And what I mean by that is that, even at a distance, it's hard for bikers to stop at speed instantly... No brakelights.

BleedPinstripes: APSBiker:

It's a speed limit, not a speed minimum

*bangs head against wall*

/that is all

Yeah, I know the math terms and all - it's still an upper limit, not a lower limit.

I don't feel sorry for them at all! If they are allowed to ride on the roads, why aren't they required to license their vehicles...errr bikes? Bikes on roads should be required to have a front and back license plate just like our cars. They should be paying for taxes for the roads just like us car drivers.

And another thing, these clowns were on the road during morning rush hour traffic when people have to get to work. They should NOT have been on the road during rush hours. I'm sick of hearing about the poor bikers and their troubles on the road. They have no respect for working people.

Must be nice to have a $12,000 toy that someone else pays for and not have a REAL job. Must be nice that someone else pays your living expenses too. I don't give a damn that you are practicing for the Olympics. We working trolls have bills to pay. GET THE HELL OFF THE ROAD DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC!

BleedPinstripes:
It doesn't matter what the speed limit is. You are required to travel at the speed which traffic is flowing.

I've looked up my home state, MN, and quickly, this is the best I can find. It just states that the slower vehicles remain in the right lane: Link

This site appears to be from the state of NY and it very explicitly states that you aren't obligated to exceed posted limits. See question: What do I do when it seems that everyone else is exceeding the speed limit?

Link

If you can back up how I'm required to exceed the speed limit, I'd be interested to see that and I don't mean that in an up-yours way.

I totally agree that going 50 in a blizzard is stupid. There was a large pileup in the fog two years ago on I43 along Lake Michigan. Can't believe how many people overdrive how far they can see in such conditions.

Tawnos
it's hard for bikers to stop at speed instantly... No brakelights.

And if the bikes stop instantly, the riders will usually stop a few yards further on.

yorkydee:

Must be nice to have a $12,000 toy that someone else pays for and not have a REAL job. Must be nice that someone else pays your living expenses too. I don't give a damn that you are practicing for the Olympics. We working trolls have bills to pay. GET THE HELL OFF THE ROAD DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC!

I hope you feel this way about pro football, baseball, rugby, etc. players. Especially since they suck down more money out of our taxes than a cyclist does (stadiums, more TV coverage, and all the ancillary costs).

For the record, I still pay my taxes for the roads everytime I fill up my car when I can't ride, so why can't I use these roads I pay for again? I hear all you asstards making this argument but just hear sputtering when I make this point time and again. I work a 8-5 job too, does that diminish my right to get to work any way I choose?

APSBiker:

Yeah, I know the math terms and all - it's still an upper limit, not a lower limit.

No it is not. It is the speed you should be traveling at under normal conditions.

If you are in a 50 zone it doesn't mean you get to pick a speed from 0-50. It means you should be traveling at 50 unless something is preventing you from doing so.

If you are consistently driving around at 15 in a 50 you will be lucky to get off with just a ticket. If you try and argue with the cop that it is a speed limit, not a speed minimum, you will probably end up with you car impounded.

Broadcastdave: ImOscar: ..... I understand that it's cheaper than riding the bus, but it will get a lot more expensive when you crack your skull open on the pavement.


It's so cute that you think immigrant day workers would actually pay their medical expenses.

I was going to say close to precisely the same thing!!

seriously though, don't block the road by driving 60 across, that's farking dumb

The Voice of Doom: Tawnos
it's hard for bikers to stop at speed instantly... No brakelights.

And if the bikes stop instantly, the riders will usually stop a few yards further on.

Scariest thing for me was doing a front wheel stand as someone did a right-turn cut off in front of me. Slammed both brakes, which shifted my considerable mass forward, barely stayed on as I was quite literally looking forward at the ground. In retrospect, the move was pretty cool, but I doubt I could ever do it again if I tried. I basically rolled forward and released the brake at just the right time to keep from stopping on the windshield of the car.

frostus: SpaceBison: I hope gas goes up to ten bucks a gallon.

Because then drivers will be even more pissed when they're on the road?

/I hope tire air goes up to $0.50!

Yeah but you can't blame cyclists for that one, chief. Tire air, is always free, minus the 10 bucks for the pump.

BleedPinstripes: APSBiker:

Yeah, I know the math terms and all - it's still an upper limit, not a lower limit.

No it is not. It is the speed you should be traveling at under normal conditions.

If you are in a 50 zone it doesn't mean you get to pick a speed from 0-50. It means you should be traveling at 50 unless something is preventing you from doing so.

If you are consistently driving around at 15 in a 50 you will be lucky to get off with just a ticket. If you try and argue with the cop that it is a speed limit, not a speed minimum, you will probably end up with you car impounded.

If you aren't actively impeding traffic, it is indeed an upper limit. IF you are actively impeding traffic, then it is illegal in most areas. These bikers were NOT impeding traffic on a 6-lane motorway, hence the reason the motorist was COMPLETELY in the wrong.

/learn your local laws and regulations before arguing on the intarwebs.

SirDeath: I HATE bicyclists... 99% a$$hats the lot of them are. I learned to ride a unicycle. It takes twice the man to ride half the bike. Now when people think I'm a douche, at least I'm a somewhat entertaining douche who stays on the sidewalks and obeys traffic laws.

What the fark are you talking about? You don't even have gears NOR brakes. You SHOULD be on a sidewalk. Or was that the point of your trolling?

wow... I'm surprised how many people here hate anyone on a bicycle. I don't wear spandex or have a $9000 bike or anything, but I like to bike around town to get groceries, go to classes, or just get some exercise. I don't run red lights, and I stop or at least do a rolling stop at stop signs.

It's sad that so many people think that because they are driving a bigger vehicle they are entitled to the road, and if you are injured or killed as a cyclist it's your own fault. When I drive I have no problem passing cyclists, and I try to give them lots of room so they don't feel pressured. People should really get over it; the time it takes to pass a cyclist won't kill you. Also, your cities should install more bike lanes and multi-use paths, as it's not that expensive compared to building new roads, and it makes things feel safer for everyone.

ScotterOtter: A bicyclist has just as much right to a lane as a motor vehicle.

Yes, but if a car is trying to pass you and you keep him from passing you, you get a ticket, car or not.

over here we solved that problem with a simple method... its called "minimum speed limit"

tell me, were those cyclists within 20kph of the posted speed limit?

no? their fault.

I remember when I lived in Belgium, there were protected bicycle lanes next to every major surface road. I saw the same thing in the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden. Why can't we have that? The primary reason I don't bike everywhere is because I'm scared shiatless some fatass in an SUV will run me over.

APSBiker:

If you aren't actively impeding traffic, it is indeed an upper limit. IF you are actively impeding traffic, then it is illegal in most areas. These bikers were NOT impeding traffic on a 6-lane motorway, hence the reason the motorist was COMPLETELY in the wrong.

/learn your local laws and regulations before arguing on the intarwebs.

The problem is it is open to interpretation if you are impeding traffic.

I'm not saying the driver was right in this instance, but a vehicle not capable of traveling at the posted speed is always a risk to impede traffic. You can't take a moped on streets with a posted speed higher then its maximum speed for this reason. Bicycles shouldn't be any different.

It shouldn't be thought of as a speed limit. It should be thought of as the required traveling speed. If you know you cannot travel at that speed, you should not be on the road.

What I don't understand here - if the bicycle club planned out this event in advance, couldn't they have gone to the local police and requested to have a less traveled road blocked off for them to train on or paid the fees for a few escort vehicles to go with them so this incident could have been avoided?

There's a local bicycle club that meets on Saturday mornings in my town. They engage in road riding. They do this on the busiest road in town. They insisted on continuing their rides on this road when it was under construction and had been reduced from three lanes of traffic each way to one lane. You can imagine how pissed off the drivers behind them were. However, as pissy as Texas drivers can be, there's never been an incident like this in my town.

/wouldn't be surprised if the cyclists are the same guys that will run up on my back bumper when I do "only" 70 on the highway

prjindigo: over here we solved that problem with a simple method... its called "minimum speed limit"

tell me, were those cyclists within 20kph of the posted speed limit?

no? their fault.

You don't need a minimum speed limit. Those signs are only their to drive the point home.

It is always illegal to travel at a speed that may impede the the normal movement of traffic, on any road.

There are tons of bike paths in this town. It's a college town. But folks still like to bike out in 2 or 4 lane traffic. And I'm not talking about a narrow strip of the road bike path. I'm talking about a 4-5 foot wide asphalt path. And they still use the road, taking up the whole lane in a 45 mph area with hills that make it hard to see them. I've seen them ride next to the dividing line in the right lane of a 4 lane (two each way) instead of next to the curb.

It is legal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk here, except in marked areas. What I like about our city government is that it is illegal to ride a bicycle on certain roads. You can't ride in one of the main 4 lane streets here in town. There are also "bicycle friendly" residential streets, usually one or two blocks over and parallel to the no biking road.

But it is all moot, since hardly any of the bicyclists follow the street laws about stop signs and traffic signals. I ride my bike to school a fair amount, but I use the damn path. I even got hit by a car that didn't yield at a stop sign and crosswalk. I've seen both sides. The car drivers are just idiots. Bicyclists are d-bags that flout the rules.

The main trick I love is when they ride along in traffic, get to a stoplight behind some cars, pull their bike up on the sidewalk, and then hit the crosswalk button. Then when the light the other way goes yellow (before the sign says "walk"), they pull back into the road and ride in front of the first car in the line before their light turns green. I've seen a few people do this at this light near an off-campus housing area.

yeah.. sure they were riding two wide.

as long as NOBODY EVER PASSES. The only way they were riding max of two wide was if they were all riding in a single line, so that people could pass one at a time.

unlikely.

Holden C [TotalFark]
Show me the driver who is so damned important that a 5-10 minute slow-down for a bicyclist is going to mess up their life.

It's irritating, because there are rules on the road for cars, and the bikes are on this road. If a car was going that slowly, it would be in trouble as well. It has little to do with the damned importance of the driver, but after a day at work, a day waiting for everyone else..the one time you're in your car driving home, and spandex-laden bicyclists are in the middle of the road...it can get irritating.

This hatred of cyclists is amazing. All the fat slobs who sit in their SUV's getting their jollys by whipping past cyclists ought to be dropped into the middle of a freeway and told to stand there for 20 minutes to see how it feels.

I have a Volvo. I drive freaking slowly around cyclists and I'm petrified of hitting them. Take your smug attitude and shove it in your spare wheel.

I've been screamed at

Sometimes that happens in real life. Get over it.

Yeah, so bicyclists have an attitude. If they want to be idiots about the rules of the road, then Darwin will probably get them sooner than later.

Darwin has nothing to do with it...it's the driver of the car who deals with the death of this bicyclist who was using stupid judgment. Case in point: last year there was a 50-something, middle class guy in his yellow spandex and matching helmet, cycling across town. He was riding in the middle of the road and crossed over in front of a car with a mother and her 17 year old daughter, on their way for senior pictures. I pull out of a driveway just in time to see the daughter bolt out of the car...the guy on the bike is unconscious and bleeding from the head, the mother is in shock and in the car. It was a HORRIBLE situation. THAT is my experience with bicyclists. So you can hate all SUV driving people you want...I will never forget that man twitching on the ground in his blood.


All I can figure is that the cyclist haters either:
1) Are so self-absorbed that they take it personally if anything delays their all-important plans
2) Resentful of people who actually have fitness or athletic ability
3) Cannot make the mental leap that if one cyclist acts like an a**hole, not all cyclists will behave that way.

Everyone else has a problem. You're clearly perfect. Congratulations.


/would be interested to know if any posters actually have ever cycled more than 20 miles on a public road
//am guessing most haven't

I'm too scared to ride my bike in a city. I have been in 2 major accidents of people not watching where they are driving, while I was in the bike lane. I still find bicyclists more irritating and dangerous.

But, you have all the answers, so what do you care.

BleedPinstripes: APSBiker:

If you aren't actively impeding traffic, it is indeed an upper limit. IF you are actively impeding traffic, then it is illegal in most areas. These bikers were NOT impeding traffic on a 6-lane motorway, hence the reason the motorist was COMPLETELY in the wrong.

/learn your local laws and regulations before arguing on the intarwebs.

The problem is it is open to interpretation if you are impeding traffic.

I'm not saying the driver was right in this instance, but a vehicle not capable of traveling at the posted speed is always a risk to impede traffic. You can't take a moped on streets with a posted speed higher then its maximum speed for this reason. Bicycles shouldn't be any different.

It shouldn't be thought of as a speed limit. It should be thought of as the required traveling speed. If you know you cannot travel at that speed, you should not be on the road.

I see your point, but what if there are no viable options for travel (from town to town, for example) other than a highway where bicycles are legally allowed, such as what these riders were probably doing? I rode yesterday a route where there were gravel roads I took to avoid as much 55mph highway as I could, but sometimes it is unavoidable. The good thing is occurences like this help bring attention to the fact that we can and should make better ways for bikes and cars to coexist, but for now, why exclude people that already have a complete right to the road? Because you say so?

What if you have a car that kind of runs, and no access to a tow truck, phone, and staying on the side of the road is an unavailable option? Should you abandon your car and walk 20 miles to the nearest town, or drive your car at 15mph to the nearest safe place to leave your car? I love working with hypotheticals!

Tawnos: itsdrew: Tawnos: itsdrew:

/if there's a sidewalk, why not use it?

I'll give you a clue, if you aren't too thick to get it. Sidewalks are for WALKing.

/sideWALK

Kind of like a DRIVEway or a PARKway?

/thanks for being a grown-up about it, though

Considering you drive onto a driveway (and, historically, they'd be a larger affair than now), and a parkway would, traditionally, be a path through a park... You fail, again.

Then walk on the side of it, douche.

Two points.

1. Tawnos, you're a douche and a moron. You got owned with a joke that was old when Bob Hope was starting out, and it stung. You're only digging yourself deeper by protesting that it didn't happen.

2. As a kid I got run over by bikes a couple of times. As a slightly older kid, I got hit by a car going ~30 mph while on a bike. Both were scary. Only one had a realistic chance of killing me.

But I understand that there's a reason it's illegal to ride on the sidewalk in some places. So I don't when I'd be a hazard. But there are times when it's absolutely the safest place for me to be. Then I ride there. And I get angry at the rules-uber-alles assholes.

For instance, take the idiot Texans who screamed "that's agains the law" from their pickup's open windows as they sped by on a four-lane road. I was laboring up a hill at about 5 m.p.h, and was on an absolutely empty sidewalk. Straight as an arrow, great sightlines and no one for hundreds of yards at least, probably miles. I mean, wtf? Sure, I'm breaking the law. I'm also promoting safety, so fark you you farking coont biatches.

/Got hit in America while riding my bike in the left lane. From behind.
//Knew I had to turn in 50 yards, so crossed early so I wouldn't be held up waiting to make the turn by traffic behind me. Could see there was no oncoming traffic for a long, long way. Have no idea how the fark the driver got back there.
///Maybe she moved over to pass me and then just ignored the road in front of her? Would have had to ignore it for a long time, the traffic was at least 10 car lengths back when I moved over.
////No helmet, but I got hit from straight behind and kept my balance. Lived, but no thanks to myself.

Confabulat: Bikers always whine "But we have a legal right to be on the road! It's ours too!"

I've noticed that when a car smashes into one of these bicyclists, it fails to recognize that legal right as it crushes their skull.

So, by that logic, we should ban cars, since trucks obviously crush a car the same way, even though a car has as much right to the road as a big truck?

We live in the Interbay Area of Seattle - On too many occaisions, I have been close to being nailed by a cyclist while walking across the Fremont Bridge, or driving anywhere around here. Worse yet, are the motorists or other cyclists making dangerous maneuvers to avoid or get around each other. While I do admire the balls of some of these people, they really piss me off !

Holden C: If bike lanes were pristine, and wide, and not full of tire-popping crap (if they're there at all) then maybe a car would never have to wait for a bicyclist. I've been screamed at for slowing down a car on a narrow two-lane because the woman had to wait 3 minutes for cross-traffic to pass before she could pass me.

Yeah, so bicyclists have an attitude. If they want to be idiots about the rules of the road, then Darwin will probably get them sooner than later. The majority of cyclists, however, are obeying traffic laws and trying to be as safe as possible.
/would be interested to know if any posters actually have ever cycled more than 20 miles on a public road
//am guessing most haven't

We have three types of cyclists here.

1) The pros who obey all the laws, actually compete in events, and are well aware of how not to hog the road.
2) Average joe's trying to get from A to B cheaply but don't necessarily obey most of the laws.
3) Hippie Douchebags that purposely clog traffic.

I love #1 they're courteous and try to do their best to let cars by and don't ride bikes the size of Hummers. They're fine in my book.

I'm annoyed by #2 because they actually impede traffic, intentionally or not. It's annoying when you have a specifically budgeted amount of time to get from home to work and some douche on a bike hogs the road and doesn't obey any of the rules.

#3 "Critical Mass" can go die under a semi truck. That is all.

I'm a cyclist and pedestrian. I avoid traffic whenever possible and take care to obey as much of the rules of the road as I can given whatever situation I'm in because, as you said, the bike lanes are shiat (when they exist), even here. Sometimes I've got to leave that bike lane because the city refuses to spend some money to fill that giant chasm.

However, if you're blocking traffic and being a general douche, I hope to god you get squashed. One cyclist to another.

yorkydee: I don't feel sorry for them at all! If they are allowed to ride on the roads, why aren't they required to license their vehicles...errr bikes? Bikes on roads should be required to have a front and back license plate just like our cars. They should be paying for taxes for the roads just like us car drivers.

And another thing, these clowns were on the road during morning rush hour traffic when people have to get to work. They should NOT have been on the road during rush hours. I'm sick of hearing about the poor bikers and their troubles on the road. They have no respect for working people.

Must be nice to have a $12,000 toy that someone else pays for and not have a REAL job. Must be nice that someone else pays your living expenses too. I don't give a damn that you are practicing for the Olympics. We working trolls have bills to pay. GET THE HELL OFF THE ROAD DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC!

You're a silly little idiot, aren't you? First off, you should at least take a cursory glance at the responses in the thread before posting your thoroughly idiotic thoughts. First off, as has been stated many times before, we all pay taxes that go into the construction and maintenance of roads, not just drivers. Second, the law states that bicyclists need to use the road, not the sidewalk, which means we have to follow the rules, but it also means YOU have to follow the rules. And finally, most of the 50 - 60 people that clown tried to run off the road were not Olympians, they were everyday people who ride their bikes semi-professionally. And everybody has someone paying for their living expenses, it just so happens that the guy who was being interviewed was getting his paycheck from a sponsor, rather than an employer.

APSBiker: So, by that logic, we should ban cars, since trucks obviously crush a car the same way, even though a car has as much right to the road as a big truck?

It was a joke.

Weisenheimer: Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes YES! And yes, I know people were hurt, killed, etc., but maybe, just MAYBE this will force farking bicycles off the road and onto the sidewalks they belong! I have no trouble paying a little more road tax to build bike paths or modified roadways to give cyclists proper space, but I really, really want those cyclists off the roads!

AND THEN US BIKERS CAN FINALLY FORCE PEOPLE WHO WALK ON THE SIDEWALKS ONTO THE GRASS WHERE THEY BELONG!!!!!!11

Southern Cross Drive, hotlinked from Wikipedia, for fun.

After hearing horror stories of the Rectumized Bicyclers in San Francisco terrorizing car drivers (and trashing their cars as they go by), I can only salute this vehicle driver for his courage and quick thinking. If there were six lanes of road, why was he aggravated by the slow cyclists, unless they were hogging the entire road?

In fairness to the San Fran cyclists, they probably all have removed the seats from their bicycles to enhance the pleasure of their ride.

Shwirv: seriously though, don't block the road by driving 60 across, that's farking dumb

Who was driving 60 across? Apparently you DRTFA.

StephakneeSays: I'm aghast that this was greenlit with an "amusing" tag. Scary or dumbass is more appropriate.

Here is the google map of the location given in the article. (new window) In no place near here is that road 2 lanes. It is always 4 at minimum.

Why the hell are all the cars driving on the wrong side of the road?

PumpkinCake:

If a car was going that slowly, it would be in trouble as well. It has little to do with the damned importance of the driver, but after a day at work, a day waiting for everyone else..the one time you're in your car driving home, and spandex-laden bicyclists are in the middle of the road...it can get irritating.

You know what's irritating? After a hard day of work having some shiathead drive up beside you and lay on the horn, or having someone throw a bottle or a battery out their window at you, or buzz you within inches because "it's funny".

Come now, let's talk about levels of severity here. You've got a stereo and climate control and a couch. What, exactly, is fifteen seconds' inconvenience to you anyway?

pinguwin:

This site appears to be from the state of NY and it very explicitly states that you aren't obligated to exceed posted limits. See question: What do I do when it seems that everyone else is exceeding the speed limit?

Link

If you can back up how I'm required to exceed the speed limit, I'd be interested to see that and I don't mean that in an up-yours way.

I totally agree that going 50 in a blizzard is stupid. There was a large pileup in the fog two years ago on I43 along Lake Michigan. Can't believe how many people overdrive how far they can see in such conditions.

It can be a bit of grey area in some places, but in general the police want you to maintain the flow of traffic whenever reasonable.

For instance, the NY traffic law states:

§1180. Basic rule and maximum limits.

(a) No person shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing.

Which is actually a good explanation of it. Normally the prudent speed is the posted one, but conditions will vary. You are a serious threat to everyone around you if you cause a bottleneck in traffic on the highway, whether or not you are traveling at the speed limit.

Those 40 car pile-ups are typically caused by the main body of traffic hitting a slower moving vehicle. Even if in your area it is a bit unclear, I'd rather be alive to argue it rather then dead at the bottom of a massive pile up.

APSBiker
So, by that logic, we should ban cars

I'm more in favor of lowering the speed limit to 10 mph on all roads, so all the incompetent drivers can stop whining about bikes slowing down traffic.

Weisenheimer MAYBE this will force farking bicycles off the road and onto the sidewalks they belong!

It's illegal to ride on the sidewalks in most places. It's also more dangerous for the cyclists because cars can't see them.

Bike paths are another thing. More of them, just as long as they don't become bus lanes and parking lanes like they do in most cities.

Saborlas: In my book, this is attempted homicide.

Say whatever else you want, this asshat performed actions that anyone could see were potentially fatal. Against a group of professional cyclists who were going out of their way to not bother anyone.

And screw the handy-dandy "road rage" excuse. If you can't keep your cool behind the wheel, you probably can't keep your cool in general. Get some self-control.

We now return to the masturbatory cyclist hate-fest in progress.


I agree 100%. I can't believe it took 20+ posts in to the thread before I found someone who was actually sticking up for the cyclists and not the driver.

FarkRavingMad
Where I'm located the law states a few things that would make this an entirely different legal matter.

First, Bicycles are to abide all the same rules as motor vehicles. That means 1 cycle per lane spaced at least one "car-length" per 10 miles per hour of velocity.

Second, if you hit someone from behind, you are automatically at fault in a collision. No matter how quickly the vehicle in front of you comes to a stop, you are expected to be able to safely stop in time to avoid a collision. If you are in a collision and tell the cop "I couldn't stop in time" instead of "I was careless/distracted", then you'll get "following too closely" added to your list of offenses.

Yes, the guy who did this is an a-hole of the highest order, endangered the lives of people for no good reason, etc. I'm merely pointing of the fact that one could also view this from another perspective. Why couldn't bicycles stop in less time than a motor vehicle?

Why was the semi following the bicycles so closely that he jack-knifed? If I'm behind a vehicle that I know can stop in 1/10th the distance I can, then I need to allow enough space for that to happen, for me to realize it, and for me to stop.

In short, I don't see any good guys here.

The bicyclists were cut off, following distance rule don't really matter if you're not given a chance to obey them. And if someone abruptly cuts you off you will likely not have the time to react to it anyway.

The trucker may have been in a different lane. When the crash occured that group of 60 cyclists were likely getting bunched up and thrown into his path and he had to swerve to avoid them, slamming on his brakes at the same time to try and slow down and ended up jackknifing.

a big "yo dog" to all my fellow philly riders

soze: You know what's irritating? After a hard day of work having some shiathead drive up beside you and lay on the horn, or having someone throw a bottle or a battery out their window at you, or buzz you within inches because "it's funny".

People do that shiat if they can get away with it. What, people have never thrown shiat at you when you're walking on the sidewalk?

You're putting yourself in a very vulnerable situation when you cycle in a big city. So quit with the martyr act.