Missed connection

[Steve]

@rcannon100 62987 wrote:

Stafford should be one way.

Are you saying always or just during drop-off/pick-up? If the latter, then I agree. I also wish that if schools have a pick-up/drop-off zone, then it be more enforced to be used. Key Elementary has Key as a one way road during these times, which seems smart and to work well, but lots of folks still use Veitch, which always involves some mid-block crossing by parents and their kids. I figure what’s the point in making Key one way if it’s not the mandatory exit?

[mstone]

@Dickie 62980 wrote:

The “meaningless” aspect is only for those that do not see the consequences of their actions, but for those law abiding cyclists like myself who are stopped with the rest of traffic at a light I see the head shakes and disdain growing in your wake. I just love how some cyclists want more respect from drivers but refuse to earn it.

Baloney. Pure and simple baloney. (I’m keeping this at a family forum level.) DO NOT buy into that baloney narrative. I don’t care what you do, there are some people in cars who are going to be pissed off that you are on a bike. Don’t feed into the attitude that it’s ok for them to endanger cyclists because this one time this guy on a bike was a jerk. Unless the driver actually had his life put at risk, he’s just rationalizing being a jackhole. There’s no “earning” to be done here, we have a right to get where we’re going and we do not need to “earn” that right EVEN IF IT WERE POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THE MINDS OF THE JACKHOLES.

This morning I was honked at twice by people in cars, on the other side of the road. I’m not entirely sure why, but I think it was because I was on a bike. One of them seemed really confused by my actions, but that’s because I was waiting at a red where the other side has an advanced green. After he was gone I “blew through the red light” because it’s one of the ones on my route that doesn’t change for cyclists. I also “blew through the red light” at Nutley after the intersection was clear and the other side got their green because that one also doesn’t change for cyclists. Another cyclist passed me while I was sitting at the red, after slowing and observing that the road was clear. Am I morally superior for actually stopping and sitting longer at the red? I don’t know, and I can come up with reasonable arguments either way. I didn’t break any laws today, but per you, that’s “meaningless” and I need to “earn” more respect. (Presumably, by waiting until a car comes up, so he can shout at me to get out of the road while tripping the sensor?) But you know what? I don’t want to have a MEANINGLESS conversation about whether what I did was legal, I’d much rather the focus be on whether I acted in a way that respected others and didn’t put anyone else in danger. How ’bout we try that for a while and see what happens, ok?

You also seem to have completely missed my point that the reason the “blow the light” narrative is meaningless is that it doesn’t explain the circumstances in sufficient detail to understand whether the action was reasonable. I am confident (based on experience) that if you’re in a mixed group of people, whatever you think “blow the light” means is not the same thing it means for every other person.

[lordofthemark]

@Dickie 62980 wrote:

The “meaningless” aspect is only for those that do not see the consequences of their actions, but for those law abiding cyclists like myself who are stopped with the rest of traffic at a light I see the head shakes and disdain growing in your wake. I just love how some cyclists want more respect from drivers but refuse to earn it.

Increasingly I beleive that we will earn respect from drivers, when more drivers ARE cyclists, and understand the issues. But of course when we reach that point, the infra (including signals) will be changed to reflect the issues.

Which means that arguing over idaho stops, red light sensors, etc is less important than getting more people on bikes, whatever way we can.

[Steve]

@mstone 62990 wrote:

Baloney. Pure and simple baloney.

Just because we should have the right to not being endangered and not having some drivers hate us, doesn’t mean we actually have it. I don’t think real life works like that. I think Dickie’s point has something to do with advocacy, and the fact that as a group we are trying to overcome something here, which is a car-centric way of thinking. If you think those rights are just going to be handed to us all, I think that is wishfull thinking. It’s through a lot of advocacy, education, etc. that things will change. Part of that is trying to do things the right way, it is very important from an advocacy standpoint.

That being said, I know there is a lot of grey area with lights, especially in less trafficed areas. My attitude about red lights at 530am is sometimes different than at 530pm because of traffic and safety. I think the biggest problem is that the laws of the road are generally seen as universal for all road users, but that makes no sense to me. A bike is VERY different from a car: size, weight, acceleration, top speed, etc. What I would like to see is more road laws that identify bike provisions, to stop acting like we’re all the exact same road users.

[Drewdane]

To the guy headed West on the WOD this morning, approaching N. Van Buren Street: Sorry I cut in front of you as I was turning onto the trail from NVB; I should have squared that turn and didn’t.

In my defense, I see so few people headed West on the WOD on weekday mornings that cutting corners is almost never an issue – except when it is. Totally my bad regardless.

[NicDiesel]

lordofthemark;62991 wrote:

increasingly i beleive that we will earn respect from drivers, when more drivers are cyclists, and understand the issues.

Enjoy waiting for Godot.

[lordofthemark]

@NicDiesel 62995 wrote:

Enjoy waiting for Godot.

There are more cyclists today than there were 5 years ago.

And fewer than there will be in 5 years from now.

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single turn of the pedals.

You and I, we will change the world

http://hebrewsongs.com/?song=aniveata

[Tim Kelley]

@brendan 3622 wrote:

Yup, some even bike commute! http://www.commutebybike.com/2011/05/09/on-parking-and-bikeshare-not-all-republicans-think-alike-if-at-all/

Brendan

Also by the same guy, “How to Talk About Cycling to a Conservative” http://www.commutebybike.com/2010/12/11/how-to-talk-about-cycling-to-a-conservative/

[mstone]

@Steve 62993 wrote:

Just because we should have the right to not being endangered and not having some drivers hate us, doesn’t mean we actually have it. I don’t think real life works like that. I think Dickie’s point has something to do with advocacy, and the fact that as a group we are trying to overcome something here, which is a car-centric way of thinking. If you think those rights are just going to be handed to us all, I think that is wishfull thinking. It’s through a lot of advocacy, education, etc. that things will change. Part of that is trying to do things the right way, it is very important from an advocacy standpoint.

So, since you won’t get everyone on a bike to always behave well (any more than any non-zero set of people will always behave well), will you just admit failure? Or, is there some more practical approach? Because if that’s your going-in position, it’s over. Changing the conversation is hard, but at least it’s a path to something viable.

[cyclingfool]

@lordofthemark 62988 wrote:

I wish that when I drove 30MPH in a 25MPH zone, people wouldn’t tailgate me or flash their headlights because I go too slowly.

The reality is we are very very very far from universal enforcement of traffic laws. The notion of eliminating the 10MPH speed “buffer” over the limit is a dream (at least in Fairfax.) Police simply don’t have the resources. And speed cameras are illegal in Virginia (shows how much poliitcal will there is to enforce traffic laws). Discussions of enforcing everything need to take place in this context or they are unrealistic, and thus poor guides to policy.

I agree with you about lack of political will. Given that, though, it seems funny to me that VA is one of a two “states” (the other being DC) that outlaw radar detectors in private automobiles. I also see more “Speed Patrolled by Aircraft” signs on VA highways than any other state I’ve driven in. From those two things, you’d expect VA to be super harsh on speeding. Alas, that is not the case.

[americancyclo]

@americancyclo 62970 wrote:

I passed by a high school this morning and there were two giant electronic signs, a police officer and two crossing guards to remind drivers that pedestrians have right of way in the crosswalk and to NOT run over children.

@dasgeh 62984 wrote:

Was this W&L? It would be helpful to know for tonight’s MMTSSSC meeting.

This was George Mason High School on Haycock. The signs were on the north and south sides (facing traffic) of the pedestrian crossing between GMHS and the Giant supermarket across the street. Cops were on the High School side of the crosswalk, pointed towards Broad St/Rte 7.

[mstone]

@cyclingfool 63000 wrote:

I agree with you about lack of political will. Given that, though, it seems funny to me that VA is one of a two “states” (the other being DC) that outlaw radar detectors in private automobiles. I also see more “Speed Patrolled by Aircraft” signs on VA highways than any other state I’ve driven in. From those two things, you’d expect VA to be super harsh on speeding. Alas, that is not the case.

It’s mixed. If you get nailed for high speed on an interstate (20 miles over the limit or anything over 80), it’s a reckless driving charge which will get you a misdemeanor criminal offense in the national database. Some people get a very bad surprise when speeding on 95. That’s state police, and you can see them on 66 or 95 writing tickets as fast as they can, but there aren’t enough of them to really make a dent in number of speeders.

But for local neighborhood traffic, yeah, the local police don’t really take speeding seriously. If enough people complain they’ll put a radar sign out for a few days, and maybe an officer for an afternoon, but they don’t really see it as a priority. I also don’t know that they tend to write them as reckless driving charges; I’ve only really heard of that from the state police on the interstate, but finding people doing 45 in a 25 really shouldn’t be that hard. I’ll ask some friends in the local departments. It’s pretty common for those to get pled down, and they may just not bother if it’s not a priority from the top. (Or, knowing the local politicians, they may get actually get pressure if they do up the enforcement.)

[jrenaut]

@cyclingfool 63000 wrote:

…From those two things, you’d expect VA to be super harsh on speeding. Alas, that is not the case.

My impression is that VA is super harsh on speeding, but only where it’s convenient to enforce, like 66. Making sure it’s safe in front of every school in the county sounds like real work.

[Hancockbs]

@dasgeh 62981 wrote:

It doesn’t have to be subjective. There is plenty of data already gathered and plenty more to be gathered.

I love the use of data, but data should be used in creating and changing the law, NOT in deciding how and when to enforce existing laws. There are many problems with using data for selective enforcement, not the least of which is that the data can be interpreted in many ways. I still say that if you/we don’t like the law, work to change it rather than asking for selective enforcement.

[lordofthemark]

@Hancockbs 63011 wrote:

I love the use of data, but data should be used in creating and changing the law, NOT in deciding how and when to enforce existing laws. There are many problems with using data for selective enforcement, not the least of which is that the data can be interpreted in many ways. I still say that if you/we don’t like the law, work to change it rather than asking for selective enforcement.

given finite resources, prioritizing enforcement is also a policy decision, which can be supported by data.

[Author]

Posts