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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How about this: no one person is more important than everyone else on the road. When one commuter slows down the other hundred, that one's an asshole, whether it's a biker, jogger or pogo stick rider.

Then you're an asshole if you're not on a motorcycle. You take up too much space and get in the way of others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I can tell some of these people are lawyers lol It's like arguing with a hall monitor

Look yes you have a right to drive on Wis avenue in rush hour

Should you no, should steps be taken to make it easier to do it no, should steps be taken instead to make it more hospitable to drivers who are the vast vast majority of users of this route yes

Again the vast majority of drivers on Wisconsin (and every other arterial or local street in DC) are from the suburbs.

And I don't think it is a priority for most DC residents, even those who drive, to make policy decisions that benefit impatient & aggressive suburban drivers at the expense of vulnerable DC residents. Almost everyone you meet in DC, including those in suburban parts of town, are flabbergasted and frustrated by the dangerous and inconsiderate behavior they see every single day from suburban commuters.

The streets are open and despite being allowed to drive on them for free guests to DC just can't get to a place where they can show basic consideration for the cities laws and its residents.

[Anonymous]

I'm not convinced there's not a particularly wily anti-bike campaigner moonlighting in this thread as a bicyclist in order to further his cause by alienating people. If that's the plan, it seems to be working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

How about this: no one person is more important than everyone else on the road. When one commuter slows down the other hundred, that one's an asshole, whether it's a biker, jogger or pogo stick rider.

Again, you are prioritizing car trips. Bicycle commuters and pedestrian commuters do not prevent car commuters from using the road, but car commuters do prevent bicycle and pedestrian commuters from using the road.

Meanwhile, when I'm driving, who's slowing me down is: other drivers. Please keep your car off the road when I'm driving on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone knows why but you, man.

Then explain, please. If it's so obvious and well-known, it should be easy to explain.

It's not a matter of importance, it's a matter of moving traffic efficiently. And bikes gum up the works during rush hour if they take a whole car lane going 30 mph.

If a road with a 30MPH speed limit (IE DC arterials) is going 30MPH at rush hour?

Thing about arterials is, some of the time they are moving so slowly, bikes keep up with traffic. Some of the time they are so lightly traveled, that losing on lane on a road with two lanes in each direction is no big deal.

The other thing is if a cyclist spends 90% of the trip on trails, side roads, etc, they may well be speeding up traffic even if they are slowing it on the one section where their trip overlaps with yours.

Now a 45MPH arterial, might be another thing. But none of those in DC, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I can tell some of these people are lawyers lol It's like arguing with a hall monitor

Look yes you have a right to drive on Wis avenue in rush hour

Should you no, should steps be taken to make it easier to do it no, should steps be taken instead to make it more hospitable to drivers who are the vast vast majority of users of this route yes

Most of the people in the travel lanes on Wisconsin Avenue are drivers because the travel lanes on Wisconsin Avenue are inhospitable to people who aren't in cars. That's not an argument for staying off Wisconsin Avenue unless you're in a car; it's an argument for making Wisconsin Avenue more hospitable to everybody, whether they're in cars or not. Why DC would want to prioritize the desires of car commuters from the suburbs over the desires of its own residents, I can't understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And I don't think it is a priority for most DC residents, even those who drive, to make policy decisions that benefit impatient & aggressive suburban drivers at the expense of vulnerable DC residents. Almost everyone you meet in DC, including those in suburban parts of town, are flabbergasted and frustrated by the dangerous and inconsiderate behavior they see every single day from suburban commuters.

The streets are open and despite being allowed to drive on them for free guests to DC just can't get to a place where they can show basic consideration for the cities laws and its residents.

Fact is the bike haters are losing in Md too. MoCo is encouraging more cyclists, more bike infra, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How about this: no one person is more important than everyone else on the road. When one commuter slows down the other hundred, that one's an asshole, whether it's a biker, jogger or pogo stick rider.

Then you're an asshole if you're not on a motorcycle. You take up too much space and get in the way of others.

[Anonymous]

If DC really wanted to move the most people efficiently on Wisconsin, the would probably put in bus only lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How about this: no one person is more important than everyone else on the road. When one commuter slows down the other hundred, that one's an asshole, whether it's a biker, jogger or pogo stick rider.

[phone]

[Anonymous]

Reading the comments by cyclists in this thread makes me hate cyclists more than I ever thought possible. The entitled smugness is just boundless. I used to be sort of indifferent to them, but now that I think about all the times I've seen them blow through redlights or stop signs, then post here how it's no big thing and deflect the issue saying drivers run redlights too.... you know what? I've never seen a car drive along the shoulder past other traffic waiting for a light, and then drive through the light forcing other cars to avoid them. But I see cyclists do it all the time. Then I read some of them on this thread, it infuriates me. I hate them. HATE them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading the comments by cyclists in this thread makes me hate cyclists more than I ever thought possible. The entitled smugness is just boundless. I used to be sort of indifferent to them, but now that I think about all the times I've seen them blow through redlights or stop signs, then post here how it's no big thing and deflect the issue saying drivers run redlights too.... you know what? I've never seen a car drive along the shoulder past other traffic waiting for a light, and then drive through the light forcing other cars to avoid them. But I see cyclists do it all the time. Then I read some of them on this thread, it infuriates me. I hate them. HATE them!

Yeah. I think this thread should sufficiently answer OP's question. It appears to be a huge level of smugness, total lack of concern for other people bordering on some kind of cognitive social disorder, and a superiority complex. Not a good combination, to say the least.

And I came into the thread not disliking cyclists either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I can tell some of these people are lawyers lol It's like arguing with a hall monitor

Look yes you have a right to drive on Wis avenue in rush hour

Should you no, should steps be taken to make it easier to do it no, should steps be taken instead to make it more hospitable to drivers who are the vast vast majority of users of this route yes

Most of the people in the travel lanes on Wisconsin Avenue are drivers because the travel lanes on Wisconsin Avenue are inhospitable to people who aren't in cars. That's not an argument for staying off Wisconsin Avenue unless you're in a car; it's an argument for making Wisconsin Avenue more hospitable to everybody, whether they're in cars or not. Why DC would want to prioritize the desires of car commuters from the suburbs over the desires of its own residents, I can't understand.

OMG it's a freaking road you moron. Its designed to move cars, not bikes not buses, not pedestrians cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading the comments by cyclists in this thread makes me hate cyclists more than I ever thought possible. The entitled smugness is just boundless. I used to be sort of indifferent to them, but now that I think about all the times I've seen them blow through redlights or stop signs, then post here how it's no big thing and deflect the issue saying drivers run redlights too.... you know what? I've never seen a car drive along the shoulder past other traffic waiting for a light, and then drive through the light forcing other cars to avoid them. But I see cyclists do it all the time. Then I read some of them on this thread, it infuriates me. I hate them. HATE them!

I am confused - is your problem behavior at stop signs, or is it filtering to the right?

Filtering to the right is legal and in many places makes traffic work better. In particular I can use it to get to a bike lane, or a right turn, and get out of the way of motor vehicles. I don't filter in places where I am going to have to stay in the general lanes, and will only need to be passed again.

Treating stop signs as yield signs is not legal in the US outside Idaho and Colorado - but it is much like cars going a couple of MPH over the limit - its not really a big deal. Thats not smugness, its reality. The fact is that all types of transportation system users - drivers, cyclists, and walkers, violate the law. In ways that are specific to their mode. Maybe we should discourage that, but its not a reason to hate them as a class.

I also note again, one difference is that most cyclists have driven cars (or even do so regularly) and all walk. While most drivers and pedestrians have never ridden in traffic, and don't actually understand what we do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I can tell some of these people are lawyers lol It's like arguing with a hall monitor

Look yes you have a right to drive on Wis avenue in rush hour

Should you no, should steps be taken to make it easier to do it no, should steps be taken instead to make it more hospitable to drivers who are the vast vast majority of users of this route yes

Most of the people in the travel lanes on Wisconsin Avenue are drivers because the travel lanes on Wisconsin Avenue are inhospitable to people who aren't in cars. That's not an argument for staying off Wisconsin Avenue unless you're in a car; it's an argument for making Wisconsin Avenue more hospitable to everybody, whether they're in cars or not. Why DC would want to prioritize the desires of car commuters from the suburbs over the desires of its own residents, I can't understand.

OMG it's a freaking road you moron. Its designed to move cars, not bikes not buses, not pedestrians cars.

Road aren't designed to move buses? Roads were built for bikes before they were built for cars because bikes came before cars but leaving aside your ignorance do you really think buses should not be on the road?