Bikes that think they're cars

[Anonymous]

On highly trafficked trails, I've started "taking the lane" as a pedestrian, and go more towards the center line. I'm fed up with ahole aggressive cyclists passing dangerously close when the trail is busy. The considerate cyclists will not care that I take the lane, and will wait and pass patiently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't care as long as they act like a car in all scenarios. I witnessed an accident the other day where a bike blew through a red light because he thought he had enough time to get through before the other light turned green. He didn't and was clipped by a car. Thankfully they had just started moving when he went through and the bicyclist appeared ok. I stayed behind to make sure the cops knew whose fault it was.

What was your conclusion? Sure, the cyclist ran the light, but the driver who hit the gas when the light turned green also failed to ensure that the intersection was clear before pulling into it. There's some blame to go around in the scenario you described.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again...

If that cyclist is really going 20 miles per hour, do you know how dangerous it would be for him to be riding on that walking path? No matter how much you object, he's riding where he is supposed to be.

People walk 3-4 miles per hour, so if the cyclist is going 20 mph, there is a 17 mph differential. There is a 25 mph differential on the road in this scenario. Personally, I don’t think either scenario is safe — bikes need their own lanes or they don’t belong on the road.

The other day I spent 5 minutes trying to get past a biker in my neighborhood who was blocking the road despite the multi-use trail on the side. He was going 10-15 mph, but due to cars parked on the street I couldn’t get around him. Finally, I got around him, only to have him blow by me at the next stop sign because he didn’t stop at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again...

If that cyclist is really going 20 miles per hour, do you know how dangerous it would be for him to be riding on that walking path? No matter how much you object, he's riding where he is supposed to be.

People walk 3-4 miles per hour, so if the cyclist is going 20 mph, there is a 17 mph differential. There is a 25 mph differential on the road in this scenario. Personally, I don’t think either scenario is safe — bikes need their own lanes or they don’t belong on the road.

The other day I spent 5 minutes trying to get past a biker in my neighborhood who was blocking the road despite the multi-use trail on the side. He was going 10-15 mph, but due to cars parked on the street I couldn’t get around him. Finally, I got around him, only to have him blow by me at the next stop sign because he didn’t stop at it.

You should have used the multi-use trail to go around him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's great that you're biking. But do you have to be completely taking over a spot in a lane slowing down all the traffic? You are going 20 miles per hour in a 45 mile per hour zone. There is a walk/bike path that you could be using, but in your mind, you are a car.

I just saw the car in front of me almost have a head-on collision, because they are trying to get around you.

This is an intervention. You are not a car.

The driver of that car should learn how to drive safely, before they hurt someone. "Don't pass unless it's safe to do so" is a basic driving rule.

Wait. You are blaming the cyclist because an impatient car made a probably illegal but definitely idiotic pass (he didn't check for oncoming traffic first?). Come on. You have to be kidding me.
If I am behind Grandma in her Olds who is cruising, it is still up to ME to pass safely. No matter who I am passing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn't be on the road if they can't go the minimum speed. Annoying.

That's not what the law says.

So you're okay with cyclists riding on 495 or 66 or 95 in the lane in front of you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again...

If that cyclist is really going 20 miles per hour, do you know how dangerous it would be for him to be riding on that walking path? No matter how much you object, he's riding where he is supposed to be.

People walk 3-4 miles per hour, so if the cyclist is going 20 mph, there is a 17 mph differential. There is a 25 mph differential on the road in this scenario. Personally, I don’t think either scenario is safe — bikes need their own lanes or they don’t belong on the road.

The other day I spent 5 minutes trying to get past a biker in my neighborhood who was blocking the road despite the multi-use trail on the side. He was going 10-15 mph, but due to cars parked on the street I couldn’t get around him. Finally, I got around him, only to have him blow by me at the next stop sign because he didn’t stop at it.

Dedicated bicycle infrastructure is a good thing. But when there isn't any, chances are that people will bike on the road. Because people on bikes need to get where they're going, just like you do in your car.

Also, let's be realistic - a "multi-use trail" is basically a wide sidewalk. Do you want people riding bikes going 10-15 mph where people are walking? I don't.

So, bottom line: every now and then, somebody on a bike will add a few minutes to your car trip. That's just how it is. And it's nothing compared to the time added to your car trip by other people in cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again...

If that cyclist is really going 20 miles per hour, do you know how dangerous it would be for him to be riding on that walking path? No matter how much you object, he's riding where he is supposed to be.

Why can't the cyclist slow down when riding around walkers? It's the same thing you're asking drivers to do (slow down when driving around cyclists). You're basically saying that cyclists shouldn't have to slow down for anyone, but drivers (and everyone else) have to slow down for them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn't be on the road if they can't go the minimum speed. Annoying.

That's not what the law says.

So you're okay with cyclists riding on 495 or 66 or 95 in the lane in front of you?

People on bicycles are not allowed on limited-access highways, including interstates. I walk, bike, and drive, and I know that. Do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn't be on the road if they can't go the minimum speed. Annoying.

That's not what the law says.

So you're okay with cyclists riding on 495 or 66 or 95 in the lane in front of you?

Those highways all have posted minimum speed limits and/or specific signage which prohibits non-motorized vehicles. Not so for your neighborhood streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again...

If that cyclist is really going 20 miles per hour, do you know how dangerous it would be for him to be riding on that walking path? No matter how much you object, he's riding where he is supposed to be.

Why can't the cyclist slow down when riding around walkers? It's the same thing you're asking drivers to do (slow down when driving around cyclists). You're basically saying that cyclists shouldn't have to slow down for anyone, but drivers (and everyone else) have to slow down for them?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again...

If that cyclist is really going 20 miles per hour, do you know how dangerous it would be for him to be riding on that walking path? No matter how much you object, he's riding where he is supposed to be.

Why can't the cyclist slow down when riding around walkers? It's the same thing you're asking drivers to do (slow down when driving around cyclists). You're basically saying that cyclists shouldn't have to slow down for anyone, but drivers (and everyone else) have to slow down for them?

People on bikes can - and should - slow down around people who are walking, just like people in cars can - and should - slow down around people who are riding bikes.

People in cars who say that people on bikes should ride where people are walking are basically, saying, "I don't want to have to slow down, so you should have to."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's great that you're biking. But do you have to be completely taking over a spot in a lane slowing down all the traffic? You are going 20 miles per hour in a 45 mile per hour zone. There is a walk/bike path that you could be using, but in your mind, you are a car.

I just saw the car in front of me almost have a head-on collision, because they are trying to get around you.

This is an intervention. You are not a car.

The driver of that car should learn how to drive safely, before they hurt someone. "Don't pass unless it's safe to do so" is a basic driving rule.

Wait. You are blaming the cyclist because an impatient car made a probably illegal but definitely idiotic pass (he didn't check for oncoming traffic first?). Come on. You have to be kidding me.
If I am behind Grandma in her Olds who is cruising, it is still up to ME to pass safely. No matter who I am passing.

This. No matter how annoyed you are at the vehicle in front of you, whether it's a cyclist or a really slow driver, it doesn't absolve you of your obligation to drive safely, which includes not passing unless it's safe to pass. And no matter how much you wish that bikes were no allowed on the roads, they are, and you have to deal with it. I neither drive nor bike on a regular basis, so I have no dog in this fight. I've seen irresponsible and unsafe cyclists and irresponsible and unsafe drivers. Everyone needs to learn and obey the rules of the road, period.

[Anonymous]

I’m looking behind me and it looks like a funeral procession right now. About 35 cars all having to go 20 miles per hour right now. All because this bike thinks he’s a car.

[Anonymous]

I drive on a two lane road (40 mph speed limit) with bikers that take the lane. What really annoys me is when I change lanes to pass and get back in front of a biker, and then at a red light they zoom up to the front and slow it all down again. When there's a biker on my route it doubles my commute time.