You've seen them (or maybe you are one): holier-than-thou urban bicyclist who think they're better than their environmentally destructive, car-driving brethren.
Will Doig of Slate's Dream City blog is a cyclist - and he has written about the image problem of urban bicyclist:
Urban bicyclists have an image problem. They’ve become stereotyped as pretentious, aloof jackasses, and a lot of this has to do with the changes taking place in cities right now. [...]
Railing against bikes, in fact, became a great way to sell papers. A hundred years ago, newspapers ginned up scare stories about the threat that hapless women on bicycles posed to pedestrians. Today, old-school tabloids like the New York Post have found that the bicyclists-versus-everyone narrative still resonates. In Op-Eds with titles like “Bike-Lane Bloodbath,” bicycles are portrayed as weaponized toys, and isolated accidents are held up as proof that bicycles are an urban menace. Last week in San Francisco, a 23-year-old bicyclist was charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter for striking and killing a pedestrian — a tragic incident, but one that occurred in a city where 800 pedestrians are hit by cars every year. Still, the story was front-page news, sparking an online uproar: “I’m sick of bicycles and their cocky, self-righteous riders,” one commenter wrote on the San Francisco Chronicle’s website. “Bicyclists believe that they are untouchable.”
So 'fess up: are you a bike snob? http://www.salon.com/2011/12/04/are_urban_bicyclists_just_elite_snobs/singleton/ - via Metafilter
No matter what vehicle you're using, if you're going 10 MPH, you don't belong on the road.
There - fixed it for you.
Face it Bicyclists are not the problem. Seriously, how many pedestrians or car drivers are being killed by inattentive bike riders? I'll even spot you the one already in the article. I'd bet you can't find a 10 in the past 10 years. How many bicyclists, pedestrians, other drivers are killed by other drivers every year? 40,000 - 50,000 in the US alone. So what is more dangerous? Obviously motor vehicles and their pretentious drivers are the real danger to our innocent pedestrian brethren.
My sister's car was hit by a boke, and the cyclist got up and rode away. Hit-and-run is still hit-and-run, isn't it?
So, open your eyes and grow up folks. There are bastards in every form of transportation.
I live in a semi rural area and we get the bicyclist snobs on weekends. They hold up traffic on a two lane road that has a double yellow for seven miles, and refuse to pull off to the side so people towing large horse trailers, end up behind them for miles. Which in turn causes a parade of vehicles whose drivers end up seething with rage. Which in turn causes an accident, when one driver a few cars back, "can't take it anymore" then decides to pull out, cross the double yellow on a blind corner, then swerves back into the lane to miss an oncoming car, and in turn hits the bicyclist, who refused to let a dozen cars pass them, Because the bicyclist felt that they have the same rights to be on the road.
There are few bicyclist that do obey the laws. However it is not those few who get noticed. Instead it is the pretentious a$$holes who give bicyclist the bad image.
Seriously? Cyclist and pedestrian die every day at the hands of drivers that say they had is coming. And most of the time, it's not even considered a crime or even a traffic violation.
With stories and comments like the ones associated with this blog post, as an urban cyclist, I feel more like a target than a snob.
Most people that could be urban cyclists are more likely put off bicycling because of the real risk of injury or death. Labeling somebody a snob for actually doing it doesn't help.
No, they're just cavalier given the amount of crush space they have.
Frau, you describe the kind of car driver who shouldn't be on the road AT ALL - someone who 'can't take it anymore' and pulls out on a blind corner, swerves because he sees an oncoming car (really? hence the no overtaking lines!) and hits a cyclist... and Frau has the nerve to attach blame to the cyclist 'because the bicyclist felt that they have the same rights to be on the road.'
Newsflash: they DO have the same rights to be on the road, and like it or not you have to live with that and adapt your driving to compensate for it. And don't forget that whoever makes a mistake, it will almost certainly end up worse for the cyclist than the car driver, so a little extra consideration (and patience) might not be out of place.
Most urban cyclists just want to get to work and obey the law as much as any car driver (ie about 90% of the time) but car drivers and pedestrians have two perception problems; firstly that they only notice the cyclists who are breaking the law; and secondly that they don't even understand the law. And example of the latter is that they don't realise that it isn't illegal for a cyclist to filter to the front of the queue at a junction, just so long as the cyclist does not obstruct anybody in doing so. Most car drivers not only seem to think this is illegal, but resent the fact that cyclists can do this while they are stuck in a queue.
The arrogant dickheads with their stupid clothing and often equally ridiculous bikes have created an image problem for the ordinary cycle commuter.
However what amuses me is that cyclists tend to hold the same resentment for motorcylcists as do car drivers for cyclists. As a cyclist, car driver, motorcyclist and (obviously) a pedestrian I hear all sides of the argument. Cyclists tend to whinge about the fact that motorcyclists can do most of the things they can as cyclists, but also have the speed advantage of cars and can accelerate faster than anything else on the road.
IOW it all comes down to resentment. Car drivers resent cyclists because they can get through urban traffic more quickly. Cyclists resent motorcyclists for the same reasons. My view is that all modes of transport have their advantages and disadvantages and if everybody stopped being such a bunch selfish cocks we would all get along on the roads just fine.
Only the other day I was stuck behind a horse trailer on a twisty moorland road for miles. It didn't pull over to let me past, but that's just fine because I realised that the driver was probably going as fast as was possible and safe. Why should I expect somebody else to pull over to make my journey quicker and in doing so make their journey take longer?
So much of the resentment and bad driving I encounter in road users is down to selfishness and self importance. It's all about people imagining that their journey and the time it takes is more important than anybody else's journey. Dangerous overtaking, running red lights, cutting people up, speeding, etc. nearly all of it is because people are impatient and selfish.
Traffic is about every road user, not just you and not just one type of road user.
On saturday I heard a friend complaining that he had been late because he had allowed and hour for the journey and due to traffic on the motorway he had been half an hour late. In his mind the problem was entirely down to the traffic preventing him from driving the whole journey at the 80mph he had planned, even though that would be illegal, not that he had not allowed enough time for his journey. And this is the attitude of most drivers these days - they treat the posted limit as a minimum cruising speed not an absolute maximum to be attained when the wind is fair.
no we don't! no... we... don't! and that's half the problem. i'm an "urban cyclist"... my attitude is that when i'm on the street, i'm on the vehicle's street. when i'm on the sidewalk, i'm on the people's sidewalk. i am last in the pecking order and it is my job to stay out of the way. and i do it well, and cause little trouble. and oh by the way, i'm not stopping for a stop sign or posting up at a red light, so don't get pissy. i'm getting a head of steam to get out of the vehicle's way.
on the flip side, i also drive a truck and give bikers room. BUT, please don't ride directly in front of me. it really is annoying, and you just shouldn't be there...
bikers are snobs. drivers are snobs. everybody is so self important and in a freaking hurry these days, it's ridiculous! too many people are wrapped up in their own heads.
-a cyclist.
I was driving behind a bicyclist in my hometown of Pittsburgh, home of many steeeeeep streets. On a particularly steep incline, this bicyclist missed his pedal and completely ate it in the middle of rush hour traffic. If I hadn't been driving way under the speed limit (both because of the rush hour traffic, and that the bicyclist was going quite slowly up the hill), I would either killed him or had to drive into oncoming traffic to miss him. It scared the bejesus out of me.
There are just some places that bicyclists shouldn't go, unless there are bike lanes. It's unfortunate, but true.
"it is my job to stay out of the way"
It's this kind of attitude that leads to some bad behaviors...
Yes, there are some times to stay out of the way. But if you wanted to, you are fully entitled to be an ass and play pretend like you're a car taking up the lane the whole time. As counter intuitive as it may seem, taking the lane can be a whole lot safer at certain times.
You DO have the same rights on the road whether you want to accept it or not.
What you do not have the right to do is running stop signs and lights. You are part of the problem here.
staying out of the way of cars and people leads to bad behaviors?!?!
running stop signs and red lights... you think i'm doing that during heavy traffic or something? take it in context, you ass.
"But if you wanted to, you are fully entitled to be an ass and play pretend like you're a car taking up the lane the whole time"
THAT is bad behavior.
but hey, if you want to piss people off and potentially get hit, go right ahead. i'll bike my way...
Also, to take it in context, you must give context.
Note "... be an ass and...", I don't recommend it, it is simply something that is legal to do.
I didn't even describe how I bike (or that I even bike in the first place) and you're attacking it?
Anyways, your philosophies on how to bike are more likely to piss people off and get you hit, but yeah, you too. Do your own thing I guess.
I think everybody has been stopped at a red light with no cross traffic only to see a cyclist come up on the shoulder, look both ways, and cross anyway.
"Frau, you describe the kind of car driver who shouldn't be on the road AT ALL - ... and Frau has the nerve to attach blame to the cyclist 'because the bicyclist felt that they have the same rights to be on the road."
No, I described a driver who had been stuck for more than several miles behind a line of cars going on average 20 mph. Their remark to the sheriff was "I couldnt take it anymore."
I have not attached blame to the bicyclist. They did that themselves. It was their own words to the sheriff when asked why they did not move over after they acknowledged that they did see the line of cars behind them "I refuse to let them pass... because I have as much rights on the road as they do."
I travel that road to and from work, as well as part of my job. Due to past observations, I had the sense enough to call the sheriff and inform them of a potentially dangerous situation. I had some concern for the bicyclist more than the traffic that was being held up. The sheriff did arrive, but had to fall in line behind what was about thirteen vehicles at about the fifth mile. The sheriff did observe what was going on for a mile, when the inevitable happened.
Both the cyclist and the motorist were ticketed. the cyclist whined about their ticket. One moment they were claiming that they had every right to be on the road and had the same rights as a motorist. The next moment they did not want a ticket because they were being treated with the same respect they would have been given had they been a motorist.
@Jolly
"@Frau so the cyclists "refuse" to pull over do they?"
In this instance, yes. This cyclist told the sheriif that they refused to do so. I did not say this. The cyclist did.
@Jolly
"I don't know about where you live, but in my neck of the woods there is no minimum speed limit."
While there is no posted minimum speed limit - there is law enforcement who uphold the law. This includes citing drivers, cyclists and any person operating a motor vehicle when they have broken the law. The cyclist in this instance received a ticket because they were "impeding or blocking the normal and reasonable movement of traffic" The sheriff does not limit themselves to bicyclists either. I have seen them ticket the school bus driver in the same section of road, for holding up traffic.
Our motor vehicle laws do have a section on traveling with trailers, large vehicles or slow movement. It is required that if you are holding up traffic you are required to move to the side and let traffic pass, when safe.
No I don't see that. If you have rights you should excercise them. And as for cycling like a coward, yes it does lead to bad behavior. Nervous cyclists who give way all the time lead car drivers to expect cyclists to give way all the time.
I like the French example. You know the maritime law where powered vessels must give way to sail? So if a powered vessel colides with a sailing vessel then it is up to the skipper of the powered vessel to prove the skipper of the sailing vessel was in the wrong. And it's pretty unlikely that he will manage that. Well in France if a car collides with a cyclist (or indeed motorcyclist) then the assumption is that the car driver was in the wrong. The onus is on the car driver to prove that the rider was at fault. This makes car drivers pay a whole lot more attention to two wheeled road users.
You are absolutely right, Jolly, bikers do have the right to ride right down the middle of the road going six miles an hour, all the while incoveniencing dozens of cars at a time. And, motorists have every right to think they are inconsiderate for doing so.
I am a kayaker. I have the right of way over motor boats on the river. It would be dangerous, stupid, and selfish for me to take the center of the channel and block the way for faster moving vessels.
And some cyclists do. No group on the road is without a-holes inconveniencing others within the law.
Don't get me wrong, taking the middle of the lane at the right time is more than warranted.
commuteorlando.com/wordpress/animations/lane-control/
This shows some reasons to take the lane
Amsterdam In Your Pocket
http://www.neatorama.com/2010/05/16/rush-hour-in-utrecht/
Most roads in the Netherlands or Europe in general as far as I know have bicycle lanes.
A lot of inner cities in Europe are banning car traffic, at least in part.
Conversely, there are enough rude biker's around who impede traffic for no good reason, flout all traffic rules, etc. to give many people the impression that biker's are inconsiderate.
Why a lot of people dislike a particular group of biker's is because they have a holier-than-thou attitude, which seems to say: "I'm the one saving the world here, so I get to do what I want."
The other day, I honked at a cyclist who entered the intersection without stopping or even slowing down and turned left in front of me without signalling. This guy looked at me like I was trying to abridge his rights. So, he cuts in line, then cops an attitude when someone complains. Way to go champ.
"coward" may be a strong word, but it's a better description than "cycling with consideration to everyone around me".
Giving consideration to everyone sounds more like biking predictably, presenting your self in the lane well, following the rules of the road, etc. Safer for you and other users of the road.
BTW, calling people names when ever they disagree with you isn't very effective
IME as a member of several groups it's car drivers who have the highest proportions of dickheads. But because almost all of us are car drivers we don't view car drivers as a group, what we do is subdivide it.
So you may feel that everybody who drives an Audi is arrogant and agressive. You may feel that all Rover drivers are dodering old fools. It may be that you expect every driver under the age of 21 to be a dangerous idiot with no road sense. And so on. Substitute car brands to suit your territory.
So when you're out in your car you view every other road user as not being part of your group. Lets say you're a white male, forty years old and drive a Volvo. Everybody who isn't a white male of a similar age and driving a Volvo is in a different group to you. You see a cyclist do something stupid and you think "all cyclists are dickheads". You see a car driver do something stupid and you don't think "all car drivers are dickheads" because that would include you. So you think maybe you think "all young drivers are dickheads" or whatever. Even if you saw a white male of about 40 driving a Volvo do something stupid you would probably think of a classification which includes him, but excludes you. "Look at that idiot. Men with beards just can't drive!"
If you happen to be a cyclist you don't think all cyclists are dickheads. You just categorize them into as many subgroups as you like to support your prejudices.
That's how most humans work. Divide the rest of the world into social groupings just so you can hate them. Sad really.
And yet still I get some idiot (middleaged, respectable looking man in a respectable looking car - so nuts to a whole load of prejudices) who decides he just has to overtake me. In the face of oncoming traffic and leaning on the horn while doing so. He wasn't in a hurry because once past me he didn't pull away.
Why did he do it? Simple really he is one of that mindless bunch who believes that certain road users must be overtaken, no matter what the risk. Cyclists, horses, farm machines, etc. no matter what the speed and what the situation you must overtake. Of coure half a mile later we reached a traffic light. I filtered to the front and used the ASL. For my troubles I got a blast on the horn from the angry old man as I passed.
This sort of thing isn't uncommon. A couple of years ago an idiot decided to pass me even though I was travelling at the same speed as the traffic. Said idiot found there wasn't room for him to slow and get back in before he reached the car in front of me. He hit the rear threequarter of that car. His excuse to the injured party actually was "I had to pass that idiot on the bike". Had to? I don't recall anywhere in the RTA where it says you have to pass cyclists.
* Before you say I was speeding. Strictly speaking I was, but in practice I was not. I could not be prosecuted unless I was doing 4mph more.
funny, i go about my way and don't get beeped at, let alone cause an accident. and my method is wrong?
great stories, thanks!