Is it worth it to try to educate people?

Is it worth it to try to educate people in a civil manner about biking when you're probably going to get yelled at? 

For example, this morning I was biking south on Wells around Ohio when there was a runner jogging south with traffic, in the bike lane.  She was in the buffered lane itself, not even in the parking area to the right (and with headphones on).  It's too bad I couldn't explain that she's putting bikers at risk by taking their lane in the few seconds that I passed by.    

It just puts a damper on my morning when the response to my "this is not a jogging lane" is "fuck off!" 

Julie

 

Views: 1008

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Julie Aberman (Hochstadter) on June 27, 2012 at 1:28am
I tnink letting people know is good, hold them accountable. Everyone has their own way of communicating and rep0sponding as well.

For me it depends on the day. Sometimes I don't have the time or energy to put someone in their place.

Now if they cut me off or almost door me, tnats a different story,
Permalink Reply by Tank-Ridin' Ryan on June 27, 2012 at 1:50am

I'd phrase that differently.  If something like that happens again, try framing it in way that's looking out for the person's safety like, "This is a bike lane.  You might get clipped by a cyclist who isn't expecting to see a runner here."

Permalink Reply by Julie Aberman (Hochstadter) on June 27, 2012 at 3:21am

that's a great idea.  

Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:

I'd phrase that differently.  If something like that happens again, try framing it in way that's looking out for the person's safety like, "This is a bike lane.  You might get clipped by a cyclist who isn't expecting to see a runner here."

Permalink Reply by GabeW (not the other Gabe) on June 27, 2012 at 3:29am

Well, this is not a classroom lane either....

How die-hard BIKES ONLY do you want to get?  The bike lane nazi says biking only.  No lecturing.

Am I the only one seeing a parallel between cars sharing with bikes, and bikes sharing with runners?  Bike lanes are a convenience, not a requirement for riding in the street.  A car on a road without a bike lane telling a cyclist that it's for cars only would likely get a "fuck off" response from us, right?  And you want to lecture a pedestrian about where to be?  Or tell a pedestrian that we don't expect to see them?  Try that one as a defense in court, lol.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on June 27, 2012 at 3:41am

I agree.

Julie Hochstadter said:

that's a great idea.  

Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:

I'd phrase that differently.  If something like that happens again, try framing it in way that's looking out for the person's safety like, "This is a bike lane.  You might get clipped by a cyclist who isn't expecting to see a runner here."

Permalink Reply by Carter O'Brien on June 27, 2012 at 3:50am

Anyone who looks at a bike lane and thinks "hey, what a great space to jog" is already unclear on the concept.  I don't expect reasonable responses from such people any more than I do motorists using bike lanes or expressway shoulders to pass traffic, or cyclists using sidewalks.  People are people regardless of their mode of transit, some are extra-considerate, most are just trying to safely get from point A to point B, and a small subset is borderline criminally self-centered.

Permalink Reply by GabeW (not the other Gabe) on June 27, 2012 at 3:54am

So, if a car pulls up along side you and politely tells you that:

"this is the road, you might get clipped by a car who isn't expecting to see a cyclist here."

We would respond favorably to that comment? I see joggers on the shoulder all the time on the streets, it's nothing new or unexpected.

Permalink Reply by daWillinChi on June 27, 2012 at 4:05am

I rather agree with this one.



GabeW (not the other Gabe) said:

Well, this is not a classroom lane either....

How die-hard BIKES ONLY do you want to get?  The bike lane nazi says biking only.  No lecturing.

Am I the only one seeing a parallel between cars sharing with bikes, and bikes sharing with runners?  Bike lanes are a convenience, not a requirement for riding in the street.  A car on a road without a bike lane telling a cyclist that it's for cars only would likely get a "fuck off" response from us, right?  And you want to lecture a pedestrian about where to be?  Or tell a pedestrian that we don't expect to see them?  Try that one as a defense in court, lol.

Permalink Reply by Dan Ciskey on June 27, 2012 at 4:08am

I think it's a pretty well-accepted practice to walk or jog in the street against traffic. This allows you to see traffic coming, especially if you've got headphones in. I give joggers who run with traffic a pretty loud "ON YOUR LEFT" if they've got headphones in. I feel like that's a small price to pay if you're going to be a dummy. There are definitely legitimate reasons to run on asphalt instead of cement, so I don't begrudge people that option.

Permalink Reply by Tim S on June 27, 2012 at 4:13am

the occasional jogger I can deal with.

Permalink Reply by Carter O'Brien on June 27, 2012 at 4:13am

Joggers in the street/bike lanes is a relatively new phenomenon, mid/late 90s housing boom brought it to areas like LP and LV where I guarantee you it was rarely- if ever - practiced.

Your analogy is faulty as cyclists are legally defined as intended users of the roadways.  If there is such legal language for pedestrians I've never seen it - why wouldn't joggers just use sidewalks? 

With a bike lane the issue is pretty clear IMO - joggers in the lane (who often aren't even going in the right direction) mean there's no room for a cyclist to safely pass.  If a car can pull up alongside you on a bike, you're already talking about two different issues as you aren't stopping the car from its forward progress.



GabeW (not the other Gabe) said:

So, if a car pulls up along side you and politely tells you that:

"this is the road, you might get clipped by a car who isn't expecting to see a cyclist here."

We would respond favorably to that comment? I see joggers on the shoulder all the time on the streets, it's nothing new or unexpected.

Permalink Reply by Carter O'Brien on June 27, 2012 at 4:20am

And from this opinion related to the "intended user" cyclist victory of Boub vs. Wayne Township:

http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/supremecourt/1998/october/opi...

"Second, the appellate court apparently failed to recognize the difference between `permitted' and `intended' uses under section 3-102(a) of the Act. The court noted that rural country roads are commonly used by persons other than drivers of automobiles, listing such uses as horseback riding, bicycling, jogging, walking and driving farm equipment. [Citation.] However, most of the activities listed are also common uses of city and residential streets. Illinois courts have concluded that although pedestrians may be permitted users, they are not intended users of streets outside of marked crosswalks or other areas designated and intended for the protection of pedestrians." Sisk, 167 Ill. 2d at 349.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service