priorities. A cop can't give somebody a ticket because of hearsay..
> He has to SEE the kid run the red light.

Perhaps that's what he meant, but to me, the phrasing wasn't clear.

I know I've seen a wrong way rider crash a red light while cutting
diagonally through a four way intersection directly in front of a cop
car, and the cops did nothing at all. I've seen cops pass wrong way
riders, and riders with no lights at night, and do nothing at all.
Yet I've heard cops give speeches on how important helmets are.

But we have no MHLs here, so I suppose it's not a fair test.

- Frank Krygowski

PatTX

October 14th 08, 10:26 PM

:
: I know I've seen a wrong way rider crash a red light while cutting
: diagonally through a four way intersection directly in front of a cop
: car, and the cops did nothing at all. I've seen cops pass wrong way
: riders, and riders with no lights at night, and do nothing at all.
: Yet I've heard cops give speeches on how important helmets are.
:
: But we have no MHLs here, so I suppose it's not a fair test.
:
: - Frank Krygowski

I don't know if you are talking about seeing the wrong way rider while you
were on a bike or in your car. I have seen cops ignore things that car
drivers did right in front of them! Once, I counted the cars with only one
headlight on my way to numerous referee meetings. Finally, I asked a cop,
"Why don't you ticket those cars?" and he replied, "Well, by the time I see
the car with only one headlight, I'd have to make a U-turn and go back and
try to find him. It's just too much trouble!" I was astonished because I
had seen numbers in the mid-20's of cars at night with only one
headlight--and that was just while on my way from Severna Park to Columbia!
So, by the time I returned home, I had seen upwards of 40 cars driving with
only one headlight.

I, too, have been in the car and have seen cops passing bicyclists without a
light at night and just ignoring the situation. And, that's just plain
dangerous! Why don't cops enforce laws on bicyclists? Dunno.

Pat in TX

DennisTheBald

October 14th 08, 11:00 PM

On Oct 12, 9:33 pm, wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:07:11 -0500, "PatTX" >
> wrote:
>
> >Oh, I haven't said anything to them about that, but I do wonder if they will
> >have a second time...after all, it's tough to ride with your chin getting
> >hit by your knee each time it comes up, not to mention grinding it out in a
> >high gear. I saw a woman yesterday that fit that description, and as I went
> >by, I said to her "Put it in a lower gear." (in a nice way). I didn't get
> >all of her answer, but most of it was "I can do that?"
>
> >I just noticed that all of the people I see riding the sidewalks are adults
> >in their 40's and above. None have mirrors, either.
>
> I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. There's
> about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. It's
> rare that anyone actually uses it for walking, and on the rare
> occasion that I do see someone, I yield to them. I'm not a novice
> cyclist, and I've read some of Forester's stuff, but I've picked
> myself out of ditches a couple times to avoid getting creamed. The
> roadway is not wide enough to share a lane, and if you take it, the
> driver's will pass close enough to scare the hell out of you just to
> make a point.
>
> Dave Clary
> Corpus Christi, TX

There are about a gazillion different situations. You gotta do what
makes sense for you in the situations that you are in. As much sense
as Forester makes in his book... it's still just a freaking book and
not even the rule book. If everybody followed the rules in the real
rule book Forester wouldn't have much of a market for his book now
would he?

DennisTheBald

October 14th 08, 11:06 PM

On Oct 13, 9:41 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 9:55 am, "PatTX" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > ::
> > :: I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. There's
> > :: about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. It's
> > :: rare that anyone actually uses it for walking, and on the rare
> > :: occasion that I do see someone, I yield to them. I'm not a novice
> > :: cyclist, and I've read some of Forester's stuff, but I've picked
> > :: myself out of ditches a couple times to avoid getting creamed. The
> > :: roadway is not wide enough to share a lane, and if you take it, the
> > :: driver's will pass close enough to scare the hell out of you just to
> > :: make a point.
> > ::
> > :: Dave Clary
> > :: Corpus Christi, TX
>
> > I hope this doesn't devolve into one of those "I break the rules of the road
> > because I feel threatened!" threads, because everyone has to make up his own
> > mind when breaking the traffic rules is necessary. I am talking about
> > people who are riding the sidewalks when there is a bike lane right
> > alongside them! Or when the street is so deserted that a bike could have the
> > entire lane with cars passing by in one of the other two lanes going that
> > direction. Yesterday, I saw a woman riding her bike on the sidewalk, and
> > with this particular sidewalk, there are stretches where no sidewalk exists.
> > So, she would be riding on the grass and rocks until she could get back on
> > the sidewalk, whereas I was riding in my bike lane right beside her! When I
> > went by, she looked up, startled. I got the impression from her face that
> > she was thinking, "You're allowed to ride on the street surface?"
>
> Based on my experience, everything Pat says is also true without bike
> lanes. They are not a requirement, whether the street is deserted or
> no. Ordinary roads are fine.
>
> And regarding Dave Clary's post: We've gotten dozens of similar posts
> over the years, with about half of them coming from one colorful
> individual. The general idea is always "You don't know how dangerous
> it is to ride HERE! If you were here, you'd [ride on the sidewalk /
> ride facing traffic / run traffic lights / stop every time a car gets
> near / etc.]"
>
> From what I see, over 99% of people who do those things are riding in
> places where competent cyclists ride normally and safely. I suppose
> it's not absolutely impossible that they're in some amazingly unusual
> situation. But I strongly doubt it.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

You presume that the only reason anyone would ride anywhere but the
road is that they are scared of the cars. I assure you this is not
the only situation where riding the sidewalk is warranted. But if you
are going to ride on the sidewalk - were legal or not - you have a
moral obligation not to run down the unwheeled gits that you share it
with.

DennisTheBald

October 14th 08, 11:35 PM

On Oct 13, 8:51 pm, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 2:34 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
>
>
> > I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
> > in my line, too. The ones I usually encounter
> > are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
> > conversing with imaginary companions, and their
> > bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
> > of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
> > depot.
>
> And they probably post a lot on Usenet, too!
>
> > It doesn't take much to set some of these
> > folks off on an irrational tirade.
>
> Q.E.D.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

Yes, that is probably me that you're talking about... and it's not
just aluminum, I recycle my brass too. You would be wise not to
accost me with any holier than thou BS.

Then again, even I have trouble defending wrong way riding.

DennisTheBald

October 14th 08, 11:51 PM

On Oct 13, 8:30 pm, wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 07:41:48 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>
> > wrote:
> >And regarding Dave Clary's post: We've gotten dozens of similar posts
> >over the years, with about half of them coming from one colorful
> >individual. The general idea is always "You don't know how dangerous
> >it is to ride HERE! If you were here, you'd [ride on the sidewalk /
> >ride facing traffic / run traffic lights / stop every time a car gets
> >near / etc.]"
>
> >From what I see, over 99% of people who do those things are riding in
> >places where competent cyclists ride normally and safely. I suppose
> >it's not absolutely impossible that they're in some amazingly unusual
> >situation. But I strongly doubt it.
>
> >- Frank Krygowski
>
> Believe what you want but I've ridden extensively in Las Vegas, raced
> and trained in Berlin for three years, toured in Denmark and the
> Netherlands, and was a bike club president for two years in west
> Texas. I never felt like I was doing something dangerous in those
> settings. That changed when I moved here. Once I was taking a right
> turn when a car turning left cut the corner and was coming right at
> me. I literally had to dive into a roadside ditch to avoid getting
> hit. And the guy yelled at me as I was lying there with my bike on
> top of me.
>
> I do ride in the street the vast majority of the time here, but I
> several incidents coming home when traffic was heavy, where drivers
> had to wait to pass me, and they cut it very close and blasted their
> horns as they went by. They probably never would hit me, but it still
> makes for a very uncomfortable ride. So for that short stretch, where
> the sidewalk goes mainly by undeveloped property, I use it.
>
> Dave Clary
> Corpus Christi, TX

Yeah, when I'm on the road I don't take crap from crackers with loaded
suburbans pointed right at me... I'm surely not gonna take similar
unsolicited advice from some skinny tired sports enthusiasts that
don't even have luggage when I choose to ride on the sidewalk. You
use your own judgment, it's been working this far.

The flip side of this coin is that you can't be giving crap (no matter
how witty you think it to be) to people riding down the stripe between
two rows of cars that are waiting for the light to change. Their lack
of judgment will catch up with them eventually.

Roger Zoul

October 15th 08, 01:39 AM

"PatTX" > wrote in message
...
> :
> : I know I've seen a wrong way rider crash a red light while cutting
> : diagonally through a four way intersection directly in front of a cop
> : car, and the cops did nothing at all. I've seen cops pass wrong way
> : riders, and riders with no lights at night, and do nothing at all.
> : Yet I've heard cops give speeches on how important helmets are.
> :
> : But we have no MHLs here, so I suppose it's not a fair test.
> :
> : - Frank Krygowski
>
> I don't know if you are talking about seeing the wrong way rider while you
> were on a bike or in your car. I have seen cops ignore things that car
> drivers did right in front of them! Once, I counted the cars with only one
> headlight on my way to numerous referee meetings. Finally, I asked a cop,
> "Why don't you ticket those cars?" and he replied, "Well, by the time I
> see the car with only one headlight, I'd have to make a U-turn and go back
> and try to find him. It's just too much trouble!" I was astonished
> because I had seen numbers in the mid-20's of cars at night with only one
> headlight--and that was just while on my way from Severna Park to
> Columbia! So, by the time I returned home, I had seen upwards of 40 cars
> driving with only one headlight.
>

A driver can have a blown headlight for months without even noticing it.
Again, that's not nearly a serious an infraction as someone driving
wrecklessly. I'd rather they hunt down those who are drunk or wreckless than
to bother with tracking down every driver with just one headlight. Let's
not forget the gas they'd use up if they tried to hound all one-eyed driver.

WWR fall into a similar group as those who drive with one headlight.

> I, too, have been in the car and have seen cops passing bicyclists without
> a light at night and just ignoring the situation. And, that's just plain
> dangerous! Why don't cops enforce laws on bicyclists? Dunno.
>
> Pat in TX
>

Tom Keats

October 15th 08, 02:30 AM

In article >,
Tom Sherman > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>> In article >,
>> Frank Krygowski > writes:
>>> On Oct 13, 2:34 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
>>>> in my line, too. The ones I usually encounter
>>>> are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
>>>> conversing with imaginary companions, and their
>>>> bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
>>>> of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
>>>> depot.
>>> And they probably post a lot on Usenet, too!
>>>> It doesn't take much to set some of these
>>>> folks off on an irrational tirade.
>>> Q.E.D.
>>
>> I seem to stand accused of poor-bashing.
>> Perhaps some context will vindicate me:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/4s8yau
>> http://preview.tinyurl.com/4s8yau
>>
>> in full: <http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=12d1dfbd-1395-490c-836e-4ba794c7167f>
>>
>> Past & present Provincial governments here have
>> seen fit to severely cut back needed support of
>> mentally distressed individuals.
>>
> That is what you get for imitating the US.

No imitation. Canada is not the Utopia so many
OtherWorlders think it is.

>> Back in the '70s we had all kinds of mental health
>> safety net, but that went by the wayside since the
>> Recession of the early '80s and the "downsizing"
>> trend of the early-mid '90s. These fellow citizens
>> find themselves unemployable and unhousable, and out
>> on the streets, trying to eke by as best they can, often
>> by collecting returnable cans & bottles (we have
>> deposits on returnable cans & bottles here.) There's
>> a /lot/ of these so-called "street people" here, and
>> cans & bottles are often their main sources of income.
>> You'd be hard pressed to find an empty beer or pop can
>> on the streets of Vancouver.
>>
> "Social Darwinism" in action.

Classism, anyway.

"Social Darwinism?!" Darwinian evolution is about
selective propagation, not selective depletion of
species. If Chas. Darwin was alive today I think
he'd be fascinated by the intricate adaptations
of cephalopods, and saddened by the prevalence
of human misery.

>> [...]
>> For what it's worth, a lot of street people with
>> mental issues find themselves suspected of having
>> addled their brains with drugs, when in reality
>> they've sustained on-the-job brain injuries that
>> have rendered them unable to continue with the
>> only kind of work they've ever known.
>>
> They should have chosen to be born economically independent. No mercy
> for those who do not choose to have rich parents. <end sarcasm>

Some of the street people with un-tended mental issues
here /do/ have rich parents. And I know one particular
person who ran a successful business, until there was
a house fire in which his son died. He blames himself,
and decided he should suffer deprivation for the rest
of his life for it. He has an imaginary companion
with whom he sometimes argues. The only people taking
care of him now is the Salvation Army.

Wealth is not a perfect defence against the onslaughts
of the world. Not even for Conrad Black.

British Columbia's main industries involve extraction
of raw resources -- timber, fish, minerals and tourists.
It's often dangerous work.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 15th 08, 03:45 AM

On Oct 14, 6:06*pm, DennisTheBald > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 9:41 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 9:55 am, "PatTX" > wrote:
>
> > > ::
> > > :: I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. *There's
> > > :: about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. *It's
> > > :: rare that anyone actually uses it for walking, and on the rare
> > > :: occasion that I do see someone, I yield to them. *I'm not a novice
> > > :: cyclist, and I've read some of Forester's stuff, but I've picked
> > > :: myself out of ditches a couple times to avoid getting creamed. *The
> > > :: roadway is not wide enough to share a lane, and if you take it, the
> > > :: driver's will pass close enough to scare the hell out of you just to
> > > :: make a point.
> > > ::
> > > :: Dave Clary
> > > :: Corpus Christi, TX
>
> > > I hope this doesn't devolve into one of those "I break the rules of the road
> > > because I feel threatened!" threads, because everyone has to make up his own
> > > mind when breaking the traffic rules is necessary. *I am talking about
> > > people who are riding the sidewalks when there is a bike lane right
> > > alongside them! Or when the street is so deserted that a bike could have the
> > > entire lane with cars passing by in one of the other two lanes going that
> > > direction. Yesterday, I saw a woman riding her bike on the sidewalk, and
> > > with this particular sidewalk, there are stretches where no sidewalk exists.
> > > So, she would be riding on the grass and rocks until she could get back on
> > > the sidewalk, whereas I was riding in my bike lane right beside her! When I
> > > went by, she looked up, startled. I got the impression from her face that
> > > she was thinking, "You're allowed to ride on the street surface?"
>
> > Based on my experience, everything Pat says is also true without bike
> > lanes. *They are not a requirement, whether the street is deserted or
> > no. *Ordinary roads are fine.
>
> > And regarding Dave Clary's post: *We've gotten dozens of similar posts
> > over the years, with about half of them coming from one colorful
> > individual. *The general idea is always "You don't know how dangerous
> > it is to ride HERE! *If you were here, you'd [ride on the sidewalk /
> > ride facing traffic / run traffic lights / stop every time a car gets
> > near / etc.]"
>
> > From what I see, over 99% of people who do those things are riding in
> > places where competent cyclists ride normally and safely. *I suppose
> > it's not absolutely impossible that they're in some amazingly unusual
> > situation. *But I strongly doubt it.
>
> > - Frank Krygowski
>
> You presume that the only reason anyone would ride anywhere but the
> road is that they are scared of the cars. *I assure you this is not
> the only situation where riding the sidewalk is warranted. *But if you
> are going to ride on the sidewalk - were legal or not - you have a
> moral obligation not to run down the unwheeled gits that you share it
> with.

Sorry, I didn't presume what you say. I was reacting to a poster who
specifically said why he rode on the sidewalk - because he was scared
of the cars.

FWIW, I agree that there are some times where riding on a sidewalk is
reasonable. But I believe those times are fairly uncommon. I also
believe the vast majority of sidewalk riding happens because people
are unduly afraid of cars, and that the vast majority of sidewalk
riders don't understand that they are probably in more danger than if
they were in the street.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 15th 08, 03:48 AM

On Oct 14, 6:35*pm, DennisTheBald > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 8:51 pm, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 2:34 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
> > > I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
> > > in my line, too. *The ones I usually encounter
> > > are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
> > > conversing with imaginary companions, and their
> > > bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
> > > of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
> > > depot.
>
> > And they probably post a lot on Usenet, too!
>
> > > It doesn't take much to set some of these
> > > folks off on an irrational tirade.
>
> > Q.E.D.
>
> > - Frank Krygowski
>
> Yes, that is probably me that you're talking about... and it's not
> just aluminum, I recycle my brass too. *You would be wise not to
> accost me with any holier than thou BS.

Sheesh! That was a joke! Did you not notice that I post to Usenet
too??

- Frank Krygowski

[email protected]

October 15th 08, 04:37 AM

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:45:34 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
> wrote:

>
>Sorry, I didn't presume what you say. I was reacting to a poster who
>specifically said why he rode on the sidewalk - because he was scared
>of the cars.

No, what I said specifically was I wanted to avoid some drivers who
intentionally pass close to cyclists with the intention of scaring
them.

Dave Clary
Corpus Christi, TX

Alex Colvin

October 15th 08, 01:07 PM

>Again, that's not nearly a serious an infraction as someone driving
>wrecklessly.

I've been driving wrecklessly for years %)
--
mac the naïf

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 15th 08, 03:50 PM

On Oct 14, 11:37*pm, wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:45:34 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>
> > wrote:
>
> >Sorry, I didn't presume what you say. *I was reacting to a poster who
> >specifically said why he rode on the sidewalk - because he was scared
> >of the cars.
>
> No, what I said specifically was I wanted to avoid some drivers who
> intentionally pass close to cyclists with the intention of scaring
> them. *

Hmm. Can you explain the difference? I don't see it.

- Frank Krygowski

[email protected]

October 15th 08, 07:26 PM

On Oct 13, 7:56 pm, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 4:54 pm, Luigi de Guzman > wrote:

> Likewise, when our village got its first bike cop, I saw him riding
> wrong way, and very, very carefully mentioned it - something like "Um,
> you realize you were violating the law there, right?" He said
> "Really? You know, I've had people ask me which side of the road a
> bike's supposed to ride on, and I didn't know what to tell them."

In most places with bike cops these days there are laws on the books
exempting them from normal traffic laws.

[email protected]

October 15th 08, 07:54 PM

On Oct 15, 8:50 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 11:37 pm, wrote:

> > No, what I said specifically was I wanted to avoid some drivers who
> > intentionally pass close to cyclists with the intention of scaring
> > them.
>
> Hmm. Can you explain the difference? I don't see it.

Your deliberately insulting "scared of cars" comment implies an
irrational fear of the unknown. Dave is talking about something
completely different, a rational fear based on his experience of
having been repeatedly and deliberately harassed by motorists on a
specific stretch of road.

If he were "scared of cars" he would use sidewalks whenever possible.

PatTX

October 15th 08, 10:46 PM

::: Likewise, when our village got its first bike cop, I saw him riding
::: wrong way, and very, very carefully mentioned it - something like
::: "Um, you realize you were violating the law there, right?" He said
::: "Really? You know, I've had people ask me which side of the road a
::: bike's supposed to ride on, and I didn't know what to tell them."
::
:: In most places with bike cops these days there are laws on the books
:: exempting them from normal traffic laws.

Maybe so, but that doesn't exempt the cop from knowing which side of the
road a civilian should ride on....

Pat in TX

[email protected]

October 16th 08, 02:54 AM

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:54:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>On Oct 15, 8:50 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>> On Oct 14, 11:37 pm, wrote:
>
>> > No, what I said specifically was I wanted to avoid some drivers who
>> > intentionally pass close to cyclists with the intention of scaring
>> > them.
>>
>> Hmm. Can you explain the difference? I don't see it.
>
>Your deliberately insulting "scared of cars" comment implies an
>irrational fear of the unknown. Dave is talking about something
>completely different, a rational fear based on his experience of
>having been repeatedly and deliberately harassed by motorists on a
>specific stretch of road.
>
>If he were "scared of cars" he would use sidewalks whenever possible.

Thank you. You explained exactly how I feel in words I never would
have come up with myself. Appreciate it!

Dave Clary
Corpus Christi, TX

brink[_3_]

October 16th 08, 04:46 AM

> wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:54:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>>On Oct 15, 8:50 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>>> On Oct 14, 11:37 pm, wrote:
>>
>>> > No, what I said specifically was I wanted to avoid some drivers who
>>> > intentionally pass close to cyclists with the intention of scaring
>>> > them.
>>>
>>> Hmm. Can you explain the difference? I don't see it.
>>
>>Your deliberately insulting "scared of cars" comment implies an
>>irrational fear of the unknown. Dave is talking about something
>>completely different, a rational fear based on his experience of
>>having been repeatedly and deliberately harassed by motorists on a
>>specific stretch of road.
>>
>>If he were "scared of cars" he would use sidewalks whenever possible.
>
> Thank you. You explained exactly how I feel in words I never would
> have come up with myself. Appreciate it!

Hey Dave,

What's your route in Corpus Christi? I just visited there last week and
biked that 10 mile stretch from the intersection of Ennis Joslin/358 to
downtown and back a few times. Really nice ride. In the evenings, you feel
like a superhero riding into downtown with those strong winds at your
back... but man, do you pay for it riding back out of downtown.

That route was well-designed for bike traffic but looking around I can see
where other routes would pose some dilemmas for bikes.

brink

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 16th 08, 04:26 PM

On Oct 15, 2:54*pm, wrote:
> On Oct 15, 8:50 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>
> > On Oct 14, 11:37 pm, wrote:
> > > No, what I said specifically was I wanted to avoid some drivers who
> > > intentionally pass close to cyclists with the intention of scaring
> > > them.
>
> > Hmm. *Can you explain the difference? *I don't see it.
>
> Your deliberately insulting "scared of cars" comment implies an
> irrational fear of the unknown.

I suppose I could come up with a phrase that you might somehow judge
less insulting. Perhaps "Nervous enough in the presence of lots of
automobiles that he chooses to ride on the sidewalk"? But I think
"scared of cars" works well. Brevity is good.

I'll accept "scared of the cars on that road" if you prefer - but the
difference seems a detail.

> Dave is talking about something
> completely different, a rational fear based *on his experience of
> having been repeatedly and deliberately harassed by motorists on a
> specific stretch of road.
>
> If he were "scared of cars" he would use sidewalks whenever possible.

If he were _always_ scared of cars, he would use the sidewalks
whenever possible.

If he were scared of cars on that stretch of road, he would use the
sidewalk along that road. Which is what he does.

- Frank Krygowski

[email protected]

October 16th 08, 07:39 PM

On Oct 16, 9:26 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:

> > If he were "scared of cars" he would use sidewalks whenever possible.
>
> If he were _always_ scared of cars, he would use the sidewalks
> whenever possible.
>
> If he were scared of cars on that stretch of road, he would use the
> sidewalk along that road. Which is what he does.

He's not scared of the cars on that road, he's scared of the people.

Have you ridden that road? Do you have any idea what you're talking
about?

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 16th 08, 09:49 PM

On Oct 16, 2:39*pm, wrote:
> On Oct 16, 9:26 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>
> > > If he were "scared of cars" he would use sidewalks whenever possible.
>
> > If he were _always_ scared of cars, he would use the sidewalks
> > whenever possible.
>
> > If he were scared of cars on that stretch of road, he would use the
> > sidewalk along that road. *Which is what he does.
>
> He's not scared of the cars on that road, he's scared of the people.

How fine can we split these hairs?

Is he afraid of all the people on that road? No. Is he afraid of the
people walking on that road, or living on that road, or shopping on
that road? No. Is he afraid of the people who drive on that road
when they are not actually driving? No.

What he's afraid of is the possibility of bodily injury caused by the
cars those people operate while he's riding a bicycle on that road.

IOW, he's afraid of the cars. Everybody knows exactly what that
phrase means, and brevity is good.

> Have you ridden that road?

I can't say for sure. It's certainly possible.

> Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

:-) At the moment, I'm talking about blathering and obfuscation. I
can tell it when I see it!

- Frank Krygowski

PatTX

October 16th 08, 11:52 PM

::
:: I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. There's
:: about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. ::
:: Dave Clary
:: Corpus Christi, TX

Dave, this thread is not about you! Everytime somebody says the word
"sidewalk", you are there with a vengeance trying in vain to explain why you
ride on the sidewalk. Face it, you are one in a thousand---one who knows how
to ride and knows the laws, but chooses to ride on the sidewalk in one part
of your commute. Fine. But, a sidewalk thread is about the newbies and the
clueless. I repeat: It's not about you, Dave! Every single damn time you
sniff the word sidewalk you raise up and start hijacking the thread. Give it
a rest. We all have read many times about your sidewalk riding and why you
do it. Now, let's go back and talk about all of the new riders who have
started because of the gasoline price crunch and what we can do to help them
get off of the sidewalk.

Pat in TX

PatTX

October 16th 08, 11:54 PM

One thing is for sure, whenever Dave reads the word "sidewalk" the thread
instantly becomes all about Dave! We have read his explanations many times.
The typical sidewalk rider is NOT Dave Clary.

Pat in TX

[email protected]

October 17th 08, 02:36 AM

On Oct 16, 4:54 pm, "PatTX" > wrote:
> One thing is for sure, whenever Dave reads the word "sidewalk" the thread
> instantly becomes all about Dave! We have read his explanations many times.
> The typical sidewalk rider is NOT Dave Clary.

So who is the typical sidewalk rider. Around here the typical sidewalk
rider is navigating counterflow on a one way street, not because
they're fearful but because it's convenient.

[email protected]

October 17th 08, 02:36 AM

Tellya what. If I'm shuffling down a sidewalk anytime in the next
few months and a cyclist comes along, I promise I'll tear into them.
Built up anger and frustration, being stuck a pedestrian for thehe
foreseeable future.
OTOH, for anyone who's keeping track, as of today I'm officially
weaning myself from walker to cane. It's slow progress, but it's
progress.

Bill

-----------------------------------------------------------
| Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, |
| misdiagnosing it and then misapplying the wrong remedies. |
| -Groucho Marx |
-----------------------------------------------------------

PatTX > wrote:
> I just wish they'd get off of the sidewalks!

[email protected]

October 17th 08, 02:52 AM

On Oct 16, 2:49 pm, Frank Krygowski > wrote:

> Is he afraid of all the people on that road? No. Is he afraid of the
> people walking on that road, or living on that road, or shopping on
> that road? No. Is he afraid of the people who drive on that road
> when they are not actually driving? No.

There aren't any other people on that road. There's Dave, the drivers,
a lane that's too narrow to be shared and an empty sidewalk. Sounds
like riding the sidewalk is a reasonable choice in that situation.

> What he's afraid of is the possibility of bodily injury caused by the
> cars those people operate while he's riding a bicycle on that road.
>
> IOW, he's afraid of the cars. Everybody knows exactly what that
> phrase means, and brevity is good.

The phrase is, at best, imprecise, so in this case brevity is not
good. He is not randomly and universally "afraid of cars." What caused
him fear were specific and deliberate acts of intimidation by drivers.
He believed these incidents occurred due to the specific nature of the
street geometry and drivers' micro-culture on that particular stretch,
and he felt that similar incidents would continue to occur if he
continued to ride on that particular stretch. Sidewalk being empty, he
makes a rational choice and uses it. That's the beauty of the bicycle.

Continuing to use the street in such circumstances would be your
personal choice.Criticizing another rider on the other side of the
country for their rational choice to use the sidewalk in such
circumstances is the realm of the flailing ideologue.

[email protected]

October 17th 08, 03:53 AM

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:46:40 -0500, "brink" >
wrote:

>Hey Dave,
>
>What's your route in Corpus Christi?

I work on the Naval Air Station so my ride is a straight shot down
Waldron Road and NAS Drive. That stretch along Ocean is a decent
route. They actually narrowed the driving lanes to give a little more
room for the runners/cyclist to use the shoulder.

I used to commute 22 miles one-way from Flour Bluff to my office cross
town (Agnes and Baldwin if you're familiar with those streets). That
was on a fully-faired recumbent and drivers seemed to give me a little
more room with that machine. But cross winds along Ocean Drive made
handling that thing a litle dicey (in other words--I was "scared of
the wind"). :-)

Dave

[email protected]

October 17th 08, 04:14 AM

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:52:57 -0500, "PatTX" >
wrote:

>::
>:: I commute to work on a bike--seven miles in each direction. There's
>:: about a two-mile stretch coming home where I use a sidewalk. ::
>:: Dave Clary
>:: Corpus Christi, TX
>
>Dave, this thread is not about you! Everytime somebody says the word
>"sidewalk", you are there with a vengeance trying in vain to explain why you
>ride on the sidewalk. Face it, you are one in a thousand---one who knows how
>to ride and knows the laws, but chooses to ride on the sidewalk in one part
>of your commute. Fine. But, a sidewalk thread is about the newbies and the
>clueless. I repeat: It's not about you, Dave! Every single damn time you
>sniff the word sidewalk you raise up and start hijacking the thread. Give it
>a rest. We all have read many times about your sidewalk riding and why you
>do it. Now, let's go back and talk about all of the new riders who have
>started because of the gasoline price crunch and what we can do to help them
>get off of the sidewalk.
>
>Pat in TX
>
What the f&^^k are you talking about? There are 63 messages in this
thread and I've made three replies about sidewalks. One to you which
was on topic and germane to the discussion, and two to Frank to
clarify my position. Your rant above is a crock of ****. You want to
steer the thread in a particular direction--be my guest. Meanwhile go
swim a few laps and chill out.

Dave

brink[_3_]

October 17th 08, 04:51 AM

> wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:46:40 -0500, "brink" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>Hey Dave,
>>
>>What's your route in Corpus Christi?
>
> I work on the Naval Air Station so my ride is a straight shot down
> Waldron Road and NAS Drive. That stretch along Ocean is a decent
> route. They actually narrowed the driving lanes to give a little more
> room for the runners/cyclist to use the shoulder.
>
> I used to commute 22 miles one-way from Flour Bluff to my office cross
> town (Agnes and Baldwin if you're familiar with those streets). That
> was on a fully-faired recumbent and drivers seemed to give me a little
> more room with that machine. But cross winds along Ocean Drive made
> handling that thing a litle dicey (in other words--I was "scared of
> the wind"). :-)

Wow, small world. We stayed at an RV park out there on Waldron, I'm pretty
sure you must pass it on your ride.

I was tempted to try riding from Waldron all the way through the NAS to
Ocean Dr, then through the A&M campus and all the way to downtown, but I
thought it was iffy for me to have a chance going through the base if I
didn't have base business... would they have let me through?

brink

brink[_3_]

October 17th 08, 04:57 AM

Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2:54 pm, wrote:
>> On Oct 15, 8:50 am, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 14, 11:37 pm, wrote:
>>>> No, what I said specifically was I wanted to avoid some drivers who
>>>> intentionally pass close to cyclists with the intention of scaring
>>>> them.
>>
>>> Hmm. Can you explain the difference? I don't see it.
>>
>> Your deliberately insulting "scared of cars" comment implies an
>> irrational fear of the unknown.
>
> I suppose I could come up with a phrase that you might somehow judge
> less insulting. Perhaps "Nervous enough in the presence of lots of
> automobiles that he chooses to ride on the sidewalk"? But I think
> "scared of cars" works well. Brevity is good.

Brevity is fine but accuracy and clarity are more important. Without the
qualifier, the implication is that Dave is scared of all cars. At least
that's my understanding of American English vernacular... I'll assume most
readers agree.

It's not much different than turning my statement that "Those four dogs that
chased me on my ride today scared me" (true story) into "Brink is scared of
dogs."

> I'll accept "scared of the cars on that road" if you prefer - but the
> difference seems a detail.

No, it's a difference of kind... therefore worthy of the extra qualifier.

brink

Dave

October 17th 08, 03:10 PM

On Oct 16, 10:51*pm, "brink" > wrote:
>> I was tempted to try riding from Waldron all the way through the NAS to
> Ocean Dr, then through the A&M campus and all the way to downtown, but I
> thought it was iffy for me to have a chance going through the base if I
> didn't have base business... *would they have let me through?

No, unless you have some kind of identification (military, DOD
civilian) that permits you to get in. Now if you come back and do the
ride around the bay (search on Conquer the Coast), they open the gates
for that!

Dave

PatTX

October 17th 08, 03:20 PM

:
:: On Oct 16, 4:54 pm, "PatTX" > wrote:
::: One thing is for sure, whenever Dave reads the word "sidewalk" the
::: thread instantly becomes all about Dave! We have read his
::: explanations many times. The typical sidewalk rider is NOT Dave
::: Clary.
::
:: So who is the typical sidewalk rider. Around here the typical
:: sidewalk rider is navigating counterflow on a one way street, not
:: because they're fearful but because it's convenient.

The typical sidewalk rider may be identified by who he is NOT. He is not a
savvy bike commuter. He is not a regular cyclist. He does not own any
cycling gear such as padded shorts. He does not use a mirror. He does not
have pedals that clip into cycling shoes.

He IS, on the other hand, someone who thinks laws do not apply to him
because he is riding a bike. I don't know if he is fearful, but I suspect a
good many of them are fearful of riding in the street. He, evidently, thinks
he is invisible because he rides across intersections where he has a red
light.

Out where I live there aren't any one way streets, so I can't comment on my
experience with that. I speculate that the average adult who rides on the
sidewalk thinks he was told as a child that sidewalks are where bicycles
"belong."

Pat in TX

PatTX

October 17th 08, 03:25 PM

:::
::: Dave, this thread is not about you! Everytime somebody says the word
::: "sidewalk", you are there with a vengeance trying in vain to
::: explain why you ride on the sidewalk. Face it, you are one in a
::: thousand---one who knows how to ride and knows the laws, but
::: chooses to ride on the sidewalk in one part of your commute. Fine.
::: But, a sidewalk thread is about the newbies and the clueless. I
::: repeat: It's not about you, Dave! Every single damn time you sniff
::: the word sidewalk you raise up and start hijacking the thread. Give
::: it a rest. We all have read many times about your sidewalk riding
::: and why you do it. Now, let's go back and talk about all of the new
::: riders who have started because of the gasoline price crunch and
::: what we can do to help them get off of the sidewalk.
:::
::: Pat in TX
:::
:: What the f&^^k are you talking about? There are 63 messages in this
:: thread and I've made three replies about sidewalks. One to you which
:: was on topic and germane to the discussion, and two to Frank to
:: clarify my position. Your rant above is a crock of ****. You want
:: to steer the thread in a particular direction--be my guest.
:: Meanwhile go swim a few laps and chill out.
::
:: Dave

I'm talking about EVERY thread where the word sidewalks is mentioned. Even
though we are talking about newbies and adults who haven't ridden a bike in
years, you feel obligated to jump in with your commute story. We GET it,
Dave. You are an experienced rider. The thread is about people who have
started to ride for pleasure due to the gas prices going up. This is no
"rant"---it is my experience of hearing about your commuting story over and
over and over again. You hear the word sidewalk and your antenna assumes
"they're talking about me again." Well, nobody is talking about you---until
you jump in and hijack the thread with your timeworn story. Look at the
subject of the thread! It wasn't written as "experienced riders who ride on
the sidewalk occasionally." It was about newbies until you hijacked it,e.g.,
it was YOU who are trying to steer the thread in a particular direction.

Pat in TX

Dave

October 17th 08, 04:52 PM

On Oct 17, 9:20*am, "PatTX" > wrote:
> He IS, on the other hand, someone who thinks laws do not apply to him
> because he is riding a bike. I don't know if he is fearful, but I suspect a
> good many of them are fearful of riding in the street. He, evidently, thinks
> he is invisible because he rides across intersections where he has a red
> light.

Pat,

I think you are mistaking me for someone else. For starters, I have
almost no posting history in this NG. And I guarandamntee you I have
NEVER said anything about running through red lights. In my post I
mentioned how I ride very defensively when I use the sidewalk meaning
I'm very cautious at intersections and driveways. I absolutely stop
for signals. So this rant of yours about me jumping in everytime the
subject of sidewalks comes up is misdirected. There must be someone
else that posts to this group that you are confusing me with.

DennisTheBald

October 17th 08, 05:35 PM

On Oct 14, 9:48 pm, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 6:35 pm, DennisTheBald > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 8:51 pm, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 13, 2:34 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
> > > > I hate having to contend with wrong-way riders
> > > > in my line, too. The ones I usually encounter
> > > > are very scruffy looking (and smelling,) often
> > > > conversing with imaginary companions, and their
> > > > bikes are festooned with green garbage bags full
> > > > of cans & bottles to be cashed-in at the recycling
> > > > depot.
>
> > > And they probably post a lot on Usenet, too!
>
> > > > It doesn't take much to set some of these
> > > > folks off on an irrational tirade.
>
> > > Q.E.D.
>
> > > - Frank Krygowski
>
> > Yes, that is probably me that you're talking about... and it's not
> > just aluminum, I recycle my brass too. You would be wise not to
> > accost me with any holier than thou BS.
>
> Sheesh! That was a joke! Did you not notice that I post to Usenet
> too??
>
> - Frank Krygowski

yeah, but do you pack your kit in garbage bags like I do?
If I've mistaken you for one of those helmet nazi, club riders that
assume the roads are only safe if you're in a large pack of spandex
clad gits on saturday morning and that everybody else should do like
you do, and you're not; then I can only offer a thousand mea culpas.

But even if you're not, it would still be wise not to shout out rude
things like "get off the sidewalk" when ya seem me coming, I might
mistake you for one of those motorists that are always shouting "get
of the road". On the other hand if you're wearing a floppy hat or a
dew rag I would tolerate "where's your helmet" without actually
showing you as I occasionally do the aforementioned spandex clad gits.
(I am not an anteater but my two sons are)

Dave

October 17th 08, 07:02 PM

On Oct 17, 9:25*am, "PatTX" > wrote:
> I'm talking about EVERY thread where the word sidewalks is mentioned.

Go do a Google Groups search and check my participation in this
group. I have posted to exactly TWO threads in the last NINE years.
I don't know who it is that has your panties all in a bunch but it
ain't me. So get your facts straight.

I stand by my contention that my post was on topic and germane to the
discussion. I can't help it if there has been someone else in this
newsgroup who has been crusading for acceptance of cycling scofflaws.

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 18th 08, 12:41 AM

On Oct 17, 12:35*pm, DennisTheBald > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 9:48 pm, Frank Krygowski > wrote:
>
> > Sheesh! *That was a joke! *Did you not notice that I post to Usenet
> > too??
>
> yeah, but do you pack your kit in garbage bags like I do?

I have sometimes lined my panniers with garbage bags, if that makes
you feel better.

> If I've mistaken you for one of those helmet nazi, club riders that
> assume the roads are only safe if you're in a large pack of spandex
> clad gits on saturday morning and that everybody else should do like
> you do, and you're not; then I can only offer a thousand mea culpas.

Then it's time to start the mea culpas, Dennis.

Anyone who mistakes me for a helmet nazi hasn't been paying attention
at all!

>
> But even if you're not, it would still be wise not to shout out rude
> things like "get off the sidewalk" when ya seem me coming...

FWIW, I don't think I've ever shouted at another cyclist, except a few
over the years that were about to run into me by their inattention.

I have spoken briefly with wrong way cyclists, usually because they
endanger me. I've spoken a few times with unlit cyclists at night,
saying (truthfully) "You need lights! You're almost invisible!" None
of those have ever been shouts.

Sidewalk cyclists normally get nothing at all from me, except a sad
shake of the head. In fact, the only time I recall ever mentioning
that to a cyclist was when a student of mine stopped to talk to me
while he was riding on the sidewalk on which I was walking.

- Frank Krygowski

Tom Keats

October 18th 08, 05:11 PM

In article ]>,
Ryan Cousineau > writes:

>> We have a great number of intersections with cyclists'
>> traffic light push-buttons that aren't on designated/official
>> bike routes. You just have to know where they are.
>> You don't always have to push the button.
>>
>> The diagonals will set you free.
>
> Interesting theory. I'll try it.

It takes a bit of exploration to find such routes,
but that affords the opportunity for changes of
scenery. Shortcuts can be found, too. For example,
one can ride up (northbound) that road who's name
escapes me behind BCIT (the one with the horrible
bike lane,) hang a right onto Manor St to its end,
traverse a small patch of undeveloped real estate
and come out onto Douglas Rd. Ride over the freeway
overpass, hang a right onto Norlands, and stop at that
truck-stop cafe who's name also escapes me, to enjoy
a delicious, cafe-style burger & fries, grease 'n all.
There's a lot of truck traffic in there, but there
are also wide, unpaved shoulders providing lots of
escape route if needed. Riding through there is
rather like riding in a parking lot, except the
cars are big semi/tractor rigs.

Further along Norlands and that other road that
goes by Burnaby's big sports arena/hockey rinks gets
you to Old (Sperling? Sprott?) Road, which northbound
cuts through Deer Lake Park. You get to ride over
that cute li'l wooden bridge. Further along, you might
have to dismount to cross the RR tracks, but big deal --
in late summer it's an opportunity to pick some blackberries.
Next thing you know you're on Winston St, right behind
Dairyland. Cruise a while southeast along Winston, and
you can either veer northwest to SFU, which is obviously
not very direct, or southeast (via Cariboo, IIRC) to
Sapperton, where we can wallow in ennui, and then proceed
into Coquitlam via United Blvd from Braid St, and wallow
in ennui there. Another cute li'l wooden bridge to contend
with. Or you can use Winston to access the Lougheed Hwy,
having bypassed some problem intersections you'd otherwise
have to deal with if you accessed the Lougheed via
Broadway/Boundary from Vancouver.

I wish I could be more precise with street names, but
especially outside of Vancouver (Proper) I tend to get
around by dead reckoning and landmarks. And sometimes
a little guesswork.

I used to have an inventory of all the non-bike-route
cyclists' traffic light pushbuttons, but I lost it
after a harddrive crash. I still know where they are,
but I can't always name the street intersections.

But there /are/ ways to traverse barriers such as
Oak St, south Granville St, East 1st Ave, Kingsway,
Cambie St, Rupert St &c, and head more directly to
your destination without being railroaded by bike routes,
or resorting to traffic light-encumbered arterials.

It takes some exploration & research, and being mindful
that routes can suddenly become improved or ruined in
one day's worth of meddling by traffic engineers. It's
kinda like repeatedly putting that old mathematical
Travelling Salesman Problem to the test by actually
~doing~ it, instead of merely thinking about it.

I guess figuring out personal bicycling routes is
a way of practically "living" and applying mathematics.
That oughta appeal to ya :-)

To paraphrase John B.L. Soule (misattributed to
Horace Greeley:) Go north/east/west/south, young man,
and become intimately acquainted with the country.

That's just my way of saying it can be enjoyable to just
casually ride around and look for routes that can be
advantageous to ya. Especially when you need to get
out of the house for awhile, anyway. I realize you
already know that. But sometimes it doesn't hurt to
remind a whole bunch of on-line readers and wish 'em
all good rides, all at once. After all, we all tend
to get stuck in the ruts of following the same, old,
familiar routes, and the devils we know.

It's good to break out of the loop and discover stuff.
That's what /I've/ gotta do again, too.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[email protected]

October 18th 08, 09:03 PM

On Oct 18, 10:11 am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> Burnaby's big sports arena/hockey rinks ...

I'd like to take a quick second here and thank our neighbors to the
north for spawning the Great Joe Sakic. Burnaby Joe, as he is
sometimes known.

> To paraphrase John B.L. Soule (misattributed to
> Horace Greeley:) Go north/east/west/south, young man,
> and become intimately acquainted with the country.

Silas Soule's dad?

Frank Krygowski[_2_]

October 19th 08, 04:01 AM

On Oct 18, 12:11*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
> It takes some exploration & research...

I've sometimes wished for a way to recruit all the 10 to 16 year old
kids in town to have them document their shortcuts. Kids are like
ants. They find every possible way of getting around. Some of their
shortcuts are useful.

- Frank Krygowski

Tom Keats

October 19th 08, 04:37 AM

In article >,
Frank Krygowski > writes:
> On Oct 18, 12:11*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>>
>> It takes some exploration & research...
> I've sometimes wished for a way to recruit all the 10 to 16 year old
> kids in town to have them document their shortcuts.

Fix 'em up with GPSs and pitch a pizza rally for 'em,
where everybody gets to select their own route :-)

> Kids are like
> ants. They find every possible way of getting around. Some of their
> shortcuts are useful.

Then we get older, more set in our ways, and less inclined
to explore (generally speaking.) I guess that's part of
the theme/moral of the tragic Peter Pan story. On a brighter
note, maybe bicycling helps to preserve our youthful spirits
by facilitating exploring, investigating and discovering.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Ryan Cousineau

October 19th 08, 06:46 AM

In article
>,
wrote:

> On Oct 18, 10:11 am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> > Burnaby's big sports arena/hockey rinks ...
>
> I'd like to take a quick second here and thank our neighbors to the
> north for spawning the Great Joe Sakic. Burnaby Joe, as he is
> sometimes known.

The arena Tom is referring to (8 Rinks) is right beside a sports field
complex, which is accessed via Joe Sakic Way.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

PatTX

October 19th 08, 03:50 PM

:::: It takes some exploration & research...
::: I've sometimes wished for a way to recruit all the 10 to 16 year old
::: kids in town to have them document their shortcuts.
::
:: Fix 'em up with GPSs and pitch a pizza rally for 'em,
:: where everybody gets to select their own route :-)
::
::: Kids are like
::: ants. They find every possible way of getting around. Some of
::: their shortcuts are useful.

:: Then we get older, more set in our ways, and less inclined
:: to explore (generally speaking.) I guess that's part of
:: the theme/moral of the tragic Peter Pan story. On a brighter
:: note, maybe bicycling helps to preserve our youthful spirits
:: by facilitating exploring, investigating and discovering.
::
::
:: cheers,
:: Tom

The more older we get, we understand ideas like "illegal" and "dangerous"
and "orthopedic surgeon." One of my earliest self-imposed rules was "Don't
ever follow a child on skis through the forest."

Pat

Tom Keats

October 19th 08, 04:03 PM

In article >,
"PatTX" > writes:

>:: Then we get older, more set in our ways, and less inclined
>:: to explore (generally speaking.) I guess that's part of
>:: the theme/moral of the tragic Peter Pan story. On a brighter
>:: note, maybe bicycling helps to preserve our youthful spirits
>:: by facilitating exploring, investigating and discovering.

> The more older we get, we understand ideas like "illegal" and "dangerous"
> and "orthopedic surgeon." One of my earliest self-imposed rules was "Don't
> ever follow a child on skis through the forest."

Ahh, but we also get to understand ideas like
serendipity, epiphany, eureka and easements.

Riding around to seek out better routes doesn't
necessarily have to be dangerous or involve
illegalities.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

PatTX

October 19th 08, 07:44 PM

:: serendipity, epiphany, eureka and easements.
::
:: Riding around to seek out better routes doesn't
:: necessarily have to be dangerous or involve
:: illegalities.
::
::
:: cheers,
:: Tom

The shortest route usually involves at least one of those....

Tom Keats

October 20th 08, 01:26 AM

In article >,
"PatTX" > writes:

>:: Riding around to seek out better routes doesn't
>:: necessarily have to be dangerous or involve
>:: illegalities.

> The shortest route usually involves at least one of those....

But shorter doesn't necessarily mean better,
or even faster. For example, a route via
arterial streets may look shorter on a map,
but those arterials could be heavily encumbered
with traffic lights. A better might be one that
zig-zags diagonally crosstown via minor streets,
residential sidestreets, access lanes (alleys,)
parks, hospital parking lots, undeveloped real
estate fractions, school playgrounds, &c.

Anyway, to get back to your original topic of
adult sidewalk riders, this article might be
of interest to you:
http://www.bicyclepaper.com/articles/2008/09/you_got_a_problem__dude

It speaks of riders doing unlawful stuff just to
be some sort of self-styled renegade.

I already submitted the above link in the Cyclists At War
thread, but I think it's also germane here.

It might also be of interest to Ryan 'cuz BicyclePaper
has some CX stuff in it.

It might also be of interest to Claire and Dane 'cuz
it's somewhat PNW-oriented.

Chances are Ryan, Claire & Dane are already aware of
this publication's existance. I just discovered it
today while buying some reflective tape at a LBS.

Sidewalk riders don't grind my gears nearly as much
riders who ride in crosswalks. 'Cuz crosswalks are
supposed to be a sort of sanctuary for pedestrians.
Dis'ing ~that~ is selfish and ugly.

I guess it boils down to: some riders rationalize
themselves as pedestrians when it suits them 'cuz
they aren't driving motor vehicles, and hypocritically
also consider themselves as vehicular traffic when it
suits them. They want it both ways. Have their cake
and eat it, too. At other people's expense.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Tom Keats

October 20th 08, 03:41 AM

In article >,
writes:
> On Oct 18, 10:11 am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>> Burnaby's big sports arena/hockey rinks ...
>
> I'd like to take a quick second here and thank our neighbors to the
> north for spawning the Great Joe Sakic. Burnaby Joe, as he is
> sometimes known.

We British Columbians also bask get to
bask in the glory of Chris (Kris?) Holm,
the Xtreem Unicyclist. Check out some of
his online vids if you've got the bandwidth.
That guy is amazing.

>> To paraphrase John B.L. Soule (misattributed to
>> Horace Greeley:) Go north/east/west/south, young man,
>> and become intimately acquainted with the country.
>
> Silas Soule's dad?

I dunno. Some underling from whom Horace Greeley
took credit. Just like Thos. Edison took credit
from his hirelings.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Tom Keats

October 26th 08, 01:58 AM

In article >,
John Thompson > writes:
> On 2008-10-12, Jay > wrote:
>
>> On the city part of my commute, cars or trucks double-parked in the bike
>> lane is a daily event. (Lawrence Ave between Kedzie and Jeff Park.) But at
>> least they are not moving. Seeing a bike going the wrong way in a bike lane,
>> hard to tell what he might do.
>
> I yell out "welcome to America! We ride *with* the traffic here!"

I encountered a wrong-way rider today.
I just aimed at him, geared up and booted it,
forcing him to my left. There wasn't anybody
else on the street to endanger him at the time,
so it was okay. This was on a feeder side street
(St George) onto an arterial (41st Ave, Vancouver.)
I had just hung a right off the arterial, and he was
approaching it (and me,) on the wrong side of the street.
There's a cyclists' traffic light push-button right at
that intersection, but I guess that wasn't convenient
enough for him.

Sometimes (not always) the best way to deal with wrong-way
riders is to aim at them and shoo them outa yer way like
a bunch of barnyard chickens. It's a judgment call.

Sometimes wrong-way riders are on a street they feel
fairly safe on, lining themselves up to hop onto a sidewalk
alongside a road they don't feel safe on, so they can
hurtle down the sidewalk against the traffic.

Somtimes they shouldn't ride on that sidewalk because
they'll endanger a bunch of foot-traffic.

Mind-reading & clairvoyance while riding can be hard work.
But it nevertheless can be done.

And it's not really ESP. It's just a matter of acquiring
the feel of anticipating people's intentions from their
body/car/bike English, and how they're dealing with their
surroundings.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Tom Keats

October 27th 08, 02:30 AM

In article ]>,
Ryan Cousineau > writes:
> In article
> >,
> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 18, 10:11 am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>> > Burnaby's big sports arena/hockey rinks ...
>>
>> I'd like to take a quick second here and thank our neighbors to the
>> north for spawning the Great Joe Sakic. Burnaby Joe, as he is
>> sometimes known.
>
> The arena Tom is referring to (8 Rinks) is right beside a sports field
> complex, which is accessed via Joe Sakic Way.

And the name of the road behind BCIT, with the horrible
bike lanes is Wayburne Way. I finally remembered it.

Now I've gotta return to that truck-stop, greasy-spoon
burger joint on Norlands to get /it's/ name.

Please don't tell me. I'm just gonna go there, and find out.

Maybe one of these days I'll even check out the Sweetheart
Cafe, on Columbia St in New Westminster. But I intuitively
feel it'll be disappointing. After all, the sign over the
door says: "Burgers / Sushi". That's just plain incongruous.

Maybe I'll just go for the sushi. But there are two or
three good sushi places along Main St, so to heck with
New West.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca