Who Are the Annoying People Who Ride Their Bikes on River Road During Morning Rush Hour???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just whip around em. If they want to ride on the road with the big cars then they can't be upset when someone passes them with a foot of clearance going 45mph. Deal.

Except the law is 3 feet and most bikers have GoPros and will record your license plate when you pass too close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cyclists do themselves no favors whenever they try to defend themselves. They all tend to gang up (or try to) on anyone who comes into the thread. No wonder everyone hates you guys and there's constant stories of cyclists being run over.

How - almost every single person on this thread who has written from the perspective of strictly being a driver has repeatedly defended and advocated for illegal, aggressive and dangerous driving behavior.

So whose words reflect poorly on them in this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Considering the number of bicyclists vs the number of car drivers, clearly it's the bicyclists providing the inconvenience. Glad you agree with my logic though. Now that you're aware of the true level of nuisance you are, seeing you on the road will result in ear-splitting honking and perhaps a last minute swerve. Appropriate punishment.

Excuse me while I e-mail Governor Hogan to tell him the good news: there's no need to spend an enormous pile of money on I-270! All he has to do is ban bicyclists from using it.

You would be an idiot because bicyclists are already barred from interstate highways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cyclists do themselves no favors whenever they try to defend themselves. They all tend to gang up (or try to) on anyone who comes into the thread. No wonder everyone hates you guys and there's constant stories of cyclists being run over.

How - almost every single person on this thread who has written from the perspective of strictly being a driver has repeatedly defended and advocated for illegal, aggressive and dangerous driving behavior.

So whose words reflect poorly on them in this thread?

The absolutely cluelessness of this statement seems to be the go-to defense for cyclists. "Whatttttttt do you mean I'm inconveniencing everyone? Huh? I don't understand!!!!!1!" That and vicious sniping.

Newsflash: it ain't workin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just whip around em. If they want to ride on the road with the big cars then they can't be upset when someone passes them with a foot of clearance going 45mph. Deal.

Except the law is 3 feet and most bikers have GoPros and will record your license plate when you pass too close.

Who the hell cares

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just whip around em. If they want to ride on the road with the big cars then they can't be upset when someone passes them with a foot of clearance going 45mph. Deal.

Except the law is 3 feet and most bikers have GoPros and will record your license plate when you pass too close.

Who the hell cares

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cyclists do themselves no favors whenever they try to defend themselves. They all tend to gang up (or try to) on anyone who comes into the thread. No wonder everyone hates you guys and there's constant stories of cyclists being run over.

There aren't, actually.

There are, actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cyclists do themselves no favors whenever they try to defend themselves. They all tend to gang up (or try to) on anyone who comes into the thread. No wonder everyone hates you guys and there's constant stories of cyclists being run over.

There aren't, actually.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/express/wp/2016/05/12/how-safe-is-bike-commuting-perhaps-less-than-you-think/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Considering the number of bicyclists vs the number of car drivers, clearly it's the bicyclists providing the inconvenience. Glad you agree with my logic though. Now that you're aware of the true level of nuisance you are, seeing you on the road will result in ear-splitting honking and perhaps a last minute swerve. Appropriate punishment.

Excuse me while I e-mail Governor Hogan to tell him the good news: there's no need to spend an enormous pile of money on I-270! All he has to do is ban bicyclists from using it.

You would be an idiot because bicyclists are already barred from interstate highways.

Poe's Law in action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do you even live in DC? Since I assume you don't you just need to suck it up and follow the laws.

In DC the default speed limit is 25 MPH and even most casual bikers can comfortably go about 15MPH and even on arterial roads in DC the speed limit is just 30 MPH so some of the differential is actually generated by aggressive and speeding motorists.

It is especially stupid when people complain about bikes in DC - in most parts of the city during rush hour bikes can comfortably move along at the same rate as traffic. That doesn't mean they are as fast as cars on every stretch of roadway but when you factor in congestion at every single intersection the average speed on DC streets is quite low and almost always below a comfortable speed for biking.

But that is what pisses off most drivers. They get behind a biker and eventually pass them (usually illegally and dangerously) with a rage acceleration and apparently a laying on of the horn and then half a block later the cyclists coasts up to them at the next intersection.

So all that chest beating and machismo and angst and Mr. North Potomac in his SUV can't go any faster than a guy on a CABI.

I agree that, certainly in DC or other city traffic, this is what bugs drivers most about bicyclists. You're sitting there in your car, going nowhere, while the person on the bicycle is moving.

And then, of course, there's the assumption that people not in cars should make way for people in cars. (I have never read any complaints, anywhere, from pedestrians or bicyclists about the inconsiderateness of drivers driving their cars at the same time that pedestrians/bicyclists are trying to get to work.) Although, to be sure, US society has designed its transportation systems based on this assumption for at least the last 70 years, so it's not surprising that people don't question it.

So wait.... cyclists are angry about being passed by the "guy from potomac" (weird chip on your shoulder there, wonder why...), presumably because they want to be treated as if they were an actual car, and then they want to be able to use the far side of the road, instead of waiting in line like an actual vehicle?

Yes, this is exactly why people hate cyclists. The absolute self absorption, the demand of being treated "like a vehicle" when it suits them, and disregarding it as soon as its convenient. It's laughable, absurd, and contemptible. Which is why most people see cyclists and look down on them.

North Potomac - you know there is a difference right?

In any case the passing was probably illegal and dangerous but what you don't get is it was unnecessary - you didn't get ahead!

Legally in DC bikes are vehicles so yes they have the right to be treated as such. And no that right doesn't go away because some cyclists break the law just like it doesn't go away because most drivers break the law.

I would be fine with no one ever passing each other in congested urban areas. You don't rage acceleration by my to get to the next intersection 2 seconds faster and I won't weave between car lanes either at intersections when everyone else is stopped.

This would actually slow bikers down and hence result in bikes taking up an entire lane in setting where there is room for them to be more efficient and use less space which would increase the road capacity for drivers but in net that would be a much safer scenario for bikers so I'd accept that trade-off without hesitation.

Good luck finding drivers willing to accept it though.

Who cares. If tricyclists want to play fast and loose with the law and interpretation of them being a vehicle, then cars can do it too. It absolutely works both ways. And we all know who will win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Considering the number of bicyclists vs the number of car drivers, clearly it's the bicyclists providing the inconvenience. Glad you agree with my logic though. Now that you're aware of the true level of nuisance you are, seeing you on the road will result in ear-splitting honking and perhaps a last minute swerve. Appropriate punishment.

Excuse me while I e-mail Governor Hogan to tell him the good news: there's no need to spend an enormous pile of money on I-270! All he has to do is ban bicyclists from using it.

You would be an idiot because bicyclists are already barred from interstate highways.

Poe's Law in action.

You already used that one. Come on, Nathaniel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree, bikers are irritating. They have the right to commute as do cars. Fine. I can still be annoyed though.

No, you can't. They are putting their lives on the line while you're cozy and safe in your gaz-guzzler contributing to global warming.

What you should be doing is paying extra attention to the safety of bikers and pedestrians, ie all those who don't have a metal cage protecting them from a collision.

I drive a car, and that's what I do. Bikers never annoy me. I am concerned for them.

Then clearly you have not encountered the bikers I have. The ones who blow through stop signs or red lights so I have to slam on my breaks so I don't run them over. The ones that cut off in front of me with no signal. The ones that go 15 mph in a 35 and ride in the center of the street or too far to the middle to safely pass. If you want to bike, follow the rules of the road. Then, maybe I will be concerned for and respectful of cyclists!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree, bikers are irritating. They have the right to commute as do cars. Fine. I can still be annoyed though.

No, you can't. They are putting their lives on the line while you're cozy and safe in your gaz-guzzler contributing to global warming.

What you should be doing is paying extra attention to the safety of bikers and pedestrians, ie all those who don't have a metal cage protecting them from a collision.

I drive a car, and that's what I do. Bikers never annoy me. I am concerned for them.

Then clearly you have not encountered the bikers I have. The ones who blow through stop signs or red lights so I have to slam on my breaks so I don't run them over. The ones that cut off in front of me with no signal. The ones that go 15 mph in a 35 and ride in the center of the street or too far to the middle to safely pass. If you want to bike, follow the rules of the road. Then, maybe I will be concerned for and respectful of cyclists!

+1

Until then, nope. Given the injury rates, it seems no one else is, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cyclists do themselves no favors whenever they try to defend themselves. They all tend to gang up (or try to) on anyone who comes into the thread. No wonder everyone hates you guys and there's constant stories of cyclists being run over.

There aren't, actually.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/express/wp/2016/05/12/how-safe-is-bike-commuting-perhaps-less-than-you-think/

The article also says bike commuting is overall healthiest. Nice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Then clearly you have not encountered the bikers I have. The ones who blow through stop signs or red lights so I have to slam on my breaks so I don't run them over. The ones that cut off in front of me with no signal. The ones that go 15 mph in a 35 and ride in the center of the street or too far to the middle to safely pass. If you want to bike, follow the rules of the road. Then, maybe I will be concerned for and respectful of cyclists!

I've encountered drivers who do all of this, and more. While I was driving. So I shouldn't be concerned for and respectful of drivers?