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

[Anonymous]

They are mostly (upper) middle aged men trying to feel young and adventurous again.

And no, cyclists should not use the sidewalk. The problem is that our sidewalks and roads were not built and designed for their habits. They want to share the road, but most don't follow laws or rules. There is also such a thing as going too slow - which by design, is a fact for many cyclists (and then they also exceed trail speed limits on local trails). It not conducive to a safe flow of things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are mostly (upper) middle aged men trying to feel young and adventurous again.

And no, cyclists should not use the sidewalk. The problem is that our sidewalks and roads were not built and designed for their habits. They want to share the road, but most don't follow laws or rules. There is also such a thing as going too slow - which by design, is a fact for many cyclists (and then they also exceed trail speed limits on local trails). It not conducive to a safe flow of things.

The same is true of drivers, of course.

My advice to you, as a fellow road user, is that, when you're driving, you should focus on driving in a lawful manner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are mostly (upper) middle aged men trying to feel young and adventurous again.a

And no, cyclists should not use the sidewalk. The problem is that our sidewalks and roads were not built and designed for their habits. They want to share the road, but most don't follow laws or rules. There is also such a thing as going too slow - which by design, is a fact for many cyclists (and then they also exceed trail speed limits on local trails). It not conducive to a safe flow of things.

+1

And being as selfish and boneheaded as all male baby boomers. So very.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are mostly (upper) middle aged men trying to feel young and adventurous again.

And no, cyclists should not use the sidewalk. The problem is that our sidewalks and roads were not built and designed for their habits. They want to share the road, but most don't follow laws or rules. There is also such a thing as going too slow - which by design, is a fact for many cyclists (and then they also exceed trail speed limits on local trails). It not conducive to a safe flow of things.

The same is true of drivers, of course.

My advice to you, as a fellow road user, is that, when you're driving, you should focus on driving in a lawful manner.

Oh, bull. The vast majority of drivers stop at red lights. Maintain a range of speed close to the speed limit (may go above, but in a reasonable range). Yield to pedestrians (I am one), drive the right way on roads (ie, not "salmoning") and follow road rules pretty closely. That's not true for cyclists and you know it. Making BS claims isn't helping the cause towards acceptance of cyclists.

[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.

You're breaking the law. I hope you don't complain about "scofflaw bicyclists".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, bull. The vast majority of drivers stop at red lights. Maintain a range of speed close to the speed limit (may go above, but in a reasonable range). Yield to pedestrians (I am one), drive the right way on roads (ie, not "salmoning") and follow road rules pretty closely. That's not true for cyclists and you know it. Making BS claims isn't helping the cause towards acceptance of cyclists.

When a police officer pulls you over for speeding, do you explain that you weren't breaking the law, because while you were driving faster than the speed limit, it was still within a reasonable range?

Drivers break laws. Bicyclists break laws. Pedestrians break laws. Why? Because people break laws, regardless of the mode of transport they're using.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems pretty damn stupid to put your life on the line to get to work.

I'd either get a car like everyone else, or take a bus. But it's idiotic to risk your life (it it really IS that dangerous) just to get to work.

You can't tell me a bike is the ONLY option these people have. No one believes that.

Therefore it's a choice. And they are CHOOSING to risk their life to get to ....... their desk at work.


That's just F'ing stupid.


If I'm gonna risk my life, it'll be to save my kids or my wife. Not for getting to my job.

It's pretty stupid of you to drive to work. So you know you're risking your life/health every time you do it? You should get a job where you telework only otherwise you don't love your wife and kids.

Are you seriously debating the relative safety of driving vs biking on River Road?

No, just mocking dumb arguments over safety.

Explain how it's mocking when it's an indisputable fact that in a collision between a cyclist and a car, the cyclist is going to be hurt or killed, and the car driver might need to .. go to a car wash to get the blood off?

Safety is about risk, which is both probability and consequences. The probability of dying or being seriously injured while either biking or driving is quite low especially if you're not an idiot (texting while driving, blowing through red lights, etc).

[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.

Want to play a game of illegal things someone can do to put you at risk? Good luck on the receiving end of that. You're not invincible.

[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.

Want to play a game of illegal things someone can do to put you at risk? Good luck on the receiving end of that. You're not invincible.

I'm a big proponent of biking, but I kind of agree with this PP: a biker who choses to bike down River Road at rush hour just can't expect 3 ft of clearance and big slow downs from passing cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are mostly (upper) middle aged men trying to feel young and adventurous again.

And no, cyclists should not use the sidewalk. The problem is that our sidewalks and roads were not built and designed for their habits. They want to share the road, but most don't follow laws or rules. There is also such a thing as going too slow - which by design, is a fact for many cyclists (and then they also exceed trail speed limits on local trails). It not conducive to a safe flow of things.

The same is true of drivers, of course.

My advice to you, as a fellow road user, is that, when you're driving, you should focus on driving in a lawful manner.

Oh, bull. The vast majority of drivers stop at red lights. Maintain a range of speed close to the speed limit (may go above, but in a reasonable range). Yield to pedestrians (I am one), drive the right way on roads (ie, not "salmoning") and follow road rules pretty closely. That's not true for cyclists and you know it. Making BS claims isn't helping the cause towards acceptance of cyclists.

Have you ever looked at drivers while they're driving? From my bike, I can see a lot of drivers using their phones while driving. Making BS claims isn't helping the cause towards acceptance of drivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Want to play a game of illegal things someone can do to put you at risk? Good luck on the receiving end of that. You're not invincible.

I'm a big proponent of biking, but I kind of agree with this PP: a biker who choses to bike down River Road at rush hour just can't expect 3 ft of clearance and big slow downs from passing cars.

+1

How very insanely entitled to think you can hold up dozens if not hundreds of people and then get upset when they actually treat you as another vehicle. The mind boggles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Want to play a game of illegal things someone can do to put you at risk? Good luck on the receiving end of that. You're not invincible.

I'm a big proponent of biking, but I kind of agree with this PP: a biker who choses to bike down River Road at rush hour just can't expect 3 ft of clearance and big slow downs from passing cars.

Realistically, you shouldn't expect it, because drivers don't do it. However, it is the law. I hope that every drivers who complains about bicyclists breaking the law is scrupulous about giving three feet of clearance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems pretty damn stupid to put your life on the line to get to work.

I'd either get a car like everyone else, or take a bus. But it's idiotic to risk your life (it it really IS that dangerous) just to get to work.

You can't tell me a bike is the ONLY option these people have. No one believes that.

Therefore it's a choice. And they are CHOOSING to risk their life to get to ....... their desk at work.


That's just F'ing stupid.


If I'm gonna risk my life, it'll be to save my kids or my wife. Not for getting to my job.

Pretty sure that more people die in car accidents than bike accidents....get your facts straight you nut job.

[Anonymous]

Has this already been discussed last year?