04.08.11 Bikes & Cars: Lessons Learned
Update – April 11, 6:20pm: Sadly the bike nazis (who are a small minority of cyclists) continue to pound away at me. In fact, they have now degenerated into straight ad hominem attacks. It’s interesting to note that the cyclist I originally had the altercation with is no longer doing that — his posts on the topic the past couple of days have been gentle and constructive. He and I don’t necessarily agree on how all the parts of our altercation came about, but we are completely in agreement that we don’t need to be angry at the other any more and that continued warfare, overall, just ain’t helpful to anyone.
I will no longer approve any comments on this blog post that are about attacking me personally or otherwise not constructive. To be scrupulously fair about this, my ban on unhelpful comments will also extend to car drivers who seek to paint all cyclists as demons to be disrespected and punished.
Overall, I’m deeply saddened that my honest attempt to learn something from a bad situation and to lower the temperature overall continues to be stomped on by the anger-mongers on both sides. For shame!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The first paragraphs of this piece appear as a teaser on Washington Post’s All Opinions Are Local.
A week ago, I wrote about a traumatic incident I experienced that included having a cyclist feign an accident with me at an intersection. The deluge of feedback (overwhelmingly hostile) I have gotten from the cyclist community has provided a great learning opportunity for me. Perhaps it can also lead to increased understanding on both sides of the car-bike divide.
As I have written, even before last week’s events, I was bike-friendly: believing in the basic principle that bikes have a right to be on the road and to be safe there. Though I have been taken aback by the intensity and anger I have met in the past week, it has not changed my sympathetic view towards bikes on the road. Au contraire!
Some things I’ve learned:
• The cycling community is very tight-knit, hypersensitive to insult or incursion, resistant to giving benefit-of-the-doubt to drivers, and so intensely ideological as to be unable to separate friends from enemies: if you are in a car, you’re bad; if you’re on a bike, you’re good.
• Cyclists have every right to be paranoid and hostile: any interaction between a car and a bike is inherently more dangerous for the cyclist than for the driver. Not only that, but they face the indifference and outright hostility of drivers all the time. Who could blame them for seeing cars (and drivers) as enemies?
• After I came close to the cyclist at the first intersection last week, he moved purposely leftward, so that – even as I was touching the while line to my left – he was coming closer and closer to me. I interpreted his move as purposely aggressive. Cyclists have since pointed out to me that what he was probably trying to do was to “take the lane”: cyclists moving toward the center of the lane are trying to force cars to stay behind them as they approach an intersection, rather than come up alongside. They do this because it puts them in a safer position. I never heard of this idea before, but – whether it is the law or not (which isn’t clear to me) – I intend to respect it from now on.
• Cyclists assume that all drivers know that the law requires cars to stay three feet away and that everyone knows the take-the-lane principle. They view any driver who does not abide by these guidelines as purposely and provocatively breaking the law, i.e., the interaction and their reaction to is not only about safety for them (legitimate as that is), but also about hostile fire in an ongoing war.
• Many cyclists seem unwilling to consider the possibility of flaw among their own, just as they seem unwilling to accept any driver as a potential ally.
So, here’s the “scorecard”:
• I was wrong to come close to the cyclist in the first place. Though it was hardly purposeful on my part, there is no doubt that my action precipitated what happened next.
• The cyclist’s pounding on my window and screaming turned a mistake (on my part) into a conflict.
• His “taking the lane” may have been a reasonable attempt to communicate with me, but it backfired, because I didn’t speak that language. (This was not something covered in drivers ed 35 years ago!)
• He staged an “accident” to score a point in the aggressive game we both assumed the other was playing. (I am absolutely certain that I was nowhere near close enough to hit him; I saw him jerk himself/his bike against my car after I had come to a stop.)
• I should have stayed in my car and called the cops. There can never be any justification for escalating to physical confrontation, no matter how outrageous the provocation may be.
There is an opportunity here. Among the insults I have received from cyclists over the past few days are at least a couple of correspondents who seem interested in discussing these events in a constructive manner. I have lost my patience even with them, because of their apparent need to continue lecturing me even after I’ve “given them the lane” in a conversation that is no longer an argument.
Just the same, I think reasonable cyclists and reasonable drivers could come together to find ways to reduce inbred hostility and to recognize that at least some of the warfare going on is due to misunderstanding and ignorance, as opposed to ill will. I would hope such a conversation would include acknowledgement of the danger that some cyclists (e.g., the infamous bike messengers downtown) pose to pedestrians.
I hereby extend an invitation to any cyclists who are interested in further dialogue to contact me (lefthandview@kberner.us). I would love to help turn this big bucket of lemons into some lemonade.
*****
Update – 4/9, 9:45am: In his posts on a cycling website, I started to see some introspection on the part of the cyclist and he invited me to call him. So I did. We both acknowledged mistakes and apologized for them. I am proud we got to this constructive point.
As far as I’m concerned, this affair is closed. I’m going to be much more cognizant of how I’m driving around cyclists from now on. And I hope the cycling community, at large, will try to understand that not all drivers are against them. That’s the bottom line here: both “sides” need to endeavor to put themselves in the shoes of the other. Cyclists need to realize that the guidance in cycling safety guides (e.g., “take the lane”) is not something most drivers are aware of. Drivers need to understand that coming too close to a bike — no matter how inadvertent — is not an “inconvenience for he cyclist, but rather a matter of life and death.
I wish safe riding to the man I had a fight with a week ago and safe driving to myself.
PS. I still wish I could find the heroic woman who intervened to stop the fight. I would so much like to thank her. If you have any idea who she might be, please send her my way.
©2011 Keith Berner
Explore posts in the same categories: Miscellaneous, Washington Post CrosspostedTags: bicycle rights
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
April 8, 2011 at 4:05 pm
I learned something today. This is the first I’ve heard of a law requiring drivers to stay 3 feet away, and I, like the writer, consider myself a bike-friendly driver. [I actually hope to sell my car and switch to getting around by bike and bus before too long.]
So, the takeaway for the general public: one of the most useful things to promote bike culture would be an education campaign about the 3-foot rule.
April 8, 2011 at 4:26 pm
You may find some like minded folks here: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Cars-hate-pedestrians-pedestrians-hate-cars-but-everyone-hates-a-cyclist/310837792308?sk=wall
April 8, 2011 at 10:32 pm
Just so you know what I just posted over on Washcycle. Post it or not. Your call.
“I welcome Mr. Berner’s dialogue. No harm ever came from talking.
And I’d ask him to take down the latest post on his site. It’s not helping things, really, for either of us. It’s two competing stories we have going. You believe in yours, and I (and most others) believe in mine. But personally, I’m kind of tired of the drama.
Keith, if you ever want to talk, I’m in the phone book. As you say, you know who I am.”
April 9, 2011 at 9:02 am
Posted on Washcycle
I’ll check it out. For future reference in continuing a dialogue with other cyclists, I would suggest you not tar them with the bad acts of the messengers. That’s directly akin to implying all Italians are like the Mafia. The messengers are a completely separate group of people who happen to ride bikes, and those in the commuting and recreational riding community will tune you out if you suggest there’s a single cycling community that shares the blame for them.
April 10, 2011 at 10:46 pm
[...] [Continue reading Keith Berner’s post at Left-Hand View.] [...]
April 11, 2011 at 5:04 am
Kudos for this article, you are spot on with your analysis. Unfortunately too many cyclists look at their cycling (and the motorists’ driving) through an ideological lense instead of going about it in a pragmatic way: even if you’re not three feet away that doesn’t mean you didn’t see (or care for) the cyclist. No need to throw out good manners and start screaming over that.
April 11, 2011 at 6:21 am
[...] [Continue reading Keith Berner’s post during Left-Hand View.] [...]
April 11, 2011 at 7:55 am
Do *you* hate cyclists, “Media Mike”? Cos you sound like an empathetic kind of guy, otherwise.
April 11, 2011 at 9:14 am
I don’t agree with any of your characterizations here (and what about bikers who also drive?), but you are willing to learn so that’s good enough for me.
One thing to consider regarding the violence aspect of the whole thing. We don’t think about it, but a car is essentially a fortified cage. If I’m on my bike, with no protection beyond my own hands/feet, and a driver gets out of his fortified cage and approaches me angrily, my immediate assumption is that he has violent intentions, which obviously I’m going to prevent however I can (why else would he give up that protection?). NOT SAYING you deserved getting thrown to the ground, but just pointing out the mindset bred from the inherent safety inequity.
April 11, 2011 at 9:39 am
One of the conclusions from your message above paints a false equivalency that puts cyclists at a serious disadvantage.
You noted “That’s the bottom line here: both “sides” need to endeavor to put themselves in the shoes of the other. Cyclists need to realize that the guidance in cycling safety guides (e.g., “take the lane”) is not something most drivers are aware of.”
Under your logic here, cyclists are asked to put themselves into the shoes of the driver. You’ve set up the expectation that the cyclist doesn’t already know what the driver feels when the cyclist is off the saddle and in the car. I own a car and use it on occasion, so I know what driving feels like and I know how to behave around other vehicles (including cyclists) who share the road with my car. While I’m certain that some regular car drivers also own and ride their bikes on occasion, there are many more drivers than cyclists on any given commute day. The numbers run against cyclists under your equivalency.
Second, you ask cyclists to understand that car drivers may be unaware of cycling safety guides. While I can appreciate that a driver who’s never been on a bike will not memorize safe cycling guides, we’re not just talking about arcane inter-bike lingo. Cyclists have a reasonable expectation that drivers will follow the law when operating their vehicles. It’s not our responsibility to educate drivers on vehicular regulations. YOU accepted that role when you chose to seek a license and operate a vehicle.
If the law “is not clear to you” I strongly encourage you to educate yourself before the next time you drive. Many things change over time. There are likely a number of new regulations that were not “covered in driver’s ed 35 years ago”.
April 11, 2011 at 10:13 am
> If the law “is not clear to you” I strongly encourage you to educate yourself
> before the next time you drive. Many things change over time. There are
> likely a number of new regulations that were not “covered in driver’s ed
> 35 years ago”.
While this is of course true, it is an illusion to think that everybody everywhere knows every change in the law. And it definitely does not mean that it is ok to start screaming and shouting if somebody is ignorant about it.
It is the job of the police to enforce law and regulations; private action is not only questionable, but totally beside the point – as a cyclist the focus should be on returning home in one piece, full stop. Throwing hissy fits can easily be left to blockheads.
April 11, 2011 at 10:11 am
Kudos for engaging in some introspection. I could say a lot, but I’ll just make one point: whatever your intentions, if I’m on a bike, and you’re in a car , and you’re passing me with a foot or less of clearance, I’m going to interpret that as an assault, and respond accordingly. You don’t need a law degree to know that swinging a machete in a crowd is criminal negligence.
Give ‘em room.
April 11, 2011 at 10:38 am
I’m glad that you are considering this an introspective moment. As you said, cyclists have a lot more to lose in these encounters and are (rightfully) adamant about defending their rights (especially rights we fought hard for, such as the 3-ft passing rule).
On your point that “His “taking the lane” may have been a reasonable attempt to communicate with me, but it backfired, because I didn’t speak that language.” and “whether it is the law or not (which isn’t clear to me)”, however, I must say it shows a lack of common sense.
Here is what was covered in driver’s ed: bikes (and motorcycles, and scooters, and tractor-trailers) are vehicles. If a vehicle is in the lane in front of you, how do you pass it legally? You signal a lane change, change your lane, pass, and then change back into your travel lane. This time-honored practice happens probably a million times a day on our nations roadways, and it does not change when the other vehicle is a bike.
As for whether it is the law or not, I direct you to the Maryland Vehicle Code, § 21-309. Driving on laned roadways.
(b) Driving in single lane required.- A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane
and § 21-301. Driving on right side of roadway; exceptions.
(b) Special rule for slow-moving traffic.- On every roadway, except while overtaking and passing another vehicle going in the same direction or when preparing for a lawful left turn, any vehicle going 10 miles an hour or more below the applicable maximum speed limit or, if any existing conditions reasonably require a speed below that of the applicable maximum, at less than the normal speed of traffic under these conditions, shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic OR as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway. [note the OR].
Thus: if it is safe, as close as practicable to the right edge of the roadway. If you don’t think it is (or with no reason at all as one is not required), then the “vehicle” (read: bike) may travel in the right-hand lane of traffic.
April 11, 2011 at 11:05 am
This is not a matter of knowing laws, it’s about giving your fellow man or woman the respect that they deserve as a road user. People in general are selfish and unwilling to slow down for anything or anyone. The thing to remember here is that human on the bike has a family and friends that they need to go home to just like you do. Slow down and respect your fellow man.
April 11, 2011 at 11:22 am
@Aaron:
That’s the bottom line. I just wanted to say one more thing on this, especially after re-reading the first piece, in which Mr Berner accuses the cyclist of playing the bully while disingenuously claiming victimhood–which is probably the most pitch-perfect example of projection I’ve read in the last five years.
Let’s forget about the account of the cyclist; let’s judge this situation purely from the account of Mr Berner. What’s completely clear is that his behavior was completely indefensible. Let’s review:
First: “I was in the middle of my lane – the rightmost through lane — and the bicycle was partway into the lane. There was plenty of room to its right, in an unoccupied right-turn-only lane.”
Just to clarify (and this is actually quite illuminating): it’s not “your lane”, Mr Berner. What you meant to write was, “I saw a cyclist in the lane up ahead, and nevertheless I rolled up on him, leaving less than a foot of clearance.”
Second: “His message had sunk and, as I approached the next intersection, I was as far left as I could go, with my tires just about touching the dotted white line. The bicyclist had also moved leftward, well into the lane.”
So now we’ve got a single traffic lane, with the cyclist even nearer to the center–presumably so he doesn’t get passed again with inches to spare–and Mr Berner (who obviously “got the message”) decides to do the exact same thing, only as close or closer.
It’s a bit like one of those self-absorbed twits you see in Whole Foods who ram you in the knee with their cart and run over your toe because, you know what, I was pretty sure there was enough room to get by, and anyway, you were the rude one because you should’ve seen me coming and just stepped back an inch or two.
When someone does that to me, I give them a dirty look, and probably say, “Well, excuse me!” If they did it again, I’d probably grab their cart and tell them in no uncertain terms to be more careful. And if they took off their jacket, and started purposefully striding towards me with their fists up, I’d do my best to pick ‘em up and stuff them in their cart. At which time, they’d go home and write a blog post about how mean and angry folks are at the supermarket.
What’s shocking to me is that this sort of blithely negligent behavior–which pretty much puts 100% of risk on some stranger–is defended because, you see Mr Berner wasn’t completely familiar with the latest motor vehicle code. After all, he last took the written test 35 years ago, so passing someone on a bike when you’re at least 70% sure there’s enough room to get by–just as long as the cyclist doesn’t sneeze, or hit a pothole–is totally acceptable. Doing it *twice* within the space of five minutes should, of course, in no way be interpreted as an act of passive aggressive violence.
I’m sure if there was someone’s child in the road, Mr Berner wouldn’t think twice about passing that kid with 6″ to spare…. Hell, he probably wouldn’t even slow down. After all, who knew there was a law recently passed codifying the principle that we behave like decent human beings to one another, and leave sufficient clearance while passing?
April 11, 2011 at 11:37 am
Oboe–
The fact that you — long after I have conceded my mistakes — continue to attack me does no honor to any spirit of reconciliation, healing, or learning. Neitherdo you do any honor to cyclists. Instead, you are merely reconfirming negative stereotypes by furthering this counterproductive war. Please take some deep breaths and hold your fire.
–Keith
April 11, 2011 at 11:40 am
Kudos!
April 11, 2011 at 11:45 am
I think Keith you taking half ownership for your part in this does not let you off the hook. Had you taken a breath prior to taking back your lane, this would not be a story.
April 11, 2011 at 12:09 pm
Thanks for the kudos. But why do you — two minutes later — accuse me of letting myself off the hook? I’ve been publicly ON the hook — by name — for nine days now.
Also, please see my response to Ryan: in fact the cyclist had *not* taken the lane and I was not fighting to retake it. He was never ahead of me, but rather to my right, moving left as I moved left. I’ve given him the benefit of the doubt in saying that he may have been trying to take the lane (while letting him slide on the fact that he never had the lane to begin with).
April 11, 2011 at 11:25 am
On Saturday afternoon, my girlfriend and I were witnessed the following incident:
At the corner of 15th and P Streets, NW a bicyclist headed north on 15th street blew through the red light and knocked down a young woman in front of us as she tried to cross the street – we had the green light. The cyclist never stopped or even bothered to slow down and look at what he had done. Fortunately, the young woman was not seriously injured – just shaken up with some bruises.
Judging from the comments made here over the past week, one can reasonably conclude that the biking community would want to string up a driver for doing the thing to someone on a bike.
I’m waitng for some biker apologist to blame Saturday’s incident on the young woman (“How dare she get in a cyclist’s way and impede his right to use the road?”).
April 11, 2011 at 11:59 am
And if, as I suspect, no cyclist does, will you apologize for assuming so little of us?
April 11, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Hi ceefer66:
Glad to see you’ve brought your usual insight to the issue. I’m a cyclist (and pedestrian, and driver, btw) so I’ll go ahead and give you the mea culpa you’re looking for: I think the anonymous asshole who ran a light and “knocked down a young woman” was being an asshole. If I’d been there, I’d have put my umbrella in his (or her) spokes.
On behalf of cyclists everywhere, I apologize unreservedly. Also, I saw a guy step on someones foot the other day without apology. So I’d like to humbly apologize on behalf of pedestrians and walkers in general.
April 11, 2011 at 11:42 am
First off, I’m an avid cyclist. I commute by bike and I log over 100mi/wk of recreational cycling as well.
Now then, I see only one mention of how to properly make a lane change posted by Aaron. So now my question, did the cyclist signal his intent to take the lane?
Many cyclists around here have some sort of death wish with cars. In groups we always here the phrase “hold the line”, it’s for our own safety and the safety of those around us. Yet when it comes to cars, we swerve into the lane to avoid, whatever, in an unpredictable manner and then get pissed when a car almost hits us… something to consider. Throw a hand out, it makes a difference even in split second instances.
April 11, 2011 at 12:01 pm
In fact, in this case, the cyclist gave no indication of trying to take the lane. In fact, he was never in front of me — he was to my side pulling closer and closer even as I moved farther and farther left. The response of other cyclists merely informed me of the principle and I was giving me the benefit of the doubt (well after the fact) that he may have been trying to take the lane.
April 11, 2011 at 11:51 am
Please drivers who want to hate cyclists and vice-versa, STOP IT! The whole purpose of my blog post is to STOP THIS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WAR!
To those reminding me that there is no equivalence of danger between cars and bikes, I get it and have been trumpeting that point. The equivalence I am citing is the need for both sides to chill out and do some learning.
Let me clarify another point: I do not claim ignorance of the law as an excuse for *anyone’s* misbehavior. We all should be acting with common sense that respects the other guy’s safety, period. But it would behoove *cyclists* to keep in mind that drivers who don’t know about the 3-ft. rule aren’t *purposely* and hostilly flouting it. Sure, object when your safety is threatened, but don’t make a bad situation worse by assuming purposeful ill will and and anti-bike bias so strong as to cause purposeful disregard for the law. Hey, bikers: I pointing this out to you for your own good.
April 11, 2011 at 1:39 pm
It would behoove *cyclists* to keep in mind that drivers who don’t know about the 3-ft. rule aren’t *purposely* and hostilly flouting it. Sure, object when your safety is threatened, but don’t make a bad situation worse by assuming purposeful ill will and and anti-bike bias so strong as to cause purposeful disregard for the law. Hey, bikers: I pointing this out to you for your own good.
Right, but generally speaking, that’s what cyclists do. If there’s some background level of animosity, it’s because most of the folks out there who ride at all end up in a situation–fairly regularly–where through inattention, or a sense of “teaching a lesson”, or just general jerkiness, drivers do *not* act in a way that respects the other guy’s safety.
It should be obvious that you want to give a vulnerable road user about 2-3 feet of clearance. I’d say 99% of the cars that pass me on a given day have *always* done this. Of the few who don’t, about half gun their engine while passing, honk their horn, or yell something obscene.
So from that perspective, you can understand why when you did this not once, but arguably twice a lot of cyclists might not give you the benefit of the doubt.
April 11, 2011 at 12:34 pm
As a driver for 10 years, and a bicyclist for 4 months, I can see both sides of the story. Its insanely annoying to have a whole lane of traffic slow to a crawl because some guy is biking along at 10 mph, but its also utterly terrifying to try to get to work alive with sideview mirrors whizzing by at 50 mph.
This morning, I was very nearly hit by a car. The driver was attempting to beat traffic and make a left across North Capitol St onto M St NE. I was riding across M St NE, with 18 seconds left on the crosswalk, behind a young couple and their two children- one in a stroller, one about 4 or 5 years old.
The driver never even looked at me or the family; as he was accelerating across North Capitol, an oncoming SUV honked at him and further distracted him. I swerved, and the driver came to a stop so close I could have put my hand down on the hood of his car.
I couldnt breathe, much less speak to give him the verbal butt-kicking he deserved, so I kept going.
When I made a left onto K St NE, the firetruck and ambulance had just arrived to assist a man on a bicycle who had been struck by a car.
I watched them secure his neck brace, load him onto a stretcher, and remove his mangled bike. I hope that man pulls through, and I feel bad for the driver involved as well, since her life will be impacted, regardless of who was at fault, but all I could think was: that could have been me.
I make every effort when Im riding to be aware and considerate of drivers, and I beg that all of you drivers take a deep breath, calm down, and watch out for cyclists. That could be someone’s father, mother, brother, wife or child you injure or kill. And god knows your life would never be the same again either.
April 12, 2011 at 11:24 am
I couldnt breathe, much less speak to give him the verbal butt-kicking he deserved, so I kept going.
I’m curious, Keith, if Heather had yelled at the driver in the SUV, would she be equally to blame. Or more so, because she’d be escalating the situation?
Are there jerks on bicycles? No question. But you’re fundamentally misunderstanding the dynamic if you think there are folks riding around on bike just looking to get into scuffles with drivers. There aren’t.
As you said on another site “There is no equivalence of danger when a car and bike interact, but there is an equivalence of anger, hostility, and idiocy on both sides.”
We’ve seen in Heather’s post where the “anger and hostility” starts. The anger and hostility on the part of your average driver starts when a) they’re inconvenienced; or b) someone they’ve just encroached upon in some way tells them off.
I think we’d go a long way towards making progress on this if drivers were to realize *why* there’s a lot of anger on the part of cyclists. And how it’s fundamentally different from the anger *drivers* feel.
Judging the two types of anger to be equivalent is like equating the anger felt by marchers in “Take Back The Night” with the anger felt by the frat boys who feel unfairly singled out. It ain’t the same thing. Not at all.
April 12, 2011 at 11:32 am
Points well taken, Oboe.
April 11, 2011 at 1:16 pm
“And if, as I suspect, no cyclist does, will you apologize for assuming so little of us?”
Fair enough.
However I’m amazed and appalled at the way Keith has been attacked by cyclists on this blog. That, coupled with what I witnessed on Saturday, has frankly created a bad taste in my mouth.
Although I mainly drive, I ride a bicycle myself, but strictly for recreation. When driving, I make every effort to be mindful of everyone else out there – drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, and animals. But I’ve recently seen a disturbing degree of agressive and rude behavior on the part of cyclists.
As a driver, I’ve been cursed at, spit at, surrounded, and challenged to a fight for having the temerity to blow my horn at 3-abreast bikers who were hogging the road; as a biker, I’ve been scolded by the gonzos for “moving too slow” in a bike lane; as a pedestrian I’ve had several near-misses because of cyclists blowing through red lights or riding on the sidewalk.
There’s far too much entitlement and machismo on the part of DC-area cyclists. And frankly, the fiestiness isn’t winning them any friends.
I’m sory for generalizing, but there are honestly too many bad apples out there.
And I’ll be the first to admit there are lousy drivers as well.
April 11, 2011 at 1:29 pm
As a cyclist, I’ve been bumped, had stuff thrown at me, honked at out of anger and for “fun” and yelled at. I once had a guy come at me with a baseball bat, and I didn’t do anything as obnoxious as honking my horn at cyclists (you know that is not what’s it’s for, right? It’s a safety device. It is not a “get the hell out of my way” device). Are you really trying to argue that drivers are intimidated and threatened by cyclists in a way that is at all comparable to the way cyclists are intimidated?
Whatever entitlement may exist in cyclists it pales in comparison to that in drivers. I’ve never once heard a cyclists say “the roads are for bikes and bikes only.” But I hear the equivalent from drivers regularly.
Keith has been attacked – and I wouldn’t really use that word – because he was wrong and initially blamed the cyclist. Even in his follow-up he’s still taken a few swipes at cyclists. It’s hard to smooth things over when you’re calling people hypersensitive, intensely idealogical and unreasonable. Are we suppose to say thanks?
April 11, 2011 at 1:52 pm
Always amazes me how worked up people get about this topic. I’m an avid cyclist and I’ll be the first to admit there are are a few cyclists who feel a little too entitled and act like a dhead on two wheels. It does nothing but give the rest of us a bad name. With that said I’ve lost track of the number of times some redneck in a pickup almost killed me because they can’t move over slightly when they pass on a two or three lane country road. I try to ride on low traffic roads at times that are off peak and I stay far to the right. Yes, I also drive a car and I do understand that bikes can sometimes be an inconvenience on roads but these as$clowns have no respect for life and even less of a clue.
Anyway nice blog post. I appreciate you making the effort. As R. King once said “can’t we all just get along?”.
April 11, 2011 at 2:37 pm
Thanks! It sure is nice to see at least a few comments that aren’t intended to pour gas on the flames.
April 11, 2011 at 2:41 pm
[...] the first post here and his follow up in whole here. Posted on April 11, 2011 by Lindsey. This entry was posted in DC Life, News. Bookmark the [...]
April 11, 2011 at 3:55 pm
[...] [Continue reading Keith Berner’s post at Left-Hand View.] [...]
April 11, 2011 at 9:57 pm
[...] [Continue reading Keith Berner’s post at Left-Hand View.] [...]
April 12, 2011 at 5:44 am
[...] Bikes & Cars: Lessons Learned Blog Post [...]
April 17, 2011 at 7:46 pm
[...] Washington Post Blogger’s View as a Motorist [...]
April 22, 2011 at 8:18 pm
Sorry I just posted this on a previous blog post and it sounds like you’ve been slightly edumacated on the matter and you now understand some of the basic concepts.
You should not have been occupying the same lane as a bicycle however, it sounds like he may not have properly asserted his place in the lane. Cyclists need to know that the awareness of a motorist is not as acute as someone operating a bicycle or a motorcycle. Cyclists also need to understand that some motorists do not understand or care about the laws which require them to share the road and not be negligent about things transpiring around them. Because of this negligence, people on bicycles need to ride offensively to keep themselves from not being killed and keep motorists from getting their feelings hurt. It’s hard for some bikers to grasp the concept that it’s much safer to ride closer to the middle of a lane than it is to ride near the shoulder.
I wasn’t there, but it sounds a lot like the motorist in this situation was negligent but the cyclist was violent and that’s a super bummer dude. I’m glad neither of you got hurt.
April 22, 2011 at 8:20 pm
*** of course, I’m talking about urban bicycling. I guess you wouldn’t want to ride in the middle of a winding country road and let Pumpkin-John run you over with his Chevy. – I’m in Seattle.