Calmar writes:
Seattle is getting on my nerves because the Wallingford roads seem narrow and cars seem everywhere, especially on-coming. In 59 years of driving I have never been in a car wreck but now such seems probable. I feel sorry for people riding bicycles for traveling must be even more dangerous.
Yesterday I was stopped by traffic ahead on Roosevelt at University Bridge and suddenly heard shouting behind me. “WHAT! WHAT! WHAT! WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS?” I looked back and a person that had been on a bicycle was off his bike and was standing and he was attacking a surprised and bewildered man on a motorcycle. The standing man was throwing heavy punches onto the other. The motorcycle man had to use his hands to hold his rig upright and he seemed incapable of defending himself. The attacker was furious and swearing at the victim—as though the man on the motorcycle had somehow endangered or insulted the man on the bicycle. My lane of traffic started to move and so I left, mid-attack.
About twenty minutes later I drove north and saw many fire trucks on the bridge so I parked and walked over. I asked why they were there and a friendly guy told me they thought someone had jumped. Below a police boat was churning about downstream (west). I told the first man what I had seen and he had me talk to a fireman. They had not known about the attack on the inner lane—right where they thought someone had jumped. I left.
It seems to me Seattle must stop and must plan for safe and exclusive routes for bicyclists. An over-head roadway could be made over the side of I-5. Twenty foot wide long floats could be pushed in place twice a day between Kirkland and Madison for bicyclists–and same in Lake Union. Underground tunnels from bikers would be just fine. What set the bicyclist off?
Possibly the sense of entitlement, moral superiority and self-importance that so many bicycle nuts in this town seem to possess.
I am a cyclist as well – What gives the cyclists the right to rant and cause bodily or property damage – I have had a cyclist blow off on me when I was driving and kick my door in and then ride off because he felt I was too close to him, I have seen them spit on cars, shout all sorts of obscenities – Given I cycle as well to work, I would want to make sure that I (the cyclist) take all the precautions as there is nothing between me and the pavement where as the car driver is insulated a lot and he can be a lot faster than me. And making new roadways – get a grip – how are you going to pay for that? I wonder how you will feel when they raise your property tax a lot to pay for that nonsense. I have an idea – how about closing 45th to all motors and let them use 50th instead, and let the cyclists and pedestrians use 45th – that’s far better an alternative then wasting $$ on more construction. And if you want to go to Kirkland or Redmond, go swim, there is nothing in your way then – else use the Burke Gillman trail?
Calmar makes a good point. What is the cause of what many of us have experienced as road rage? Increased density perhaps? This is a good topic of conversation.
To SL:
I take offence at the over characterization of ANY group of people. As a long time driver/bike rider I have seen a lot of bad behavior, by drivers and bike riders. Often, someone has just made a mistake. I have made many of them, have you? How about just a little forgiveness before your anonymity gives you license to accuse and abuse. Even if it is just plain bad/dangerous behavior, other than speaking with the person, (granted, often not possible), is quick movement to expressions of rage/insult really helpful to anyone?
As a driver/bike rider, I strongly endorse Jon Berkedal’s reminder not to stereotype. Drivers can as easily feel entitled to the streets, which seem built for cars, as cyclists can feel morally superior for producing zero pollution. But such sentiments are by no means universal among drivers or cyclists, not least because most of us are both.
Rather than beat each other up, we should pressure the City Council to fulfill its promise to allocate $20 million per year for the improvement of cycling safety. $20 million per year is a drop in the bucket compared to what is spent on support of the automobile, and it would go far to help separate the two streams of traffic. And let’s not forget walking, the most dangerous, neglected and underfunded form of “transportation” of all.
I do drive occasionally but mostly I walk or bus. Walking is good for you. Also you can walk around the traffic. If I was younger I would bicycle (used to in my younger years). If I tumbled on a bike I might hurt myself.
What I mean to say is I have not had problems with bicycles. I don’t like encountering me on narrow sidewalks though I have not been hit. I smile at them. I have not been hit by a car or pedestrian either.
Walking is the best way not to be stopped by traffic. You can walk around it.
I understand many people need to drive. I used to have to drive my elderly mother to her elder care through traffic at rush hour. I had to pick her up after work. Many people drive their children to day care. They don’t have a choice many times. Some people can’t walk far.
I love seeing the “family bicycles”. Many people have these. The children are either in a carrier connected to the bus some to the front. At Greenwood & 85th there is a bicycle shop that sells bicycles for families and other uses. That is a wonderful way to be ecologically sound. Some bicycles even have a trailer attached for hauling. As Rodney King once said “Why can’t we all just get along”
No truer words have been spoken. We are all trying to get by
What about drivers of luxury SUVs, can I at least stereotype them? How about if they also choose to cover their luxury SUV in swastikas?
I drive in fear of hitting a cyclist. I am appalled at the lack of civility and flouting of laws, that are exhibited by some cyclists. I see no traffic cops pulling over cyclists for violations . Traffic laws, rules should be for everyone.and should be enforced equally.
I’m glad to see people moving away from the us versus them mentality about bikes vs cars. I blame McGinn for creating that negative environment that suggested bicycles were more significant than mass transit or cars. As a city, we need to spend money on multiple mass transit options to move people around, efficiently and quickly. Waiting for a bus that runs on the half hour encourages the use of cars, including cars- to-go. Efficient mass transit is the only way many people will be able to get out of their cars. It’s pointless to expect half the city to jump on a bike. Seattle is so far behind on mass transit. Cutting our already minimal bus service before a light rail is in place is wrong headed. And not being able to get home from downtown at night doesn’t encourage one to use the only inner city mass transit option we have. (Getting home from any area of town at night is a problem,I waited for a bus by the locks for over an hour at 9 pm not too long ago, after walking up from golden gardens). The issue is not bikes vs cars.
Might note that among the variety of good reasons for riding a bicycle, is if your motor vehicle license has been taken away. Most riders in that category are no problem, but it’s conceivable that a few could be conspicuous exceptions.
Also – for motorcycle riders – remember to wear your protective clothing, helmet etc.!
While there Seattle could be improved for bicyclists (and surrounding area, 520 is a glaring example), I’d have to agree that transit funding should be a higher priority, so we have to look for inexpensive fixes. I don’t think the temporary floating bicycle bridge is a real good idea – I could be wrong, but think it would take a huge stack of linked units, and they’d have to be heavy duty to work in the rough water that you’ll often get out there.
I also feel a strong dislike for most cyclists. I have encountered many more inconsiderate and law breaking bikers than the opposite. One almost ran me over when I was crossing the street in a crosswalk. I have also narrowly missed quite a few who blow through stop signs. Children seem to have more awareness than the adults. Maybe they will grow up to be law abiding.
Driving/walking/biking have all become much more aggressive and frightening. The sense of entitlement, of the need for speed, the narrower roadways that act more like fire hoses of cars than orderly traffic; it’s not a WAR, folks. Calm down, slow down, leave earlier, keep a sense of humor and an open heart.
I have the great misfortune of driving around Green Lake daily, and would like to note the number of cars that tailgate with their brake lights on. Which means the other foot must be on the gas. Just use one at a time.
Can’t we all get along?
I suspect drivers & bicyclists go off for different reasons, though the root-cause is going to be stress in both cases.
When you drive, you are cooped up in a tiny box that you paid a lot of money for, all so you can wait behind a crap-ton of other tiny boxes, all of whom are conspiring to keep you from where you’re going. Your progress in the city is not measured in miles, it’s measured in cars between you & where you’re going. When you have to stop at a light, and someone turns right or left, they’ve put you a car further away from where you want to be. If someone change lanes, cutting in front of you, that’s the ultimate insult, as they were going the same direction you were, and will now get there first.
Buses are particularly bad, as they are huge enough you can’t get around them, and they stop (never mind that they often contain as many people as are in cars between you and work).
But, bikers are the worst. They don’t have to wait for anyone, they just go down the right side, or between lanes of stopped cars. And then, all of a sudden, they’ll just take the lane right in front of you and stay there, moving at a snail’s pace.. They’re the ultimate cheaters.
When you bike on the roads, though, your stress is caused by a constant fear of injury or death. You mostly move more slowly; you’re surrounded by stressed drivers, many of whom are distracted (eating, on the phone, or otherwise not paying 100% attention to the task at hand), and the only thing that protects you is a few almost-never-enforced laws, and a hope that if you put yourself directly in view of a driver, they won’t actually run you down. However, when you do so, you do so with the knowledge that 90% of drivers are not looking for anything on the road but another car. And, if someone acts in a way that indicates they were completely oblivious to your presence, even if they don’t put you directly at risk, it’s a Big Deal, because with slightly different timing you might been killed right there. And, the guy who did it probably never knew it happened.
And, all of this stuff, on or off a bike, happens over & over & over on your trip. Which can rattle a normally calm & polite person.
I think more separated infrastructure that minimizes & formalizes the interactions between drivers & bikers will be a huge improvement, at least for the stress levels of bikers. Unfortunately, almost all road-rage incidents involving drivers are with other drivers, so there’s not a great solution there which doesn’t involve limiting or eliminating drivers from our streets.
Slow news day, Jordan?
Jon, Bill, everyone:
I never said all or even most bicyclists possess the characteristics I mentioned — just that many do, and that such a person may have been involved in the incident reported by Calmar.
Judging by some of the above posts, I am not alone in observing that bad attitudes and bad behavior are by no means limited to motorists.
To those proposing big public expenditures to benefit bicyclists, I for one would rather see every penny of those funds go to frequent and reliable mass transit.
PS: I tried biking to work a few years ago, but came to my senses after a few close calls. I’m nearing retirement ago, and old bones take FOREVER to heal.
Bikers is the word for people riding motorcycles. Cyclists is used to describe people riding bicycles. It isn’t clear to me which type of rider is being referred to in some of the posts.
Perhaps the two incidents are unrelated. SPD has a Twitter feed and it doesn’t seem to mention either incident. That road rage happens with bicyclists too is no big surprise. The thing to keep in mind when using the roadways is give people the benefit of the doubt. If someone cuts you off it may be simply because they did not see you. Shame on them for not seeing you but humans are fallible beings obviously.
With the new parking-less housing construction on 45th, expect to see more cyclists in the coming years. #coexist.
Having worked for many years in Wallingford I have observed the crazy traffic at the intersection of N 45th St. and Wallingford Ave. N and have seen numerous, daily violations which could easily result in serious accidents. Over those years, my observations have shown that, in descending order of frequency, the biggest offenders are: #1 Bicyclists, #2 Metro bus drivers, tied for #3 pedestrians and regular motor vehicle drivers. If bicycles are going to have all the rights of motor vehicles, then bicyclists need to hold a license, need to have insurance and must be forcefully held to the laws of the road that other users must observe.
I think it is time for Seattle to start licensing Bicycles. I have lived in other cities where this is standard practice for bicycles owned by people over the age of 12. The cost was minimal, about a dollar at that time (in the 50’s). The license stays with the bike. I would like to hear constructive comments
Thank you
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought cyclists were supposed to follow the same rules of the road as other vehicles. Also, what’s the deal with no helmets? I see more cyclists WITHOUT helmets these days. I never ride without wearing one and I never take crazy chances with my life.
Helmets don’t have much of an effect on safety, and aren’t used in Europe at all. See:
http://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2013/06/04/feds-no-longer-back-1989-seattle-helmet-effectiveness-study-city-should-modify-its-helmet-law-before-bike-share-launches/
Also, we license cars as they’re things that easily kill other people. It’s a lot harder to kill somebody with a bike.
I would like to know if there any statistics regarding cyclist being injured or killed when it is their fault vs. when it is the motorists fault.
Some facts, one opinion.
Regarding helmets: RCW 9.10.010 Any person operating or riding on a bicycle not powered by motor on a public roadway, bicycle path or on any right-of-way or publicly owned facilities located in King County including Seattle, shall wear a
protective helmet designed for bicycle safety. (This will be a significant factor for the planned Seattle Bike-Share program.)
Regarding Traffic Laws for Cyclists: RCW 46.61.755 Every person riding a bicycle upon a roadway shall be granted all the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle.
Regarding licensing bicycles: Providing more resources for cyclist education and training and increased police enforcement is a more cost-effective approach for improving safety and awareness.
I agree with the people saying we need to focus on improving Mass Transit first before we look at anything else. Also all cyclist need to follow the rules of the road and the Helmet Law!
Julie, there are a lot of interesting data in SDOT’s annual traffic report. Here’s the most recent one available:
http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/2012TrafficReportfinalv3.pdf
I know I’ll earn a ton of angry responses, but I rarely bike with a helmet. As Eric notes, it’s just not a cut-and-dried case that it’s a good idea. There are some upsides and some downsides, and I make my personal choice not to wear one.
I do have my son wear one, but I’ve got to say, I think it’s ridiculous when I see kids on those little razor scooters with helmets. I mean, you’ve got as much chance of falling on your head on one of those as you do if you’re running.
You run without a helmet!?
@26 I don’t see anything here to get “angry” about. But I’d like to ask that you reconsider the two messages you’re conveying to your son:
(1) you don’t have to abide by any laws that you disagree with (a theme we see played out often in Wallingford), and
(2) wearing a helmet is not a safety concern for “adults.” (This one is open to the corollary, if you don’t wear a helmet, you’re a grown-up….might be an incentive for your son to toss that helmet as soon as he can.}
I don’t have an opinion on the efficacy of helmets, though I wear one when I ride my bike because that does make sense to me in terms of protecting my head in the event of a fall.
But in any case, from the link that Eric posted (thanks, Eric!), looks like the Seattle bike helmet law may be excessive, and I highly doubt that it’s enforced anyway. How about working to get it changed so bike riders can make their own choices?
Traffic in Seattle has increased exponentially since I moved here 12 years ago. We fought for years on if we should be a light rail or monorail, when we should have just done something. Now people have rage because a ten minute drive is taking a half hour or hour.
Here’s my solution, stop development of knocking down a block and building 400 new condos, until we address a comprehensive transportation plan. Have the developers that bring all those lucrative condos pay money to help build roads and plans to address bringing in hoards of people into the city.
You don’t get to be the fastest growing city by putting the brakes on development.
In discussions about development, specific developments or in general, it’s common for proponents to characterize opposition as “hates change.” The driver who’s enraged that a 10 minute commute takes half an hour hates change too, whether he or she has really thought it through or not. Only a fool would love change that’s bad, and only a fool would think the changes we’re seeing are just going to naturally work out to be good because the growth fairy is going to bring us all manner of good things. Massive growth binges overtax the growth fairies.
I always wear a helmet when I ride, but I’m fine with cyclists not wearing one. I frankly think they’re stupid, but whatever.
I do wonder, Jordan, what kind of cyclist you are. Do you ever ride in the city? Or just strap your kid on the back of your bike and roll to the Fremont Fair or neighborhood block party. Because, frankly, as someone who rides in the city pretty much everyday and has to deal with antagonistic drivers, I’m pretty appalled that you posted Calmar’s semi-coherent and totally unverified screed in the first place.
It served no purpose but to incite a bunch of uninformed, anti-cyclist diatribes, thus furthering the “Us vs. Them” mentality that exists between drivers and cyclists in Seattle.
Oh, it also increased page hits and comments, every blogger’s bread and butter. You sucked me in, so mission accomplished I guess. Congratulations.
Just to clarify my statement above, I think people who ride without helmets are stupid, not the helmets themselves. Helmets do save lives.
Interesting column in Sunday’s Times, from a staff columnist who’s been helping draft an update to the journalist Code of Ethics. These days we all bear the responsibility that classically belonged to reporters, for the information we disseminate. We don’t get a lot of training in responsible reporting, but that’s not much of an excuse.
I agree with @DOUG, #32. Any post mentioning a bicycle is a trigger for anti-biker hate speech. (sorry, @Abigail, I ride a bicycle and consider myself a biker, not a cyclist.)
For those saying “everyone has to follow the same rules,” I’ll say that the “rules” were created for automobiles, not bikes. If we want rules that work for everyone, some of the rules need to change with input from all stakeholders. As well as the infrastructure.
If you spent one day biking around Seattle, you would see many of the following barriers:
1. vehicles parked in designated bike lanes, or driving in bike lanes, or pulling into bike lanes to merge onto another street.
2. multiple places where a bike right-of-way (lane, path, whatever) just ends, and there is no clear “legal” way for a bike to merge or connect to the lane again. (eg., try getting from Burke-Gilman westbound onto 34th St. westbound at Stone Way. The only “legal” way to do that is to walk your bike across several crosswalks, waiting for red lights each way. No car driver would ever stand for that.)
3. Pedestrians walking in the bike lane, when there are clearly marked “walker and biker” lanes. Eg., Myrtle Edwards trail. I don’t care that much about this, I’m flexible, but boy have I been bitched out by walkers if I’ve wandered into the ped lane for some reason.
4. Just the other day, I was riding straight through an intersection on a green light, and a pedestrian walked right out into the crosswalk, looking the other way, against the light. Lucky for her, I am very maneuverable and was able to swerve away from hitting her, ringing my bell and politely informing her that I had the green light. If I had been a car, she would have gotten hit.
5. Lights that don’t (ever!) change for a bike, forcing a biker to go on red after confirming no oncoming cars.
6. Four-way stops where remaining in a track-stand, with feet clipped in to pedals, maintaining very slow forward speed, is more efficient for bikes AND cars. Expecting a bike rider to unclip and put foot down before proceeding is the equivalent of expecting every car to turn off its engine and start it up again. It would slow down the whole works. Drivers should be happy to see bikers doing this.
7. Cars whose drivers intentionally drive fast and very close to you (sometimes honking their horns which is VERY alarming and loud when you’re not in a glass box) because they share the bike-hate that many of you have expressed here. Do you really think your preconceptions don’t taint the way you behave on the road?
8. Stories in the news regularly about another bike rider killed or seriously injured by a vehicle not paying attention – or experiencing it personally (to self or someone close to self). Need I remind you all that our own neighbor was killed on 2nd avenue by a vehicle recently?
The rules for bikes ARE different than the rules for motorized vehicles. Bikes use bike lanes except when they don’t. Bikes ride single file except when they don’t. Who knows what etiquette is for transitioning from a bike lane to a green-zone stop area in front of a herd of stopped cars, etc.
I feel that most of the problem is while the rules for vehicles are clear, nobody really knows what the rules are for cyclists.
@runyararo
1. Bikes in car lanes. Bikes in pedestrian walk ways. Happens all the time.
2. Not sure it’s an issue at all. Pedestrians going in the same direction would do the same thing. Cars don’t have to do that only because cars can’t go on Birk-Gilman trail.
3. Cyclists yell at pedestrians when they are forced to slow down around pedestrians all the time also.
4. Not sure how this is an issue. There are careless cyclists that would have been hit by cars but saved by careful car drivers also. So what?
5. Not sure what intersection and what’s the issue
6. Not sure this is something that needed to be highlighted. Why would drivers need to be happy or unhappy about this?
7. Pedestrians get this kind of treatment from cyclists also.
8. Cyclists are not a special class in this. Pedestrians aren’t better off.
There can be good discussions about how rules and environment can be improved, but pointing out bad deed of some non-cyclists is only making it more of a “class” war than it has to be.
I’m not all that interested in anecdotal antics of car drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists etc. (and agree with DOUG that this was a pointless story), but the class war thing is a little scary, because it’s so uneven. To operate a motor vehicle is to have awesome power in your hands, commonplace enough that we take it for granted but it can easily maim and kill. People who cultivate this ridiculous sense of victimization in drivers are contemptible to say the least.
Runyararo – YES!! EVERYTHING YOU SAID! I am a new bike rider (this is my first year) and I stop at every light and wait, sometimes for multiple cycles until I can drag myself over to the crosswalk and depress the pedestrian button to get the light to change. I stay in my little bike lane the whole way around Greenlake while men yell things at me, honk at me, make lewd gestures and comments, and sometimes even reach out to grab me or my bike. I stop at the four-way stops in Tangletown even though I know I am going to get honked at when I start back up because I am on the steepest hill EVER and just can’t pedal fast enough. I am 100% in agreement with everything you said. I follow the rules (because I am not wanting to get hit or fall down) and others don’t, and then get ticked at me for just existing.
Also, great video if you have never seen it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Ui21AmA3M
@Umlaut @ TJ, bikes are permitted in car lanes. bikes are permitted to ride two abreast.
@TJ, I was not pointing out bad deeds, I was describing what it is like to be on a bike on any given day. And these experiences were just from the last three days for me. Nice of you to go line-by-line and take it upon yourself to decide whether my experience is valid or not.
I also am not interested in a war among user groups. I am a driver and a pedestrian also (and an inline skater, for that matter). In the current system, the automobile is at the top of the food chain, pedestrians are second (because they also have a dedicated sidewalk on most urban streets) and bicycles are trapped between the two, with no real space of their own. Yes, there are some yay-hoos on bikes, but most of us are out there trying to get where we’re going without getting killed, acutely aware that most other users resent us.
@Erin, thanks for sharing your experience – and that hilarious video! 🙂
By the way, the most important factor that keeps us on our bikes – BIKES ARE FUN! There is something very joyful about riding a bike. We try to enjoy our fleeting moments of joy in between potential life-threatening encounters.
@DOUG. : If I ride downtown or to Capitol Hill, I always wear a helmet. When I’m riding around Wallingford, I tend not to.
And the conciliator in me would say “Don’t you mean ‘their actions are stupid’, not ‘they’re stupid’?” But maybe you don’t. 🙂
The reason I posted this was that I liked the voice. I wouldn’t call it semi-coherent, but there is a stream of consciousness feel to it. To me, it fit one of my goals with the blog very well, which is to transport people behind the eyes of their neighbors, if briefly.
Yes, it’s true that there is an “us v them” thing going on with bicyclists and drivers. I’m not not going to publish stories about bicycles and safety just because people who I disagree with are likely to say things I disagree with in response. Every conversation is an opportunity to educate.
And really, I don’t care about the pageviews. Wallyhood sponsors don’t pay by the impression, it’s a flat rate, so it really doesn’t do much for me.
“Stupid is, as stupid does.”
Cyclists can have full rights of the road when a) they pay for them as auto drivers do and b) when they follow the rules of the roads they use. Period. Why are they riding every which way, including at break-neck speed on the sidewalks, with no license, insurance, rules or consequences? As motorists, we are required to posses and follow all of the above. Why are they so very special?
You wanna ride your bike, stay on the trails, your bike lane and out of the way! Yes, you make me angry when I’m trying to get somewhere-get over and let me pass! Your time is not more important than mine!
And for the record, we may as YET not have many statistics about cyclists fatally injuring pedestrians, just give them a little time. They’re certainly headed in that direction!
And take off those dopey spandex racing suits-you’re not in the Tour de France.
Yikes! @Lulu B
I’m not a cyclist, but married to one. So as to the a) full rights of the road, read here:
http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-profiles/publicola/articles/we-all-pay-for-the-roads
.9 percent of paving, that’s what our gas taxes paid for in 2009.
b) Anecdotally, you can say that cyclists ride every which way, at every speed on sidewalks with no license, insurance, rules or consequences. Hmmm. I can say the same thing about my fellow car drivers in Seattle. I have seen cars on sidewalks, drivers with no license or insurance, and cars hitting cars and getting away with it. Show me the statistics that cyclists are more irresponsible than car drivers and I will listen to your arguments.
You are angry about being slowed down by cyclists, but I guess heavy auto traffic and gridlock at traffic lights doesn’t bother you? As a driver, I’m way more irritated by the folks who don’t clear an intersection and block the other lanes (usually the left turn lane) than cyclists who are being slow and careful. And no, my husband’s time isn’t more important than yours, but it is equally as important as yours, not more, not less.
As for the spandex, if you’ve ever gotten a pant leg caught in a chain, you’ll know why my husband wears spandex. That, and when you are sweating, cotton chinos and a button-down really aren’t the best clothes for commuting.
What frustrates me about conversations like this is the way that, when people are presented with clear, well documented facts that invalidate their claims, they go silent, and then pop up later saying the same demonstrably wrong things later.
Like the “drivers pay for the road” bit from Lulu. Sandra presents clear data that Lulu’s claim that drivers are paying for the roads is incorrect. Do you think we’ll see a “oh, I was wrong, I’ve changed my mind”?
Regarding Lulu’s “You wanna ride your bike, stay on the trails, your bike lane and out of the way! Yes, you make me angry when I’m trying to get somewhere-get over and let me pass! Your time is not more important than mine!”:
Most streets don’t HAVE a bike lane. The “rules of the road” you say bicyclists should obey (i.e., the law) say that bikes MAY use the same lanes that cars use. And getting over to the side is simply dangerous (and not in a “I might get a scratch in my paint job way, but in a “I may be killed forever” way) because a car trying to pass a cyclist because you’re “trying to get somewhere” is two vehicles in a very narrow space.
It’s not about who’s more important. It’s about sharing the road. If the bicyclist is in front you, s/he was there first. This is courtesy that my kindergartener understands.
Are you new to the Internet, Jordan? Were you actually expecting your initial post, which referenced a random (yet unverified and likely fictional) account of a cyclist attacking a motorcyclist to be “an opportunity to educate”? That’s pretty naive.
A few years back I might’ve attempted to use this comment thread as “an opportunity to educate” on how our streets are funded and what the rules of the road for cyclists are, but I stopped giving a damn about what people like “Lulu B” think when I realized doing so was an exercise in futility.
Instead I’ll work with my city government. Because more people commute by bicycle in Seattle than ever before. And new bike paths and lanes are being built. And bike share starts October 13. So for those of you who believe that there really is a “War on Cars” in Seattle, well guess what: you’re losing.
Jordan, there’s a good chance that “Lulu B” is not genuine, but rather someone presenting a line just to make you and others angry and frustrated. It’s sick, but common.
@DOUG., not sure why you think it’s likely fictional. I know who Calmar is, have corresponded with him for years, have no reason to believe he would make this up. Do you have reason to believe it’s made up?
Because it’s a bizarre story written in a bizarre manner from a guy with bizarre ideas. (Temporary floats across Lake Washington? Underground tunnels for bikes? Yeah, right.)
There’s no information on SPD’s blog or Twitter account about either an assault on Roosevelt or a jumper from the University Bridge.
I’m not saying it’s impossible, I just really doubt things went down the way Calmar says they did.
Even if you take the incident account at face value, it’s pretty “random.” The cyclist’s motives were unaccounted for, the jumper was just speculation. Now that we know you want to “transport people behind the eyes of their neighbors”, maybe people can chip in with some more lucid experiences that don’t just throw fuel on the fire of possibly dangerous tensions and conjure up the trolls.