re: Cyclists think it's ok to ride on the interstate

Unpopular opinion: lance armstrong wanna bs are as bad as pitbull owners... prove me wrong

quote:

---

The person hit was 67 years old. Try again.

---

First, he already tried two more times, while another one was older one was 44.

So now your premise is people over 65 don't use sidewalks or their lives don't matter?

quote:

---

And the most self entitled drivers are in the south.

---

Racist

quote:

---

When your child or grandchild decides to take a jump to the right or left trying to not step on a crack and gets hit by 180 pounds of bike and rider @20mph and bounces there head off the concrete it will just be scratches right?

---

So if you are that cyclist...you are coming into this scenario at 20 mph on a sidewalk? Lord I hope you're smarter than that.

Just to be clear, my point is not to force cyclists to the sidewalks. My suggestion is to give them the option of either the road or the sidewalk utilizing their common sense and hoping they select the safest avenue of travel. That's all I am suggesting...is to give them the option when the sidewalk is CLEARLY a safer path.

quote:

---

My suggestion is to give them the option of either the road or the sidewalk utilizing their common sense and hoping they select the safest avenue of travel. That's all I am suggesting...is to give them the option when the sidewalk is CLEARLY a safer path.

---

No serious cyclist will choose the sidewalk more than 1% of the time for a host of reasons. You only think it is safer because you don't have the first-hand experience.

quote:

---

No serious cyclist will choose the sidewalk more than 1% of the time for a host of reasons. You only think it is safer because you don't have the first-hand experience.

---

Yep. None of these guys have ever ridden a bike seriously in their lives. Just bloviating about a topic on which they are completely ignorant.

ETA: It is impossible to ride on the sidewalks around my house as they are busted and broken and uneven. That does not make for safe riding either.

quote:

---

None of these guys have ever ridden a bike seriously in their lives. Just bloviating about a topic on which they are completely ignorant

---

I am ignorant to the reasoning. I have clearly stated in this thread that I am not a cyclist. BUT, I am asking questions to educate myself on the logic behind laws requiring bikes to be on the road.

Again, for the umpteenth time, I am not suggesting that we force anyone to ride on the street nor on a sidewalk. I am merely suggesting we give individuals the option of choosing what they feel is the safer option. If your sidewalks are busted up and unsafe, take the road. If you have pristine sidewalks, you're out for a casual spin and there is no foot traffic, why not stay out of traffic's way and take the sidewalk?

Just asking why cyclists cannot have options, that's all.

quote:

---

What about the not-so-serious cyclists? Why not at least give them the option of being safer? Why force them into an obviously more dangerous situation by requiring them to drive on the road?

---

First, fair enough you have been asking questions and I have been harsh in my reply to you, that stops here.

I understand where you are coming from with this. Here is the thing commuters and men/women putting in miles are generally the only ones riding in any sort of traffic. Mom and dad that buy matching cruisers or hybrids because they want to do more than walk and don't want to run are going to be in their neighborhoods where the speed limits are low, there are often speed bumps and sane drivers are looking out for kids and bikes, etc. There is really no need for them to be on the sidewalk there with their bike handling skills they are more likely to crack their head but running into a heave in the concrete.

People that put in miles (I have ridden more than 70k miles over my life and that isn't a lot for having ridden over 30 years) can pretty much take care of themselves as long as you give us a little space. We actually know you are coming up on us, usually even if you are in a Tesla. No need to honk to warn us just give us 3 feet and everything will be fine. You don't need to do anything more we have FAR more experience riding with cars than car drivers have driving around bikes it is just the nature of the percentages.

I rarely ever have an issue with a car, since I am also a car driver I can usually predict what they will do. In general, drivers are actually very courteous often giving me the full lane as they pass.

Most of us are just trying to do something we love and seat a little at the same time. I honestly hate holding up cars and will go as far to the right as I can to help them feel comfortable.


BTW none of this applies to drunkcycles they need to get around so they can be anywhere in traffic and their license may have only been suspended last week and this may be the first time they have been on a bike since there were 12.

quote:

---

I am ignorant to the reasoning. I have clearly stated in this thread that I am not a cyclist. BUT, I am asking questions to educate myself on the logic behind laws requiring bikes to be on the road.

Again, for the umpteenth time, I am not suggesting that we force anyone to ride on the street nor on a sidewalk. I am merely suggesting we give individuals the option of choosing what they feel is the safer option. If your sidewalks are busted up and unsafe, take the road. If you have pristine sidewalks, you're out for a casual spin and there is no foot traffic, why not stay out of traffic's way and take the sidewalk?

Just asking why cyclists cannot have options, that's all.

---

I agree with what Obtuse said about this. I'd also like to add that I don't think any cyclist has a problem with what you said. The old people on cruisers aren't the ones on River road. They're perfectly content pedalling around their neighborhood streets at a snail's pace.

But for someone like myself who's trying to get a 50 mile ride in and average a decent pace, the options become more limited. I can't ride somewhere urban or in a neighborhood, the constant stops would never let me get a workout in. When given the option of course I'll choose a route suited specifically for bike traffic (e.g. the levee from brightside to downtown) but I don't always have that choice.

ETA: I also want to say that both cyclists and motorists have a duty to each other on the road. Cyclists should make their best effort to allow traffic to flow unimpeded and safely. Motorists should do their best to give cyclists the room they need and practice caution when they're nearby. Being inconvenienced for a few minutes is no reason to get someone killed.

quote:

---

Again, for the umpteenth time, I am not suggesting that we force anyone to ride on the street nor on a sidewalk. I am merely suggesting we give individuals the option of choosing what they feel is the safer option. If your sidewalks are busted up and unsafe, take the road. If you have pristine sidewalks, you're out for a casual spin and there is no foot traffic, why not stay out of traffic's way and take the sidewalk?

Just asking why cyclists cannot have options, that's all.

---

we do, in more enlightened locales : ) not sure what's available in baton rouge, but a lot of bicycle-friendly cities include not only dedicated bike lanes and routes, but dedicated bike paths, greenbelts, and multi-use trails. the tammany trace (it goes from like covington to slidelll) is a good example of such a path in LA. but you'll still see cyclists commuting to and from these paths.

as the other poster pointed out, most of us ride smartly and know the risks. and most of us avoid busy roads at busy times (even if they have bike lanes). and most of us wouldn't ride four wide on a two-lane road except if it were necessary for safety. those guys (and other cyclists who act like idiots) piss us off too.