B'more Sun: anti-cyclist drivel....sort of?

[konstantkarma]

Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/bal-md.dresser16mar16,0,1202795.column)

From the Baltimore Sun's "transportation reporter" Michael Dresser, regarding the state bill to make a 3 ft buffer for cyclists the law. He actually comes down in favor of the bill, but he essentially gives credence to every anti-cycling stereotype that's out there.

Here's my response below. I am sure he would love to hear from more cyclists on this issue at: gettingthere@baltsun.com, if you are inclined.

Hi Michael,

This is what you wrote in your last column:

"Bicyclists are obnoxious.

On any sunny spring day, you'll find them infesting the country roads surrounding Baltimore looking freakishly fit in their Spandex outfits and dweeby helmets. You just know they're a bunch of smug, greener-than-thou elitists whose greatest joy - apart from forcing motorists to crawl along at 10 mph while they drift toward the middle of the road - is to lecture you about your carbon footprint."

Way to go in reinforcing every negative stereotype in a few sentences, and giving every sociopath in a car additional reasons to harass cyclists. Every bike on the road represents 1 less person in a car, and that is not a bad thing.

Despite the true intent of your column, your pandering to the anti-cycling, pro-automobile crowd does no one a great service. I am a cyclist and have had full soda cans thrown at me. I've been run off the road by yokels in pickup trucks. I've been called all manner of names, cut off in traffic and intentionally brushed back by dozens and dozens of idiots in cars. All of this has occurred while I was "safely" ensconced on the 8 ft shoulder of many of our state roadways, and not actually riding to the left of the white line. Is this the type of behavior you want to reinforce? Maybe you should spend a little bit of your column space reminding everyone to take a deep breath and realize that 12 seconds out of their day to safely pass a couple of cyclists is a small inconvenience, and a small price to pay for a civil society.

[bzbvh5]

Bicyclists are obnoxious.

On anysunny spring day, you'll find them infesting the country roads surrounding Baltimore looking freakishly fit in their Spandex outfits and dweeby helmets. You just know they're a bunch of smug, greener-than-thou elitists whose greatest joy - apart from forcing motorists to crawl along at 10 mph while they drift toward the middle of the road - is to lecture you about your carbon footprint.

So I can sympathize with those members of an Annapolis House subcommittee who would really prefer to kill Del. Jon S. Cardin's bill to establish a 3-foot buffer zone for bicyclists when cars are passing them. It would be galling to hand a victory to those irksome people - half of whom don't seem to think the rules of the road apply to them. Why reward their bad behavior?

Because it's a good bill. And it's needed.

House Bill 496, along with the companion Senate measure that received preliminary approval last week, would write into Maryland law an evolving national standard that has been adopted in at least 20 states. It won't cost the state money. The State Highway Administration and AAA have endorsed it. Nobody testified against it when it came up for a hearing. It could save a life or two.

Nevertheless, Cardin told me Friday, the bill's prospects are hanging by a thread in the House subcommittee. The Baltimore County Democrat said it isn't being lobbied to death, but it has touched a nerve of resentment among some legislators.

They've seen the way some bicyclists behave. They've seen them scoot through red lights where vehicles are stopped. They see them flagrantly going the wrong way on one-way streets. They see them riding side by side and taking up a whole lane of a two-lane road, oblivious to the vehicle traffic stacking up behind them. Why would anyone possibly want to pass a law on behalf of those people?

Because it's the right thing to do.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of who does what to whom on the roads, the mismatch in weight and vulnerability between motor vehicles and bicycles is extreme. And the law protects the vulnerable, even when the vulnerable get on our nerves.

And, hard as it is to accept, there are many law-abiding, courteous bicyclists who would never dream of lecturing you about your vehicular decisions. These bicyclists tell me the law is urgently needed.

Take Adam Berg, a 35-year-old recycling business owner from Stevenson, who said he does his best to stay close to the white line on the right of the road. But that doesn't stop some drivers from passing him as closely as possible - sometimes deliberately.

"They still buzz you. It happens all the time," he said.

Berg said that the wind forces generated when a vehicle - particularly a truck - passes too closely alternately push a bicycle away and then pull it back toward the vehicle. He said that he hasn't been blown over but that he's come close to being dragged into the side of a passing truck.

One concern that always comes up in writing traffic laws is how they will be enforced. It's definitely an issue with the subcommittee chair, Del. James E. Malone of Baltimore County. And rightly so.

It's true there's no way to measure exactly the distance between every bicycle and every passing car, but this law would certainly be just as enforceable as the current statute on tailgating. We leave such judgment calls to police officers. Why not with vehicles passing bicycles? You're not going to see many officers writing tickets for vehicles passing 2 feet, 11 inches from bicycles. But many judges would give weight to an officer's estimate that a vehicle passed within a foot of a bicyclist.

And sadly, there are cases where there is actual contact - often with a protruding side-view mirror. It won't hurt the car much, but the damage to the bicyclist can be serious. For the motorist in such a case, a ticket for violating the buffer zone would be both deserved and provable.

Even if there aren't a ton of convictions for buffer-zone offenses, many bicyclists believe there is value in simply making it The Law.

"It helps to educate," said Paul DeSantis, a 35-year-old bicyclist from Freeland in northern Baltimore County. Once the law is on the books, he said, the rule will find its way into driver's ed classes. Maybe even the driver's license exam. There's value in that.

If subcommittee members are still having trouble getting their heads around the notion of voting for a pro-bicyclist bill, it might help to put a face on a person it might protect.

Delegates, imagine your best friend has a young adult son or daughter who is enjoying a glorious day pedaling through the scenic valleys outside Baltimore. That bicyclist is obeying the law, staying as far right as possible. But the driver coming up from behind at 50 mph is in a hurry, feeling stressed and in a bad mood.

Consider the worst - and how you'd explain a "No" vote to your friend.

Besides Malone, the bill's fate lies in the hands of Dels. Saqib Ali, Alfred C. Carr Jr., Barbara Frush, Cheryl Glenn, Anne Healey, H. Wayne Norman, Andrew Serafini, Dana M. Stein and Paul Stull. If someone you love is one of those obnoxious bicyclists, you might want to let them know how you feel.

[avalonracing]

We've had trouble with a few different reporters at The Sun being anti-cyclist. Regardless of that I've become anti-Sun as the paper has become a POS that is more like USA Today than a real newspaper. I finally cancelled my subscription two weeks ago. Now I'm even happier that I did.

[rugbysecondrow]

Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/bal-md.dresser16mar16,0,1202795.column)



Way to go in reinforcing every negative stereotype in a few sentences, and giving every sociopath in a car additional reasons to harass cyclists. Every bike on the road represents 1 less person in a car, and that is not a bad thing.


[/COLOR]

No offense, but it is this sort of comment that comes off as elitist, aside from the fact that it is just not true. For me and most of the people I know who ride, they do it for fun, fitness and fellowship and not for commuting. This "1 less car business" is just not true. Yes, for the small % who actually commute by bike, this is correct, but most people I know drive (Commute) to work and ride for fun. Your comment is typical of the "cyclist" response and really did nothing but enforce the stereotype that the author wrote about.

Yes, I get pissed when cars buzz me and no I don't like it when people throw bolts at me, but responding predictably and giving the pat letter to the editor response does not help. Frankly, some drivers are jerks not just to those of us on bicycles but to other motorist as a whole, but most are concerned about our safety and want to do the right thing. In addition, most cyclist are conscientious, but a few people on bikes give us all bad reputations. Just this Sat, while on my bike waiting at a redlight for the light to turn green, a cyclist (screaming bright too cool for school spandex and all) rolled past ( Buzzed me unannounced) and blew through the light. Who do you think the motorist will remember when characterizing cyclists? Me or the guy who blew the light? People like that piss motorists off aside from the fact that it freaks them out because to them ALL CYLISTS then become unpredictable. Are we going to stop, turn, wait, go, get over, stay still...they don't know and it spooks them. Hell, it spooks me and I am a cyclist!

In addition, I live in Maryland (Ellicott City) and have stopped riding at certain times of the days specifically because of traffic concerns. I would relate it my time growing up in Illinois when farmers would drive on the roads with their slow moving equipment. They avoided main routes and busy roads and typically did it at 3:AM -5:AM to accommodate the situation, even though they had the "Right" to be out there anytime.

I guess what pisses me off is to hear people complain about motorists when we need to look at ourselves as well. We have to clean up our collective house and decide if we "Are" or "Are Not" part of traffic. If we are, and we want the respect and responsibility that comes with that, then we need to obey the rules and laws and work to get our folks in line. If we don't, then we should stay on the bike paths and stop obstructing traffic. We can't have it both ways here people. I wish the police would start ticketing some of the cyclist as well, maybe that would get the point across. I have chided a buddy of mine about him not obeying basic traffic laws (lights, stop signs) and if it continues, I won't ride with him anymore. What we do is dangerous every time we go out on the road. It is more dangerous then motorcycle riding and we are more defenseless than even pedestrians when out. There is an assumed risk which we need to take is seriously.

[johnnymossville]

People just need to be a bit more patient. Waiting a few seconds to safely go around a cyclist isn't going to ruin your day. Also, cyclists should obey traffic laws like everyone else.

I ride mostly in Baltimore/Howard/Carrol Counties and find most drivers are pretty good actually. I can't complain much.

[konstantkarma]

People just need to be a bit more patient. Waiting a few seconds to safely go around a cyclist isn't going to ruin your day. Also, cyclists should obey traffic laws like everyone else.

I ride mostly in Baltimore/Howard/Carrol Counties and find most drivers are pretty good actually. I can't complain much.

+1

In general, my experience is good in Baltimore and Harford counties. Never meant to imply otherwise. However, starting off a column on the benefits of the 3 ft passing law by denigrating cyclists ticks me off.

[rugbysecondrow]

+1

In general, my experience is good in Baltimore and Harford counties. Never meant to imply otherwise. However, starting off a column on the benefits of the 3 ft passing law by denigrating cyclists ticks me off.


Yeah, I know. You touched a nerve and I think I took some of it out on you. My bad.

PP

[keevon]

Delegates, imagine your best friend has a young adult son or daughter who is enjoying a glorious day pedaling through the scenic valleys outside Baltimore. That bicyclist is obeying the law, staying as far right as possible. But the driver coming up from behind at 50 mph is in a hurry, feeling stressed and in a bad mood.

This exact scenario happened to me and four of my teammates yesterday. Driver buzzed us at 50+ MPH as we climbed a rise single-file at 10 MPH. Missed four of us by inches, clipped the lead rider with his mirror and sent him down hard. By the time the rest of us avoided a pileup and came to a stop, he was long gone. We didn't have time to catch a plate number, driver description, or even make/model of the car.

3 feet needs to be a law everywhere.

[konstantkarma]

Yeah, I know. You touched a nerve and I think I took some of it out on you. My bad.

PP

I see something touched a nerve.

The bottom line is this: The implications of the random cyclist disobeying a rule or law are nearly inconsequential for the drivers of cars. The cyclist is never in a position to bully the driver, and can never really injure them. The uncaring cyclist can feed latent anger and hostility by their actions, but rarely, if ever is there a real risk to drivers. However, the opposite is not true. It is really easy to snuff out a life by inattention, hostility and anger if you are the driver of a 4k lb vehicle versus a cyclist. Let's keep that in perspective, and do follow the rules when you are out there using your pedal power.

[WadePatton]

I see something touched a nerve.

The bottom line is this: The implications of the random cyclist disobeying a rule or law are nearly inconsequential for the drivers of cars. The cyclist is never in a position to bully the driver, and can never really injure them. The uncaring cyclist can feed latent anger and hostility by their actions, but rarely, if ever is there a real risk to drivers. However, the opposite is not true. It is really easy to snuff out a life by inattention, hostility and anger if you are the driver of a 4k lb vehicle versus a cyclist. Let's keep that in perspective, and do follow the rules when you are out there using your pedal power.
Yes.

TN does have a 3-foot rule. It was fueled in part by two cyclists deaths. And we've had a few more die since then...one was a head-on.

We now have these and posters. http://www.jeffrothcyclingfoundation.org/images/bumper-stickers.jpg

I'm working on getting the posters up at all my regular "feed zones" and of course have the stickers on the trucks.

more info: http://www.jeffrothcyclingfoundation.org/

[Ray]

The implications of the random cyclist disobeying a rule or law are nearly inconsequential for the drivers of cars. The cyclist is never in a position to bully the driver, and can never really injure them. The uncaring cyclist can feed latent anger and hostility by their actions, but rarely, if ever is there a real risk to drivers.
I largely agree with you and, generally speaking, a bad driver can do more harm than a bad cyclist. But a bad cyclist can do PLENTY of harm. Primarily because 99.9% of drivers are conscientious and would always try to avoid an accident with a cyclist, even when the cyclist is in the wrong. When a cyclist is running lights, making illegal turns, or doing anything else that a motorist on the same road wouldn't anticipate from ANY other vehicle, motorists will often be startled. At which point they're likely to take whatever kind of evasive action they have to in a split second reaction to avoid hitting the cyclist. Usually, nothing bad happens, but there have definitely been serious accidents caused by cyclists behaving badly and causing a motorist to make a bad judgment in taking split second evasive action and causing a pileup.

The bottom line is we're all responsible for out actions and for our civil behavior towards those we share the road with, regardless of what kind of vehicle we're operating.

I thought the intro to the article was over the top, but I see what he was trying to do. He was trying to get the attention of the a-hole drivers who feel that way and draw them into his main point. If he had just started off by talking about everyone's responsibility to cyclists on the road, he'd have lost a lot of readers immediately that he probably did get to read the article with the approach he took. Offensive or not, it might have been the most effective trick he could have used. I'd have preferred it if he'd said something like "Bicyclists CAN BE obnoxious", because nobody could argue with that. But if his goal was to get people on board supporting the law who might not have ever given it a thought, I can't argue that he probably drew more readers in the way he wrote it.

Do the ends justify the means? Who knows.

-Ray

[rugbysecondrow]

I see something touched a nerve.

The bottom line is this: The implications of the random cyclist disobeying a rule or law are nearly inconsequential for the drivers of cars. The cyclist is never in a position to bully the driver, and can never really injure them. The uncaring cyclist can feed latent anger and hostility by their actions, but rarely, if ever is there a real risk to drivers. However, the opposite is not true. It is really easy to snuff out a life by inattention, hostility and anger if you are the driver of a 4k lb vehicle versus a cyclist. Let's keep that in perspective, and do follow the rules when you are out there using your pedal power.

I think you and I have a difference of opinion regarding our level of responsibility while on the road.

I guess my perspective is that what we choose to do is dangerous, but the argument isn't who is more or less dangerous on the road, but rather how do the parties involved act responsibly. We could debate levels of danger from semi-trucks down to pedestrians all day long, but the point is that there are established rules in place that provide an outline of behavior. It is that outline of behavior that will help to keep us safe. We as cyclist have a huge role in not assuming because we are in a diminutive position we are not responsible, in fact we should be more so. I don't think it is appropriate to write off poor behavior by cyclists because we are potentially less dangerous than cars. Cyclists, when not playing by the rules, have a huge capacity to cause harm and confusion on the road and force multiple parties to make split second decisions that might not all reconcile in a positive outcome.

[Ozz]

....They've seen them scoot through red lights where vehicles are stopped. They see them flagrantly going the wrong way on one-way streets. They see them riding side by side and taking up a whole lane of a two-lane road, oblivious to the vehicle traffic stacking up behind them. Why would anyone possibly want to pass a law on behalf of those people?....

I've never seen a car do these things..... :rolleyes:

[jasond]

I once had a gentleman, and I use that term loosely, pass me on a motorcycle yelling something. I was currently riding on a two lane road about 6 to 12 inches away from the white line on the right side of it. About 8 miles down the road I caught up to him and asked if he had something to say to me. He told me I wasn't supposed to be riding on the rode like I was. I then explained where I was in relation to the white line and that state law said he had to pass at a safe speed and distance. He strongly disagreed and told me the next time he sees me while driving his truck he would run me off the road. What do you do with people like this, they just think they're right no matter what the situation. I honestly thought that someone riding a motorcycle would be a little more understanding to what cyclists have to go through.

J

[bzbvh5]

....They've seen them scoot through red lights where vehicles are stopped. They see them flagrantly going the wrong way on one-way streets. They see them riding side by side and taking up a whole lane of a two-lane road, oblivious to the vehicle traffic stacking up behind them. Why would anyone possibly want to pass a law on behalf of those people?....

I've never seen a car do these things..... :rolleyes:

I agree. If you want respect, you got to give it.

[rugbysecondrow]

I once had a gentleman, and I use that term loosely, pass me on a motorcycle yelling something. I was currently riding on a two lane road about 6 to 12 inches away from the white line on the right side of it. About 8 miles down the road I caught up to him and asked if he had something to say to me. He told me I wasn't supposed to be riding on the rode like I was. I then explained where I was in relation to the white line and that state law said he had to pass at a safe speed and distance. He strongly disagreed and told me the next time he sees me while driving his truck he would run me off the road. What do you do with people like this, they just think they're right no matter what the situation. I honestly thought that someone riding a motorcycle would be a little more understanding to what cyclists have to go through.

J

You can't rationalize with people like this. All you can do is your part, right?

[rugbysecondrow]

I agree. If you want respect, you got to give it.


You are incorrect. It has nothing to do with respect but rather an agreement you make when you don your helmet, straddle your bike and enter traffic.

Do you really think that we can rationalize some cyclist bad behavior based on some drivers bad behavior?

Are we really going to keep making excuses for cyclist poor behavior?

[jasond]

You are incorrect. It has nothing to do with respect but rather an agreement you make when you don your helmet, straddle your bike and enter traffic.

Do you really think that we can rationalize some cyclist bad behavior based on some drivers bad behavior?

Are we really going to keep making excuses for cyclist poor behavior?

I have a theory and I could be completely wrong. I believe if you were to look at the statistical data, of which I am unaware of any, of accidents involving cyclist and cars in which the cyclist was at fault that the majority of the so called cyclist are not cyclist at all. I like to believe the majority of cyclists are people like us who take riding quite seriously and have all the "right" equipment. I think, and again I could be wrong, that the cyclist or people riding bikes that cause accidents are probably those who do not ride on a regular basis and do not take riding as serious as some of us do. It's these people that I believe give us the bad name. Don't get me wrong I'm no angel, I take up a turning lane when I intend on turning so a car can't pass me and turn into me. But I also try to give cars fair warning of where I intend to go so they have plenty of time to react. Unfortunately you have to be somewhat defensive when riding a bike and this might come off as being an A-hole

J

[Ozz]

I agree. If you want respect, you got to give it.
ummmm.......I was coming at it from more of a "those without sin cast the first stone" point of view.....which reminds me of a joke:

Jesus is trying to stop a crowd of people from stoning a sinner, and says to the crowd "The one among you without sin can cast the first stone."

Well, this old woman fights her way thru the crowd and drops a big rock on the sinner and kills him.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Jesus looks a the old woman and says: "Mom, sometimes you really tick me off."


Thank you....I'm here till Thursday......try the veal!

[tuvw175]

Four Parachutes
One night, a Delta twin-engine puddle jumper was flying somewhere above New Jersey. There were five people on board: the pilot, Michael Jordan, Bill Gates, the Dali Lama, and a hippie. Suddenly, an illegal oxygen generator exploded loudly in the luggage compartment, and the passenger cabin began to fill with smoke. The cockpit door opened, and the pilot burst into the compartment.

Gentlemen, he began, I have good news and bad news. The bad news is that were about to crash in New Jersey. The good news is that there are four parachutes, and I have one of them! With that, the pilot threw open the door and jumped from the plane.

Michael Jordan was on his feet in a flash. Gentlemen, he said, I am the worlds greatest athlete. The world needs great athletes. I think the worlds greatest athlete should have a parachute! With these words, he grabbed one of the remaining parachutes, and hurtled through the door and into the night.

Bill Gates rose and said, Gentlemen, I am the worlds smartest man. The world needs smart men. I think the worlds smartest man should have a parachute, too. He grabbed one, and out he jumped. The Dali Lama and the hippie looked at one another. Finally, the Dali Lama spoke. My son, he said, I have lived a satisfying life and have known the bliss of True Enlightenment. You have your life ahead of you; you take a parachute, and I will go down with the plane.

The hippie smiled slowly and said, Hey, dont worry, pop. The worlds smartest man just jumped out wearing my backpack.

南安FAG轴承 (http://www.fag1.cn/)
南安FAG轴承 (http://www.fag1.cn/)
南安FAG轴承 (http://www.9nsk.cn/)
南安FAG轴承 (http://www.9nsk.cn/resolvent/258.html)

[konstantkarma]

Here's Michael Dresser's response to the letters sent in after his column on the 3 ft. passing law.....

Dresser (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/bal-md.dresser23mar23,0,416359.column)

I understand what he was trying to do with the article, but I still feel that it was over the top with the negative stereotyping, pandering to the LCD, and emphasis on the relatively few careless cyclists.

Older readers may remember a much-missed magazine called the National Lampoon, which in its heyday put on its cover a picture of a cute puppy with a gun to its head and the caption: "If you don't buy this magazine, we'll kill this dog."

Some people thought the cover was hilarious. Some thought it was tasteless. Others thought the editors really were going to murder the poor animal.

So it goes, when in the course of lampooning attitudes toward bicyclists, one describes them as "obnoxious." It didn't matter that the point of the column was to support proposed legislation in the Maryland General Assembly to protect riders by requiring drivers to allow a 3-foot buffer when passing bicyclists. Some folks were offended, which I regret.

Carl Lupica of Fallston was among the readers who thought I shot the pooch.
Way to go in reinforcing every negative stereotype in a few sentences, and giving every sociopath in a car additional reasons to harass cyclists. Every bike on the road represents one less person in a car, and that is not a bad thing.

Despite the true intent of your column, your pandering to the anti-cycling, pro-automobile crowd does no one a great service.

I am a cyclist and have had full soda cans thrown at me. I've been run off the road by yokels in pickup trucks. I've been called all manner of names, cut off in traffic and intentionally brushed back by dozens and dozens of idiots in cars.

For the record: Bicyclists are no more irksome than motorists, pedestrians, bus riders and the rest of our obnoxious species. Bike riders have every right to use the roads. Even when they have the gall to slow me down. Nothing written here should be construed as permission or encouragement to harass, annoy or maim bicyclists.

But, Carl, we have to do something about this perpetuation of negative stereotypes about drivers of pickup trucks. Those "yokels" may hold doctoral degrees.

Among other things, Charles M. Fitzpatrick of Baltimore objected to my reference to "dweeby" bicycle helmets.

That is ridiculous. The reason I wear a helmet and high visibility vest looking "dweeby" is to reduce the chance of winding up with brain damage, using a wheelchair or walking with a cane because some driver of a motor vehicle ran a red light or stop sign, drove drunk or passed me too closely.

A few years ago, before surrendering to age and sloth, I used to climb on a bike fairly regularly. When I rode, I always wore a helmet, for the reasons stated so eloquently above. I always looked like a total dweeb in that brain bucket. So what? Dweebs rock.

John Cole of Baltimore, a self-described "Lycra-clad cyclist," wrote that he wanted to give me a piece of his mind after reading the comments about cyclists - but couldn't.

It pains me more than you can know to admit that some - and the number is really very low - of my fellow cyclists exhibit the rude and inconsiderate behavior you described....

Unfortunately, a minority of cyclists seem to think that riding a bike bestows upon them some sort of ecological and moral sainthood. They are usually the first people to complain about the dangerous and boorish behavior of motorists, which I have also frequently witnessed, but they seem to think that the "Share the Road" signs mean they can do whatever they please.

Thank you for supporting the 3-foot rule.

Actually, John, most of my encounters with cyclists are extremely pleasant, and I don't begrudge them a few seconds' delay.

Brenda Blackburn of Joppa brings us back to the main point - the need for a 3-foot buffer law. She said my column brought back memories of Vernal R. Blackburn.

He was an avid cyclist, belonged to the Baltimore Bicycle Club. All his life, he was involved in sports, from baseball, racquetball, golf but got to the point that he didn't want to compete anymore.

On a very straight country road in Harford County, he was killed by a young woman who claimed not to have seen him, then said a car was coming in the opposite direction, but she hit the bicycle and he died.

He was just 46 years old, had 2 daughters and a son and was my ex-husband. I want [state legislators] to vote "yes." Thank you for bringing it to the attention of your readers.

The legislation passed the state Senate 45-2. It's under consideration by the House of Delegates.