Cyclists -- Why do you hog the road even with a large shoulder?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anne Arundel cyclist killed at blind spot in road

Where was the illegal act by the driver in this accident? The cyclist was in a shaded part of the road at the crest of the hill that was a blind spot. The driver was not speeding nor drunk. This was wrong place, wrong time and here the cyclists always loses.

As the popular athlete and Annapolis High School track coach neared the shaded top of that hill on her bicycle Wednesday evening, she was hit from behind by a Honda van whose driver was eager to get around the lone cyclist.

She was approaching the top of the hill. She would have been visible to a car behind her. And she was hit from behind, by someone trying to pass where it was not possible to pass safely in the opposite lane. The driver could have waited to pass until both the van and the cyclist were past the crest of the hill, and it was possible to pass safely in the opposite lane. The driver did not, because killing someone was not as big a deal as waiting to pass.

Douchebaggery is not an adequate word for what the driver of the van did. That is why I do not ride in the country side when I have a choice. And it is why I do not care about the complaints of rural drivers. When you take killing people seriously, I will listen.

And yet no charges.

yeah, since the victim died, it is hard to get evidence beyond a reasonable doubt - though it is also true police and DAs tend to go easy on drivers in these situations. Another reason we need more people biking - that means more cops who bike, and more DAs and judges who bike.

It is also why when I do ride in a place like that, I want it to be with a group - witnesses. And with helmet cams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
OP here. Interesting excuse (living there) for riding on an unsafe road. I live on an unsafe road, and when we first moved here, I tried riding on it a few times. Then I stopped when I saw how dangerous it was. I started taking my bike on my car to other locations to ride. It is really inconvenient, but I would take the inconvenience over risking my life. On my road, I HAVE to "take the road" in order to ride. Consequently, drivers behind me must wait until I turn off to pass, or risk passing into oncoming traffic on a curvy country road. If you are a cyclist and you live on one of these roads and ride on it, there is only one word to describe you. IDIOT.

Amazing, living someplace is an "Excuse" for wanting to use the roads where you live to get somewhere.

In fact, despite the examples of douchebaggery resulting in death, its not that dangerous. People in rural areas do bike places and generally do not get killed. And they improve their health. Apparently many people are able to wait to pass until there is a safe place to do so. There is a word for those who do not. Killers.

[Anonymous]

BTW, can you tell me which rural counties you live in so I can know to avoid them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally don't have a problem with cyclists who ride in the lane so long as it is in the right third of the lane so that passing is easy and safe. If the rider rides in the center of the lane, that is unnecessary and obnoxious, especially when he or she is aware of a line of cars waiting to pass. Unless a cyclist can maintain the speed limit, he or she should pull over to let cars pass.

I also believe cyclists can ride side by side as long as traffic is VERY light. If traffic is moderate to heavy, cyclists should ride single file, or at least have the cyclist on the left side pull back so that cars can pass.

The cyclists who feel justified in obstructing traffic for the benefit of their workout regimen are the ones who are making this an issue. If it weren't for their pompous behavior, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Signed an avid cyclist.

Just so you know, the speed limit is a maximum speed, not a minimum. When the sign says "25 MPH" that does not mean that driving 29MPH is okay, but driving 23MPH is forbidden.

Driving up to 10 MPH over the limit is widely considered acceptable. Why is driving one mile under the limit unacceptable?

Driving to slow can impede traffic. Even on a highway you are required to turn on your hazards and remain in the far right lane.

Do your thing but neither a car nor a bike has a right to impact the other. If cars are lined up behind you just pull over and let them pass.

Bikes are banned from almost all limited access highways. I am mostly concerned with city streets.

And driving slower impedes traffic. So does an accident caused by you driving too fast. Driving 24 MPH in a 25 MPH zone may delay you. As long as it is not done to intentionally slow traffic it is not illegal. Driving 26MPH though seldom enforced, IS illegal. It is very difficult to maintain exactly the same rate of speed in city conditions. Ergo, I think the belief that it is wrong to drive even 1 MPH below the speed limit, leads to speeding.

When I am riding my bike, I do try to pull over on streets where there are cars behind me, and I am going well below the speed limit. However it is not always possible to do so safely, because of parked cars. Generally I am not riding on such streets for more than a couple of blocks anyway.

And I am concerned with narrow country roads that can still be very busy.

I avoid narrow country roads, I have heard too many horror stories about cyclists being hit by douchebag drivers out there.

I live off of a narrow, curvy road country. People must have a death wish to ride on them but nope they keep on keeping on. Crazy ass people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The maintenance is the same, sorry, in fact to be even safer, bike lanes need to be added, which could require any number of infrastructure changes, such as power lines being moved etc. I also suppose you will want the bike lanes plowed in the winter too. The impact of adding truly wider lanes that make a honest safe impact should be taxed by the rider not the driver. As a driver I'm not allowed in the bike lane.

No, it's not the same. A bike lane will last much longer before needing repaving.

As for plowing, if you expect the road to be plowed in the winter, why shouldn't the bike lane be plowed. I don't see anyone being charged extra taxes for driving in winter. Why? Because plowing is paid for out of the general budget.

When drivers, and drivers alone, pay the full costs of paving and maintaining roads come back to us with your exclusive use argument. Until then it's just ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally don't have a problem with cyclists who ride in the lane so long as it is in the right third of the lane so that passing is easy and safe. If the rider rides in the center of the lane, that is unnecessary and obnoxious, especially when he or she is aware of a line of cars waiting to pass. Unless a cyclist can maintain the speed limit, he or she should pull over to let cars pass.

I also believe cyclists can ride side by side as long as traffic is VERY light. If traffic is moderate to heavy, cyclists should ride single file, or at least have the cyclist on the left side pull back so that cars can pass.

The cyclists who feel justified in obstructing traffic for the benefit of their workout regimen are the ones who are making this an issue. If it weren't for their pompous behavior, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Signed an avid cyclist.

Just so you know, the speed limit is a maximum speed, not a minimum. When the sign says "25 MPH" that does not mean that driving 29MPH is okay, but driving 23MPH is forbidden.

Driving up to 10 MPH over the limit is widely considered acceptable. Why is driving one mile under the limit unacceptable?

Driving to slow can impede traffic. Even on a highway you are required to turn on your hazards and remain in the far right lane.

Do your thing but neither a car nor a bike has a right to impact the other. If cars are lined up behind you just pull over and let them pass.

Bikes are banned from almost all limited access highways. I am mostly concerned with city streets.

And driving slower impedes traffic. So does an accident caused by you driving too fast. Driving 24 MPH in a 25 MPH zone may delay you. As long as it is not done to intentionally slow traffic it is not illegal. Driving 26MPH though seldom enforced, IS illegal. It is very difficult to maintain exactly the same rate of speed in city conditions. Ergo, I think the belief that it is wrong to drive even 1 MPH below the speed limit, leads to speeding.

When I am riding my bike, I do try to pull over on streets where there are cars behind me, and I am going well below the speed limit. However it is not always possible to do so safely, because of parked cars. Generally I am not riding on such streets for more than a couple of blocks anyway.

And I am concerned with narrow country roads that can still be very busy.

I avoid narrow country roads, I have heard too many horror stories about cyclists being hit by douchebag drivers out there.

I live off of a narrow, curvy road country. People must have a death wish to ride on them but nope they keep on keeping on. Crazy ass people.

How many deaths the last five years?

What County?

[Anonymous]

I also live off a narrow country road where the speed limit is 45mph but cars drive much faster. One narrow lane in each direction. It is very hilly, very curvy, and dangerous. There have been several traffic fatalities within a mile of my house. Several bicyclists have been run off the road onto the deep ditches in years past. This past Sunday some group or other sponsored a bike ride on this road. There were hundreds of bicyclists. They were amazingly rude, taking up the entire lane and refusing to move over. They were forcing vehicles to cross the double yellow line if they wanted to go faster than 10mph. Do these bicyclists understand how extremely dangerous this is for the vehicles on a road as curvy as this road is? What on earth is going through their prehistoric brains? Why is this legally allowed? How would these bicyclists feel if large groups of individuals appeared in THEIR neighborhoods and disrupted their ability to drive safely? The D.C. area is currently in a tither over the ATV's that take over local highways and place everyone in danger. These bicyclists are doing exactly the same thing. Again: Why is this allowed?? If these idiots can't exercise common sense and ordinary courtesy maybe it's time to legislate their ability and willingness to jeopardize everyone else's safety.

[Anonymous]

Are you in Loudoun? Reston Century was on Sunday. They of course had the right to ride the entire lane, and that was undoubtedly the safest way to ride to avoid being run off the road. If they were riding at 10MPH (I would imagine most were faster) they were not endangering anyone (also IIUC it was pretty well marshalled) To pass you have to wait for a place where it is safe to pass. It is also, IIUC a once a year event (and of course they choose Sunday when roads are most quiet)

They were riding legally and safely, from all I can gather.

AFAICT they got any necessary permits. And Loudoun police have given tickets to riders who broke traffic laws.

[Anonymous]

And of course that is the best way to ride out in the country. When you have 1500 riders with you, folks may honk, but they are not going to kill you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BTW, can you tell me which rural counties you live in so I can know to avoid them?

I know someone in a wheelchair from a bike accident with a car. It is not worth the risk . Just avoid the whole area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BTW, can you tell me which rural counties you live in so I can know to avoid them?

Simple, all of them douche

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you in Loudoun? Reston Century was on Sunday. They of course had the right to ride the entire lane, and that was undoubtedly the safest way to ride to avoid being run off the road. If they were riding at 10MPH (I would imagine most were faster) they were not endangering anyone (also IIUC it was pretty well marshalled) To pass you have to wait for a place where it is safe to pass. It is also, IIUC a once a year event (and of course they choose Sunday when roads are most quiet)

They were riding legally and safely, from all I can gather.

AFAICT they got any necessary permits. And Loudoun police have given tickets to riders who broke traffic laws.

And how is one supposed to safely and leagally pass that many cyclists?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a cousin who is temporarily living in Germany. He is amazed at how nicely the Germans treat all cyclists. He is not looking forward to coming home because he enjoys his commute to his job by bike!

That's a country with high education standards and low crime.

We don't live in such a country.

Low crime??

Most important - a driver licensing system that wouldn't allow people who don't know how to operate a car safely in the presence of
Cyclists to obtain a license.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a cousin who is temporarily living in Germany. He is amazed at how nicely the Germans treat all cyclists. He is not looking forward to coming home because he enjoys his commute to his job by bike!

That's a country with high education standards and low crime.

We don't live in such a country.

Low crime??

Most important - a driver licensing system that wouldn't allow people who don't know how to operate a car safely in the presence of
Cyclists to obtain a license.

And of course cyclists need no such training themselves ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also live off a narrow country road where the speed limit is 45mph but cars drive much faster. One narrow lane in each direction. It is very hilly, very curvy, and dangerous. There have been several traffic fatalities within a mile of my house. Several bicyclists have been run off the road onto the deep ditches in years past. This past Sunday some group or other sponsored a bike ride on this road. There were hundreds of bicyclists. They were amazingly rude, taking up the entire lane and refusing to move over. They were forcing vehicles to cross the double yellow line if they wanted to go faster than 10mph. Do these bicyclists understand how extremely dangerous this is for the vehicles on a road as curvy as this road is? What on earth is going through their prehistoric brains? Why is this legally allowed? How would these bicyclists feel if large groups of individuals appeared in THEIR neighborhoods and disrupted their ability to drive safely? The D.C. area is currently in a tither over the ATV's that take over local highways and place everyone in danger. These bicyclists are doing exactly the same thing. Again: Why is this allowed?? If these idiots can't exercise common sense and ordinary courtesy maybe it's time to legislate their ability and willingness to jeopardize everyone else's safety.

https://medium.com/@kellycatchpole/i-am-a-cyclist-and-i-am-here-to-fuck-you-up-a2fb97b1ea16#.fskrj6x9b