The bike-truck accident

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

Cyclists can legally ride on sidewalks.

Looks like you're finally right about something.

 

They are also not legally required to use hand signals

 

You are incorrect:

Seattle code:

http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?s1=11.44.140&s2=&S3=&Sect4=AND&l=20&Sect3=PLURON&Sect5=CODE1&d=CODE&p=1&u=%2F%7Epublic%2Fcode1.htm&r=1&Sect6=HITOFF&f=G

 

RCW:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.755

 

 

Our favorite 'libertarian' speaks out in favor of more regulation and taxation.

Wrong on this one too. I am a moderate-to-conservative Republican. Unlike you, I have never claimed to be of a stripe that I am not. My bicycle taxation suggestion was rhetorical, but, ya know, those nice bike paths aren't free.

 

...and here's yet another of my complaints against cyclists addressed in the law:

 

RCW 46.61.770 Riding upon roadways and bicycle paths.

(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited-access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane if such exists. (2) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Midnight groupies, googling, googling.

 

 

[whirlwind]

i ride my bike on the side walk and somtimes i even ride it on table tops, benches, stairs (on or over) in and out of traffic going the wrong way in traffic with no hands on the bars, no helmet( unless im riding downhill dirt) ive never ridden over a car but i have ran into a few that were parked (ops sorry bout the scraches) lets see, that pretty much covers it, cept i do ride bikes through stores on occasion, but just to test ride new bikes, or when im bored, or sometimes to chase down people im with, oh and occasionaly just because i can.

Edited November 4, 2007 by wirlwind

[archenemy]

I ride the bus. I'm not going to begrudge people the right to talk to someone, next to them, or in New York.

 

It can be annoying, but that's just the kind of thing you have to deal with if you decide to forgo the single-occupancy vehicle.

 

You have to coexist with OTHER PEOPLE

 

talking is one thing, LOUD talking on the cell phone so every damn person can hear every detail of your conversation is another.

I just stare at that person. It is amazing how uncomfortable that loud talker will get as soon as they feel that they are being watched. I don't mean-mug them or anything; I just keep my face either expressionless or else I raise my eyebrows and tilt my head toward them as if I am trying to hear them even better.

Works every time.

[AlpineK]

I do a lot of business via cell phone. It's nice to have direct contact with a client or potential client when you're in the field. I've always made it a rule to never talk while I'm driving unless it's a friend.

 

I've been riding the bus a lot recently, and I've watched people blab on their cell with 50 strangers listening in. I can't believe those folks don't know how rude they're being. Cell phones piss me off on the bus, but they don't make me get livid like those bluetooth phones.

 

On the bus or in the store I see folks with those things, and it takes me a minute to figure out why these people are walking around with their hands down talking. If somebody has a mental handicap or some other physical impairment then I'm pretty understanding, but if it's obvious that the person talking has no medical problems other than a device they bolted to their ear then I get mad.

[chucK]

Yes everybody seems to be so annoyed at other people talking on cellphones. I wonder how long it'll be until people start feeling justified enough in their anger at this unpoliteness to start up with CELLPHONE RAGE. People getting their cellphones punched, or bluetooths batted Just a matter of time I tell ya.

 

I've used Archenemy's strategy before, but not leaning in, but nodding and interacting like I'm in the conversation too. That's a good nonviolent way to get the message across that you're in this conversation too.

 

One great thing to do with a cellphone is to call someone behind a desk right in front of you. You know, those places where you are waiting in a line trying to get service, but the clerk also has to man the phone, and they always give preference to the phone calls instead of the people waiting right in front of them. To get around this, you can call the number and get them on the phone. I did this at a car-rental place recently. It was fun.

[JayB]

There was an NPR feature on cell-phone jammers today. Sounds like they can be had for less than $200, and the smallest units have an effective range of around ~10 feet.

[chucK]

New York Times article last week

 

The only catch is, they're illegal.

 

[ashw_justin]

As much as I hate to suggest giving The Man any more control, it's not unreasonable to consider a bicycling license endorsement (like for motorcycling), contingent on demonstrated knowledge of (and proper adherence to) the traffic code as it pertains to bicycles on the roadway. This would seem to go hand-in-hand with being taken seriously in terms of budgeting, lawmaking, planning, and otherwise being regarded as legitimate and equal users of the roads.

[tomtom]

As much as I hate to suggest giving The Man any more control, it's not unreasonable to consider a bicycling license endorsement (like for motorcycling), contingent on demonstrated knowledge of (and proper adherence to) the traffic code as it pertains to bicycles on the roadway. This would seem to go hand-in-hand with being taken seriously in terms of budgeting, lawmaking, planning, and otherwise being regarded as legitimate and equal users of the roads.

 

This should be extended to pedestrians as well. I've seen way too many folks just step off the curb without looking both ways.

 

Sidewalks are expensive to install. Look at all the money the city will be spending in North Seattle to retrofit the neighborhoods without. Pedestrians are getting a free ride in the tranportation game. We should tax the hell out of them or they should stay home.

 

It's only fair.

[ashw_justin]

I thought I read somewhere that there is actually a huge lack of sidewalks in many Seattle-area neighborhoods... In any case I don't think your casting of bicyclists as a kind of pedestrian is entirely appropriate, nor conducive to legitimizing our right to occupy lanes of traffic.

[tvashtarkatena]

As much as I hate to suggest giving The Man any more control, it's not unreasonable to consider a bicycling license endorsement (like for motorcycling), contingent on demonstrated knowledge of (and proper adherence to) the traffic code as it pertains to bicycles on the roadway. This would seem to go hand-in-hand with being taken seriously in terms of budgeting, lawmaking, planning, and otherwise being regarded as legitimate and equal users of the roads.

 

 

 

This should be extended to pedestrians as well. I've seen way too many folks just step off the curb without looking both ways.

 

Sidewalks are expensive to install. Look at all the money the city will be spending in North Seattle to retrofit the neighborhoods without. Pedestrians are getting a free ride in the tranportation game. We should tax the hell out of them or they should stay home.

 

It's only fair.

 

...or you could just shut the fuck up and learn how to drive.

Edited November 9, 2007 by tvashtarkatena

[JayB]

I thought I read somewhere that there is actually a huge lack of sidewalks in many Seattle-area neighborhoods... In any case I don't think your casting of bicyclists as a kind of pedestrian is entirely appropriate, nor conducive to legitimizing our right to occupy lanes of traffic.

 

You are in fantasy-land here dude. The only time that cyclists can realistically occupy a lane of traffic without enraging motorists and prompting them to make dangerous passes in congested conditions is when they can move at the same speed as traffic, which only happens in cases where you're descending a significant grade. No amount of cyclo-activism is ever going to change this.

 

As a cyclist, you're significantly more exposed to death or severe trauma than you are in a car, so if you're smart you do what you need to do to prevent getting hit without endangering other users of the roadway. Sometimes that means obeying the law to the letter, other times that means ignoring it - depends on the situation.

 

 

[ashw_justin]

Depends on traffic... if it's the morning commute with typical congestion, it is not hard to move at the speed of traffic. The trickier part is passing cars/buses properly on the left, and other things along the lines of following the traffic code while on the road--as if you were driving a car (only 10 times more paranoid).

[tomtom]

You are in fantasy-land here dude. The only time that cyclists can realistically occupy a lane of traffic without enraging motorists and prompting them to make dangerous passes in congested conditions is when they can move at the same speed as traffic, which only happens in cases where you're descending a significant grade.

 

I'll disagree with this. If the lane is wide enough so that a car can pass and not have to cross into the next lane , then it's rarely a problem. (Unless it's psycho like Kurt). Basically, it's incorporating the bike lane into the roadway without the dividing white stripe, creating a wide curb lane.

 

[tomtom]

The largest single cause of accidents to American bicyclists, both collisions between motor vehicles and bicycles (hereafter called car-bike collisions for simplicity) and other types of accidents, is the incompetence of the bicyclists involved. The reported car-bike collisions cause about 1,000 deaths and 50,000 injuries annually; the actual numbers may be several times greater for injuries and a small factor greater for deaths. The total number of deaths and injuries in bicycle accidents is probably about 500,000 annually. Over half of American car-bike collisions involve the cyclist suddenly getting in front of a motor vehicle by doing something that doesn't fit the traffic pattern: a dart-out, a swerve, riding in the wrong place, riding without a headlamp at night, etc. The behaviors that cause the majority of American car-bike collisions can be observed and measured. According to the measurements that have been made, the large majority of American cyclists habitually act in the ways that cause many frequent types of car-bike collision. Moreover, those accosted with criticism of their behavior tend to reply in two different ways. The majority say that they behave as they do to be safe, while the minority aggressively and vociferously defend themselves by arguing that the laws don't apply to them and aren't safe anyway. The investigator often finds that those who exhibit the worst behavior are those who are most concerned about safety.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

The largest single cause of accidents to American bicyclists, both collisions between motor vehicles and bicycles (hereafter called car-bike collisions for simplicity) and other types of accidents, is the incompetence of the bicyclists involved.

 

nice quote... with no source attribution.

 

I'd say the single largest cause of accidents to American DRIVERS in "car-car" collisions are the incompetence of drivers. We could kill two birds with one stone - less accidents, and less traffic/CO2 emissions by making it harder to GET and KEEP a driver's license.

 

[Off_White]

...or you could just shut the fuck up and learn how to drive.

 

Oh dear, gentle reader, what harsh talk you bring into the Cafe!

[tomtom]

nice quote... with no source attribution.

http://www.johnforester.com/Articles/Social/natattit.htm

 

I'd say the single largest cause of accidents to American DRIVERS in "car-car" collisions are the incompetence of drivers.

 

BS. It's all Bush's fault. If it wasn't for the War for Oil in Irak, we could be putting that money into driver education and we would be able to reduce the needless slaughter of Innocent Americans on Our Highways.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

nice quote... with no source attribution.

http://www.johnforester.com/Articles/Social/natattit.htm

 

I'd say the single largest cause of accidents to American DRIVERS in "car-car" collisions are the incompetence of drivers.

 

BS. It's all Bush's fault. If it wasn't for the War for Oil in Irak, we could be putting that money into driver education and we would be able to reduce the needless slaughter of Innocent Americans on Our Highways.

 

we don't need to educate drivers. if you can't drive properly, you haven't earned the privelege of a license.

 

WA drivers: here's a clue for the day - when merging onto a freeway, you want to accelerate to within 5 mph of the speed of the traffic. Going 25 mph on a freeway onramp when the traffic is moving at 55 just doesn't cut it.

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

Every day I walk on Seattle streets. There are marked crosswalks that idiot a-hole drivers ignore. Hey, a-hole: STOP for pedestrians at marked crosswalks. Get it? Thanks.

 

[AlpineK]

Retesting may be a good idea. Like everybody else I took the standard driving test at 16. In my 30s I was working for a company that required drivers to have a CDL. That meant more testing both written and driving around in a CDL truck with a tester.

 

More recently, after my injury from last year, the doctors wanted me to get evaluated for driving again. I had a tester show up at my place and I drove him around for an hour. At the time I figured it was in my best interest given what I'd been through, but it may be in the best interest of everybody to get themselves retested.

[chucK]

Every day I walk on Seattle streets. There are marked crosswalks that idiot a-hole drivers ignore. Hey, a-hole: STOP for pedestrians at marked crosswalks. Get it? Thanks.

 

Yeah, like you stop every time someone is standing by a crosswalk. Suuuuuure.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Every day I walk on Seattle streets. There are marked crosswalks that idiot a-hole drivers ignore. Hey, a-hole: STOP for pedestrians at marked crosswalks. Get it? Thanks.

 

Yeah, like you stop every time someone is standing by a crosswalk. Suuuuuure.

 

Actually, yes, I do. So off.

[dan_forester]

I do too. Courtesy costs nothing.