U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-17-2014, 02:15 PM
 
15,385 posts, read 8,679,661 times
Reputation: 13770

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
If you can't see a cyclist coming with enough time to react, then you probably shouldn't be driving. Unless it is dark out and they are wearing dark clothing and not properly illuminated. Then that is on them.

Is sharing the road really that hard for some of you? I rarely drive (like once or twice a week) and still have no issues with these sort of things.
I'm not talking about the first person to come up on the cyclist. I'm talking about being behind that car, then they either stop abruptly or swerve and you now see the cyclist. Yes, I understand that you need to be aware of what's in front of you when you're driving. I've been accident free for almost 40 years. But I'm pointing out that it could create situations that are MORE dangerous to everyone on the road.

I feel the same way about the law requiring cars to either slow down or change lanes when an emergency vehicle is on the shoulder of a highway, so it's not just against cyclists. Since that law, I've seen more cars abruptly change lanes, cutting other cars off, around a curve or over a hill than ever before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-17-2014, 02:23 PM
 
Location: Altadena, CA
1,519 posts, read 1,415,973 times
Reputation: 2678
I plan to move to California in the next year or two and I am impressed that they have this ordinance to protect bike riders. I can understand that those who live too far from work can't use the bike lanes for riding to work, but for those who do give up their car to bike to and from work, should be able to do so safely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,561,310 times
Reputation: 3941
I think people need to keep in mind how far 3 feet is. It's not far - it really wouldn't require you to jut out into the other lane, that would be giving the rider 5+ feet. In fact, I would imagine most of these people complaining about the law actually already give cyclists three feet, because they aren't psychopaths that want to kill or maim people (this law is essentially giving LE another legal avenue to punish those that are psycho and harass cyclists). Any less than that is terrifyingly close. As someone else said, try driving three feet from another car and you will realize just how close that is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,561,310 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ View Post
Weirdly, some of us have vision that obeys the laws of physics and of light (i.e...it doesn't bend) and we actually can't see that cyclist coming from around a curve and taking it wiiiiiiiiiiiiiide. Also, a large percentage of us unfortunately were born with some sort of defect that we are entirely without psychic ability and can't predict that the cyclists going in our direction will suddenly all decide to go au parallel and take that next corner equally wide, directly in front of us.

Maybe we could get a special handicapped sticker or something? Is that allowed? Not all cyclists may be aware of this.
I'm not advocating bending over backwards to accommodate scofflaw cyclists. I am talking about normal, everyday situation in which the cyclist is in their designated spot on the road and you are coming up behind them at a legal speed. 99 percent of the time you should be able to see them. If you come around a bend and the cyclist is in the middle of the road (and aren't legally entitled to that, because if there is no bike lane they have the right to be in the lane) and you hit them, then it is their fault.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Southern California
25,332 posts, read 24,133,744 times
Reputation: 23712
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
I'm not advocating bending over backwards to accommodate scofflaw cyclists. I am talking about normal, everyday situation in which the cyclist is in their designated spot on the road and you are coming up behind them at a legal speed. 99 percent of the time you should be able to see them. If you come around a bend and the cyclist is in the middle of the road (and aren't legally entitled to that, because if there is no bike lane they have the right to be in the lane) and you hit them, then it is their fault.
I know that...but your assertion was that there is no way a driver can't see a cyclist...and I was explaining (in a facetious way) that that's actually, logistically not always true. Look, a lot of your posts are coming off that we are all idiots who never bother to look and don't know how to drive and selfishly like hogging lanes and that somehow we're making things up, so people are just answering you with logic.

And a poster upthread posted another reason: when it's the car ahead of you or the one in front of that that is suddenly going to have to brake, leaving the rest of you to hopefully have had your morning coffee and be sharp-wide-awake enough to slam your own brakes on at pretty much the same instant to avoid hitting the car(s), and you not having seen the cyclist(s) because of the car(s) ahead of you. Not uncommon and of course not limited to bikers - sudden braking directly in front of another car is a danger no matter what the cause is. So really, the less of it the better.

Last edited by JerZ; 09-17-2014 at 02:50 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Rathdrum, ID
4,113 posts, read 3,860,715 times
Reputation: 7813
As a cyclist who rides primarily on the lightly-traveled roads in the Antelope Valley, (outside the cities), three feet is not enough! At those times when a car or truck passes me at 60-65 mph, and I'm going 15-16, three feet is way, way too close. Thankfully, I ride with a front and rear strobe so that I can be seen and usually cars move halfway over into the adjacent lane to give me enough room to where I do not fear for my safety.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Rathdrum, ID
4,113 posts, read 3,860,715 times
Reputation: 7813
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
If you can't see a cyclist coming with enough time to react, then you probably are driving too fast. Unless it is dark out and they are wearing dark clothing and not properly illuminated. Then that is on them.

Is sharing the road really that hard for some of you? I rarely drive (like once or twice a week) and still have no issues with these sort of things.
Fixed it for you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Southern California
25,332 posts, read 24,133,744 times
Reputation: 23712
Quote:
Originally Posted by volosong View Post
Fixed it for you.
You didn't fix the strawmanning, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 03:52 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,561,310 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ View Post
You didn't fix the strawmanning, though.
Don't see how I made a strawman argument. You should always be aware of something in front of you, and if you cannot see it then you should have a safe distance between you and the car in front of you so you have ample time to react.

And in fact, I don't see what you are arguing against. That there shouldn't be a law that requires drivers pass cyclists at a safe and reasonable distance? Honestly it seems your argument is that cyclists should get off the road and onto the sidewalk because they don't belong in or around the motorized vehicle's path.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 03:55 PM
 
Location: Southern California
25,332 posts, read 24,133,744 times
Reputation: 23712
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
Don't see how I made a strawman argument. You should always be aware of something in front of you, and if you cannot see it then you should have a safe distance between you and the car in front of you so you have ample time to react.
Here you go, from Wiki:

Quote:
A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument.
So in other words...you keep setting us up with things we didn't actually say (i.e. most recently, that anyone can see a car under conditions we didn't even describe), then arguing THAT...that's the definition of a strawman argument. Just for future reference.

Now the whole name-calling thing (i.e. "retarded")...I don't know that there's an official term for that. Maybe classless? You can Wiki that too, though it would be just as easy to dictionary.com it.

As for the second part of your post, you can continue to not read/listen and then argue about things you didn't read/listen to, and I can continue to refute (and so can others), and we will still get nowhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top