How to **** Off an Arrogant Pedalcyclist

In article >,
Zoot Katz > wrote:
>Sat, 14 May 2005 16:15:55 -0700,
>, Your troll,
>Scott en Aztlán > wandered:
>
>>http://tinypic.com/539poy
>>
>>There's a perfectly good bike lane (or shoulder, as Brent likes to
>>call them) not five feet from these lard-asses, yet they feel the need
>>to endanger pedestrians on the sidewalk. Why?!?!?!?
>
>What fuken pedestrians?
>Spineless as you are, you're incapable of walking upright.

Gotta love bicyclist logic.

>That sidewalk is totally devoid of pedestrians.

Except, of course, the one with the camera.

>It's sprawl writ large. It's made for cars.

No, even cars which would fit on the sidewalk would damage it.

>It's DEAD! Look at the scale. Humans aren't
>welcome there.

Not humans with agoraphobia, anyway.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article >,
Jim Yanik .> wrote:
>
>What is the difference between a cyclist and say a roller-blade skater?

An inline skater is more likely than a cyclist to use his shoulder on
a path-blocker.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article >,
Roy Owen > wrote:
>Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>>
>> OTOH, if every pedestrian to whom he failed to yield were to respond
>> by calling him a ****head, he'd quickly change his bad behavior.
>>
>Or maybe he'd just start packing a 9mm and blow people away.

In which case he'd end up dead or in jail in short order, also solving
the problem.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article >,
Bill Sornson > wrote:
>Jim Yanik wrote:
>> "Bill Sornson" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>> (Similarly, the vast majority of cyclists are considerate of and
>>> cooperative with motorists;
>>
>> "vast majority";HA,what BS.
>
>You yanking us, Yanik? Why would cyclists NOT want to coexist peacefully
>with motorists?!?

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

Matthew Russotto wrote:
> In article >,
> Bill Sornson > wrote:
>> Jim Yanik wrote:
>>> "Bill Sornson" > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>
>>>> (Similarly, the vast majority of cyclists are considerate of and
>>>> cooperative with motorists;
>>>
>>> "vast majority";HA,what BS.
>>
>> You yanking us, Yanik? Why would cyclists NOT want to coexist
>> peacefully with motorists?!?
>
> Two words: Critical Mass.

Two more words: Lunatic Fringe.

(Matthew Russotto) writes:

> In article >,
> Roy Owen > wrote:
>>Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>>>
>>> OTOH, if every pedestrian to whom he failed to yield were to respond
>>> by calling him a ****head, he'd quickly change his bad behavior.
>>>
>>Or maybe he'd just start packing a 9mm and blow people away.
>
> In which case he'd end up dead or in jail in short order, also solving
> the problem.

Lets review. Our problem is a rude bicyclist. You are tacitly
endorsing a course of action which "solves the problem" by leaving one
person dead and another either dead or in jail. Good work! I think
there is a job waitning for you in Washington D.C.

In article >, Matthew Russotto wrote:

> Two words: Critical Mass.

The counterparts to you, yanik, and galt.

They want cars off the road, you want bicycles off the road.

"Zoot Katz" > wrote in message
...
> Tue, 17 May 2005 22:50:59 -0700, >,
> "fbloogyudsr" > wrote:
>
> >BTW, Seattle has lanes reserved for buses (during rush hour), to keep
> >auto traffic moving, so the answer to your second question is yes.
>
> AFAIK, the reason it's done in Vancouver BC, is to keep bus traffic
> moving so that bus travel is more attractive and timely.

This is also the case in the Seattle area. For example, Bothell/Lake City
Way has a transit lane to facilitate the ease of travel for the buses. If
the issue was only keeping auto traffic moving, they'd only need cut-outs
for the bus to pull into at each stop.

Fbloogyudsr, however, may be refering to the bus lanes in downtown. Here, I
think the focus is to indeed keep the other motor vehicle traffic flowing.

> Bus lanes are sometimes shared with bikes. Bicycles are permitted in
> HOV lanes too.

Whether or not bicycles were permitted in the transit lanes like Lake City
Way was discussed on a local cycling commuter board, but I don't remember
the conclusion. Certainly it is a common practice on the weekends, when the
buses don't run as frequently and traffic is generally lighter. I think
there was some concern about cycling in the bus lane at rush hour when car
traffic is basically stopped and the bus in barrelling down the narrow
diamond lane at 40 mph.

Downtown is another issue. If you are cycling on Second or Fourth, which are
one-way and have the bus lanes, you want to be on the far left, not on the
far right. (In Washington State it is legal for cyclists on one-way streets
to be as close to the left as practicable as well as right.) The bus lane
simply has too many vehicles pulling in and out to be safe for cyclists.

--
Warm Regards,


Claire Petersky
Personal page: http://www.geocities.com/cpetersky/
See the books I've set free at:
http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

(Brent P) wrote in
news
> In article >, Jim Yanik
> wrote:
>
>> Have a car smack into a bicyclist at speeds 25mph or over and the
>> cyclist loses every time.
>
> I ride between 18 and 30mph. On arterial streets I am often crusing at
> 24-25mph. I have a speedo now, so I can actually see my real speed. At
> 25mph the collision speed would be about zero.

Depends on the vectors.And once you go flying OFF your bike,the impact with
the ground or some other solid unmoving object will not do you any
good.Even road rash is gonna hurt bad.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

(Matthew Russotto) wrote in news:v-
:

> In article >,
> Jim Yanik .> wrote:


WRONG;Jim Yanik did NOT say this,somebody else did.
>>
>>What is the difference between a cyclist and say a roller-blade skater?
>
> An inline skater is more likely than a cyclist to use his shoulder on
> a path-blocker.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net