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.
In a big 'ol country like America, most people wouldn't. In a smaller, denser country, most people probably would. Or at least their attitude towards transit (HSR for example) would be very different even if they didn't care all that much about the transit system in a city 100 miles away. In a small country, people probably think about mass transit the way the Bos-Wash corridor thinks about it, only they don't have to deal with a huge populace that's completely apathetic towards mass transit because it doesn't affect their lives in any meaningful way.
In the suburban portions of the Bos-Wash corridor, locals typically think of transit as just for in and out of the center city, typically commuter rail with park and rides. A way to get to places which are to get to by car (a way to extend the automobile's practical reach) rather than a driving replacement (as how say, local transit in Boston works).
In those areas, the urban form is suburban and auto-oriented, but work trips to the city are done by commuter rail or occasionally commuter bus, since the city is not as auto-friendly as the suburbs.
Transit cities too have their long-range commuter rail, but it is built as an extension of walking rather than of driving.
Hmmm. Suspect a Prius would incur more damage than a Suburban in a collision.
Depends, if a Suburban hits a Prius, I suspect the Prius would receive more damage than the Suburban. But I also suspect this is just a strawman argument from you.
Quote:
If you're wearing earbuds you aren't paying attention to your surroundings. You are deliberately blocking out your awareness of your surroundings. Apparently that's what many transit riders feel a need to do when they are riding transit.
Operating a vehicle and riding transit are two different things. I am still able to pay attention to my surroundings sitting on transit while listening to music, but when I am operating a vehicle, such as a bike, I like to be aware of my surroundings and be able to see and hear everything going on around me.
Quote:
Bicyclists go riding on roads made for cars which is dangerous for bicyclists yet they still do that - at least until the inevitable occurs.
As far as turning is concerned, cars typically wait in line and turn in order of arrival. Bicyclists don't. Bicyclist behavior causes a problem (mostly for the bicyclist) at an intersection when the bicyclist approaches on the right hand side of the car and expects to go straight while the car is in the right hand lane for the purpose of turning.
In any event I think the thread is more about why people don't take transit - and "because they take other modes of transportation" is the point rather than engaging in losing off-topic debates about bikes vs. motor vehicles.
Bicycles are called vehicles, and like cars, vehicles are allowed on the road, which is where "share the road" slogan comes from, roads are not solely for cars unless specifically marked. In most places it is illegal to bike on the sidewalks. On primary roads the need for separate bike lanes is often times needed to make it more safe for the bicyclist and the driver.
I can't speak for others, but I never run through on the right side of a car if it looks like they are turning because I assume that driver is a moron who can't see me and isn't aware of their surroundings. That train of thought for me is what helps me bike safely in traffic.
Yes, you are right, this thread is all about why people don't use transit, so please tell us why you don't use transit? You are more than welcome to ignore anything you feel is off topic.
Transit is also cheaper in many cases, if you are going to downtown, transit can make sense because it saves on gas and the cost of parking especially if you plan on doing a lot of walking around downtown. But at that point it is a personal preference, I don't mind driving to a downtown on non rush hour times and using transit when commuting for work. Though in NYC, I almost never drive into Manhattan because it costs a fortune to get there and a pain to park.
The thing I love most about having a good bus and rail system is that it gives people options besides driving for their commutes.
I have a car. I can drive downtown. I can drive to the burbs. I can drive all over town at any time of the day or night. Parking is only expensive downtown and outside of that maybe for sports games and so on. 90% of the time parking is free or low cost either on the street or in an parking lot. If you limit yourself to the downtown portion of most cities, you really are limiting yourself.
Depends, if a Suburban hits a Prius, I suspect the Prius would receive more damage than the Suburban. But I also suspect this is just a strawman argument from you.
You misinterpret (again). The issue was a collision between a bicycle and either a Suburban or Prius. The latter is likely to receive more damage than the former. The former also offers more ground clearance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Operating a vehicle and riding transit are two different things. I am still able to pay attention to my surroundings sitting on transit while listening to music, but when I am operating a vehicle, such as a bike, I like to be aware of my surroundings and be able to see and hear everything going on around me.
You are the one touting "shared spaces", "community", etc. yet after the expensive infrastructure is put in place, you disconnect from your surroundings. Maybe urbanists aren't the social creatures some seem to think they are. Seems like you can't make it on transit so you need to plug in to isolate yourself from your "shared space" surroundings and all the other people around you. Somewhat hypocritical since you promote high density population.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Bicycles are called vehicles, and like cars, vehicles are allowed on the road, which is where "share the road" slogan comes from, roads are not solely for cars unless specifically marked. In most places it is illegal to bike on the sidewalks. On primary roads the need for separate bike lanes is often times needed to make it more safe for the bicyclist and the driver.
Bicyclists are considered pedestrians and although allowed on the road, there is a certain assumption of the risk that comes with mixing with much more massive vehicles having considerably greater momentum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
I can't speak for others, but I never run through on the right side of a car if it looks like they are turning because I assume that driver is a moron who can't see me and isn't aware of their surroundings. That train of thought for me is what helps me bike safely in traffic.
Good for you. Because if you wound up at the courthouse instead of the morgue after pulling such a stunt, I'd suspect I'd be more supportive of the driver if I were one of the jurors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Yes, you are right, this thread is all about why people don't use transit, so please tell us why you don't use transit? You are more than welcome to ignore anything you feel is off topic.
I believe I've already provided one or more lists as have many others. The items on my list(s) really aren't subject for debate. "Riding bicycles" is not one of the reasons why I don't use transit.
I have a car. I can drive downtown. I can drive to the burbs. I can drive all over town at any time of the day or night. Parking is only expensive downtown and outside of that maybe for sports games and so on. 90% of the time parking is free or low cost either on the street or in an parking lot. If you limit yourself to the downtown portion of most cities, you really are limiting yourself.
Again, I prefer having options rather than just a car. And I prefer living in places that allow me to have options rather than being car dependent. For you, transit clearly doesn't work because you would prefer to drive anywhere you want in your car. That makes sense, many people are like that.
Don't let it be said, I don't.
I'd do even more, like stand at the bus to get from where I live to point b but the bus doesn't come around that early in the morning
I think some people might be put off with the extra costs involved. Maybe where they live and where they need to get to, that they have already done some calculations and it still pays off for them to drive rather than use mass transit. Maybe they've tried it on a few occasions and it hasn't worked out in their best interests. Rising costs and breakdowns or delays is enough for some people to throw the towel in. Maybe next year it'll be better - or not. Depends, but I hope if their area has increased an extra bus or stop or whatever, that they would consider trying it again.
You misinterpret (again). The issue was a collision between a bicycle and either a Suburban or Prius. The latter is likely to receive more damage than the former. The former also offers more ground clearance.
If you are on a bike and a Prius or Suburban hits the bicyclist, it is going to hurt the bicyclist and the damage is going to be similar regardless of the size of vehicle. For the "ground clearance" to be an issue would mean the one driving the car intentionally ran over a bicyclist that was riding directly in front of them. If you can't see what is in front of you, you shouldn't be driving.
Quote:
You are the one touting "shared spaces", "community", etc. yet after the expensive infrastructure is put in place, you disconnect from your surroundings. Maybe urbanists aren't the social creatures some seem to think they are. Seems like you can't make it on transit so you need to plug in to isolate yourself from your "shared space" surroundings and all the other people around you. Somewhat hypocritical since you promote high density population.
Do you find yourself constantly talking to strangers whenever you leave the house? Most of my time I am commuting with my wife and not listening to music, I tend to talk to her. On the train I always see people having conversations with people they know. If I am commuting by myself, listening to music is an enjoyable thing to do. So your statement is just another strawman argument. I prefer a more dense surrounding, but I still enjoy my privacy in my home, and enjoy listening to my music when commuting.
Quote:
Bicyclists are considered pedestrians and although allowed on the road, there is a certain assumption of the risk that comes with mixing with much more massive vehicles having considerably greater momentum.
A bicycle is a man powered vehicle, just about every DMV in this country considers it a vehicle and has regulations for bicycles. Yes, there are risks that come with riding a bike on the road, but the road is not solely for motor vehicles, so it is the job of a driver to pay attention to their surroundings and not try running other vehicles over while driving.
Quote:
Good for you. Because if you wound up at the courthouse instead of the morgue after pulling such a stunt, I'd suspect I'd be more supportive of the driver if I were one of the jurors.
That depends, does your state's DMV have laws with making right hand turns when a bike is coming? If your state requires you to yield for a bike, then the driver would lose that suit, but if that state's DMV doesn't have such a law, then it would be a different case.
Quote:
I believe I've already provided one or more lists as have many others. The items on my list(s) really aren't subject for debate. "Riding bicycles" is not one of the reasons why I don't use transit.
Yes, I believe you have stated before that you prefer to use your motor vehicle for any commuting you need to do.
If you are on a bike and a Prius or Suburban hits the bicyclist, it is going to hurt the bicyclist and the damage is going to be similar regardless of the size of vehicle. For the "ground clearance" to be an issue would mean the one driving the car intentionally ran over a bicyclist that was riding directly in front of them. If you can't see what is in front of you, you shouldn't be driving.
I was referring to the damage to the vehicle, not the damage to the cyclist...
The damage to the cyclist will likely be the same (or the difference inconsequential) although I suspect a higher ground clearance of the Suburban may be better for the cyclist in certain circumstances.
From the driver's standpoint there will be less damage to the Suburban.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Do you find yourself constantly talking to strangers whenever you leave the house? Most of my time I am commuting with my wife and not listening to music, I tend to talk to her.
So are you riding a bicycle built for two or shouting loudly while riding?
With two people you could use an HOV lane in lots of areas. Another reason to drive rather than taking transit.
When you have a job with greater responsibilities you may find that you can no longer commute at the same time because one or the other of you will have to stay a little later. Given the number of posts per day you make on CD, it's pretty apparent that you have lots of upwardly mobile job opportunities.
Bicyclists are considered pedestrians and although allowed on the road, there is a certain assumption of the risk that comes with mixing with much more massive vehicles having considerably greater momentum.
That is not true in any state. Here's from the state of Washington:
A bicycle is a legal road vehicle, just like a car.
Good for you. Because if you wound up at the courthouse instead of the morgue after pulling such a stunt, I'd suspect I'd be more supportive of the driver if I were one of the jurors.
The driver would likely be at fault. The driver of a turning car should always look to see what he's turning into it. Its his responsibilty.
I was referring to the damage to the vehicle, not the damage to the cyclist...
The damage to the cyclist will likely be the same (or the difference inconsequential) although I suspect a higher ground clearance of the Suburban may be better for the cyclist in certain circumstances.
From the driver's standpoint there will be less damage to the Suburban.
Damage to either motor vehicle would be minor.
Quote:
So are you riding a bicycle built for two or shouting loudly while riding?
With two people you could use an HOV lane in lots of areas. Another reason to drive rather than taking transit.
When you have a job with greater responsibilities you may find that you can no longer commute at the same time because one or the other of you will have to stay a little later. Given the number of posts per day you make on CD, it's pretty apparent that you have lots of upwardly mobile job opportunities.
How often do you have someone else in your car? Give a percentage of time.
Most people commute by themselves and a bike takes up far less space than a vehicle....especially that Suburban.
If you wish to monitor my posts, I would have to say the same thing about you, sounds like you could use better job opportunities. Though thanks to technology, I don't have to be at home to post on here, I can do it on my phone. Though today is a day off for me, even though I have been working from home much of the day.
But why couldn't I bike to work even with another job? If that job is within biking distance, don't see why that would be a problem.
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.
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.
