Rural Cyclists?

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Rural cyclists are:

Dedicated Exercise Enthusiasts
7
29%
Safety Menaces
5
21%
Both
12
50%
 
Total votes: 24

Deitrich
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2001 12:08 pm
Contact:

Postby Deitrich » Wed Jul 14, 2004 3:02 pm

[quote="auntgoodness"]When biking, I try my best to follow the same laws as the cars. But somehow I have the vague sense that I�m a dork for following the rules. quote]

Nope. Dorks are the people who blow through stop signs.

statz
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 5:20 pm
Location: West Side and damn glad to be here

Postby statz » Wed Jul 14, 2004 3:42 pm

shelly wrote:
Deitrich wrote:Seminole Hiway

Spandex clad mobs ride outside the bike lane. I have to routinely remind them to stay in their lane.

And EVERYONE should stop at a stop sign or red light . It's so simple.


although this might be redundant to what suburban_moron said, I want to reiterate that just because there is a bike lane, that does not mean that bikers have to stay in it and not use the rest of the road.


What's the reason for creating those lanes if people don't use them? On the same note I love it when people ride their bikes on the side walk when there is a bike lane on the other side of the curb.

Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4507
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Postby Ducatista » Wed Jul 14, 2004 3:48 pm

suburban_moron wrote:Don't EVEN get me started....

A bike is a vehicle, just as is a car, a moped, a tractor, etc....and as such they all have a right to use the roadway, All of it.

There are exceptions, of course ââ?‰?Â

jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby jjoyce » Wed Jul 14, 2004 5:24 pm

Cars vs. bikes? Is it that time already?

PopCultureCritic
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:52 pm

Postby PopCultureCritic » Wed Jul 14, 2004 5:58 pm

Madguy wrote: Why should I as a non-car owner subscribe to the same laws as those written for the 2-ton bulk metal, non-renewable resource guzzling speedsters that kill more people and animals annually than everything else combined??


Because, asshat, people like you cause those of us driving 2 ton bits of metal to have accidents trying to avoid you when you drive in our lanes, don't obey traffice rules, and are generally a big fat nusiance.

Madguy
Senior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:06 pm
Contact:

Postby Madguy » Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:20 pm

^Oh I see. I must have mistaken. Because I thought you car drivers were guilty of Killing and maiming each other without the "nuisance" of bike riders in the lanes. I didn't realize that we who are riding in your holy "car lanes" were guilty of causing you physical harm in any way. Humph. Okay, goddamitt, I can't help myself. Show me one fuckin' shred of evidence that a bicycle has ever been the cause of a car accident here in Madison. Or that Bicycles on the roads raise the risk level of car accidents. I'll bet you my dollar to your dollar they lower the risk. Bicycles using roads=more caution from all sides. It's pretty simple really. A bicycle rider knows that a slight traffic slip up could mean their life, whereas someone behind that 2-ton chunk has a false feeling of protection from harm. It's the cars that are the danger, asshat.

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12973
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Postby snoqueen » Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:58 pm

"I swerved to avoid a bicyclist and that's why I drove in to this here ditch."

yah right

- - - -

I definitely can see both sides of this one, but come on people. Try being nice, or if you can't do that try being reasonable. A car is big and can kill somebody. A bicyclist is little and can get killed. Half you guys need a tough-love tour of the state prison in Waupun and the other half needs a visitors' pass to an intensive care unit or a rehab center for quadriplegics.

Doris Ajar
Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:07 pm
Location: Lot 60

Postby Doris Ajar » Wed Jul 14, 2004 9:21 pm

suburban_moron wrote:
Deitrich wrote: I have to routinely remind them to stay in their lane.



Don't EVEN get me started....

A bike is a vehicle, just as is a car, a moped, a tractor, etc....and as such they all have a right to use the roadway, All of it.

Your routine "reminders" do nothing but show your ignorance of the law and further perpetuate the belief in some kind of road "hierarchy" where people driving cars are "better" than cyclists.



The argument that a bicyclist has the "right" to use the entire roadway has always confused me. Although my memory of the "Bicycle Safety" course that I had in grade school may be a little rusty, I do remember some basic things like "keeping to the right" and not riding abreast if it would put you out into traffic.

Although bicycles are considered vehicles in the Wisconsin Statutes, the statutes do address safety and where bicycles should be operated:

(346.80 (2)(a)) Any person operating a bicycle or electric personal assistive mobility device upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb of the unobstructed traveled roadway, including operators who are riding 2 or more abreast where permitted...

(346.80 (3)(a)) Persons riding bicycles or electric personal assistive mobility devices upon a roadway may ride 2 abreast if such operation does not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic. Bicycle or electric personal assistive mobility device operators riding 2 abreast on a 2-lane or more roadway shall ride within a single lane.

I ride my bike to work and think biking is great for the environment and personal health, but I'm still with Deitrich when it comes to gently reminding bikes to move to the right if they are out too far in traffic. Usually they thank me with an extended finger. Perhaps because they are ignorant of the law.

roadkill bill
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2002 12:33 am
Contact:

Postby roadkill bill » Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:26 pm

Please make sure to read the portion of the state statute that comes AFTER the quote you posted on riding as far to the right as practicable - not as far to the right as possible.

The statute goes on to list reasons why riding far right may not be safe - such as "...substandard lane width, defined as a lane that is not wide enough for a bicyclist and motorist to share." That means if the lane is too narrow for a car to safely pass, ride farther left to discourage illegal and unsafe passing. Also note such conditions are debris, pavement conditions, etc that might make riding far right unsafe and impracticable.

Doris Ajar
Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:07 pm
Location: Lot 60

Postby Doris Ajar » Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:52 am

roadkill bill wrote:Please make sure to read the portion of the state statute that comes AFTER the quote you posted on riding as far to the right as practicable - not as far to the right as possible.

The statute goes on to list reasons why riding far right may not be safe - such as "...substandard lane width, defined as a lane that is not wide enough for a bicyclist and motorist to share." That means if the lane is too narrow for a car to safely pass, ride farther left to discourage illegal and unsafe passing. Also note such conditions are debris, pavement conditions, etc that might make riding far right unsafe and impracticable.


I'm not sure what your point is. It does not say that you should ride out to the left to impede traffic and you are really stretching it to say that you are supposed to discourage passing.

My point was that there are statutes that address safety and keeping to the right is one of them. I did not feel like quoting the entire section of the statutes so if I missed a sentence here and there that you want to pull out and interpret, you can find them at:

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/nav/wislaw.htm

Time to get on my bike and get to work.

admin

Postby admin » Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:31 am

auntgoodness wrote:When biking, I try my best to follow the same laws as the cars. But somehow I have the vague sense that I�m a dork for following the rules. It seems like everyone is so used to bikes just flying through stops and never signaling that they are confused by the law abiding bicyclist.

Am I the only one who uses hand signals any more?? I have only seen two other people do this all season.

Also, I have one tiny request for motorists: If you happen to notice a fellow human on a bike near you at a stop, please nix the peel-out. It's fucking terrifying. I'm well aware that in car vs. bike, car always wins.


Bless you Aunt Goodness. (more appropriately Aunt Goddess) I am not confused by bicyclists who obey traffic laws, are considerate, and (gasp) understand that signalling helps everyone. I also pray for this group because you are right -- you are a dieing breed.

The posts that argue that its OK for bikes to run stop signs because increasing number of cars do it too, are just goofy. And reinforce the sense that some bicyclists think they are above the rules of the road. Which is what got the debate into the open via rural Dane County. Acting like a jerk, whether in a car or on a bike, undermines claims to occupying the high ground on this issue.

PopCultureCritic
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:52 pm

Postby PopCultureCritic » Sat Jul 17, 2004 10:06 am

All you sanctimonious, holier than thou bike nazi's can kiss my ass.

If you're so aware that in a car vs. bike situation the car will always win then step the hell off and obey the traffic laws, and stop bitching and moaning.


Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests