A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More on conspicuity



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old March 26th 17, 04:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default More on conspicuity

On 2017-03-26 07:51, Doc O'Leary wrote:
For your reference, records indicate that
Joerg wrote:

On 2017-03-25 12:06, Doc O'Leary wrote:

Totally a different class of behavior than that of basic visibility
and safe distance. Someone threatening you with their vehicle is
not simply “jerk” behavior. It is assault with a deadly weapon.
Perhaps even attempted murder. That is something that needs to be
escalated each and every time it happens. Get their license plate
and file a report with the police.


Makes no difference whatsoever. Plus no witness on my side.


Doesn’t matter. Unless you made the whole damn thing up, *someone
endangered your life*. That’s something that needs to be escalated.
Police reports allow for further actions, especially if the person in
question is a repeat offender. It is foolish to wait until that guy
kills someone (and then gets a slap on the wrist because it’s his
first offense on record) before anything gets done.


They will not take any action. So what's the point?


Here’s another radical idea: if you really live in such an awful
neighborhood, start recording your rides. In addition to filing
police reports with that evidence, post it online so that the world
forever knows who these assholes are.


A camera to the front, another to the side, another to the rear? Even
that won't be considered by police. They "don't have the time".


However, there is a 3ft legal requirement and a driver must obey laws.


Make up your mind. Either they “must obey”, or they can do whatever
they want and it “makes no difference”.


It's a law and it's not enforced. The usual. But a good law because ever
since it was published most drivers obey it. Way more than before. So, a
good law.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
Ads
  #32  
Old March 26th 17, 10:25 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default More on conspicuity

On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 6:34:52 PM UTC, Ralph Barone wrote:

There are also people who drive pickup trucks as a
lifestyle choice (because they aspire to the redneck lifestyle and want to
drive a big loud threatening vehicle).


A good start is to have more curtains in your truck than in your house. You can start with an official NRA curtain over your gun rack, so that the envious can't perve your rifles.

Andre Jute
Loaded and cocked, not locked
  #33  
Old March 27th 17, 01:41 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default More on conspicuity

On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 11:34:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 3/26/2017 12:28 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 13:32:08 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 3/25/2017 1:28 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 00:01:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 3/24/2017 9:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 13:16:07 -0700, Joerg
wrote:


Sometimes they are [jerks]. Like a week ago when the guy leaned on the horn and
gradually pushed me to the side of the road as punishment for taking
"his" lane. He had even pulled into that lane from the other (fast) lane
just to show me who is boss. Yes, those are jerks. Jerks who should not
even have a driver license.

But after all, wasn't it "His lane too"?

No.

I do remember, on one bike tour, having a low life multi-tattooed pickup
driver yell at me "Get out of my road." Our offense (there were three of
us riding together) was taking our place in a line of traffic moving at
about 10 mph.

I was not shy about telling him it was not "his" road. I think my, um,
lack of diplomacy shocked one of my touring companions.

But was it "your road"?


The road is not a possession of any individual. It's a facility
available to serve the public.


Exactly.

And come to think of it, in his analysis of the foundation principles of
traffic law, John Forester listed this principle: "First come, first
served." That is, any legal road user is allowed safe access to the
roadway for a reasonable distance in front of him. He doesn't lose that
access if someone else would prefer otherwise. The faster motorist
behind (or in my example, the obnoxious motorist who could not move any
faster than we were) cannot clear the road in front of him by demand.


Sorry about John but every state highway law that I have read, and
that isn't intended to mean I've read them all, has stated that "thou
shall not impede", usually in the form of something like "slower
traffic shall drive in such a manner as to not impede faster traffic".

I can't say that I've read that "a vehicle has the right to the road
for some specific distance ahead of them".


Perhaps you didn't understand. What Forester wrote (paraphrased above)
was not the text of the laws. It was the foundation rationality behind
the laws. I suggest reading _Effective Cycling_ for details.


To be frank, while I realize that Forester may well have written that
I can see no rational reasoning or precedence, for the claim.

After all, anyone can write anything and a certain portion of the
readers will believe it. Read, for example, the Christian bible,
specifically the 10 commandments. The various versions of the English
language translations can't even agree on the wording of the 10 laws
that God gave the Hebrews.

And yes, the laws assume a vehicle _operator_ (as opposed to a vehicle)
has a right to safe access to the road for a reasonable distance in
front. That's why there are laws forbidding pulling out of a side
street directly in front of someone; or pulling back into someone's lane
too soon after passing.

As an aside, I rather resent the inference that those driving pickup
trucks are low lifes. After all, I drive a pickup, my sister-in-law,
who is a small rice trader, drives a pickup. In fact I know a rather
large number of people who drive pickups, the majority of whom are
probably under the impression that they are just normal folks.

There was no such inference. This particular low-life was driving a
pickup truck. In stating that, I made no claim that all pickup drivers
are low-lifes.


No you didn't specifically state that people that drive pickups are
low life's.. What you said was "a low life multi-tattooed pickup
driver" which does tend to make one think that you equate pickups and
low life's. Or is it only tattooed pickup drivers who are the
low-life's??


I apply "low-life" to jerks who blare their horn and shout at bicyclists
stuck in the same 0 to 10mph queue as about 20 other motorists. Tattoos
and pickup were added to further describe the event. There were probably
other multi-tattooed pickup drivers in that line who were not low-lifes.

BTW, I didn't mention that low-life driver's passenger. She also had
multiple tattoos but was not driving. You may need to add foul-mouthed
pickup passengers to your list of people in your "protected class."


Well yes, I guess that "protected class" is a good term although I
believe it is usually pronounced "politically correct" in modern
America. If what I read is true, you even have laws protecting these
poor innocent minorities from public disdain. Or at least against
verbal or written disdain.

And, Goodness Gracious, here you are, a member of one minority group
bad-mouthing another minority group.
How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is .....

Further details? The passenger actually opened her door and stood on
the running board to more effectively yell at us and give obscene
gestures. A charming couple!

--
Cheers,

John B.

  #34  
Old March 27th 17, 03:21 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,270
Default More on conspicuity

On Sunday, March 26, 2017 at 11:43:49 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-03-26 07:51, Doc O'Leary wrote:
For your reference, records indicate that
Joerg wrote:

On 2017-03-25 12:06, Doc O'Leary wrote:

Totally a different class of behavior than that of basic visibility
and safe distance. Someone threatening you with their vehicle is
not simply “jerk” behavior. It is assault with a deadly weapon.
Perhaps even attempted murder. That is something that needs to be
escalated each and every time it happens. Get their license plate
and file a report with the police.


Makes no difference whatsoever. Plus no witness on my side.


Doesn’t matter. Unless you made the whole damn thing up, *someone
endangered your life*. That’s something that needs to be escalated.
Police reports allow for further actions, especially if the person in
question is a repeat offender. It is foolish to wait until that guy
kills someone (and then gets a slap on the wrist because it’s his
first offense on record) before anything gets done.


They will not take any action. So what's the point?


Here’s another radical idea: if you really live in such an awful
neighborhood, start recording your rides. In addition to filing
police reports with that evidence, post it online so that the world
forever knows who these assholes are.


A camera to the front, another to the side, another to the rear? Even
that won't be considered by police. They "don't have the time".


However, there is a 3ft legal requirement and a driver must obey laws.


Make up your mind. Either they “must obey”, or they can do whatever
they want and it “makes no difference”.


It's a law and it's not enforced. The usual. But a good law because ever
since it was published most drivers obey it. Way more than before. So, a
good law.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/


You've got more excuses than a company has little liver pills. Perhaps you should trade in the bicycle and buy a suplus armoured car from the military?

Cheers
  #35  
Old March 27th 17, 06:46 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default More on conspicuity

On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 19:21:47 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Sunday, March 26, 2017 at 11:43:49 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-03-26 07:51, Doc O'Leary wrote:
For your reference, records indicate that
Joerg wrote:

On 2017-03-25 12:06, Doc O'Leary wrote:

Totally a different class of behavior than that of basic visibility
and safe distance. Someone threatening you with their vehicle is
not simply jerk behavior. It is assault with a deadly weapon.
Perhaps even attempted murder. That is something that needs to be
escalated each and every time it happens. Get their license plate
and file a report with the police.


Makes no difference whatsoever. Plus no witness on my side.

Doesnt matter. Unless you made the whole damn thing up, *someone
endangered your life*. Thats something that needs to be escalated.
Police reports allow for further actions, especially if the person in
question is a repeat offender. It is foolish to wait until that guy
kills someone (and then gets a slap on the wrist because its his
first offense on record) before anything gets done.


They will not take any action. So what's the point?


Heres another radical idea: if you really live in such an awful
neighborhood, start recording your rides. In addition to filing
police reports with that evidence, post it online so that the world
forever knows who these assholes are.


A camera to the front, another to the side, another to the rear? Even
that won't be considered by police. They "don't have the time".


However, there is a 3ft legal requirement and a driver must obey laws.

Make up your mind. Either they must obey, or they can do whatever
they want and it makes no difference.


It's a law and it's not enforced. The usual. But a good law because ever
since it was published most drivers obey it. Way more than before. So, a
good law.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/


You've got more excuses than a company has little liver pills. Perhaps you should trade in the bicycle and buy a suplus armoured car from the military?

Cheers


I've always wondered whether the DANGER, DANGER, folks actually
believe their own rhetoric. After all if bicycling is actually so
dangerious it would seem that one must either be either feeble minded
or have a death wish if one continues to use such a dangerious means
of transportation.

Or perhaps riding a bike, being so dangerious, proves how brave and
resolute one is. After all, one can no longer go out and joust with
dragons in this modern world. Perhaps riding a dangerious two wheel
conveyance is the only way left to prove how fearless and resolute one
is.
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #36  
Old March 27th 17, 04:07 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Doc O'Leary[_21_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default More on conspicuity

For your reference, records indicate that
Joerg wrote:

They will not take any action. So what's the point?


The point is that a police report is evidence that can demonstrate a
pattern of behavior. Evidence people can use against the bad guy in
the future. Maybe it’s to request a concealed carry permit. Maybe
it’s to get a restraining order. Maybe it’s to file a lawsuit
against the person, or the city for not taking action.

A camera to the front, another to the side, another to the rear? Even
that won't be considered by police. They "don't have the time".


So? It’s more evidence. If you have it, post it online. Contact
the media. Name and shame.

At the very least!

Grow the **** up and *act* when someone tries to kill you.

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Colour combinations for conspicuity Nick L Plate UK 46 April 13th 09 02:47 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.