Re: [OT] A significant negative impact on Linux's popularity?
On Jul 15, 2007, at 8:15 PM, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
A bicycle legally
owns the entire lane they are riding in (in many areas where I've
Hmm. In most places I've driven bicyclists are required to share a
lane, and are *not* entitled to an entire lane by law. It strikes me
that it would really hold up traffic if they were entitled to an
entire lane, since passing is not generally allowed on city streets.
Cars would end up stuck behind a bicycle going 10-15 mph, unable to
legally get by. And unlike cyclists, drivers are not always given a
free pass by the police for breaking traffic laws.
I agree that cars should give bicycles as much space as practical,
though, and I often give them an entire lane if traffic allows, and
will hang back if there's not enough space to pass safely.
That said, if you'd rolled forward another foot, then
you'd have entered a crosswalk without stopping at the stop line that
is generally placed *before* the crosswalk, which means you'd have
rolled the stop sign -- also a violation. just sayin' it.
Actually, I *had* stopped before the crosswalk. I was beginning to
roll forward again so I could see cross traffic around the hedges
when the bicyclist suddenly appeared in front of me.
If I can get
through an intersection and onto clear open road where I'm visible and
in control of my situation then I will do it, even if it means running
a red light. that doesn't mean I blow through a light without looking
or without awareness of motorists, but it does mean that you as a
motorist may be frustrated by having to wait for a red light while I
roll through it.
Pro-cyclist groups like Critical Mass seem to feel that cyclists have
the right to block traffic that has a green light so other cyclists
can run a red. This sticks in my craw. If they want to be treated
with the same respect as other motorists they shouldn't be able to
decide the law doesn't apply to them. Just sayin' it.