| Re: drivers speeding away
On Jan 26, 8:54 pm, r15...@aol.com wrote:
> frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 11:17 am, r15...@aol.com wrote:
> > > On Jan 25, 4:04 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Nobody - or at least, no competent teacher - begins teaching
> > fine points of defensive driving to a student who doesn't know the
> > rules of the road. The rules come first - things like drive on the
> > right, stop for stop signs, stop for red lights, proceed only when
> > clear, etc. If you don't follow basic rules, you can't possibly defend
> > against the chaos you'd cause.
> It is implied in defensive driving ideology that any
> halfbaked idiot can follow the rules of the road--what is
> really important is constant vigilance toward other road users
> (aka the defensive mindset), whereas vehicular cycling
> seems to hold dearest the adherence to the basic
> traffic principles, while paying lip-service at best to
> defensive driving principles.
Again, your "seems to" statement above merely illustrates your own
misunderstanding. To say vehicular cycling "pays lip service at best
to defensive driving" is ludicrous.
The video shown in class has clips of motorists making right turns and
left turns, etc. into the paths of cyclists, and cyclists performing
the appropriate evasive maneuvers. How is that "lip service"?
Hell, our paper had photos of one of the courses I taught, showing a
student canted over in a 45 degree Jobst-like emergency turn during a
parking lot drill! How is that "lip service"?
The only way I know to make it more realistic would be to recruit a
volunteer motorist to try to run down the students during the on-road
exercises or during the road test. Maybe that would satisfy you?
Nonetheless, it would be unconscionably dumb.
> > > Those heavily invested in 'vehicular cycling' ideology
> > > seem to have trouble even admitting that the traffic system
> > > is prone to breakdowns. Dangerous.
>
> > I find it telling that the guy who argues strenuously that the rules of
> > the road don't matter, is the same guy who proclaims that cycling is
> > dangerous.
> I never argued that the rules of the road don't matter.
> What I said was that following the rules alone
> will not keep you safe.
Fine. As I've explained at least 14 times, that is thoroughly covered
in the relevant classes, in the book that first popularized the ideas,
and I believe in most pamphlets and websites that competently explain
vehicular cycling. You just keep missing it.
> The key variable
> is not rule-following or lack thereof, but the rider's
> awareness of his/her surroundings regardless of
> rule-following.
Sorry, but you're deluding yourself. I'm sure your ninja-like skills
allow you to judge the value of any and all traffic laws; but most
cyclists are mere civilians, so to speak. Given the high percentage of
people that overestimate their own judgement skills, and given the high
percentage of cyclist fatalities that are doing things like riding
facing traffic, riding at night without lights and/or riding drunk, I
think rule following is key. Pretending otherwise is specious, and
most of society realizes that.
> This seems to me a critical and
> fundamental principle of safe cycling--why does
> VC dogma not mention it?
Why does VC not put generalized "awareness" before rules of the road?
Because the nationally prominent, expert cyclists that developed
Vehicular Cycling principles disagree with you. They think that, for
example, a cyclist riding the proper direction will have so much less
need of ninja skills that it's best to get people on the right side of
the road first.
> Do you agree that the key variable is the
> rider's own awareness?
The first awareness needed, at least regarding bike-car interaction, is
awareness of how to fit smoothly into the traffic flow. That happens
mostly by following the rules of the road, and those rules are
fundamental. Second in importance come the finer points such as proper
lane position, communication with other road users, etc. Like
obedience to basic traffic laws, those techniques greatly reduce the
need for lightning reflexes and psychic tricks.
The awareness of possible motorist mistakes and proper evasive
maneuvers is good, but it's hardly as important as the first and second
points I list above.
If we pretend one has to be a mind-reading, ninja-skilled zen master to
ride a bike safely, we're telling people to never get out of their
cars.
- Frank Krygowski
|