[JFF]

I’m wholly impressed with the cyclist’s calm demeanor. I know I would not have been able to stay that calm and measured as he was given the absurd vitriol being tossed in his face for absolutely no reason. Good for him for being the adult and not taking the bait.

[JFF]

@off2ride 69240 wrote:

In a situation like that I usually just slowly crank it up. If that person can keep up then I get home quicker using him/her as my motivation. It’s good clean fun. BUT!!! If this rider is trying to make me crash or just being unsafe, then I’ll back off so I can get home in one piece. After I peel off then he/she has my permission to crash by all means.

Yeah, I know. I was tempted to ratchet up the pace for the reasons you state, but frankly was going pretty hard and he caught up to me so thought it silly to open the throttle further to have him ride my tire at even higher speeds in the dark,creating even more risk. Plus I was just about to get off the trail at Spout Run so was about to slow up and turn left (presenting another potential problem with an uninvited drafter in the dark, despite my intent to signal) and needed to slow momentarily…plus I really wanted to figure out what he was thinking. So random.

[JFF]

@eminva 69220 wrote:

This was actually the topic of my first post to this forum. Interesting how it resurfaces from time to time.

Since then, I’ve gotten used to it during daylight hours, but it still freaks me out at night when I can’t look over my shoulder and see who’s behind me. The overlapping wheels is bad; I’ve had that from time to time but I usually try to get away from that rider the best way feasible (either slowing or speeding up).

Liz

Thanks all for the feedback.

This post sums up where I am. Happy to pull someone along, but ask first or chat me up along the way – but larger point about last night you state perfectly: “freaks me out a night” when very limited visibility makes it hard to see who is there, cannot judge how fast they are coming, have no idea where exactly they are in relation to me, unclear if they are they passing or drafting – and was only alerted to their presence as I was looking out for him closing in somewhere back and was only alerted by his heavy breathing right on top of me! And then to grumble like I’m not a team player when I was so much more polite than the situation called for = chutzpah.

Anyway, an outlier example as most all of the nightly trail users are great to each other….and it still beats crawling out of the city a midst the angry horns encased in my car.

[JFF]

@mstone 68876 wrote:

I’m less interested in matters of law and more interested in matters of safety. I also have seen no evidence that some cyclists holding themselves to an unrealistic standard (because no human, in any mode, follows all rules all the time) will positively affect the perceptions of those people predisposed to dislike cyclists. (Those people will continue to focus on the small percentage of truly dangerous cyclists, and there are no practical steps we can take to improve the behavior of those cyclists short of the consistent accounting of responsibility for behavior that results in adverse effects that I’m already advocating.)

That said, I’m just as hell-on-wheels against cyclists who are actually irresponsible (e.g., by passing too close to pedestrians or not respecting pedestrian right of way in crosswalks) as I am against motorists who do the same. I just choose to focus on whether people are behaving safely rather than whether they’re being perfect and dog-whistles like “stop signs” have nothing to do with safety. Generally, though, I criticize poor cyclist behavior when talking to cyclists in a venue and context that makes it appropriate. I don’t see value in holding that conversation up in a futile attempt to beg someone to grant me the standing to criticize other non-related issues.

What is “them vs us” about saying that people drive too fast, don’t pay enough attention, and don’t drive in such a way that demonstrates a deference to more vulnerable people? I say that AS A DRIVER. Most of the benefits of people driving better don’t accrue solely to cyclists–maybe the problem is allowing the discussion to get framed as a cyclist issue? I don’t want my kids run over walking in crosswalk any more than I want them run over riding a bike. Slowing traffic down (say, to the legal speed limit as a starting point) reduces the likelihood of pedestrian accidents and reduces the severity of such accidents, and happens to also make it easier to ride a bike.

I also don’t see what is “them vs us” about insisting that our public servants hold people responsible for clear violation of laws that result in injury or death. You’re absolutely right that there’s no up side to a general argument about who is more virtuous–that’s a stupid conversation anyway–but there’s no “side” in arguing that a specific death should be investigated rigorously and criminal charges should be filed as appropriate. I absolutely reject the notion that the response “stop signs” to the question of “why didn’t police file charges when this truck ran over that person” should be given any serious credence. Again, that’s not “them vs us”, it’s simply staying focused on things that matter in a tabloid world.

And yes, the vast majority of motorists aren’t out to get anybody, but they’re driving around in a social climate that normalizes behavior that increases the risks to others; they don’t mean to “get” anybody, but they also don’t drive in a way that demonstrates that they actually care if they “get” someone and the police forces in many jurisdictions excuse that as normal when someone gets killed. As a driver and as a pedestrian and as a cyclist and as a citizen, that bothers me tremendously.

Reading your post here, mstone, I think we are in violent agreement on more points than those points on which we disagree. Last post for me on this topic (I promise), but this Weekly Standard piece that just popped onilne will make your head explode: “Drivers Get Rolled – Bicyclists are making unreasonable claims to the road.” It reveals the extreme views of the vocal minority of “I hate cyclists” types and reinforces how this “us v. them” battle is getting worse — and that makes us all far less safe.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/drivers-get-rolled_766425.html?page=1

[JFF]

@mstone 68862 wrote:

No, it’s a false equivalency and cyclists should not encourage or support it. We should simply demand safer streets. If you want to separately advocate for cyclist law adherence in the interest of law and order, fine–bit the two are not related and we should not allow the safer streets discussion to be derailed by victim blaming.

I appreciate the differences of opinion and emphasis here, but I did not suggest equivalence. This is a ” yes/and” not an “either/or.” No victim blaming here. I’ve been chased down by a motorist and challenged to a fight as I legally/safely rode; had a motorist on GW parkway gun for me, horn blaring as cars stopped to let me use the crosswalk (he/she drove around stopped cars to bear down on me as I was smack in the middle of the crosswalk because he/she was outraged to wait all of 10 seconds); have been intentionally buzzed at high speed because someone thought it was funny, and I’ve almost been hit by inattentive drivers more than I care to recall. I get it and it’s highly personal to me. {Side note, I’ve also had wonderful interactions with motorists waving me on, stopping for me, giving a wide berth, etc. So not suggesting it’s all bad; it’s not}.

All that said, I reject the premise we should focus solely on motorist behavior and better laws/enforcement (we absolutely must do that) while not also owning up to the fact that cyclists don’t help themselves or our collective reputation when too many cyclists regularly flout traffic laws – and then we are somehow not supposed to discuss that dynamic which directly relates to how some motorists view us? Bad behavior of cyclists does not ever justify or equal bad behavior of motorists, period. But we can’t have it both ways on following traffic laws/courtesy either. So, yes, the conversations are intertwined, though not equivalent.

The vast majority of cyclists are responsible – and the vast majority of motorists are not out to get us (I suspect like most of you, I’m both a cyclists and a motorist). But we can’t just do more of the same and expect different results. As Dickie rightly suggests further above this post, the “them vs. us” debate is not getting us the safety progress we deserve. If anything, as the original NYT piece posits, “we’re at a scary cultural crossroads on the whole car/bike thing. I want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

[JFF]

@sjclaeys 68849 wrote:

I like the commentary overall, but do not accept the premise that cyclists’ own behavior should determine whether motorists should follow the law and police should enforce the law. We should all be a PAL and follow the law. However, the fact that a motorist saw 99 cyclists break the law does not give them the right to drive in a dangerous manner or to receive little or no punishment for injuring or killing a cyclist. Likewise, it does not give the police the right to automatically assume that the cyclist is at fault in an accident or to otherwise not enforce the law against motorists. Finally, it is illogical to equate the potential threat to public safety of a motorist acting in an illegal manner to that of a cyclists acting in an illegal manner. This does not mean that cyclists should not follow the law and that a cyclists can harm someone else. Rather, the threat posed by the motorist is much greater and, therefore, should receive the greater amount of attention.

No disagreement here. This is a yes/and situation. Just sayin’ we cyclists too need to do our part as plenty of ’em want it both ways: running a light and then getting PO’d separately when a motorist does something wrong near us. We can’t have it both ways. Yes, motorist threat to cyclists far greater than vice versa and legal punishment should reflect that. Unconscionable a motorist who killed a cyclist (or anyone else) for “driver error” is not punished.

[JFF]

@Dirt 68652 wrote:

Just out of curiosity, why not? Does it take more than a few seconds to change? I’m not asking to be obnoxious, I just encounter a lot of people who don’t want to stop their run, ride or walk to do basic things that will be polite to others, increase their safety or increase their comfort. They’d rather just continue their journey. Does the few seconds it takes really make a huge difference? I still have some things that I choose not to stop and change… I totally get that feeling. I do tend to stop if it is something that affects others or my own safety. That’s just me though.

It completely depends on who you commute with. If no-one complains, then you’re probably okay. I’ve learned from this thread and from experience on the trail that I’m not the best judge of what offends or blinds people. If someone tells me that my light bothers them, then I’m pretty sure that it does. If you’re not hearing it, then you’re probably okay.

For folks who are offended by someone’s light configuration, it is very difficult to talk to someone about it in a way that doesn’t sound overly negative and confrontational. The time to interact is extremely brief. I’m still trying to find a way to communicate it. I think it is important to let people know though.

See how it goes with your commute. I’ve had runners complain about a Bike Arlington front blinkie and ask me to put it on steady. For some people, any blinkie light up front is offensive. If the folks on your commute are cool with it, then by all means go for it!!! I generally don’t run a blinkie when I’m on the trail unless it is seriously dark, dumping rain and foggy…. and even then I don’t use one up front.

Thanks y’all for the great discussion!

Fair question about why not stopping -and no, you’re not being obnoxious! I appreciate the discussion and am truly trying to see all sides of this. That said, here’s my answer: if I have reason to stop, I, of course will. I stop for red lights and wait, even when traffic clears and others blow by me. I stop to help if someone needs it. I slow or stop as common courtesy a lot. So I do stop when merited, probably more than most. I’m in a hurry but not at the expense or safety of others around me. I also, however, get into an exercise groove and cycling already takes longer than my car so every stop keeps me longer away from my family -and with changing ambient light scenarios every few minutes, not practical to keep stopping/starting to screw w/a rear blinkie that is supposed to broadcast in the dark, by definition. Yes, if I thought my rear blinkie was inherently bad form/dangerous to someone behind me, I’d absolutely stop to turn it off. I guess I just don’t see the issue. I regularly ride at night and never once has a blinkie bothered me…and yes, I pass far more people than who pass me so I come up on multiple blinkies each night.

At the risk of stepping into it with others here, while I fully agree headlights need to be averted to oncoming bikes/joggers (akin to highbeams on the highway), me thinks the agnst directed at rear blinkies is far overstated. Just don’t focus on it and you are fine. The positive safety benefits FAR outweigh someone supposedly blinded coming up behind me. If I were picking my spots to get miffed at fellow cyclists, this one would not even be way down on the list, it would not be on the list.

[JFF]

@jabberwocky 68057 wrote:

My rules are: …Blinkies have no place on the trail on a bike….

Why no blinkies? My ride takes me down city streets, dedicated cycle tracks, multi-use trails and back on roads again…all on the way home in the dark, lit and semi-lit areas. I’m not about to stop and swivel my messenger bag’s blinkie and then my seat post blinkie to change settings time and again. I always shift my handlebar lights down/right when facing runners/cyclists, but it seems to me back facing blinkies don’t blind anyone coming up behind me.

I’m open to being wrong, tell me more?

[JFF]

No doubt. Commuting out of the city last evening, worst part was fighting the crosswinds on Memorial Bridge. Almost put me down twice. That said, ’twas a lot more fun than being stuck in my car!

[Author]

Posts