Bicyclist pulled over for running a red light

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Food for thought: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1695668.ece

And this is for the PP who wrote about lawless cyclists some of whom don't even wear helmets!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/somerset/5334208.stm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is the poster who said I "wanted" to like cyclists.

First of all, I was actually hit by a cyclist. I've never been hit by a car! But of course, that does not a pattern make.

That said, c'mon now. The cyclists who are saying they flagrantly do not have to follow any laws are just part of the problem. If you want to be integrated into traffic, don't create an unsafe environment. I am SUCH a careful driver. I go out of my way to accommodate cyclists, pedestrians, other drivers. I'm always the guy who will stop and let you out of a parking lot, let you get over, etc. So please don't act like I'm some kind of jerk who just wants to feel the "thrill" of almost hitting a cyclist.

I don't really worry that a cyclist is going to hurt me or my kids while we are in a car (though I suppose if I swerved to avoid hitting someone I might myself get hit). But, I'm worried about YOU. And yes, by extension, me. If you skirt out in front of my car out of nowhere, and I don't see you until it is too late to stop, and I hit and injure you or kill you, my life is in shambles. How would someone recover from that?

I do my part, by driving carefully, focusing on the road (never my cell phone, etc) and genuinely attempting to share the road. The problem is not respectful cyclists, who are probably the majority of cyclists in this area.

But based on these comments, it appears we have a sampling of the "other" cyclists, the ones who are weaving in and out of traffic, almost causing an accident, then darting out into the intersection with the middle finger blazing. I guess these people just hate cars and probably don't think much of us for polluting the environment, etc. But dang, man, what are you doing to help matters if you're going out of your way to be aggressive or antagonizing?

PP above, just because you would like to rewrite the law doesn't mean you can carry on like you've done so. And besides the law, there's the social contract to consider. Do you want your teenager to get ready to proceed with the right of way you have carefully taught her, after looking both ways, only to nail a cyclist who barreled out from the sidewalk against the light? Do you want her life to be over because a cyclist's mistake (especially if it was intentionally aggressive or flagrant) to ruin your child's life?

Man, I don't get this attitude. What can you possibly achieve with this? I'm a huge supporter of cyclists and this thread is really turning me off. I do hope this isn't representative of the attitudes of most cyclists.

PS. the drivers who were honking at kids? Total assholes. I get that. I get that many drivers are assholes. and there are more drivers than bikers, so that makes more assholes than ever. But man, don't go out of your way to inflame.

THIS!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is the poster who said I "wanted" to like cyclists.

First of all, I was actually hit by a cyclist. I've never been hit by a car! But of course, that does not a pattern make.

That said, c'mon now. The cyclists who are saying they flagrantly do not have to follow any laws are just part of the problem. If you want to be integrated into traffic, don't create an unsafe environment. I am SUCH a careful driver. I go out of my way to accommodate cyclists, pedestrians, other drivers. I'm always the guy who will stop and let you out of a parking lot, let you get over, etc. So please don't act like I'm some kind of jerk who just wants to feel the "thrill" of almost hitting a cyclist.

I don't really worry that a cyclist is going to hurt me or my kids while we are in a car (though I suppose if I swerved to avoid hitting someone I might myself get hit). But, I'm worried about YOU. And yes, by extension, me. If you skirt out in front of my car out of nowhere, and I don't see you until it is too late to stop, and I hit and injure you or kill you, my life is in shambles. How would someone recover from that?

I do my part, by driving carefully, focusing on the road (never my cell phone, etc) and genuinely attempting to share the road. The problem is not respectful cyclists, who are probably the majority of cyclists in this area.

But based on these comments, it appears we have a sampling of the "other" cyclists, the ones who are weaving in and out of traffic, almost causing an accident, then darting out into the intersection with the middle finger blazing. I guess these people just hate cars and probably don't think much of us for polluting the environment, etc. But dang, man, what are you doing to help matters if you're going out of your way to be aggressive or antagonizing?

PP above, just because you would like to rewrite the law doesn't mean you can carry on like you've done so. And besides the law, there's the social contract to consider. Do you want your teenager to get ready to proceed with the right of way you have carefully taught her, after looking both ways, only to nail a cyclist who barreled out from the sidewalk against the light? Do you want her life to be over because a cyclist's mistake (especially if it was intentionally aggressive or flagrant) to ruin your child's life?

Man, I don't get this attitude. What can you possibly achieve with this? I'm a huge supporter of cyclists and this thread is really turning me off. I do hope this isn't representative of the attitudes of most cyclists.

PS. the drivers who were honking at kids? Total assholes. I get that. I get that many drivers are assholes. and there are more drivers than bikers, so that makes more assholes than ever. But man, don't go out of your way to inflame.

Look, I'm the PP who said I don't follow every traffic law to the letter. I don't disagree with you that *everyone* should driver courteously and carefully. Where I disagree with you is when you argue that driving to the letter of the law is functionally equivalent to driving courteously and carefully. It's just not. We agree that people should drive/ride like assholes. We agree that people should operate in a predictable and safe manner. And they generally do.

A cyclist coming to an intersection is extremely likely to slow down and treat the intersection like a yield sign. So stop and give them the right-of-way. It costs you nothing, and frankly, it's no different than when I'm on a bicycle, want to take a left hand turn, but don't get into the left-hand lane a block before my turn because I don't want to inconvenience drivers. Legally, I should check to see if there's a break in traffic, then change lanes, then ride in the left hand lane signaling my intent to turn left. I don't because it would slow traffic. It's a courtesy. So I'll often ride to the intersection, cross to the other side. Then wait for the pedestrian signal to change, and proceed.

As far as pissing people off, I'm not going to do it gratuitously, but if someone's pissed off at me, that means they see me. Frankly, most of the area drivers are entitled, smug pricks who break 90% of the laws that apply to them without even giving it a second thought. Don't believe me? Get on the BW Parkway, get in the left-hand lane, and set your cruise control to the posted speed limit. Or come to a full stop and let a pedestrian cross at a mid-block intersection and see how your fellow drivers react. (The latter happened just a month or so ago, and there was a pedestrian killed).

[Anonymous]

I loathe cyclists. There I said it. I'm sure there are plenty that aren't assholes. But the ones I see every freakin' day are nothing more than road hazards. Would it kill you to ride single file? And why the hell can't you follow the rules of the road like the rest of us?

Very few things make me angry. I am normally a very calm person. I have almost no temper and I'm very tolerant of slow drivers, fast drivers, pedestrians, older drivers, teens, ....but cyclists send me into instant road rage.

My horrible confession...If I thought I could hit you and (a) not cause serious injury or kill you. and (b) not get caught....I would run your ass off the road every single day.

I actually feel better after typing that.

[Anonymous]

Drivers two most common complaints about cyclists are that (1) they always run red lights/stop signs, and (2) they slow me down. But those are contradictory complaints, as going through stop signs (where safe - let's not pretend every cyclist out there is a reckless bike messenger at 18th and K) allows cyclists to travel faster, thereby NOT slowing drivers down.

I'll make a deal with all the drivers out there. I will stop at all stop signs from now on. But I will also take the lane (as is my right, at least in DC. That means riding in the center of the lane. I'll do this even where there are bike lanes. And I will expect you to adhere to the 3-foor passing rule. (Also to abandon all those rolling stops, but that's a different issue.) So now, you have a cyclist acting completely legally - but most likely won't be able to pass him. And in order to obey the law, as you insist, I'll have to stop at every stop sign, which slows down the overall trip considerably. Is this the preferred outcome?

I didn't think so. If every cyclist acted in this (completely legal) manner, drivers would have a collective apoplexy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
My horrible confession...If I thought I could hit you and (a) not cause serious injury or kill you. and (b) not get caught....I would run your ass off the road every single day.

I actually feel better after typing that.

Surely you can put yourself in the shoes of a law-abiding cyclist like me and see why it scares the shit out of us to know that we are "sharing the road" with you (when you are protected by a ton of metal and we have only a styrofoam helmet)?

[Anonymous]

But based on these comments, it appears we have a sampling of the "other" cyclists, the ones who are weaving in and out of traffic, almost causing an accident, then darting out into the intersection with the middle finger blazing. I guess these people just hate cars and probably don't think much of us for polluting the environment, etc. But dang, man, what are you doing to help matters if you're going out of your way to be aggressive or antagonizing?

I don't hate cars. I actually have one, and even drive it. But I've never even come close to hitting a cyclist or pedestrian in this town. That's because I drive through residential and congested areas as though there were cyclists and pedestrians, and as though they might occasionally do something unexpected. I drive as though I were driving through a pedestrian mall, rather than driving as though I were on I-95.

PP above, just because you would like to rewrite the law doesn't mean you can carry on like you've done so. And besides the law, there's the social contract to consider. Do you want your teenager to get ready to proceed with the right of way you have carefully taught her, after looking both ways, only to nail a cyclist who barreled out from the sidewalk against the light? Do you want her life to be over because a cyclist's mistake (especially if it was intentionally aggressive or flagrant) to ruin your child's life?

First of all, I don't carry on as though the laws are such as I described in my hypothetical. I've ridden on area roads for over twenty years and have never come close to being in an accident--in a car or on a bike. Frankly, my experience has given me a heck of a lot more credibility on the issue of cycling safety than someone who never rides, and who doesn't understand the unique issues with urban cycling. As you say, there are jerks who ride, there are jerks who drive. I'm not one of them. I am a lawbreaker though. And I'll continue to be, because that's the safest way to ride. "Always obey all the laws" is a newbie mistake, and makes cycling unnecessarily dangerous.


What I think is quite interesting is just how bent out of shape area drivers are about jay-bikers and jay-walkers. It's like it's a personal affront. When you see a pedestrian, slow down and assume they'll do something unexpected. Same with cyclists. Stop thinking that it's everyone else's moral obligation to get the Hell out of your way because you're operating a 4000 lb motor vehicle. That's what I'm going to teach my daughter. It's also what I wish they'd teach in Driver's Ed. Of course, in Driver's Ed, the mere existence of pedestrians and cyclists is an afterthought if that.

[Anonymous]

To 11:28 - So you would actually like to hit a cyclist and cause minor injury? Nasty and very sad. Perhaps you and other posters here should try swapping roles - drivers should ride a bike for a day and cyclists should drive a car. Maybe a bit of understanding and less vitriol would result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I loathe cyclists. There I said it. I'm sure there are plenty that aren't assholes. But the ones I see every freakin' day are nothing more than road hazards. Would it kill you to ride single file? And why the hell can't you follow the rules of the road like the rest of us?

Very few things make me angry. I am normally a very calm person. I have almost no temper and I'm very tolerant of slow drivers, fast drivers, pedestrians, older drivers, teens, ....but cyclists send me into instant road rage.

My horrible confession...If I thought I could hit you and (a) not cause serious injury or kill you. and (b) not get caught....I would run your ass off the road every single day.

I actually feel better after typing that.

PP cyclist here: No, no, I get that. Totally. You're in the minority, of course. But that's why I don't really give a shit about offending drivers. First of all, the cyclists' right to the roadways has been upheld by the courts everywhere, and secondly, if you're pissed off, that means you see me. It's inattentive drivers who are the danger. People with anger issues like yourself won't actually do anything unless they's sociopaths--the stakes are simply too high. And I think "=getting caught" is certainly more of a disincentive than "not causing serious injury".

Anyway, I'm glad I pissed you off!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


80% of the time there's no reason for me to stop at a stop sign because either there are no cars waiting to proceed across my path, or because I can time my riding so that I'm sharing right-of-way with a car that's going in the same direction.

Yes, that would be a great system. Everyone gets to decide for themselves whether there's a good reason that the law should apply to them in any given circumstance.

Hell 100% of the time there is no reason for me to come to a complete stop at a stop sign, but that's still the law and I do it every single time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 11:28 - So you would actually like to hit a cyclist and cause minor injury? Nasty and very sad. Perhaps you and other posters here should try swapping roles - drivers should ride a bike for a day and cyclists should drive a car. Maybe a bit of understanding and less vitriol would result.

And of course, almost every cyclist drives or has driven a car. Which is why we never start these types of threads. Inevitably they proceed like this:

A: Cyclistss are scofflaws.
B: Drivers are scofflaws, too.
A: How dare you excuse cyclist behavior!!!
B: Yawn. Time to make lunch.

Anyway, if every driver were required to ride a bike in the city for a month in order to get their license renewed, we'd never hear another word about scofflaw cyclists (with the exception of asshole cyclists who ride on sidewalks, against traffic, or recklessly on area paths and trails. Those are the cyclists who should be ticketed and cracked down on--of course, that will never happen, because they just endanger pedestrians and other cyclists. And that's not really an enforcement priority. Police only write tickets to those who inconvenience car drivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 11:28 - So you would actually like to hit a cyclist and cause minor injury? Nasty and very sad. Perhaps you and other posters here should try swapping roles - drivers should ride a bike for a day and cyclists should drive a car. Maybe a bit of understanding and less vitriol would result.

See...that's the thing. I do ride a bike. Twice a day every single school day. 1.5 miles to the school and 1.5 miles home. That's a total of 6 miles a day. My son and I bike to and from his school. But we follow the damn rules. We stay in the bike lanes. We stop at stop signs and the red light. And if there were no bike lanes, we wouldn't bike on those roads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


80% of the time there's no reason for me to stop at a stop sign because either there are no cars waiting to proceed across my path, or because I can time my riding so that I'm sharing right-of-way with a car that's going in the same direction.

Yes, that would be a great system. Everyone gets to decide for themselves whether there's a good reason that the law should apply to them in any given circumstance.

Has worked for me for over twenty years.

Hell 100% of the time there is no reason for me to come to a complete stop at a stop sign, but that's still the law and I do it every single time.

A full stop at every stop sign? Behind the white "stop" line, and out of the crosswalk? In that case, give yourself a cookie. You're one of only ~15% of drivers who do. Everyone else slows down to about 3-5 mph and rolls through. Just like cyclists.

[Anonymous]

This is another one of those inane discussions that consists of nothing but anecdotes and over-generalizations. Here are some noncontroversial observations:

Some bikers, and some drivers of cars, are safety-conscious and try their best to obey the law.

Some bikers, and some drivers of cars, are aggressive and disregard the law, and are a hazard on the road.

It's probably the case that more bikers than drivers run red lights since they are less likely to be ticketed or to see their insurance rates go up as a result.

It's probably the case that more drivers than bikers speed, because their vehicles are capable of going faster.

It's definitely the case that in a collision between a bike and a car, the biker is much more likely to be injured or killed than is someone in the car.

I think the only reasonable conclusion to draw is that whether you are biking or driving, you should not be overly aggressive, and you should obey the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


80% of the time there's no reason for me to stop at a stop sign because either there are no cars waiting to proceed across my path, or because I can time my riding so that I'm sharing right-of-way with a car that's going in the same direction.

Yes, that would be a great system. Everyone gets to decide for themselves whether there's a good reason that the law should apply to them in any given circumstance.

Has worked for me for over twenty years.

Hell 100% of the time there is no reason for me to come to a complete stop at a stop sign, but that's still the law and I do it every single time.

A full stop at every stop sign? Behind the white "stop" line, and out of the crosswalk? In that case, give yourself a cookie. You're one of only ~15% of drivers who do. Everyone else slows down to about 3-5 mph and rolls through. Just like cyclists.

More law-abiding drivers here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGA3YhfsHhY