|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to pass
us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike. Until today. I didn't even really know what happened until I played it back in mind mind immediately afterward. Karl, Kevin and I were on the return leg of our usual Tuesday/Thursday morning ride, heading north on 84 in Woodside, approaching Tripp Road. We were not only single file, but single file on the very edge of the road... I mean riding in tight formation, with maybe just a couple inches (really) of pavement to the right of our wheels. If there was a "good citizen" award for cyclists sharing the road, we would have gotten it. No reason for us to impede cars if we don't have to (the shoulder's in pretty good shape there, and being the first day of school for many, there was more traffic than usual). And then the black SUV went past us. It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't deviate from its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6 inches? Could have even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE. If one of us had had to swerve for an obstacle, it would have been game over. If the car had had to move over just a little bit to let a wide car pass in the other direction, game over. If one of us had chosen that exact time to look back and check traffic, and moved out into the road just a little bit (as often happens when you look back), it might have been game over. As it was, there was this immediate sense of marvel at the precision with which the car passed us, the three of us riding perfectly straight, with the car just inches away from our left hands. It was an almost unbelievable experience. But within seconds that amazement was replaced with one of those "What just happened?" feelings, and the more I play it back in my mind, the more upset and annoyed I become. That car should not have passed us in that manner, which means it should have waited until it was clear in the other direction so it could give us a bit more room, instead of assuming that "Share the road" means making assumptions of a perfect world at 24 miles per hour. So I'm changing my tune, and not just asking for a 3 foot passing law for cyclists, but demanding it. A relatively-narrow two-lane road (like 84 near Tripp, specifically right near the "singing gas pipes" on the west side of the road) is no place for 3 bikes & two cars to share the same strip of road. The car should have waited until it could pass us with reasonable clearance, and there obviously needs to be a law defining what "reasonable clearance" is because I doubt that particular driver thought he or she was doing something reckless. --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to pass us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike. Until today. I didn't even really know what happened until I played it back in mind mind immediately afterward. Karl, Kevin and I were on the return leg of our usual Tuesday/Thursday morning ride, heading north on 84 in Woodside, approaching Tripp Road. We were not only single file, but single file on the very edge of the road... I mean riding in tight formation, with maybe just a couple inches (really) of pavement to the right of our wheels. If there was a "good citizen" award for cyclists sharing the road, we would have gotten it. No reason for us to impede cars if we don't have to (the shoulder's in pretty good shape there, and being the first day of school for many, there was more traffic than usual). And then the black SUV went past us. It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't deviate from its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6 inches? Could have even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE. http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html Jobst Brandt |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't deviate
from its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6 inches? Could have even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE. http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html Jobst Brandt I'm missing the point. Don't get me wrong; I generally agree with what's in the FAQ. But why did you reference it? --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA wrote in message ... Mike Jacoubowsky wrote: I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to pass us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike. Until today. I didn't even really know what happened until I played it back in mind mind immediately afterward. Karl, Kevin and I were on the return leg of our usual Tuesday/Thursday morning ride, heading north on 84 in Woodside, approaching Tripp Road. We were not only single file, but single file on the very edge of the road... I mean riding in tight formation, with maybe just a couple inches (really) of pavement to the right of our wheels. If there was a "good citizen" award for cyclists sharing the road, we would have gotten it. No reason for us to impede cars if we don't have to (the shoulder's in pretty good shape there, and being the first day of school for many, there was more traffic than usual). And then the black SUV went past us. It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't deviate from its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6 inches? Could have even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE. http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html Jobst Brandt |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
"Mike Jacoubowsky" I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to pass us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike. Until today. I think part of the problem is that the car drivers are trying vainly to stay in the same lane with us! I worry more about getting hit in the back of the head by a rear-view mirror. That said, I think the closest call I've had was a guy in a pickup truck pulling a long and empty trailer--the kind with no sides. Although his truck changed lanes to pass us, when he pulled back in the lane in front of us, the blankety blank trailer nearly wiped us out! I don't think he was trying to hit us, but if there had been a 3-foot law, maybe he would have thought of the trailer as well as his pickup truck. BTW. our legislator who nixed the proposed 3 foot law, Kim Brimer, has a challenger this year in Wendy Davis, a cyclist no less! Pat in TX |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.bicycles.misc.]
On 2008-08-22, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote: So I'm changing my tune, and not just asking for a 3 foot passing law for cyclists, but demanding it. A relatively-narrow two-lane road (like 84 near Tripp, specifically right near the "singing gas pipes" on the west side of the road) is no place for 3 bikes & two cars to share the same strip of road. The car should have waited until it could pass us with reasonable clearance, and there obviously needs to be a law defining what "reasonable clearance" is because I doubt that particular driver thought he or she was doing something reckless. Times like that, a carbide spike on the end of a 3' long horizontally mounted fiberglass pole sounds awfully tempting. -- John ) ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
"Mike Jacoubowsky" I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that
requires cars to pass us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike. Until today. I think part of the problem is that the car drivers are trying vainly to stay in the same lane with us! I worry more about getting hit in the back of the head by a rear-view mirror. That said, I think the closest call I've had was a guy in a pickup truck pulling a long and empty trailer--the kind with no sides. Although his truck changed lanes to pass us, when he pulled back in the lane in front of us, the blankety blank trailer nearly wiped us out! I don't think he was trying to hit us, but if there had been a 3-foot law, maybe he would have thought of the trailer as well as his pickup truck. BTW. our legislator who nixed the proposed 3 foot law, Kim Brimer, has a challenger this year in Wendy Davis, a cyclist no less! Pat in TX I used to train out on the farm roads around my grandparent's ranch in the Sacramento Valley. Long, perfectly-straight roads for miles at a time, so you could both see and hear the double & triple-trailer rigs from a very long way away. The triple-trailer rigs were scary, even for a fearless 16 year old. You just never could quite time when the last trailer was going to come around, and the drivers would give you very little room, even though you were the only thing out on the road for MILES. It didn't take me long to figure out what to do... just ride out towards the middle of the lane whenever you heard one of the big rigs in the distance. Then, just before it was on you, move out to the edge. Life was *much* better after I figured that one out. Oh, and the suction... nothing you don't know about, I'm sure. Amazing how much it feels like there's something trying to suck you under the wheels. You'd just sort of climb inside your frame and hang on. Still, it was a lot of fun in a 16-year-old sort of way. --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
"Pat" wrote: (clip) Although his truck changed lanes to pass us, when he pulled back in the lane in front of us, the blankety blank trailer nearly wiped us out! I don't think he was trying to hit us, but if there had been a 3-foot law, maybe he would have thought of the trailer as well as his pickup truck. (clip) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I am currently scheduled for a three-day training session, courtesy of dmv, to get my license endorsed to ride my scooter. Maybe there should be a similar requirement for towing. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message
news I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to pass us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike. Until today. I didn't even really know what happened until I played it back in mind mind immediately afterward. Karl, Kevin and I were on the return leg of our usual Tuesday/Thursday morning ride, heading north on 84 in Woodside, approaching Tripp Road. We were not only single file, but single file on the very edge of the road... I mean riding in tight formation, with maybe just a couple inches (really) of pavement to the right of our wheels. If there was a "good citizen" award for cyclists sharing the road, we would have gotten it. No reason for us to impede cars if we don't have to (the shoulder's in pretty good shape there, and being the first day of school for many, there was more traffic than usual). And then the black SUV went past us. It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't deviate from its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6 inches? Could have even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE. If one of us had had to swerve for an obstacle, it would have been game over. If the car had had to move over just a little bit to let a wide car pass in the other direction, game over. If one of us had chosen that exact time to look back and check traffic, and moved out into the road just a little bit (as often happens when you look back), it might have been game over. As it was, there was this immediate sense of marvel at the precision with which the car passed us, the three of us riding perfectly straight, with the car just inches away from our left hands. It was an almost unbelievable experience. But within seconds that amazement was replaced with one of those "What just happened?" feelings, and the more I play it back in my mind, the more upset and annoyed I become. That car should not have passed us in that manner, which means it should have waited until it was clear in the other direction so it could give us a bit more room, instead of assuming that "Share the road" means making assumptions of a perfect world at 24 miles per hour. So I'm changing my tune, and not just asking for a 3 foot passing law for cyclists, but demanding it. A relatively-narrow two-lane road (like 84 near Tripp, specifically right near the "singing gas pipes" on the west side of the road) is no place for 3 bikes & two cars to share the same strip of road. The car should have waited until it could pass us with reasonable clearance, and there obviously needs to be a law defining what "reasonable clearance" is because I doubt that particular driver thought he or she was doing something reckless. --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA I had a near miss incident on Old La Honda a few weeks ago. Black 2000 Ford Expedition, license 5JCS565. Could this have been the same vehicle? -- Carl |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
On Aug 21, 7:04*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote: I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to pass us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike. Until today. I didn't even really know what happened until I played it back in mind mind immediately afterward. Karl, Kevin and I were on the return leg of our usual Tuesday/Thursday morning ride, heading north on 84 in Woodside, approaching Tripp Road. We were not only single file, but single file on the very edge of the road... I mean riding in tight formation, with maybe just a couple inches (really) of pavement to the right of our wheels. If there was a "good citizen" award for cyclists sharing the road, we would have gotten it. No reason for us to impede cars if we don't have to (the shoulder's in pretty good shape there, and being the first day of school for many, there was more traffic than usual). And then the black SUV went past us. It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't deviate from its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6 inches? Could have even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE. If one of us had had to swerve for an obstacle, it would have been game over. If the car had had to move over just a little bit to let a wide car pass in the other direction, game over. If one of us had chosen that exact time to look back and check traffic, and moved out into the road just a little bit (as often happens when you look back), it might have been game over. As it was, there was this immediate sense of marvel at the precision with which the car passed us, the three of us riding perfectly straight, with the car just inches away from our left hands. It was an almost unbelievable experience. But within seconds that amazement was replaced with one of those "What just happened?" feelings, and the more I play it back in my mind, the more upset and annoyed I become. That car should not have passed us in that manner, which means it should have waited until it was clear in the other direction so it could give us a bit more room, instead of assuming that "Share the road" means making assumptions of a perfect world at 24 miles per hour. So I'm changing my tune, and not just asking for a 3 foot passing law for cyclists, but demanding it. A relatively-narrow two-lane road (like 84 near Tripp, specifically right near the "singing gas pipes" on the west side of the road) is no place for 3 bikes & two cars to share the same strip of road. The car should have waited until it could pass us with reasonable clearance, and there obviously needs to be a law defining what "reasonable clearance" is because I doubt that particular driver thought he or she was doing something reckless. --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA If I had to guess, I'd say you were doubly lucky because IME: no horn blast + no deviation in steering = unconscious driver. A 3 foot clearance while passing cyclists law won't affect drivers that are simply zoned out at the wheel. Such a law certainly couldn't *hurt* though. Glad your close call was just that- close. Regards, Bob Hunt |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
3ft passing requirement revisited
I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to
pass us no closer than 3 feet. It's 5 feet here. 3 is much too close, imho. rms |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
36" Unicycle Inseam Requirement | 1-wheeled-grape | Unicycling | 3 | July 3rd 08 02:28 AM |
36" Unicycle Inseam Requirement | kington99 | Unicycling | 4 | July 2nd 08 04:08 PM |
36" Unicycle Inseam Requirement | Vipassana | Unicycling | 2 | July 2nd 08 01:13 AM |
In passing... | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 4 | May 18th 07 03:57 PM |
Passing on the right....... | Claire Petersky | General | 109 | May 23rd 05 09:44 AM |