I Shall Not Appease Motorists!!!

Whaa whaa, I have the right to hold up the flow of traffic, >>>Flame Removed<<<

That's what this thread is all about.

- - - Updated - - -

Take your own advice.

 

I don't find most cities to be that bad. I find rural areas to be far worse. As for bridges, I ride on the sidewalk -- whether it's illegal or not -- unless it has a bike lane.

I sometimes see families out biking along rural roads, which often basically highways, I get very nervous when passing them. On the other hand, they shouldn't have to bike on the gravel shoulder.

- - - Updated - - -

The fat, pasty white driver who can't even walk a block is the epitome of machismo... apparently.

To answer your question: yes, bikes are gay. Before cars were invented, everyone was gay. Only after the invention of the Automobile was heterosexuality discovered, and procreation could commence.

 

I'll say what ever I choose too say, If you don't like it feel free to go tattle. I could careless. My point still stands.

 

It is perfectly legal for someone to smoke, but they take their lives in the hands when they do. It is the same thing with riding bikes on public highways.

You are guaranteed that you will be encountering other people, and it is pretty common knowledge that roads are filled with idiots. Sucks we are not more bike friendly, but at the same time, there is a cost-benefit analysis when it comes to retrofitting infrastructure. It is getting to be a chore just to keep roads able to handle current traffic loads.

 

Sort of. In FL, if a bike can't maintain the speed of traffic they are required to either ride in the bike lane (if available) or as far to the right as practically possible.

http://floridabicycle.org/bicycle-traffic-law/

 

Bikes are prohibited on most public limited-access highways. If you are referring to public roads, you won't win that argument. Bikes are legal on public roads. Period. We don't care what kind of "chore" it is to keep roads able to handle traffic loads. Striping a road for bike usage is cheap compared to road maintenance.

"Practically" is up to the interpretation of the CYCLIST, not the motorist. The cyclist's safety supercedes a motorist's expediency. You will never win that battle in court. The laws were written as such very deliberately.

 

And they stripe the road on curb side so bikes have to deal with doors and traffic. You should really support them being all pro-cheap bike lanes .

some public roads, not all public roads. As I indicated earlier, my city is filled with "No pedestrians, bicycles, scooters" type signage, not just highways.

 

I ride in the bike lane where possible.. but I have to ride on the far left edge of the lane to avoid the door zone.

No. Bicycles are legal on public roads unless otherwise noted. That is EXACTLY why the signs for "No bicycles" are required.

 

Beat me to the response. Just get off the road, let the traffic pass and then go about your cycling.

 

And where shall I go? I have a right to get to work. I don't need to get off the road to save you 15 seconds.

 

So he proved you wrong and then you just HAD to throw in a jab about AZ. How very lib of you. Seems that you have angered a few people on this thread with your sense of entitlement. Keep up the good work!

 

Yea, how lib to admit my interpretation of motor vehicle was incorrect (and I explained the reason why).

Oh yea, here we go again. Following the vehicle traffic laws is entitlement.

 

Consideration needs to flow both ways. Take the lane when needed then back to a place where traffic can safely flow around you when it is possible.

 

While you are reducing the amount of smog into the atmosphere. You are doubling the amount SMUG! Please don't lose control of your bicycle while patting yourself on the back.

 

No, what made it lib was dishing out a dig on AZ before admitting it.

 

Unfortunately it looks like the old 'I'm entitled so frick you' attitude is rearing its ugly head. Cycling is great, it truly is BUT have the decency to not intentionally (*)(*)(*)(*) off the others on the road by not pulling over and letting them pass. Before you know it some State is going to restrict the use of bicycles on public roads to between 8:30AM and 3:30PM and then anytime 7PM - 6AM M-F for the public safety.

 

No, that will not happen. Additional rules will not be made up for the convenience of entitled motorists.

- - - Updated - - -

Correct.

I'll admit it. I have no problem calling out conservative states on their regression. I have no reservations about ragging on Arizona with their anti-gay legislature. But hey, who's counting?

 

I dont get why its so hard to be curtious on a bike. As someone who primarily drives but sometimes bikes I really find it easy to stay off 35 mph roads, use bikelanes, and follow the same traffic rules I do in my car. I also find it easy to not pull infront of every one at a stop light; ensuring that traffic will move slowly and everyone will have to pass me again because I'm a prick. I find it equally easy not to go uphill on a 35 mph road when a bike road exists one block north. I also dont use that same road during rush hour, again despite thd fact that there is a bike road 1 block over. Not sure why others do this stuff but Id say ticket them for impeding traffic.

 

For all of macho drivers that think bikes should not get in their way lets apply some common sense. Probably 90% of the people driving to work are not driving on two lane roads in the cities. That means that when they come up on a cyclist going to work also, just move completely over into the left lane and pass.

- - - Updated - - -

Really macho men dont need no steenkin motor!!!!!!

 

Unless of course you are on a 35, the left lane has traffic and the bicyclist who for whatever reason decided that going 20 under during rush hour was just fine is preventing you from going around them.

 

The attitude seems to be 1) because I'm Entitled 2) because I can 3) go Frick yourself or 4) some combination of the three. Just pull over and let traffic pass, EVERYONE would be a lot happier in the long run.

 

Why the hurry? If a cyclist slows you down for a couple of minutes has your life been ruined for ever? If a road is legal for cyclists to ride on then they have every right to ride as slow or as fast as they like. A little more courtesy and consideration from impatient idiots in their cars would help.

 

Well, there are mountain passes that are pretty narrow.... I imagine the ride is lovely with the scenic views... buuuuutttttttt, it is very narrow. With many blind corners.

 

How about some courtesy from bicyclists in the form of not going down roads with posted speeds you cant match? How hard is it to use a side street? Thats what I do and I make it around just fine. No one ever honks at me because Im not out there impedeing traffic.

 

All the the roads outside of town are 45-65mph.

Soooooooo... I may have a right to occupy the lane, but that would be a stupid thing to do. Especially going 25-30mph tops and 10mpg uphill and against the wind.