urbanMSP

I've been worried this was gonna happen since the first pedal pub hit the streets...
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/06/24 ... b-accident

"The driver of the Monte Carlo was arrested on probable cause of criminal vehicular injury."
Rare to see a driver actually arrested for causing this type of destruction.

I doubt if he would have been arrested if they didn't suspect him of driving drunk, but still, nice to see sometimes.

I have always wondered about the safety of the passengers if involved in a collision. While larger and heavier than a bike, it's not very nimble, and the passengers aren't really secured in by anything, not that a seat belt would be particularly helpful.

Scary stuff.

Tonight we were waiting on northbound Hennepin at Lake. A biyclist zoomed by on our right, blew through the red light and turned onto eastbound Hennepin without much of a glance. I shook my head and felt a bit irritated, but whatever.

We continued on Hennepin and headed for home on eastbound 28th. The same cyclist careened onto 28th from Girard (again appearing not to be looking). We got into the left lane preparing to enter the alley. In the meantime, we passed the cyclist.

We slow down and take a left into the alley.

*Thud*

The *very same* bicyclist hit the rear of our car.

At this point I was just plain mad. To his credit, the cyclist apologized. But what if he had been injured? That thud really scared my wife and I as neither one of us had any idea what had hit us or what we had hit. When I saw the cyclist my first thought was that maybe he was mad at us for turning left (why?) and he had slapped the trunk of the car. I still don't know, but he admitted he hit us.

And people wonder why motorists hate when cyclists disobey the rules of the road.

I still wonder that. As categories, cyclists and drivers (if we want to assume they're distinct) are both sets of people that break traffic laws and people that don't. I try not to treat all drivers the same just because many of them roll stop signs, turn right without checking crosswalks, etc. I try not to treat all bikers the same because of guys like the one in your story.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience. That doesn't really explain the "cyclists are all lawbreaking nuisances!" line that gets trotted out every time a bike lane is suggested, though.

Apparently they've had 11,000 tours with no incidents. So cars have actually done a good job of accomodating pedal pubs.

http://www.startribune.com/police-drive ... 309823911/

I'm sorry you had a bad experience. That doesn't really explain the "cyclists are all lawbreaking nuisances!" line that gets trotted out every time a bike lane is suggested, though.

I almost got hit last night by a car that came to a complete stop at a stoplight, waited three seconds, then continued straight through the red (and almost through me), but you don't see me complaining that no cars should ever be allowed on roads.

Umm...where did I ever say bikes shouldn't be on the road? I'm the first to say the bike should take the lane if that's safest.

But it does piss me off when people make excuses for cyclists ignoring the rules of the road. I'm all for rolling bicycle stops *if the law is changed.* In the meantime, we all need to operate under the currently understood rules.

And yes, the same goes for motorists. But that's a red herring for this particular topic.

Replace "cyclists" with "black people" in your little rant and whoa boy.

Sent from my phone

I don't know. Rolling bicycle stops at Stop signs (especially 4-way stops) isn't just more convenient for me as a biker, it feels safer, because then I don't get the jackanapes behind me who yell or honk when it takes me more than half a second to get moving again.

Also: FMP, that racial substitution doesn't make David's rant offensive, it makes it incoherent. What would that even mean?

"I support their rights but they should all act 100% within the law 100% of the time if they want to be taken seriously"

Sent from my phone

Honestly, likening this to the plight faced by one of the most oppressed racial groups in America is not only wrong, it's offensive. I cannot believe you actually made that comparison. You should be ashamed.

^Not only that, such absurd comparisons burn political/moral capital in trying to argue for things that, you know, actually matter. It's treads dangerously close to Godwin's law.

It was an apt observation.

Cyclists that disobey the rules of the road make *my* cycling trips more dangerous. The same goes for motorists. I'm looking at you, Beltline crossing.

Maybe the rules are the problem, not the people breaking them, then?

That's right. Cyclists who cross against the signal and don't look until they're halfway through the intersection are just fighting for their civil rights!

It was an apt observation.

Well, I have no doubt that you could, in a short period of time, find dozens of characterizations on these boards where if you replaced, oh I don't know, "NIMBY", or "Suburbanite", or "Republican", etc., etc., etc. with "Black" you would end up with incredibly offensive statements. Just sayin that much like Godwin's Law, doing so would cheapen the more serious subject, and ironically, weaken your argument as other stop taking you seriously.

Guys, I was merely pointing out David's subtle and very likely subconscious hypocrisy.

Sent from my phone