- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: EBR Councilman Buddy Amoroso struck, killed while riding bicycle in St. Francisville
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:31 am to Lsupimp
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:31 am to Lsupimp
quote:
But it would be pretty cool to be able to be able to park your car at a trailhead, get on your bike, and ride all day on paths from say Shenandoah to Downtown
Florida has an awesome paved trail that runs adjacent to 589, I think. North of Tampa. Goes for at least 50 miles.
0
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:33 am to ThatMakesSense
Its a culture thing for sure. To an extent, there are issues between motorists and cyclists pretty much everywhere. But where the culture is more favorable for cyclists, i.e. Colorado, generally less incidents occur.
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:34 am to ThatMakesSense
quote:Me too. They are all concerned about cyclists’ safety... until they get hit by a car. Then it’s their fault.
If the anti cyclist crowd was just honest and said, I don't like you because you inconvenience and annoy me, rather than, it's a safety issue, I'd have more respect for then.
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:35 am to Taxing Authority
Look. It’s a chicken or the egg situation.
Does the bad driver create the situation? Or does the situation create the bad driver?
We’re just going to argue around and around. I wish we didn’t have distracted drivers. Life would be so much easier. But we do. And they’re dangerous af. And they’re everywhere.
Until cyclist have their own designated lanes and aren’t forced to share the road with an enemy they have no Chance of winning against, we will continue to have situations like this.
It’s unfortunate. It’s unavoidable. But it’s a known risk. The math simply states as long as there are situations where a cyclist and a vehicle are trying to share the same roadway, there will be accidents. And the cyclist will always lose.
But you’ve somehow taken me pointing this simple fact out, and pointing out WHY it happens as me attacking cyclist. you’ve completely circled the wagons and gone into complete defense mode like I’m trying to say frick you get off muh road when all I’ve done is give the reason why it’s happening.
Does the bad driver create the situation? Or does the situation create the bad driver?
We’re just going to argue around and around. I wish we didn’t have distracted drivers. Life would be so much easier. But we do. And they’re dangerous af. And they’re everywhere.
Until cyclist have their own designated lanes and aren’t forced to share the road with an enemy they have no Chance of winning against, we will continue to have situations like this.
It’s unfortunate. It’s unavoidable. But it’s a known risk. The math simply states as long as there are situations where a cyclist and a vehicle are trying to share the same roadway, there will be accidents. And the cyclist will always lose.
But you’ve somehow taken me pointing this simple fact out, and pointing out WHY it happens as me attacking cyclist. you’ve completely circled the wagons and gone into complete defense mode like I’m trying to say frick you get off muh road when all I’ve done is give the reason why it’s happening.
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:36 am to Taxing Authority
It's both. They're an inconvience when the roads aren't safe for them. Therefore they're a safety issue and a hassle for drivers to have to deal with.
This post was edited on 7/1/18 at 10:37 am
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:40 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
quote:
IMO it should be illegal to ride a bike on a road where the speed limit is greater than 50MPH
Another example for you hawkster.
You are an emotional wreck. I get it that messing with one's leisure time or hobby or passion will always draw the harshest response. That's true whether it's a threat to hunting, fishing, biking, canoeing, dirt-biking, vacationing, beach access, etc. etc. Those activities are what most people consider the finer things in life, whatever their passion.
So I get how obsessed you are with this issue. I don't think I ever proposed laws against cycling. And I don't think I ever proposed giving incompetent, deadly drivers a pass at anything. I'm not a proponent of more laws and more government.
But you continue to take your stand that avoiding danger created by other people's negligence is the same as excusing that negligence. It is not.
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:41 am to EarlyCuyler3
If the road isnt safe at bicycle speeds, how is it any safer at the speeds a vehicle travels?
This post was edited on 7/1/18 at 10:42 am
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:42 am to ThatMakesSense
It isn't? But it's designed for vehicular traffic, not bicycular.
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:45 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
bicycular
I like this word. Is it a real word?
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:45 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
But it's designed for vehicular traffic, not bicycular.
Correct, it's designed to accomdate ALL speeds up to the posted speed limit.
Is a road safer at 20 MPH speeds or 70 MPH speeds?
ETA Us bicylists are only looking out for the safety of the motorists. We want y'all to slow down and be safe.
This post was edited on 7/1/18 at 10:47 am
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:46 am to EarlyCuyler3
Gonna have to go and up vote the new word, bicycular
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:46 am to beerJeep
Dammit it should be!
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:50 am to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Is a road safer at 20 MPH speeds or 70 MPH speeds?
Neither? The road is indifferent. The problem is 2 different sets of traffic coming into collision with each other. There's no gotcha here. Common sense tells you there's going to be problems.
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:50 am to beerJeep
quote:See that’s what I mean about transferring blame. A cyclist doesn’t control a drivers reaction to the bottleneck. Only the driver has the power to control his reaction. I get where you’re trying to go with this. That simply the existence of a a slower road user is provoking drivers. But it’s not.
Does the bad driver create the situation? Or does the situation create the bad driver?
If there’s a long line at the grocery store, would you say beating up the store manager is understandable, because the shopper was provoked by the long line at the checkout registers?
quote:
But it’s a known risk. .... But you’ve somehow taken me pointing this simple fact out, and pointing out WHY it happens as me attacking cyclist
Nope. I’m saying accepting the poor driving, rather than calling it out for what it is — is part of what perpetuates and enhances the dangers. Better drivers that pay attention to where they are going drastically reduces the risk to cyclists — and preserves the rights of others. But you seem to be saying “nah, drivers can’t do better because... bottlenecks.” Feel free to correct me if I’m overstating that.
quote:Ummm. You’re the one making spandex arguments.
you’ve completely circled the wagons and gone into complete defense mode
This post was edited on 7/1/18 at 10:58 am
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:50 am to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Is a road safer at 20 MPH speeds or 70 MPH speeds?
20 MPH for all drivers = #1 safest
70 MPH for all drivers = #2 safest
20MPH for some and 70MPH for others - #3 safest
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:51 am to hawkster
quote:I gave you a concrete example. How emo if me.
You are an emotional wreck.
feel free to deflect again. quote:Nope. it’s worse. It’s like saying because there are schools shooters, gun owners should turn in their guns.
But you continue to take your stand that avoiding danger created by other people's negligence is the same as excusing that negligence. It is not.
This post was edited on 7/1/18 at 10:56 am
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:54 am to ThatMakesSense
quote:
If the anti cyclist crowd was just honest and said, I don't like you because you inconvenience and annoy me, rather than, it's a safety issue, I'd have more respect for then.
I don’t like cyclist because they inconvenience and annoy me. It’s completely irrational. But it’s the same reason I hate people who pull up to the atm without their shite ready to go. It’s the same reason I hate people who walk 3 wide slow af down the sidewalk. It’s the same reason I hate people who write checks or use coupons at stores.
It’s irrational. It’s selfish.
But, like a mostly rational and logical person, I just shut up and wait and go on with my day without causing a scene or making an arse out of myself. Why be a dick to prove a point? Why pass someone in an unsafe manner just to save 3 seconds?
If anything, I respect cyclist. Especially here in this heat and humidity with our drivers. Balls of steel and probably help keep the baby powder industry afloat from swampass
Posted on 7/1/18 at 10:54 am to TigerBait2008
quote:
Dumb to be riding on that road. Plain and simple.
I dont know the road, but as an avid cyclist I'm to the point I wont ride unless there is a wide shoulder, bike path, or rural road with very little traffic.
There are to many distracted drivers and two many drivers intoxicated or on pain pills, to feel safe out there.
What's the speed limit on that two lane road with no shoulders?
Posted on 7/1/18 at 11:00 am to beerJeep
quote:but hawkster call me emotional.
I don’t like cyclist because they inconvenience and annoy me. It’s completely irrational
I can appreciate the honesty bj.
Posted on 7/1/18 at 11:01 am to PoppaD
Poppa d gets it. Smart man.
Page 20 of 27
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News