Annoying Cyclists
 

Over the holiday weekend, I was driving home from a relative's house. I ended up behind a cyclist, riding in the same direction I was going in.

I had no problems with him being where he was, and passed him carefully.

My issues came when:

1. He blew through a four-way stop without even slowing down, re-passing me.
2. The road narrowed down immediately after the four-way, with oncoming traffic making it impossible for me to pass him again.
3. Once the road widened again, instead of staying on the right-hand side of the road, the guy rode in the middle of the lane, making it impossible for me to pass without going into the lane for oncoming traffic (keep in mind, this road is easily wide enough for two lanes in each direction - the cyclist could have ridden five feet from the sidewalk/curb, and I could have passed him with a good five feet clearance between him & my car).


I have absolutely no problem with cyclists sharing the road with me. I try hard to drive as carefully as possible when passing them, and try hard to be respectful of their right to be on the road. I don't feel I'm out of line in expecting the same consideration in return.

I was going to do a reverse post but thought better of it. To tell you the truth, the only part that bothers me is blowing through the stop sign. That's bad form, annoys drivers like you, is illegal (I once got a ticket for doing it, btw) and is unsafe. Otherwesie, he was well within his rights even if annoying and how many times are you annoyed by some stupid car driver on the road? It happens.

I have a friend that I ride with maybe a couple of times a year and every time we ride he has a tendency to ride in the middle because as he tells me "we have as much right as the cars do". I just think to myself "dude you're going to die one day exercising that right".

On several bike fourms I visit from time to time (see phred.org) the issue of "taking the lane" is hotly debated. Many cyclists see it as a safer approach becasue it forces cars to pay attention to you. Others say that it is unsafe ofr reasons that I think are obvious, expecially if you ahve ever encountered a pick-up truck full of beer drinking red-necks (sorry landpoke) on an isolated country road.

As for me, I only take a lane if I am moving as fast as traffic (some residedntial roads, downhills, especially on the tandem) or if it is a safety issue (no shoulder and no safe place ot be; shadows on the shoulder, etc.) Otherwsie, I like to try to be reasonable. I prefer to try to make friends with drivers rather than antagonize them. EVven so, in California, the vehicle code says htat bicycles are entlitled to take the lane (although many cops and local ordinances seem not to be aware of this fact).

Very good advice. I find myself just left of the white line about 90% of the time.

I've never had a problem sharing the road with cyclists. They do have a right to be there as well as the vehicles.

That said, I was really annoyed by the three cyclists who decided they needed to take the entire west bound land of US20 somewhere between Worland and Thermopolis. It wouldn't have been a problem, but they were at the bottom of the mountain and there was no way I was going to follow them at their speed up the mountain. I couldn't pass because of oncoming traffic, so when I tapped the horn to let them know I needed to pass, they all turned and gave me the finger. I was able to eventually get around them after about 2 miles and ignored their yelling, though I did consider for about 2 seconds about getting right in front of them and standing on the brake.

That is the sort of thing I hate to see. WHy piss people off? Cars will always win the fight, so why start it?

Exactly. I wasn't going to do anything to hurt them. All I wanted was a bit of consideration on their part in order to keep moving.

I'd guess that I saw about 75 or so cyclists along the highways on my vacation. They all had sleep rolls and looked as if they were making a long distance ride in order to enjoy how beautiful it is along the roads in SD and Wyo. Only 3 were dickheads about it.

Yes, it does. And I wasn't trying to make a point other than to commiserate about jackasses who reflect poorly on the rest of the community of which they are a part of.


That said, Utah law actually states that you're required to yield to someone approaching from the rear traveling faster than you - regardless of how fast that person is going in relation to the speed limit.

I therefore feel completely justified in saying that that biker did NOT have as much right to the lane of traffic as I did.

And the thing that really bugs is - how would them moving over & going single-file for a few seconds hurt them in any way?

No, they were just being jackasses, for no good reason whatsoever. Common courtesy should rule out.

I very seriously doubt that.

Cyclists who ignore stop signs and traffic lights really piss me off as they give us all a bad name. There's no shortage of these types either, unfortunately. I am noticing that there is a lot more of this type of stuff as more people commute due to gas prices. I'm seeing a ton of sidewalk riding, no helmet wearing, crosswalk using, stoplight running types. They all have the $99 Mongoose "full suspension" special from Wal-Mart.

There is only one street during my commute where I take the lane right down the middle, even though I am going 10-15 mph slower than the flow of traffic. The reason I do it is that there are parked cars lining the street and the lane is not wide enough for cars to safely pass me. The problem is that they will try to pass me regardless of how tight a fit it is so I take the lane. It's about a sixth of my commute.

Doubt all you want. Next time you're in the DMV, grab a book and read it.

Not that I really care about the Utah cycling laws, but here is what the law specifically says about staying to the right of the lane:

I see nothing in there about yielding to upcoming traffic, regardless of their speed. Maybe its in the regular state vehicle code, but I doubt it.

http://health.utah.gov/vipp/pdf/Utahbicyclelaws.pdf

Edit: Note at the bottom of the link, taken directly from the Utah Driver Handbook

Sorry, I should have been more specific.

The law, as defined in the standard Utah motor vehicle book, which you can find at any DMV, pertains specifically to motor vehicles.

Fair enough. Next time I am in a Utah DMV I will be sure to pick one up.

You do that:D

Actually, I found the handbook. It looks like they've changed the language a bit - they've removed the part about "even if they are traveling faster than the speed limit".


At any rate, this:

Combined with this:

Seems to get pretty much the same meaning across, doesn't it?


http://driverlicense.utah.gov/pdf/20...20Handbook.pdf


It's interesting that they have to put "common courtesy" into the handbook so often. If only more drivers (of cars & bicycles alike) would be more courteous on the roads, I think the world would be a much happier place.

BTW, the handbook has nine "tips" for cyclists, at least three of which the cyclist in question broke:

What? You're saying that if you are driving on a one lane road and someone comes up behind you at a higher rate of speed you need to move over to let them pass regardless of your speed? I was licensed in Utah for many years and I do not recall that one. Are you sure this is the law?

According to my "find" function in acrobat, the handbook only includes the quotation you refernced in one place, which is under the heading "Freeway Driving." Inoterhwords, if you are in the left lane and someone wants to pass, then you need ot move over and let them pass. Otherwsie, this rule does not apply to other streets and certainly not to one lane surface streets (bicycles are typically not allowed on the freeway in any event, making this rule inapplicabel to bicycles as a practical matter).

lol - I really wasn't very specific when I posted that.

I believe the law was for multi-lane roads, with the caveat of being able to 'safely' move over. As I said, there was enough room for four cars to travel abreast, plus a bike lane.


My guess is a vast majority of motorists in Utah haven't the foggiest idea that this law exists. In fact, my guess is that the vast majority of motorists in Utah haven't even read the handbook cover-to-cover.

Correct, I remember now that the law was specifically for multi-lane highways.

Regardless, there's plenty of support in the same document for the cyclist in question NOT having "as much right to the lane" as I did.

I already said I agree that he was not being courteous and is certainly not a good ambassador for cycling, but i do think he had as much right to the lane as you did. Just like a slow car, unless creating a safety hazard, he can be there (now whether this is a good diea or not is another matter).

You know, I was perfectly willing to drop this thing several posts ago, but these last two posts deserve some attention.

First of all, you're being awfully selective with which parts of the driver handbook you are choosing to quote. For instance you forgot to quote the section in there that states:

Quote:

5. Do not crowd bicyclists. When the lane is too narrow to pass a cyclist safely, wait until the next lane is clear and give the bicycle all the rights of any other slow moving vehicle.

or this:

Quote:

Although bicyclists will normally ride near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, they can legally move left to turn left, to pass a vehicle or another bicycle, or to avoid debris or parked cars.

Are you sure there wasn't any crap on the side of the road, perhaps that he could see that you could not?

And remind me again which three "tips" the cyclist in question broke? With the limited info that you gave us, I can only see one - running the stop sign (I agree, this was inexcusable).

And your quotes :

Quote:

At any rate, this:

Quote:

Quote: If another vehicle wants to pass you, you must move safely to the right, and you may not increase your speed until the other vehicle has passed you. Combined with this: Quote: Bicycle riders on public streets and highways have the same rights and responsibilities as automobile drivers. Drivers of motor vehicles must treat bicycle riders the same as drivers of other vehicles.

are irrelevant to this discussion. You said it was a 2 lane road. You wouldn't expect a car to pull over to the side of the road to let you pass, would you? Thats ridiculous.

While he may have been able to pull over the shoulder, you have no way of really knowing if it was safe to ride a bike there. And he was perfectly within his rights, according the the great state of Utah and their DMV handbook, to do what he did.

I'm just sayin', since he's not here to defend himself, someone else has to try.

Any other questions?

-Tips #1, 4, & 6.

Yes, I'm absolutely sure there was nothing unsafe about riding a bicycle within six feet of the curb, which would have easily allowed me the three feet of distance necessary to legally pass him.

I have, indeed, experienced cars pulling over on this portion of road to allow others (including me) to pass. Again, it's a two-lane road, but could easily support four lanes PLUS a bike lane.
That said, yes, it would be ridiculous for a motorist traveling the speed limit to pull over for me. Just as it is ridiculous (not to mention illegal) for a cyclist to ride in the middle of the actual travel lane when it is safe for him to ride closer to the curb.

I actually do have a way of knowing that it was safe for the cyclist to travel on the right side of the lane - I not only could see the road and see that there were no obstructions, but I've driven the road every day for three years and have plenty of experiences passing cars turning left on the right side of the road.

Again - I had no problem at all with this particular cyclist UNTIL he:

1. Blew through the stop sign without so much as slowing down, and
2. Rode in a position that made it difficult & dangerous to pass him, when he could have safely ridden on the shoulder.


I feel I'm a very courteous driver - especially towards cyclists & motorcyclists. I always try to be extra-cautious around them, understanding that it's my duty, being in the position of inflicting serious injury on a cyclist, to do what I can to make their trip safe.

I feel I'm not out of line in expecting courtesy in return.

Yes. Did you notice that it is a subjective standard? If the Cyclist percevies it is safest for him to take the lane, he can. Do you ride or commute by bike? There are times when you think it is indeed the only safe way. Was your example doing this? I don't know, but there is also no way for you to know. Your perception from inside your car or truck about what's safe is meaningl;ess. It is the rider's perception that matters.

POint is, I don't disagree that it sounds like he was being annoying, but sometimes you just have to suck it up and be annoyed. Look at it like this, it is just a karmic retribution ofr one of the many hundreds of times that I have been crowded by cars, had things thrown at me, or things shouted at me, have been driven off the orad, have been cut off under so many different circumstances that it is hard to recall them all, or have been almost hit by some idiot driver (not to mention them time I was actually hit by an idiot driver who ran through her own sign to broadside me). And that's just me. Sorry you were annoyed, but your attempt to justify your anger through the handbook (which may or may not accurately reflect the law) and place it all on the cyclist is simply misguided.

BTW - I don't expect the experience to sour me at all on cyclists. For the most part, I've found the vast majority of (adult) cyclists to be quite courteous & easy to share the road with.

I don't disagree with you here. I would hope that all drivers and riders extend courtesy to each other. I also hope you will continue ot be courteous and that the clown who blew through the stop sign will figure out that it is a bad idea.

Bullshit. Subjective standard my ass. It was safe to travel on the right of the lane - regardless of whether the guy was riding a bike, a unicycle, or walking barefoot. Perception has absolutely nothing to do with it. The guy was on the right of the lane all the way until that point, and you're trying to tell me he may have thought it was unsafe to travel on the right? Let's pause for a moment while I laugh my ass off.


You're trying to make this a gray-area issue. It's not. Imagine a six-lane freeway, with only two lanes, right in the middle of the road. Nothing more than a bit of dirt on the road. Now, imagine the cyclist riding in the middle of the traffic lane, with two full lanes of available space to his right, riding right in front of a car.

I could easily have passed the cyclist on the right. I chose not to do so, because I felt it would present too much danger to the cyclist.

I have never, EVER, done any of the things of which you posted. I'm sorry those happened to you, and hope the drivers get the "karmic retribution" they richly deserve. I didn't deserve it, and will continue to be annoyed at the fact that a jackass forced me into an unsafe position simple because he either purposefully or carelessly ILLEGALLY obstructed my ability to pass him.

I will certainly continue to be courteous - this experience is absolutely NOT justification for NOT being courteous, even should I run across the same guy in the same situation again.