Driver admits killing Marine cyclist

h squared wrote:



yes, i am comparing bike lane roads to narrower roads not capable of
"hosting" them. i would like the narrow road* to be widened and a bike
lane added to it. but if they just widened the road without adding a
lane, that would be almost as good for me, i'm happy for both
improvements, but i prefer to have cars banned from the right side of
the road if they make me queen and i get to decide.

You might rethink your ban. Having motorists drive on the right side of
the road when bicyclists are not present is desirable from a debris
perspective. I've written a detailed paper on the topic.

http://www.humantransport.org/bicycl...ary/Debris.pdf




and if the bike lane is wide enough, cars shouldn't have to move over at
all. that's the whole idea. (if cars still need to pull over to pass,
the bike lane is ridiculous) the bike lane on 140th is nice and wide,
and the lanes are nice and wide too. that way everyone can drive and
ride along at their own speed without having to worry about anyone else.


Same thing essentially happens if the same pavement width exists but
there is no bike lane stripe. Frankly though, motorists not worrying
about bicyclists is not beneficial to bicyclists. There is ample
rationale that people ought to worry about other road users.


i don't want cars to move over for me; i want them to be far enough away
already. when they do move over and i'm in my own lane, i take it almost
as an insult that they think i'm not capable of riding in a straight
line. are you getting it that i like having my own lane? that at
least should strike a chord with you.


That's nice to have your own lane. I'd like one for my car too. Scion xB
lanes! And so would the guy in the beer truck. Why don't we also make
separate lanes for motorcyclists, mini drivers, golf cart users, mopeds,
and pogo stick jumpers or anyone else who thinks they are special?



we'll never see eye to eye, wayne, at least admit that. it amuses me
that you won't admit or believe that some people find bike lanes
pleasant to ride in, but that's ok.

Heather, where did you get that I won't admit that people like bike
lanes? This is another wacky assumption that you and others on this
thread have pulled out of the sky and frankly it's quite annoying. I
know many people love them. Bicyclists love them because it absolves
them of the guilt of slowing down motorists and they don't have to worry
about the boogey man from behind. Motorists love them so bicyclists are
out of their way. Planners love them because it gives them brownie
points and something to do. Pavement layers love them because it gives
them money.

I think they are reasonable on freeway design roads, but elsewhere I
believe the pavement width but without the restrictive stripe is better.
But widening pavement just so motorists can pass me easier and faster is
a dubious benefit. My 2 foot wide bicycle fits quite easily on any road,
so widening is primarily a benefit to motorists.

Wayne

Wayne Pein wrote:


That's nice to have your own lane. I'd like one for my car too. Scion xB
lanes! And so would the guy in the beer truck. Why don't we also make
separate lanes for motorcyclists, mini drivers, golf cart users, mopeds,
and pogo stick jumpers or anyone else who thinks they are special?

i was trying to make a joke (centering on how you've taken so much flack
here for talking about "your lane"), but more seriously, around here we
give special lanes to carpool-ers, because they are helping to reduce
traffic. there are some roads with lanes only for busses. that's part of
why i thought bike lanes existed- as a reward and to encourage people
not to drive so much. that's how they work for me.

Heather, where did you get that I won't admit that people like bike
lanes? This is another wacky assumption that you and others on this
thread have pulled out of the sky and frankly it's quite annoying.

i'm sorry, i feel like i've been saying it all along over and over and
you would never say that you saw it from my point of view (and what i
wanted you to admit was that some people find bike lanes pleasant to
ride in, not just that they "like them"). in fact, my son and i were
both complaining on our drive home about how annoying it was of *you*, lol.

well, at least i've managed to annoy you, if not make you empathize. now
we're even

h

In article ,
Wayne Pein wrote:

Howard Kveck wrote:

Bicyclist segregation is enforced in places, and some motorists treat us
like ****.

You don't see that there's worlds of difference between what you perceive as
bicyclist segregation and Jim Crow laws of the south and associated lynchings?
Damn...

Here's a simple thing that I find works well for me: it isn't "my lane",
it's the lane I'm using.



Semantic game. OK. When I'm on my bike or driving my car it's the lane
I'm using. In either case, I can choose with impunity how much of it I
use. That make you feel better?

Actually it *isn't* semantics. There's a difference. Think about it.

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article , Stu Fleming wrote:

Steven Bornfeld wrote:
I once read where a reporter asked this woman why she bought an SUV.
Her answer was that if she gets into an altercation with a car "I win".
I doubt this woman will think of Wayne as "as wide as any other

SUV sales are in the toilet. Bicycles sales in US up 40%.
Interesting times.

From the WSJ (26 September, 2005):

"General Motors is pinning its turnaround on a series of new full-sized SUVs
-- the very models whose sales have fallen as gas prices have climbed. GM
previewed the redesigned Chevrolet Tahoe and several other 2007 models last
week."

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Wayne Pein wrote:
If I were you, I would examine my previous posts to see where
your perceptions of me have strayed from reality.

Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote:
I am glad to hear I have once again strayed from reality. I'll take it
on your word.

At least you can use all the money you save on reality altering drugs to
buy epo and blood bags instead.

Donald Munro wrote:
Wayne Pein wrote:

If I were you, I would examine my previous posts to see where
your perceptions of me have strayed from reality.


Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote:

I am glad to hear I have once again strayed from reality. I'll take it
on your word.


At least you can use all the money you save on reality altering drugs to
buy epo and blood bags instead.

Damn--outed again!!

Steve




--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl {\f0\fswiss\fcharset0
Arial;}}
{\*\generator Msftedit 5.41.15.1507;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 Remove
"nospam" to reply\par
}

Howard Kveck wrote:


From the WSJ (26 September, 2005):

"General Motors is pinning its turnaround on a series of new full-sized SUVs
-- the very models whose sales have fallen as gas prices have climbed. GM
previewed the redesigned Chevrolet Tahoe and several other 2007 models last
week."

But will we bail out GM and Ford like we did Chrysler?

Steve




--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl {\f0\fswiss\fcharset0
Arial;}}
{\*\generator Msftedit 5.41.15.1507;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 Remove
"nospam" to reply\par
}

Howard Kveck wrote:

In article ,
Wayne Pein wrote:


Howard Kveck wrote:


Bicyclist segregation is enforced in places, and some motorists treat us
like ****.


You don't see that there's worlds of difference between what you perceive as
bicyclist segregation and Jim Crow laws of the south and associated lynchings?
Damn...


Only in scale/scope. Damn.....



Here's a simple thing that I find works well for me: it isn't "my lane",
it's the lane I'm using.



Semantic game. OK. When I'm on my bike or driving my car it's the lane
I'm using. In either case, I can choose with impunity how much of it I
use. That make you feel better?


Actually it *isn't* semantics. There's a difference. Think about it.


I have thought about it intensly. It is my lane. You see, there is a
priciple of first-come-first served. Vehicle operators are entitled to
their lane space with a buffer in front and behind. This is the
principle that implicates a following driver for hitting the one in
front. Does that make sense to you? Or are you going to continue to
write in circles without providing any supporting evidence for your
point of view?

Wayne

Steven Bornfeld wrote:

But will we bail out GM and Ford like we did Chrysler?

IIRC, the gummint provided loan guarantees, kind of like a co-signer,
not actual loans. Am I incorrect in thinking that (although that is
still government support)?

In article ,
Wayne Pein wrote:

Howard Kveck wrote:

In article ,
Wayne Pein wrote:


Howard Kveck wrote:


Bicyclist segregation is enforced in places, and some motorists treat us
like ****.


You don't see that there's worlds of difference between what you
perceive as bicyclist segregation and Jim Crow laws of the south and
associated lynchings?
Damn...


Only in scale/scope. Damn.....



Here's a simple thing that I find works well for me: it isn't "my lane",
it's the lane I'm using.



Semantic game. OK. When I'm on my bike or driving my car it's the lane
I'm using. In either case, I can choose with impunity how much of it I
use. That make you feel better?


Actually it *isn't* semantics. There's a difference. Think about it.


I have thought about it intensly. It is my lane. You see, there is a
priciple of first-come-first served. Vehicle operators are entitled to
their lane space with a buffer in front and behind. This is the
principle that implicates a following driver for hitting the one in
front. Does that make sense to you? Or are you going to continue to
write in circles without providing any supporting evidence for your
point of view?

Who's writing in circles? What I'm saying is pretty straightforward, and all
goes back to your disconnect between "teaching motorists to respect" cyclists
and you not "giving a ****" if you delay motorists, as well as the further
disconnect between your attitude and how motorists may perceive you (and how
their perceptions of you and your attitude affects their dealings wwith other
cyclists). You appear to have a sense of entitlement ("my lane") and a sense of
victimhood (equating "Bicyclist segregation" with the civil rights movement). In
short, you come across as a horse's ass. Get it?

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?