Colorado: new bicycle bill passes - Page 3

03-01-2005, 05:16 AM

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 05:20:56 GMT, "mark" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Zoot Katz" wrote ,
>> ,
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
>>
>> >I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
>> >traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
>> >right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
>> >could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?
>> >
>> >And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation.
>> \snip
>>
>> Yep, and a head signal encourages them and helps get the message
>> across. It does expedite matters and drivers seem to appreciate it.
>> --
>> zk
>
>Sounds like I need to reconsider my position on right turn signals.

I thought I read that you can omit a signal if it's unsafe to remove both
hands from the h/b.

jj

03-01-2005, 05:34 AM

In article <1109649820.061795.213640@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups .com>,
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] writes:

> And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation. The
> "left arm crooked upward" signal for a right turn is much less clear -

I quite agree. While the "left arm crooked upward" is an
holdover from the old car hand signals (a North American
driver's right arm pointing to the right would be impossible
to see,) I doubt if very many drivers are familiar with them
anymore. But a bike a rider's right arm right-turn signal's
meaning should be pretty obvious. Actually, I think I've
encountered drivers who don't know what hand signals are
at all.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

03-01-2005, 05:34 AM

In article <1109649820.061795.213640@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups .com>,
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] writes:

> And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation. The
> "left arm crooked upward" signal for a right turn is much less clear -

I quite agree. While the "left arm crooked upward" is an
holdover from the old car hand signals (a North American
driver's right arm pointing to the right would be impossible
to see,) I doubt if very many drivers are familiar with them
anymore. But a bike a rider's right arm right-turn signal's
meaning should be pretty obvious. Actually, I think I've
encountered drivers who don't know what hand signals are
at all.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

03-01-2005, 06:03 AM

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 07:10:40 -0500, "Ken Marcet" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:
>
>Forget about new laws for cyclist. How about harsher punishment for all the
>drivers of motor vehicles who endanger / hurt / kill bike riders! Like
>mandatory prison time for any accident involving a cyclist!

You know where Ken is coming from when you read drivel like this.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

03-01-2005, 06:03 AM

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 07:10:40 -0500, "Ken Marcet" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:
>
>Forget about new laws for cyclist. How about harsher punishment for all the
>drivers of motor vehicles who endanger / hurt / kill bike riders! Like
>mandatory prison time for any accident involving a cyclist!

You know where Ken is coming from when you read drivel like this.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

03-01-2005, 06:48 AM

"Tom Keats" wrote ,
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] writes:
>
> > And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation. The
> > "left arm crooked upward" signal for a right turn is much less clear -
>
> I quite agree. While the "left arm crooked upward" is an
> holdover from the old car hand signals (a North American
> driver's right arm pointing to the right would be impossible
> to see,) I doubt if very many drivers are familiar with them
> anymore. But a bike a rider's right arm right-turn signal's
> meaning should be pretty obvious. Actually, I think I've
> encountered drivers who don't know what hand signals are
> at all.
>
>
> cheers,
> Tom

Around here the motorcyclists all seem to favor hand signals. I'm still
trying to decide if a hand signal is more apparent than a motorcycle's turn
signal / brake light.
--
mark

03-01-2005, 06:48 AM

"Tom Keats" wrote ,
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] writes:
>
> > And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation. The
> > "left arm crooked upward" signal for a right turn is much less clear -
>
> I quite agree. While the "left arm crooked upward" is an
> holdover from the old car hand signals (a North American
> driver's right arm pointing to the right would be impossible
> to see,) I doubt if very many drivers are familiar with them
> anymore. But a bike a rider's right arm right-turn signal's
> meaning should be pretty obvious. Actually, I think I've
> encountered drivers who don't know what hand signals are
> at all.
>
>
> cheers,
> Tom

Around here the motorcyclists all seem to favor hand signals. I'm still
trying to decide if a hand signal is more apparent than a motorcycle's turn
signal / brake light.
--
mark

03-01-2005, 10:20 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Rich <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
> mark wrote:
>
>> I've always felt that I
>> was better off letting other vehicle operators think I was going straight
>> through an intersection.
>
> That's rude. Why hold the vehicle operator's up when it's unnecessary?

Noting Mark was referring to right turn signals, maybe
this is one such situation:

you're riding on a street that crosses the T of a T
intersection where you want to turn right. An oncoming
driver simultaneously wants to turn left onto the same
narrow street. By your not signaling, the driver assumes
you're going straight through and holds-off making his left
turn where he might otherwise crowd you as you make your turn.
This pessimistically (or perhaps instinctively) assumes the
driver would not respect your ROW if you signalled.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

03-01-2005, 10:20 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Rich <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
> mark wrote:
>
>> I've always felt that I
>> was better off letting other vehicle operators think I was going straight
>> through an intersection.
>
> That's rude. Why hold the vehicle operator's up when it's unnecessary?

Noting Mark was referring to right turn signals, maybe
this is one such situation:

you're riding on a street that crosses the T of a T
intersection where you want to turn right. An oncoming
driver simultaneously wants to turn left onto the same
narrow street. By your not signaling, the driver assumes
you're going straight through and holds-off making his left
turn where he might otherwise crowd you as you make your turn.
This pessimistically (or perhaps instinctively) assumes the
driver would not respect your ROW if you signalled.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca