Why Are DC Area Cyclists the RUDEST I Have Ever Seen ?

[ronwalf]

@Roscoe 9943 wrote:

First, most cyclists (at least right near me) are only moving “at the speed of traffic” because they have in fact slowed down the traffic. It’s clearly a very small minority of riders that maintains a pace at or near the posted speed limit.

The conditions are a disjunction. Any one of them is sufficient for a cyclist to take the lane, and they are a plain description of Maryland’s law regarding the matter:
(a) Each person operating a bicycle or a motor scooter at a speed less than the speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing on a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable and safe, except when:
(1) Making or attempting to make a left turn;
(2) Operating on a one-way street;
(3) Passing a stopped or slower moving vehicle;
(4) Avoiding pedestrians or road hazards;
(5) The right lane is a right turn only lane; or
(6) Operating in a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle or motor scooter and another vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.

I certainly won’t dispute that these rules you post are apparently factual. But neither can you dispute that following them as written would cause situations of total traffic backlog and demonstrate a complete lack of courtesy on the part of cyclists, who would be CHOOSING to make no effort whatsoever to convenience the traffic. Just as the 2-abreast riders do.

MDoT put that book out to educate cyclists on safe cycling. Their recommendations have nothing to do with conveniencing drivers. When I take the lane, I do it for safety reasons, not out of ego or to provoke drivers behind me.

[jabberwocky]

I don’t know what road you’re having these issues one (and honestly, I rarely ride in DC so I can’t comment on the RUDENESS of the riders there). Cycling has its share of selfish jerks, just like any other group of human beings.

I do reject the premise that taking the lane or riding 2 abreast is automatically rude. A sufficiently narrow road is going to require the motorist to use the opposite lane to safely pass regardless of where the cyclist is positioned. In my experience, motorists who get annoyed in these circumstances are the ones who want to pass in marginal circumstances anyway (i.e. on narrow roads, blind turns, etc). As such, I don’t feel all that inclined to decrease my own safety to facilitate their convenience.

I don’t advocate taking the lane in all circumstances, but I certainly will do so when I think it makes me safer, and fortunately the law is in agreement with me even if your average motorist isn’t. Does that make me rude? I don’t really know, and honestly don’t really care.

[Roscoe]

@ronwalf 9947 wrote:

MDoT put that book out to educate cyclists on safe cycling. Their recommendations have nothing to do with conveniencing drivers. When I take the lane, I do it for safety reasons, not out of ego or to provoke drivers behind me.

You make an interesting point, and I’m interested in hearing those in addition to venting.

So I guess ALL cyclists EVERYWHERE (in MD, that is) should ride in the center of the lane at all times then ? Because it’s both lawful AND increases safety ?

[ronwalf]

@Roscoe 9950 wrote:

So I guess ALL cyclists EVERYWHERE (in MD, that is) should ride in the center of the lane at all times then ?

No. But cyclists, in accordance with the law and through experience and education, should choose the lane positioning where they feel safest. It is both their prerogative and duty.

[Tim Kelley]

@DismalScientist 9929 wrote:

Tim: At least you stick to the streets for your Cat 6 races. :p

Rematch any day!

[Mark Blacknell]

Roscoe, do you ever drive on the Beltway in rush hour? If so, do you get the same sense of capital letter rage and sickness and disgust at the drivers in front of you that cyclists seem to inspire? Or is that just reserved for people on bikes?

[eminva]

Roscoe, I’m going to back up and clarify something that most of the responses to your post assume: most of us who ride regularly in traffic take the full lane for safety, and indeed, this is recommended in the Washington Area Bicyclists Association Confident City Cycling class. On many streets, it is not safe to ride “in the gutter.” Like most commuters, I ride fully in the lane in downtown DC every day and motorists, by and large, seem to understand what I’m doing and give me ample space when passing. I also don’t think I’m holding up traffic (it’s usually the other cars holding up traffic, but that’s another topic).

The streets you mentioned only have one travel lane in each direction. They are also secondary roads. I used to live reasonably close to that area and I think a lot of motorists use those streets to avoid East West Highway and Connecticut Avenue. Living so close to Rock Creek Park, which gets heavy recreational use on the weekend, I never expected to drive through or near the park quickly on the weekend. Just one minor downside to living near a beautiful but popular natural resource. And there are wider, more car friendly alteratives to the roads you mentioned above.

Liz

[jrenaut]

@DismalScientist 9935 wrote:

If this were true, it would be illegal to filter through traffic if the cars were moving at all.

I don’t know the laws on filtering. I had always assumed, if filtering was legal, then they were carving out an exception to the car law specifically for bikes.

[mstone]

@Roscoe 9944 wrote:

I have NEVER seen a cyclist hit in years of living right next to some of the most heavily cycled roads in Montgomery County. But EVERY weekend I see traffic backed up and travelling at 15 mph (if that) on many roads near here because some cyclists show courtesy, while an astounding number revel in their opportunity to flex their ego and achieve their small victory against motorists by slowing them down unnecessarily.
[/quote]

Perhaps you’ve never seen an accident because so many cyclists are protecting their safety by taking the lane…

Quote:

Which of course doesn’t even factor in the fact that many motorists are not very skilled and most of the “swerving back into their lane” occurs when they have to pass riders abreast by going 100% into the oncoming lane.

Unfortunately, accident statistics don’t bear that out. The major difference between the approaches is that the cyclist who takes the lane has a couple of feet of pavement to his right to give him some options, and the cyclist already at the edge of the road has no way to avoid injury. It is extremely common for motorists to have no idea where the right side of their car is, and these motorists will approach the cyclist regardless of how far they swung into the oncoming lane.

Quote:

What’s the problem with the bikers just showing a little courtesy in the first place ?

Well, if you’re not trolling you would have noticed by now that what you consider “discourteous”, others consider “essential for safety”.

[Roscoe]

@mstone 9960 wrote:

Well, if you’re not trolling you would have noticed by now that what you consider “discourteous”, others consider “essential for safety”.

Perhaps if you weren’t trolling you’d notice the glaring inconsistencies implicit in your reply, or you’d notice several facts that you either didn’t comprehend or choose to ignore.

First, the majority of cyclists on the MD roads I refer to are riding singly. Or in file. So for you to suggest that there are no accidents because they are taking the lane is…..perhaps wrong. Since most are not.

Second, If what you advocate is so “essential for safety”, why is it not universally, or even by majority, advocated ? It’s a provable fact that the vast majority of cyclists in the area do not consider taking the entire lane essential for safety….since if they did, they would DO SO !!

It’s simply an astonishing amount that DO choose to ride abreast for solely an increase in discourtesy, but no gain in safety whatsoever. How can these apparently accomplished cyclists have no problem riding courteously on the right when they’re solo…..but then feel that the horrifying danger of a car spending several seconds more in passing two riders who are on the right, rather than just one, is some kind of tremendous elevation in the danger level ? It’s not just discourteous, it’s counter-productive – they force motorists who may not be very skilled to make the more dangerous move of passing in an entire oncoming lane.

[Roscoe]

@Mark Blacknell 9953 wrote:

Roscoe, do you ever drive on the Beltway in rush hour? If so, do you get the same sense of capital letter rage and sickness and disgust at the drivers in front of you that cyclists seem to inspire? Or is that just reserved for people on bikes?

No, I usually don’t. Just the standard displeasure most probably get when the roads are extremely crowded.

And do you miss my point entirely ? I don’t have any sickness, rage or disgust for people on bikes. Just the ones that think it’s their time to ride side by side to chat while going 15mph in a 25 zone. Or who congest the roads by riding abreast ostensibly for “safety reasons” that are quite obviously specious, since the cyclists solo or in file have no safety problems in these areas.

By the way, ever ride the section of Rock Creek Park where the roads are closed on weekends ? If you approach it from the north there’s fully a mile of Beach Dr. that is open to traffic before the road is closed. Ever seen the crowds of what appears to be seasoned cyclists that just lollygag in that road with their buddies as they apparently approach where they are to begin their ride, probably not even going 15 mph ? It’s astoundingly discourteous. They just seem to think they can take over the road because they have numbers. They abuse other peoples’ concern for their safety by inconveniencing everyone else, just so they can selfishly gab while they approach their ride. No courtesy whatsoever.

[mstone]

@Roscoe 9971 wrote:

Perhaps if you weren’t trolling you’d notice the glaring inconsistencies implicit in your reply, or you’d notice several facts that you either didn’t comprehend or choose to ignore.

First, the majority of cyclists on the MD roads I refer to are riding singly. Or in file. So for you to suggest that there are no accidents because they are taking the lane is…..perhaps wrong. Since most are not.
[/quote]

Taking the lane has nothing to do with how many riders there are next to each other; I can do it alone or I can do it with someone. The assertion made earlier is that if you’re taking the lane anyway, riding two abreast doesn’t change the situation for following traffic.

Quote:

Second, If what you advocate is so “essential for safety”, why is it not universally, or even by majority, advocated ? It’s a provable fact that the vast majority of cyclists in the area do not consider taking the entire lane essential for safety….since if they did, they would DO SO !!

It is advocated quite often, as in the language you misread above from the MD manual, safe cycling training, etc. I’d guess that more people would do it in unsafe situations if they didn’t have misguided notions about “being courteous” that makes them hesitate to take the safest option.

Quote:

It’s simply an astonishing amount that DO choose to ride abreast for solely an increase in discourtesy, but no gain in safety whatsoever.

And there you go again. Since you’re completely convinced that you know what they’re thinking and that they can’t possibly have any thought of what’s safest for themselves, why continue the conversation? Everybody you disagree with is obviously wrong.

Quote:

It’s not just discourteous, it’s counter-productive – they force motorists who may not be very skilled to make the more dangerous move of passing in an entire oncoming lane.

Again, I’d rather it be dangerous for them than for me. Them having a head-on collision with another car at sub-highway speeds in a modern car is probably a walk-away accident. Them forcing me off the road because I have no room to maneuver probably is not. (Or, they could simply wait until it’s safe for everybody. Your original scenario of a twisty narrow road with bad sight lines and a double yellow line sounds exactly like the kind of scenario where people should just sit back and wait rather than squeeze past–whether they’re a little bit in the other lane or a lot in the other lane.)

Note: I have never been on the roads under discussion. I have been on a number of roads where it’s unsafe to ride near the edge, and am offended by the idea that nothing but rudeness can explain not wanting to do so.

[Roscoe]

@mstone 9974 wrote:

Note: I have never been on the roads under discussion. I have been on a number of roads where it’s unsafe to ride near the edge, and am offended by the idea that nothing but rudeness can explain not wanting to do so.

It’s good of you to at least admit your ignorance as to the roads I refer to, that sheds some light on why you don’t seem to know what I am referring to.

@mstone 9974 wrote:

Taking the lane has nothing to do with how many riders there are next to each other; I can do it alone or I can do it with someone. The assertion made earlier is that if you’re taking the lane anyway, riding two abreast doesn’t change the situation for following traffic.

It’s hard to understand why you don’t seem to comprehend what I’ve written. But to make it even simpler; NOBODY (at least that I have ever seen) takes the entire lane in these areas when they are solo. So why is this situation suddenly so dangerous when there are two riders that THEY need to take the entire lane….when multitudes of others have no problem not doing so.

@mstone 9974 wrote:

It is advocated quite often, as in the language you misread above from the MD manual, safe cycling training, etc. I’d guess that more people would do it in unsafe situations if they didn’t have misguided notions about “being courteous” that makes them hesitate to take the safest option.

So you’re trying to assert that MORE people should be taking the entire lane while riding solo in Montgomery County Maryland ? I haven’t heard that yet, but please just come out and say it if that’s what you mean. Perhaps I just misunderstand and I should actually be grateful that cyclists EVER ride on the right side on 25mph 2-lane roads ? Do I really just misunderstand that my own (apparently unwarranted and extraordinary) courtesy as a cyclist actually needn’t be shared by anyone else ?

@mstone 9974 wrote:

And there you go again. Since you’re completely convinced that you know what they’re thinking and that they can’t possibly have any thought of what’s safest for themselves, why continue the conversation? Everybody you disagree with is obviously wrong.

And there YOU go again…simply ignoring the FACTS. Specifically that if these roads are so consistently and easily traversed by cyclists keeping on the right side……that it is not logical that they are suddenly astoundingly dangerous for just a discourteous few, who need to take the entire lane, but only when with a friend.

@mstone 9974 wrote:

Again, I’d rather it be dangerous for them than for me.

Yes, that seems apparent. Unfortunately what doesn’t seem apparent, to YOU anyways, is that these riders force traffic into frequently making passing moves that are less safe than if the cyclists were on the right. I know, I know….you’ll try to say it’s really just me driving like that. Which is a pretty senseless thing to either assert or believe. When it’s well-known that drivers will frequently react without patience, why put them in a situation where it’s dangerous when they do so ? For NO GAIN.

[americancyclo]

Somebody make me stop reading this thread before I gouge my eyes out.

[jabberwocky]

@Roscoe 9972 wrote:

I don’t have any sickness, rage or disgust for people on bikes. Just the ones that think it’s their time to ride side by side to chat while going 15mph in a 25 zone.

Anyone complaining about being held up on a road with a 25mph speed limit deserves a smack with a wet fish. Roads with 25mph speed limits are small, neighborhood roads. They are not, by and large, commuting arteries. You should absolutely expect slow traffic on them. If slow traffic bothers you, do not commute on small roads with low speed limits.

[Author]

Posts