Missed connection

[DismalScientist]

@mstone 63033 wrote:

Which is all a good rant, except you’re talking about two different jurisdictions; the state police writing tickets on the interstates aren’t the same ACPD or FCPD writing tickets in front of the school…

The ACPD don’t seem to have any problems sitting at the ramps on 66 generating revenue by issuing HOV violations. I’m sure the revenue per minute there exceed that of dissuading bad behavior in school zones.

[jabberwocky]

@DismalScientist 63032 wrote:

The problem with “benign” cyclists running red after stopping and seeing that all traffic is clear and then proceeding across is that it would be perfectly safe for an automobile driver to do the same thing. (I’m not talking about signals not detecting cyclist here.) Defending this behavior by cyclists and not automobile drivers is basically saying the cyclists should have special rights. I don’t think this is a good way of establishing comity between road users.

Aside from that, my main issue is that cyclists who run lights consistently eventually get into a mindset that they are entitled to run lights. Several times in Reston I’ve almost hit cyclists who ran a light, and the reaction if you honk or say anything is they give me the finger or yell at me to “pay attention”. :confused: Its like, dude, run the light if you’re going to, but if I almost run your dumb ass over its gonna be your effing fault. Traffic signals exist for a reason, and you ignore them at your own peril.

[jrenaut]

@83(b) 63031 wrote:

I’m afraid I disagree about cyclists automatically being jerks just because they yell. I’ve had to bellow a sharp “Oi!” at more than a few pedestrians who were blithely jaywalking directly into my path on Penn. …

I don’t mean cyclists should never yell – in some cases it’s at least somewhat appropriate. But when the pedestrian is in between the two lanes of the cycletrack, behind the signs, waiting until it’s clear (and hopefully for their walk signal), yelling is being a jerk. There are marked pedestrian islands at most of the intersections, and pedestrians should be able to use them without being yelled at. Jaywalkers in your path are a different story.

[lordofthemark]

@DismalScientist 63032 wrote:

The problem with “benign” cyclists running red after stopping and seeing that all traffic is clear and then proceeding across is that it would be perfectly safe for an automobile driver to do the same thing. (I’m not talking about signals not detecting cyclist here.) Defending this behavior by cyclists and not automobile drivers is basically saying the cyclists should have special rights. I don’t think this is a good way of establishing comity between road users.

Arguably there are visibility differences – cyclists can see better than motorists can (a similar argument is made about the Idaho Stop). And of course if a cyclist errs in their crossing, the consequences are almost always going to be entirely to themselves. And there are cyclists who want to get out ahead of turning traffic, and be more visible, as a strategy to be safer. No similar argument for autos, which are not as vulnerable.

I do not feel myself an experienced enough street rider to be able to judge other riders who make those claims (or who might).

Cyclists DO have special rights. They have the right to filter between lanes of stopped traffic, to ride the sidewalk in most places, and to ride in bike lanes and on trails. Just as motor vehicles have the right to drive on limited access highways where bikes are banned. And they have no requirement to stay to the right depending on circumstances, as bikes do. There is a meme out there that the obligation to share the road, and the rule that bikes should in general act as vehicles, means that bikes and motor vehicles are the same under the law. They are not.

Now a benign red light violation may impair comity. True. That impairment is finite, and each rider can weigh that against all other considerations.

We have as much right to judge someone for their contribution to comity through their cycling practices, as we do to judge people for their contributions of time and money to bike advocacy.

[jabberwocky]

@mstone 63033 wrote:

Which is all a good rant, except you’re talking about two different jurisdictions; the state police writing tickets on the interstates aren’t the same ACPD or FCPD writing tickets in front of the school. There is a level of effort argument (easier to just go back to the same spot than find a new one in a different neighborhood each day) but that’s a matter of top level priorities. I don’t believe it’s a revenue issue; the police really don’t care much, and they’d still be able to write plenty of tickets. Cops generally really hate writing tickets, and will usually try to get some done as quickly as possible in the absence of any incentive to prioritize one spot over another.

*Shrug*. Even the locals tend to focus on highways (there are more highways in the area than just interstates, ya know ). I see tons of enforcement on, say, Baron Cameron Drive or Fairfax County Parkway, but basically zero on smaller roads. They focus on places with high volume, because then the down time between tickets is really low. Plus, on highways its a lot easier to find a place to hide, there are nice shoulders for people to pull over on and easy places to turn around to get back in position for the next ticket.

[bikeeveryday]

You: Jogger on the CCT between Conn. Ave. and E-W Highway this morning running toward Bethesda. In the right lane, wearing a highly visible white t-shirt, and NOT wearing headphones.

Me: Cyclist passing you in the left lane without providing audible warning.

You: “Please provide an audible warning when you pass.”

Me: “Sorry, …… but I had plenty of clearance…”

You: “That doesn’t matter!”

Me: After thinking about it… He’s right.

[Vicegrip]

@jabberwocky 63040 wrote:

*Shrug*. Even the locals tend to focus on highways (there are more highways in the area than just interstates, ya know ). I see tons of enforcement on, say, Baron Cameron Drive or Fairfax County Parkway, but basically zero on smaller roads. They focus on places with high volume, because then the down time between tickets is really low. Plus, on highways its a lot easier to find a place to hide, there are nice shoulders for people to pull over on and easy places to turn around to get back in position for the next ticket.

I am reluctant to join into this conversation but on this I disagree. I see FCPD bagging speeders in school zones and other high risk areas. Going 15 over in a school zone is not the same as 70 in a 55. One cop on a high volume road will be noticed by 50,000 the one in front of my kids school might be seen by 2000 people. The other 48,000 think cops are only on the highway. Both cops scanned all traffic while on post.

[eminva]

I am also reluctant to join in, but in Vienna, I do think the police maintain a visible presence around schools (and the eponymous school is across the street from the Pox HQ) and at key intersections near schools. I have seen enforcement of both speeding and stop sign running (the latter is enforced as to cyclists as well as automobiles).

Liz

[Hancockbs]

@lordofthemark 63039 wrote:

And of course if a cyclist errs in their crossing, the consequences are almost always going to be entirely to themselves.

Cyclists DO have special rights. They have the right to filter between lanes of stopped traffic

Having hit a pedestrian who was not in a crosswalk one dark night many years ago, I can tell you that they are NOT the only ones to suffer the consequences of their actions. It does have an effect on the other people that become involved in an incident.

Where does the “right to filter” come from? It is my understanding that bikes using the road are subject to the same laws as other Road users. I am not aware of any legal right to filter. Taking it just a bit further, if you filter past cars that recently passed you in a safe manner, don’t you think they have a legitimate beef if they have to wait to pass you safely again?

[mstone]

@Hancockbs 63046 wrote:

Taking it just a bit further, if you filter past cars that recently passed you in a safe manner, don’t you think they have a legitimate beef if they have to wait to pass you safely again?

No

[DismalScientist]

I don’t think the right to filter stopped traffic is specific to bikes. Cars can filter on the right to make a right turn if there is room. Generally lanes are not sufficiently wide for cars to filter each other.:rolleyes:

The special right of bicyclists to ride on the sidewalk makes them no longer road users when doing so. As such it is not a special road rule.

The “rule” that bicyclists ride on the right is really a rule that slower traffic stays to the right, whether motorized or not. Unfortunately IMO, this rule does not seem to be enforced against motorists any more. If you are riding at the prevailing speed of traffic, you have no obligation to stay to the right (as far as practicable).

[Hancockbs]

@mstone 63048 wrote:

No

Wow! I can only say that as a cyclist, I abhor your attitude. As a car driver, it infuriates me. You want all of the “rights” of the road, but none of the responsibilies. This is precisely why you, and yes, I mean you, mstone, will not be taken seriously as an advocate and why I don’t want you representing me as a cyclist.

[lordofthemark]

@Hancockbs 63046 wrote:

Having hit a pedestrian who was not in a crosswalk one dark night many years ago, I can tell you that they are NOT the only ones to suffer the consequences of their actions. It does have an effect on the other people that become involved in an incident.

Thats why I said almost. Quantities matter.

[jhr]

@bikeeveryday 63042 wrote:

You: Jogger on the CCT between Conn. Ave. and E-W Highway this morning running toward Bethesda. In the right lane, wearing a highly visible white t-shirt, and NOT wearing headphones.

Me: Cyclist passing you in the left lane without providing audible warning.

You: “Please provide an audible warning when you pass.”

Me: “Sorry, …… but I had plenty of clearance…”

You: “That doesn’t matter!”

Me: After thinking about it… He’s right.

As an added incentive: if you call your pass when there’s a bike rapidly approaching from the opposite direction, I will be glad to yell “bike up” at the top of my lungs at no charge.

[Hancockbs]

@DismalScientist 63049 wrote:

I don’t think the right to filter stopped traffic is specific to bikes. Cars can filter on the right to make a right turn if there is room.

Maybe I misunderstand the use of the term “filter”. As a motorcyclist, the term means to ride the line between lanes to get to the front of the line and to proceed in front of the traffic that has been stopped. This activity is highly sought by motorcycle riders, but is illegal in all states except California. As such, I expect the same law applies to bicycles.

If you are talking about using the right side of the right lane to get to the front for a right turn only, then you might be okay, but I would submit that you should have the same safety buffer (3 feet) that you ask cars to maintain.

[Author]

Posts