Hit and Run - Page 52 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

06-06-2004, 11:16 PM

In ba.bicycles Ben Pfaff <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>> I don't remember: do these intersections have "cross traffic does not
>> stop" warning signs?

> What does it matter? A driver who can't tell whether cross
> traffic has to stop should not be driving.

Err well again in a perfect world it wouldn't matter. Do you suggest
that we abolish all such yellow warning signs? After all a driver who
can't recognize a hazardous situation should not be driving.

Of course it is no excuse, but given that most streets in the vicinity
of Bryant have 4-way stops, drivers who are accustomed to rolling
through stops when they are the first to reach an intersection, may
use more caution if they see a warning sign.

-- Dave

06-06-2004, 11:21 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Terry Morse <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> Thanks for stating what I was trying to, but with much more tact.

I think Eric Sande had the appropriate tact.

The rest is just a bunch of words blowin' in the wind.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-06-2004, 11:21 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Terry Morse <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> Thanks for stating what I was trying to, but with much more tact.

I think Eric Sande had the appropriate tact.

The rest is just a bunch of words blowin' in the wind.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-06-2004, 11:21 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Terry Morse <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> Thanks for stating what I was trying to, but with much more tact.

I think Eric Sande had the appropriate tact.

The rest is just a bunch of words blowin' in the wind.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-06-2004, 11:21 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Terry Morse <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> Thanks for stating what I was trying to, but with much more tact.

I think Eric Sande had the appropriate tact.

The rest is just a bunch of words blowin' in the wind.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-06-2004, 11:21 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Terry Morse <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> Thanks for stating what I was trying to, but with much more tact.

I think Eric Sande had the appropriate tact.

The rest is just a bunch of words blowin' in the wind.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

06-07-2004, 07:05 PM

> LioNiNoiL_a t_Ne t s c a pE_D 0 T_Ne T [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>If a cyclist continues to get himself in
>>>> near miss situations with law breaking motorists on
>>>> the same road, there's something wrong with the cyclist.
>>>
>>> See what I mean?
>>
>> I think some people blame cyclists for getting in trouble,
>> but these posts have not.
>
>The post quoted above blames the cyclist for _getting himself_ in
>near-miss situations with law-breaking motorists. How do you parse that
>into _not_ blaming the cyclist??

You ignored the important part of the particular post you quote as evidence of
a "blame the cyclist" mentality. The part you ignored describes a cyclist that
*continues* to have near misses *on the same road* [my emphasis added]. That's
quite specific to one cyclist in one situation as opposed to all cyclists or
even cyclists in general. As such it's hardly any indication of the bias you
allege.
If a man burns his hand on a hot stove once it's a learning experience. Maybe
we can blame the burn on poor stove design. OTOH, if that man repeatedly burns
his hand on the same stove we have to consider that maybe the real problem is
that the man doesn't know how to operate the stove.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

06-07-2004, 07:05 PM

> LioNiNoiL_a t_Ne t s c a pE_D 0 T_Ne T [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>If a cyclist continues to get himself in
>>>> near miss situations with law breaking motorists on
>>>> the same road, there's something wrong with the cyclist.
>>>
>>> See what I mean?
>>
>> I think some people blame cyclists for getting in trouble,
>> but these posts have not.
>
>The post quoted above blames the cyclist for _getting himself_ in
>near-miss situations with law-breaking motorists. How do you parse that
>into _not_ blaming the cyclist??

You ignored the important part of the particular post you quote as evidence of
a "blame the cyclist" mentality. The part you ignored describes a cyclist that
*continues* to have near misses *on the same road* [my emphasis added]. That's
quite specific to one cyclist in one situation as opposed to all cyclists or
even cyclists in general. As such it's hardly any indication of the bias you
allege.
If a man burns his hand on a hot stove once it's a learning experience. Maybe
we can blame the burn on poor stove design. OTOH, if that man repeatedly burns
his hand on the same stove we have to consider that maybe the real problem is
that the man doesn't know how to operate the stove.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

06-07-2004, 07:05 PM

> LioNiNoiL_a t_Ne t s c a pE_D 0 T_Ne T [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>If a cyclist continues to get himself in
>>>> near miss situations with law breaking motorists on
>>>> the same road, there's something wrong with the cyclist.
>>>
>>> See what I mean?
>>
>> I think some people blame cyclists for getting in trouble,
>> but these posts have not.
>
>The post quoted above blames the cyclist for _getting himself_ in
>near-miss situations with law-breaking motorists. How do you parse that
>into _not_ blaming the cyclist??

You ignored the important part of the particular post you quote as evidence of
a "blame the cyclist" mentality. The part you ignored describes a cyclist that
*continues* to have near misses *on the same road* [my emphasis added]. That's
quite specific to one cyclist in one situation as opposed to all cyclists or
even cyclists in general. As such it's hardly any indication of the bias you
allege.
If a man burns his hand on a hot stove once it's a learning experience. Maybe
we can blame the burn on poor stove design. OTOH, if that man repeatedly burns
his hand on the same stove we have to consider that maybe the real problem is
that the man doesn't know how to operate the stove.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

06-07-2004, 07:05 PM

> LioNiNoiL_a t_Ne t s c a pE_D 0 T_Ne T [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>If a cyclist continues to get himself in
>>>> near miss situations with law breaking motorists on
>>>> the same road, there's something wrong with the cyclist.
>>>
>>> See what I mean?
>>
>> I think some people blame cyclists for getting in trouble,
>> but these posts have not.
>
>The post quoted above blames the cyclist for _getting himself_ in
>near-miss situations with law-breaking motorists. How do you parse that
>into _not_ blaming the cyclist??

You ignored the important part of the particular post you quote as evidence of
a "blame the cyclist" mentality. The part you ignored describes a cyclist that
*continues* to have near misses *on the same road* [my emphasis added]. That's
quite specific to one cyclist in one situation as opposed to all cyclists or
even cyclists in general. As such it's hardly any indication of the bias you
allege.
If a man burns his hand on a hot stove once it's a learning experience. Maybe
we can blame the burn on poor stove design. OTOH, if that man repeatedly burns
his hand on the same stove we have to consider that maybe the real problem is
that the man doesn't know how to operate the stove.

Regards,
Bob Hunt