HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc

In rec.bicycles.soc, calvert@QueensU.CA (John Calvert) writes:

    I am confused about the discussion against HOV lanes.

You are not alone.  I think this may be one of the discussions where
"You had to be there" to understand.
    
    I haven't been able to follow this thread properly.

I kind of feel like I've been listening to only part of a conversation
too.  There must be some email going on behind the scene.  Either that
or those of us with short commutes that can be done with a bike are so
ignorant of their problems that we can't begin to understand.
    
    Could someone summarize the problems with HOV?

- Evidently, not many people use HOV lanes.

- The other commuters feel that it is a better use of the lane to let "them"
  drive in it, after all, "nobody is using it".

- Of the few people who do use the lanes, many aren't in true High Occupancy
  vehicles.

I've come to the conclusion that the only thing that will get Americans
out of their cars is for operating costs to get so high that it hurts 
real bad.  Until that happens, I'll just try to live near enough to work
that I don't have to deal with the mess.
From: casseres@apple.com (David Casseres)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: 105 MPH (was Re: Motorcyclist Hits Bicyclist on Skyline Blvd.)
Date: 14 Oct 92 16:55:55 GMT
Followup-To: rec.bicycles.soc
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <48560@shamash.cdc.com>, ldh@svl.cdc.com (Lawrence D. Hare)
wrote:
> 
> In article <Bw0vBJ.6F4@rice.edu> Sam Henry, shenry@cs.rice.edu writes:
> >In article <1992Oct8.032223.6075@eye.com> jesse@eye.com (Jesse Lackey)
> >writes: 
> >
> >>You know, something I've *always* wanted to do is come up alongside a
> >>bicyclist and give them a good hard shove  ... I wouldn't mind doing
> >>joggers either ... These people have to learn that roads are for
> >>vehicles, not people. 
> 
> And what about animals? Shove them too? Or perhaps just squash them. They
> have to learn as well I suppose.
> 
> Seems to me that there is a lot of learning required here...

Am I the only one who thinks Jesse Lackey was trying to make a joke?  I
don't think it's very funny, but I have a hard time taking it seriously.

--

David Casseres
Exclaimer: Wow!
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Friday, 9 Oct 1992 15:54:21 MST
From: Hans DeBano <KGHDB@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject:    Re: Ticketing illegal cycling

Eric Praetzel writes:

>   If you happen to be one of these people who drives at exactly the speed
> limit and always stops dead at every sign I imagine that you are one of the
> most dangerous drivers in your area.  The law has no moral founding and is
> not a golden rule to base your life upon.  It is merely an outline for the
> conduct of drivers on the road or members of society.  It helps people to
> get along well.  Unfortunately some people believe in strict laws and should
> be enforced to the letter of the law.  Alas they don't understand the
> intent of the law.  Usually they also believe the averge person to be devoid
> of any intellegence and so they must be lead like sheep and punished so that
> they keep going along their narrow path of life.  Society and its rules
> evolve.  There is more to law that the letter of the law.  And a good law has
> a spirit that is eaily understood.  An example of a bad law are current speed
> limits that few people obey (including police and other officials) and that
> are randomly enforced to serve some unknown purpose of the police.
>  If you want to be safe make sure that a car knows what to expect of you.
> Act in a safe and reasonable manner.  In most cases this will agree with the
> law.  Because most laws have a purpose and spirit you know what to expect
> from other vehicals.  In most cases acting in self interest will be for the
> best of all involved (I'll leave the proof to phil. people).
>  - Eric

I agree!  The other day someone had the sheer audacity to suggest to me
that I drive my car in the right-hand lane rather than the opposing lane.
Can you imagine...
Xref: sparky rec.bicycles.soc:563 rec.motorcycles:35815 ba.motorcycles:569
From: rct@fulcrum.co.uk (Richard Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc,rec.motorcycles,ba.motorcycles
Subject: Re: 105 MPH (was Re: Motorcyclist Hits Bicyclist on Skyline Blvd.)
Date: 13 Oct 92 11:55:36 GMT
Organization: Fulcrum Communications

In article <73198@apple.Apple.COM> ehouse@Apple.COM (Eric House) writes:
>In article <1992Oct07.153623.2882051@locus.com> dana@locus.com (Dana H. Myers) writes:
>>
>>Ahem.... 105 MPH on Skyline happens to be the DoD Nominal Speed...
>>
>> * dana@locus.com  DoD #466 	| reflect those of my employer	*
>
>Ok, I give up.  What the hell does "DoD" stand for.  I don't suppose it's
>motorcycle for "STI"?
>-- 


What's STI?

Regards,

============================================================================
Richard Taylor                 DoD #981                  (rct@fulcrum.co.uk)
"Would you trust a company who have their bits reversed ?".
============================================================================
Fulcrum Communications Ltd., Fordrough Lane, Birmingham, B9 5LD, ENGLAND.
From: rfriedel@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Ronald J Friedel)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Do we have any rights?
Date: 13 Oct 1992 11:51:29 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Summary: Hire a lawyer!

In article <2927747204.0.p00004@psilink.com> p00004@psilink.com (Michael Smith) writes:
>>DATE:   8 Oct 92 16:41:34 GMT
>>FROM:   Shamim Zvonko Mohamed <sham@cs.arizona.edu>
>[material deleted]
>>This is strange. I was in a similar accident - no, make that was a victim of
>>careless driving about a year ago. The cop who showed up did cite the driver,
>>and also gave him a lecture. Most gratifying. The driver was as usual making
>>noises about "where did he come from" and "just couldn't see him" as I was
>>writhing on the ground, and I heard one of the witnesses say "What the hell
>>are you talking about? He was riding along, and you just drove into him! What
>>do you think he did, hide behind a hedge and jump out in front of you?" I
>>wanted to sit up and shake his hand.
>
>Hosanna in excelsis. At last, a story in which the law sides with a 
>cyclist (first I've heard, by the way). 
>
>But just what was he cited for? Did it go to court? Did you get any 
>money for bicycle damage and/or pain-n-suffering? 
>
>Oh, and in what fortunate city did this incident take place? How's the 
>job market there?
>
>--Michael Smith

As the person that started this thread I'll tell you what happenned with
me.

In my accident, (right turning van, van driver at fault but not cited and
me with a concussion and severe leg bruising), I hired a friend who is
a lawyer to investigate the van driver.  I thought he was up to some sort
of illegal and fishy activity and I wanted this friend to check out his
story.  Never did find out just exactly what he was doing driving into
driveways of mansions one after another.

The van driver was uninsured and didn't have any assets so I couldn't
directly go after him to get money to at least fix or replace my bike or
other expenses.  So my lawyer friend found another way to get money.
(They're good at that!)  I carry uninsured motorist coverage on my car
insurance.  In Wisconsin, it has been established through case law that
this coverage also extends to when you are on the roadway and not in a
car.  So eventually we got a multi thousand dollar settlement with my
insurance company that covered my bike, my medical expenses, pain and
suffering and permanent leg damage.  The good part about the situation
is that my insurance company will go after the van driver and try to
recover their money.  At the least, he lost any driver's license he
might have had for one year if he didn't pay the insurance company.
I expect the insurance company hassled him.  (My son was involved in
an incident with another car that he basically denied and he was
later hit by a much larger bill from the insurance company to repair
damage to the other car.  It took him a couple of years to pay off what
he owed.)

Ron Friedel


-- 
Ron Friedel
GeoSciences  UW-Milwaukee
rfriedel@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
From: Bicycle Federation of America <bfa@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Date: 06 Oct 92 18:52 PDT
Subject: Re: US Bicycle Policy
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1702500014:000:1205
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!bfa    Oct  6 18:52:00 1992


From:  Bill Wilkinson, Bicycle Federation [bfa@igc.apc.org]

I would simply like to say that having more than passing familiarity with this
subject and the various events described in Topics 6&7(?) there is another all
together different interpretation available, and that IMHO it falls much
closer to the truth.  For now, I'll say that based on 20+ years of bicycle
advocacy -- both inside and outside public agenices -- I have never seen such
broad support from so many elected officials and senior public servants for
the non-motorized modes (yes, I am concerned with pedestrians/walking, too).
And, it should be noted, there will always be occasions where some well-meaning
person will call for more "bike paths" thinking that that is what cyclists 
want/need.  I can live with that because (1) they are really trying to support
bicycling, and (2) they are not the folks making the decisions on the type(s)
of facility treatments to be used in any specific situation.

If anyone is interested in following up on the real direction of Federal policy
regarding bicycling feel free to ask questions by e-mail, phone [202-332-6986],
or write:  Bill Wilkinson, BFA, 1818 R Street NW, Washington, DC 20009.

Xref: sparky rec.bicycles.soc:506 rec.motorcycles:35306 ba.motorcycles:515
From: ehouse@Apple.COM (Eric House)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc,rec.motorcycles,ba.motorcycles
Subject: Re: 105 MPH (was Re: Motorcyclist Hits Bicyclist on Skyline Blvd.)
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:06:06 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Oct07.153623.2882051@locus.com> dana@locus.com (Dana H. Myers) writes:
>
>Ahem.... 105 MPH on Skyline happens to be the DoD Nominal Speed...
>
> * dana@locus.com  DoD #466 	| reflect those of my employer	*

Ok, I give up.  What the hell does "DoD" stand for.  I don't suppose it's
motorcycle for "STI"?
-- 
****************************************************************************
Eric House			"My employer doesn't share its opinions with
"Quayle in '94"		   	 me, so I can share only mine with you"
From: sham@cs.arizona.edu (Shamim Zvonko Mohamed)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Do we have any rights?
Date: 12 Oct 92 18:09:50 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

>>FROM:   Shamim Zvonko Mohamed <sham@cs.arizona.edu>
>> The cop who showed up did cite the driver,
>>and also gave him a lecture. Most gratifying.

Michael Smith writes:
>But just what was he cited for? Did it go to court? Did you get any 
>money for bicycle damage and/or pain-n-suffering? 
>
>Oh, and in what fortunate city did this incident take place? How's the 
>job market there?

He was cited for failure to yield, and maybe reckless endangerment, I don't
remember. It didn't go to court, his insurance company reimbursed me for the
bike, clothing (ripped shorts) and medical expenses.  I didn't go after any
pain and suffering settlements.  I think it was the hospital trip that made
the ins. company settle quickly without any run-around.

This was in Tucson. If you can stand high temperatures (but low humidity)
and the elderly winter visitors ("snowbirds"), it is very nice for a bicycle
lifestyle.  Wide roads, city engineers responsive to cyclists' complaints,
and bike cops with a really good attitude. (City cops; the university bike
cops are idiots.)

There is a little of the "cyclist inferior" attitude - the city recently
spent about $1.5 million to make a 1-mile stretch of roadway "bike-friendly"
(which means a concrete bike lane colour-separated from the roadway by a 4'
ribbon of paving stones) and there are a couple of bike paths.  And there is
a city ordinance that says that cyclists must use any bike lane or path if
there is one close by (but I've never been cited for this), and that
cyclists may not travel more than two abreast (regardless of traffic etc.).

But they also recently re-striped a major street that used to be two narrow
lanes each way into a central left-turn lane and one wide traffic lane each
way.  And many of the arterial streets have wide curb lanes and/or bike
lanes, and freeways are not an essential component of the transportation
system so you can almost always get from anywhere to anywhere by a
reasonably direct route.  With no interference from the weather.

Unfortunately there aren't a lot of electronics/software companies in Tucson.

-s
--
Henri Desgrange, 1902: "Variable gears are only for people over forty-five.
Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles rather than by the
artifice of a derailleur? We are getting soft. Come on, fellows. Let's say that
the test was a fine demonstration---for our grandparents! As for me, give me a
fixed gear!"

  Shamim Mohamed / {uunet,noao,cmcl2..}!arizona!shamim / shamim@cs.arizona.edu
 Member of the League for Programming Freedom - write to league@prep.ai.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: afdenis@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison)
Subject: Re: motorists
Followup-To: rec.bicycles.soc
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Ancient Souls Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: 12 Oct 1992 13:42 EST  

In article <1992Oct8.222452.26096@Princeton.EDU>, qpliu@princeton.edu writes...
>In article <8OCT199216121832@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov> afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:
>>Due to the inherent *lack* of acceleration and speed capabilites of most 
>>bicycles and riders, putting them on the same road as cars and *expecting* 
>>motorists to accept delays and frustration because `we have a right to be 
>>on the road too' is optimistic at best.
> [...]
>>          Also, a *minor* infraction is much more likely to cost a cyclist 
>>his/her *life*, ergo you'd think they would have a vested interest in 
>>proper road etiquette.
> 
>Such arguments sound like threats.

Only to those looking to be threatened. The first citation was an 
observation based on human nature, not on any highway law I am aware of, 
and I'm not sure where you were able to read that into what I said. Nice 
bit of detective work there. Motorists *also* have to yield the right of 
way to legally operated farm machinery going 20 mph in a 55 zone ... don't 
expect them to be *happy* about doing *that* either. 

The second citation was a rationale for one paying more attention to laws when 
one is more vulnerable. As it involves a certain amount of logical thought, 
and based on your slur of southern folks, I wouldn't expect you to 
understand it.

> 
>  "*Baacycles* don't belong on the *haaway*!"
> 
>  What law says that?
> 
>  "You'll git run over..."

I'll have to correct you here ... for the slur to be complete, it would 
have to read...

"You'll git RUNNED over..."

The only thing worse than an elitist is an educated elitist.

> 
>  (Was that a threat?)
>-- 

As you framed the scenerio to answer your own question, I'd have to say it 
was *meant* to sound like one.

Have a nice day.

-- Stephen

     Though *believing* in things often wounds the spirit, *not* believing 
     in anything will eventually kill it. Therefore, *dream* ... and accept 
     the costs as reasonable.
Xref: sparky rec.bicycles.soc:502 rec.motorcycles:35281
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc,rec.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Motorcyclist Hits Bicyclist on Skyline Blvd. (10/4/92, 1: 30p)
Date: 8 Oct 92 13:12:17 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Oct7.203921.16224@netcom.com> douglas@netcom.com (Douglas Mason) writes:

>I can see that the speeding is a problem, but why on earth is a bike
>being loud a problem?  Seems like the noise at least alerts a biker that
>something is coming.  If they were completely silent, the biker would be
>all over the road and something would come out of nowhere at an unreasonable
>speed.

Bicyclists hear best of any road user. Unless the cyclist is deaf, a
motorcycle whose exhaust was _completely_ silent would still be making
enough engine noise and tyre noise on an empty road that the cyclist
would hear it coming in plenty of time.

The only time loud pipes might be a useful warning are in thick noisy
traffic when car drivers have their windows closed and their music
turned up loud. But "loud pipes save lives" is just an excuse. If
people really believed it you'ld have the safety police insisting that
bikes not only go around with their headlights on all the time, but
their horns too. 

IMHO loud pipes are dangerous, because some drivers get annoyed by
them, some take a noisy bike as a challenge, and the police always
look to see how fast you're going and whether you're behaving
properly. I find I can travel faster and more safely through congested
urban traffic on a quiet bike than a noisy one.
-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh          +44 (0)31 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc,dc.general
From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: HOV abolished!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 06:55:13 GMT

Since this HOV thread began I started paying much closer attention to the
HOV lanes on the east side of San Francisco bay.

During the thickest rush hour, while traffic in the adjoining lanes is
bumper-to-bumper, there is about 1/4 _mile_ spacing between cars in the
HOV lanes. In every case I have watched there were no more than _two_
commuters per car. In many cases there was only one person breaking the
driving regulation.

It is always nice to know that there are people out there who are more
than willing to take our money and supply goods and services to someone
else. And if they can quote "for the public good" as reason to exibit
their own biases they consider themselves saints.

HOV lanes are an abomination and should be abolished everywhere.
From: jimd@pequod.gvg.tek.com (Jim Delwiche)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Ticketing illegal cycling
Date: 16 Oct 92 00:41:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: gold.5432
Distribution: na
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <casseres-131092141946@kip2-23.apple.com> casseres@apple.com (David Casseres) writes:
>
>To signal while riding a bike means taking one hand off the handlebars, and
>disturbing the balance of the bike -- as well as making yourself much more
>vulnerable to losing control if you hit a pothole or something.  This is
>worrisome if you're riding in close contact with cars and trucks, so I
>don't do it unless there's someone I need to get the message to.  It's not
>like driving a car, where you just flick the turn-signal lever.  I think
>that in many situations I get safer streets by looking all around (which
>also unbalances thing a bit) than by sticking my arm out.  Of course there
>are also plenty of situations that do call for a signal, and that's when I
>do signal.
>
>The whole point is that safety comes from knowing what the safest thing is,
>and doing it -- not from mindlessly making hand signals for every single
>move or coming to a dead stop at every stop sign.
>

Signalling a turn is not only for your safety.  It's also for the
safety of those you share the road with, and also for the convenience
of other drivers/riders.  For example, let's say you come to a
four-way stop where a driver is coming to a stop at the stop sign of
the road entering to your right.  You intend to make a right turn,
and, since you are afraid you might crash and burn if you take a hand
off the bars, you just creep through the stop sign and make a right
turn.  Whether you put your foot down and make a legal stop or not,
this action has 'pinned down' the driver, since he didn't know you
were going to turn.  If you had signalled the right turn as you
approached the intersection, he could have gone on his way.  His
reaction after you start out is, "<expletive deleted>!"

The argument that signalling takes a hand off the bars and is
therefore dangerous is somewhat specious.  One could argue that if you
are not able to take your hand off the bars and maintain control, you
are not riding within your bike handling skills.  

Jim
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc,rec.motorcycles,ba.motorcycles
From: prahren@pb2esac.uucp (Peter Ahrens)
Subject: Re: Motorcyclist Hits Bicyclist on Skyline Blvd. (10/4/92, 1:30p)
Summary: Mechanized Marauders vs Human-powered Pilgrims
Keywords: delta v, bike polo, faceless archetype
Organization: Pacific*Bell ESAC, Oakland, CA.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:17:28 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.033513.19829@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> bushnell@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (William D. Bushnell) writes:
>
>On a club (bicycle) ride...

Interesting tale of bike polo taken to the next level of play.  

The original poster asks:

>Why should [bicyclists and motorcyclists] antagonize each other?

In most cases, the present incident notwithstanding, I really believe it is
more a case of "Delta V" (velocity differential) than outright hostility.  

If we're going to bare our souls here, it is incredibly alarming and 
dangerous to approach bicyclists who behave as though oblivious to their
road environment.  The most critical task of the motorcyclist is to
pay attention: many common features of bicyclist behavior, obstructing 
the thoroughfare, ignoring stop signs, crossing the centerline on a fast
downhill run, appear exceedingly stupid to the motorcycle rider.  Many
bicyclists seem to regard themselves as "wheeled pedestrians". 

I will stipulate without enumeration the bad habits exhibited by some
motorcyclists.  This issue is a major preoccupation for many rider 
organizations.  Unfortunately, only the problem is visible to the non-
riding public; very little of the serious effort to build a solution
is known beyond the motorcycling community.

The original poster, a bicyclist, describes:

>[...] Many but not all of them wore leather jackets emblazoned
>with "Hell's Angels" on the back.
>
>[...] I said I
>wouldn't be able to identify the motorcyclist as they all looked the same...

The non-motorcyclist either does not see the motorcycle at all or sees
a faceless archetype.  (My recollection is that Hell's Angels affix their
emblem on sleeveless denim worn over flesh or leather, but this is an
impression acquired at a discreet distance.)  Of course, it is pretty 
easy to be a faceless archetype when you sport a smoked shield full face
helmet.

>...are there just a few disgruntled renegade motorcyclists out there giving 
>law-abiding motorcyclists a bad image?

A disgruntled renegade?  You mean like a Reagan democrat? 

Motorcyclists, a bad image?  What, me worry?

-Pete Ahrens
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc,rec.motorcycles
From: ericm@microunity.com (Eric Murray)
Subject: Re: Motorcyclist Hits Bicyclist on Skyline Blvd. (10/4/92, 1: 30p)
Organization: MicroUnity Systems Engineering Inc.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:57:21 GMT

In article <26682@castle.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.203921.16224@netcom.com> douglas@netcom.com (Douglas Mason) writes:
>
>>I can see that the speeding is a problem, but why on earth is a bike
>>being loud a problem?  Seems like the noise at least alerts a biker that
>>something is coming.  If they were completely silent, the biker would be
>>all over the road and something would come out of nowhere at an unreasonable
>>speed.
>

>Bicyclists hear best of any road user. 

Actually, it's not nearly as good as you think.  Wind noise from
the wind going past the ears is suprisingly loud, even at 18 mph.
Loud enough to mask out quiet motor vehicles until they're close.
The wind noise rises as the square of velocity, so on a 30-35 mph
descent you really can't hear anything that's behind you.  It's about
the same as the noise from my noisy Beiffe helmet at 50 mph.


--
Eric Murray   ericm@microunity.com   Ride fast, die young, wear black leather.
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc