Warning: iPod Zombie Cyclists On the Rise

Status
Not open for further replies.
Steve01S4 said:
To all of you drivers in here complaining about the idiots on bicycles (notice I did not call them cyclists):

Real cyclists hate those idiots far more than you do. The majority of us ride safely and pay attention to the flow of traffic and the rules of the road. You just don't notice us because we stay out of your way and do nothing to piss you off. In fact, you often don't notice us when you very nearly hit us. You do notice every idiot you pass though, and since they're the only ones you notice, they're the only ones you remember. You then come to assume anyone on a bicycle is an idiot, as seen in this thread so far.

So, you hate the iPod Zombie Idiots on Bicycles because they're annoying and inconvenience you on your commute. Cyclists hate them because they make drivers resent anyone on a bicycle. They don't just endanger themselves, they make the roads more dangerous for all of us.

And, if you don't like sharing the road with bicycles, ask your city to install more bike lanes.
Click to expand...

Pyroja said:
Things to note: Unless the road specifically prohibits non-motorized traffic, then cyclists have a right to the road. Given that you need a license to drive, cars only have the privilege to the road. Not saying it's right or wrong, just saying.

Now, I've seen my fair number of people on bikes that don't follow the rules, and frankly it ticks me off. Not as a driver, but as a cyclist. Almost any major road in the Bay Area has nice, wide bike lanes. Yet so many of these idiots on their $50 Huffy's ride on the sidewalk, and often times the WRONG WAY. They'll ride at night in dark clothing and no lights or reflectors (Protip for new riders: Reflectors are effectively useless. Get lights.). They'll ride with no helmet. And then they get indignant when you call them out or nearly hit them. This bothers me as a cyclist.

I'll admit, I play a little fast and loose with the rules at times. Usually only when it comes to stop signs. If I've got good momentum going, and the intersection is clear, I'll blow through a stop sign. If a car is there, I stop to let them go by. 9 times out of 10, they wave me on anyway. *shrug* I always stop at red lights, though. I treat 'em just as if I were in a car. More importantly, I ride in the bike line, on the correct side of the road. I wear my helmet. I have lighting on the front and back of my bike. I keep aware of my surroundings.

I'm with Nanan on the fear of large vehicles and inexperienced drivers. I used to ride my bike to high school every day. Having to deal with idiot teens and self-absorbed soccer moms in SUVs and the like who had a great habit of not noticing me and trying to run me off the road taught me well.

In my experience, there are idiots in cars as well as as idiots on bikes. I'm equally frustrated by both, but just as I don't hate ALL drivers, I certainly don't hate all those on bikes. All I can do is do my best to keep myself safe, lawful, and expedient in all situations.
Click to expand...


Well said by both. There is some serious "guilty by association" going on that often times has nothing to do with the people that actually pay attention to the laws of the road. As a cyclist, I am more wary of the people flying through the streets then anything else. People here seem to generalize true cyclists with the "squeaky wheel" idiots that dont pay attention and believe that everyone should yield to them. Those are the ones that should be hit. No matter what type of biker you are you should always wear protective gear (hell my wife and I were helmets, etc. riding our beach cruisers around the back streets) and realize that a car is much bigger and will more than likely kill you if not permanently injure you.

When riding with your ipod, it should DEFINITELY not be loud enough to impair your realization and understanding of things going on around you. If you can't hear sirens, cars approaching, etc then you shouldnt be wearing it.
 
I am a Cycling contradiction. I blow through lights and generally show little regard for the laws, I wear headphones. however, I don't get angry with drivers. I already know they won't or don't see me. as such I'm constantly looking around like a hawk because I know I'm responsible for my personal safety.
 
gregnash said:
When riding with your ipod, it should DEFINITELY not be loud enough to impair your realization and understanding of things going on around you. If you can't hear sirens, cars approaching, etc then you shouldnt be wearing it.
Click to expand...

What I find interesting about this topic is that people are up in arms about cyclists with earbuds, but no one gives a hoot about motorists with radios.
 
Blown 89 said:
Are there any topics of conversation you don't get your feathers ruffled over? Why do you even come on this forum if every topic posted makes you argumentative?
Click to expand...

who's being least argumentative? The person who defends his cycling habit or the person who lumps cyclists together stereotypically?

pot, meet kettle.
 
FIXED:

Pyroja said:
What I find interesting about this topic is that people are up in arms about cyclists with earbuds, but no one gives a hoot about motorists with radios hooked to dual amps hooked to monster speakers - turned up so loud your fillings fall out as they drive by.
Click to expand...
 
Lol most working folks (i.e. over 16 years old) don't need a soundtrack to get home. Sorry but that stereotype that covers 1% of drivers on the road isn't going to work.
 
Mav451 said:
Lol most working folks (i.e. over 16 years old) don't need a soundtrack to get home. Sorry but that stereotype that covers 1% of drivers on the road isn't going to work.
Click to expand...

Lulz. Most responsible cyclists obey the rules of the road and therefore don't stand out. Sorry, that stereotype that covers 1% of riders on the road isn't going to work.
 
Well for what its worth I live in Missouri where cyclists all seem to obey the rules of law and the road very closely, but then again, the people riding bikes out here are real cyclists, not just morons on bikes

most of the moron drivers out here are the ones who never should have passed the drivers test at the DMV
 
Being someone who doesn't own a car and rides a bike every day, I see a simple solution for this: require a bicycle provisional to gain road access. It wouldn't harm me any to go take a test, and it would only keep people off the roads that shouldn't be there.

Now, you could then place limits on people without the provisional (sidewalk only at x speed, not allowed to ride after x time, whatever), but in theory, something like this could be done at the elementary school level, akin to a children's driver ed, and extended to all people pretty easily with the end result being people learning the rules of riding early, leaving no room for excuses later.
 
I live in toronto and you do see those kinds here fairly often downtown, but I havent seen many of them being real reckless. There was this one time though, I was sitting with my feet out and some guy with no helmet and a big set of over ear headphones decides to run over them. It wasnt his lucky day because I was wearing steel toe shoes, and I was actually pretty shocked how far he flew. Luckily he didnt land on his head, and my feet were fine. Now that head on crash I had with this douche on a road bike (while Im on this cheap mountain bike that most likely weighs more than him and his bike together) going the wrong way on a one way road. . . that didnt end up too well for his helmetless head or bike.
 
I'm all for a provisional bike license. I've seen on more than one occasion where cyclists race through a red intersection, playing real life frogger. Not exactly responsible behavior, and it occurs regularly enough that the "wtf" look I see from nearby motorists no longer surprises me.
 
First - I'm a cyclist. I've raced before, volunteered for races/rallies, helped co-found a local cycling club and volunteered for local community related cycling programs. Dealing with the opinions expressed here are exactly why we formed the club.

In Texas atleast - bicycles ARE vehicles and must obey all vehicle traffic laws. You can't drink and ride, you must stop at stop signs, you can't speed (yes some cyclists can hit 40+mph in sprint). There are only a few laws that apply in addition to other vehicle laws -

You cannot impede the flow of traffic. Actually, this one applies to all vehicles, but seems to be pointed out more often in discussion with cycling. In talking with a local police officer that we asked to speak to our club - the definition of "impede" is vague and up to the officer's judgement.

You must ride to the right, as far as is practicable. This means within a few feet of the right side lane marker (in the lane, not on the shoulder). If something is in the road, you may take the whole lane. If you are on a two lane road (two lanes going your direction that is) you may take the rightmost lane. Also, cars must maintain a safe distance when passing you. Currently "safe distance" is debatable and a recent safe passing law that defined it as 3 feet was not passed.

When riding at night, you must have a fixed front light (that is on!) and a red rear reflector. Rear lights are better, but the reflector is what is required by law.

You cannot ride on the interstate (highway yes, interstate no) unless there is no access road. This is common when going over bridges in my area (we're rural).

Also, like all other vehicles you may NOT wear headphones while riding!

I'm sure I'm forgetting a few, but those are the major ones.

There are several reasons why cyclists are unfairly characterized as being dangers to the road. First, cyclists are considered as an after thought by civil engineers (as above) and city planners. Remember, we have a right to the road, just as you do in your car. Give us a bike lane and we'll use it. Put up road signs where we ride most often. Second, unfortunately some cyclists (usually not those of us in spandex) treat their bikes as if they are toys and the roads are their playground - just as we all did as kids. These people are clearly wrong in their lack of respect/knowledge of the law. Third, cyclists are not random strangers that live on some other planet. We are your neighbors, your teachers, your politicians, your students, your doctors. Besides the only obvious cyclist you may recognize in the US (Lance), we are all around you even though you don't realize it. George W. is a cyclist, my state representative is a cyclist. We even have a high school cycling leage in TX now. So your kids are riding around out there. Treat us as your neigbors - because we are.

I've also seen my fair share of law breaking cyclists. But to me the proportion is about the same as law breaking drivers. People are going to do as they do. I'm trying to do my part by helping local cyclists become aware of the law, and be more responsible on the road. But we need help from drivers to be aware of cyclists too. We are aware of the risks when we ride. If we get into a wreck with a car, we know we will likely be dead. And in Texas, the motorist will likely get away with it. We are not out there to be a pain or danger on the road. We're putting in miles training, we're riding to work, we're riding to school. For some of us, it's our only form of transportation either by choice or by circumstance. A little respect goes a long way - for both of us.
 
Once again - civil engineers have no say in the design. That's on the architect and client. Civil engineer can advise as much as he/she can, but that is not within our means to change. Also reviewers or permitting departments - yeah, they can over rule anything on design. They hold the key to getting plans approved. So ONCE again, it is not the civil engineers faults - please stop perpetuating this.

That said, the wheels of change are moving particularly in most "revitalization" projects to includes bike lanes in the typical section. The problem is funding these changes to get it county if not state-wide? Yeah good luck in this economy, TARP money or not.
 
When cave men ran out in front of a Saber Toothed Tiger and made faces at him they became dinner. Natural selection at work here folks. Move along nothing to see here!
 
schenksmill said:
Being someone who doesn't own a car and rides a bike every day, I see a simple solution for this: require a bicycle provisional to gain road access. It wouldn't harm me any to go take a test, and it would only keep people off the roads that shouldn't be there.

Now, you could then place limits on people without the provisional (sidewalk only at x speed, not allowed to ride after x time, whatever), but in theory, something like this could be done at the elementary school level, akin to a children's driver ed, and extended to all people pretty easily with the end result being people learning the rules of riding early, leaving no room for excuses later.
Click to expand...

Theres a thread that was going on at xkcd on this that explores the issue far better then I can link

but the main problem is that it discourages people from taking something that is cleaner, less costly to the government to provide for, and of course most riders are kids who use it as their primary form of transportation. The problem with licensing is that it would cost people money to get these, and people would have to go out of their way to get them.

few thoughts:
- How would the licensing program work? you say at elementary school, but how long would the license last? what if you don't have a bike at the time? what if you miss the licensing day? who would do the licensing? how much would it cost? What would you drop from the curriculum to fit this in? Can you even drop it if some kids don't own bikes? will the kids actually benefit from it?

- Would cops pull bikers over to do license checks? is it even possible to keep track of all bikers? how easily would licenses be revoked?

Then there is the question of whether pedestrians should need licenses. Obviously not, but they do many of the things that people are complaining that cyclists do.
12 % of automotive fatalities involve pedestrians link.
 
The-UselessNoob said:
Theres a thread that was going on at xkcd on this that explores the issue far better then I can link

but the main problem is that it discourages people from taking something that is cleaner, less costly to the government to provide for, and of course most riders are kids who use it as their primary form of transportation. The problem with licensing is that it would cost people money to get these, and people would have to go out of their way to get them.

few thoughts:
- How would the licensing program work? you say at elementary school, but how long would the license last? what if you don't have a bike at the time? what if you miss the licensing day? who would do the licensing? how much would it cost? What would you drop from the curriculum to fit this in? Can you even drop it if some kids don't own bikes? will the kids actually benefit from it?

- Would cops pull bikers over to do license checks? is it even possible to keep track of all bikers? how easily would licenses be revoked?

Then there is the question of whether pedestrians should need licenses. Obviously not, but they do many of the things that people are complaining that cyclists do.
12 % of automotive fatalities involve pedestrians link.
Click to expand...

Certainly there are issues w/ the idea, and it's not something I've really explored. Mostly I think any licensing setup, wherever it ends up, would mostly be based on the important distinction of road access vs. sidewalk access. Past there, idiots are idiots regardless of whether they are on the sidewalk or road, and should be dealt with accordingly.
 
I never had much problems with cyclists and I live in an area with many of them
the weekend recreational cyclists ride through the back roads and industrial complex away from main traffic
student cyclists use the bike lanes
every now and then there's some idiot riding on the ride side of the road but I dont let it bother me
 
I'm pretty sure this is not confined to just cyclists, holding any sort of electronic artifact with the fruit logo on it seems to turn people into zombies. Maybe that is part of Jobs larger scheme!!! ;)
 
Pyroja said:
What I find interesting about this topic is that people are up in arms about cyclists with earbuds, but no one gives a hoot about motorists with radios.
Click to expand...
Motorists are actually not allowed to wear headphones while driving. This is one of those unenforced laws like mandatory 'hands free' cell phones while driving.

The reason is so the driver can hear emergency vehicles and other motorists. Honestly, the same sort of restrictions should apply to cyclists, but again, it would likely be largely unenforced.

As someone else implied by their reply to you, I think there should be similar restrictions on audio output by both motorcycles and cars with enhanced noise-making capabilities (almost none of these serve any functional purpose other than narcissism), and sound systems.

I'm not against HAVING a loud sound system in your car, just don't play it while driving it. Just because your taste in music sucks, there's no need to let everybody know.
 
After living and driving in Austin for 4 years I HATE cyclists. ALL of them. There, I said it.

The couriers downtown were the worst. Many of them had no problem riding between cars and even against traffic... there were so many times I wanted to just open my door and fuck their world up:p
 
Well I'm a cyclist so it really depends. I don't have anything against drivers but drivers are horrible when it comes to paying attention at least where I'm from. I'm on my side of the road, a car would be turning into the direction I'm coming from while the driver is looking the other way waiting for their opportunity to get in traffic. But I have the right-of-the-way almost getting hit because they didn't look to check the other way that the way is cleared for them to go. It happens a lot more frequently even when at crosswalks that the light is white instead of red and drivers tries to cut me off just for the fuck of it. Thankfully I'm more careful when it comes to my own safety. I've been hit by a car twice (no injuries in both cases), a lot of near-misses because the driver wasn't paying attention even this morning, and a lot of my own wipe-outs because of mistakes I made myself that didn't affect others which I have the scars to prove that.
 
Vaelin said:
Motorists are actually not allowed to wear headphones while driving. This is one of those unenforced laws like mandatory 'hands free' cell phones while driving.

The reason is so the driver can hear emergency vehicles and other motorists. Honestly, the same sort of restrictions should apply to cyclists, but again, it would likely be largely unenforced.

As someone else implied by their reply to you, I think there should be similar restrictions on audio output by both motorcycles and cars with enhanced noise-making capabilities (almost none of these serve any functional purpose other than narcissism), and sound systems.

I'm not against HAVING a loud sound system in your car, just don't play it while driving it. Just because your taste in music sucks, there's no need to let everybody know.
Click to expand...

It's actually quite surprising how many people I see wearing headphones while in their car. I'll never understand it, but it happens a lot. All the same, my car does not have 'enhanced' audio capabilities, but cranking the radio to the point that any outside noise is drowned out is very possible.

Given the amount of emergency vehicles I see ignored on the roadways, I'd say a lot people aren't paying attention with their ears or eyes, period.

Honestly, self-absorbed people are everywhere. Peds, cyclists, and drivers alike. I'll never forget one oblivious ped I encountered on my way to work...

I was cycling down the road, in the bike lane, with the flow of traffic, with my lights on AND flashing to increase visibility. I was probably going about 17mph. My bike has knobby tires so it makes that characteristic 'hum' common to most vehicles with knobby tires. On the sidewalk, ahead of me a way and on the right, was a middle-aged man standing at a crosswalk. Against the crosswalk signal (I had the green, he had the 'red hand'), without looking either way or even looking up from the ground, he stepped out right in front of me. I anticipated this, quickly corrected, and saved us both from a nasty collision. Despite the fact that this guy couldn't be bothered to so much as look straight forward, let alone left or right, before crossing one of the busiest streets in town, this guy had the nerve to yell at me, as if it were my fault.

No doubt in his mind he was decrying those 'crazy cyclists' as he continued on his way, interrupted from the incredibly important practice of moving about the world with his eyes affixed to the ground immediately before him.
 
The author of the story evidently does not like cyclists as he is generalizing all of them in one lump together. So people that listen to their car stereos at high volume, people that walk with a headset on, none of those people evidently contribute to the accident ratio as it is evidently just people on bicycles with Ipods on that do.
 
To all the butt-hurt "real" cyclists:

A person who drives a car is referred to as a motorist whether they're an idiot or not.

A person on a bike is referred to as a cyclist whether they're an idiot or not.

To all the butt-hurt cyclists who can't come up with any better rebuttal than "cars are more dangerous":

an erratic/unsafe cyclist causes just as much disruption on the road, if not more, than an erratic motorist.

And finally, for the people citing the legality of biking on the road:

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's not unsafe and/or fucking stupid.

Thanks for reading.
 
Vaelin said:
...Honestly, the same sort of restrictions DO apply to cyclists, but again, it would likely be largely unenforced...
Click to expand...

Fixed.

The laws are in place... Just a lot of people don't seem to give a shit.
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
To all the butt-hurt "real" cyclists:

A person who drives a car is referred to as a motorist whether they're an idiot or not.

A person on a bike is referred to as a cyclist whether they're an idiot or not.

To all the butt-hurt cyclists who can't come up with any better rebuttal than "cars are more dangerous":

an erratic/unsafe cyclist causes just as much disruption on the road, if not more, than an erratic motorist.

And finally, for the people citing the legality of biking on the road:

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's not unsafe and/or fucking stupid.

Thanks for reading.
Click to expand...

To all the butt-hurt motorists:

A person who drives a car is referred to as a motorist whether they're an idiot or not.

A person on a bike is referred to as a cyclist whether they're an idiot or not.

To all the butt-hurt motorists who can't come up with any better rebuttal than "cyclists are morons and/or dangerous":

An erratic/unsafe person on the road causes just as much disruption as... an erratic/unsafe person on the road.

And finally, for the people citing the legality of biking on the road:

It's legal and safe whether you like it or not. Just because you think it's stupid or unsafe doesn't mean anything.

Thanks for reading.
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
an erratic/unsafe cyclist causes just as much disruption on the road, if not more, than an erratic motorist.
Click to expand...

I would have to disagree with this point, cyclists don't cause nearly as much trouble, and here is the important point, don't cause nearly as much actual DAMAGE. they endanger themselves sure, and sometimes can cause damage from cars swerving to avoid them, but this sure as hell doesn't compare to an erratic driver going around hitting people.
 
Blown 89 said:
Cyclists are just as bad. The amount of cyclists who flat out ignore the rules of the road are mind boggling and they are the first to open their mouths and complain about drivers who need to follow the rules of the road. God forbid you say anything bad about them because as you can see here they get their panties in a wad.
Click to expand...

Some do break rules. But honestly-when is the last time a cyclist breaking the law killed someone? I'm sure it's happened somehow, but I highly doubt it happens often. Flip things around though, and I'm sure your death toll will be much higher.
 
Mav451 said:
You do realize that Civ E's design per the spec of the client? A civil engineer can tell the client (City or other) that a design is not safe, but politics or architectural "aesthetics" will usually over rule safe engineering design.

Please do NOT blame engineers when they have their hands bound by politics or by a dumb clients.
Click to expand...

Then don't blame cyclists for riding where the city/state has told us to. Fair enough?
 
Steve01S4 said:
To all of you drivers in here complaining about the idiots on bicycles (notice I did not call them cyclists):

Real cyclists hate those idiots far more than you do. The majority of us ride safely and pay attention to the flow of traffic and the rules of the road. You just don't notice us because we stay out of your way and do nothing to piss you off. In fact, you often don't notice us when you very nearly hit us. You do notice every idiot you pass though, and since they're the only ones you notice, they're the only ones you remember. You then come to assume anyone on a bicycle is an idiot, as seen in this thread so far.

So, you hate the iPod Zombie Idiots on Bicycles because they're annoying and inconvenience you on your commute. Cyclists hate them because they make drivers resent anyone on a bicycle. They don't just endanger themselves, they make the roads more dangerous for all of us.

And, if you don't like sharing the road with bicycles, ask your city to install more bike lanes.
Click to expand...

+1. Thanks for your words-exactly what I meant earlier.
 
Another easy answer (notice specifically the Gatling gun):


They could also ride on the sidewalk. Let them dodge pedestrians, instead of drivers dodging them.
 
Last time I cheked, it was the Saber-Tooth that is extinct.

linuxfueled said:
When cave men ran out in front of a Saber Toothed Tiger and made faces at him they became dinner. Natural selection at work here folks. Move along nothing to see here!
Click to expand...
 
Monkey34 said:
Another easy answer (notice specifically the Gatling gun):


They could also ride on the sidewalk. Let them dodge pedestrians, instead of drivers dodging them.
Click to expand...

If you check your local laws regarding bicycles, a lot of places outright ban or place restrictions on tire size for bicycles on sidewalks.
 
As a someone who is both a cyclist and a motorist, I can count on one hand the number of times cyclists have pissed me off all the years I have been driving; but using all my fingers and toes I run out of digits to count the number of idiotic things motorists did today on my way home from work. It really isn't that hard to show some courtesy to someone taking a lot less safe method of transportation.

My belief is that most non-cycling drivers have this sense of entitlement, "I'm in a hurry get out of my way" aholes who have no regard for others. Someday, they will be known as "defendants" in lawsuits and criminal actions.

I know the number one reason people seem to get mad at cyclists is when they "take the lane" when there is no bike lane or cars are parked in it, and the cars are forced to slow behind the bike. So what? Slow the F down! Show some courtesy. The world doesn't F-ing revolve around you.
 
uclajd said:
As a someone who is both a cyclist and a motorist, I can count on one hand the number of times cyclists have pissed me off all the years I have been driving; but using all my fingers and toes I run out of digits to count the number of idiotic things motorists did today on my way home from work. It really isn't that hard to show some courtesy to someone taking a lot less safe method of transportation.

My belief is that most non-cycling drivers have this sense of entitlement, "I'm in a hurry get out of my way" aholes who have no regard for others. Someday, they will be known as "defendants" in lawsuits and criminal actions.

I know the number one reason people seem to get mad at cyclists is when they "take the lane" when there is no bike lane or cars are parked in it, and the cars are forced to slow behind the bike. So what? Slow the F down! Show some courtesy. The world doesn't F-ing revolve around you.
Click to expand...

Yeah I've been driving for quite some time now and I don't remember a time where a cyclist has irritated me but I get irritated by other drivers daily on the highway. Thank god for stereos and music so that I can stay sane.
 
I occasionally use my road bike properly and almost get hit by 10 or so assholes in a town where there are tons of Amish folk and they ride their bikes all the time (quite safely I might add). Just as rarely (thankfully cyclists in my town are really safe, for the most part) I drive my car and cut cut off by someone on a bike or nearly hit someone because they aren't following to rules, so to say. With that in mind I'll say that I like bikes and I like cars, but I hate the effing idiots that use them.
 
uclajd said:
I know the number one reason people seem to get mad at cyclists is when they "take the lane" when there is no bike lane or cars are parked in it, and the cars are forced to slow behind the bike. So what? Slow the F down! Show some courtesy. The world doesn't F-ing revolve around you.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you realize this, but causing a 1-lane road to have its design speed, let's say 35-40mph for a rural arterial, cut down to 10mph b/c of a single cyclist is the definition of the world revolving around the cyclist. There's nothing more selfish than a cyclist thinking he owns the road b/c he's on a bike and not a car.

I'm friends with cyclists who ride through G'town or the back areas of Virginia every weekend. Now only b/c they are my friends, I don't really share my opinion. But they really sound like dicks when they complain that pedestrians won't jump out of their way when they're on a mountain trail. That, by definition, is the world revolving around a cyclist. Maybe they should try to think outside of their helmet for a change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top