How about this cretin?

Status
Not open for further replies.
This guy who posted this sign shows a lack of restraint and good judgement. From here on out, if he were to EVER hit a cyclist and kill them, he could potentially be charged with premeditated murder. There are dozens of cases where people posted online or texted what they would do in a given situation. The situation arose, the written verbiage was subpenaed and used against them in court resulting in extended prison stays. Anything one texts or posts online can be used against them even long after that individual forgot about it or thought it was deleted.
The fact that this individual has this sign on his property pretty much makes him screwed for the rest of his life if he were to hit a cyclist.
 
Originally Posted By: datech
I don't think they should allow more than one abreast, after all cars aren't permitted to drive like that.


2 abreast is legal in Texas but I don't know about other locations.

Texas Transportation Code, Chapter 551 "OPERATION OF BICYCLES, MOPEDS, AND PLAY VEHICLES"
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/tn/htm/tn.551.htm

That being said, my group always goes single file if cars are coming up behind us so we can let them pass more easily.
 
Last edited:
Generally it takes just a few bicyclists to poison a lot of driver's opinions of them.

I share the road when driving; Often that concept is not reciprocated by the riders.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Generally it takes just a few bicyclists to poison a lot of driver's opinions of them.

I share the road when driving; Often that concept is not reciprocated by the riders.


That is so true, and I despise the bad apples that cause so much trouble for all us cyclists. If everyone would just follow the rules of the road things would go so much better overall.

Sometimes I even pull off the road if I see there's a couple of cars waiting, better to let them go by and on their way than to say what I am doing is more important than what they are doing. I wish more cyclists would do that.
 
Originally Posted By: BISCUT
Constant issue around me in NY. Both motorist and bicyclist push the issue to very bad places. When there is no bike lane and you choose to ride 2 or 3 wide, there aren't many New Yorkers who are going to patiently wait for an opportunity to pass you. IMHO when you do that (ride multiple wide) you are seeking a fight or to be hit.


Its not just in NY. Anyplace that there isn't a full-width shoulder and/or a proper bike lane, theres high chance for issues. And even bike lanes aren't really wide enough for two-wide.

Anyplace where the speed limit is over 25, bikers are a further liability. Because its pretty easy to ride 20 MPH sustained, even on an MTB, but its really hard to go 35 or 45 MPH when cars are going that fast. The higher the speed delta, the bigger issues.

Ive more or less changed to off-road biking, and when I do want to go longer rides on roads, stay on 25 MPH roads with less traffic. That's not always possible though...
 
Wow, It's amazing how people take things out of context and spin them to suit their own points of view.

"It is better to run over a bicyclist, than to get in a head on accident because they don't share the road."

In the case of an ACCIDENT (which is clearly qualified here), with no exit path, do you:

A. Choose a head on collision between two fully loaded family sedans, or

B. Hit the bicyclist that has chosen a dangerous hobby and has possibly chosen to ride two or three wide on a winding country road.

A quick threat/risk analysis should make it painfully clear that nothing in the statement is incorrect. However if you want to speculate on his motives and meanings, that is a personal problem of yours.

Two licensed cars driving legally on the road and following laws, and a bicyclist with no permits, not paying into road upkeep, and riding in a fast moving lane on blind corners. Who is at fault and who should get hurt, because someone has to? Two cars and a bicyclist simply cant occupy the same space.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: asand1
In the case of an ACCIDENT (which is clearly qualified here), with no exit path, do you:

A. Choose a head on collision between two fully loaded family sedans, or

B. Hit the bicyclist that has chosen a dangerous hobby and has possibly chosen to ride two or three wide on a winding country road.

I wouldn't give the bicycle rider good odds in that situation.
 
Originally Posted By: asand1
Wow, It's amazing how people take things out of context and spin them to suit their own points of view.

"It is better to run over a bicyclist, than to get in a head on accident because they don't share the road."

In the case of an ACCIDENT (which is clearly qualified here), with no exit path, do you:

A. Choose a head on collision between two fully loaded family sedans, or

B. Hit the bicyclist that has chosen a dangerous hobby and has possibly chosen to ride two or three wide on a winding country road.

A quick threat/risk analysis should make it painfully clear that nothing in the statement is incorrect. However if you want to speculate on his motives and meanings, that is a personal problem of yours.

Two licensed cars driving legally on the road and following laws, and a bicyclist with no permits, not paying into road upkeep, and riding in a fast moving lane on blind corners. Who is at fault and who should get hurt, because someone has to? Two cars and a bicyclist simply cant occupy the same space.





Biased much?

I love how people often assume that cyclists don't contribute to road upkeep- the overwhelming majority of cyclists also own cars and of course contribute to upkeep via the taxes and fees associated with their operation. Now as to the impact that a bicycle has on a road vs. a car/pickup, it is magnitudes LESS. So he pays into the upkeep and does virtually no damage or none at all.

I suppose you would have bikes stick to trails and the hand full of bike lanes exclusively? You sure as heck can't ride the sidewalk as most places have ordinances against that for good reason... Like it or not, cyclists not only belong on the road, but they pay to keep it in serviceable condition.

It's up to BOTH parties to act like responsible, educated adults to keep everyone safe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top