4 ms·

You've been hit by numerous bike riders while out jogging or walking on local trails? This is mind-blowing. As a former distance runner, I've put in 10,000+ mi

by xiaoma 12y ago

You've been hit by numerous bike riders while out jogging or walking on local trails? This is mind-blowing. As a former distance runner, I've put in 10,000+ miles of running on trails, on sidewalks and on small roads and done so in several countries. In over a decade of that, I was never hit by any cyclist. Even in terms of close calls I can only remember a couple. What kind of trails do you frequent and what the heck are you doing to get hit not once but numerous times? Are you using some kind of headphone that blocks out surrounding sounds?

bane 12y ago
I had a full on collision last year that sprained my elbow so bad I may have to get surgery. I'm waiting to see if it heals up. The bicyclist gave me an earful about blocking the shared-use trail with my walking until I called pulled out my phone to call the cops and then he high tailed it out there. It was literally a vehicular hit and run. And if I need surgery will cost me thousands of dollars and months of physical therapy on top of the medical and physical therapy bills I've already paid. About a month ago I was clipped by a guy in full kit who then kept on pedaling without checking on me (another hit and run). My wife was pushed off a trail by another guy in full tour de France kit while out for a walk earlier this summer. I've probably been hit or clipped or pushed a half dozen times since I moved into my neighborhood. I could go on. Bike riders around here are really serious about their hobby and are generally assholes to anybody who gets in their way.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- msandford 12y ago
  That's pretty awful and I can see how it might affect your views on cyclists. I would want to punch those guys myself. I had the good fortune to start cycling seriously with a university club where the coach was really strict about safe riding being a pre-requisite to participation and as such I don't do the kinds of things you're talking about. In fact most of the cyclists I know don't do that stuff either. But just because I'm not exposed to a bunch of jackasses doesn't mean they don't exist. I think your support of separate spaces for separate uses is admirable given the bad experiences you've had.
  - bane 12y ago
    Thanks. I support cycling, I think it's great. I wish it was easier and more practical to do in the U.S. What I don't support is this weird viewpoint that lots of American cyclists seem to have that the world revolves around their hobby and/or transportation choice. America was built around the car, it sucks, but that's the way it is. I don't like it, I wish it wasn't that way and I'm absolutely in love with the current trend in urban planning to de-emphasize the car and reemphasize more efficient transport modes: bikes, trams, subways, etc. As somebody who doesn't live in a city, this trend is not good for me because it makes it hard to get in and out of the city. But I recognize it as a better way for more people than just me and my car and I can get myself over my minor inconvenience and just drive to the local mass transit link and walk a bit instead of fighting for parking downtown. There's a balance somewhere, but cyclists don't seem to want to recognize it. They want to feign anger and offense when motorists complain when they take their bikes onto roadways that were not intended or engineered for them and they block traffic and cause safety issues. I recognize that not all cyclists are like this, but damn if the ones around my area aren't some kind of special crop of bastards (and there's enough of a population that bikes to support a very nice local bike shop I can walk to). I'm actually hoping that with better bike infrastructure more people get on bikes and drown these kinds of assholes out. The more people biking, the greater the political lobby to continue building out good balanced infrastructure for everybody and the more unacceptable it will be for bad cyclists to get onto automobile roads. If you want an idea of the kind of nonsense I deal with almost weekly, here's a picture I found (not my area but looks close enough) https://imgur.com/q1xM217 https://imgur.com/q1xM217 To be clear, I don't really have a problem with this https://imgur.com/E8CGnmt https://imgur.com/E8CGnmt other than I hope the guy on the left doesn't fall over or veer into highway traffic. But they're both off the road, not bothering anybody and doing their thing. You know what I'd love to see in that second picture? A barrier between me and them and that shoulder turned into a dedicated, clearly marked bike trail. At intersections, I'd love to see tunnels and overpasses purpose built for them. I'd love love love that.
    - msandford 12y ago
      > They want to feign anger and offense when motorists complain when they take their bikes onto roadways that were not intended or engineered for them and they block traffic and cause safety issues. The part I take issue with is "were not intended" because the laws are very clear on what rights and responsibilities cyclists have when using the roads. The law gives them a right to be there. The majority of states laws on the matter say that you have to ride as close as is practicable to the edge of the road and that cars are required to give you a three foot space when passing or overtaking or whatever you'd like to call it. And then many go on to state that when the lane is narrow enough that cars can't give you the three feet and still pass safely, you get the whole lane. In Texas and Florida if the lane is less than 14 feet wide there is no adjacent, designated bicycle lane (not the shoulder, but a designated lane) then the cyclist has the right to the whole lane. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_the_United_States#Remaining_on_the_edge_of_the_roadway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_the_United_State... In many states you're legally allowed to ride two abreast provided that it doesn't impede traffic so in cases with wide enough bike lanes this is OK and it's also allowed on roads where the lane is less than 14 feet wide and there is no bike lane. http://www.biketexas.org/en/infrastructure/texas-bicycle-laws http://www.biketexas.org/en/infrastructure/texas-bicycle-law... A lot of states also have laws that specify that cyclists must pull over and let cars pass if more than say 5 of them are piled up behind a cyclist, unable to pass. That's definitely a legitimate grievance for cars as they have the right to demand the cyclist let them pass but few know about the law much less follow it. In the first picture you linked the lane looks to be of questionable width (probably less than 14 feet) in which case what the riders are doing is not only legal but also for their own safety. Once more than 5 cars are behind them though, they all need to pull off and let everyone pass. I suspect that most of the cyclists you encounter conveniently "forget" about that part of the law, aggravating drivers. The "take the lane" laws are on the books so that cyclists can prevent cars from passing on roads that aren't wide enough to safely permit passing. It's infuriating at times when it's a single lane road and cyclists are poking along at 20mph instead of 50mph but the law enshrines this right. I can understand the frustration you feel when cyclists follow the law and take up a whole lane, and further when they break the law and don't allow passing. But that's what the law says so I have to respectfully disagree about the use of the word "intended"

by xiaoma 12y ago

bane 12y ago

I had a full on collision last year that sprained my elbow so bad I may have to get surgery. I'm waiting to see if it heals up. The bicyclist gave me an earful about blocking the shared-use trail with my walking until I called pulled out my phone to call the cops and then he high tailed it out there. It was literally a vehicular hit and run. And if I need surgery will cost me thousands of dollars and months of physical therapy on top of the medical and physical therapy bills I've already paid. About a month ago I was clipped by a guy in full kit who then kept on pedaling without checking on me (another hit and run). My wife was pushed off a trail by another guy in full tour de France kit while out for a walk earlier this summer. I've probably been hit or clipped or pushed a half dozen times since I moved into my neighborhood. I could go on. Bike riders around here are really serious about their hobby and are generally assholes to anybody who gets in their way.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
msandford 12y ago
That's pretty awful and I can see how it might affect your views on cyclists. I would want to punch those guys myself. I had the good fortune to start cycling seriously with a university club where the coach was really strict about safe riding being a pre-requisite to participation and as such I don't do the kinds of things you're talking about. In fact most of the cyclists I know don't do that stuff either. But just because I'm not exposed to a bunch of jackasses doesn't mean they don't exist. I think your support of separate spaces for separate uses is admirable given the bad experiences you've had.
- bane 12y ago
  Thanks. I support cycling, I think it's great. I wish it was easier and more practical to do in the U.S. What I don't support is this weird viewpoint that lots of American cyclists seem to have that the world revolves around their hobby and/or transportation choice. America was built around the car, it sucks, but that's the way it is. I don't like it, I wish it wasn't that way and I'm absolutely in love with the current trend in urban planning to de-emphasize the car and reemphasize more efficient transport modes: bikes, trams, subways, etc. As somebody who doesn't live in a city, this trend is not good for me because it makes it hard to get in and out of the city. But I recognize it as a better way for more people than just me and my car and I can get myself over my minor inconvenience and just drive to the local mass transit link and walk a bit instead of fighting for parking downtown. There's a balance somewhere, but cyclists don't seem to want to recognize it. They want to feign anger and offense when motorists complain when they take their bikes onto roadways that were not intended or engineered for them and they block traffic and cause safety issues. I recognize that not all cyclists are like this, but damn if the ones around my area aren't some kind of special crop of bastards (and there's enough of a population that bikes to support a very nice local bike shop I can walk to). I'm actually hoping that with better bike infrastructure more people get on bikes and drown these kinds of assholes out. The more people biking, the greater the political lobby to continue building out good balanced infrastructure for everybody and the more unacceptable it will be for bad cyclists to get onto automobile roads. If you want an idea of the kind of nonsense I deal with almost weekly, here's a picture I found (not my area but looks close enough) https://imgur.com/q1xM217 https://imgur.com/q1xM217 To be clear, I don't really have a problem with this https://imgur.com/E8CGnmt https://imgur.com/E8CGnmt other than I hope the guy on the left doesn't fall over or veer into highway traffic. But they're both off the road, not bothering anybody and doing their thing. You know what I'd love to see in that second picture? A barrier between me and them and that shoulder turned into a dedicated, clearly marked bike trail. At intersections, I'd love to see tunnels and overpasses purpose built for them. I'd love love love that.
  - msandford 12y ago
    > They want to feign anger and offense when motorists complain when they take their bikes onto roadways that were not intended or engineered for them and they block traffic and cause safety issues. The part I take issue with is "were not intended" because the laws are very clear on what rights and responsibilities cyclists have when using the roads. The law gives them a right to be there. The majority of states laws on the matter say that you have to ride as close as is practicable to the edge of the road and that cars are required to give you a three foot space when passing or overtaking or whatever you'd like to call it. And then many go on to state that when the lane is narrow enough that cars can't give you the three feet and still pass safely, you get the whole lane. In Texas and Florida if the lane is less than 14 feet wide there is no adjacent, designated bicycle lane (not the shoulder, but a designated lane) then the cyclist has the right to the whole lane. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_the_United_States#Remaining_on_the_edge_of_the_roadway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_the_United_State... In many states you're legally allowed to ride two abreast provided that it doesn't impede traffic so in cases with wide enough bike lanes this is OK and it's also allowed on roads where the lane is less than 14 feet wide and there is no bike lane. http://www.biketexas.org/en/infrastructure/texas-bicycle-laws http://www.biketexas.org/en/infrastructure/texas-bicycle-law... A lot of states also have laws that specify that cyclists must pull over and let cars pass if more than say 5 of them are piled up behind a cyclist, unable to pass. That's definitely a legitimate grievance for cars as they have the right to demand the cyclist let them pass but few know about the law much less follow it. In the first picture you linked the lane looks to be of questionable width (probably less than 14 feet) in which case what the riders are doing is not only legal but also for their own safety. Once more than 5 cars are behind them though, they all need to pull off and let everyone pass. I suspect that most of the cyclists you encounter conveniently "forget" about that part of the law, aggravating drivers. The "take the lane" laws are on the books so that cyclists can prevent cars from passing on roads that aren't wide enough to safely permit passing. It's infuriating at times when it's a single lane road and cyclists are poking along at 20mph instead of 50mph but the law enshrines this right. I can understand the frustration you feel when cyclists follow the law and take up a whole lane, and further when they break the law and don't allow passing. But that's what the law says so I have to respectfully disagree about the use of the word "intended"