SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An Anonymous Coward writes:
Velonews has this story, http://www.velonews.com/2017/05/news/legally-speaking-brought-justice_437651 which describes an incident of road rage against a bicyclist. Turns out, this was the wrong cyclist to buzz, he was a lawyer and eventually settled with the cager's insurance company for USD $4500 -- setting a price for cyclist harassment in Louisiana.
The road-raging driver had just endangered the life of the cyclist and his toddler, and now he was spoiling for a fight. It began on a calm Sunday morning in New Orleans. Charlie Thomas had gone for a ride with his young daughter Colette, towing her in a Burley trailer, enjoying the ride and time together. But on the edge of the iconic French Quarter, their peaceful Sunday morning was violently interrupted when a speeding car buzzed them, passing within a foot of Charlie and Colette.
[...] "I'm not trying to start anything," Charlie said, "but you passed way too close to my daughter and me."
And that's when the driver, motioning that he was about to get out of his car, responded with his tough-guy threat: "How about I get out and f—k you up in front of your kid?" Charlie's emotions surged, but he knew that any further engagement would be unproductive, and with his daughter there, unsafe. So he broke off the encounter, and the driver sped away.
[...] Although the incident didn't involve a physical impact, Louisiana has both a three-foot passing law and a non-harassment law on the books. Charlie filed suit seeking damages for the driver's harassment. There had never been a case setting the value of damages for a harassed bicyclist under Louisiana's law, so Charlie and the driver's insurance company were in uncharted negotiating territory.
Eventually, Charlie negotiated a settlement that established a value of $4,500 damages in a civil case for cyclist harassment in Louisiana; the proceeds were donated to Bike Easy, the New Orleans-area bike advocacy group. The official case on the books is Thomas v. Arbona, Case No. 16-03127; First City Court for the City of New Orleans. Now, any other cyclist who sues a driver for harassment in Louisiana can use the value for damages established in this case.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by leftover on Tuesday May 09 2017, @08:05PM (18 children)
OK, so half of the problem is being addressed. Perhaps now these bicyclist lobbying organizations
could develop resources teaching bicyclists to avoid being asshats in rush hour traffic.
The undercurrent of hostility toward cyclists stems from their irresponsible behavior in traffic. If automobile
drivers slowed major feeder traffic to 10mph during heavy traffic times, they would be ticketed, at the very least.
Asking seriously: why should it be OK for cyclists to do so?
Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @08:25PM (10 children)
Don't have that problem here. NY State roads have (for at least the last 25 years) been rebuilt to new standards that include a wide walk/bike shoulder. Sometimes it is combined with a sidewalk ("pavement" in UK) that takes all the walking traffic. Some locally owned (town, county) roads still have narrow or non-existent shoulders, but they are typically not the ones that carry heavy rush hour traffic. Combine with 5 cents deposit on bottles and the wide shoulder is clean enough to ride a bike on, even with thin racing tires.
Are you really complaining about cyclists, or are you complaining about your local infrastructure?
(Score: 5, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday May 09 2017, @09:44PM (2 children)
Are you really complaining about cyclists, or are you complaining about your local infrastructure?
Could be both. Not every municipality can completely redesign its streets to make them very friendly to cyclists. Particularly in old east-coast cities in the U.S. with areas of downtown that sometimes have narrow streets, there's simply no room to expand the streets or the shoulders.
I lived in one of these cities for a while, and I can say without question that cyclists were the greatest menace on the streets. I was mostly a pedestrian commuter, and I was almost struck numerous times by cyclists who often came out of nowhere, didn't obey traffic laws, would serve on and off sidewalks and between parked cars, and didn't seem to realize that when you're in a heavily congested area where parked cars often obscure views for everyone, you can't just always speed through every intersection with a stop sign and red light. For similar reasons, at least twice while driving I almost hit cyclists who came speeding up on my right-hand side in a narrow passage and ignored my right turn signal thinking they could get away with speeding through an intersection where they were obligated to stop -- I'm a pretty aware driver, but when you come speeding through my blind spot at a time when I'm getting ready to turn and think traffic laws don't apply to you, you're creating a serious hazard. (Keep in mind this is the sort of place where intersections at rush hour were very busy with cars, pedestrians, schoolkids, etc. all over the place, so trying to account for the possibility of a rogue cyclist flouting traffic laws among that set of obstacles is just an unnecessary variable.)
I'm all for sharing the road. I support the construction of bike lanes, bike paths, better infrastructure for bikes in general. But there was a significant subset of cyclists (and I'll emphasize that it was a minority of cyclists), particularly during rush hour, who rode very aggressively and terrorized pedestrians and motorists alike. If you've ever ventured into the online cycling community, you'll find these folks, at least some of whom were likely radical cycling activists who hate cars and encourage aggressive behavior to "take back the streets" from cars. Personally, I'd have been happy if there were fewer cars on the roads (and as I said, I usually commuted by walking myself), but that doesn't excuse the cyclists' behavior.
To be clear -- I absolutely do NOT condone the horrible behavior of the motorist in TFA. But I do think at least some of the animosity some drivers feel toward cyclists is through the kind of encounters I mention here with the minority of cyclists who also can behave like jerks.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 09 2017, @09:56PM (1 child)
I'll emphasize that it was a minority of cyclists), particularly during rush hour, who rode very aggressively and terrorized pedestrians and motorists alike.
Oh come on. You can say the exact same thing about motorists: a minority of them drive very aggressively and terrorize pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists alike.
If you've ever ventured into the online cycling community, you'll find these folks, at least some of whom were likely radical cycling activists who hate cars and encourage aggressive behavior to "take back the streets" from cars.
Again, you can say the exact same thing about motorists: at least some of them are likely radical anti-cycling activists who hate bicycles and encourage aggressive behavior. You can even see it right here in this thread from Ethanol-Fueled.
but that doesn't excuse the cyclists' behavior.
No, but I don't see any attempts at all by society to curb bad behavior by motorists either ("road rage"). The only thing the government does is have police pull people over for speeding, especially in places/times where there's little to no traffic, rather than during rush hour or other crowded places where speeding is more of a danger. When was the last time you saw someone in rush-hour traffic pulled over for aggressive driving or tailgating? Never?
But I do think at least some of the animosity some drivers feel toward cyclists is through the kind of encounters I mention here with the minority of cyclists who also can behave like jerks.
Sure, and again you can say the same thing about those cyclists: at least some of their animosity towards drivers is caused by the poor and extremely dangerous behavior of so many drivers. Worse, cyclists can easily lose life or limb because of one wrong move by an evil or inattentive motorist. This just isn't true for the motorists. I can see how some of them might turn into extremists in this environment. Maybe if our governments actually worked at making the roads safer, instead of just trying to get as much revenue as possible, and worked at keeping the worst drivers off the road, then it wouldn't be so bad. It'd also help if they built more facilities for safe cycling. If they fucked up their city planning so much they can't build decent bike lanes, then they can turn to more radical solutions like building elevated bike lanes. Sounds a bit pricey, sure, but it's a lot cheaper than widening roads and highways or building bridges and overpasses for cars/trucks, and it's also a lot cheaper than building subways/light rail. It would also save society a ton by improving public health and thus reducing healthcare costs.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday May 09 2017, @10:26PM
You can say the exact same thing about motorists: a minority of them drive very aggressively and terrorize pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists alike.
In the city in question, I was NEVER in fear of motorists as a pedestrian. Despite the much higher volume of cars I potentially came into contact with, I can only recall once when I had a "close call" with a car as a pedestrian that wasn't my fault. But I was almost struck quite a few times by cyclists.
Of course there are jerks in all camps. But the difference for me was the unpredictability. Cars, for the most part, basically obeyed traffic laws with an exception of speeding or an occasional U-turn or something. They'd basically stop at Stop signs and traffic lights. They wouldn't drive off the streets. Many cyclists would not obey these laws, and they'd even weave (illegally) on and off the sidewalks.
Unlike your broad brush painting of all Southerners below, I'm NOT trying to condemn or stereotype all cyclists. I explicitly said that I advocate for better infrastructure to make cycling easier and safer. But I DO think -- at least in the city I'm talking about -- that there were a higher percentage of them that rode aggressively and definitely ILLEGALLY compared to motorists.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by leftover on Tuesday May 09 2017, @10:11PM (5 children)
The situation in New York sounds both decades ahead and decades behind here (Ohio).
In my suburb, there was an extensive network of bike paths, completely separate from
roads. They were intended for mixed bicycle and pedestrian traffic. The cyclists were such
self-righteous and rude assholes that the city banned bicycles on the bicycle paths.
So they went back onto the roads and continued being insufferable jerks.
As usual, I have to mention Amsterdam. Roads, canals, trams, bicycle paths and pedestrian sidewalks.
How utterly civilized.
Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @11:31PM (4 children)
In my suburb, there was an extensive network of bike paths, completely separate from
roads. They were intended for mixed bicycle and pedestrian traffic. The cyclists were such
self-righteous and rude assholes that the city banned bicycles on the bicycle paths.
That's the kind of anecdote that, if true, stops any self-righteous bicyclist in their tracks.
So, where can I find proof of this to throw in their faces?
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday May 09 2017, @11:55PM (3 children)
Multi-use trials are not the same as bike paths. In particular, speeds are limited.
Bike trails intended for commuting should not be filled with pedestrians.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 10 2017, @12:09PM (2 children)
"Bike trails intended for commuting should not be filled with pedestrians."
Then by this standard, streets intended for commuting motorists should not be filled with cyclists.
Fair enough, right? Or do cyclists see themselves as a virtue-signally class of entitled twats?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 10 2017, @06:49PM
Bikes::cars is not the same as pedestrians::bikes
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Wednesday May 10 2017, @10:48PM
It would not be such a problem if pedestrians acted in a predictable manner (that said, I have seen the same complaint about cyclists under this very story).
I find it is easier to pass pedestrians properly facing oncoming traffic. They don't meander nearly as much as a cyclist approaches them. Problem is that most pedestrians don't know that rule (passing vehicles are supposed to give them the lane). One time the local newspaper published two letters to the editor: each advocating a different side of the multi-use trail to walk on.
For my commuting I have taken to accelerating hard off the line (up to about 12MPH), then taking it easy as I reach the higher gears. This gives impatient motorists room to pass me. In my jurisdiction, cyclists are also expected to be as far right as practical. For some narrow lanes, that implies taking the whole lane. If the is snow/sand on the side of the road, that also forces me into the travel lane. Staying near the travel lane is important so that cross traffic can see you.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Tuesday May 09 2017, @11:15PM
NY State roads have (for at least the last 25 years) been rebuilt to new standards that include a wide walk/bike shoulder.
Wish we had that here. I do aerobics 3 times a week, driving a 2.5 mile trip takes 5-15 minutes depending on traffic lights (not traffic, the lights make the traffic). For half of that, if I rode my bike, I would consider it a combat tour in Afghanistan without the perks.
That said, I don't see how the city can help things. Widen the road? Take out buildings/widen bridges. Take out parking? The apartments were built assuming street parking was available, plus in some cases you flat out can't widen the road without destroying parts of strip malls.
I like to ride my bike but I'm a realist, sometimes the cost isn't worth the benefit. I will never be able to ride my bike safely to my local YMCA.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday May 09 2017, @08:46PM
Even their own city folk don't like them -- Here in San Diego a bunch of high-ranking cyclist douches are proposing to get rid of all those nice downtown parking spots to make the city more "bicycle-friendly."
Local business owners are raging because their business would drop. This is even in the gay part of town, where people are supposedly progressive, but they know losing all the traffic of those upper middle-class suburbanites would be catastrophic to their businesses.
The answer to your question is that the majority of cyclists are the same salesmen and middle-managers who drive douchey cars like the Prius and M3. They're just being the same douches on bikes, and know they have wide latitude to fuck over others with their right-of-way.
I think we should legalize clubbing cyclists. I've long felt the urge to come to a stop ahead of one and then open my car door at the last minute. "Whoops, didn't see ya comin' buddy!"
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @09:50PM
I'll bite. Lets look at traffic light stops. Many cyclists will get ahead of the lights to get a head start on the cars because "Oh sorry I didn't see you" combined with high acceleration away from the lights. It's just safer.
On round-abouts taking a position in front for any vehicle for the same reasons, if you not in front your not visable and you get cut up (read dead)
In addition filtering in traffic is more dangerous and the idea that the average car driver allows at least 3 feet clearance is laughable, Not only will they buzz you as they go by, but (because your so slow) then cut you up as they turn down a road without indicting.
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday May 09 2017, @11:39PM
The rule for bicycles is the same for motorvehicles. If you are getting a long line of vehicles behind you, you should pull over every 5 minutes to let traffic though.
Sometimes you need to move into heavy traffic because it is the only way to get where you are going (in a reasonable time). It may take me up to 2 minute to move over and execute a left turn. Most of that is probably spent waiting for the light.
(Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Wednesday May 10 2017, @07:22AM
The undercurrent of hostility toward cyclists stems from their irresponsible behavior in traffic.
Indeed, don't you just hate it when other people use the road too? I know you singled out cyclists, but let's be honest here, pedestrians aren't better.
And motor cyclists are even worse. Those are almost as bad as truck drivers. But the worst of the bunch is people driving cars. I mean, seriously, have you seen how people in cars drive? There should be a law against that. Road rage would be solved if people would just get off of my road - but noohoo. All these other people and their irresponsible behaviours are allowed on the road. Sheez, just stop, will you all? Go home and stay home!
</sarcasm>
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Wednesday May 10 2017, @12:04PM (2 children)
I don't currently bike to work (too far), but I have done so a lot, and in three different cities. I did have a couple of cars pass me uncomfortably close, but nothing awful, and explained at the time by the traffic situation.
Bicyclists, on the other hand, are the worst. They embarrassed me at the time, because I could see why drivers and pedestrians would get annoyed, and then potentially take it out on me.
There are two horrible groups of bicyclists who misbehave on major roads: The clueless and the snobs.
- The clueless don't ride their bicycle very often, and they either don't know or don't care about the rules. They doodle along, weaving across the whole roade, they don't wear helmets, they don't signal their turns. Totally clueless. Example: On the major road running through our town there is a nice, wide bicycle lane on each side. The amateurs are the ones who ride in the wrong direction, i.e., against traffic. Cars on intersecting streets do not always check for traffic travelling the wrong way. They are a menace to themselves.
- The snobs. These are the people on their super racing bikes, wearing their special bicycling clothes, generally going along like a bat out of hell. They know the rules, and don't care. Car parked on the side of the road? Hop onto the sidewalk (who cares about granny tottering along with her walker). Pedestrian crossing? Blow through it, dodging the woman walking with her little kids. These idiots are a menace to everyone else.
As other posters have written: I don't understand why the police don't clamp down on this. Try driving your car on the wrong side of a major street, and see what happens. Blow through a pedestrian crossing, or drive on the sidewalk in your car: you *will* get a ticket.
Bicyclists seem to get a free pass. As a bicyclist, let me say that they shouldn't. If the police can set up speed traps, they can set up traps to nail the clueless and the snobs.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 1) by purple_cobra on Wednesday May 10 2017, @10:16PM
UK resident, so obviously the laws and situation differ...
I used to walk about half a mile to work and every day, without fail, some idiot would be riding his bike on the pavement despite there being cycle lanes on both sides of the road. AFAIK it's illegal on pavements by the side of a road, but good luck finding a friendly police officer to issue a bollocking. If they want to risk life and limb on those infernal contraptions, that's their lookout; they should not be putting pedestrians at risk through their own selfishness.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11 2017, @12:14PM
As a cyclist - this. Fundamentally, cycling on the road is dangerous here in America. It is dangerous because the drivers are 1) not paying attention and 2) are dicks. That said, there is no enforcement of cycling rules. Just none, in either direction. As the perfect example - cyclist going the wrong way down the street? I see it literally every day. You can bet that a car driving down the left side of a highway would receive a ticket (they are a danger to other drivers!), and the cyclists seem to get a free pass, despite the fact that they endanger other cyclists.
Similarly - the rules frequently dictate that you be "kind of a jerk" for your own safety. As an example, in areas without a bike lane, you are entitled to 3 feet of space in the right lane, for safety. Cars that try to pass (without changing lanes) are breaking the law and endangering the cyclist. That said - it happened EVERY DAY on my ride to work.
There is just little education and no enforcement, so it is dangerous.