Skip to comments.Old dude runs down bicyclist
Posted on 08/17/2012 3:49:13 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Police are looking for an elderly, white, gray-haired man who, in an apparent fit of road rage, chased a bicyclist onto a golf course in Santa Rosa and ran him down.
The bicyclist told Santa Rosa police he was cycling down Pythian Road at about 5 p.m. Wednesday when the driver began yelling at him and tried to hit him.
To get the angry motorist off his tail, the cyclist told police he raced onto the nearby Oakmont Golf Course. But the driver steered onto the course and continued chasing him, eventually hitting him before speeding away.
The cyclist had moderate injuries and was transported to a local hospital. He described the driver as an elderly man with gray hair, and the car as a gold or beige sedan similar to a Toyota Corolla.
The sedan may have a broken passenger side mirror, police said.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.sfgate.com ...
Am I too late to post In Before Lame And Predictable Bicycle Haters?
I don't think it's the motorists having the trouble, Sparky.
Same here in San Antonio, Texas. It is a very rare thing to see a bicyclist comply with traffic laws. This week alone I’ve had two run stop signs right in front of me. Of over a minimum of a hundred bicyclists I’ve only seen two that actually stopped at a red light. As a motorcyclist I’m keenly aware of how we two wheelers are ignored. There’s simply no reason whatever to magnify your chances of being seriously injured. I don’t know why but most of these cyclist are very foolish.
What saddens me is she seems to have a mirror deficiency. I have a few heft issues but she thinks she is hot, given her hair dyejob.
Sure, every group has idiots, but with bicyclists nowadays, especially in urban areas, the idiots must outnumber the decent ones by a hundred to one. I’m not going to go out and run over a bicyclist though, I just have no more patience for them. It’s gotten to the point where I will yell at them like a crazy old man when I see them pulling their stunts, and I am only 33 :)
I’d hate to see what would happen if he got caught in a ‘Critical Mass’ bike ride in San Francisco. .. and
I am pretty sure "easy" is a term in every language in the world.
Bike lanes and sidewalks solve most of the problem.
As to cyclists running through lights and ignoring stop signs, I plead guilty, sometimes. If there is a fair amount of traffic, I scrupulously obey the rules. But if there is no traffic, or the nearest car is down at the end of the next block, I sail through, for the same reason that pedestrians routinely jaywalk. People moving by muscle power tend to take the path of least resistance. This includes following the law of inertia, which means you try to keep moving, and the law of people-over-forty-not-wanting-to-jump-up-and-down-off-bicycle-seats-unnecessarily. This is an unwieldly formal name, so this principle is generally known as "Sphinx's axiom."
I once strolled through a campus with a university president, an otherwise bright guy, who started bemoaning the trail students had worn in the grass across an otherwise immaculate quadrangle. I was impertinent enough to laugh, and point out the doors of the buildings that the students were obviously traveling between. I told him that his only solution was to plant barriers, or give in and provide a landscaped path. People on foot are simply not going to take the long way around just because the President is trying to grow grass on the shortest route. I don't think he liked my answer, but I wasn't sure I really wanted the job for which I was interviewing, so I didn't much care.
>>Sorry, but I must reply - EVERY GROUP has IDIOTS! I do ride my bicycle everywhere I can and the money that I save is part of what I donate as a MONTHLY FR Donor.<<
Hey, calm down. I have purchased, used and donated bicycles at many venues. I enjoyed it (well, the uphills kind of are a problem...). When the N. Texas weather calms down (I think we’ll have a window between October 2 and November 24), I’ll be back on a bike to enjoy my area.
The same motorists who do this will fight to the death to keep anyone from impinging on their own little cul-de-sac. This is why the cul-de-sacs tend to empty onto the same jammed arterial roads; no one wants cross traffic cutting through the back way.
Suburbanites tend to have a bad case of "I've got mine; I'm pulling up the drawbridge behind me; but I'm ready to steamroller your street to add another lane."
She might be hot under the fatsuit she’s wearing.
The idiots are in cars playing with their expensive electronic toys.
You can’t fight idiots. My local university has learned and has paved the shortcuts
What makes you think we don't? You think cyclists don't own cars? I have seven bikes in my garage. I also have two cars. I pay every tax you do, and probably more of each; gasoline taxes, property taxes, automobile registration and more. But you apparently believe that only your desires for transportation infrastructure be addressed with those tax dollars.
Sometimes you just get trapped, or surprised. I avoid the main roads whenever possible. But when I go out for a ride, I generally go exploring -- looping around the city, exploring the parks, or looking for pleasant streets and attractive neighborhoods. Or I'll be heading out to a destination. In other words, I don't just ride a regular loop to get my miles in.
So it happens with some frequency that I'm peddling along, and suddenly ... a BARRIER. It's an arterial road. Suddenly there's no sidewalk. The nearest crossing is a three mile uphill backtrack. There's just no good way to get from A to B, so I suck it up and dodge cars, and never go that way again.
Two of the worst times I've been caught in this way were when I took my car in to be serviced, and threw my bike on back to ride home (the dealerships not being metro accessible). Two different cars, two different dealership, several years apart. Anyhow, homeward I go, and suddenly there's no good way forward. Sheesh ... this is in the near suburbs, heavily urbanized areas, and there's no way to get across the street. Stupid design. Neighborhoods that get these kinds of arterial roads shoved through them are blighted for years, perhaps permanently, because neighborhood traffic and pedestrians are also inconvenienced.
Suburbanites tend to be oblivious to this because they generally won't move more than 50 feet without getting into a car, and because they rarely explore the neighborhoods across which they drive. They don't realize the costs they impose on other people.
Well, there is a pic that will give the spandex haters a thrill up their legs...........
Well then, you’ll be happy to learn of Obamalamadingdong and his crew’s efforts in killing the suburbs. I have no doubt it’s YOU who’s the Sierra Club member. Listen to yourself and all your “they should give us” talk. You’d be right at home with Occupy crowd.
I’m with so many other posters who have had it with this nonsensical “share the road” crap. I’ve been flipped off, slowed down, and damn near had to run into oncoming traffic because some spandex-covered ass was busy asserting his “right” to try and commit suicide. Roads built for cars ARE BUILT FOR CARS. Get it?? If you want something else take it up with your locals. If you have enough cyclists paying taxes where you live, have at it. Not enough do-gooders in your town, then gee, just do what others like you do and whine to some commie judge about how UNFAIR it all is, maybe that’ll work like it does for so many other libs — roads for cars are unconsitutional!!
“...But Im an observer. I have yet to see a single bicyclist signal their intentions before turning or stopping,...”
I don’t think I ever see automobile drivers signal their intention to stop before they actually apply their breaks. This is what you seem to be asking bicyclists to do.
If you have ever ridden a road bike, you would know that they have front and rear hand breaks which require both hand to operate. When they must stop, how do you expect them to signal their intention to stop when both hands must be operating the breaks? This is a completely unreasonable complaint.
When you apply the breaks in your car, *you* do not signal your prior-intention to stop. You just hit the breaks and the car’s break lights are automatically activated.
In regard to signaling for a turn, it is often dangerous to take one’s hand off the handlebars and attempt a signal, especially while on the dropped handlebars. This is because the area of road close to the curb (where the cyclist is riding) is often rough, has stones, glass, sewer grates. I have also noticed that it is fairly evident, just by observing the biker’s posture when he or she is preparing for a turn. pay attention!
Most people here are also generalizing a great deal about bicyclist’s behavior, perhaps from a few incidents, you generalize about all bikers.
Give these people on bikes a break. they are working much harder than you to get where they’re going, they are in harm’s way and they’re not hurting anybody.
In many newer suburban areas, each little subdivision is its own little world, one from which you cannot get to any other.
So you can’t travel any distance except on the main roads.
This could easily be solved simply by mandating each subdivision connect to the adjacent ones with a sidewalk, not a street. Cars are still restricted from taking shortcuts through the neighborhood, but pedestrians and cyclists can get around without riding the highway.
All I am saying is that roads in urban areas should have sidewalks and frequent crossings. Roads in suburban and rural areas should be designed with sidewalks or adequate shoulders. What is radical about that?
When I say mandate I mean at the local level when a developer applies for permitting for his subdivision.
I agree. Heck, in Northern Virginia, the blasted parking lots don't connect to each other. You have to get back on the blankety-blank highway, jammed and stalled, to get from the Arby's to the gas station next door.
I sometimes think the real reason suburbanites don't like bicyclists is that the cyclists go zipping by while the lard-butts in their cars are wasting most of the day sitting in traffic. It's resentment, pure and simple.
The more local (and private in many cases) the better.
Would you believe that the people mover in Detroit is rider funded at the rate of around 7%. That means that 93% is funded by local, state, and federal taxes in some form or another. From what I’ve read 25% rider funding is pretty much considered a successful average for urban public transportation systems.
A few years back, Karl Levin was seeking some $2 million in transportation funds to save the old Tiger stadium in Detroit. His justification for seeking transportation money was that a bus stop would be included in the design.
It cracks me up when I see urban people complain about contract disputes with their taxpayer funded trash pick up service. We use private services out here and have better than a half dozen different companies to choose from with dozens of different service plans.
OK. You said it. You are actually farther gone than I thought.
Seven, huh? If you have < 7 people to use them, you’re a glutton. Worse, you expect me to think more highly of you because of your seven bikes. Bully for you. And good luck continuing to find ways to drain others as you go though life. After a while, people start to resist.
To be fair, roads are generally funded with taxes, although much of it comes from taxes on fuel.
I’ve seen some comparisons of cost of funding transportation between public transport and auto, by person/mile, etc.
Public transport is way more expensive, but not as much so as is commonly claimed.
Don’t remember where I saw the comparisons. Also lots of arguing about what comparisons are valid.
Everybody wants their taxes cut but few can find anything that they’re personally willing to give up. Its easy to yammer on about entitlements but until we ourselves find ways of cutting taxes on our end, it doesn’t mean a thing.
I think my township should drop their contract with the county to plow snow here within the village and hire a local farmer with a big tractor. I think we should drop our contact with the sheriff’s department for patrols and call them as needed. I also think we should drop the 6 figures we pay for the dozen or so street lights within the township. We don’t have a fire department so I’m OK contracting with surrounding townships for that. Right there is a couple million dollars in cuts for my township alone.
True story about a bicyclists from about two weeks ago.
Driving along on a divided main road. Two very wide lanes in either direction, concrete island dividing traffic, exceptionally wide berm - about 2-3 feet of asphalt, plus a nice margin of fine gravel. Enough berm that you could park a car or truck on the side of the road and not impede traffic.
It’s morning rush hour, so traffic is heavy. Come up on a cyclist in his full regalia, but the important items is he has a helmet-mounted mirror (so he is aware of the backup of traffic he is causing) and a suprisingly loud horn.
He’s riding a couple feet to the left of the white line, essentially forcing cars to pass him as if he were a car. He’s so far left that cars could actually pass him on the right without leaving the asphalt.
We get to a stop light and I’m about 2 cars behind him. Sure enough, he shoots to the right side of the white line and starts passing cars in the right median.
Light changes, he slips his way into traffic. All the people that so carefully and thoughtfully passed him are now trapped behind him again, and have to pass him again.
The next light is far enough away that I get a chance to get around him. We stop at a light, I look in the mirror - same behavior. A lady in a car pulls into the road from the side street before the light changes. She’s now in the front of the “pack” of cars, but has no idea about Zippy that’s going to come up behind her.
Next light is the entrance to a freeway. The lady wants to make a legal right turn on red, and is waiting for oncoming traffic from the other side that has a green arrow to make a left.
She has no idea Zippy is flying along in the median coming up on her right, nor really should she have to consider that.
She gets a break in traffic and starts to make her turn when Zippy gets to her with his (surprisingly loud) horn. Luckily for Zippy, it’s a nice day and she has her window down. She, of course, stops, trying to figure out what’s going on, but not before her car has nudged out to the right, blocking Zippy.
More horn from Zippy as he cuts her off, memorializing the moment with an obscene gesture as he cuts over to the crosswalk (now he’s apparently a pedestrian), runs through the red light, gets across the street and again jumps into the road, a few feet to the right of the white line. So everyone who passed him and isn’t getting on the freeway must pass this douchebag again.
I have yet to see a driver of a vehicle act with such reckless disregard for traffic laws and safety. You couldn’t do half that in a car without being reported to, and then chased and aprehended by police.
The carheads on this thread have generally ignored the simple solutions that have been put forward. Build roads with ample shoulders or sidewalks, and provide enough crossings so that cross traffic by pedestrians and cyclists is reasonably convenient. I don't think these are radical suggestions. I'm not arguing for bikepaths everywhere (although more bikepaths would be nice.) I DO believe that in heavily urbanized areas, non-motorized movement should be accommodated.
So let's talk about personal conveniences of choice. A suburbanite chooses, for example, to live 30 miles away from his job. His personal convenience involves arterial commuter roads slashed through other people's neighborhoods. If those roads are improperly designed, they become major barriers to non-motorized neighborhood traffic. It is the BARRIER that I object to, not the cars per se.
"Complete roads" is a matter of internalizing the externalities. If the commuters want to drive noisome, dirty, and dangerous blight-inducing roads through other people's neighborhoods, it is not unreasonable to require mitigation. The cost of those offsets should be considered a cost of building the road.
Dagnabit, roads in the city should have sidewalks so that people on foot or bikes can get around without risking their lives. Roads in the suburbs and rural areas should have ample shoulders. This in fact is usually part of the original design of the road, or in theory should be. What happens is that eventually commuter traffic grows, another lane is needed, the shoulder gets taken, and now you've got yet another dangerous road with no accommodation for anything but cars. In other words, a barrier.
The extra lanes, the limited access, the high speed, cars-only roadways are all driven by the personal convenience of commuters who want to live ever further away from their jobs, out in cul de sac land, and shave time off their commutes by imposing these costs on other people. And then they rise up on forums like this and argue that it's an unreasonable request when people like me advocate sidewalks and more frequent crossings so that their commuter sluiceway doesn't become an impassable barrier in my neighborhood.
One size doen't fit all, but as a resident of a walkable, bikeable neighborhood, I will oppose any commuter highway "improvements" that would dump more commuter cut-through traffic onto residential streets. I will oppose any road-widening schemes that involve taking peoples' sidewalks and front yards; the city is blighted by corridors of formerly attractive residential streets that were destroyed in the 60's and 70's to create commuter racetracks, so no more.
There are great neighborhoods all over the city, both in the city and throughout the suburbs. In Washington, and I suspect in most major metro areas that are choking on traffic, people need to get over ingrained prejudices and adapt to living closer to their jobs.
One size doesn't fit all, but in the DC area, there is no way -- I don't care if you're liberal, conservative, or Martian, NO WAY -- that anticipated population and traffic growth can be met simply by increased roadbuilding. You cannot add enough lanes to I-66 or I-270 or I-95/395 or the beltways to handle all the people who want a half acre in the suburbs and a fast commute into town. It can't be done. So traffic just gets worse. This is what is driving gentrification in the city; people are already adapting. The city is already changing fast. If we could just voucher the schools, the rate of change would astound you, but that's a subject for another day. Around here, we are reaching the practicable limits of roadbuilding. Your situation may differ.
I agree. As a cyclist, I would enjoy testifying against one of these turkeys. Same for the pedestrians who do stupid things. Capitol Hill is heavily gentrified but we do have a residual underclass presence. Some of the behavior is patently passive aggressive: the guys riding their bikes the wrong way down the middle of a one way street, or casually strolling diagonally across a busy intersection just as the light changes, or the guys in motorized wheelchairs who drive around in the street. Where's an 18 wheeler when you need it?
I don't trust anyone in Spandex either.
I thought it was only Liberals that take a couple of anecdotal incidents and uses them to stereotype and vilify an entire population of otherwise innocent people.
I could tell you a lot of stories about a person carrying a handgun, who went into a rage and killed a bunch of people. Is everyone with a handgun nuts!? Does everyone with a handgun have no regard for the law?
This is the kind of ‘logic’ you are using. You belong on DU, not here.
How Marxist of you. I guess you think I should redistribute my wealth of bicycles to the less fortunate.
Worse, you expect me to think more highly of you because of your seven bikes. Bully for you.
No, I'm just pointing out that I'm an avid cyclist, as well at an automobile owner, homeowner and taxpayer. I honestly don't care one whit what you think of me. The opinion of some anonymous guy on the internet effects my life not one iota. My point is that your argument about cyclists not paying the same taxes that you do doesn't hold water.
And good luck continuing to find ways to drain others as you go though life.
What am I draining? The bicycle supply? Again, you seem to have a very Marxist point of view about surpluses and private ownership.
You seem to have anger issues. Exercise can help that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.