Why do people have a problem with bikes?

|
(67)
Mona Caron

I've always been perplexed at all negativity that gets directed at bicyclists in general, and those who ride on Critical Mass in particular. The people from around the world that I've met this week as I worked on our cover story about the 20th anniversary of Critical Mass have been some of the nicest and most positive and life-affirming people I've met in a long time, the exact opposite of the sometimes-voiced stereotype that they're entitled or angry.

So I was interested to read a pair of dueling online posts this week analyzing why motorists and other non-cyclists feel such disproportionate and inexplicable anger and resentment toward a whole class of people who have made a transportation choice that helps everyone, reducing traffic congestion and transit costs while helping protect the environment and reduce dependence on oil.

Their answers range from the affect heuristic, which is the idea that emotional triggers like seeing a cyclist almost get splattered affect our perceptions far more than our reason, to the resentment many drivers feel about being stuck in traffic while cyclists zip past them and just the basic sense of how foreign and strange cycling seems to many who don't do it.

Some of those arguments ring more true to me than others, but I think the entire discussion is a fascinating one to have in the days leading up to this Friday's 20th anniversary Critical Mass ride, which will feature a rainbow of nationalities, ideologies, ethnic and class backgrounds, and other traits – their only real commonality being an affinity for bikes.

“I just really like to ride. It's a meditative thing for me. All my epiphanies come to me on a bike,” Alix Avelen, a 25-year-old woman who just moved to San Francisco from Toronto, bike touring the final leg from Vancouver starting in July, told me during Sunday's Art Bike/Freak Bike Ride, part of the CM20 celebration.

It was her very first Critical Mass, although she's been a regular urban cyclist for the last six years, and she believes that it's important to have events, communities, and cultural happenings that promote cycling: “It just makes sense in cities.”

“We're going to end up riding bikes because oil is getting more expensive and the streets are becoming more crowded,” rRez, a San Francisco native and longtime supporter of the city's cycling community, told me on that ride. “Things are changing partly because we want them to change and partly because the old world is not sustainable.”

We can continue to cling to the old ways in the face of evidence that neither local roads nor our taxed planet can accommodate an indefinitely growing number of cars. Or we can encourage more people to try riding bikes, and give us the infrastructure we need to do it safely, rather than seeing us as a hostile force trying to take over your roads.

Even grungy looking anarchists like Justin Hood of the Black Label Bike Club offer surprisingly clear-eyed assessments of the role of bikes and Critical Mass. “The point of Critical Mas is just to go out and ride your bike. It's not supposed to be about confronting drivers and smashing cars,” Hood said, admitting that there are times and places for such aggressive resistance, just not during this ride. “The point of Critical Mass is that if there's enough of us, we are traffic. And this Critical Mass coming up is going to be gigantic!”

Or if you'd rather talk than ride, there are some opportunities for that this week as well, including the Shift Happens: Critical Mass at 20 book release party and discussion at 5:45 this afternoon at the Main Library; and the International Critical Mass Symposium from 5-8pm on Saturday at the California Institute of Integral Studies.

Comments

Let me begin by saying that I am an avid cyclist. I also, drive, walk, and use BART, Muni, and Caltrain. People dislike cyclists (not bikes) because far too many riders behave with impunity towards the rights of others. When walking, I all too frequently have to ask cyclists to please ride in the street. The response is either a) the one fingered salute, b) a stream of profanity, c) justification for riding on the sidewalk, or d) all of the above. How does such behavior foster goodwill towards cyclists?

Stand at the corner of 3rd and Market between 8 and 9 AM on a work day, and count the number of cyclists who have moved from the right hand side of the street to the left in order to make an illegal left hand turn while running a red light, completely oblivious to the stream of pedestrians trying to cross with the right-of-way.

There are many encounters between motorists and cyclists, with the motorist frequently being in the wrong, but how often have you seen an encounter between a pedestrian and a cyclist where the pedestrian is in the wrong? Personally speaking, I never have. If cycling activists want fewer cars on the road, why do so many cyclists challenge pedestrians? Aren't walkers part of the solution?

Until rampant poor behavior on the part of cyclists is brought under control, the cycling community will never garner the respect and voice in urban planning it so badly wants.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 1:53 pm

I would say that while on a bike I have had to ride out into traffic for pedestrians who wonder out into the street and then stare at oncoming traffic or are just staring down the street at a bus stop, I suppose the farther you move out into the street the faster the bus shows up.

I've almost been run into by bike riders as they race through stop signs, after I have waited for my turn to go while on a bike. While crossing the street with the light my dog was run into by one of these life style choice riders. So these un-entitled people really have no respect for anyone, but they were nice to Steve.

Part of he annoyance with life style bike riders is the "one less car attitude," which is really a justification for their lack of awareness.

Posted by matlock on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 2:46 pm

Thank you for this - As a cyclist for 30 years, then mostly pedestrian and occasional driver for the last 20 years, it is exactly the rampant poor behavior of the current crop of cyclists in SF that gives all cyclists a bad name. As an aging pedestrian, I've learned to view all of them as enemies, and a far bigger danger to my life and limb than drivers ever were.

Posted by Guest1 on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 3:08 pm

Cyclists are a far bigger danger to your life and limb than drivers ever were?

Since 2008, San Francisco has averaged 17 pedestrian deaths a year. I believe there has been one pedestrian death caused by a cyclist in that time frame. So, as a pedestrian, you are about 70 times more likely to be killed by a car than a bike. How are cyclists in any way a bigger danger to your life than drivers?

Posted by Guest on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 10:46 am

Because many many bicyclist do not follow the rules. They blow stop signs, red lights. They don't stop for pedestrians when they should - they just go around them. They are totally invisible at night right out in front of me and blow red lights at night. I've come very close to completing left turns on a GREEN ARROW only to have someone on a bike with no lights blast into the intersection coming down a hill.

A bike is a moving vehicle. Again, A bike is a moving vehicle just like an automobile in the eyes of safety and the state vehicle codes.

So you have public roads mainly populated with cars, bikes and pedestrians.

If a pedestrian decides they can cross they road whenever they want because they are a pedestrian and not a car - it makes it unsafe for EVERYONE.

Same for people on bikes. If you are on a bike and not following the rules you are creating situations where drivers and pedestrians alike have to react to your unsafe actions.

If any bike, pedestrian, or car is not following laws put in place for safety - then everyone is put at higher risk.

Living in the bay area - I'm happy to share the road - if you follow the rules. But too often I feel that bicyclists think that because they are on a bike they are entitled to their own set of rules - I go whenever I want because I am on a bike.

I do encounter a lot of respectful bicyclists - but they are not the majority. The vast majority of bicyclists I encounter yell and swear at me when I do nothing but try share the road when they do nothing but treat the road like its all theirs.

Posted by Guest2 on Oct. 03, 2012 @ 9:52 am

I agree with you 100%!! I constantly see bicyclist running lights and breaking all kinds of road rules, but they are the first to yell at you or give you the finger if you almost hit them because they ran a red light. I'm sorry, but these people are selfish, self-absorbed idiots. That is why people hate bicyclists.

Posted by Guest on Dec. 29, 2012 @ 11:32 am

It's this simple: as a pedestrian I'm buzzed, at close range, by a bicyclist riding illegally on the sidewalk nearly every day. This isn't some person leisurely making their way through the city, but aggro riders at high speed. During walks with my dog or my daughter in my neighborhood, this can be horrifying.

And yet it's rare, if ever, that I feel threatened by a driver. Encounters with even the most oblivious drivers on the road are rarely as scary as being buzzed on the sidewalk by a cyclist.

Are cars more dangerous than bikes? Of course they are, especially in inclement weather. But when the cars brake for me when I'm in the crosswalk, and when I continually get sideswiped in bright daylight on the sidewalk, it's the bikes and not the cars that are scary.

Combine this with the holier-than-thou attitudes of many cyclists, who have spent so many years bitter about cars that they don't seem to understand how they're harassing those of us using our feet and public transit to get around, and you have a recipe for resentment.

I biked for many years before moving to San Francisco, and before moving to here, I too believed that it was a wonderful, environmentally-conscious, healthy way to get around. I don't want to be associated with the ones cyclists I've had to deal with here. The SF cycling community opened my eyes to everything that's wrong with cycling in America, and somehow got me to hate and resent something that I used to find fun, healthy and enjoyable.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 04, 2012 @ 2:55 pm

This is exactly the case. I am an avid cyclist but I hate other cyclists and I especially hate cycle coalitions. They really are part of the problem. There's no desire to teach people about safety or traffic laws. They just want more bicycles on the street at all costs. They encourage cyclists to break the law by using the "Idaho Stop" - which apparently just means running any and all signals and signs at full speed, and they're basically against helmets. They worry if people think their hair will get mussed they won't want to ride. Remember, as many cyclists as possible at all costs. It's a really sad state.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 7:20 pm

totaly agree. waiting to cross at 8th & market 3 cyclists were cruising on the friggin sidewalk to "avoid street traffic" , and forced there way thru a group of waiting pedestrians to make the opposite light..rude and self centered comments traded.....not a way to win support for thier cause.

Posted by Guest tomb2 on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 10:30 pm

@Guest -- I have lots of encounters with pedestrians where if I wasn't paying attention we'd both be injured due to their negligence. This morning I was riding through the panhandle on the right-hand side of the path when a women with earbuds in and eyeballs glued to the text message she was writing decided to step in front of me. Fortunately I have working brakes!

Pedestrians frequently cross when they have one or two seconds left and as a result make everyone else wait during a green light.

Of course pedestrians are part of the solution, as is anything that reduces the number of single-occupancy vehicles on the roads, but your claim that cyclists display "rampant poor behavior" is unfounded. For every anecdote you have of that time a cyclist pissed you off I've probably got one where a pedestrian pissed me off. That doesn't prove anything beyond the fact that idiots tend not to favor one form of transportation.

Posted by SeanGuest on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 9:07 am

Kill thed pedestrians. Bikers rule.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 28, 2012 @ 5:07 pm

Simple- They are on the road, riding next to me, I have to watch carefully for them, yet, they apparently do not have to obey the same laws I do, i.e stop signs, red lights, etc. It is a rare sighting of a cyclist who actually stops at a stop sign or a red light. Too many times I have come to a stop sign, stopped and started to go when a cyclist comes flying down a hill and causes me to slam on my brakes because he/she completely failed to stop at the intersection. That is why cyclists bug me.

Posted by D. Native on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 2:31 pm

All road users break the law, everyday, all over the city, for everyone to see. Motorists speed and run red lights, pedestrians jaywalk, and cyclists don't come to complete stops -- but only cyclists seem to be the target of such widespread scorn and derision, challenged on both our behaviors and what people perceive to be our attitudes. The articles I link to offer some interesting explanations about why that may be. As for your point, DN, that you need to "watch carefully for them," I think that is a common misconception that adds to conflicts on the road. We cyclists can take care of ourselves, and if drivers just follow the normal rules of road, accepting the right of way and proceeding when it's their turn (without acting as if they're more entitled to space in the lane than we are), then we'll all get along just fine. And if we behave in a reckless way, such as running a red light into your path, and we get hurt, that's a risk that we've assumed and accept. We don't need special treatment, just fairness.

Posted by steven on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 2:57 pm

"And if we behave in a reckless way, such as running a red light into your path, and we get hurt, that's a risk that we've assumed and accept. "

What about damage to my car, what about my insurance rates, what about the trauma I experience from getting your blood all over my car? And frankly I do need to watch carefully, plenty of cyclists out there with no lights at night, no common sense, etc.

Posted by D. Native on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 3:52 pm

or at least slow down enough if they don't have the right away, many bike riders will just expect the cars to wait for them as they race on through. I seldom have been cut off by a car at a four way stop, it can happen to me any day of the week from a fellow member of the bike rider club.

When riding up to a stop sign and seeing that I don't have the right of way I come to a stop, there are so many poor actors on bikes that cars just expect me to blow through, so drivers just sit there, which fucks it up for everyone as we all sit there.

Drivers don't honk their horns and blast through stop signs, which would be the car equivalent.

Many riders do expect special treatment, and it's not a small minority.

Posted by matlock on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 5:39 pm

Along with:

Riding at night with no lights front or back.
Never indicating upcoming turns.
Running red lights.
Running red lights when 1+ cars are clearly in the middle of a green arrow turn.
Riding on the sidewalk esp busy sidewalks.
Failing to yield to a pedestrian inside a crosswalk.
Riding down a road against traffic.
Riding down one way streets the wrong way.
Riding into traffic whenever they feel like it.

And many more...

Posted by Guest2 on Oct. 03, 2012 @ 10:11 am

I'm an avid biker and a non-car owner (use City Carshare). I hope the bike lane network is expanded.

But some of the Critical Mass people are completely out of line. Last spring, I saw a spate of them spitting on a car that was stuck in the middle of an intersection (and it wasn't an expensive car, but an old Toyota)

Posted by Troll the XIV on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 2:59 pm

I don't drive, have never owned a car. I walk and bus. I love walking, and don't enjoy riding bikes -- but I always supported Critical Mass and bike lanes. Yet in the last few years, the sheer number of ill-behaved, rude, dangerous cyclists has skyrocketed, and I'm beginning to hate them all, despite myself.

I live and work in in SOMA, and it's an epidemic of assholes riding down the sidewalk because it's a one way street and they're too goddamn lazy to go around the block. When I tell them to get off the sidewalk, politely, they scream obscenities at me.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 5:37 pm

Everyone complains about the inconvenience of cyclists on the road and you never hear about the nasty pollution that cars leave behind.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 8:02 pm

Your entitlement is not really the point here.

People who walk everywhere don't produce the pollution that is required to dig, smelt and weld the metal for bikes.

We should all walk to work at our mud huts down by the river.

Posted by matlock on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 8:43 pm

How many cyclists from their recklessness have killed pedestrians? They have a holier than thou, sanctimonious attitude. They forget they have to follow the rules of the road, just as an automobile does. They think they can ride on the sidewalks, and pedestrians have to get out of the way. Critical Mass is a reason for chaos--nothing more; I don't want to hear that it has something to do with saving the environment--that hypocrisy. They are as irrational as Occupy is; spoiled brats. Tell the cyclists to WALK, like decent people do...

Posted by StevenTorrey on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 10:15 pm

After ten years of bicycling in the city, I have had exactly two confrontations with motorists, but I have experienced dozens of incidents with other bicyclists. There's always some jerk dressed like Lance Armstrong barreling through a stoplight without pausing, or riding the wrong way down a sidewalk right next to a bike lane, or making daring left hand turns through crowds to avoid a stoplight, text-messaging while riding and other stupid moves. Who are these people? Didn't they learn anything as kids? (I suspect most of them grew up in gated communities where they could do anything they wanted.) I almost had a collision last weekend with an urban warrior-twitter manager who cut into my lane to avoid a stoplight at about forty miles an hour. This happened on "the wiggle," the new Yup-infested bike path. My solution: I avoid bike paths and bike events and other bicyclists whenever I can.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 9:56 am

On a meta level we have the breakdown of civil society -- i.e. the idea that each individual is a perfectly formed mote of self-interest born to run free: Ayn Randian soul-cancer.

In such a spiritually-devoid (and I use the term *quite* loosely) milieu, we end up with yahoos acting anti-socially; even when engaged in an activity which is at its foundation positive on so many levels.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 10:44 am

There are few things more amusing than cutting off a would-be Lance Armstrong in his silly little costume while I'm in my car. Forcing bikers to stop so fast that they wipe out is the highlight of my day.

Posted by Orwell's Uterus on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 10:22 am

Odd to see a supposedly progressive publication supporting a demonstration that makes it harder for working people to get home from work.

Posted by Rob Anderson on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 12:18 pm

In a dynamic city like San Francisco, there are a multitude of factors that cause delays worse than the 10 minutes it generally takes Critical Mass to ride past (sometimes a bit longer if motorists lose their minds and spark a conflict), almost all of them involving too many people taking private automobiles, whether they're going to a Giants game, heading to Tahoe for the weekend, or just headed home from work. Critical Mass adding an extra bit of snarl once a month pales in comparison to the many inconveniences of everyday life in a teeming metropolis. Honestly, Rob, we've talked and I generally think you're a pretty smart and reasonable guy, but I've never understand your near pathological obession with cyclists.

Posted by steven on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 2:07 pm

It is this "we are so much better that you" because we ride and you pollute and us causing you problems is ok because we are spreading a good message etc.

Posted by D. Native on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 2:27 pm

Purposely wasting peoples time as opposed to acts of god?

So good. What are you talking about bike, riders in this town not being entitled?

Posted by matlock on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 5:40 pm

Rightly or wrongly most drivers view bicyclists as wanting a seat at the transportation decision table without making the fiscal contributions to back up that demand. I know Steven's response - bicyclists already contribute to the road repair fund through general taxes they pay on income, sales, property blah, blah, blah. But this is a perception issue which could so easily be mitigated through the imposition of a $10 yearly fee on bicyclists. That, very simply, would silence their critics and calm much of the rancor that's directed at them as a group.

Of course that's entirely too much for Stephen and his ilk - who'd rather soak motorists with increases in vehicle registration fees and gas taxes than cough up a measly $10. Meanwhile the Highway Trust Fund, which includes monies for mass transit, takes in less and less each year as people use less gasoline due to increasing gas mileage standards and drive less. Bicyclist's solution? Raise taxes and make drivers pay more. And it's important to note that bicyclists DO NOT contribute to the Highway Trust Fund - which is entirely funded by gas and heating oil taxes.

Posted by Troll II on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 2:36 pm

through the defense budget largely devoted to keeping world petro lines open. Bicyclists benefit by miniscule amounts from that. Pedestrians and bicyclists subsidize car drivers *already* far too much.

(Not to be taken as validation for piggish behavior on two-wheels, you rude bikey scum reading this.)

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:01 pm

Motorists pay directly through their purchase of gasoline, bicyclists do not - although they do pay some road maintenance fees through general taxes. It's the absence of a direct fee, like the one motorists pay each time they purchase gasoline or register their cars or use a toll road or bridge, which makes drivers crazy. Telling motorists they're already subsidized too much in response to their complaints is a non-starter - it's like Mitt Romney telling 47% of Americans they're dead-enders and freeloaders - it just pisses people off.

This is all in response to Steven's query - not really my personal opinion. I drive and bike and walk so I can see all three sides.

Posted by Troll II on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:32 pm

in this context.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_Americans_own_a_car

89% of households own a car.

http://www.autospies.com/news/Study-Finds-Americans-Own-2-28-Vehicles-Pe...

Study Finds Americans Own 2.28 Vehicles Per Household

etc... The vast majority of Americans take part in driving.

===

How is something a subsidy if a vast majority of people do it?

Since the vast majority of people don't ride bikes as a general rule while not paying various targeted taxes directed at vehicle owners, they are actually getting the subsidy.

Lets try an exercise, is giving free MUNI tickets a subsidy in you mind?

I agree that American foreign policy sucks, but it seems to be done to keep gas cheap for the vast majority of people who drive.

Posted by matlock on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 10:07 pm

Out of deference to Daniele E, I'm keeping this clean, but I really feel like hurling a torrent of cuss words at you for being so over-the-top silly.

I mean really: wiki.answers? Oh, geeze.

The real absurdity is your other "citation." Did you do this as a joke? And asking *me* if I "understand" as something like a punch line?

The study which shows 2.28 vehicles per household... is... of...households... which .... have... one... car... or... more....

D'ya know? This *is* emblematic of the kind of sloppy ridiculous tripe you and your fellow anti-Mirkarimi reactionary haters peddle here on a daily basis.

Why don't you just go away? SFGate *needs* you.

Posted by Ridiculous matlock. on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 10:48 pm

nonsense.

Posted by matlock on Sep. 28, 2012 @ 5:36 pm

Besides the extremely dubious source for your statistics, and your incompetent misunderstanding of what the study regarding car ownership signified, your underlying premise is ridiculous. I forgot to point that out because I was so flabbergasted by your use of Wiki Answers.

Matlock, just try to put "site:.edu" in the Google search window after your search terms. That way you'll come up with some credible university syllabus or published paper.

There are something like 80 vehicles for every 100 people in the U.S., but that doesn't neccessarily equate to 89% of households having cars.

In any case, your premise that if a majority of people get a subsidy for something, then it is by definition not a subsidy is absolutely false. How can you even think such a thing? Ridiculous. Unless *everybody* is getting a subsidy, then there are winners and losers.

One more thing: the costs of automobile transit -- and other petro-based transit -- fall also on the environment, but these costs are deferred onto future generations through global climate change. That's a *huge* subsidy.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 28, 2012 @ 9:01 pm

of people obviously own or transit by car.

You do not understand the word subsidy.

Done.

Posted by matlock on Sep. 29, 2012 @ 1:29 pm

Out of deference to Daniele E, I'm keeping this clean, but I really feel like hurling a torrent of cuss words at you for being so over-the-top silly.

I mean really: wiki.answers? Oh, geeze. I don't even quote wikipedia, but wiki answers?

Of course that's tame compared to your real absurdity. Is your other citation a joke? Was your asking *me* if I "understand" something like a punch line?

Your vaunted study which shows 2.28 vehicles per household... is... of...households... which .... have... one... car... or... more....

It says so right in the first line! "In a study of households with at least one vehicle, Experian Automotive found that households with three or more cars are the single largest group among American car owners."

D'ya know? This *is* emblematic of the kind of sloppy ridiculous tripe you and your fellow anti-Mirkarimi reactionary haters peddle here on a daily basis.

Why don't you just go away? SFGate *needs* you.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 10:54 pm

Who the hell still uses heating oil? We burn coal.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 03, 2012 @ 10:09 pm

Steve -

Spend some time at Valenica and Market Streets, near the Flax store, but not on the sidewalk or you'll risk getting hit by a speeding bicyclist.

Also check out all the fast bikers coming down the north side of Market between Buchanan and Laguna, after taking a left off the bike path behind Safeway.

If you do this, you'll see what lots of bikers such as myself and plenty of pedestrians see all the time: Bikers putting others at risk by riding on the sidewalks of Market Street.

Actually, many stretches of Market Street's sidewalks are hazards to pedestrian because of bikers. Or hangout on Wednesday at the congested UN Plaza Farmers' Market and witness dozens of bikers recklessly weaving in and out of the pedestrians shopping and almost getting hit.

Maybe then you'll have a few answers as to why people have problems, not with bikes, but unsafe bikers using the sideWALKs for riding.

Posted by MPetrelis on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 2:53 pm

That's often all that there is time to say when encountering two-wheeled louts.

I think its fine to ride on the sidewalk, but it should *only* be done at slow speed posing absolutely *no* danger -- or even perceived threat -- to the pedestrians who have a *much* clearer entitlement to be there; meaning come to a full stop and dismount in the presence of children, baby carriages, or crowds, and ride at walking speed making sure your presence is known at other times when pedestrians are present.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:40 pm

is because you always have to sidestep the speeding bikers?
;-)

Posted by Greg on Oct. 03, 2012 @ 10:20 pm

Now I'll be ready: if a bikey tries that retort on me, I won't waste any time being astonished, but rather I will *immediately* throw a rock at 'em.

:0)

Posted by lillipublicans on Oct. 04, 2012 @ 6:58 am

A mixture of jealousy and envy is what I believe makes motorists scornful of cyclists.

Having said that, cyclists can be an annoyance and danger to pedestrians, especially those cyclists that ride on the sidewalk at greater speeds than pedestrians walk. If cyclists ride at the same speed as pedestrians, the risk of collisions are dramatically reduced.

Works for me. I've been riding almost exclusively on the sidewalks in SF for about ten years. Never had an accident with a pedestrian.

Until we have infrastructure in place to make cycling completely safe from motorists, I will continue to use the sidewalks.

Posted by Avid cyclist on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:19 pm
Posted by Troll II on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:33 pm

+1. Avid should know he's breaking the law. It's not legal to drive your car on the sidewalk, why should it be legal to ride your bike there.

Posted by Hortencia on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:44 pm

I will when the streets are safe for cyclists. They're not.

Posted by Avid cyclist on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:49 pm

I'll just drive up on the sidewalk and leave my car there - when there are enough parking spots THEN I'll park on the street.

Posted by Troll II on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 4:07 pm

I too think the streets are too dangerous to bike on. So I walk or bus. You could join me.

Don't want to walk or bus? Then deal with those streets. Don't make your problem my problem.

I'm sick of dodging cyclists on the sidewalks, being nearly run over as they blindly charge up the handicapped ramp at intersections, disgusted watching them speed down upon pedestrians from behind, blowing past unsuspecting old and disabled people, who stop dead, wobbling, startled, as the asshole "I'm better than you because cars are bad" cyclist obliviously continues on down the sidewalk. Yeah. Your superiority to cars makes it OK to be a jerk to people who walk with canes. Right.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 8:01 pm

"...admitting that there are times and places for such aggressive resistance, just not during this ride."

When, exactly? And why can I just hear the glee in his voice at the prospect of such aggression? Find me an auto driver who thinks that way.

Posted by Hortencia on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 3:42 pm

And now for a break from all the vitriol... Cool band from Colombia~

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBgtm4vE_rk

Posted by Guest on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 6:06 pm