www.ditl.org

Captain Seafort wrote:

Jim wrote:A new law here in PA is that cars have to give bicycles a 4 foot cushon when passing the bike...

So which do they want you to do? Keep an enormous queue of cars travelling at the speed of the bike or play chicken with oncoming traffic at a closing speed of 50-60mph?

... um... yes...

Nickswitz wrote:Wow, that's a crappy law. I understand it's probably because of a lot of bicycle accidents relating to drivers wanting all of the road, but still, that's a little overboard.

I do not have a problem with a level of "share the road"-ness... However, the issue is with people that are just slowly riding to wherever they are going. A determined biker doing 20 mph is not an issue. Some po-dunk jack-hole doing 10mph is. Just as a car doing 10 mph would be a pain and a accident waiting to happen, so are the slow-poke bikers.

I am annoyed here by a small law that bikes cannot be on sidewalks. Personally I just find it dangerous for both a car driver and the bike rider. Car driver could serve to avoid the bike and hit something else. That and i felt the riding with the flow of traffic to be dumb. I'd rather see a car coming at me so I might have a chance of avoiding it as opposed to being hit from behind and not knowing about it until it's too late.

I've noticed some localities will add bike lanes to the sidewalks when they revamp a thoroughfare.

Tholian_Avenger wrote:I've noticed some localities will add bike lanes to the sidewalks when they revamp a thoroughfare.

I have noticed that too.

McAvoy wrote:I am annoyed here by a small law that bikes cannot be on sidewalks. Personally I just find it dangerous for both a car driver and the bike rider. Car driver could serve to avoid the bike and hit something else. That and i felt the riding with the flow of traffic to be dumb. I'd rather see a car coming at me so I might have a chance of avoiding it as opposed to being hit from behind and not knowing about it until it's too late.

The problem stems entirely from the fact that many bicyclists forget (or ignore) the fact that they are operating vehicles on a roadway and need to act as such - that is, obey traffic laws, ride on the proper side of the road, not do stupid things like shortcut through blind spots, etc. Just the other day I was stopped at a red light waiting to make a right turn - a light posted with a "no turn on red" sign (where not posted as such, New Jersey allows a right turn on red after a stop.) A cyclist came flying up behind me and coasted through the red light to make a right turn - as the light changed to green. I began my turn and the cyclist - who should have been stopped at the light as well, and therefore visible - had to pull back to the side of the road onto which we'd turn, and the stupid whore began to cuss at ME! I merely told her to call a cop and explain how her violation of traffic laws was somehow my fault - or try to hit me and see how much damage her face could do to my station wagon.

Mikey wrote:

McAvoy wrote:I am annoyed here by a small law that bikes cannot be on sidewalks. Personally I just find it dangerous for both a car driver and the bike rider. Car driver could serve to avoid the bike and hit something else. That and i felt the riding with the flow of traffic to be dumb. I'd rather see a car coming at me so I might have a chance of avoiding it as opposed to being hit from behind and not knowing about it until it's too late.

The problem stems entirely from the fact that many bicyclists forget (or ignore) the fact that they are operating vehicles on a roadway and need to act as such - that is, obey traffic laws, ride on the proper side of the road, not do stupid things like shortcut through blind spots, etc. Just the other day I was stopped at a red light waiting to make a right turn - a light posted with a "no turn on red" sign (where not posted as such, New Jersey allows a right turn on red after a stop.) A cyclist came flying up behind me and coasted through the red light to make a right turn - as the light changed to green. I began my turn and the cyclist - who should have been stopped at the light as well, and therefore visible - had to pull back to the side of the road onto which we'd turn, and the stupid whore began to cuss at ME! I merely told her to call a cop and explain how her violation of traffic laws was somehow my fault - or try to hit me and see how much damage her face could do to my station wagon.

I agree. There is a HUGE issue with many road riders thinking that NONE of the traffic laws (or common sense) apply to them because they are on a bike, not in a car. They ignore signs, lights, vehicle's turn signals, pedestrians, painted lines... everything.

I find it particularly annoying when cyclists overtake each other on a rather narrow road. I very nearly took a cyclist off today when a pair of them overtook a slower rider. If you overtake anything ever, you should at least do a check of the road around you and not just go out in the road. Especially since the vehicle behind me was an enormous Sainsburys Lorry.

Reliant121 wrote:I find it particularly annoying when cyclists overtake each other on a rather narrow road.

If they're overtaking I don't have much of a problem with them. It's when idiots are cycling two abreast for mile after mile that I sometimes wish I was allowed to drive over the top of the offside one.

Jim wrote:They ignore signs...vehicle's turn signals

That, at least, is excusable on the grounds that most car drivers are apparently unaware of their existence.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Reliant121 wrote:I find it particularly annoying when cyclists overtake each other on a rather narrow road.

If they're overtaking I don't have much of a problem with them. It's when idiots are cycling two abreast for mile after mile that I sometimes wish I was allowed to drive over the top of the offside one.

I know at least around here (when the road is wide enough), two abreast is the widest a group can ride for safety reasons. I'm willing to bet our road shoulders are a little wider and so better adapted for that. The general rule of thumb for riding safety is, single file generally but no more than two abreast in group rides. .... Whether people actually follow that is its own question :/

Another thing with PA's new 4 foot rule... what if a rider is riding out in the lane and nar the center line. It is possible that a vehicle traveling in the other direction would be within 4 feet and therefore potentially get a ticket.

Sonic Glitch wrote:

Captain Seafort wrote:

Reliant121 wrote:I find it particularly annoying when cyclists overtake each other on a rather narrow road.

If they're overtaking I don't have much of a problem with them. It's when idiots are cycling two abreast for mile after mile that I sometimes wish I was allowed to drive over the top of the offside one.

I know at least around here (when the road is wide enough), two abreast is the widest a group can ride for safety reasons. I'm willing to bet our road shoulders are a little wider and so better adapted for that. The general rule of thumb for riding safety is, single file generally but no more than two abreast in group rides. .... Whether people actually follow that is its own question :/

I live in a small town with consequently small roads, even for British roads. Consequently, the road space is only really appropriate for single file riding.

I'm with Seafort on this one. It was common conventional wisdom that you ride single file (no, not to hide your numbers .) Doing otherwise is some arcane mix of arrogance, idiocy, and assholism.

Captain Seafort wrote:That, at least, is excusable on the grounds that most car drivers are apparently unaware of their existence.

Interestingly, I had an interesting conversation on this topic once with the driver of a BMW M5 in a parking lot, pertaining to my feigned disbelief that a vehicle that expensive wouldn't have turn signals as standard equipment. TBF, nowadays it's a rare cyclist who even knows how to use hand signals.

My son, of course, is learning the right-hand turn signal thanks to Clint Eastwood and an orangutan.

Mikey wrote:My son, of course, is learning the right-hand turn signal thanks to Clint Eastwood and an orangutan.

I've seen bits and pieces of it, but never the whole thing.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Mikey wrote:My son, of course, is learning the right-hand turn signal thanks to Clint Eastwood and an orangutan.

I've seen bits and pieces of it, but never the whole thing.

We may all try to put on airs of highbrow erudition at times... but no matter how you slice it, watching some guy get punched in the "gob" (as you would say) by an orangutan is timeless comedy.