Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

Because a lot of cyclists think they own the road they pedal on and think they are above the law..

Well they are sponsored by top brands. Put on those sponsor clothes and do whatever they please.

Here are the 3 categories of bicyclists I mainly see:

1. low-income men biking to get from Point A to Point B, on the sidewalk.

2. middle-class people biking to get from Point A to Point B, in the road or on the sidewalk.

3. kids, mostly on the sidewalk.

I guess it's true about people on bikes being invisible.

We come out of nowhere...

:steps back into the corn:

Anonymous wrote:I've never seen a fellow cyclist run a stop sign or red light. It just flat doesn't happen. This whole thing is a myth.

I’ve seen cyclists do this when I’ve been on my bike, and when I’ve been in my car or on foot. I’ve also seen cars do it. It certainly happens. The difference is that some drivers appear only to see cyclists when we do something memorably dangerous, which is why you get people in threads like this insisting that EVERY cyclist breaks the law all the time and with flagrant impunity.

Obviously you should stop for buses and stop signs in any vehicle.

The worst bike crash I ever had, meanwhile, was when a young kid dashed out into the street off the sidewalk between two parked cars in the middle of the block. I saw her in time to slam on my brakes and basically deliberately wipe out so I didn’t hit her. It was a blast. (Had to get a new helmet.) So let’s call it a wash karmically — I crashed my bike into the ground once to avoid hitting a kid who shouldn’t have been in the street and that makes up for the cyclist OP saw.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate it when cyclists riding think that they have the rights of pedestrians in crosswalks and come flying across, auto traffic notwithstanding. It happens a lot by the Lincoln Memorial and the Mall. If a rider dismounts, he is a pedestrian. Otherwise, vehicle rules apply and the rider must yield.

No, that's incorrect.

In DC, when a person is riding in the crosswalk, they have all of the rights and responsibilities of a pedestrian, except that bicyclists must yield the right-of-way to pedestrians (Section 1201.11). That is, a driver must yield to a bicyclist in the crosswalk just as a driver must yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk.

I actually had a cop explain this to me once when I was on my bike waiting in a crosswalk for a car to go by — the cop yelled at me that I should have gone and the car would have had to stop. I told him I thought I had to yield, he said no. I was mostly annoyed that he yelled at me, and I also was pretty sure he was wrong, but when I looked it up later, I realized he was right.

Anonymous wrote:Do red flashing school bus lights apply to cyclists? In traffic on MacArthur I just saw a speeding cyclist pass a school bus on the left while it was loading kids. An accident would have been as devastating as with a car for the kid. One more reason to hate them.

“I saw a bike rider do a bad thing once so I hate them all” is a hell of an attitude,

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

Because a lot of cyclists think they own the road they pedal on and think they are above the law..

Well they are sponsored by top brands. Put on those sponsor clothes and do whatever they please.

Here are the 3 categories of bicyclists I mainly see:

1. low-income men biking to get from Point A to Point B, on the sidewalk.

2. middle-class people biking to get from Point A to Point B, in the road or on the sidewalk.

3. kids, mostly on the sidewalk.

I guess it's true about people on bikes being invisible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

Because a lot of cyclists think they own the road they pedal on and think they are above the law..

Well they are sponsored by top brands. Put on those sponsor clothes and do whatever they please.

Let's see, in the last couple of days I saw drivers : run a red, make a left when the no left red arrow was lit, go straight from a turn only lane, make an illegal u turn, and park in a "protected" bike lane.

Thats not even counting all the times they block crosswalks while waiting to make a right on red, or block curb cuts in front of apartment buildings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

Because a lot of cyclists think they own the road they pedal on and think they are above the law..

Nope.

But today I heard from somebody who was furious that, while driving in their neighborhood, they had to slam on the brakes at a busy trail crossing, where there are crosswalk markings and the signs say "Stop here for pedestrians and bicyclists" and "State law stop for pedestrians and bicyclists in crosswalks," in order to avoid hitting a person on a bicycle who was legally crossing the road in the trail crossing. This person thought that people on bicycles should have to stop and let the people in cars go by, instead of people in cars having to stop to let the people on bicycles cross.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

It's not really a question. It's an attack by a drivist who saw a bicyclist do something rude/risky to children. I'm confident that the drivist sees plenty of bad behaviors from fellow drivists and doesn't come running to DCUM.

So funny.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

Because a lot of cyclists think they own the road they pedal on and think they are above the law..

Well they are sponsored by top brands. Put on those sponsor clothes and do whatever they please.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

Because a lot of cyclists think they own the road they pedal on and think they are above the law..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

It's not really a question. It's an attack by a drivist who saw a bicyclist do something rude/risky to children. I'm confident that the drivist sees plenty of bad behaviors from fellow drivists and doesn't come running to DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:As a cyclist I just assume they apply to me and stop for them.

Agree--also a cyclist. How is this a question?

I dont know about cyclist ad buses but I am so careful that I stop for kids when I walk pass the buss.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, if your problem is that PP said "EVERY multilane road" I would tend to agree. I would not pass a policy for converting one lane to bike lanes on EVERY multilane road. I would look at conditions on specific roads. Thankfully that is what WABA and other local bike advocacy groups call for, what DDOT and most suburban transport depts are doing.

If only they were. But they're not.

Hmm. Arlington and Alexandria are. MoCo has a ways to go but is doing some good stuff in downtown Silver Spring. Even Fairfax is making some improvements here and there. Falls Church seems focused on widening the W&OD.

Certainly none of them are doing it on every road, which is what PP feared. I mean I can see frustration with slow implementation. But I think its entirely correct to say that they look at conditions on specific roads.

And then there's the whole rest of the county, where the number of general-travel lanes converted to bike lanes is zero.

Isn't there a nice PBL up near Pike and Rose? Maybe it wasn't converted from general travel lanes?

Anyway, this again misses my point in response to the other PP.

No.

If your point is that nobody is proposing a wholesale conversation of general travel lanes to protected bike lanes - that is, unfortunately, true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, if your problem is that PP said "EVERY multilane road" I would tend to agree. I would not pass a policy for converting one lane to bike lanes on EVERY multilane road. I would look at conditions on specific roads. Thankfully that is what WABA and other local bike advocacy groups call for, what DDOT and most suburban transport depts are doing.

If only they were. But they're not.

Hmm. Arlington and Alexandria are. MoCo has a ways to go but is doing some good stuff in downtown Silver Spring. Even Fairfax is making some improvements here and there. Falls Church seems focused on widening the W&OD.

Certainly none of them are doing it on every road, which is what PP feared. I mean I can see frustration with slow implementation. But I think its entirely correct to say that they look at conditions on specific roads.

And then there's the whole rest of the county, where the number of general-travel lanes converted to bike lanes is zero.

Isn't there a nice PBL up near Pike and Rose? Maybe it wasn't converted from general travel lanes?

Anyway, this again misses my point in response to the other PP.