Cyclists are elitist assholes
I'm sure I'm going to take some heat for the post but I think its time someone finally said it.
Cyclists are a road hazard and when they're inevitably hit and killed it should be no one's fault but their own.
Here in Vermont, many of the popular cycling routes have "bike lanes" for cyclists. For the most part they're wide, kept clean and in good condition. However these egomaniac turds in their spandex racing outfits never use them. Instead they must travel in the right of way, slowing traffic and causing dangerous conditions not only to themselves but to everyone else on the road.
Yesterday I've seen a double line of these sterile pricks peddling away in the right of way, yet, there is a new unobstructed bike lane alongside this narrow two lane road and these morons are just too cool for school to use it. Meanwhile motorists were forced to nervously pass them and cross the double lines in the process. Two head-on collisions were nearly avoided. One car went off the road and spun around, only by luck it didn't hit anything. But these self-centered assholes still couldn't be bothered to move over to the clean and unobstructed bike lane.
This wasn't the first time I've witnessed something like this. Actually I can't ever recall seeing cyclists using the bike lanes and thereby avoiding causing mayhem on Vermont's narrow and winding roads.
So, if they're never used why does the State need to build the bike lanes?
Why should anyone care when these selfish idiots are hit and killed?
Posted in Random Thought
by usrbingeek at 2005-07-01 11:36 ET (GMT-5) | 13 Comments | Permalink
So the penalty for annoying you should be murder?
Why don't you put a bumpersticker on your car 'death to cyclists'? Too chickenshit? Figured.
No it's a penalty for needlessly endangering everyone else's life.
So where can I get such a bumper sticker? I'd gladly put it on.
Why don't you elitist, asshole, can't be delayed for 2 seconds motorists quit poisoning the air and acting like you own the god damn road.
/usr/bin/geek: Your article violates your own rules "Hate speech of any kind ... won't be tolerated."
Your article meets the definition of hate speech because it
1. stereotypes all members of a class with a negative attribute (elitist, not moving right to yield to faster traffic), and
2. advocating violence against all members of that stereotyped class.
There are a few cyclists who are inconsiderate and ride unlawfully. The majority will use a bike lane as long as it free of debris and obstacles. Your article seems to be designed to incite road rage by cars against bikes. If it works, chances are the victim will be innocent.
I think you're incorrect in your assumption that the roadway system is a monoculture built for motoring. If you *really* want to experience slow, wait until the environmentalists figure out that they can legally snarl traffic by commuting with a horse-drawn carriage. Freedom of movement is a common-law right, after all.
Most experienced cyclists despise bike lanes because they're flatly hazardous. Shaving along the edges of parked cars is dangerous with any kind of vehicle. The hue and cry for paths and lanes come from anti-car activists who generally don't cycle very much.
In my state cyclists are allowed to ignore the bike lane if its dangerous, and we do. It isn't against the law for me to get in the way and slow you down. Hit-from-behind accidents are stastically few.
I now yield to Godwin's Law:
When I'm driving (or cycling, for that matter) in the mountains in Colorado, I'm can count on my way being impeded by tourists from Vermont and other states.
By Geek's logic, if I stupidly cross the double yellow line to pass these obese, self-centered egomaniac turds going slow in the right-of-way and I get hit by a semi-truck coming the other way, it's somehow the tourists' fault. My impatience trumps whatever reason the tourists are on my road. Why should anyone care when these selfish idiots are run off the road?
Yeah Geek, you are way outta line on this one. Ever consider ditching your car for a true *auto*mobile?
Rules [as practiced by usrbingeek]:
1. Please treat everyone else as you would like to be treated. [unless they're on a bicycle in "your" way]
2. Hate speech of any kind and personal attacks won't be tolerated. [unless it's directed against cyclists]
You have it right. Having lived in Austin, Texas for 4 years, I've noticed both kinds of cyclists -- those who are too good for the bike lanes(and the bike lanes are EVERYWHERE), and those who use them.
The former are on the rise. And I don't think we should have to avoid them either. There ought to be a law, that if a bike lane is present, and you get run over outside of it -- too damned bad.
Lance Armstrong always uses the bike lanes, and he's arguably the most elite cyclist in the world, why the hell can't every one else?
ok give this some actual *thought* for a moment:
the bike lane is just another lane, except its for bikes only, considering how wide it is. now, if the bike lane wasn't there, the biker would be in the next available lane, the rightmost lane of wherever he is going. so all of the lanes are available to him, but he has to stay over to the right lane when given the opportunity. now think about this in terms of cars. If you have 2 lanes, and there is a parked car in the right lane for whatever reason, you shift over to the next lane to get around it, right? well, with bikers, who are often travelling at the speed of the flow of traffic, there are often "elitist" drivers who have pulled over to the street parking and randomly open their doors wide open without so much as a pause or a backwards glance. are you saying cyclists should slam on the brakes and skid to a halt rather than dropping into the flow of traffic? God forbid the other drivers have to even *look* at the cyclist! Now I'm all for using the lanes when it's safe, but I'm also all for the rule of thumb that it's only safe for the lane to be 1 biker wide, because that biker has to skirt the left side of the lane to give sufficient reaction space for car doors. Can the biker not drop in with normal traffic when a delivery truck is parked in the bike lane? Listen, bikes are here to stay, and it would do you well to accept the fact that there are some things (or individuals) whose well-being (read: health, lack of broken bones) are more important than your relationship with your gas pedal.
I want to agree wholeheartedly with you. I am incredibly tired of cyclists with their holier-than-thou because-I'M-not-polluting attitudes.
"So, if they're never used why does the State need to build the bike lanes?"
Why indeed. One of the foremost experts on cycling, John Forrester, advocates that bike lanes only endanger cyclists (statistically the accident rate of cyclists is something like 15 times higher in bike lanes than riding on the road), and limit where they can travel. I'm not the only one who agrees with him - most cyclists I know do too. Blame the ignorant politicians who want to seem "environmentally friendly" while wasting money on something that almost never gets used for it's intended purpose.
Now as far as cycling and cars coexisting, I have some very simple advice: learn to drive. "Driving" does not mean driving your gas pedal into the floor from one red light to another. "Driving" does not mean swerving erratically at high speeds because you are scared of men in tights. I don't have any problems driving around cyclists even when they are riding in pairs - use your head and you won't either. Of course, the only reason there are not more auto accidents in the US is because what in the rest of the world is considered 4 and 1/2 lanes counts as 2 in America (bigger is better, right?), but apparently that's still not enough for poor drivers like Geek. SUVs and cheap sports cars have made this problem even worse. I'm actually in favor of reducing speed limits all around to try to at least offset all this ignorance.
BTW - the first paved roads in the US were built in the 1890s because of a campaign by the League of American Wheelmen, a bicycle club. So the only reason you can go 60mph today is because of cyclists.
Most bicyclists operate their bikes as vehicles when it suits them (e.g., riding down the middle of the road, demanding to be treated like any other vehicle) but then pretend they are pedestrians when it suits them (as when going through red lights, riding on sidewalks, heading the wrong way on a one way street). Many inner city bicyclists dart in front of pedestrians and zoom by pedestrians within inches of hitting them.