[Akhenaten]

ASLplease ASLplease:

An ignorant cyclist puts his own life at risk. But, an ignorant driver puts the lives of all cyclists at risk. With the safety of a 2 ton shield comes the responsibility to not use it as a weapon.

I've seen you try, here and there throughout the thread, to bring up the fact that although this cyclist is a bad example, and other bad examples exist, that at the end of the day there are many more examples of every day drivers putting cyclists at risk just because they're too pigish to share the road with anyone let alone a cyclist. If that point is in you somewhere waiting for the right opportunity to come out I just want to say, I agree 100%. When I used to commute by bike pretty much every day there would be some bozo who would cut me off or pass me by inches as if to try and bully me off the road.
There's a catch 22 when one learns to drive. If they learn properly then the car just becomes an extension of their body. This is desired, unfortunately all too often it also becomes an extension of their body language. So when they want to get pushy-shovey with you while safe behind their tempered glass and steel they use their cars to do it and then drive off knowing (thinking) they'll never have to face any consequences. That's why occasionally you're going to get a cyclist (not like this one) who has, perhaps legitimately, decided that some driver has just threatened their life or limb. It's at that point that an otherwise mild mannered cyclist can turn into a raving lunatic ready to maim.

I've been there.

[ASLplease]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

ASLplease ASLplease:

An ignorant cyclist puts his own life at risk. But, an ignorant driver puts the lives of all cyclists at risk. With the safety of a 2 ton shield comes the responsibility to not use it as a weapon.

What's funny is, the cyclist, by making the choice he did, created the weapon and used it against himself.

for the sake of conversation, lets assume you are correct in saying the cyclist 'created the weapon'

the driver also created a weapon when he recklessly smashed into the bicycle. and at what point was this weapon uncreated? Is a weapon not a weapon when it is used to flee a crime scene? Or when it is used to kill a person that is trying to stop you from leaving a crime scene?

[Yogi]

ASLplease ASLplease:

An ignorant cyclist puts his own life at risk. But, an ignorant driver puts the lives of all cyclists at risk. With the safety of a 2 ton shield comes the responsibility to not use it as a weapon.

No! Only the cyclists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. Same way an ignorant cyclist is a danger to all motorists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. ie; I have had to 'swerve suddenly' to avoid an ignorant cyclist, putting myself, my passengers, pedestrians and other drivers/passengers at risk because of the ignorance and selfishness of a single cyclist!
Face it. It cuts both ways. There are ignorant cyclists, but not many by comparison, and their are ignorant motorists, again not many by comparison, but when 'the two meet' inevitabley, the outcome is tragic, more often than not for the cyclist. Until such time as everyone using the roadways realise that the laws do apply to them and start following them such situations will continue to happen. Everyone using the roadways has the responsibility to do so in a safe and courteous manner!

[Akhenaten]

Yogi Yogi:

ASLplease ASLplease:

An ignorant cyclist puts his own life at risk. But, an ignorant driver puts the lives of all cyclists at risk. With the safety of a 2 ton shield comes the responsibility to not use it as a weapon.

No! Only the cyclists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. Same way an ignorant cyclist is a danger to all motorists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. ie; I have had to 'swerve suddenly' to avoid an ignorant cyclist, putting myself, my passengers, pedestrians and other drivers/passengers at risk because of the ignorance and selfishness of a single cyclist!
Face it. It cuts both ways. There are ignorant cyclists, but not many by comparison, and their are ignorant motorists, again not many by comparison, but when 'the two meet' inevitabley, the outcome is tragic, more often than not for the cyclist. Until such time as everyone using the roadways realise that the laws do apply to them and start following them such situations will continue to happen. Everyone using the roadways has the responsibility to do so in a safe and courteous manner!

This is all true, except that if the motorist decides to use his vehicle as a weapon they're at great advantage. It's also, imo, more likely they will do something stupid with their vehicle because they think they're immune to retribution. Hit-and-runs are very common between cyclists and motorists. If a motorist hits a car he pretty much has to stop because too much evidence will be present on both cars. If a motorist cuts off a biker or swirves into him without looking, they can run off and they know they have a pretty goo chance of getting away with it.

[QBall]

Yogi Yogi:

Quit being obtuse! ( Much as I like the word obtuse, I think the word 'DINK' is more fitting, but lest I be accused of flaming or such...)

How about dense?

This Nancy person obviously has an agenda to push, and any rational argument is pointless as she is going to spin it or throw out red herrings to try and promote it. Why this thread has gone on for this long when we're stuck on the merry-go-round is beyond me. This is not an issue about cyclists vs. motorists, as this situation is so bizarre and unique it's pointless for either side to take this up to support their cause. This is not how the average cyclist acts and this is not a situation the average motorist encounters.

[Akhenaten]

QBall QBall:

Yogi Yogi:

Quit being obtuse! ( Much as I like the word obtuse, I think the word 'DINK' is more fitting, but lest I be accused of flaming or such...)

How about dense?

This Nancy person obviously has an agenda to push, and any rational argument is pointless as she is going to spin it or throw out red herrings to try and promote it. Why this thread has gone on for this long when we're stuck on the merry-go-round is beyond me. This is not an issue about cyclists vs. motorists, as this situation is so bizarre and unique it's pointless for either side to take this up to support their cause. This is not how the average cyclist acts and this is not a situation the average motorist encounters.

Yep.

[ASLplease]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

When I used to commute by bike pretty much every day there would be some bozo who would cut me off or pass me by inches as if to try and bully me off the road.

All too often, they believe that they have a right to do that. They have lost all perspective towards safety and courtesy.

[ASLplease]

Yogi Yogi:

ASLplease ASLplease:

An ignorant cyclist puts his own life at risk. But, an ignorant driver puts the lives of all cyclists at risk. With the safety of a 2 ton shield comes the responsibility to not use it as a weapon.

No! Only the cyclists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. Same way an ignorant cyclist is a danger to all motorists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. ie; I have had to 'swerve suddenly' to avoid an ignorant cyclist, putting myself, my passengers, pedestrians and other drivers/passengers at risk because of the ignorance and selfishness of a single cyclist!
Face it. It cuts both ways. There are ignorant cyclists, but not many by comparison, and their are ignorant motorists, again not many by comparison, but when 'the two meet' inevitabley, the outcome is tragic, more often than not for the cyclist. Until such time as everyone using the roadways realise that the laws do apply to them and start following them such situations will continue to happen. Everyone using the roadways has the responsibility to do so in a safe and courteous manner!

a cyclist getting in close proximity to a parked car doesn't lead to fatalities.

a car getting in close proximity to a parked cycle does.

[Yogi]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Yogi Yogi:

ASLplease ASLplease:

An ignorant cyclist puts his own life at risk. But, an ignorant driver puts the lives of all cyclists at risk. With the safety of a 2 ton shield comes the responsibility to not use it as a weapon.

No! Only the cyclists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. Same way an ignorant cyclist is a danger to all motorists whom he/she is in close proximity to at any given time. ie; I have had to 'swerve suddenly' to avoid an ignorant cyclist, putting myself, my passengers, pedestrians and other drivers/passengers at risk because of the ignorance and selfishness of a single cyclist!
Face it. It cuts both ways. There are ignorant cyclists, but not many by comparison, and their are ignorant motorists, again not many by comparison, but when 'the two meet' inevitabley, the outcome is tragic, more often than not for the cyclist. Until such time as everyone using the roadways realise that the laws do apply to them and start following them such situations will continue to happen. Everyone using the roadways has the responsibility to do so in a safe and courteous manner!

This is all true, except that if the motorist decides to use his vehicle as a weapon they're at great advantage. It's also, imo, more likely they will do something stupid with their vehicle because they think they're immune to retribution. Hit-and-runs are very common between cyclists and motorists. If a motorist hits a car he pretty much has to stop because too much evidence will be present on both cars. If a motorist cuts off a biker or swirves into him without looking, they can run off and they know they have a pretty goo chance of getting away with it.

And we all know that whenever a cyclist hits and causes damage to a motor vehicle, attended or otherwise, that they stop and provide all the necessary information rather than 'taking off' leaving the vehicle owner to pay for the damages!( As was the case with my wifes 2004 Cavalier. Maaco quoted me $200 to repair the small dent and $2,000 to 'clearcoat' the car!)

[Akhenaten]

Yogi Yogi:

Face it. It cuts both ways. There are ignorant cyclists, but not many by comparison, and their are ignorant motorists, again not many by comparison, but when 'the two meet' inevitabley, the outcome is tragic, more often than not for the cyclist. Until such time as everyone using the roadways realise that the laws do apply to them and start following them such situations will continue to happen. Everyone using the roadways has the responsibility to do so in a safe and courteous manner!

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

This is all true, except that if the motorist decides to use his vehicle as a weapon they're at great advantage. It's also, imo, more likely they will do something stupid with their vehicle because they think they're immune to retribution. Hit-and-runs are very common between cyclists and motorists. If a motorist hits a car he pretty much has to stop because too much evidence will be present on both cars. If a motorist cuts off a biker or swirves into him without looking, they can run off and they know they have a pretty goo chance of getting away with it.

Yogi Yogi:

And we all know that whenever a cyclist hits and causes damage to a motor vehicle, attended or otherwise, that they stop and provide all the necessary information rather than 'taking off' leaving the vehicle owner to pay for the damages!( As was the case with my wifes 2004 Cavalier. Maaco quoted me $200 to repair the small dent and $2,000 to 'clearcoat' the car!)

That really sucks. I mean it. However, you're alive to bitch about it aren't you? $2000 is peanuts compared to spending the rest of your life as a shopping cart which is exactly what that 'small dent' might mean if a cyclist is on the recieving end. Just sayin'. Some people have suggested that cyclists should have licence plates present for just this circumstance and I agree. However I dont think that'll stop motorist vs cyclist hit-and-runs. Cars already have plates and they get away with that in droves.

[ASLplease]

the law states that the cyclist must ride to the right unless unsafe to do so.
and the law states that the motorist must keep a safe distance away from the cyclist but doesn't give a specific distance. ( many areas are settling on a 3 foot rule)

- the problem occurs when the cyclist is riding to the right on a lane that is not wide enough for the car to pass while maintaining a safe distance away. Many ( not just a small group) motorist can not recognize this situation and will motor on past at an unsafe distance.

What should we do?

if motorists won't educate themselves, do we really want the cyclist to move further to the left and take the lane?

thats what some of them are doing, and its the motorist's fault.

[Yogi]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Yogi Yogi:

Face it. It cuts both ways. There are ignorant cyclists, but not many by comparison, and their are ignorant motorists, again not many by comparison, but when 'the two meet' inevitabley, the outcome is tragic, more often than not for the cyclist. Until such time as everyone using the roadways realise that the laws do apply to them and start following them such situations will continue to happen. Everyone using the roadways has the responsibility to do so in a safe and courteous manner!

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

This is all true, except that if the motorist decides to use his vehicle as a weapon they're at great advantage. It's also, imo, more likely they will do something stupid with their vehicle because they think they're immune to retribution. Hit-and-runs are very common between cyclists and motorists. If a motorist hits a car he pretty much has to stop because too much evidence will be present on both cars. If a motorist cuts off a biker or swirves into him without looking, they can run off and they know they have a pretty goo chance of getting away with it.

Yogi Yogi:

And we all know that whenever a cyclist hits and causes damage to a motor vehicle, attended or otherwise, that they stop and provide all the necessary information rather than 'taking off' leaving the vehicle owner to pay for the damages!( As was the case with my wifes 2004 Cavalier. Maaco quoted me $200 to repair the small dent and $2,000 to 'clearcoat' the car!)

That really sucks. I mean it. However, you're alive to bitch about it aren't you? $2000 is peanuts compared to spending the rest of your life as a shopping cart which is exactly what that 'small dent' might mean if a cyclist is on the recieving end. Just sayin'. Some people have suggested that cyclists should have licence plates present for just this circumstance and I agree. However I dont think that'll stop motorist vs cyclist hit-and-runs. Cars already have plates and they get away with that in droves.

I believe that I was the first one to advocate 'plates for bikes' here, as I have tried also with local pols, with little success. This incident ( no pun intended) was the instigating factor!

[ASLplease]

Yogi Yogi:

And we all know that whenever a cyclist hits and causes damage to a motor vehicle, attended or otherwise, that they stop and provide all the necessary information rather than 'taking off' leaving the vehicle owner to pay for the damages!( As was the case with my wifes 2004 Cavalier. Maaco quoted me $200 to repair the small dent and $2,000 to 'clearcoat' the car!)

This morning I was riding along at 6 A.M. Down xxxxxxxxxx Boul. and some guy in a big one ton Dodge pickup was stopped at my right, waiting for me to go through the intersection...just as I passed in front of his vehicle he honked and then when I rode down the pathway beside the road, he slowed down and glared at me. I looked over at him and yelled "what's wrong with you, something wrong...What?"...he then sped away driving like a maniac down the centre of the street. This sure was strange...perhaps he missed his meds.

Don't assume I am just an Anti-Automobile bigot running off at the mouth. I drive When necessary. I even drive more often than necessary. It's just that I have found that the definition of "Necessary" varies dramatically from person to person. Biking is just more fun".

How many motorists hate their morning commute? I don't.

[Akhenaten]

Yogi Yogi:

I believe that I was the first one to advocate 'plates for bikes' here, as I have tried also with local pols, with little success. This incident ( no pun intended) was the instigating factor!

Ok but....
If cyclists get those plates Yogi does that mean all the legitamate complants of motorist bullying will vanish? I doubt it. This I think is the underlying point behind some people who want to, not defend this cyclist, but point out that completely normal peaceful nice people can turn into raving murderous maniacs if some ignorant driver cut in front of them or otherwise risked their life just because they want to be 3 seconds fast to work or they just figure, because they're inconvienent to them at the moment, that cyclists "just shouldn't be on the road".
When the adrenaline is up and you're convinced someone just put your life at risk, well you can get a little crazy. I've seen middle aged moms threaten violence in that circumstance. The driver thinks that all they did was cut someone off, they don't realize they may have risked someone's life (or sometimes they do and don't care). That attitude is all to common and regular otherwise reasonable people express that attitude too often in dangerous ways.

[ASLplease]

plates are a non issue with me. I already have to go down to the registries once a year for my truck. it would be no inconvenience for me.