Bicyclists going wrong way and other crimes

DTJ

wrote:

Huh? If you hit the door going the wrong way there is a chance you will
slam it into the driver and injure him/her as well.

Good. The asshole should have looked before opening the door.

Why should he have to look? Just because its the proper and legal thing to do?
Rather like riding with traffic? What a maroon.

Bob Hunt

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 06:32:04 GMT, "S o r n i"

Bill "dead serious" S.

Why? What about what I've suggested is more dangerous than riding in
the direction of traffic?

Sigh. OK, just ONE example: car comes out of side street and wants to turn
right; which way are they gonna look? They *NEVER SEE YOU* approaching from
their right, because THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY TRAFFIC coming from that
direction /on that side of the road/.


There shouldn't be any traffic, but you'd better look anyway.

As an inexperienced teen turning right onto a 3-lane, 50 mph feeder road
with no sidewalk, I came to a full stop, looked right (nothing there),
looked left and waited for an opening.

I saw an opportunity and started to go for it, but noticed a jogger with
his hands on my hood. Fortunately, I was stopped, so he wasn't injured,
but I should have looked right again.

Of course, the jogger was an idiot too, but sometimes it takes 2 stupid
actions for something like that to happen. If you're not one of the
stupid people, it won't happen - or it will be less likely to.

If the biker's gonna do that, he would do well to do so very carefully.


Bill "add alleyways, pedestrians, sane bicyclists, etc." S.


--
There's no way to delay that trouble comin' everyday

DTJ wrote:
On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:29:44 -0700, Bill Baka wrote:

Hey, even I, the wrong way on one road guy, will not ride against
traffic in town. There are too many cars backing out of driveways,

If you are incapable of watching for cars in driveways on side
streets, you should not be on a bike at all.

Further, I watch both behind and in front of me. Should someone come
up in front, I am on the right side before they get there. Should
they come up from behind, I am on the left before they get there. If
someone is coming from both directions, I typically place myself near
a parked car to have some form of shielding. I don't see why anyone
should care that I do this.

OK, see, you just blew your troll. You had a fairly good flow of BS goin'
there for a while, but you tried to take it a tad too far.

Bill "nice while it lasted tho'" S.

Hunrobe wrote:
DTJ

wrote:

Huh? If you hit the door going the wrong way there is a chance you
will slam it into the driver and injure him/her as well.

Good. The asshole should have looked before opening the door.

Why should he have to look? Just because its the proper and legal
thing to do? Rather like riding with traffic? What a maroon.

Not just a maroon; a transparent troll.

Bill "latest spate of posts gave it away" S.

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:26:53 GMT, DTJ

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 10:12:13 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

1. Drivers of cars, walkers, and other cyclists never expect to find you
there.

Then they should not be driving, walking or cycling.


I can't argue with that, but the reality is that they are driving
(mostly - some walk or cycle too).

2. You can't see traffic signs or signals from the left side of the street.

Bull****.

Do you ride with a rearview mirror on a 50 foot pole sticking out the
front of your bike?


3. If you're riding toward the cars, you come together faster. There's
less time to avoid a crash.

Assuming I am riding at 50 MPH, maybe. Since nobody bikes that fast,
bull****.

The car could easily be going 50.


4. If you're riding toward the cars, you'll hit much harder if there's a
crash.

Bull****. The tiny difference is irrelevant, as there will be no
crash.

are you drunk?


5. When drivers of cars pull into the road (from a stop sign or
driveway), they won't look for somebody coming the wrong way. They'll
pull right in front of you. And it'll be your fault!

Yes, it will be my fault that they pull in front of me. However,
since that is irrelevant, who the **** cares. What will not be my
fault is a crash, because none will occur.

How are you going to be sure they see you and will stop unless you see
them look you in the eye?


6. If there isn't enough space for the car to pass you on the road, the
driver can't wait until it's safe to pass. You'll get forced off the
road into the ditch - or worse, into a head-on crash.

Wow, and how is this different from the other side, except I die
without the chance to maneuver out of danger if I do it your way?


Well, if the car and all the cars behind it can stop before you reach
them, you should be just fine.

7. A wrong-way bicyclist is a real problem for another bicyclist riding
correctly. Someone has to go into the ditch or into traffic.

Nope. Most side streets have PLENTY of room for multiple riders.

side streets?

****, you mean this whole discussion is about side streets? Somehow I
think others were talking about using their bikes to actually go
somewhere.


8. Riding against traffic is one of the leading causes of serious
bicycle accidents.

Bull****.

After reading reasons 1-7, it sounds plausible to me.


9. Riding against traffic is against the law. But don't worry about
this one. They won't arrest you unless you're alive.

Nobody cares about laws. I do care about my safety, which is why I do
what I do.

--
There's no way to delay that trouble comin' everyday

DTJ wrote:
On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:32:10 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

and you can check out the "common" advice
on the matter, to find out what "common sense" really says.

Just because something is common does not mean it makes sense.

Just because something is legal does not mean it is safe, nor the best
method.

And sometimes, just once in a while, something is illegal because it is
extremely dangerous. Such is the case with riding on the left. Everyone,
everywhere, who has looked at the issue seriously has come to the same
conclusion. It should be illegal to ride against traffic. In all
circumstances. Including yours.

Austin

DTJ wrote:
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:10:33 GMT, "AustinMN"
wrote:

How do you think it became law that bikes ride on the right (or left
where
traffic is on the left)?

The same way they came up with speed limits. Some moron decided it
made more sense, and idiot elected officials didn't bother to THINK.

You know, in the 1970's, there were safety groups that taught children to
ride on the left. In a few instances, they may have gotten laws changed.
The only thing that stopped them was the carnage that resulted. Riding
facing traffic is always dangerous. Always.

You are the one who is not bothering to think. The vast majority of
car-bike accidents occur in intersections. A wrong-way bicycle rider is
ALWAYS in the wrong (and therefore dangerous) place at an intersection. The
rear-end collisions you are afraid of are actually remarkable in their
absence from the statistics. If you had bothered to think "Gee, actual
experience counts more than idiotic ideas" then you would have bothered to
do a little research and found that out. (Hint: there have been links to
the info in this thread).

Austin

DTJ wrote:
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 06:32:04 GMT, "S o r n i"
wrote:

Sigh. OK, just ONE example: car comes out of side street and wants to
turn
right; which way are they gonna look? They *NEVER SEE YOU* approaching
from
their right, because THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY TRAFFIC coming from that
direction /on that side of the road/.

But I do see them. So who the **** cares if they see me!

Even if you are at a dead stop, they can still hit you. Much faster than
you can move out of the way. This is one of the top causes of
car/pedestrian accidents. The pedestrian is two steps into the sidewalk,
and the car never looked right. Do you think you can move out of the way
while on your bike faster than a pedestrian? If so, I want to meet you.
You must be superhuman.

If they are
coming out of the side street, I believe they have the right of way
because they are bigger than me.

Bull****. Absolute nonsense. Do you drive a car on the roads when there
are trucks on the road? They are biger than you, so they must have the
right of way!

No matter where I am, on either
side, I view it as my responsibility to protect myself.

Nobody is telling you otherwise. What we are trying to tell you is that
your riding DOES NOT protect you. Some day, it may seriously injure or kill
you. And the driver will get off. Because you were the one who caused the
accident, or at least a contributing cause.

Relying on some idiot driver to not run me over from behind prevents me
from keeping safe.

What? Only about 4% of car/bike accidents are hit-from-behind accidents.
Even if you can completely eliminate that risk, you have only improved
things by 4%. But I assure you, you have at least doubled (and probably
quadrupled or more) your risk of being hit in an intersection. So your
total risk of an accident with a car has gone up far more than what you can
possibly prevent by even eliminating all risk of being rear-ended.

Bother to do some research. Wrong way-riding really is dangerous.

Austin

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:50:29 -0700, Bill Baka wrote:

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 22:06:01 GMT, AustinMN wrote:

Bill Baka wrote:
Defensive driving is needed more on a bike than motorcycle or car.

And wrong-way riding is a false defense.

Austin

The road I ride wrong way is just too dangerous to ride right way.
The sun sets directly in front of the drivers when I am going
the right way in the evenings. Going wrong way allows them to
see me since the sun is now behind them. It is a 2-3 mile stretch
of bad road but I have to ride it to get to some of the good
mountain roads and paths.

There is absolutely no other alternate route?

I am not telling people that wrong way riding is the way to ride,
just that there are some circumstances where it makes more sense
than right way riding.

It almost never does, and it certainly doesn't in this case:

1) What would you do if you, riding the wrong way, encountered a
cyclist on the same side of the road who was riding the right
way? You, riding wrong way, have just endangered you both.

2) Your closing speed with oncoming traffic is now your speed PLUS
the speed of the oncoming traffic. If you have to swerve to
miss broken glass, a pothole, a pile of nails, etc., or if
there is no room for the oncoming car to make room to pass you,
KERBLAMMO.

Riding with traffic reduces the closing speed to the car's
speed MINUS your speed (i.e., both of you have more reaction
time), and, furthermore, gives the car the option of slowing
down until there is room to pass you safely (e.g., in the event
that you take the lane to avoid debris at the edge of the
road).

Riding against traffic isn't even close to as safe as you think it
is.

--
Chris BeHanna
Software Engineer (Remove "allspammersmustdie" before responding.)

I was raised by a pack of wild corn dogs.

DTJ wrote:
On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:32:10 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:


and you can check out the "common" advice
on the matter, to find out what "common sense" really says.


Just because something is common does not mean it makes sense.

Just because something is legal does not mean it is safe, nor the best
method.

You seem to have missed the first and most important thing I suggested:
find actual data on which method is safer!

You're not very good at this, are you?

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]