Dealing with Wrong-Way Riders

Harris

Mike Kruger <MikeKr@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> I do the opposite. I treat them as if they were a pedestrian, so they pass
> me on my right.
> If necessary, I will move farther left into the lane in order to do this.

Correct. You don't want to get trapped between him and the curb.

Art Harris

Tom Keats

In article <c4pteg$q6m$1@terabinaries.xmission.com>,
moonshdw@xmissionz.com writes:

> Question One: What's the best way to pass this bozo?

I generally just heave-to and stop if I can, and let the WWR do
all the passing. The WWRs in my neck of the woods are all so
unskilled, they haven't clued-in to the fact that a bike tends to
go where the rider is looking. I've found any movement on my part
tends to draw their notice and thereby causes them to aim right
at me. It's a small inconvenience to stop, but in the long run
I think it saves me a lot of grief.

> Question Two: What, if anything, would you say to him about his
> illegal, inefficient, unsafe, stupid way of riding?

Nothing. Most Vancouver WWRs appear to be either on drugs
or hungover, and readily become too bellicose to reason with.
So I just regard them as another irritant that just has to be
endured. Besides, by the time I see them, they will have
already been through umpteen confrontations with drivers --
each of those confrontations possibly shortening their fuse a
little more.

Interestingly, I've never, ever seen a female WWR.

The last time I encountered a WWR was while rounding a blind corner.
The second to last time was while I was just about to egress an
access lane, onto the street (he hung quick a left from the sidewalk
into the lane, and didn't expect anybody to be there.) I think the
worst way to encounter WWRs is during turns.


cheers,
Tom

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

Zippy the Pinhead

The other day I saw a kid riding on the sidewalk on the left side of
the street run a red to zip through an intersection. He's cheating
the odds. Hope he gets smart before he gets hit.

Chris Zacho The Wheelman

I handle all wrong way riders the same: Ride close enough to the curb
that he (or she, if applicable) is forced to pass you on the left (or
right, if you live in a country that drives on the left). As this is the
proper way for two vehicles traveling in opposite directions to pass
each other anyway, it should be legal as well.

Besides, if a car is approaching from behind, better him/her than me.
AND it might just teach him/her something...

- -

"May you have the wind at your back.
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

Zippy the Pinhead

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 16:25:38 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" <matt@deltanet.com>
wrote:

>Graydon wrote:
>
>> Call the police, and report it as you would a motorist doing something
>> wrong.
>
>That's like telling the teacher in the third grade rather than learning to get
>along with the other kids. One of the biggest probems in today's society is
>that people have lost the ability to confront each other in civil fashion. For
>example, rather than speak neighbor-to-neighbor about barking dogs, they go
>straight to the cops. We're becoming a nation of spineless, passive-aggressive
>cowards. And then we lament the loss of a sense of community...

Aaah, yes. The idyllic sense of community:

http://lists.envirolink.org/piperma...103/009556.html

Zoot Katz

Mon, 5 Apr 2004 12:39:12 -0700, <0lcs4c.ca5.ln@bud.garden.local>,
tomk2003@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:

>The last time I encountered a WWR was while rounding a blind corner.

The westbound Bridgeport Rd. exit off Knight St. bridge scares me.
You're riding on a narrow path around big sweeping right hand curve
where the sight lines are cut by bush. I ring my bell all the way
around but I'm not sure that will do any good.

Many's the time I've met WWR traversing that bridge.

Once it was a dad hauling his kids in a trailer. I had to dismount for
him to get by. I don't know what he did when he got to the other end
where the concrete barricades were shoved around partially blocking
the sidewalk.
--
zk

Zippy the Pinhead

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 17:50:51 -0700, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com>
wrote:

>You're riding on a narrow path around big sweeping right hand curve
>where the sight lines are cut by bush.

Geez. He gets blamed for everything...

Tom Keats

In article <4083fee4.23666820@news.individual.net>,
Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com> writes:
> Mon, 5 Apr 2004 12:39:12 -0700, <0lcs4c.ca5.ln@bud.garden.local>,
> tomk2003@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
>>The last time I encountered a WWR was while rounding a blind corner.
>
> The westbound Bridgeport Rd. exit off Knight St. bridge scares me.
> You're riding on a narrow path around big sweeping right hand curve
> where the sight lines are cut by bush. I ring my bell all the way
> around but I'm not sure that will do any good.
>
> Many's the time I've met WWR traversing that bridge.
>
> Once it was a dad hauling his kids in a trailer. I had to dismount for
> him to get by. I don't know what he did when he got to the other end
> where the concrete barricades were shoved around partially blocking
> the sidewalk.

Yeah, the local bridges do seem to inspire a lot of wrong way
riding. I guess they're trying to orient themselves for
whichever way they're going to go on the other side. The 2nd
Narrows seems to get a lot of that, too. There's especially
not much room for squeezing past on the Alex Fraser bridge.

As I understand the etiquette, when cyclists /do/ meet head-on
on the same side of a bridge (or one of its approaches or exits),
the one going downhill gets the "ROW". At least, that seemed to
be more-or-less how it was done during the Lions Gate upgrade,
and bi-directional cycling was relegated to one side of the bridge.
The tricky part is, does the other rider understand that?


cheers,
Tom

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

jeffbonny

So tomk2003@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) says:

>As I understand the etiquette, when cyclists /do/ meet head-on
>on the same side of a bridge (or one of its approaches or exits),
>the one going downhill gets the "ROW". At least, that seemed to
>be more-or-less how it was done during the Lions Gate upgrade,
>and bi-directional cycling was relegated to one side of the bridge.
>The tricky part is, does the other rider understand that?
>
>
>cheers,
> Tom

Or is he even paying attention? I got shoved into an oncoming pickup
truck on the Petullo Bridge years ago trying to pass an oncoming
cyclist who had his head down. The side view mirror hit me in the face
so hard I broke the seatpost outta the bike on my way to the pavement.
Broke my jaw and shattered my cheek too. I don't trust anyone on
bridges anymore.

jeffb

DRS

Kevan Smith <Kevan@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
o0j370hhgbliu1glfsm0qcimbm45p8a0is@4ax.com
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 04:27:09 +1000, "DRS" <drs@removethis.ihug.com.au>
> from Ihug Limited wrote:
>
>> You're in America. Shoot the prick.
>
> *BANG*
>
> Will you go away now?

Nah, I like you, I think I'll stay a while.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

MP

You're right, of course. WWC is more serious, mainly because it
endangers others, not just the offending cyclist.

But the OP mentioned helmetlessness as another sign of freddyosity.

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 12:21:59 -0500, Kevan Smith
<Kevan@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>There is no safety comparison between wrong way cycling and helmet use.

MP

Agreed.

My point is that endangering others is morally less defensible than
endangering yourself.

MP
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:32:54 -0700, Father Haskell
<FraHaskell@mayfield.edu> wrote:

>MP wrote:
>>
>> You're right, of course. WWC is more serious, mainly because it
>> endangers others, not just the offending cyclist.
>
>It's suicidal. Vehicles pulling into the street from an intersection
>will be looking the other way.

loki

"MP" <Schlabotnik@DELETESPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:qjl570dpkvvsh6qtp8jten5ios7jmkekqd@4ax.com...
> Agreed.
>
> My point is that endangering others is morally less defensible than
> endangering yourself.

I agree with what you mean but not what you say.

To wit; take a generic 'righteous' war whereby we are all drafted as GI
Joes and Janes. Since we are on the side of right it is morally more
defensible to endanger certain others [the enemy] than ourselves.

Now maybe if we cast the Kulture Warz in terms of a epic struggle - a war
if you will - betweeen good and evil, light and dark, right-way and
wrong-way riders, we could have a useful analogy.




--
'If I seem unduly clear to you,
you must have misunderstood what I said'
-alan greenspan

Father Haskell

MP wrote:
>
> You're right, of course. WWC is more serious, mainly because it
> endangers others, not just the offending cyclist.

It's suicidal. Vehicles pulling into the street from an intersection
will be looking the other way.