The Perfect Passenger

That is the :"common" understanding of the practise and what is being
discussed.. Not "abuse", as you pointed out..

Amongst many of us, we call that "gene-pool cleansing".. I believe when we
see a biker doing this, we all get a bad taste in our mouth..

That is exactly right.. No expert on Calif. law, but I am not sure there is
anything in the law addressing the issue of "white lining" or "lane
splitting" LOL.. I am not an expert on any law, for that matter.. Never
heard of the 15 mph recommendation, but it does make sense..

Nothing hypocritical about it.. "Common Sense" would be the rule that should
apply.. Whether in a vehicle or afoot.. thoughless and rude behavior does
cause me to take offense.. Road rage is another issue.. I would think that
this discussion addresses a safety issue.. All of us face the possibility of
confronting road rage, each time we are behind the wheel or handlebars.. The
bicyclist who defiantly confronts road rage, while he is exercising his
"rights", is a fool and should be reprimanded for obstructing traffic,
hopefully, before another "fool" comes along and kills him..

Perhaps, expression of "infuriated" on my part was not a word "well
chosen".. I remind you that safety and common sense and courtesy is involved
in this discussion.. on the part of the motorized vehicles and the
bicyclist..

Sharing our highways is a mutual responsibility

Irritation is a fact of life.. I believe it is just as irresponsible to
impose or intrude, to the point of irritating someone, just because of a
perceived "right".. Being irritated will not cost me or anyone else serious
injury or death.. When a bicyclist exercises his "right" to control a lane
of highway, and he is hit by an unsuspecting motorist, traveling at
reasonable speeds, then he must be content to carry the thought "I showed
them, my right as a vehicle to obstruct traffic, was clear".. Even into the
hospital or cemetary.. The motorist must carry the guilt of taking another
life with him for the rest of his life... Who is the winner, in this
instance ??

I would offer, that attitude is as dangerous as "road rage".. Saving my own
life and the lives of others on that highway is always foremost, in my
mind..LOL.. Maybe that is why I have "survived" for all these years, on that
highway ..

That is very good and generic advice..

That is a given..

I believe we may be discussing apples and oranges.. You seem to be talking
about street driving.. That is an altogether different world than the
highway.. Safety and courtesy should prevail in either environment..

Good advice and I will add.. "Learn to ride and afford the other traffic the
courtesy and consideration it deserves"..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Without presuming to be a scholar of the laws.. Most have been devised and
developed with safety of ALL foremost in mind.. (Note: "Most, not
all)..Common sense should prevail, courtesy and consideration of other
traffic must determine individual actions, for the sake of safety, your own
as well as others.. Many cases that I have observed and witnessed were
blatant abuses of "obstruction of traffic".. As I am given to understand,
this is an offense that is clearly defined.. Although I have no direct
knowledge of it, I have not heard of a citation being issued to any
offender.. As they blithely continue their unconscious journey, not even
aware of the havoc their behavior has caused as an aftermath of other
drivers attempting to avoid them.. Irritating, absolutely.. Especially when
an officer was quietly sipping his coffee while waiting to catch a
"speeder", trying to get to work on time.. Probably after being delayed by
that same offender..

The pros and cons of this discussion are very misleading and both have
viable and creditable arguments.. Common sense and the respect, courtesy as
well as consideration of other operators of vehicles should prevail.. That
would apply to LEO's as well as the drivers..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

That was my understanding, too. The fewer number of people stuck, the
less congestion and the less air pollution.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I also thought lane splitting was legal
in Cali if the general traffic was moving UNDER a certain speed
(30mph?) on the highway. Since I don't live in Cali I don't recall
the specifics, but I was pretty sure it only applied in certain
conditions and not in all conditions.

I get upset with anyone or any group that rides like they own the road
and is completely inconsiderate of others. That may be bicyclists,
but more often than not in my case it applies to motorcyclist.
Usually groups of motorcyclists that for some reason love to travel at
about 5mph UNDER the posted speed limit.

In either case, as long as they (bikes, cage, motorcycles) make an
effort so as not to impede the flow of traffic or be a danger to the
rest of the traffic then I don't have a problem with it. If you want
to drive under the speed limit that is your prerogative.

This even gets into the whole left hand lane thing. Has anyone
noticed HOW many people stay in the left lane even though countless
numbers of cars as passing them? Is that not completely rude? They
should be issued a citation even if they ARE going the speed limit.
It is supposed to be a lane utilized for PASSING slower moving
traffic.

In Europe / Ireland, while it is just the opposite, you would be cited
for passing a vehicle on the left (in our case, the right). Of
course, the vehicle that refused to get out of that lane would also
get cited.

Here, people get in the left lane and just hang there and feel that it
is their personal responsibility to try to slow everyone down.

While I don't disagree with you, that is so wrong for people to react
the way they do. In Mexico, the Bahamas, Belize, etc. people use
their horns all the time. Sometimes they are just saying "hello" to
someone they haven't seen in a while, but more often than not they are
alerting others to their presence. You hear horns all the time, and
people don't get offended by it. It's really exactly what they were
intended for.

Especially when riding alone I use mine all the time as I approach
intersections or opposing left-turn lanes when I can't tell if the
other car sees me or not. Couple little honks. I'm not trying to
piss anyone off, but ever notice when a horn goes off people will stop
what they are doing (makeup, directions, phone, whatever) and pay
attention to the road?

Just human nature. It's what we do about it that may be childish or
beneath us.

I'd debate this a little bit, but not solely on the legal issue.
Since you want to talk about responsibility then I would say it lies
with BOTH people.....the one going slow, and the one going faster.
You both have a responsibility to drive safely and that may mean that
the one going slower should realize that they are a hazard to
themselves and others (in some situations) and make an effort to
minimize that risk. Additionally, both parties should make efforts
not impede the flow of traffic (which one needs to work harder at
that?). This kind of falls in line with what I wrote above.

I get really ticked off when I see construction trucks with the signs
on the back that read "stay back 100 feet, not responsible for broken
windshields, etc." To me, that is complete bullshit. You have a
responsibility to other people on the road. Saying "I'm not
responsible" and having a 3ft piece of rebar flying off your truck and
taking out someone and then saying "well I had a sign saying I'm not
responsible" is just wrong.

well I have been talking about highways here, and there shouldn't be
any kids on the highway.

--Fullstate

 

That is my impression relating to engaging in highway travel.. Any time we
get out on one, our safety is our responsibility..

I am not sure about the specific conditions, although I rode in California..
Recall my experience with the CHiPs officer on IH 5..

Nothing I can think of is more impressive than a group of bikers riding in
formation and roaring down a highway.. If you notice the other vehicles are
fascinated and respectful of them, as well..

Those are the "safe"drivers that have never been cited and never had an
accident.. What we don't know is, how many accidents and casualties their
irresponsible driving has caused..

They

I would remind you of the "obstruction of traffic" infraction.. Until
someone who knows contradicts my impression, I will maintain, there is a law
against it.. Refer that to most LEO's and they will give you a blank stare..
Who knows ?

As he should ..

That seems to be the attitudes of some..
Speaking of "horns" I am looking into some air horns for my motorcycle..
Also, it is why I have those gutted pipes.. If you can't see me, surely you
can hear me..

Another case in point..LOL.. In Mexico, of which I am most familiar, the
brakes ain't worth a shit, but the horns work just fine.. My expression
there when commenting about the driving habits is that " you drive like a
Tijuana Taxi Driver"..

My ambition to put something on my motorcycle to sound like a semi would
work in that area.. When I blow that sucker I want them to think a freight
train is bearing down on them... Scare the piss outta some of those semi
comatose idiots..

Acting out is childish behavior.. I suppose we all have been guilty of that
at one time or another.. The trick is to minimize it as much as we can...

It is everyone's right to drive in the manner they consider "safe" for
them.. The forty mph slug should not be on a freeway or open road if that is
the limit of his capablity.. I will add furthur add, the bicyclist shouldn't
be there either..

The two different worlds of the highways and the city streets have to be
recognized.. I am more afraid of the streets than I am "open highway".. The
only time I've ever been hit was on a street with both feet on the pavement
while I waited for a light to change.. On the open highway, I have had many
close calls, but, fortunately have used the power of the bike to escape
contact and evade the danger.. As long as I have the power and control of
the motorcycle, I believe I can elude most dangerous situations and avoid
accidents.. That is my opinion, only.. Not a one size fits all attitude,
either..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Uh- I didn't miss the point. I even made mention of it in my
original reply. But I also happened to say something about lane
splitting and THAT is what kicked off the whole other thread.

;-)


--Fullstate

 

I'd just like to add that I was on that ride with Bill and Fullstate. The
bicyclist was riding on the left side of the lane, making passing more
dangerous than it should have been. We all passed safely but the tandem
should have pulled over to the right, just to the right tire track would
have been enough. I'm an experienced bicyclist, I've toured in California,
Arizona, New Mexico, Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, I've crewed 4 times for
RAAM (the Race Across AMerica, a 3000 mile race), my bicycle cost
significantly more than my motorcycle, so I think I'm qualified to say that
they were riding in an unsafe manner. A little attention behind them is all
it would have taken. We were out on a road with virtually no traffic, so
they probably weren't being as diligent in watching for traffic as they
might have been on a busier road.
Rob

 

You didn't lose the election, my friend.. "WE" lost that election.. My
contention that the worst nightmare for a corrupt politician of any
persuasion, is that everyone commence to talk to one another without
animosity.. Surprising enough, when we do that, we just might find out that
we are not each other's enemy and have much in common to agree upon.. That
idea scares the hell out of corrupt politicos..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

LOL.. as with all good things, Leslie.. One never knows where a subject will
wind up when a newsgroup gets it.. Bikers are the world's worst, or best,
however you prefer to talk about whatever is on their mind and who knows
what may occur to them.. Happens frequently..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Respect was properly submitted with the original post and we all fully
appreciate the sentiments.. I, perhaps more so , because of the many miles
and hours, my own son and I have shared while we have enjoyed our mutual
motorcycling enthusiasm.. Your reminder is timely and also respected..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

I would disagree that horns were designed strictly as an emergency
warning device. I'm not disagreeing with you about what the law is,
though.

As always, appreciate the comments, information and advice!


--Fullstate

 

rude.

Of course Mike.. your observation is being offerred with first hand
knowledge.. I wasn't aware that you were riding with us that day.. Seems
that your impression is at odds with those of us who were there and
personally witnessed the event.. My own impression was that it was
intentional, arrogant, dangerous for the man and his wife, as well as rude..
The conditions prevailing was not of someone "unaware".. That man was
conscious of our presence even before he saw us.. The roar of those
motorcycle can be heard from at least 1/2 mile away, on that country
highway..

All the more reason for bicyclists to exercise extreme courtesy, respect to
other drivers.. On a two wheeled light bicycle, powered at speeds of 15
mph, when traveling on a highway with speed limits of up to 70 mph, the
operator of the bicycle should reasonably expect other motorists to be
there.. In conditions of restricted visibility, due to curves and hills, the
rider of the bicycle should take all precautions to make himself less of a
target.. When he intentionally places himself in harms way by assuming a
position in the middle of that highway, he has become an aggressor .. The
driver of the motorcycle or cage who takes him out could actually be
considered the victim.. Being a party to the taking of life, is a
considerable burden, regardless of who is at "fault".. Making "statements"
of some perceivable right is not worth that risk, regardless of the
arguments..

The "food chain" is a fact of life.. You have missed the point of the entire
event.. I GAVE that trucker all the highway he needed.. No time to debate,
argue or make a "statement".. I consider that the two lives I saved, mine
and the lady behind me, plus the trauma to the semi operator, the deciding
factor.. The finsish of the story is that we stopped at a truck stop after
the incident.. I talked to that driver.. At first, angrily.. Guess what, he
was as scared as I was.. He was visibly shaking and white as a ghost.. Seems
that when he topped that rise, his headlights were pointed over us and he
didn't realise anyone was there until he saw the evasive action I took.. By
that time of course, he was on top of us..If he had hit us, quite possibly,
his life would have been changed, forever.. We would be dead and he would
suffer.. Statements of rights are really meaningless when the consequences
are certain death and final..

I think so.. Common sense and thoughtful safety should take priority over
perceived "rights"..

Regardless of legal argument.. The stupidity of that rider is more than an
irritant.. That man exposed himself, his wife and the other operators on
that highway.. None of us have mentioned that we were behind him for quite a
distance while he stubbornly and arrogantly blocked that highway.. Under the
conditions I have described and attested to by others, the man was a menace
to all the other traffic and should be admonished for his actions..
Normally, I do exactly that, with a few rare lapses of common sense..

That is with mutual respect to each other..

This discussion seems to have commenced going in circles.. I have also seen
quite a few signs that read "Only motorized Vehicles Allowed".. Actually, I
don't remember seeing ANY signs posted on those highways.. Circling around
to the Common Sense and Safety issues..

It really isn't a contest at all when you consider the consequences of the
finality of death..

Bull... Mike.. there is nothing "safe" when you are sitting in the middle of
a public highway, traveling at 15 mph, knowing the speed limit is posted 65
or over.. Being amongst areas of limited visibility, you would "safely"
assume that any vehicle approaching from the rear, just might not see you in
time to evade.. With all reason, I would take the most unassuming position
available to ensure the other driver could avoid hitting me.. Doing
otherwise is extremely dangerous as well as irresponsible..

LOL.. quite lame, but after that driver has failed to see me while I
irresponsibly assume a danerous position on the highway, I am just as dead..
I believe it is MY responsibility to also assume a safe position on that
highway in addition to my visible colors.. And YES.. obstruction is
restricting traffic under the conditions I have described to you..

Not necessarily, Mike..

Not ONE of us sanction killing ANYONE.. I have repeatedly pointed out the
tragic consequences.. Any time I see any accident involving a motorcycle, I
will try to find out what the causes were.. I have observed many riders who
operate their motorcycles in such a manner, that eventually, they will
become another statistic.. The unfortunate motorist who is a party, should
not be held accountable for the reckless and dangerous behavior that is the
real reason for the biker's death..
That statement is the height of arrogance and stupidity.. There is also an
unwritten law that says that "your rights extend to limits of infringement
upon mine".. When the exercise of a non-motorized vehicle intrudes on the
rights of motorists to travel a public highway, there is that argument to be
made..

The rider in question was definitely not riding responsibly nor
defensively.. His irresponsible behavior not only placed his wife and
himself in danger.. He also endangered anyone else on that highway ..
Evasive manuevers to avoid hitting him can also cost lives, Mike..I can hear
the other driver, after the accident, "I topped the hill and there, right in
front of me was some idiot on a fucking bicycle in the middle of the road"..

Either way.. expressing a "right" is a poor substitute when a "kid" or
anyone else is killed in a traffic accident..

Hopefully, you were not traipsing around on a public highway, making
statements of your rights.. I know that I wasn't..To hell with all the
rights thing, I wanted to live..
Your advice is well taken.. Here's some from me.. Learn to perform in a
manner that is not provoking or inconveniencing someone sharing that space..
There is a time and place to make "statements".. The highway is not the
place..

The subject of "signs" come to mind again.. I have said that there are no
signs pertaining to bicycles on that highway.. I have seen many signs that
say "Slower traffic, keep to the right".. Ever seen one of those.. Then
there is another "left lanes for passing only"... What would those signs say
to you ??

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Uh, well....I was the first bike....and I came up on him FAST. The
2nd bike did as well. I figured by the THIRD bike he would get the
hint, but Bill would have been the FITH bike and there were still two
more after that.

And just for the record, none of the bikes were slouching down that
particular stretch of road. ;-)

Well, I'm sorry but I'll support Bill on this one. The hill and the
bend were what *I* came around to find this guy, he was on a
straightaway with a slight downhill grade. Easy for any bike. And, I
think we had already mentioned, he was close to the center stripe or
left-most portion of his lane. Nobody is saying he should have been
hugging the shoulder, but he certainly could have been more to the
right and made it easier for vehicles to navigate around.

I feel we are splitting hairs when the word "right" gets used. As I
said in another post, it is more a matter of responsibility. And
regardless of whether or not *I* might have been the one to hit them
it was irresponsible of this person to not recognize the potential
danger to themselves, their passenger, and the other motorcyclist that
were riding that road. I'll even give you the first two of our pack,
but he should have been over by the time Bill got there. I don't care
whose "right" it was to hold the lane.

Yup, it would have sucked....for all those involved.

--Fullstate

 

Absolutely true. You have to think about that if you are going to use
your horn more. The last thing I want is for someone to get squirly
or slam on the brakes in front of me.

Ok, I'm no lawyer, here and I bet Steve can offer his opinion, but
children don't have the same rights, if any right as an adult. LOL

Just pulling your chain. And although I say they shouldn't be on the
highway doesn't mean that they won't be. I was pretty unruly as a kid
and did a ton of stuff I wasn't supposed to.

ahh....NO. That is why they aren't allowed to have a license until
they are 16 or so.

BTW - NOBODY has the RIGHT to drive. It is a PRIVLEDGE and we all
need to recognize that.




--Fullstate

 

I believe it was "rhetorical" on his part.

Here's one for you: What about the many times where the sign says
"slower traffic keep right" and you are in the left lane passing cars
and there are many cars to pass...then some ass-wipe rips up behind
you and expects you to get over into the slower traffic so he can go
around?

Many of these people (ass-wipes included) perceive that just because
they are going faster than you that you should be to the right....no
matter what.

Just another annoyance to me

 

Whoa! It wasn't meant as a "father and son" love-hug....I was just
pointing out that the ugly fat chicks can't compete with a small kid
on the back of the bike

Just kidding there...it was really a nice day!

 

Never had one of them, but I know some who have received the letters that
state "your driving privileges have been suspended" or "revoked".. Another
thought.. I did things as a kid, that was dangerous and absurd.. We all did
that.. Ask Brian.. My dad did all that he could to impress me with right and
wrong.. Dangerous and safe.. He discouraged me against wrong behaviour and
unsafe actions.. With his belt...or a tree limb..if necessary..I got the
point.. In my immature mind, I still could think how much fun it would be to
take some risks.. That was another time and those risks have increased many
times over, on our highways.. That is not the place for some immature and
reckless kid to be traipsing around without the benefit of adult supervision
and instructions.. Any parent who would knowingly permit his child to do
that, should be held accountable.. Without intent on the drivers part, any
fatality in that type of collision, should be considered an accident..
Unfortunate .. sure, any fatality is unfortunate..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker