Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there is a bike path, why do they need to be on the road. I am all for sharing the road where there is no lane or path for bikes. The fact that the path is not in good condition for riding shouldn't be an excuse. The roads are not in ultimate conditions and cars still need to use them. Also, that the path is being used by walkers and other bikers is not a good excuse either. Roads are full of cars and they are still used by cars.

Yes it is a good excuse. Pedestrian paths are riskier because you have kids who have no idea about safety, joggers with earbuds who can't hear any warnings, people stopping abruptly and turning around on the path with no thought that a bicycle might be coming their way.

Anyone with some common sense knows that the bigger risk is a bike-pedestrian collision.

Let's get right to it: you don't like the inconvenience of the cyclists.[u] Sure, there are some safety issues.but they are your red herring. Cyclist/Car collisions on MacArthur are as rare as hen's teeth. Stop the nonsense.

Actually, the signs on McArthur's path says "Bike path" not pedestrian. Kids who have no idea about safety, say something about their parents and besides, they should always be accompanied by them. Cyclists are not an inconvenience. Like I said, I'm all for road sharing. I don't mind waiting. However, where there is a path for bicycle use, it should be USED! Everything mentioned about the path just doesn't make sense to me, including the ones you listed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there is a bike path, why do they need to be on the road. I am all for sharing the road where there is no lane or path for bikes. The fact that the path is not in good condition for riding shouldn't be an excuse. The roads are not in ultimate conditions and cars still need to use them. Also, that the path is being used by walkers and other bikers is not a good excuse either. Roads are full of cars and they are still used by cars.

Yes it is a good excuse. Pedestrian paths are riskier because you have kids who have no idea about safety, joggers with earbuds who can't hear any warnings, people stopping abruptly and turning around on the path with no thought that a bicycle might be coming their way.

Anyone with some common sense knows that the bigger risk is a bike-pedestrian collision.

Let's get right to it: you don't like the inconvenience of the cyclists.[u] Sure, there are some safety issues.but they are your red herring. Cyclist/Car collisions on MacArthur are as rare as hen's teeth. Stop the nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's call it what it is. This is about drivers who are pissed that they have to slow down. Everything else is window-dressing.

Look how many drivers blow the speed limit on that road. Who are you to throw the rule books at the cyclists? Oh the safety the safety you say. Right.

Even if that is true--and I'll admit, I absolutely get pissed off at having to drive 10 mph in a 25 zone because some weekend warrior is too cool for the bike path--so what? That's a perfectly natural and defensible reaction. How would cyclists feel if they had to ride behind pedestrians for 3 minutes at a time at a walking pace until it was safe to pass? To say nothing of the many near misses I've endured from cyclists as a pedestrian in a crosswalk? Get off your high horse. Speaking only for myself, I always give cyclists a wide berth, even if it is very frustrating, but it should be a two-way street.

You just hit on one of the reasons why cyclists ride on the road instead of the bike path along MacArthur, in Rock Creek, and other places. The paths are multi-use and if it's not pedestrians walking two, three, four abreast, it's someone with a dog on a retractable leash or a kid weaving around on a tricycle that cyclists often get caught behind until it's safe to pass. And yes, it can be a couple of minutes. For all the people who are anti-cyclist on MacArthur, where would you have people ride? The bike paths really are not conducive to riding for exercise -- if you don't believe me, go out and try to really ride -- so what other solutions are out there? People have already said Glen Echo killed bike lanes. Where do you want people to ride?

Anonymous wrote:I loathe bikers on the roads. ... They take the right of way rather than yield the right of way. !

My four year old was hit by a bike on the sidewalk near the zoo. I was holding his hand and the bike came up behind us screaming "passing!". He hit my son before I could figure out what was going on.

Whenever and wherever I pass a biker in traffic I always hug the curb afterwards which forces them to stop or pass me on the left, risking their lives. F them.


I think I'm going to start doing exactly that

Anonymous wrote:I didn't see any bikers complaining that they had to slow down for pedestrians? Where are those comments, please? I saw pedestrians upset that bikers were actually riding bikes on the bike path.

Whenever and wherever I pass a biker in traffic I always hug the curb afterwards which forces them to stop or pass me on the left, risking their lives. F them.

Velodromes. Build them. Stop endangering pedestrians on Beach Drive on weekends, joggers and kids on Capital Crescent Trail and drivers on curvy MacArthur Blvd. You are a narcissistic menace, you need to be in your own space.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it funny that the bikers complain about having to slow down for pedestrians but think drivers shouldn't complain about having to slow down for them?

Bikers are terrifying on the bike paths, screaming "On your right," and then almost knock you over.