Prisoners of love Blue skies above Can't keep our hearts in jail Prisoners of love Our turtle doves Soon coming 'round with bail Oh, you can lock us up And lose the key But hearts in love Are always free! Prisoners of love Blue skies above 'Cause we're still prisoners We're still prisoners We're still prisoners of love
"Taking space away from cars? Ouch. When late to work, it pains a driver to slow down for a bunch of bicyclists hogging the roadway. In the past, you might have tried to steer around them. These days, they are right in front of the car.
"It will be interesting to see how far this goes, whether bicyclists are allowed to stay in the middle of the highway. As the deaths mount, maybe it will become clear they need ride to the right."
"As the deaths mount?" What a fucking asshole. But some of the comments are actually fairly intelligent, in contrast to the whackjobs who write comments on the Star Tribune web site here in Minneapolis.
Maybe USA Today attracts a better class of readership (actually, I jest a bit. The Strib has long been identified as a "liberal" newspaper- which hasn't really been the case for years now- to be targeted by a cadre of right wing idiots from around the country and in response a bunch of left wing idiots from around the country have targeted them for retaliation...).
"Prosecutors alleged Thompson had a history of run-ins with bikers, including a similar episode four months before the 2008 collision, when two cyclists told police that the doctor tried to run them off the road and braked hard in front of them. Neither of the riders was injured".
And a physician to boot. What ever happened to
"I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone".
> "Taking space away from cars? Ouch. When late to work, it pains a driver > to slow down for a bunch of bicyclists hogging the roadway. In the past, > you might have tried to steer around them. These days, they are right in > front of the car.
> "It will be interesting to see how far this goes, whether bicyclists are > allowed to stay in the middle of the highway. As the deaths mount, maybe > it will become clear they need ride to the right."
> "As the deaths mount?" What a fucking asshole. But some of the > comments are actually fairly intelligent, in contrast to the whackjobs > who write comments on the Star Tribune web site here in Minneapolis.
> Maybe USA Today attracts a better class of readership (actually, I jest > a bit. The Strib has long been identified as a "liberal" newspaper- > which hasn't really been the case for years now- to be targeted by a > cadre of right wing idiots from around the country and in response a > bunch of left wing idiots from around the country have targeted them for > retaliation...).
On Nov 3, 5:50 am, Big Jim <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If cyclists kept to the right they wouldnt get drivers as upset.
But there are many times a cyclist can't keep right and still be safe.
Ride far enough _left_ to be safe. If safely possible, ride far enough right to share the lane. But safety is more important than not upsetting the occasional driver.
Date: Tue, Nov 3, 2009, 7:30am (EST+6) From: Frank.Le...@esa.int (Tosspot)
>And a physician to boot. What ever >happened to >"I will prescribe regimens for the good of >my patients according to my ability and >my judgment and never do harm to >anyone".
A LOS ANGELES physician. Who probably lives in Beverly Hills (or some similar high priced neighborhood) and sincerely believes that this gives him absolute dominance over the road.
On Nov 3, 12:20 pm, dedendaddy4spamm...@webtv.net (It's Chris) wrote:
> A LOS ANGELES physician. Who probably lives in Beverly Hills (or some > similar high priced neighborhood) and sincerely believes that this gives > him absolute dominance over the road.
More precisely, Mandeville Canyon, where the incident took place To find it search just south of "San Vicente Mountain" in http://maps.google.com/ or Google Earth.
On Nov 3, 3:50 am, Big Jim <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If cyclists kept to the right they wouldnt get drivers as upset.
That's simple in theory but there are plenty of roads with minimal or non-existent shoulders where even riding to the right does not keep a cyclist completely out of the path of motorized vehicles. This is true even for a very well-behaved single cyclist.
Not to say that cyclists never ride irresponsibly but, ultimately, the "perception" of the driver, accurate or not, can be more of part in the equation of whether that driver feels impeded.
In the case being discussed, the cyclists were riding the speed limit but the doctor still had the unreasonable perception that he was being blocked and, has now been established, took illegal action to "teach them a lesson." Do you suppose he would have had the reaction to another CAR traveling the speed limit?
> On Nov 3, 12:20 pm, dedendaddy4spamm...@webtv.net (It's Chris) wrote: >> A LOS ANGELES physician. Who probably lives in Beverly Hills (or some >> similar high priced neighborhood) and sincerely believes that this gives >> him absolute dominance over the road. DirtRoadie wrote: > More precisely, Mandeville Canyon, where the incident took place > To find it search just south of "San Vicente Mountain" in > http://maps.google.com/ > or Google Earth. > Also > http://lalife.com/address/Mandeville_Canyon_Rd_Los_Angeles_CA_90049/h...
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 08:10:07 -0800 (PST), DirtRoadie <DirtRoa...@aol.com> wrote: >On Nov 3, 3:50 am, Big Jim <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> If cyclists kept to the right they wouldnt get drivers as upset.
>That's simple in theory but there are plenty of roads with minimal or >non-existent shoulders where even riding to the right does not keep a >cyclist completely out of the path of motorized vehicles. This is true >even for a very well-behaved single cyclist.
>Not to say that cyclists never ride irresponsibly but, ultimately, the >"perception" of the driver, accurate or not, can be more of part in >the equation of whether that driver feels impeded.
>In the case being discussed, the cyclists were riding the speed limit >but the doctor still had the unreasonable perception that he was being >blocked and, has now been established, took illegal action to "teach >them a lesson." Do you suppose he would have had the reaction to >another CAR traveling the speed limit?
Yes, he would have had exactly the same emotional reaction. The difference would be in how he expressed it and how he chose to retaliate.
RonSonic <ronso...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 08:10:07 -0800 (PST), DirtRoadie > <DirtRoa...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 3, 3:50 am, Big Jim <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If cyclists kept to the right they wouldnt get drivers as upset.
> >That's simple in theory but there are plenty of roads with minimal > >or non-existent shoulders where even riding to the right does not > >keep a cyclist completely out of the path of motorized vehicles. > >This is true even for a very well-behaved single cyclist.
> >Not to say that cyclists never ride irresponsibly but, ultimately, > >the "perception" of the driver, accurate or not, can be more of > >part in the equation of whether that driver feels impeded.
> >In the case being discussed, the cyclists were riding the speed > >limit but the doctor still had the unreasonable perception that he > >was being blocked and, has now been established, took illegal action > >to "teach them a lesson." Do you suppose he would have had the > >reaction to another CAR traveling the speed limit?
> Yes, he would have had exactly the same emotional reaction. The > difference would be in how he expressed it and how he chose to > retaliate.
|
