Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition
-
Last night I was riding my bike around my neighborhood. It's a horseshoe-shaped street (with no sidewalks) that no one has any business being on unless they live there - so traffic is very light. I was about two feet from the right curb with 30 feet of empty road to my left. I heard a car behind me - but it never passed. A few hundred feet up the road, it's still behind me. Suddenly, the car swing around me (fine), pulls back to the right, gets his fender in front of me and slows down enough so I have to get on the brakes to avoid hitting him.
WTF did he expect me to do? How exactly did I piss him off? Did he want me to ride into the grass? Maybe speed up to 30mph?
-
WTF did he expect me to do? How exactly did I piss him off? Did he want me to ride into the grass? Maybe speed up to 30mph?
Some people are just gigantic assholes.
-
I do come across the occasional spandex idiot riding in the road, though. They can't even keep up on a relatively slow stretch of road (25-35MPH limits). Fuck those guys. If I pass one and then get back into the lane and stop at a red light, I make sure to get close to the curb so they can't pass me on the right. Because fuck those guys.
This.
I do the same thing. In my area, they are a plague. I live close to a college that has a cycling team, and those fucking bastards are always riding through my neighborhood. They will blow through stop signs in packs of ~100 dressed like shrink-wrapped fruit.
I try to inconvenience them as much as I possibly can. Including the time that I stopped at a stop sign, saw them coming and took my sweet ass time getting through the intersection to that they all had to stop.
I have also driven down the street in front of them at ~10mph just so they know the frustration of being behind someone who is going too slow for the traffic flow.
Most of the people who ride bikes in my area are Central American immigrants who can't afford a car. They aren't entitled assholes, however, and mainly ride on the sidewalks, so everyone gets along.
People who are riding for utility get a pass from me. Perhaps they cannot afford a car, maybe they are a HTO. I get that, and I give them a pass and a wide berth. But when people are riding around for fun or exercise and obstruct traffic because they think that everyone else should accommodate their hobby...fuck them. They can obey the traffic laws. They would get more exercise by stopping at traffic lights and stop signs anyway.
-
If they're obstructing traffic because there's no other option, that's one thing. If there's a bike path / sidewalk that's sitting empty right next to the road, they need to pull their heads out of their asses, too.
A couple of months ago, I was driving on a local "parkway" that's sort of a hybrid between big street and highway (depending on where you are). At one point, there was a path off the road, specially marked for bikes. One idiot was riding his bike in the right lane. THE SPEED LIMIT WAS 50MPH! He had no fucking business there.
-
The "dance" they were doing is deliberate. I sometimes ride well away from the kerb for the same purpose. The purpose is not to piss you off or block your access to the road in front of the cyclists. The purpose is to send a very clear message to the drivers behind, and the message is "You may think there's room for you to squeeze past me here, but you're wrong. Don't try."
I think the dance really says, "I am an inconsiderate asshole who travels at well under the speed limit and is obstructing traffic for a hobby".
-
I'm in favor of bicyclists riding on the sidewalk
I'm not - it's fucking dangerous for everyone involved unless the cyclist is only moving at walking pace anyway.
-
This is how bikes should be handled.
Requires infrastructure (wide paths) and education, which means spending money.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Ontario just introduced a law saying "If you pass a bike, you must****strong text leave at least 1 meter (3 feet for you backwater imperial folks), or get a hefty fine & points".
Here too. Leave 1 metre if you want to obey the law, leave two if you don't want to be an arsehole.
-
I think the dance really says, "I am an inconsiderate asshole who travels at well under the speed limit and is obstructing traffic for a hobby".
Oh no, you might get to your mega-urgent appointment two minutes later than expected.
-
That's all very well, except that they shouldn't have been there at all. They had moments before ridden past the clearly marked entrance to a clearly marked separated cycle lane...
But when people are riding around for fun or exercise and obstruct traffic because they think that everyone else should accommodate their hobby...fuck them.
I think the dance really says, "I am an inconsiderate asshole who travels at well under the speed limit and is obstructing traffic for a hobby".
Okay, so there's a lot of entitlement in this thread from overweight white guys who are too lazy to get out of their cages. Here's something you need to accept because it's never changing: Bicycles have as much right to use the roads as you do. Most of us are considerate of other road users whatever vehicles we and they are in. Please do the same.
A few (cyclists|car drivers|truck drivers| tractor drivers) are arseholes and aren't considerate and don't follow traffic laws. You will get through life with much less stress by getting over it.
-
I think the dance really says, "I am an inconsiderate asshole who travels at well under the speed limit and is obstructing traffic for a hobby".
Are we talking about car drivers here? Because that's what you all seem to do to me when I'm on my motorbike. If you can't keep up, get the fuck out of the way. You're slowing me down and inconveniencing me because of your choice of hobby.
-
At this rate I more or less expect sirens within 5 years.
Nah. We already ignore those. Just ask the police and fire.
-
+
We do, but we ignore them at our (and the public servants') peril...
Earlier today I was on a 4 lane road in the left (center, I'm an amurican) lane and a fire truck came blasting down the other way. I turned on my right turn signal and carefully pulled into the right lane and pulled over, where I was immediately honked at by the idiot behind me in the right lane. The fire truck had to go in the middle of the second and third lanes because there was a semi in the right going the other way, and if I had not pulled over, I'd be blocking the fire truck. But I guess the guy who thought I cut him off and stopped moving didn't really grasp that part of the situation...
-
This is how bikes should be handled.
Except those pedestrians walk across the entire path. With a dog on a leash. And cuss you out when you say "on your right". (And in college, I raced. So our training rides are going to be well above the average speed mom+kid expect.)
A bike is a vehicle. It needs to behave like one. And be treated like one. This applies to both the bike rider and the car driver.
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said:
That's all very well, except that they shouldn't have been there at all. They had moments before ridden past the clearly marked entrance to a clearly marked separated cycle lane...
But when people are riding around for fun or exercise and obstruct traffic because they think that everyone else should accommodate their hobby...fuck them.
I think the dance really says, "I am an inconsiderate asshole who travels at well under the speed limit and is obstructing traffic for a hobby".
Okay, so there's a lot of entitlement in this thread from overweight white guys who are too lazy to get out of their cages. Here's something you need to accept because it's never changing: Bicycles have as much right to use the roads as you do.
I agree with @Polygeekery on this, and I'm classified as underweight, so you can shove your microsgressed posturing where the sun don't shine. Of course, it pisses me off mostly because here in the Phoenix valley the main roads are designed to be bike friendly. There are bike lanes on every major street. Even a noticeable number of all other streets have bike lanes. And yet, what do you see bicyclists doing? Using the main traffic lanes, where cars are driving 45 MPH, or the sidewalks where pedestrians have to jump out of their way. I have seen many bicyclists on the roads and sidewalks around here. I have yet to see a bicyclist using the dedicated bike lanes.
-
'm not - it's fucking dangerous for everyone involved unless the cyclist is only moving at walking pace anyway.
Newsflash--any time you mix transport modes, it's dangerous for all involved! Nonetheless, if I were biking on main Dallas streets I'd do it on the sidewalk. Of course, I'm also aware that most of them will have virtually no pedestrians.
-
where I was immediately honked at by the idiot behind me in the right lane
Here's hoping it was his house on fire, and the truck got there 30 seconds too late.
If there's a bike path / sidewalk that's sitting empty right next to the road, they need to pull their heads out of their asses, too.
Actually, you know who needs to be fucked with a rusty battery?. Joggers. Sorry "lifestyle runners / marathoners". But not all of them. Just those special snowflakes who decide they're allowed to run ON THE FUCKING ROAD!
There's a perfectly good sidewalk RIGHT THERE, shit-cocker! And don't give me any of your new age pseudoscience bullshit about "asphalt is better than concrete". ANY hard surface is equally bad. So get your ASS-FAULT (see, funny?) on the sidewalk, or better yet, into a park. You literally have no one to blame but yourself when you get a two ton steel enema.
Filed under: Next up, fucking morons who cross in the middle of traffic even though there's a controlled crosswalk five metres further up the street IN THE DIRECTION THEY ARE WALKING ANYWAYS!
-
I'm classified as underweight, so you can shove your microsgressed posturing where the sun don't shine
I don't really know how much any of you weigh, I just threw that in for fun. Also the "white guys" bit, I suspect it's correct for the main offenders but I don't really know for 100% certain.
There are bike lanes on every major street. Even a noticeable number of all other streets have bike lanes. And yet, what do you see bicyclists doing? Using the main traffic lanes, where cars are driving 45 MPH, or the sidewalks where pedestrians have to jump out of their way. I have seen many bicyclists on the roads and sidewalks around here. I have yet to see a bicyclist using the dedicated bike lanes.
So either they're not using the bike lanes or you're just not noticing them doing so. If it's the second, you're pretty normal, if it's the first there's probably a reason why. The bike lanes might be full of debris or potholes. Bikes in the bike lane might be less visible to crossing traffic which leads to collisions and being cut off by turning vehicles. Bike lane markings might be slippery. Bike lanes might be too wiggly, too bumpy, too narrow, could be anything. I know that I choose to use bike lanes and cycleways as often as possible but I still find I need to ride on the road sometimes, even when there's a marked bike lane right there.
-
Newsflash--any time you mix transport modes, it's dangerous for all involved!
This is true, but footpaths are not cycle paths, and foot paths are more dangerous for the cyclists let alone the pedestrians. There are fewer injuries overall riding on the road.
Nonetheless, if I were biking on main Dallas streets I'd do it on the sidewalk. Of course, I'm also aware that most of them will have virtually no pedestrians.
Maybe it's appropriate in Dallas, I've never been there. Pedestrians aren't the only concern though, I find the next biggest is often crossings at side streets.
-
Maybe it's appropriate in Dallas, I've never been there. Pedestrians aren't the only concern though, I find the next biggest is often crossings at side streets.
Well, this is one reason I try to avoid riding in/next to streets anyway, preferring trails. Sadly, there aren't many long ones near where I live.
-
So either they're not using the bike lanes or you're just not noticing them doing so. If it's the second, you're pretty normal
This is Phoenix. Any bikes on the road are notable because anyone willing to brave heat to ride their bicycle is psychotic.
The bike lanes might be full of debris or potholes. Bikes in the bike lane might be less visible to crossing traffic which leads to collisions and being cut off by turning vehicles. Bike lane markings might be slippery. Bike lanes might be too wiggly, too bumpy, too narrow, could be anything. I know that I choose to use bike lanes and cycleways as often as possible but I still find I need to ride on the road sometimes, even when there's a marked bike lane right there.
Bike lanes are kept as well maintained as the rest of the road, and since these are the main arterial streets that means they're kept in pretty damn good shape. So that discounts:
The bike lanes might be full of debris or potholes. … Bike lanes might be too wiggly, too bumpy
Well, except right after a storm, There's a good chance of debris right after a storm, but that's an unusual event anyway, and you probably shouldn't be biking on the main roads in those conditions.
There are minimal markings in the lanes. Just diamonds every few hundred
yardsmeters, and those are made with basic road paint. That seems to discount:Bike lane markings might be slippery.
Bike lanes are about 1
yardmeter wide, which should be plenty for the amount of bike traffic I've seen. So much for:Bike lanes might be … too narrow
The only one I can't really figure is:
Bikes in the bike lane might be less visible to crossing traffic which leads to collisions and being cut off by turning vehicles.
But if that's the issue, then why are some of them preferring the sidewalk? That's going to be even less visible!
-
Bicycles have as much right to use the roads as you do.
Legally, yeah, sort of. Morally? Not even close.
Most of us are considerate of other road users whatever vehicles we and they are in. Please do the same.
I have never run my car over anyone riding a bicycle, no matter how much he deserved it.
-
Well, this is one reason I try to avoid riding in/next to streets anyway, preferring trails. Sadly, there aren't many long ones near where I live.
I'm lucky to live in a very cycle-friendly city. We have a fairly extensive network of cycleways. They're shared paths so pedestrians are allowed but the paths are quite wide and the pedestirans mostly expect bicycles.
If you're into the rough stuff, we hosted the World Mountain Bike Championships a few years ago and still have those facilities. There's a few other places nearby too.
-
I'm lucky to live in a very cycle-friendly city.
I'd love to do that, myself, but it wouldn't be, like, the (so to speak) driving priority.
We have a fairly extensive network of cycleways. They're shared paths so pedestrians are allowed but the paths are quite wide and the pedestirans mostly expect bicycles.
Dallas probably does too, depending on your definition of "extensive". I can think of several trails that are 7mi+. Most of them are designed to be pedestrian/bicycle shared. There's a lot of, in particular, greenbelt parks, that follow streams or the big powerline towers. But most of them are, as I said, not particularly near me.
-
Legally, yeah, sort of. Morally? Not even close.
You're a terrible person.
I have never run my car over anyone riding a bicycle, no matter how much he deserved it.
Less terrible than Stalin but still terrible.
-
Bicycles have as much right to use the roads as you do.
And if bicyclists are considerate and obey the laws and common sense, go for it. But when they obstruct traffic like a bunch of assholes and make everyone travel at 8mph they can fuck right off.
-
And if
bicyclistsdrivers are considerate and obey the laws and common sense, go for it. But when they obstructtrafficmotorcycles like a bunch of assholes and make everyone travel at 80mph they can fuck right off.<empty
-
You're a fucking criminal, what do you know?
And don't you measure distance in some weird standard based off of the Queen's knickers?
-
-
You're a terrible person.
When did you notice? Anyways, sometimes I'd rather be right than good.
Less terrible than Stalin but still terrible.
There's still time for me.
BTW, we have an excellent bike trail for people who just want to ride their bikes. It's an old rail line that's been converted.
-
Less terrible than Stalin but still terrible.
I'd make a stupid joke about a certain compiler for a certain language, but the two people who would get it would want to put out contracts on my life if I did.
Filed Under: Just reinforcing my Smug Lisp Weenie rep some more.
-
On a related topic, can we send the 50 km/h mopeds and speedpedelacs out of my 25 km/h bike lane?
-
you're just not noticing them doing so
Microaggression.
@another_sam said:white
You forgot "overprivileged cis"
@HardwareGeek said:it is unthinkable to even consider that the mind might be wrong?
See? This isn't even from this thread.
@boomzilla said:You're a terrible person.
Macroagression by quote proxy.
-
@Polygeekery said:
And if
bicyclistsdrivers are considerate and obey the laws and common sense, go for it. But when they obstructtrafficmotorcycles like a bunch of assholes and make everyone travel at 80mph they can fuck right off.<empty
bicycles forcing traffic below speed limit ≠cars forcing motorcycles to speed limitEdit: Assuming that the speed limit is, say, 90:
let x = speed limit - 10 let y = x / 10 bicycles forcing traffic to y ≠cars forcing motorcycles to xIt sounds like your complaint is that the speed limit is just too slow for your tastes.
-
Anyways, sometimes I'd rather be right than good.
Except here you've shot for neither of those things.
BTW, we have an excellent bike trail for people who just want to ride their bikes. It's an old rail line that's been converted.
Rail trails are pretty awesome, although it makes me sad at the decline of the railway.
-
bicycles forcing traffic below speed limit ≠cars
forcing motorcycles tobeing too slow to reach the speed limitDifferent vehicles accelerate, turn, cruise and stop at different speeds and yet it is still legal to use different vehicles on the same roads. Get over it.
Do you rage at trucks for accelerating and turning too slowly? What about slow moving tractors? I've driven both of those things on the road.
I'll tell you now that you being on the road in a car is going to annoy someone, and their rage at you (unless you're actually being incompetent or an arsehole) is just as misplaced as your rage at cyclists (unless they're actually being incompetent or an arsehole).
It sounds like your complaint is that the speed limit is just too slow for your tastes.
Sometimes this is true. I do enjoy speed on occasion. But the point I'm really trying to get across is that the roads are a shared resource, and just because you drive a car doesn't mean that a car is the only valid use of a road.
-
I'll tell you now that you being on the road in a
carvehicle is going to annoy someoneFTFY.
For the most part, I'm not too bothered by cyclists. With a few exceptions, such as where they cut over a section of pedestrian-only path even though there are pedestrians using it. Mind you, we've now got the new year's crop of students wandering around like a herd of particularly moronic sheep, so that'll probably irritate the cyclists back a lot.
Much worse is the habit of some cyclists (a definite minority) to ignore traffic signals. That's outright illegal in the UK (which mostly just states that bicycles are road vehicles and must obey road vehicle rules for indicating, stopping and yielding) and likely to get them seriously hurt or killed sometime.
I also see plenty of stupidity by car drivers. I'll criticise them some other time though. ;)
-
the new year's crop of students wandering around like a herd of particularly moronic sheep
Much worse is the habit of some cyclists (a definite minority) to ignore traffic signals. That's outright illegal in the UK (which mostly just states that bicycles are road vehicles and must obey road vehicle rules for indicating, stopping and yielding)
As a sometime cyclist, the annoys the hell out of me, too, as it makes all of us look bad. Not everybody sees that it is a "definite minority" (and frankly, I'm not sure it is, at least in the places I'm familiar with), and tends to think that is the norm for cyclists.
-
As a sometime cyclist, the annoys the hell out of me, too, as it makes all of us look bad. Not everybody sees that it is a "definite minority" (and frankly, I'm not sure it is, at least in the places I'm familiar with), and tends to think that is the norm for cyclists.
The worst is when there's a whole cycling club doing it. Guys (and guyettes) if you wanted to ignore the signals, you'd have got the police to close the road to ordinary traffic. There's a procedure for that, and it's perfectly OK to apply for that permission. But just blundering through red lights en masse is just asking for someone to get hurt, and it won't be a frustrated car driver that ends up in hospital…
-
Except here you've shot for neither of those things.
False. But I can see how you could be confused.
Rail trails are pretty awesome, although it makes me sad at the decline of the railway.
It was an old and local line designed to bring coal into the city. Been out of business for nearly 50 years. Of course, construction is currently underway now on a rail line to carry people, so...
-
@abarker said:
bicycles forcing traffic below speed limit ≠cars
forcing motorcycles tobeing too slow to reach the speed limitSo your issue is really that you can't accelerate as quickly as you'd like. Well, at least you can still get up to the speed limit when stuck behind a slow-to-accelerate asshole car. In a car behind an asshole cyclist? Guess you're stuck doing 10-15 MPH, even if the speed limit is 50 MPH[1].
Different vehicles accelerate, turn, cruise and stop at different speeds and yet it is still legal to use different vehicles on the same roads.
No
, Sherlock. I have not complained that cyclists are allowed to use the road.I'll tell you now that you being on the road in a car is going to annoy someone, and their rage at you (unless you're actually being incompetent or an arsehole) is just as misplaced as your rage at cyclists (unless they're actually being incompetent or an arsehole).
What you fail to see at this point is that all the anger, rage, fury, whatever you want to call it, in this thread that has been aimed at cyclists is aimed at incompetent/asshole cyclists. We have complained about cyclists:
- Not dressing properly for night rides
- Not obeying the rules of the road (e.g. failure to obey signage)
- Not using dedicated bikes lanes, which forces traffic to 10-15MPH in a 45 MPH zone.
- While doing this, cyclists are using the road in such a way that motorists cannot pass, even when there is no oncoming traffic.
[1] Yes, I have been in that situation. 50 MPH zone, one lane each way, nice broad hard shoulder available. Cyclist is riding down the center of the lane at ~ 10 MPH. Double yellow lines down the center, so no passing. Tried a few things to get his attention politely, but he just kept riding along like he owned the road, instead of politely using the shoulder to allow myself and several other cars pass.
-
Double yellow lines down the center, so no passing.
I don 't know shit about USA of course, but here overtaking of vehicles not capable of driving more than 30km/h[1] is permitted even through solid lines. I don't know for sure whether it applies to bicycles but I always assumed it does and driven accordingly.
[1] This is indicated on the back of a slow vehicle with a special sign
http://www.compliancesigns.com/media/NH/truck-transportation/600/Driver-Traffic-Safety-Sign-NHE-13726_600.gif
-
Double yellow lines down the center, so no passing.
Unless that lane is 4 meters wide, you need to cross that double line to pass the bike anyway.
-
I did mention the wide hard shoulder, didn't I?
nice broad hard shoulder
Yes. Yes I did.
-
I don't know what you define as a hard shoulder over there, but to me it sounds like the bike should go off-road for your convenience.
-
The hard shoulder is tarmac like the rest of the road, no?
Isn't that the case everywhere?
-
ESL. If it's tarmac then sure. If it's like those stone ridges they put in so a car going offroad doesn't immediately sink axle-deep into the mud then no.
-
The hard shoulder is tarmac like the rest of the road, no?
Well, assuming that's what was used as the paved surface. Could just be bare concrete. But yes, a hard shoulder is a paved surface.
ESL. If it's tarmac then sure. If it's like those stone ridges they put in so a car going offroad doesn't immediately sink axle-deep into the mud then no.
No clue what you mean by stone ridges. If you mean that they put a layer of rocks and gravel down, then that's a soft shoulder. Well, a soft shoulder is really anything that isn't paved.
-
it won't be a frustrated car driver that ends up in hospital…
With Critical Mess, it might be... (no-way-no-how will I ever get near the city on the last friday of the month)
-
False. But I can see how you could be confused
If I'm confused it's because you have communicated poorly.
It was an old and local line designed to bring coal into the city. Been out of business for nearly 50 years.
I see. We are unfortunately decommissioning most of the regional rail network which is a terrible idea, some of which is then turned into rail trails, which is a nugget of awesome. I think rail should be extended and improved instead of decommissioned, both because trains are awesome and because I'd prefer to get long-haul heavy vehicles off the roads to improve the safety of cyclists. Oh, and car occupants.
