#51
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
Wes Newell wrote:
Chalo wrote: It's going to take prolonged separation from his car to break the spell.. I drove the car yesterday for the first time in several months. So I wonder what period you consider prolonged separation. A person that jumps to conclusions *usually jumps to the wrong one. Ah, then you're not a deranged unethical motorist; you're just deranged and unethical. Congratulations. What the hell is wrong with you? |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On 2/3/2011 8:20 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 2/3/2011 6:00 PM, Wes Newell wrote: On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 21:21:51 +0000, Phil W Lee wrote: [...] It builds false expectations among motorists that nothing will ever be in their way, and they can recklessly charge around blind bends without consideration of what may be there. When everyone acts as you do, the motorists start thinking they have some kind of RIGHT to be criminally negligent morons - just the attitude you seem to be demonstrating. That is a major reason for the "safety in numbers" effect - the more cyclists that are encountered by motorists, the more they come to expect (and respect) them. They do have the right to the roadway. They pay for it with license fees and gas taxes. Cyclist don't pay for it. We are just allowed to use it.[...] B U L L S H I T ! Local roads are paid for almost entirely by property taxes; and license fees and fuel taxes do *not* cover the externalities of motor vehicle use. Cycling is a *right*, motor vehicle use is a *privilege*. Here both cycling and mv use are privileges which can be restricted or curtailed as the government chooses. I wish that cycling was considered a right but it isn't. The government can prevent me from cycling anywhere that it wishes to prevent me. It was the same when I lived in Albany NY, Boston MA and New Orleans LA. Frank says that Ohio guarantees his right to ride a bicycle so I assume that other places beside Ohio do as well but not any that I've lived in. That said, motorists aren't normally homicidal maniacs. If they are accustomed to cyclists most will learn to coexist, albeit grudgingly in some cases. I agree that the more cyclists, the safer for the cyclists. Don't know where Wes is from. Maybe it's another place where motorists see one bicycle per day... |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
Wes Newell wrote:
Yes. It's called common courtesy. The roads were built for automobiles that can go a lot faster than I can on a bike. I give them the right of way because it doesn't bother me to do so, and I stay safer because of it. Recently, I woman jogging on a hiking trail was killed in Dallas when a cyclist ran into her. She had the right of way too for all the good it did her. Well there's certainly nothing wrong with "common courtesy" except that it appears to be not so common now days. You know it is not just people on foot or on bicycles that had the right of way, and ended up dead at the hands of someone who should have given way to another. It happens even to motorists as well, yet I believe very few of them give up their automobiles because of such dangers. I generally try to keep as far right *as is safe to do so*. A lot of persons new to bicycle as transport interpret this as a legal, or self-preservation, requirement. This is not always the case. Keeping way off to the right sometimes will encourage a motorist to zip by you with mere millimeters to spare, whereas if one was more "out in the lane", it would have dawned on even the most dense of drivers, that slowing and swinging left was going to be required. (This is a legal requirement BTW; bicycles are road vehicles and have the right to as much of the road as they need for safe travel. Even side-by-side bicycle riding isn't always illegal. Bicyclists are not required to ride the gutters.) It's a good idea not to irritate motorists if you can help it. In most cases in my experience, this is not difficult to do. Most motorists are really not psychopathic killers. They want to get along and they don't really mind losing a few seconds to get by a bicyclist in a safe manner. In most cases, they lose no time in doing so. But of course there are those who take it as an afront to their dignity and they simply won't give way for mere bicyclist. However I've seen such motorists perform the very same rude, dangerous behavior towards other motorists after they've passed me on my bike with mere inches to spare. I could very well end up squished on the side of the road tomorrow (and you could slip in the shower to meet your end just as well), but I'm not getting off the road because of a very few idiots, who by some means have been legally declared competent to operate a motor vehicle, but in practice, aren't. SMH |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On 2/4/2011 8:59 AM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Wes considered Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:38:19 +0000 (UTC) the perfect time to write: On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 06:41:45 +0000, Phil W Lee wrote: Get a copy of CycleCraft, by John Franklin. It will teach you methods to ride on those roads that you are currently too afraid to ride on, and with a high degree of safety. There's a lot of difference between the UK and the US. Drivers here are a bunch of morons when it comes to encountering cyclist on road simply because there aren't that many. It's not even safe for a motorcycle here. And I've got the scars to prove it. But on a motorcycle, I didn't have to worry about being hit from the rear as much. There is an edition of CycleCraft appropriate for North America. And I have driven in the US, as well as the UK. The main differences I saw were the much wider roads and generally lower speed limits. Depends on where you are. I find the south to have more space for roads and the northeast to be more cramped. Probably due to the older cities in the north and the higher population densities but I don't know for sure. As for speed limits, I think they vary greatly from place to place. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On 2/4/2011 8:26 AM, Duane Hebert wrote:
Here both cycling and mv use are privileges which can be restricted or curtailed as the government chooses. I wish that cycling was considered a right but it isn't. The government can prevent me from cycling anywhere that it wishes to prevent me. It was the same when I lived in Albany NY, Boston MA and New Orleans LA. Frank says that Ohio guarantees his right to ride a bicycle so I assume that other places beside Ohio do as well but not any that I've lived in. I live in Boston and don't believe that to be true. I don't know how I could be prevented from cycling by the government since I require no license or registration. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On 2/4/2011 10:26 AM, Peter Cole wrote:
On 2/4/2011 8:26 AM, Duane Hebert wrote: Here both cycling and mv use are privileges which can be restricted or curtailed as the government chooses. I wish that cycling was considered a right but it isn't. The government can prevent me from cycling anywhere that it wishes to prevent me. It was the same when I lived in Albany NY, Boston MA and New Orleans LA. Frank says that Ohio guarantees his right to ride a bicycle so I assume that other places beside Ohio do as well but not any that I've lived in. I live in Boston and don't believe that to be true. I don't know how I could be prevented from cycling by the government since I require no license or registration. Can you ride a bike on 128? I'm not saying it's some vindictive state conspiracy but they can prevent your access if they choose. I'm not aware of any case where cycling is prohibited without cause and I don't expect it to be anytime soon but that's not to say that it's a right. Here, if there's a bike lane, they mandate that I use it. I don't have a right to ride on the road in that case. I have a choice to take a different road and usually do if the bike lane is not safe. Similar laws existed in Albany NY when I lived there. I don't remember many lanes in Boston (1987 - 1993) Bikes don't usually need to be licensed nor do cyclists so it's less so than motor vehicles but it's still not a right to ride a bike IMO. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On Feb 4, 3:30*am, Wes Newell wrote:
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 23:46:49 -0800, Chalo wrote: It's going to take prolonged separation from his car to break the spell.. I drove the car yesterday for the first time in several months. So I wonder what period you consider prolonged separation. In your case, several months was obviously not enough. You still suffer from delusions of privilege, you seem unable to comprehend written laws, you have grossly inflated ideas on the minimal risks of bicycling, you're ignorant of infrastructure funding, and your attitude needs improvement. You have a LOT to learn. I suggest giving up your car for two solid years, and spending that time a) riding a bike, and b) trying to learn. - Frank Krygowski |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 08:26:18 -0500, Duane Hebert wrote:
Don't know where Wes is from. Maybe it's another place where motorists see one bicycle per day... More like one a month unless you count the local kids riding their bike in their neighborhood. It's rare to see a cyclist on any of the main streets. AFAIK there aren't any designated bike lanes around here. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On Feb 4, 10:55*am, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 2/4/2011 10:26 AM, Peter Cole wrote: On 2/4/2011 8:26 AM, Duane Hebert wrote: Here both cycling and mv use are privileges which can be restricted or curtailed as the government chooses. I wish that cycling was considered a right but it isn't. The government can prevent me from cycling anywhere that it wishes to prevent me. It was the same when I lived in Albany NY, Boston MA and New Orleans LA. Frank says that Ohio guarantees his right to ride a bicycle so I assume that other places beside Ohio do as well but not any that I've lived in. I live in Boston and don't believe that to be true. I don't know how I could be prevented from cycling by the government since I require no license or registration. Can you ride a bike on 128? I'm not saying it's some vindictive state conspiracy but they can prevent your access if they choose. *I'm not aware of any case where cycling is prohibited without cause and I don't expect it to be anytime soon but that's not to say that it's a right. Bob Mionske's book _Bicycling and the Law_ devotes pages 8 to 14 to the question of cyclists' rights to the road. He demonstrates our rights to the road based on statutory law, common law and the constitution. He quotes and references court decisions affirming that right, going all the way back to the 1880s. Mionske's book refers to the U.S. Perhaps some of that legal logic doesn't work in Quebec, I don't know; but I'd think the common law portions would. Here, if there's a bike lane, they mandate that I use it. While that's truly regrettable, that doesn't remove your right to the road. Similarly, pedestrians and bicyclists are often prohibited from limited access roads. Cars with only one motorist inside are prohibited from high occupancy lanes. But putting restrictions on behavior is not the same thing as removing rights. IANAL, but you should read Mionske. - Frank Krygowski |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Forester says...
On 2/4/2011 11:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Here, if there's a bike lane, they mandate that I use it. While that's truly regrettable, that doesn't remove your right to the road. poo-tee-weet! Similarly, pedestrians and bicyclists are often prohibited from limited access roads. Cars with only one motorist inside are prohibited from high occupancy lanes. But putting restrictions on behavior is not the same thing as removing rights. IANAL, but you should read Mionske. Can you or Mionske ride your bikes on 128S? All that I'm saying is that the "right" to ride a bike can be restricted. Some rights are inalienable. Others, not so much. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Forester says... | Tºm Shermªn™ °_°[_2_] | General | 184 | February 9th 11 05:01 PM |
Casio Men's Ana-Digi Forester Illuminator Watch #FT610WV-3BV -Cheapest Watch | [email protected] | Social Issues | 0 | April 30th 08 09:24 PM |
J.Forester How to Brake | nash | General | 0 | March 11th 07 06:17 PM |