• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

The great bicycle debate: moved from Schiano thread

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Buckeye86 said:
Taking a step back for a moment, you're saying that riding a bike amongst a few thousand pounds of steel traveling at high speeds (regardless of the behavior of the drivers or riders) isn't inherently dangerous?
Click to expand...
Being on the road in a vehicle amongst other vehicles is inherently dangerous. As long as both cyclists and drivers pat attention and obey traffic laws, riding a bike on the open road is really not dangerous, no more so than riding on a motorcycle. It's when one or the other (or both) ignore the laws and common sense that cyclists get hurt/killed.
 
Upvote 0
BUCKYLE said:
I'm just trolling mili.

I don't want to see a biker hurt. I understand the law says bikers have rights. I don't understand why you would put your life at risk to ride.

Cars are very heavy. They are driven by stupid, angry, impatient, impulsive, distracted, drunk, sleepy, medicated morons. Why put your life in their hands?
Click to expand...
Same can apply to motorcycles.
 
Upvote 0
I think we all can agree that if it had been this clown on his moped we could at least all agree....
shaneKOd.jpg
 
Upvote 0
Bicyclist are a danger tp pedestrians on the sidewalk because of the speed differential.
We've talked about "responsibility on Buckeye Planet for years now. Motorists have a responsibility to watch for and share the road with cyclists.
Cyclists have a responsibility to ride in the road and not do things that endanger themselves and pedestrians.
It's Darwinian!
 
Upvote 0
SEREbuckeye said:
It's not necessarily a "fuck you" as much as it is a "hey asshole, it's 4:30 and I'm trying to drive at normal speeds to get home from a long days work. The last thing I really want to do is slow down to 20 mph and lag behind your slow ass until I can get around. As if rush hour isn't bad enough, Mr Armstrong, your slow peddling ass is impeding the flow of traffic. Keep up or get on the sidewalk where it's clear as day. This isn't the Tour de France, this isn't a completion. you're just an adult on a bike."
Click to expand...

As an avid triathlete and someone who works in auto insurance, I pay quite a bit of attention to the news of cyclists hit by vehicles. Accidents are fairly rare, but they are newsworthy due to the catastrophic injuries to the rider(s). When drivers' concern for slowing down to 20 mph for 30 seconds is a bigger issue than the life of that cyclist, then I completely agree with Oh8ch's sentiment and send a big 'ol "Fuck You" to said drivers.

Both riders and drivers choose the roads that they are on. If a particular road is routinely problematic, both driver and cyclist likely have other routes. No, a sidewalk is not a legal option for either.
 
Upvote 0
I can understand why bikers like the exercise, it's not like you can just jump on a bike indoors and peddle away for hours in your living room. Or at an exercise facility.

I ride a bike occasionally. I don't wear spandex nor a helmet. I also understand cars are larger and a danger, so I stay the hell out of the way. Riders around campus are not of the same mind. They show everyone their fat rolls where fat shouldn't be and for many men they evidently have traded their testicles for that cone helmet. And they think they are entitled to the road no matter how large or dangerous the vehicle you are driving.
 
Upvote 0
Go Bucks!!! said:
As an avid triathlete and someone who works in auto insurance, I pay quite a bit of attention to the news of cyclists hit by vehicles. Accidents are fairly rare, but they are newsworthy due to the catastrophic injuries to the rider(s). When drivers' concern for slowing down to 20 mph for 30 seconds is a bigger issue than the life of that cyclist, then I completely agree with Oh8ch's sentiment and send a big 'ol "Fuck You" to said drivers.

Both riders and drivers choose the roads that they are on. If a particular road is routinely problematic, both driver and cyclist likely have other routes. No, a sidewalk is not a legal option for either.
Click to expand...

I would say slowing down to 20 mph IS a purposeful effort to protect their life. If I was blowing by them at 40-50, you may have a point. Then again, if the speed is 45 mph, a bicycle rider should be prepared for cars at high speeds. If you want to be on a rode andact like a motorist, then know what you are getting into. If the sidewalk is clear with no pedestrians, then what is the foul in trying to protect your life by riding on it? I'm not going to choose a different route home, delaying my drive another 10 minutes because a guy on a huffy wants to constantly be on a roadway where cars are traveling within the law at high speeds.
 
Upvote 0
CentralMOBuck said:
Isn't it within the law to share the road with bicyclists? It's people like you that will keep me from ever getting a road bike.
Click to expand...
I get the whole share the road stuff but I admitt bicycles infuriate me on the road. Namely because if you make 1 wrong move near one you could be staring at involuntary manslaughter where as if it was a car you just get in a slight fender bender and everyone goes home.

I don't take risks and because of that if I ever do get a bike my ass will be on the sidewalks not because people make mistakes (because they will) but it's because the margin for life and death is just too close when there are mistakes.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top