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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. The bikers on this thread, sadly, are simply contributing and adding to anti-bike sentiment. Their rude responses seem to be never ending, and only support stereotypes people have of bikers as being unagreeable and socially clueless.

You are rights. We should not respond. Not with emotions, and not with facts. We should allow falsehoods and insults to stand. History has shown that is how change is achieved.

That would be a nice first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can get from Tenleytown to Dupont on smaller surface streets. No need to take Wisconsin, unless you prize a direct route over safety/being a good citizen approrpiately sharing the road.

https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/publication/attachments/dc_bike_map_2012_full_version.pdf

By "sharing the road", you evidently mean, "staying off the road".

No, sharing the roads by taking appropriate routes. It's not that hard to figure out.

Who's sharing Wisconsin Ave with whom?

Stop being dense. you're not helping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say it's anti-social to bike commute. I said it's anti-social to be "that guy" who bikes down River Road at rush hour. I love bike commuting, did it for years (on bike lanes and lesser-trafficked surface streets.) It's anti-social to bike down the middle of a fast-moving artery with no bike lane at rush hour. And it does not help the cause of building up a biking culture one single bit, because either annoys the drivers or makes bike commuting look like something only maniacs do.

What again is the alternative route? I am assuming this is River Road north of Goldsboro.

I dunno, but if there were truly no safe and appropriate route, I just wouldn't bike commute. If you chose instead to be unsafe/inappropriate, then that's on you.

It's not unsafe. And it's only inappropriate if you start with the assumption that people shouldn't bike on roads with lots of cars during rush hour.

That's a pretty fair assumption that I think everyone (including lots of bikers) except an extreme minority shares: you shouldn't bike on roads with no bike infrastructure with lots of cars during rush hour.

+1000

[Anonymous]

As a biker, I want to say: the extremist bikers in this thread do not represent me. I hope drivers know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I didn't say it was illegal; just very unwise. And you certainly can't expect cars to be overjoyed about you when you're deliberately engaging in antisocial (albeit legal) behavior.

Unwise compared to what?

and it is NOT antisocial, other than to people like you who try to avoid understanding why cyclists do what they do.

you have the wrong person. I'm a biker and I've loved the times when I had a feasible bike commute. I agree that biking on busy traffic arteries is legal in DC; but it's unwise, and it's anti-social to slow down traffic at rush hour. And overall it's not good for the cause of getting more investment in and acceptance of bike infrastructure. Just bike to Bethesda and metro in like the rest of us.

I don't live in MoCo. But riding in on arterials is probably MORE wise than taking metro for most people, in terms of health outcomes.

Also if someone can ride to downtown Bethesda, can't they ride into DC on the Capital Crescent Trail? What does this have to do with River Road? What high speed road are you thinking of ? One in DC? I am pretty sure the DC govt is not going to stop putting in bike lanes because some folks in Bethesda and North Potomac don't like cyclists.

Sure, take the Capital Crescent, that's an excellent alternative. I seriously doubt there's any research comparing taking the Metro to biking down highly trafficked arterials like River Road with no bike infrastructure. But anyway the other point is being anti-social. You're engaged in an activity that's impinging on traffic, so you're going to get annoyed responses just like this OP. You can't engage in out-of-place behavior that inconveniences others, and not expect them to be annoyed. Which is not a great look, if you care about getting better bike infrastructure created.

1. The CCT is NOT a good alternative for someone living in say, Tenleytown and heading to Dupont. I know this is hard, but not everyone lives in MoCo.

2. While there is no specific research on that particular route (I mean reallY?) the health effects are major, and few people are hurt riding during the day, in helmets, on arterials like that. Its not terribly comfortable, but you are nice and visible and most drivers don't want a collision. There are lots of places that drivers think are safe for biking that are in fact more dangerous.

3. The District of Columbia does not consider it antisocial. They are not going to build less bike infra because of resentment by Marylanders (while except for the Marylanders who attend influential black churches in DC, but I don't think many of those live in Potomac or Bethesda). If anything, higher levels of biking on the state avenues in upper NW just might prod them to accelerate alternatives.

You can get from Tenleytown to Dupont on smaller surface streets. No need to take Wisconsin, unless you prize a direct route over safety/being a good citizen approrpiately sharing the road.

https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/publication/attachments/dc_bike_map_2012_full_version.pdf

Amazingly enough cyclists actually like to go directly. Just like other road users. And again, its not unsafe, you have presented no evidence it is (and taking a route with a lot of turns can be less safe) And it is not inappropriate. Any more than your choice to drive on Wisconsin, polluting DC and endangering pedestrians instead of taking the Red Line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If you insist you have to bike to work at all costs, then you should chose a home location that allows you to do that. You are NOT building up a bike culture by biking on River Road. I'm sorry, you're just not. It's a highly trafficked artery without room for a heaving volume of bikes.

Is the State of Maryland more likely to put bike infrastructure on roads that bicyclists use, or on roads that bicyclists don't use?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say it's anti-social to bike commute. I said it's anti-social to be "that guy" who bikes down River Road at rush hour. I love bike commuting, did it for years (on bike lanes and lesser-trafficked surface streets.) It's anti-social to bike down the middle of a fast-moving artery with no bike lane at rush hour. And it does not help the cause of building up a biking culture one single bit, because either annoys the drivers or makes bike commuting look like something only maniacs do.

What again is the alternative route? I am assuming this is River Road north of Goldsboro.

I dunno, but if there were truly no safe and appropriate route, I just wouldn't bike commute. If you chose instead to be unsafe/inappropriate, then that's on you.

and again its better for you than driving. And it is not inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can get from Tenleytown to Dupont on smaller surface streets. No need to take Wisconsin, unless you prize a direct route over safety/being a good citizen approrpiately sharing the road.

https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/publication/attachments/dc_bike_map_2012_full_version.pdf

By "sharing the road", you evidently mean, "staying off the road".

No, sharing the roads by taking appropriate routes. It's not that hard to figure out.

Who's sharing Wisconsin Ave with whom?

Stop being dense. you're not helping.

"Share the road" means "share the road" -- and, when on a sign, was actually directed towards drivers, not bicyclists. (Because of this misunderstanding, DOTs don't put that sign up anymore; they now use "Bicyclists may use full lane".) "Share the road" doesn't mean "Bicyclists, use a different road".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say it's anti-social to bike commute. I said it's anti-social to be "that guy" who bikes down River Road at rush hour. I love bike commuting, did it for years (on bike lanes and lesser-trafficked surface streets.) It's anti-social to bike down the middle of a fast-moving artery with no bike lane at rush hour. And it does not help the cause of building up a biking culture one single bit, because either annoys the drivers or makes bike commuting look like something only maniacs do.

What again is the alternative route? I am assuming this is River Road north of Goldsboro.

I dunno, but if there were truly no safe and appropriate route, I just wouldn't bike commute. If you chose instead to be unsafe/inappropriate, then that's on you.

and again its better for you than driving. And it is not inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say it's anti-social to bike commute. I said it's anti-social to be "that guy" who bikes down River Road at rush hour. I love bike commuting, did it for years (on bike lanes and lesser-trafficked surface streets.) It's anti-social to bike down the middle of a fast-moving artery with no bike lane at rush hour. And it does not help the cause of building up a biking culture one single bit, because either annoys the drivers or makes bike commuting look like something only maniacs do.

What again is the alternative route? I am assuming this is River Road north of Goldsboro.

I dunno, but if there were truly no safe and appropriate route, I just wouldn't bike commute. If you chose instead to be unsafe/inappropriate, then that's on you.

It's not unsafe. And it's only inappropriate if you start with the assumption that people shouldn't bike on roads with lots of cars during rush hour.

That's a pretty fair assumption that I think everyone (including lots of bikers) except an extreme minority shares: you shouldn't bike on roads with no bike infrastructure with lots of cars during rush hour.

Most cyclists PREFER not to ride on such roads. Most cyclists who are fast and experienced are quite willing to ride on them, in lieu of not riding, or taking some terrible sidepath or long circuitous detour.

Some of the inexperienced riders who avoid such roads end up getting hurt because they favor sidewalks where there is danger of cars pulling out of driveways, because their fear of getting hit from behind makes them ride to far to the side and creates danger at intersections, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a biker, I want to say: the extremist bikers in this thread do not represent me. I hope drivers know this.

No one here is an extremist. No cyclist here is calling for a change to law in Md or DC. We are just giving facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say it's anti-social to bike commute. I said it's anti-social to be "that guy" who bikes down River Road at rush hour. I love bike commuting, did it for years (on bike lanes and lesser-trafficked surface streets.) It's anti-social to bike down the middle of a fast-moving artery with no bike lane at rush hour. And it does not help the cause of building up a biking culture one single bit, because either annoys the drivers or makes bike commuting look like something only maniacs do.

What again is the alternative route? I am assuming this is River Road north of Goldsboro.

I dunno, but if there were truly no safe and appropriate route, I just wouldn't bike commute. If you chose instead to be unsafe/inappropriate, then that's on you.

It's not unsafe. And it's only inappropriate if you start with the assumption that people shouldn't bike on roads with lots of cars during rush hour.

That's a pretty fair assumption that I think everyone (including lots of bikers) except an extreme minority shares: you shouldn't bike on roads with no bike infrastructure with lots of cars during rush hour.

Why shouldn't you? Because it's unsafe? But it isn't unsafe, if you know what you're doing. Because it's inconsiderate? Now you're begging the question. It's inappropriate because it's inconsiderate; it's inconsiderate because it's inappropriate.

The idea here is that people on bicycles shouldn't delay people in cars, because people in cars are more important. That trips in cars are more important than trips on bikes. But they're not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say it's anti-social to bike commute. I said it's anti-social to be "that guy" who bikes down River Road at rush hour. I love bike commuting, did it for years (on bike lanes and lesser-trafficked surface streets.) It's anti-social to bike down the middle of a fast-moving artery with no bike lane at rush hour. And it does not help the cause of building up a biking culture one single bit, because either annoys the drivers or makes bike commuting look like something only maniacs do.

What again is the alternative route? I am assuming this is River Road north of Goldsboro.

I dunno, but if there were truly no safe and appropriate route, I just wouldn't bike commute. If you chose instead to be unsafe/inappropriate, then that's on you.

It's not unsafe. And it's only inappropriate if you start with the assumption that people shouldn't bike on roads with lots of cars during rush hour.

That's a pretty fair assumption that I think everyone (including lots of bikers) except an extreme minority shares: you shouldn't bike on roads with no bike infrastructure with lots of cars during rush hour.

Why shouldn't you? Because it's unsafe? But it isn't unsafe, if you know what you're doing. Because it's inconsiderate? Now you're begging the question. It's inappropriate because it's inconsiderate; it's inconsiderate because it's inappropriate.

The idea here is that people on bicycles shouldn't delay people in cars, because people in cars are more important. That trips in cars are more important than trips on bikes. But they're not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why shouldn't you? Because it's unsafe? But it isn't unsafe, if you know what you're doing. Because it's inconsiderate? Now you're begging the question. It's inappropriate because it's inconsiderate; it's inconsiderate because it's inappropriate.

The idea here is that people on bicycles shouldn't delay people in cars, because people in cars are more important. That trips in cars are more important than trips on bikes. But they're not.

Which part of this post, specifically, are you rolling your eyes at, and why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why shouldn't you? Because it's unsafe? But it isn't unsafe, if you know what you're doing. Because it's inconsiderate? Now you're begging the question. It's inappropriate because it's inconsiderate; it's inconsiderate because it's inappropriate.

The idea here is that people on bicycles shouldn't delay people in cars, because people in cars are more important. That trips in cars are more important than trips on bikes. But they're not.

Which part of this post, specifically, are you rolling your eyes at, and why?

Np. I would guess all of it.