Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Richard Jarrow on November 23, 2011 at 8:56am

Those assertions are absolutely false!

 

Personally, I work downtown Chicago and I see bicyclists blow red lights, drive the wrong way down one-way streets, swerve all over in and out and through traffic, I've seen bikes hit pedestrians (and flee the scene), kick cars and even flat-out yell and insult people who try to ask what exactly they think they're doing.

 

The perception that bicyclists are scofflaws and reckless is a perception based VERY SOLIDLY in fact.   Stand at a busy intersection downtown and watch from a pedestrian or even drivers point of view and you'll see for yourself very clearly.  I don't care if the bicyclist is there - I care that they're not being respectful of ANYONE else beyond their own selves.

 

If you're going to compare bicycle couriers and cabs - at least they're WORKING at that moment.  Regular passenger cars and bicycle commuters have even less excuse to be reckless and unpredictable in traffic.

 

Income level has nothing to do with respecting others enough to act considerately in traffic.   Your argument would allow someone with a POS rusty car to blow lights and drive like a maniac just becausr that's the transportation 'they can afford'.

 

Peenworm Grubologist said:

Here's the problem: if the hate is based on a faulty perception, changing reality isn't going to change the perception because it isn't based in reality. Antipathy toward cyclists is often blamed on scofflaw behavior on the basis of a single incident or less, sometimes just based on the habitual assumption that that's what cyclists are like. It's a little bit like saying feminism is disparaged because of the perception of feminists as joyless man-haters, so if feminists could be less like that the perception would decrease. If the perception isn't being informed by reality, you can't change it by changing reality.

 

In my experience this scofflaw complaint is a post-hoc rationalization which sounds more acceptable than just being pissed off that the cyclist is there at all. Just to throw more anecdotes on the pyre, the most success I've ever had with changing someone's perception about bicycle scofflaws is pointing out that every courier they've seen and grumbled about has plenty of taxi equivalents, and which is actually putting more people in danger?

 

The other thought that comes to mind is that usually people I see "salmoning" or on a sidewalk or whatever are people biking largely because that's the transportation they can afford, in lower-income neighborhoods and so forth. It'd be kind of a dick move to give them shit about how they're getting around in my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael J Blane on November 23, 2011 at 9:09am

I guess, salmoning: going against the current, like a salmon swimming upstream.

Michelle Gregorek said:

I'm sorry Scott, I realize this is a brainstorm discussion.  Please excuse any frustration caused. 

Thanks for the definition of salmoning. (My guess would have been weaving in and out of traffic.)

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Jarrow on November 23, 2011 at 9:25am

Bicyclists treating stop signs like yield signs actually makes sense most of the time.  However, intersections that have yield signs still means that some traffic WILL have to stop fully and wait for other vehicles to clear the intersection.   The 'treat stop signs as yield signs' won't give bicycles the right to automatically blow through any stop sign.

 

Traffic lights (controlled intersections) shouldn't be messed with.   Red is stop.  Always.   Imagine the circumstance of a car or cars legally going through a green light hitting a bicyclist who treated a red light as a stop sign...   Whose fault is it?  Both were legally cleared to go through the intersection in that scenario.   No - perpendicular traffic can only flow ONE WAY - then the cross traffic goes.   Safely and legally and consistently.  There can be no 'two sets of rules' when dealing with vehicles (of which bicycles are included) on the road.   If you're on the street, there are traffic rules - end of story.  It's better and safer for everyone involved.

 

kiltedcelt said:

My two wheels worth - I think a bigger issue is not necessarily campaigning to get bikers to obey all the rules of the road but instead to see about modifying the rules of the road to accommodate cyclists. The Idaho stop that was mentioned somewhere in this thread is one thing we could do. If we could get the legislature to change the rules for cyclists to allow us to treat stop signs like yield signs and traffic lights like stop signs that would go a long ways towards ending what is currently scofflaw behavior among cyclists. I'm fortunate in that most of my commute is on the LFP so I don't deal with a lot of stop and start traffic b.s. However, when I do ride on regular streets I do adhere to rules of the road for the most part. I stop at all the lights with the cars and wait, although I admit to only pausing at stop signs. I don't blow through them like most cyclists I see, but I do slow down enough to accurately assess ALL traffic coming from all directions before I go. My thoughts are that as long was we have to go with "same rules, same rights", we should all be adhering to that. However, it's obvious that we need a revolution here in this country at all levels regarding infrastructure that accommodates cyclists as well as a change in the rules that realizes that bicycles are NOT the same thing as cars and thus should be allowed to operate on a slightly different set of rules.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Schmoe on November 23, 2011 at 9:27am

Richard:  Cars are worse.  Blocking the box, blocking the bike lane, flooring it between red lights, speeding, cutting the crosswalk in front/behind pedestrians, passing on the right, opening doors into traffic, double-parking, blowing red lights, failing to yield to bikes in shared lanes, and blowing stop signs (almost never coming to a full stop)... and they can kill people.  Are there scofflaw cyclists?  Sure.  And they tend to make me about as angry as scofflaw motorists... except the motorists can kill people.  The difference is we've been conditioned to expect bad driving behavior, as just a natural part of cars being on the road.   The cyclists I see doing dumb stuff usually only endanger themselves (causing accidents by cars having to take evasive action aside).  And I've personally gotten super indignant w/motorists who come close to killing me. So what?  I should smile and say "thanks for almost running me over Mr. Range Rover, have a pleasant day in our fair city"?  Whatever. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Jarrow on November 23, 2011 at 9:36am

Cars are at least subject to police enforcement.   Drivers know if they blow a red light there's an expensive ticket in their future or arrest.    And you're comparing a car that slows, comes to a near-stop, and goes at a stop sign to (some) bicyclists who doesn't even seem to have any intention of slowing or stopping.  

 

The ongoing excuse of 'they did it, so I can to' is really getting tiresome.  I see a far smaller percentage of car drivers blowing red lights and expecting others to get out of their way than I do bicycle riders.  

 

But lets take your example of cars needing to take evasive action...   Let's say a bike crosses an intersection at a red light, a car swerves or brakes hard and an collision occurs.  Maybe even a severe one..   That bicyclist if they're not involved will pedal away as fast as they can, leaving the damage and insurance issues to the blameless drivers who were victim to this bicyclists reckless behavior.    If it were a car that had blown the red light - there might be a camera pic.  But not bicycles!   If it was a car, that driver, as the causal factor of the accident, would be legally responsible and their insurance could cover it.  But not bicycles!   If it was a car, someone might be able to identify the car by their license plate.  But not bicycles!

 

You see where I'm going with this?   Bicycles have the right to ride on the road, but as a whole I don't see them embracing the responsibility that goes hand in hand with that.  And no, I'm not exonerating motorists, but you cannot exonerate bicyclists, either.

 

Joe Schmoe said:

Richard:  Cars are worse.  Blocking the box, blocking the bike lane, flooring it between red lights, speeding, cutting the crosswalk in front/behind pedestrians, passing on the right, opening doors into traffic, double-parking, blowing red lights, failing to yield to bikes in shared lanes, and blowing stop signs (almost never coming to a full stop)... and they can kill people.  Are there scofflaw cyclists?  Sure.  And they tend to make me about as angry as scofflaw motorists... except the motorists can kill people.  The difference is we've been conditioned to expect bad driving behavior, as just a natural part of cars being on the road.   The cyclists I see doing dumb stuff usually only endanger themselves (causing accidents by cars having to take evasive action aside).  And I've personally gotten super indignant w/motorists who come close to killing me. So what?  I should smile and say "thanks for almost running me over Mr. Range Rover, have a pleasant day in our fair city"?  Whatever. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by your duncle on November 23, 2011 at 9:43am

Hey Guy, don't waste your breath trying to tell people what to do.  Just show them what to do.  They will follow.

 

Lead by example with smiles, waves and "good mornings!".  Riding with the Golden Rule on your side. Tip your tweed helmet to drivers that are doing a good job.  I would even suggest forgetting the sticker and going with a tweed armband.  Otherwise, I wish you a Happy Thanksgiving with my favorite lyric from Depeche Mode, "People are People".  Cheers!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scotto 6.8 on December 2, 2011 at 10:49am

So a bit of follow up to this idea.

 

 

I've been in touch with Sarah Becan who created the "League of Courteous Cyclists" (LOCC) graphic.  I presented her with the idea of putting some LOCC stickers around the city on bike racks and she liked it.  

 

 

 

She has a bunch of the stickers (and a few t-shirts if anyone is interested) that she would dedicate to this purpose.

 

 

Hopefully some cyclists (scofflaws and law-abiders) will read these and understand that their are other cyclists who ride courteously and safely - it could serve as some positive reinforcement.

 

By the way, Sarah does some great work in a variety of mediums, please check it out:

Her comics: http://www.sauceome.com/

http://sarahbecan.com

 

I'm definitely interested in placing the stickers, does anyone else want to help distribute?  What other places might benefit from a sticker.

 

Scott

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Jarrow on December 2, 2011 at 10:54am

That's a great logo!   Places that would benefit from a sticker would be: bike racks, the single parking meters meant for bicycles, telephone and electrical poles near busy intersections, particularly along Milwaukee and Elston (major bike routes), and even bicycle shops.  Get the word out where folks go to get their bikes looked at.

Scott H said:

I'm definitely interested in placing the stickers, does anyone else want to help distribute?  What other places might benefit from a sticker.

Scott

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on December 2, 2011 at 1:32pm

It boggles my mind that right on the sticker for a group centered on being courteous you are endorsing cursing at people...

It is never necessary to curse.  Fun, yes, but never necessary.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page