A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

If Only He'd Taken The Lane



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 29th 06, 03:15 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default If Only He'd Taken The Lane

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/135749


Note the article had to include:
"He was wearing a helmet" Of course he is still "seriously hurt".

He may have had his 'head down', however did passing traffic keep him
from getting around the trailer?






Ads
  #2  
Old June 29th 06, 03:30 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default If Only He'd Taken The Lane


Brent P wrote:
> In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> > http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/135749

>
> Note the article had to include:
> "He was wearing a helmet" Of course he is still "seriously hurt".


Why shouldn't they mention it? The writer isn't making a judgement,
they are stating facts of the wreck.

> He may have had his 'head down', however did passing traffic keep him
> from getting around the trailer?


What's the difference? Are you going to blame legally driven autos for
something yet another dimwit did on a bicycle?

  #3  
Old June 29th 06, 04:04 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default If Only He'd Taken The Lane

In article .com>, Larry Bud wrote:
>
> Brent P wrote:
>> In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>> > http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/135749

>>
>> Note the article had to include:
>> "He was wearing a helmet" Of course he is still "seriously hurt".


> Why shouldn't they mention it? The writer isn't making a judgement,
> they are stating facts of the wreck.


It's the usual pro-nanny state crap.

>> He may have had his 'head down', however did passing traffic keep him
>> from getting around the trailer?


> What's the difference? Are you going to blame legally driven autos for
> something yet another dimwit did on a bicycle?


Dimwits in automobiles rutinely expect bicyclists to dive in and out of
parked vehicles on the road side. He should have been riding further to
left when parking is legal on the road and have been well to the left a
few hundred feet before the trailer. However, motorists will act to 'pin'
down a bicyclist on a path that is blocked by another motor vehicle.

I have had drivers intentionally try to force me into parked vehicles on
a number of occasions when I was younger and not as experienced. They
would do this by coming very close to me just before I reach the
parked vehicle intending to force me into going to the right to avoid a
collision with them but then having the parked vehicle directly in front
of me. Imagine they are either entirely ignorant or think it's funny.
Now when I see a parked vehicle ahead I move left gradually starting a
good distance before hand. By the time I reach the parked vehicle I am
outside the door zone.

This crash could have easily been the result of an inexperienced
bicyclist (in traffic) and motorists who pinned him in, or even
intentionally blocked his move to the left by accelerating. I would
expect the bicyclist went into the drop position and accelerated to
merge left but then had a driver accelerate to block, forcing him to
abort but being too late to stop. A dimwit POB riding slowly with his
head down would not have in anyway been seriously hurt, thusly this was
rider in the drop position going full out or at least at significant speed.

  #5  
Old June 30th 06, 03:44 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default If Only He'd Taken The Lane

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

>>> Not outdriving one's brakes is the rule no matter what kind of vehicle
>>> one is driving.


>>You're driving, accelerating to merge into an open gap when the arsehole
>>accelerates and closes off that gap.


> Leaving a gap behind him for you to erge into.


Not the same with a bicycle. Someone can accelerate and block you when
you are at a point of no return. You can actually be in the gap when the
driver accelerates and blocks you. Because of the size and speed
differential, 'behind him' becomes 'into him'. Of course an experienced
bicyclist in traffic expects this and can deal with or prevent it, the
inexperienced bicyclist however could end up crashing.

>>Bicycle brakes aren't the greatest


> All the more reason to never outdrive them.


In order to compete for space with motor vehicles, one does have to
outdrive the brakes in the sense you are describing them. However because
as bicycle is small, there is usually a way to compensate, for instance a
move to the left or right will allow one to stop safely along side a car.

Which reminds me of arseholes who have to pass at traffic signals. they
force their way past and then jam on the brakes. I have at times ended up
just going right past them because they took my braking space and well,
if they are going to pass rudely using their power, I'll pass rudely
using small size and take back my spot in the queue. (a majority of these
drivers fail to accelerate at the same rate as I do on the bicycle when
the light turns green)

> In any case, either this guy wasn't paying attention, or he failed to
> leave himself an out.


I stated he is likely inexperienced.

>>But this brings up a flaw with your bike lane concept, nobody is to park
>>in traffic lanes.


> Huh?


Parking in 'bicycle' lanes forcing these sort of situations.


  #6  
Old July 1st 06, 05:17 AM posted to rec.autos.driving
Brent P[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,639
Default If Only He'd Taken The Lane

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> The story says the trailer was parked on the shoulder of the road, not
> in a bike lane. Oh, wait - according to you a "bicycle lane" is merely
> a "glorified shoulder," so in your eyes the trailer WAS in the bike
> lane. My bad.


Then the bicyclist wasn't where he should have been. He should have been
on the roadway.


  #7  
Old July 2nd 06, 03:59 AM posted to rec.autos.driving
Matthew Russotto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,429
Default If Only He'd Taken The Lane

In article >,
Brent P > wrote:
>In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>> http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/135749

>
>Note the article had to include:
>"He was wearing a helmet" Of course he is still "seriously hurt".


Maybe if he weren't wearing a helmet he could have seen in front of
him even with his head down.

>He may have had his 'head down', however did passing traffic keep him
>from getting around the trailer?


Who cares? Did his bike have brakes?


--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
June is Lane Courtesy Month Ivan Driving 12 June 19th 06 06:52 AM
Lane Inertia Larry Scholnick Driving 2 February 14th 06 04:11 AM
Merging redux (onramp, lane reduction, junction) Daniel W. Rouse Jr. Driving 35 October 25th 05 04:14 AM
Construction Zone Lane Restrictions Paul Hovnanian P.E. Driving 0 September 26th 05 10:34 PM
Sloth turn lane confusion Alexander Rogge Driving 6 April 29th 05 08:01 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.