rupert murdoch hates bikes...

[crownjewelwl]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/cyclists_collision_course_mjKgIqI8yQZtsvehrk7rVL

[oldpotatoe]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/cyclists_collision_course_mjKgIqI8yQZtsvehrk7rVL

Think he hates idiots on bikes, not bikes.

Geeez, even in cycling mad small town here, there is a certain friction between many who ride bikes(won't call them cyclists) and those who drive. Just having them stop at red lights and use lights at night would go a long way.

[Wilkinson4]

Think he hates idiots on bikes, not bikes.

+1. Didn't see anything in that article that wasn't true. There are probably more people who ride bikes that have no idea what their rights are vs. cyclist who do obey the law. Especially in the city with stuff like critical mass, alley cat, etc...

Just my 2 cents.

mIKE

[Ahneida Ride]

Well, not that long, I was driving down in Manhattan.
There were bikes going in all directions.
As a motorist, my attention was constantly challenged.

The trajectory of the next encounter was difficult to predict.
The ability to anticipate is the key to avoiding rendezvous.

[drewski]

The article should really be entitled:

Who in their right mind would want to own a car in NYC?
Between the cost of parking, alternate side of the street rules,
the crazy cabbies, the bridge and tunnel tolls and yes anarchastic cyclists its a war trying to get around by car. A lot of the restaurants
deliver food by bicycle and some of those guys make careless
short cuts.



The reason that there are so many accidents is probably
because the recession is making it impossible for people to sustain
other types of transportation.
Also since New York is a port city it has a large illegal alien problem
which contributes to the number of people who need to get around by bicycle.

When I was kid growing up in New York in the 1980's they estimated
there were over 100k illegal alliens just from Ireland in New York.
Blaming the problem on cyclists is just too simplistic. There
are numerous socio economic forces at work here.
The gulf between the halves in the have nots will certainly
make cycling related incidents increase.

Also since the City has increased the number
of bike lanes in the city there are bound to be growing pains.
To me this is partially a good thing. Of course nobody wants
to see anyone hurt in cycling related accidents. If
anything I think this number will rise as long as the City fathers
and mothers don't ahead of the curve.





The Costs of Owning a Car
By JIM MOTAVALLI
How much does it cost to own a car? Wheels readers debated that question after I posted an article about how the recession has helped to decrease driving. I have since found that the cost of car ownership is probably a whole lot more than you think. If your estimates are based on what you paid for your vehicle, plus the cost of gas, oil and repairs, you’re forgetting about insurance, depreciation, parking fees, tolls and registration, among other things.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, American “consumer units” (similar to a household) spent an average of $8,758 on all forms of transportation in 2007 (up 2.9 percent from 2006). We’re a car-owning country, so only $537.81 of our average spending went to public transit, including taxis and air travel. The latter expenses would appear to skew the statistics because the lowest-income fifth of the population spent an average of $171.30 annually on transit and the richest fifth $1,406.45.

In 2007, a statistically average household, with an annual pretax family income of $63,091 and 1.9 vehicles, spent more on transportation than it did on clothing, health care and entertainment combined ($7,432). The average outlay for new cars and trucks was $1,571.80, but Steve Henderson, a bureau spokesman, said he expected to see that number decline because of the recession.

Owning bicycles is a comparative bargain, said Paul Steely White, executive director of the New York-based Transportation Alternatives, whose mission is to “reclaim New York City’s streets from the automobile.” Mr. White estimated that the annual cost of owning a bicycle is $390. The average “consumer unit” contains 2.5 people, so family bike ownership runs $975.

The $390 annual cost, Mr. White estimated in an e-mail message, includes $200 for maintenance, $60 for replacement and upkeep of helmets and other accessories, $60 for the bike itself (a tenth of the cost of a $600 commuter bike with an estimated 10-year life span) and $70 for theft and replacement of seats, wheels and other core components, “since this is New York.”



To me this poem is an excellent metaphor for depicting the disconnect between keeping a car in New York as opposed to making it easier for the residents to get around by bicycle


The Pickaxe by Rumi

Tear down this house.
A hundred thousand new houses can be built
from the transparent yellow carnelian
buried beneath it, and the only way to get to that
is to do the work of demolition,
and then the digging beneath the foundation.


With that value in hand all the new construction
will be done without effort. And anyway, sooner or later,
the house will fall on its own.


The jewel treasure will be uncovered,
but it will not be yours then.
The buried wealth is your pay
for doing the demolition,
the pick and shovel work.


If you wait and just let it happen,
you will bite your hand and say,
I did not do as I knew I should have.

[Ahneida Ride]

If you got a car in NYC and especially Manhattan ..
you got frns and plenty of then.
mucho disposable frns.

Just parking in a garage is 600+ frns a month !
A motorcycle space is also outrageous !

[TMB]

Funny.

I didn't see Rupert Murdoch's by-line on the piece.







It really is time to grow up people.

[dcuper1]

The article is 100% correct. Just try to walk on 2nd ave from Hudson Street to 9th Street and you can easily see 5 close calls between bikes, cars, and pedestrians. If you walk there every day you will probably see 1 accident a week. The same is true of midtown around Lexington and 50-90th streets.

I was walking to get on the Williamsburgh Bridge from Manhattan and had several cyclists flying next to me going down the bridge. They were really close and passing me by all sides. I understand the thrill of cycling down a bridge and going fast, I am a cyclist too, but don't do that in the city with other thousands of people around you.

I don't really mind the cyclists, I look closely before crossing the street, but others in this city definitely mind.

[bobswire]

Road riding and city commuting are two different environments and unless you lived in and have ridden in a major city it's difficult to explain.
There are situations where safety and survival are at odds with traffic laws not
to dismiss the idiots,there are plenty of them in both autos and bikes. Just saying, take the article with a grain of salt.

[dcuper1]

The article should really be entitled:

Who in their right mind would want to own a car in NYC?

Yes, for sure owing a car in New York City is crazy and riding a bike is awesome. The problem is how you ride your bike.

Look at cities such as Copenhagen and see how the cyclists over there follow the rules of the road. Of course they have many more facilities and infrastructure than in NYC, but the infrastructure here won't get better by breaking traffic laws.

[93legendti]

Hmmm...Murdoch didn't write the article. My guess is the OP has an issue with Murdoch...yawn...


Cyclists' collision course
3,830 accidents by 2-wheel heels
By JOHN DOYLE, ALEXIS JEFFRIES and LARRY CELONA

Somebody hit the brakes!

There's been an alarming 16 percent spike in vehicle and bicycle collisions over the past year that investigators blame in large part on rogue cyclists who have turned city streets into demolition derbies.

There have been 3,830 accidents involving bicycles, including 12 fatal ones, so far this year, compared to 3,294 in 2009, city statistics show. The East Village and Downtown Brooklyn have the most accident-prone intersections.

"This was a catastrophe in the making as soon as they put those bike lanes up around the city," said a cop in the East Village, the epicenter of collisions even with several bike-only lanes.

"They are arrogant. They think they now own the road and think they can do no wrong," the officer said. "Some even yell at police cars saying they have the right of way."

Other danger spots include both sides of the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges.

"It's crazy. The volume of traffic, careless bicyclists and too many turns in too many directions is a recipe for disaster," said a traffic-accident investigator. "Most times they don't obey [laws] and that leads to chaos."

Commercial drivers say they live in fear of hitting bikers.

"Man, it's a pain because they truly think they can just do whatever they want to do," said Manny Sosa, a UPS driver for 15 years.

Some 17,500 people commute daily by bike -- up from 8,500 in 2006, according to the Department of Transportation.

"We have too many bicyclists that are bad actors, so to speak. Too many bicyclists don't obey the rules," said Councilman Jimmy Vacca (D-Bronx), chairman of the Transportation Committee. "If they don't, they deserve a ticket just like any driver."

Cops handed cyclists 29,545 tickets in 2010, compared to 27,555 last year.

Bikers, however, blamed drivers for the rise in accidents.

"I get hit in some fashion probably every couple of weeks," said Chris Gewecke, a bike messenger. "I'll get 'doored' or something by someone getting out of a cab or a truck. They just don't see you sometimes, or they don't care."

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/cyclists_collision_course_mjKgIqI8yQZtsvehrk7rVL#i xzz18lPgqsuI

[drewski]

People riding biycles way too fast is as old as the House of Tweed.
They used to call fast bicyclists scorchers. I have a Centennial magazine from 1898 about cycling in New York and they had the problem then. This problem is 112 years old at least. The question I have is observing traffic
laws is really the root cause why is this problem still ocurring?

The problem is how you ride your bike <= way too oversimplified.




Andrew

Yes, for sure owing a car in New York City is crazy and riding a bike is awesome. The problem is how you ride your bike.

Look at cities such as Copenhagen and see how the cyclists over there follow the rules of the road. Of course they have many more facilities and infrastructure than in NYC, but the infrastructure here won't get better by breaking traffic laws.

[gemship]

[QUOTE=93legendti]Hmmm...Murdoch didn't write the article. My guess is the OP has an issue with Murdoch...yawn...


I briefly noticed this thread, didn't read the article. I think it's that Murdoch owns the paper but yeah I don't think Murdoch cares one way or the other.

[zap]

Really-Murdoch hates bikes?

To the op, expand your reading list to include the WSJ. In addition to many articles worth reading you will find regular cycling stories covering the sport, the biz, the fashion and the lifestyle.

[dcuper1]

People riding biycles way too fast is as old as the House of Tweed.
They used to call fast bicyclists scorchers. I have a Centennial magazine from 1898 about cycling in New York and they had the problem then. This problem is 112 years old at least. The question I have is observing traffic
laws is really the root cause why is this problem still ocurring?

The problem is how you ride your bike <= way too oversimplified.




Andrew

I am sure you can find an article from 1898 saying that horses pulling carriages poop all over the floor and an article from 1930 saying cars drive too fast. So what is your point? Just because the problem persists does not mean it is not a problem.

For how many years have we been fighting crime? Beacause people have been robbing banks for more than 112 years, does that mean it is okay to rob a bank? I really don't get your point.

[bobswire]

What bothers me is "cyclists" who march in lock step with this biased article depicting cyclists as the culprits when in fact the infrastructure supporting traffic is/was based on needs of the automobile which is at odds with practical bike commuting.
Someone cited the great "law abiding" cycling citizens of Copenhagen then mentions that there are more facilities and infrastructure than in NYC, but the infrastructure here won't get better by breaking traffic laws.
As though cyclists in NYC "want" or prefer to break the law rather than cyclists needing to adapt to the environment for survival and an efficient biking,stopping every block will not endear folks to using bikes for practical travel.
Stopping and starting a bike is not fun nor practical.
San Francisco has adapted Valencia St. to accommodate both cars and cyclists by having signals set for 14 mph, much like they do in Copenhagen.
Because of this cycling accidents have decreased dramatically as has cars vs
pedestrians and the added benefit of practical bike commuting and much less signal jumpers (there are always going to be idiots).


So I'd rather put the onus where it belongs and that is modernizing infrastructure.

[drewski]

I don't dispute this as being a problem. I agree it is. But the root cause
you state is the one I take issue with. The number of bike lanes
you can really use to get from point A to point B In New York
and almost any American city, if these points are more than 4-5 miles apart is zero. The only way bicycle messengers can be viable is by making several trips a day and cutting corners. Believe me you would not want this job for 1 day.

If you look at how New York has developed it has never really
responded to the needs of its citizenry. Whereas Cophenhagen
and Denmark have radically catered to cycling, due to its
inherent benefits, New York took several decades to finally get a clue.
The city really needs to put in several more greenways
with bicycle traffic lights before we can even catch up with
Copenhagen. In the mid 50's Park avenue used to be actually
be a Park, until the head of the Port of Authority of New York
changed it to a car boulevard.

People who read this article and place blame on supposed
rogue cyclists don't really get it. For some of these cyclists
its the only job they can get it to keep them alive. A little
bit of compassion is in order, especially this time of year.





I am sure you can find an article from 1898 saying that horses pulling carriages poop all over the floor and an article from 1930 saying cars drive too fast. So what is your point? Just because the problem persists does not mean it is not a problem.

For how many years have we been fighting crime? Beacause people have been robbing banks for more than 112 years, does that mean it is okay to rob a bank? I really don't get your point.

[dcuper1]

What bothers me is "cyclists" who march in lock step with this biased article depicting cyclists as the culprits when in fact the infrastructure supporting traffic is/was based on needs of the automobile which is at odds with practical bike commuting.
Someone cited the great "law abiding" cycling citizens of Copenhagen then mentions that there are more facilities and infrastructure than in NYC, but the infrastructure here won't get better by breaking traffic laws.
As though cyclists in NYC "want" or prefer to break the law rather than cyclists needing to adapt to the environment for survival and an efficient biking,stopping every block will not endear folks to using bikes for practical travel.
Sure infrastructure is the main culprit. Sure it would be great if lights were timed.

Let's not talk about bikes for a second, look at cars. Every time I try to cross a street near my house in Brooklyn, a car is making a right or left turn, trying to speed in front of me, trying to get to the entrance of the Brooklyn Queens Expressway. I have seen a woman run down by a school bus on this intersection and also a car that jumped the curbed and hit into a building. Is the infrastructure the main culprit? Yes of course, they probably didn't think very well that entrance, but infrastructure will never be 100%, we will always have gaping holes in our infrastructure, and we need the citizens to stand up and act according to the law.

Drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists, lack traffic education in this city.


Stopping and starting a bike is not fun nor practical.
Who said that commuting should be fun?
It is great fun for you, but for pedestrians is not great fun. That is definitely the entitled attitude we know and love! You will find many intersections in Copenhagen that are not timed and cyclists have to stop and start. I guess they just don't like to have as much fun as we have here.

[drewski]

Sure infrastructure is the main culprit. Sure it would be great if lights were timed.

Let's not talk about bikes for a second, look at cars. Every time I try to cross a street near my house in Brooklyn, a car is making a right or left turn, trying to speed in front of me, trying to get to the entrance of the Brooklyn Queens Expressway. I have seen a woman run down by a school bus on this intersection and also a car that jumped the curbed and hit into a building. Is the infrastructure the main culprit? Yes of course, they probably didn't think very well that entrance, but infrastructure will never be 100%, we will always have gaping holes in our infrastructure, and we need the citizens to stand up and act according to the law.

Drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists, lack traffic education in this city.


Who said that commuting should be fun?
It is great fun for you, but for pedestrians is not great fun. That is definitely the entitled attitude we know and love! You will find many intersections in Copenhagen that are not timed and cyclists have to stop and start. I guess they just don't like to have as much fun as we have here.

You really can't compare the US to Denmark. The US is the capital
of entitlement car culture and Denmark believes in small is beautiful.

[rugbysecondrow]

I am constantly suprised by the number of cyclists who refuse to accept any critisicm of poor riding cyclists. Whether they are called commuters, roadies, recreationalists...it doesn't matter. There should be standards and if you cannot meet those standards you should either stop riding or get tickets. Blaming the infrastructure is a BS arguement, you choose to ride in that environment, accept responsibility for how you act.

This is a pet peeve of mine as we are ALL lumped together when some douche weaves through traffic, cuts off cars, rides the wrong way down the street, hops on and off the sidewalks, ignores traffice signals etc.

Riders need to take responsibility for how they ride and stop making excuses. I have ridden in major cities and have never been forced to weave through traffic and participate in some of the crazy tactics outlined as necesary. Seems like lazy riders who are inconsiderate.

[rugbysecondrow]

You really can't compare the US to Denmark. The US is the capital
of entitlement car culture and Denmark believes in small is beautiful.

Cliche and tired.

[bobswire]

Who said that commuting should be fun?
It is great fun for you, but for pedestrians is not great fun. That is definitely the entitled attitude we know and love! You will find many intersections in Copenhagen that are not timed and cyclists have to stop and start. I guess they just don't like to have as much fun as we have here.[/QUOTE]

If you're going to take something I posted out of context at least quote me correctly.
I never said commuting should be fun. I said stopping and starting on a bike is not fun nor efficient.

BTW being a goody two shoes and going along with the system might get you a gold star in kindergarten but won't do jack in changing the laws, activism, civil disobedience and bringing light to a problem will have greater effect.

[rugbysecondrow]

Who said that commuting should be fun?
It is great fun for you, but for pedestrians is not great fun. That is definitely the entitled attitude we know and love! You will find many intersections in Copenhagen that are not timed and cyclists have to stop and start. I guess they just don't like to have as much fun as we have here.

If you're going to take something I posted out of context at least quote me correctly.
I never said commuting should be fun. I said stopping and starting on a bike is not fun nor efficient.

BTW being a goody two shoes and going along with the system might get you a gold star in kindergarten but won't do jack in changing the laws, activism, civil disobedience and bringing light to a problem will have greater effect.[/QUOTE]


So, you believe in the Critical Mass type of movement? Does weaving through traffic, ignoring the law and riding in a non-predicatable way help the cause?

[BengeBoy]

Rupert Murdoch's British satellite TV service (Sky Broadcasting) sponsors a pro cycling team: Team Sky.


http://www.teamsky.com/

[fiamme red]

I have ridden in major cities and have never been forced to weave through trafficTry riding down Fifth Avenue or up Sixth Avenue in Manhattan during rush hour, and you'll see the value of weaving. :rolleyes:

[drewski]

If you had to depend on cyclists traffic infractions to support car infrastructure
we would probably never be able to recoup the cost of our roads and highways.
However if the converse were true we could probably build 10-12 Copenhagens,
and solve the unemployment crisis.

[fiamme red]

New York City is not, and will never be, confused with Copenhagen. In fact, Bloomberg is trying to make the city not into a Copenhagen but a Hong Kong, with unlimited development and high-rise buildings everywhere.

[crownjewelwl]

sorry for those that didn't get my humor...

rupert murdoch owns news corp which owns the post...i have linked to a bunch of articles from this storied publication and they all seem to depict cyclists as nut jobs (except for the one about the lunatic who slashed a rider on the brooklyn bridge).

and IT IS funny that Sky is (through several layers of ownership) indirectly supported by murdoch as well.

i don't read every post so please feel free to ignore mine

[rugbysecondrow]

Try riding down Fifth Avenue or up Sixth Avenue in Manhattan during rush hour, and you'll see the value of weaving. :rolleyes:

So, the extreme is what you think we should use to define the standard? :rolleyes:

Is it OK to ride like crap in some places (NYC for instance) but elsewhere, there are no excuses for no obeying the law. I have to tell you, riders are ignoring the laws and being crappy riders everywhere, and they all think they have valid reasons. :rolleyes:

[crownjewelwl]

Really-Murdoch hates bikes?

To the op, expand your reading list to include the WSJ. In addition to many articles worth reading you will find regular cycling stories covering the sport, the biz, the fashion and the lifestyle.

I think the Post and the forum suit me just fine. Sorry my interest in cycling isn't as intellectual or refined as yours.

[1happygirl]

Lemme put in my .02 cents in this soon to B closed thread (haha)

anyway, I can't speak to NYC, but I can say we are not like anywhere else, (I like to B different-sometimes good/sometimes bad). I think the only way to behave is how you would treat others as you want to be treated.

A story from the summer for me is when I took a new person I really liked to a bike ride of massive numbers (HHH 100). Anyway, this person was not, will not be a bike rider now or in the future (by choice of hobbies) but he will be an activist or donator ($$) because he is interested in a person (me) who is interested in bikes. Long story short, I had to hear/see/ be embarrassed by "cyclists" who wondered around not paying attention to anybody, anything pedestrians OR cars, dogs anything. I know this is probably true all over but we cyclists were in a concentrated area and the person I was with noticed and commented several times. Strike that, MORE than several times. It will be a miracle if this person ever goes back. My point, we have to behave as we want to be treated, no more, no less. It was really shedding a bad light on cyclists in general for peeps that aren't cyclists and opened my eyes as to how others can perceive us.

I love bikes more than the next person, but just as women and men aren't equal in some ways--neither are cars and bikes, bikes and pedestrians etc
Rant over. AND

Sorry about peeps in NYC but as in all other areas, two wrongs don't make things right.

PS would love to have what NYC has and commute by Subway (or walk even). Don't have it here. If I never drove again it would be okay. (when I was 16 y/o it was different)
peeps always want what they can't have.

[bironi]

I've read a few articles of late about the tension in NYC over newly established bike lane markings. The resentment of drivers loosing parking and convenience as a result are real. This news rag is simply amplifying those tensions. Nothing new here, ride on. :beer:

[drewski]

Not sure where you live, but everywhere I turn I see lots of things
wrong including catering everything to making it convenient for persons
to drive cards. Even though we know there are issues that are leading to rising of sea levels. Take a look at what is happening in Norfolk, Virginia.
By the time they have the problem with bicycling civility solved Manhattan will probably have a serious flooding problem.

I agree cyclists need to stop the madness but our culture is so out of whack in its priorities that to point out the lack of civility on the list of these problems is kind of laughable.

We have much larger problems that to tackle rogue cyclists. Cycling
can help fix a number of problems, outside of a few major cities hardly
anyone even commutes. Ask the people of California which issue
is bigger H20 or rogue cyclists.

I agree 2 wrongs don't make a right, but some wrongs have a bigger
impact on human life than others.

Lemme put in my .02 cents in this soon to B closed thread (haha)

anyway, I can't speak to NYC, but I can say we are not like anywhere else, (I like to B different-sometimes good/sometimes bad). I think the only way to behave is how you would treat others as you want to be treated.

A story from the summer for me is when I took a new person I really liked to a bike ride of massive numbers (HHH 100). Anyway, this person was not, will not be a bike rider now or in the future (by choice of hobbies) but he will be an activist or donator ($$) because he is interested in a person (me) who is interested in bikes. Long story short, I had to hear/see/ be embarrassed by "cyclists" who wondered around not paying attention to anybody, anything pedestrians OR cars, dogs anything. I know this is probably true all over but we cyclists were in a concentrated area and the person I was with noticed and commented several times. Strike that, MORE than several times. It will be a miracle if this person ever goes back. My point, we have to behave as we want to be treated, no more, no less. It was really shedding a bad light on cyclists in general for peeps that aren't cyclists and opened my eyes as to how others can perceive us.

I love bikes more than the next person, but just as women and men aren't equal in some ways--neither are cars and bikes, bikes and pedestrians etc
Rant over. AND

Sorry about peeps in NYC but as in all other areas, two wrongs don't make things right.

[bobswire]

So, the extreme is what you think we should use to define the standard? :rolleyes:

Is it OK to ride like crap in some places (NYC for instance) but elsewhere, there are no excuses for no obeying the law. I have to tell you, riders are ignoring the laws and being crappy riders everywhere, and they all think they have valid reasons. :rolleyes:


I don't think he's saying that at all, being there and done that carries more weight with me than being opinionated with no practical experience.

I don't break laws on purpose but have on occasion broke the law when it is expedient and safe to do so than not.

[dcuper1]

Try riding down Fifth Avenue or up Sixth Avenue in Manhattan during rush hour, and you'll see the value of weaving.

I have ridden on 5th and 6th avenue. It is not fun and very dangerous. I minimize the threat level by not weaving at all. Weaving will only make it more likely that you will get hit.

[fiamme red]

I have ridden on 5th and 6th avenue. It is not fun and very dangerous. I minimize the threat level by not weaving at all. Weaving will only make it more likely that you will get hit.I actually find it fun and pretty safe (traffic is often moving slower than I am :) ), and I do split lanes and "filter" and "weave" regularly.

[1happygirl]

Hey Drewski:

On an aside sort of
All good. Even though I may believe some things it's kinda not my right to 'force' it on you and by making you mad,etc doesnt get you to listen and be receptive to my opinion. Going with my friend made me really see from a non bicyclist point of view that we need to work in the system to make it better.
"Hey come on " "ride with me. its fun" encouragement etc is some good I can do.

Just as I can't force peeps to pray everyday even though it helps me and I think its a good idea, same with bike riding or anything else. My rights stop where yours begin.

[dcuper1]

I actually find it fun and pretty safe (traffic is often moving slower than I am :) ), and I do split lanes and "filter" and "weave" regularly.

Go right ahead man, I think weaving is the least of our problems, but those salmons on the other hand...

[drewski]

I completely agree with you. I just think there are is a huge cloud
of darkness over a culture. You and I am sure are on the on the same team here. IMHO I think we are so cut off from what are the wisest courses
to take for the benefit since we feel cut off from one another.

For example you take these folks who are thrashing around NYC
and put them in a church I bet they would be willing to feed,
clothe and shelter the homeless. I know tons of these rogue scorcher folks
and I was one in my youth.

Just like you move someone from a lofty position at a bank
and make them deliver messages on bicycle and I think they would cut
corners after a while. I think this pressure to be a rogue is in the
water we drink, the air we breathe.

Nobody want's to think they are rougue. I think we are all disgraceful
at some point during the day.
:cool:

Hey Drewski:

On an aside sort of
All good. Even though I may believe some things it's kinda not my right to 'force' it on you and by making you mad,etc doesnt get you to listen and be receptive to my opinion. Going with my friend made me really see from a non bicyclist point of view that we need to work in the system to make it better.
"Hey come on " "ride with me. its fun" encouragement etc is some good I can do.

Just as I can't force peeps to pray everyday even though it helps me and I think its a good idea, same with bike riding or anything else. My rights stop where yours begin.

[bobswire]

I'd like to reiterate my objection to the article was not to defend bad riding habits. I thought the article was a biased anti cycling story that exaggerates
conditions and lumps all the negatives together like accidents and attributes them to the cyclists.
Having lived and ridden since the 70's in San Francisco I can sympathize with my NY brethren.

Now I'm off to navigate the mean streets of San Fran to head down the coast a bit.

[Lifelover]

.... Take a look at what is happening in Norfolk, Virginia.
....


What is happening here. Am I missing something important :crap:

[torquer]

sorry for those that didn't get my humor...

rupert murdoch owns news corp which owns the post...i have linked to a bunch of articles from this storied publication and they all seem to depict cyclists as nut jobs (except for the one about the lunatic who slashed a rider on the brooklyn bridge).

and IT IS funny that Sky is (through several layers of ownership) indirectly supported by murdoch as well.

i don't read every post so please feel free to ignore mine
I did get the joke, and thanks for the post.
I also thought about Murdoch's sponsorship of Team Sky, but others beat me to the reply. So it's not that he hates bikes, or that he loves bikes. He loves money (and dominating the media) so he will peddle whatever there's a market for, be it reinforcing stereotypes of out-of-control two-wheeled commandos for the mouth-breathers who read the Post ;) or shilling big-buck life-style enhancers for WSJ readers (lots of folks read both, I know).
My point is, he'll publish/broadcast whatever we'll buy, love or hate having little to do with it. He even endorsed Hilary Clinton for senate in '06, for crike's sake!

[93legendti]

It's a little more complicated then "he'll publish/broadcast whatever we'll buy".

It's more accurate to state that whatever he publishes/broadcasts people buy. Fox News' ratings dwarf the other cable news networks. If it was as simple as he publishes what people will buy his competitors wouldn't be losing market share and laying off employees-they'd do the samething...unless his competitors are in business to lose money.

[fiamme red]

It's more accurate to state that whatever he publishes/broadcasts people buy.How Rupert Murdoch won the Wall Street Journal and lost billions in the process (http://www.slate.com/id/2255620/) :rolleyes:

[jbrainin]

If you got a car in NYC and especially Manhattan ..
you got frns and plenty of then.
mucho disposable frns.

Just parking in a garage is 600+ frns a month !
A motorcycle space is also outrageous !

A garage in Manhattan across the street on 21st St between 6th and 7th Avenues has a "limited number" of parking spots for bikes at $150 month.

[drewski]

What is happening here. Am I missing something important :crap:


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/science/earth/26norfolk.html


Article about the sea level has risen 14.5 inches since 1930.

[rugbysecondrow]

I don't think he's saying that at all, being there and done that carries more weight with me than being opinionated with no practical experience.

I don't break laws on purpose but have on occasion broke the law when it is expedient and safe to do so than not.

This seems to be an excuse. I would venture to say that many of us who ride in suburban locations tread lightly as our lives are just as much at stake in conditions that are just as dangerous (likely more so).

Of course, you can search for and accept whatever answer you want or whatever one is most convenient.

[fiamme red]

This seems to be an excuse. I would venture to say that many of us who ride in suburban locations tread lightly as our lives are just as much at stake in conditions that are just as dangerous (likely more so).Riding in the suburbs and through midtown Manhattan are completely different.

[rugbysecondrow]

Riding in the suburbs and through midtown Manhattan are completely different.

The point is not that they are the same, I venture to say NYC is not the same as San Fran, or Chicago or DC. The point is that being a strong, predictable rider is the proper way to go. I can't speak to every extreme of riding situation, but if you are weaving through traffic and you get hit, it is your fault for riding like crap. If you blow through stop lights and I thump you in my minivan, it is your fault. Sorry, that is consistent regardless of where you ride.

Hopefully one would learn their lesson, but instead I imagine it would end up starting a thread about some effin car that hit anothe cyclist.

[93legendti]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/science/earth/26norfolk.html


Article about the sea level has risen 14.5 inches since 1930.
Lol. That's as funny as Murdoch hates bikes.

...Like many other cities, Norfolk was built on filled-in marsh. Now that fill is settling and compacting. In addition, the city is in an area where significant natural sinking of land is occurring...

[dcuper1]

I'd like to reiterate my objection to the article was not to defend bad riding habits. I thought the article was a biased anti cycling story that exaggerates
conditions and lumps all the negatives together like accidents and attributes them to the cyclists.
Having lived and ridden since the 70's in San Francisco I can sympathize with my NY brethren.

Now I'm off to navigate the mean streets of San Fran to head down the coast a bit.

If when you are riding in San Francisco, you would meet on the course of 1 day, 20 different bike riders riding against traffic towards you, how would you feel?

[bobswire]

If when you are riding in San Francisco, you would meet on the course of 1 day, 20 different bike riders riding against traffic towards you, how would you feel?

Huh, I don't so where's the relevance?

[drewski]

The point is not that they are the same, I venture to say NYC is not the same as San Fran, or Chicago or DC. The point is that being a strong, predictable rider is the proper way to go. I can't speak to every extreme of riding situation, but if you are weaving through traffic and you get hit, it is your fault for riding like crap. If you blow through stop lights and I thump you in my minivan, it is your fault. Sorry, that is consistent regardless of where you ride.

Hopefully one would learn their lesson, but instead I imagine it would end up starting a thread about some effin car that hit anothe cyclist.


"Any escape might help to smooth the unattractive truth, but the suburbs have no charms to soothe the rest-less dreams of youth"

[rugbysecondrow]

"Any escape might help to smooth the unattractive truth, but the suburbs have no charms to soothe the rest-less dreams of youth"

Restless dreams of MY youth are lived out regularly in the arms of a beautiful woman and while on my bike.

[1happygirl]

Just like you move someone from a lofty position at a bank
and make them deliver messages on bicycle and I think they would cut
corners after a while. I think this pressure to be a rogue is in the
water we drink, the air we breathe.


:cool:

Touche'
I'm happy and am naive being sheltered as a ute (see my moniker) but I sure wanna believe nice guys and (my case, yeah, Gals) get ahead without trampling the masses.

[dcuper1]

Huh, I don't so where's the relevance?

That is what I deal with when I commute in NYC. 20 bike salmons every day.

[bobswire]

That is what I deal with when I commute in NYC. 20 bike salmons every day.

You commute by bike and they are going the opposite direction in your lane?
If so that is a no no. Where's the beef with me?