Passing or Not Passing Cyclists

[Anonymous]

do bicyclists have to stop at stop signs if they are riding on the road? Not a California stop, but a complete stop at each stop sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:do bicyclists have to stop at stop signs if they are riding on the road? Not a California stop, but a complete stop at each stop sign.

Of course they have to, if there are other vehicles or cyclists in or approaching the intersection. The ONLY circumstance where a cyclist is permitted by law to pedal through a stop sign (called an Idaho stop) after briefly slowing to check for any vehicles, is when no other vehicles, cyclists or pedestrians are anywhere in the intersection.

As for red lights, cyclists are required by law to stop and wait at red lights until the signal changes to green. Just like a car.



The law is clear a unambiguous on this. It’s not subject to argument or interpretation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am cyclist. They are not annoyed. They worry that you are. So if they signal you to pass and you don’t, in a way, they’d feel a bit better cause they gave you a chance to pass. They’ll probably try to give you other chances, not cause they’re annoyed with you, but when they see an opening.

Keep in mind, many cyclists are also drivers, so feel the pain on both sides.

As a driver, I also wouldn’t trust some random cyclist unless I was confident I could clear.

So, the idea of maybe pulling over for a minute and letting the line of slow traffic that has accumulated behind you go around you just never even materialized, huh?


Of course it didn’t.

DP -- I pull over behind parked cars when I'm on my bike if a car has been behind me without passing, and I see plenty of other cyclists doing the same.

I drive every day I have never once seen a cyclist do this. Anyone else care to chime in?

I've never seen this either. Rather, the exact opposite. Many insist on riding during rush hour.

+3 - absolutely NEVER seen that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am cyclist. They are not annoyed. They worry that you are. So if they signal you to pass and you don’t, in a way, they’d feel a bit better cause they gave you a chance to pass. They’ll probably try to give you other chances, not cause they’re annoyed with you, but when they see an opening.

Keep in mind, many cyclists are also drivers, so feel the pain on both sides.

As a driver, I also wouldn’t trust some random cyclist unless I was confident I could clear.

So, the idea of maybe pulling over for a minute and letting the line of slow traffic that has accumulated behind you go around you just never even materialized, huh?


Of course it didn’t.

DP -- I pull over behind parked cars when I'm on my bike if a car has been behind me without passing, and I see plenty of other cyclists doing the same.

I drive every day I have never once seen a cyclist do this. Anyone else care to chime in?

I've never seen this either. Rather, the exact opposite. Many insist on riding during rush hour.

Yes, cyclists insist on riding during rush hour because they’re commuting to or from work, the same reason so many drivers insist on driving during rush hour. But it’s still possible to swerve into the space behind a parked car and let a car go by.

Possible? Sure. Will they? Absolutely not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:do bicyclists have to stop at stop signs if they are riding on the road? Not a California stop, but a complete stop at each stop sign.

Of course they have to, if there are other vehicles or cyclists in or approaching the intersection. The ONLY circumstance where a cyclist is permitted by law to pedal through a stop sign (called an Idaho stop) after briefly slowing to check for any vehicles, is when no other vehicles, cyclists or pedestrians are anywhere in the intersection.

As for red lights, cyclists are required by law to stop and wait at red lights until the signal changes to green. Just like a car.



The law is clear a unambiguous on this. It’s not subject to argument or interpretation.

Cars also run stop signs, just fwiw, reading this thread you'd think only cyclists ever do it. I live at a corner with a four-way stop between two major commuting roads from Maryland into D.C., and I can't even bother counting the number of times people just roll right through it.

[Anonymous]

I think its hilarious drivers complaining about cyclists on Beach drive. If you are in a hurry then you should probably go for Plan B aka the highway. Also coming from Jones Bridge there are lights or stop signs about every 30 seconds so always amazed by the amount of drivers that are hellbent on speeding and getting around cyclists only to stop 10 seconds later at a light or stop sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am cyclist. They are not annoyed. They worry that you are. So if they signal you to pass and you don’t, in a way, they’d feel a bit better cause they gave you a chance to pass. They’ll probably try to give you other chances, not cause they’re annoyed with you, but when they see an opening.

Keep in mind, many cyclists are also drivers, so feel the pain on both sides.

As a driver, I also wouldn’t trust some random cyclist unless I was confident I could clear.

So, the idea of maybe pulling over for a minute and letting the line of slow traffic that has accumulated behind you go around you just never even materialized, huh?


Of course it didn’t.

DP -- I pull over behind parked cars when I'm on my bike if a car has been behind me without passing, and I see plenty of other cyclists doing the same.

I drive every day I have never once seen a cyclist do this. Anyone else care to chime in?

I've never seen this either. Rather, the exact opposite. Many insist on riding during rush hour.

Yes, cyclists insist on riding during rush hour because they’re commuting to or from work, the same reason so many drivers insist on driving during rush hour. But it’s still possible to swerve into the space behind a parked car and let a car go by.

Possible? Sure. Will they? Absolutely not.

I do this multiple times whenever I commute by bike, for whatever that's worth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the road is that dangerous that you don’t feel comfortable passing them, people shouldn’t be cycling on it. Pure entitlement and selfishness.

They can move over so you can pass. Also, if the road is so dangerous you probably shouldn’t be driving that much faster than they’re going, anyway.

There's no shoulder on Beach at all. The roads are wind-y so you can't see oncoming traffic to know if it's safe to pass.

Beach is not a commuter street. This stretch is closed three days of the week +holidays to bikers and pedestrians. The bikers on Beach are generally VERY fast and can nearly keep up with the speed limit.

No... they don't. They are happy to cycle anywhere from 8-15 mph, usually in pairs that take up the lane.

[Anonymous]

The worst is when you finally get a break in oncoming traffic and pass them, and then at the next stop sign, they zip past you without stopping and it starts all over again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just chiming in to say I hate the bikers on Beach and I scream at them (with my windows closed) to use the trail. Anyone saying the bike trail (that is RIGHT there) is unsuitable for bikes is ridiculous. It is much safer for them to ride on the trail. There is a lot of hubris that they must ignore the trail and ride on the road where passing is stressful and not passing is maddening.

Here’s the deal - I LIVE on the trail. It’s literally in my back yard. I also ride a bike - in my neighborhood and on the trail, but not on Beach when it’s open to cars. So I definitely speak from experience on this, certainly more so than most of you here.

The trail is NOT suitable for the kind of cycling most of these spandex clad idiots want to do. There’s too many people (like me) walking their dogs, pushing strollers, walking, jogging, or (like me) slowly riding a slow mountain bike. The trail is only about 8 feet wide. It’s too narrow to allow them to pass at the speeds they want to ride. It’s also very bumpy and very slippery in some places, so riding fast on the trail is not only uncomfortable but it will probably result in a crash on a slippery spot.

For these cyclists, who want to ride fast (for a bike “fast”) you can’t do it on that trail. It’s basically impossible.


And yes, I hate them too, even though I own a bike myself.

So, bikers don't want to use the bike path because they can't go as fast as want, but it's OK for them to use the roads, even though doing so forces the cars to drive considerably slower than the speed limit. So only cyclists (and I guess, dog walkers) get their way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just chiming in to say I hate the bikers on Beach and I scream at them (with my windows closed) to use the trail. Anyone saying the bike trail (that is RIGHT there) is unsuitable for bikes is ridiculous. It is much safer for them to ride on the trail. There is a lot of hubris that they must ignore the trail and ride on the road where passing is stressful and not passing is maddening.

Here’s the deal - I LIVE on the trail. It’s literally in my back yard. I also ride a bike - in my neighborhood and on the trail, but not on Beach when it’s open to cars. So I definitely speak from experience on this, certainly more so than most of you here.

The trail is NOT suitable for the kind of cycling most of these spandex clad idiots want to do. There’s too many people (like me) walking their dogs, pushing strollers, walking, jogging, or (like me) slowly riding a slow mountain bike. The trail is only about 8 feet wide. It’s too narrow to allow them to pass at the speeds they want to ride. It’s also very bumpy and very slippery in some places, so riding fast on the trail is not only uncomfortable but it will probably result in a crash on a slippery spot.

For these cyclists, who want to ride fast (for a bike “fast”) you can’t do it on that trail. It’s basically impossible.


And yes, I hate them too, even though I own a bike myself.

So, bikers don't want to use the bike path because they can't go as fast as want, but it's OK for them to use the roads, even though doing so forces the cars to drive considerably slower than the speed limit. So only cyclists (and I guess, dog walkers) get their way.

This is a surprise to you? The powers that be took away an entire lane from Old Georgetown Rd to use as a bike lane - took 1/3 of available lanes from a road that had major conjestion when all 3 lanes were available... and there are barely any bikes on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just chiming in to say I hate the bikers on Beach and I scream at them (with my windows closed) to use the trail. Anyone saying the bike trail (that is RIGHT there) is unsuitable for bikes is ridiculous. It is much safer for them to ride on the trail. There is a lot of hubris that they must ignore the trail and ride on the road where passing is stressful and not passing is maddening.

Here’s the deal - I LIVE on the trail. It’s literally in my back yard. I also ride a bike - in my neighborhood and on the trail, but not on Beach when it’s open to cars. So I definitely speak from experience on this, certainly more so than most of you here.

The trail is NOT suitable for the kind of cycling most of these spandex clad idiots want to do. There’s too many people (like me) walking their dogs, pushing strollers, walking, jogging, or (like me) slowly riding a slow mountain bike. The trail is only about 8 feet wide. It’s too narrow to allow them to pass at the speeds they want to ride. It’s also very bumpy and very slippery in some places, so riding fast on the trail is not only uncomfortable but it will probably result in a crash on a slippery spot.

For these cyclists, who want to ride fast (for a bike “fast”) you can’t do it on that trail. It’s basically impossible.


And yes, I hate them too, even though I own a bike myself.

So, bikers don't want to use the bike path because they can't go as fast as want, but it's OK for them to use the roads, even though doing so forces the cars to drive considerably slower than the speed limit. So only cyclists (and I guess, dog walkers) get their way.

You really need to learn how to take “yes” for an answer.

I agree with you, dummy! I said I don’t like them either - despite being a rider myself. I was simply explaining WHY they won’t ride on the multi-use path and instead ride in the road.

FFS

[Anonymous]

Why is it that cyclists get to ring a bell to have pedestrians scatter out of their way on the side walk but cars have to remain behind the cyclist in the lane? Shouldn't cyclists on sidewalks have to follow the same rules as cars on roads as the faster object?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that cyclists get to ring a bell to have pedestrians scatter out of their way on the side walk but cars have to remain behind the cyclist in the lane? Shouldn't cyclists on sidewalks have to follow the same rules as cars on roads as the faster object?

Cyclists are often not allowed to be on sidewalks. The bells aren't "to have pedestrians scatter," they're so people know the bicycle is there — if you're using it correctly, you would ring it before passing someone, then pass them by going around them (not by having them get out of your way), and you wouldn't be on the sidewalk.

Cars don't HAVE to remain behind cyclists; several cyclists in this thread have said cars should pass them. But apparently some drivers prefer to go really slowly in order to harass cyclists and/or to make other drivers annoyed at them.

[Anonymous]

Do you know anyone who survived a crash from a car while biking without major injuries? I don’t! And I know 2 that were killed. I don't know why people would continue to do this.