| |
Main
Date: 14 May 2007 20:33:51
From: Reuben Hick
Subject: Answering the Cager...
|
The local TV news station did a bit on a confrontation between cyclists and
an angry motorist. Guess who won.
Later they posted a blog where viewers can leave comments and I was
horrified to see the malevolence directed towards bicyclists. After
reading many of the comments, I was left with the impression that they would
drive over their own child if the kid delayed their travel by only one
second.
Apparently anger is only directed at bicyclists who delay them only few
seconds, and not at the dimwit who begins fishing around in her oversized
purse looking for her out-of-state cheques after the groceries have been
tallied up, or at the thoughtless clods at the post office, the DMV, the
buffet line, the telephone etc. Why do they get violently upset upon
sight of a rider in spandex but think nothing about how they inconvenience
everyone else when they stand in line at a busy McDonalds, and then, and
only then, when they are up to the counter do these mouth breathers tilt
their head up and stare at the menu that hasn't changed in forty years for
several minutes carefully contemplating before ordering what they have
ordered countless times in the past?
Even the folks over at the office are profoundly violent in their thoughts
towards cyclists who ride on the roads. Many even acknowledge that their
hatred and thoughts of brutal death towards the rider are irrational and
disturbing, yet they can't understand why the animosity.
So while pedalling home from yet another 11 mile commute, I thought "Cure
the ignorance" and hence here is a start at compiling an answer guide to the
homicidal cager.
"Bicyclists don't pay taxes so they shouldn't use the road."
1. Most adult bicyclists own one or more licensed and registered motor
vehicles. There is no discount if the car or motorcycle is parked in the
garage all year, or driven on the public roads continuously. If anything,
all other things considered equal, the car parked in the garage gets less
value out of his fees and taxes than the car being driven on the roads
daily. This is a case where the cyclist pays a higher tax per mile than the
motorist.
2. Taxes, inspections and fees aren't the only subsidy that cyclists give to
the motorist, the car that is garaged is probably also insured and much less
likely to be involved in a collision or a claim event. Each day the
motorist drives his car, his risk of filing a claim increases relative to
the parked car. In other words, the commuter cyclist makes an excellent
risk to the insurance underwriter and his premiums can be used to subsidize
the cost of carrying the daily driver.
3. On the topic of insurance, over fourteen percent of motor vehicles on the
road today are uninsured. In states like California the number is
twenty-six percent and Colorado boasts over one third of its motorists don't
bother having insurance. Quick, which one will cost you more? A commuter
rear-ending your car with his mountain bike or getting slammed head-on by an
uninsured drunk illegal alien operating a 1975 Ford F-350?
4. Ask yourself why major metropolitan areas have higher prices for fuel.
In part its because of gasoline reformulation. Those boutique fuels come
courtesy of the environmentalists. These fuels have less energy and cost
more than regular "rural" gasoline. Also as the number of motor vehicles
increases, local governments like to impose expensive and time consuming
emission tests. If cyclists quit their commuting or changed their
recreation to something that required driving somewhere, that threshold
might just be reached sooner and all kinds of new costs and hassles will be
added to everyone in the county.
5. Who trashes out the roads more requiring more maintenance and clean-up?
The 200 pound cyclist and equipment, or the two ton oil dripping pickup
truck filled with day laborers tossing trash as they pull their dirt, rock
and building material spewing trailer down the road? Who pays for the
disposal of the tires, oil, and eventually the worn out car?
---
"Your garaged car and your bicycle aren't paying gasoline taxes."
1. What an interesting argument. Based on that reasoning drivers operating
hybrids, electric cars and other high mileage vehicles are thieving bastards
too. All hail the Hummer, Dodge Viper and the extended length three axle
RVs as they rack up eight mile per gallon performances that pay more for
mile than the wind-up cars. Perhaps, since they pay many times more in
taxes per mile of road used, they should have a dedicated lane in their
honor. Government should even discourage the rich from driving fuel
efficient cars so that they will be forced to pay their much higher "fair
share" . Rich people, in order to promote social conscience should be
obligated to drive around in extended length limosines.
2. As a corollary, whatever argument one makes to give the electric-car a
pass can also be applied in spades to the bicyclist because the two wheeled
commuter doesn't put a strain on the electrical grid. In other words, the
bicycle isn't going to be a cause for brownouts. Now there is an
inconvenience.
---
"No matter who pays taxes, road taxes are to benefit automobiles"
1. If we are going to be all of a sudden concerned that taxes will be spent
so that a cyclist can commute, or heaven forbid, enjoy a healthy
recreational ride, then I would like to register my own personal fiscal belt
tightening. Lets close museums, libraries, public skating rinks, parks,
public baseball and soccer fields, river walks, hiking trails and any other
tax payer funded recreational site. If you are going to be homicidal
because I occupy a traffic lane with my bicycle, what kind of hypocrite must
one be to ignore the thousands upon thousands of cars crowding the roadway
so that they can drive to these recreational venues? Or is it OK to be
delayed several minutes by the masses driving to their yoga class, pizza
buffet or their child's piano lesson?
---
"The roads are for cars, use the bike lanes, sidewalks and jogging trails."
1. Most laws prohibit bicyclists from using the sidewalks. Which is usually
a good idea since the sidewalks are for walking and bicyclists often travel
over twenty miles per hour which makes the cyclist more dangerous to
pedestrians and their pets than motorists are to cyclists when the cyclist
is in the street.
2. Jogging trails are nice - for jogging. They are also nice for walking
pets, pushing strollers and for rollerblading. Jogging trails often are
used by recreational cyclists but the nature of jogging trails makes them
impractical for the commuter. Besides, weren't we complaining about taxes
being spent on cyclists when they should be spent on roads? Who
underwrites those out-of-the-way bicycle paths?
3. The law recognizes that bicyclists are entitled to enjoy the use of most
public roadways. If you hate bicyclists that much, there is always toll
roads and the interstate highway that you can claim all for yourself.
4. As for dedicated bicycle lanes? I usually love them, so do people who
like to park their cars in front of their homes. Bicycle lanes also act as
magnets for broken glass, sharp metallic building materials and roadkill.
After the winter season, it takes an unusual amount of rain to remove the
thick layer of tire shredding sand that was used to be on the ice covered
roadway. Oblivious joggers engrossed in their iPods also enjoy bike lanes
too.
---
"Bicyclists inconvenience me."
1. You are driving your SUV loaded with screaming kids to the local hair
salon on a busy street with only street parking. You will have to park
blocks away if there are no parking spots open in front of the shop. To
your delight you see an available parking space right near the front door.
What you probably didn't see, and most likely will never thank, is the
bicyclist inside who left the car at home rather than drive downtown to
occupy that space you just took.
2. Under most circumstances, the waiting to pass a bicyclist will take only
eight seconds out of your long life. During that eight seconds when rage
and thoughts of cold blooded murder fill your mind, take a few seconds to
ask yourself what kind of Jack Bauer torture was intended for the oblivious
cell phone phalker who slept through the traffic light causing everyone
behind her to wait another ninety seconds for the next light change. Then
ask yourself, if time is so important why you didn't TiVo American Idol
rather than risk turning on the program eight seconds after it started.
3. Lets say that you just discovered that the driver who caused you to sit
through another cycle of the traffic lights was on the way to the gym to
ride the stationary bicycle. Do you want to compare those precious eight
seconds the road cyclist "stole" to that mildly irritating ninety seconds?
4. Do you prefer to be dealing with the seventy or more cars parked outside
and around the elementary school twice a day, or would your commute be
faster if those same kids walked or rode their bicycle to school instead of
being chauffeured?
5. The delay on your life slowing down to traverse a reduced speed school
zone is much greater than waiting to pass the commuting bicyclist. Do you
wish to jump the curb and mow down the children trudging off to school with
the same zeal and fury you reserve for the commuting cyclist?
6. How inconvenienced are you when you watch the commuting bicyclist ride
over the horizon while you sit in gridlocked afternoon rush hour traffic?
It will take me thirty-five minutes to bicycle to the office, and twenty
minutes by motorcycle in pre dawn "traffic". If I were to ride home during
rush hour, that same trip is rarely more than forty minutes on the bicycle
and at least fifty minutes in the car - and I just had well over an hour of
aerobic exercise.
---
"Bicyclists are dangerous! They ignore traffic laws"
1. As pointed out earlier, most bicyclists also have a driver's license
which means that they have achieved at least the below average skill needed
to qualify for that laminated card. Furthermore, to say that most/all
bicyclists ignore the laws one must also posit that there is something
peculiar and mystical about a bicycle that causes the average "law abiding"
motorist to abandon all they know and care about and ride in a dangerous
manner as to taunt death the moment their feet are clipped to the pedals. I'm
thinking that in the quest to find a head to put the goat horns on, one
rationalizes that all bicyclists are members of the brain damaged neo
luddite Critical Mass cabal.
2. While we are pondering the dangerous bicyclist, we must also say that he
is also suicidal because any confrontation with a motor vehicle is a loss,
even a loss of life for the cyclist while the cager just shrugs his
shoulders, wipes the blood off the grill, unwraps the bicycle from the axle
and gets home before dinner gets cold.
3. But if bicyclists are so dangerous and lawless in comparison to the
motorist, why are the municipal traffic courts clogged and whole branches of
government are organized just to raise ad hoc taxes on motor vehicle code
violation? Are the red light cameras and radar traps for bicyclists or
for motorists?
4. Poor health is more dangerous than rolling a stop sign at an empty
suburban intersection. Fat people don't ride bicycles for long. They
either can't take the abuse on their bodies and quit, or they are
transformed by their new passion to be thinner and healthier. I don't see
cyclists chain smoking on their commutes, farding, or stuffing their faces
with the latest triple bacon cheese GluttonFest hamburger. Some of the best
looking and healthy men and women are bicyclists.
---
"I hate it when they ride in packs, three across, taking up the whole lane"
1. In many jurisdictions it's a code violation to squeeze a bicyclist out of
his lane. The police often advise bicyclists to utilize the law that
permits them to occupy the entire lane if they so desire. That dozen or so
bikes you see, whether they are single file, or riding stripe to stripe are
entitled to that lane. Get over it.
2. While you are delayed that eight seconds before you can pass, ask
yourself if the cyclists weren't cyclists but was a cop driving ten under
the posted speed limit scanning the neighborhood, would you like to shoot
the cop or run him off the road as much as you delight in "teaching a
lesson" to the cyclists? Same delay, same use of lane. I dare you to
pass the police officer.
3. Have you considered that when there are that many bicyclists riding
together in a pack that it probably wasn't an accident but instead it is a
club ride? And once you discover that it is likely an organized club ride,
they might even have a schedule? And as a scheduled club ride they might
be on the same road at the same time of day next week? Is there really
only one route and one time you can drive home or to wherever you must get
to?
4. Are you going to fire bomb the church down the street when they delay
your travel during the scheduled weekly service changes? Are you going to
unload an AK47 at the school bus that occupies an entire lane and delays
your travel much more than a bicyclist ever would?
---
"When cyclists ride the curb up to the front of the queue at the light, I
sometimes have to pass them several times"
1. This should be a clue to you that maybe the cyclist isn't really robbing
you of your five to fifteen seconds of life that you can't afford to lose.
If you have to keep passing the same cyclist, it might just be that he is
not delaying or inconveniencing you at all. In fact, it might just be the
other way around.
|
|
| |
Date: 16 May 2007 21:12:27
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager... What is comes down to!!!!!!
|
On May 15, 10:25 pm, ST <n...@no.com > wrote:
> I am very aware and have not been hit for about 20 years! But I do have
> close calls every week. People just do not understand it can be a
> life-or-death commute if you are not aware on your bike and bring your A
> game on every trip through the rush hour & Starbucks zone...........
Many posters here commute in many different environments yet don't
speak of their commutes as being life and death struggles. If you have
"close calls" every week you're doing something wrong.
Regards,
Bob Hunt
|
| | |
Date: 18 May 2007 02:26:20
From: ST
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager... What is comes down to!!!!!!
|
On 5/16/07 9:12 PM, in article
1179375147.319245.178830@q23g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, "Bob"
<hunrobe@aol.com > wrote:
> On May 15, 10:25 pm, ST <n...@no.com> wrote:
>
>> I am very aware and have not been hit for about 20 years! But I do have
>> close calls every week. People just do not understand it can be a
>> life-or-death commute if you are not aware on your bike and bring your A
>> game on every trip through the rush hour & Starbucks zone...........
>
> Many posters here commute in many different environments yet don't
> speak of their commutes as being life and death struggles. If you have
> "close calls" every week you're doing something wrong.
>
> Regards,
> Bob Hunt
>
Do you have crosses/memorials on the side of the road on your commute??
I do.......
Have you seen a dead cyclist, still uncovered, with a police officer asking
you when you stop if you knew him? Along your route?
I did.......
Did you see a motorcyclist down after being hit by a car in the last week
along your route??
I did...
|
| | | |
Date: 18 May 2007 12:13:39
From: _
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager... What is comes down to!!!!!!
|
On Fri, 18 May 2007 02:26:20 GMT, ST wrote:
> On 5/16/07 9:12 PM, in article
> 1179375147.319245.178830@q23g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, "Bob"
> <hunrobe@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 15, 10:25 pm, ST <n...@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am very aware and have not been hit for about 20 years! But I do have
>>> close calls every week. People just do not understand it can be a
>>> life-or-death commute if you are not aware on your bike and bring your A
>>> game on every trip through the rush hour & Starbucks zone...........
>>
>> Many posters here commute in many different environments yet don't
>> speak of their commutes as being life and death struggles. If you have
>> "close calls" every week you're doing something wrong.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bob Hunt
>>
>
> Do you have crosses/memorials on the side of the road on your commute??
>
> I do.......
>
> Have you seen a dead cyclist, still uncovered, with a police officer asking
> you when you stop if you knew him? Along your route?
>
> I did.......
>
> Did you see a motorcyclist down after being hit by a car in the last week
> along your route??
>
> I did...
Lotteries are a tax on those who failed maths.
Anecdote is not proof.
|
| | |
Date: 17 May 2007 06:04:43
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager... What is comes down to!!!!!!
|
On 16 May 2007 21:12:27 -0700, Bob <hunrobe@aol.com > wrote:
>On May 15, 10:25 pm, ST <n...@no.com> wrote:
>
>> I am very aware and have not been hit for about 20 years! But I do have
>> close calls every week. People just do not understand it can be a
>> life-or-death commute if you are not aware on your bike and bring your A
>> game on every trip through the rush hour & Starbucks zone...........
>
>Many posters here commute in many different environments yet don't
>speak of their commutes as being life and death struggles. If you have
>"close calls" every week you're doing something wrong.
Well, in RBTech some people take cycling very very seriously -- for
example if you ride around with less than 36 spokes on each wheel you
risk being stranded out there!!!!
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
| | | |
Date: 17 May 2007 05:30:38
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager... What is comes down to!!!!!!
|
John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetremove@jt10000.com > wrote:
> On 16 May 2007 21:12:27 -0700, Bob <hunrobe@aol.com> wrote:
>>On May 15, 10:25 pm, ST <n...@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>Many posters here commute in many different environments yet don't
>>speak of their commutes as being life and death struggles. If you have
>>"close calls" every week you're doing something wrong.
>
> Well, in RBTech some people take cycling very very seriously -- for
> example if you ride around with less than 36 spokes on each wheel you
> risk being stranded out there!!!!
Well, the 32 spokes on my front has caused me many sleepless nights. I
didn't feel like spending an extra $150 on the Schmidt dynohub, so I
built it with the Shimano (which only came in 32).
I really should take off the tire [1] and check how much braking track I
have left.
[1] Which I haven't done since I put it on.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
Hire the morally handicapped.
|
| | | |
Date: 17 May 2007 08:56:00
From: Curtis L. Russell
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager... What is comes down to!!!!!!
|
On Thu, 17 May 2007 06:04:43 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
<usenetremove@jt10000.com > wrote:
>Well, in RBTech some people take cycling very very seriously -- for
>example if you ride around with less than 36 spokes on each wheel you
>risk being stranded out there!!!!
>--
>JT
I assume you mean spares. Riding around with less than 36 spare
spokes, and you really risk being stranded.
I'd also have a spare pedal, but I don't know whether to go with a
left or a right.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 16:30:29
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
On May 15, 7:23 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com >
wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:58:51 -0700, tkeats2...@hotmail.com (Tom Keats)
> wrote:
>
> >It's not so much just behind stuck behind a cyclist --
> >it's having nothing to look at except that lycra-clad
> >ass up ahead, practically mooning them. When it finally
> >sinks in that they've been gawking at some guy's ass for
> >an inordinately long time, that's when they yell: "Faggot!"
>
> Funny.
>
> --
> JT
> ****************************
> Remove "remove" to reply
> Visithttp://www.jt10000.com
> ****************************
Stole this but it's from Ron White originally:
You Are All A Little Gay
There's a great sequence from a comedy routine by Ron White, where he
shares a bit of dialogue he supposedly had with one of his blue-collar
buddies:
"We're all a little bit gay."
"Naw man, I ain't gay!"
"Sure you are, and I can prove it to you."
"Hell no!"
"Well, do you watch porn?"
"Of course man, you know I watch porn."
"Do you only watch two women?"
"Naw, I like to watch a woman and a man make love."
"Do you like the man to have a tiny, flaccid penis?"
"Naw! I want to see a big hard throbbing cock!" {pause} "I did not
know that about myself!"
Bill C
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 15:54:53
From: Scott
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
On May 14, 7:33 pm, "Reuben Hick" <outerdarkn...@warmoose.com > wrote:
> The local TV news station did a bit on a confrontation between cyclists a=
nd
> an angry motorist. Guess who won.
> Later they posted a blog where viewers can leave comments and I was
> horrified to see the malevolence directed towards bicyclists. After
> reading many of the comments, I was left with the impression that they wo=
uld
> drive over their own child if the kid delayed their travel by only one
> second.
>
> Apparently anger is only directed at bicyclists who delay them only few
> seconds, and not at the dimwit who begins fishing around in her oversized
> purse looking for her out-of-state cheques after the groceries have been
> tallied up, or at the thoughtless clods at the post office, the DMV, the
> buffet line, the telephone etc. Why do they get violently upset upon
> sight of a rider in spandex but think nothing about how they inconvenience
> everyone else when they stand in line at a busy McDonalds, and then, and
> only then, when they are up to the counter do these mouth breathers tilt
> their head up and stare at the menu that hasn't changed in forty years for
> several minutes carefully contemplating before ordering what they have
> ordered countless times in the past?
>
> Even the folks over at the office are profoundly violent in their thoughts
> towards cyclists who ride on the roads. Many even acknowledge that their
> hatred and thoughts of brutal death towards the rider are irrational and
> disturbing, yet they can't understand why the animosity.
>
> So while pedalling home from yet another 11 mile commute, I thought "Cure
> the ignorance" and hence here is a start at compiling an answer guide to =
the
> homicidal cager.
>
> "Bicyclists don't pay taxes so they shouldn't use the road."
>
> 1. Most adult bicyclists own one or more licensed and registered motor
> vehicles. There is no discount if the car or motorcycle is parked in the
> garage all year, or driven on the public roads continuously. If anything,
> all other things considered equal, the car parked in the garage gets less
> value out of his fees and taxes than the car being driven on the roads
> daily. This is a case where the cyclist pays a higher tax per mile than =
the
> motorist.
>
> 2. Taxes, inspections and fees aren't the only subsidy that cyclists give=
to
> the motorist, the car that is garaged is probably also insured and much l=
ess
> likely to be involved in a collision or a claim event. Each day the
> motorist drives his car, his risk of filing a claim increases relative to
> the parked car. In other words, the commuter cyclist makes an excellent
> risk to the insurance underwriter and his premiums can be used to subsidi=
ze
> the cost of carrying the daily driver.
>
> 3. On the topic of insurance, over fourteen percent of motor vehicles on =
the
> road today are uninsured. In states like California the number is
> twenty-six percent and Colorado boasts over one third of its motorists do=
n't
> bother having insurance. Quick, which one will cost you more? A commuter
> rear-ending your car with his mountain bike or getting slammed head-on by=
an
> uninsured drunk illegal alien operating a 1975 Ford F-350?
>
> 4. Ask yourself why major metropolitan areas have higher prices for fuel.
> In part its because of gasoline reformulation. Those boutique fuels come
> courtesy of the environmentalists. These fuels have less energy and cost
> more than regular "rural" gasoline. Also as the number of motor vehicles
> increases, local governments like to impose expensive and time consuming
> emission tests. If cyclists quit their commuting or changed their
> recreation to something that required driving somewhere, that threshold
> might just be reached sooner and all kinds of new costs and hassles will =
be
> added to everyone in the county.
>
> 5. Who trashes out the roads more requiring more maintenance and clean-up?
> The 200 pound cyclist and equipment, or the two ton oil dripping pickup
> truck filled with day laborers tossing trash as they pull their dirt, rock
> and building material spewing trailer down the road? Who pays for the
> disposal of the tires, oil, and eventually the worn out car?
>
> ---
> "Your garaged car and your bicycle aren't paying gasoline taxes."
>
> 1. What an interesting argument. Based on that reasoning drivers operat=
ing
> hybrids, electric cars and other high mileage vehicles are thieving basta=
rds
> too. All hail the Hummer, Dodge Viper and the extended length three axle
> RVs as they rack up eight mile per gallon performances that pay more for
> mile than the wind-up cars. Perhaps, since they pay many times more in
> taxes per mile of road used, they should have a dedicated lane in their
> honor. Government should even discourage the rich from driving fuel
> efficient cars so that they will be forced to pay their much higher "fair
> share" . Rich people, in order to promote social conscience should be
> obligated to drive around in extended length limosines.
>
> 2. As a corollary, whatever argument one makes to give the electric-car a
> pass can also be applied in spades to the bicyclist because the two wheel=
ed
> commuter doesn't put a strain on the electrical grid. In other words, t=
he
> bicycle isn't going to be a cause for brownouts. Now there is an
> inconvenience.
>
> ---
> "No matter who pays taxes, road taxes are to benefit automobiles"
>
> 1. If we are going to be all of a sudden concerned that taxes will be spe=
nt
> so that a cyclist can commute, or heaven forbid, enjoy a healthy
> recreational ride, then I would like to register my own personal fiscal b=
elt
> tightening. Lets close museums, libraries, public skating rinks, parks,
> public baseball and soccer fields, river walks, hiking trails and any oth=
er
> tax payer funded recreational site. If you are going to be homicidal
> because I occupy a traffic lane with my bicycle, what kind of hypocrite m=
ust
> one be to ignore the thousands upon thousands of cars crowding the roadway
> so that they can drive to these recreational venues? Or is it OK to be
> delayed several minutes by the masses driving to their yoga class, pizza
> buffet or their child's piano lesson?
>
> ---
> "The roads are for cars, use the bike lanes, sidewalks and jogging trails=
."
>
> 1. Most laws prohibit bicyclists from using the sidewalks. Which is usua=
lly
> a good idea since the sidewalks are for walking and bicyclists often trav=
el
> over twenty miles per hour which makes the cyclist more dangerous to
> pedestrians and their pets than motorists are to cyclists when the cyclist
> is in the street.
>
> 2. Jogging trails are nice - for jogging. They are also nice for walking
> pets, pushing strollers and for rollerblading. Jogging trails often are
> used by recreational cyclists but the nature of jogging trails makes them
> impractical for the commuter. Besides, weren't we complaining about tax=
es
> being spent on cyclists when they should be spent on roads? Who
> underwrites those out-of-the-way bicycle paths?
>
> 3. The law recognizes that bicyclists are entitled to enjoy the use of mo=
st
> public roadways. If you hate bicyclists that much, there is always toll
> roads and the interstate highway that you can claim all for yourself.
>
> 4. As for dedicated bicycle lanes? I usually love them, so do people who
> like to park their cars in front of their homes. Bicycle lanes also act =
as
> magnets for broken glass, sharp metallic building materials and roadkill.
> After the winter season, it takes an unusual amount of rain to remove the
> thick layer of tire shredding sand that was used to be on the ice covered
> roadway. Oblivious joggers engrossed in their iPods also enjoy bike lanes
> too.
>
> ---
> "Bicyclists inconvenience me."
>
> 1. You are driving your SUV loaded with screaming kids to the local hair
> salon on a busy street with only street parking. You will have to park
> blocks away if there are no parking spots open in front of the shop. To
> your delight you see an available parking space right near the front door.
> What you probably didn't see, and most likely will never thank, is the
> bicyclist inside who left the car at home rather than drive downtown to
> occupy that space you just took.
>
> 2. Under most circumstances, the waiting to pass a bicyclist will take on=
ly
> eight seconds out of your long life. During that eight seconds when rage
> and thoughts of cold blooded murder fill your mind, take a few seconds to
> ask yourself what kind of Jack Bauer torture was intended for the oblivio=
us
> cell phone phalker who slept through the traffic light causing everyone
> behind her to wait another ninety seconds for the next light change. Then
> ask yourself, if time is so important why you didn't TiVo American Idol
> rather than risk turning on the program eight seconds after it started.
>
> 3. Lets say that you just discovered that the driver who caused you to sit
> through another cycle of the traffic lights was on the way to the gym to
> ride the stationary bicycle. Do you want to compare those precious eight
> seconds the road cyclist "stole" to that mildly irritating ninety seconds?
>
> 4. Do you prefer to be dealing with the seventy or more cars parked outsi=
de
> and around the elementary school twice a day, or would your commute be
> faster if those same kids walked or rode their bicycle to school instead =
of
> being chauffeured?
>
> 5. The delay on your life slowing down to traverse a reduced speed school
> zone is much greater than waiting to pass the commuting bicyclist. Do you
> wish to jump the curb and mow down the children trudging off to school wi=
th
> the same zeal and fury you reserve for the commuting cyclist?
>
> 6. How inconvenienced are you when you watch the commuting bicyclist ride
> over the horizon while you sit in gridlocked afternoon rush hour traffic?
> It will take me thirty-five minutes to bicycle to the office, and twenty
> minutes by motorcycle in pre dawn "traffic". If I were to ride home duri=
ng
> rush hour, that same trip is rarely more than forty minutes on the bicyc=
le
> and at least fifty minutes in the car - and I just had well over an hour=
of
> aerobic exercise.
>
> ---
> "Bicyclists are ...
>
> read more =BB
Here's a tip on an argument I've used a number of times when trying to
talk calmly with a motorist who's nearly hit me, tried to hit me,
screams at me, or whatever. When the argument shifts to a discussion
of any of the points you mention, which they almost always do, try
this: Tell the driver that even if you concede every point the guy
makes, not that you are, but IF, then ask them if the appropriate
penalty for violating their rule that you shouldn't be on the road is
death? Be nice about it, but ask 'em if they really think you should
die.
When you get the puzzled look that invariably follows, explain that if
they hit you, it will likely kill you. Ask 'em again if they really
think that whatever they're upset about is worth killing you over?
With only one exception, I've had everyone I've used this approach
with come to the realization that trying to cause a crash or trying to
hit you is a really stupid idea. Most have apologized. The one guy
who told me that if I didn't like it, tough... well, unfortunately he
drove away before we could "discuss" it further.
|
| | |
Date: 15 May 2007 20:25:38
From: ST
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager... What is comes down to!!!!!!
|
I tend to get pretty annoyed when someone almost kills me!
People in cars get "Inconvenienced"!!
WE get an "All expense paid" trip to the hospital! And even THAT does not
always happen!
When someone does come close to taking me down AND I can communicate with
them either then or at the next light....
I make sure that they will remember this incident in the future! I want this
to go through their head next time they are in this situation. If by
drilling this in their head they add cyclists to the list of items they look
for while driving my work is done....
I am very aware and have not been hit for about 20 years! But I do have
close calls every week. People just do not understand it can be a
life-or-death commute if you are not aware on your bike and bring your A
game on every trip through the rush hour & Starbucks zone...........
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 12:28:09
From: bdbafh
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
On May 14, 9:33 pm, "Reuben Hick" <outerdarkn...@warmoose.com > wrote:
I would add the use of the example of "horse-drawn carriages" aka
buggies.
There are parts of PA (e.g. the BikePa South Route around New Holland)
where one may see more buggies than cars. Motorists in those areas are
used to seeing such relatively slow-moving vehicles and manage to deal
with them (mostly) without rage.
-bdbafh
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 11:58:51
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
In article <5682i.3231$zj3.3103@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net >,
"Reuben Hick" <outerdarkness@warmoose.com > writes:
> Even the folks over at the office are profoundly violent in their thoughts
> towards cyclists who ride on the roads. Many even acknowledge that their
> hatred and thoughts of brutal death towards the rider are irrational and
> disturbing, yet they can't understand why the animosity.
It's not so much just behind stuck behind a cyclist --
it's having nothing to look at except that lycra-clad
ass up ahead, practically mooning them. When it finally
sinks in that they've been gawking at some guy's ass for
an inordinately long time, that's when they yell: "Faggot!"
> So while pedalling home from yet another 11 mile commute, I thought "Cure
> the ignorance" and hence here is a start at compiling an answer guide to the
> homicidal cager.
While you're at it, you can convince them of their
contributions to Climate Change.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 15 May 2007 19:23:36
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:58:51 -0700, tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats)
wrote:
>It's not so much just behind stuck behind a cyclist --
>it's having nothing to look at except that lycra-clad
>ass up ahead, practically mooning them. When it finally
>sinks in that they've been gawking at some guy's ass for
>an inordinately long time, that's when they yell: "Faggot!"
Funny.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
| |
Date: 14 May 2007 22:13:12
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
Reuben Hick wrote:
> Apparently anger is only directed at bicyclists who delay them only few
> seconds, and not at the dimwit who begins fishing around in her
> oversized purse looking for her out-of-state cheques after the groceries
> have been tallied up, or at the thoughtless clods at the post office,
> the DMV, the buffet line, the telephone etc. Why do they get
> violently upset upon sight of a rider in spandex but think nothing about
> how they inconvenience everyone else when they stand in line at a busy
> McDonalds, and then, and only then, when they are up to the counter do
> these mouth breathers tilt their head up and stare at the menu that
> hasn't changed in forty years for several minutes carefully
> contemplating before ordering what they have ordered countless times in
> the past?
Umm, sorry, but you are exhibiting exactly what they did. It's not that
they only get irate about cyclists. Suggest any topic, and people will
come out of the woodwork to rant about it. You just did that with your
favorites. They just had different favorites. Your contrast between
"bicyclists" doing one thing and "dimwits" and "mouth breathers" another
shows exactly the same quick anger as those who would run over their
children were the little darlings to get in the way.
> "No matter who pays taxes, road taxes are to benefit automobiles"
>
Well, here you have a point. Roads, and road taxes, are not just for
automobiles. They are for the public use, and those who would pilot a
dangerous, noxious vehicle on the public roads need a special permit to
do so. Those of us who walk or ride on the roads, or ride horses or
ox-drawn carts, have the right to use them.
There are exceptions, of course, on both sides. Limited-access
highways, by their very name, suggest that some users are kept off those
roads. Fine. Those who don't want their roads cluttered by the public
should go there. Bike paths serve the same function, and have similar
limitations, in that they are not everywhere, and they do not go everywhere.
> "Bicyclists are dangerous! They ignore traffic laws"
>
> 1. As pointed out earlier, most bicyclists also have a driver's license
> which means that they have achieved at least the below average skill
> needed to qualify for that laminated card.
So? So have most drivers. But your rhetorical point has a basis in
fact. Too damn many cyclists ignore the laws, and think themselves
abused should a driver repay them in kind. You want drivers to respect
cyclists' rights to the road? Then we cyclists have to do the same for
them. I have seen far too many experienced cyclists who on the one hand
refuse to stop at a stoplight, much less a mere sign, and on the other
scream at a driver for passing them too closely. You can't have it both
ways, and we shouldn't try to.
> 1. In many jurisdictions it's a code violation to squeeze a bicyclist
> out of his lane. The police often advise bicyclists to utilize the law
> that permits them to occupy the entire lane if they so desire.
In many states riding more than two abreast is OK only if it does not
impede other traffic. This is not an onerous anti-cycling law, it is
common courtesy.
--
David L. Johnson
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by
little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
| | |
Date: 14 May 2007 21:44:47
From: Reuben Hick
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
"David L. Johnson" <david.johnson@lehigh.edu > wrote in message
news:e-Odnd3jmKSnitTbnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@ptd.net...
>
> Reuben Hick wrote:
>
>> Apparently anger is only directed at bicyclists who delay them only few
>> seconds, and not at the dimwit who begins fishing around in her oversized
>> purse looking for her out-of-state cheques after the groceries have been
>> tallied up, or at the thoughtless clods at the post office, the DMV, the
>> buffet line, the telephone etc. Why do they get violently upset upon
>> sight of a rider in spandex but think nothing about how they
>> inconvenience everyone else when they stand in line at a busy McDonalds,
>> and then, and only then, when they are up to the counter do these mouth
>> breathers tilt their head up and stare at the menu that hasn't changed in
>> forty years for several minutes carefully contemplating before ordering
>> what they have ordered countless times in the past?
>
> Umm, sorry, but you are exhibiting exactly what they did. It's not that
> they only get irate about cyclists. Suggest any topic, and people will
> come out of the woodwork to rant about it. You just did that with your
> favorites. They just had different favorites. Your contrast between
> "bicyclists" doing one thing and "dimwits" and "mouth breathers" another
> shows exactly the same quick anger as those who would run over their
> children were the little darlings to get in the way.
As a point of contrast. IOW, the "dimwits" and "mouthbreathers" statement
is because we can get up front and experience what is "holding us up". The
word "dimwit" and "mouthbreather" is not used to described bicyclists unless
it is reflexive to utter those words at people who one is frustrated with.
"Mother F-----" and "Asshole" are the usual hasty road-side assessments made
of cyclists.
Lets say that your analysis is correct, and you are saying in so many words
that I am a hypocrite (just to get that out of the way), I must say that the
intensity of the distaste for those who take away my eight seconds of life
is anything near approaching the intensity of hate that I see in blogs, and
folks ranting about some cyclist they saw on the way to work.
For instance, is anyone surprised when the slackers at the USPS are playing
perfectly their role of the stereotype? I am delightfully surprised if
they half the speed and efficiency of your typical Walmart or Best Buy
checkout line. Nevertheless, the "mouthbreather" who is carefully studying
the menu has no excuse for studying the menu other than force of habit, lost
in thoughts, retarded, or indecisive. While waiting five minutes in line,
that person could just as well have been deciding what to eat. Yet absent
any valid reason for stalling at the counter doesn't get anyone upset - at
least I never have heard of it mentioned around the water cooler, which was
exactly the reason I brought it up. The act of wasting time at the counter
takes more time out of everyone elses schedule than your typical slowdown
behind a cyclist yet it doesn't get its 2 minutes of air time on the local
FOX News. Why is that?
I didn't know how to put any sort of contrast in there without it sounding
hypocritical. Maybe you have a better way to communicate the comparison.
<snipped >
> So? So have most drivers. But your rhetorical point has a basis in fact.
> Too damn many cyclists ignore the laws, and think themselves abused should
> a driver repay them in kind. You want drivers to respect cyclists' rights
> to the road? Then we cyclists have to do the same for them. I have seen
> far too many experienced cyclists who on the one hand refuse to stop at a
> stoplight, much less a mere sign, and on the other scream at a driver for
> passing them too closely. You can't have it both ways, and we shouldn't
> try to.
Which brings up an interesting point. Some people wear helmets because
they anticipate having to use them. I prefer not getting into a situation
where one would need that helmet. So to follow up on your sage observation
that there should be a quid pro quo, or at least a balanced expectation,
what are some of the ways that one can Dale Carnegie their way into a safer
ride?
I avoid those scenic roads that I have a right to use, but in exercising
that right I know it will peeve the motorists who are delayed, so I just
don't use them and so there is one less person to negatively influence a
motorist.
When approaching a four-way stop with traffic, its a throw of the dice on
whether there is a the legal and courteous progression by all sides throught
the intersection. I have found if I play "traffic cop" by waving through
the vehicle most likely to turn in the direction I am going to ride, I have
one less person trying to pass me, a decision has been made for the
indecisive, or they will in return wave me through and will not likely do so
in order to get a better shot at running me over.
I'm still relatively new to bicycle commuting in an urban area so some of
the other unwritten survival tricks will be of benefit.
I have noticed that if I begin my ride an hour before sunrise, people will
go out of their way to accomodate me. In contrast, one hour before sunset
on the very same route, and I think I am in a Mad Max movie. It can't all
be demographics.
|
| | | |
Date: 15 May 2007 10:33:12
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
Reuben Hick <outerdarkness@warmoose.com > wrote:
>
> I have noticed that if I begin my ride an hour before sunrise, people will
> go out of their way to accomodate me. In contrast, one hour before sunset
> on the very same route, and I think I am in a Mad Max movie. It can't all
> be demographics.
It does seem to me that people are less aggresive in the morning. Not
necessarily any better at driving, but less aggressive. I don't think
I've ever gotten a honk during the morning commute. I've gotten plenty
of those and other things in the afternoons.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"Visitors are expected to complain at the office between
the hours of 9 and 11 A.M. daily."
-In a Hotel in Athens
|
| | | | |
Date: 15 May 2007 19:32:13
From: Kristian M Zoerhoff
Subject: Re: Answering the Cager...
|
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.bicycles.misc.]
On 2007-05-15, Dane Buson <dane@unseen.edu > wrote:
> Reuben Hick <outerdarkness@warmoose.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have noticed that if I begin my ride an hour before sunrise, people will
>> go out of their way to accomodate me. In contrast, one hour before sunset
>> on the very same route, and I think I am in a Mad Max movie. It can't all
>> be demographics.
>
> It does seem to me that people are less aggresive in the morning. Not
> necessarily any better at driving, but less aggressive. I don't think
> I've ever gotten a honk during the morning commute. I've gotten plenty
> of those and other things in the afternoons.
I've gotten one honk in the morning, by a guy in a hurry to make his train
(he had a good 10 minutes to spare, and this was 2 blocks from the train
station), and one at night (guy was in a huge hurry to get to god-knows-
where, and no one was going to slow him down). That's it, actually, in
3 seasons of heavy-duty riding now.
I get the harrassment beep, inevitably from a car going in the opposite
direction, or a faull 1-2 lanes over from me in the same direction. That's
a different sort of "confrontation", designed to get a rise out of me.
I'm slowly learning to resist them, and suppress my middle-finger reflex.
--
__o Kristian Zoerhoff
_'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com
(_)/ (_)
|
|
