Dealing with Wrong-Way Riders

jeffbonny

So "DRS" <drs@removethis.ihug.com.au> says:

>Justification for a war and conduct of a war are two different things. WWII
>wasn't a standard kind of power grab between two equally greedy, amoral
>groups simply struggling for their own advantage. Naziism was unambiguously
>evil and there could be no honourable compromise or settlement with it.
>Either democracy prevailed or Naziism did, there could be no inbetween.

Greedy, amoral, no honorable compromise or settlement with no in
between? That accurately describes dealing with a major credit card
company.

jeffb

DRS

Curtis L. Russell <curtis@the-md-russells.org> wrote in message
dnu8705obn8vdtslfmhblpc7v6fe0tg47a@4ax.com

[...]

> Pedestrians OTOH are a different story. The first couple of days in
> Britain evidently can be deadly, or at least frightening, for U.S.
> pedestrians. Habit is habit...

Oh, ain't the the truth, as I discovered shortly after moving back to Oz
after living in Holland for a few years. The scary thing is I *know* I
looked before stepping out onto the road... Fortunately it was a side
street and the car wasn't going very fast.

--

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

Q.

"Hunrobe" <hunrobe@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040407093205.16880.00000857@mb-m28.aol.com...
> >dpharris@gci.net (Dennis P. Harris)
>
> wrote in part:
>
> >I turn sideways and block the lane, and then tell them that it's
> >illegal for them to ride facing traffic
>
> Unless you are statutorily empowered to do so (construction flaggers,
police
> and fire personnel, etc.) blocking traffic to direct other traffic is also
> illegal. Move further into the lane and mind your own business.

Whoa! Since when is operating a vehicle legally, and stopping in the road
to keep from being hit by a criminal a crime itself? Sorry, it doesn't wash
.... when someone is breaking the law by riding (or driving) the wrong way
they are no longer traffic, they are criminals and give up the right to be
treated as other law abiding citizens are. That's like saying it's illegal
to lock your doors at night because it prevents thieves from moving freely,
or that it's illegal to drive the speed limit when others want to go faster
than you because you're blocking traffic.

And it is my business if some guy is riding the wrong way and heading
towards me. He's already established his stupidity by doing so, and he
looses the benefit of the doubt. It's at this point I have to protect
myself by taking action. I'm not going to end up under the wheels of a bus
because of some looser on a DUI-brid.

C.Q.C.

Mark Hickey

David Reuteler <reuteler@visi.com> wrote:

>Mark Hickey <mark@habcycles.com> wrote:
>> David Reuteler <reuteler@visi.com> wrote:
>>>the cause may be moral but the means (war) certainly aren't. you've just
>>>given up finding a better resolution. war is never moral.
>>
>> I too wish a giant group hug would fix everything wrong in the world
>> today. Sadly that's not going to happen any time soon. The best we
>> can do until basic human nature changes is to try to always choose the
>> best option from what are usually two difficult paths.
>
>nothing to do with group hugs & the difference is not semantic. everything
>to do with not allowing yourself to rationalize war as a "moral" answer to a
>problem. it's not.

A frightened young woman runs into the restaurant you're having lunch
in and cowers behind a potted plant. 10 seconds later a wild-eyed man
with a large handgun runs in and asks you if you've seen his soon to
be dead wife.

It's morally wrong to lie, but obviously morally wrong to tell the guy
where she is. Maybe it's morally wrong to hurt someone, but perhaps
you choose to smack the guy across the room with a chair when he turns
his back. You didn't tell him where his wife was hiding because
you're morally opposed to violence - but are you wrong if you
overpower the guy?

Neville Chamberlain felt the same way you did. His complacency cost
Europe millions of lives in the end. I'll take a Winston Churchill
over a Neville Chamberlain any day.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Mark Hickey

Curtis L. Russell <curtis@the-md-russells.org> wrote:

>Pedestrians OTOH are a different story. The first couple of days in
>Britain evidently can be deadly, or at least frightening, for U.S.
>pedestrians. Habit is habit...

Living in China a couple years cured me of any problem with looking
for traffic. I now always look both ways (plus often over my
shoulder) before stepping out onto ANY road, regardless of the
direction of traffic. If there were traffic rules in China, they
weren't obvious.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Hunrobe

>"Q." LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com

wrote in part:

>> >I turn sideways and block the lane, and then tell them that it's
>> >illegal for them to ride facing traffic
>>

>Whoa! Since when is operating a vehicle legally, and stopping in the road
>to keep from being hit by a criminal a crime itself?

Re-read the above. Positioning your vehicle sideways across the lane to stop
another vehicle so you can tell that vehicle's operator that they are violating
the vehicle code is *not* "operating a vehicle legally". The types of vehicles
involved make no difference in that regard.
BTW, exactly how does intentionally placing yourself in a vehicle's path and
blocking it keep you from being struck by that vehicle?

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Ryan Cousineau

In article <Ye4dc.215572$Cb.1883222@attbi_s51>,
"Claire Petersky" <cpetersky@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> "David Kerber" <ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1addba23376b90d09896a4@news.east.cox.net...
>
> > Stalin killed a hell of a lot of people, but he never declared that he
> > wanted to eliminate an entire religious/ethnic group simply because of
> > their religion/ethnicity.

I'm just going off the top of my head, but didn't Stalin make a pretty
good run at eliminating a couple of ethnic groups, notably the Ukranians?

> Do you count his elimination of the entirety of the class of the so-called
> rich peasantry? That was pretty calculated genocide. It's not a religious
> group, or an ethnic group, but a social economic class -- pretty close in my
> book.

I think there's a meta-question here: hands up everyone who would care
why a particular tyrant had marked them for death. I mean, does it hurt
more to be killed for ethnic reasons than economic ones, or to be
singled out at random, or to die because your leader knows nothing about
food production?

Like Mao after him, Stalin's single deadliest act was probably not
related to his politically motivated purges, but had to do with his
incompetent agricultural policies: both instituted agricultural reforms
that led to a huge number of famine deaths.

What does this have to do with riding the wrong way? To paraphrase "The
Simpsons," wrong-way riders are worse than Hitler.

In flavor country,
--
Ryan Cousineau, rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

Michael J. Klein

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:12:25 -0500, "Kyralessa"
<ryan_lundy@spamless_hotmail.com> wrote:

>"DRS" <drs@removethis.ihug.com.au> wrote in message
>news:c4s04p$j5u$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>> Bestest Handsander <none@u.biz> wrote in message
>> OM-dndJUvsL5Ru3dRVn-iQ@aros.net
>> > I second this approach. People are free to be idiots in this
>> > country, and it has been my experience that idiots get awfully upset
>> > when you question their idiocy.
>>
>> Like when people point out how bad top-posting is? In any event, people
>are
>> not free to be idiots when their idiocy puts others at risk.
>
>Yes, just like that. Most people who top-post aren't aware that it's
>considered a faux pas. You can catch more flies with molasses...

or their use of USENET dates to the time when the top posting crowd
didn't exist.

Michael J. Klein

Rick Onanian

On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:07:28 +0000 (UTC), moonshdw@xmissionz.com
wrote:
>helmet, he hauls a large load in a backpack, and he invariably rides on
>the wrong side of the road. (This being in the USA, that's on the left.)
> Question One: What's the best way to pass this bozo?

Play chicken. Hold your line. He'll have to go somewhere...

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

There's nothing you can say that will help unless you can engage him
in a pleasant conversation and drift the topic to safe riding
practices...and even then you'll probably be ineffective.

Twice today, I saw side-by-side wrong-way cyclists taking the lane.

That is, wrong-way cyclist, in the middle of the wrong-way lane,
with another cyclist next to him sharing the same lane.

The second pair had a beautiful Alaskan Malamute (sic) running on
the opposite side from them (proper side). The cyclists were a child
and either an older sibling or a parent. As automotive traffic on
this narrow road approached from both directions, they converged
into single-file wrong-way shoulder riding...

Eek.

When I was a child, my parents had me riding the wrong way. I don't
know how I ever had the balls to do that...it's scary, having an
effective closing speed of 40 to 60 mph on what should be a 25mph
road, with no shoulder, and a big truck barreling towards you.
--
Rick Onanian

Rick Onanian

Others wrote:
>>> WWII was a righteous war. The Nazis were not just an enemy, they
>>> were genuinely evil.
>>
>> Many inhabitants of our fair planet who think about such things feel
>> the same way about George W. Bush.
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 10:27:39 +1000, "DRS"
<drs@removethis.ihug.com.au> wrote:
>For all his faults, which are many and egregious, even Shrub has yet to
>declare any intention much less instituted any actual policy to commit
>genocide. He is a bad man but he's not even close to Hitler and nobody is
>served by such loose and inappropriate comparisons. WWII was arguably
>unique in history in that it was the closest war to being morally black and
>white as there ever has been.

Now that Nazis have been discussed and compared to GWB, isn't this
thread supposed to die?
--
Rick Onanian

frkrygow

Hunrobe wrote:
>>"Q." LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com
>
>>Whoa! Since when is operating a vehicle legally, and stopping in the road
>>to keep from being hit by a criminal a crime itself?
>
>
> Re-read the above. Positioning your vehicle sideways across the lane to stop
> another vehicle so you can tell that vehicle's operator that they are violating
> the vehicle code is *not* "operating a vehicle legally". The types of vehicles
> involved make no difference in that regard.

I think you're probably wrong. Absent certain signage, that is.

It seems to me it's legal to stop a bike by the side of the road, unless
there's a "No standing or stopping" sign. Since there wasn't one
mentioned in the instance in question (and since they're not that
common) my bet is the action was legal.

If a ticket were given to the person who stopped, it would have to be
given based on the cop's assumption of the person's intent. I'd think
that would be trivial to fight in court.

I also think it would be a very rare cop who would ticket the right-way
cyclist. Face it, even the wrong-way cyclists are generally far below
cop-radar. You'd need to find a cop who cared enough about correct
cycling to notice and stop for the wrong way cyclist, but be picky
enough about his interpretation of legal minutae to also ticket the
cyclist who agreed with the law, but showed it improperly.



Incidentally, yesterday's related incident. True story:

I was walking across a downtown street at a Tee intersection, using a
ped crossing with a ped light and a "Yield to pedestrians in crosswalk"
sign. Just behind me were five little day-care kids with their
guardian, also waiting to cross.

The light changed, I stepped out, and a driver coming from the base of
the "Tee" started to turn left directly at me - and possibly at the kids
beind me, depending how he made the turn. (I didn't know if they
stepped off the curb or not.)

I suppose I could have stepped back, and maybe tried to make sure any
kids were herded back to safety, but I didn't. I stopped dead in front
of the car with my "Halt!" hand up toward the driver's face. He
stopped. I glared. We crossed.

Was what I did illegal? Was I obstructing traffic? I don't think so,
and I don't see the legal difference with what's described here, and
what Dennis described, except for the absence of the little kids.


> BTW, exactly how does intentionally placing yourself in a vehicle's path and
> blocking it keep you from being struck by that vehicle?

If nothing else, it guarantees you won't have a head-on collision at
combined closing speed. Thus, it could be safer than dodging east and
having him also dodge east right into you.

Besides, what would you tell a motorist to do if a wrong-way motorist
came at him? I'd certainly stop my car; and if I happened to stop in
such a way that it caused him to stop, I can't imagine _any_ cop
ticketing me.

And I think this is another time that cyclists should be treated like
motorists.

--
-------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

Kyralessa

"Mark Hickey" <mark@habcycles.com> wrote in message
news:h4n97012jjbmgeh4clkoo7t59hnqipfvlq@4ax.com...
>
> A frightened young woman runs into the restaurant you're having lunch
> in and cowers behind a potted plant. 10 seconds later a wild-eyed man
> with a large handgun runs in and asks you if you've seen his soon to
> be dead wife.

How do I know that woman is his wife? I figure that out of all the women
she could be, there's only a one-in-three-billion chance that she's his
wife. So I'd say "no" and figure that I'm more likely right than wrong.

Kyralessa

"Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@the-md-russells.org> wrote in message
news:dnu8705obn8vdtslfmhblpc7v6fe0tg47a@4ax.com...
>
> Pedestrians OTOH are a different story. The first couple of days in
> Britain evidently can be deadly, or at least frightening, for U.S.
> pedestrians. Habit is habit...


'Cept for in London, where at many crosswalks is painted, as appropriate,
LOOK LEFT or LOOK RIGHT. When I was there for a day those came in very
handy, I couldn't rewire my brain enough to get used to looking the wrong
way (or was that the right way?).

Kyralessa

"Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@the-md-russells.org> wrote in message
news:k29a70h8av68gjqa4nr7ij5qmnd2r05lc1@4ax.com...
>
> Well, I have [a WWR] in my neighborhood. For some reason she is always
> coming up the hill when I am trying to build speed before my final
> climb on the leg home. If you speak to her she gets a look of near
> panic, as if she is in the vicinity of a nut. (OK, so sometimes she's
> right.)
>
> Thought it was because I was an unknown male, but my wife got the same
> look, riding alone. Our final guess is that she may not speak English
> at all and is riding as she was taught, wherever she is from. Never
> have heard a word from her in four or five years, nor has any other
> rider in the area I've talked to. Whether we yelled or talked, we all
> evidently get the same near-panic look.


Imagine the number of near-death experiences she's surely had due to her
habitual wrong-way riding. I'd be skittish too.